The Pete Quiñones Show - Reading Solzhenitsyn's '200 Years Together' w/ Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson - Episodes 41-50

Episode Date: December 3, 2025

8 Hours and 41 MinutesPG-13Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson is a researcher, writer, and former professor of history and political science, specializing in Russian history and political ideology.Here are episodes 41-50 in which Pete reads Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's '200 Years Together," and Dr' Johnson provides commentary.Dr Johnson's PatreonDr Johnson's CashApp - $Raphael71RusJournal.orgTHE ORTHODOX NATIONALISTDr. Johnson's Radio Albion PageDr. Johnson's Books on AmazonPete and Thomas777 'At the Movies'Support Pete on His WebsitePete's PatreonPete's SubstackPete's SubscribestarPete's GUMROADPete's VenmoPete's Buy Me a CoffeePete on FacebookPete on TwitterBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-pete-quinones-show--6071361/support.

I want to welcome everyone back to part 41 of our reading of 200 years together by Alexander Solzhenycin. How are you doing this fine Saturday, Dr. Johnson? I'm doing very well. You know, I'm very weather sensitive. There's like one weekend in November where I'm happy with the weather. That's pretty much it. But these days up here, it's been extraordinary. It's been cool.

It's been tremendous. but I do have some news. I record the Orthodox nationalist show I do on, you know, on Saturday today. And I finally, I don't know why I didn't do it before, but I'm finally going to do an hour lecture on Karl Marx's Zer Udean Fraga, the Jewish question. I don't think any of our people have touched it. It's extremely interesting.

And it's going to go out on Radio Albion, I suppose, this coming week. So it's a good thing I got a good night, a good night's sleep last night for once. I sleep really well, but I don't know. Recently, I don't know what's going on, but how are you? I'm doing good, looking forward to that.

That should be great. Yeah, it's one of those things that I've never even thought to bring up and read on the show as much as I read on the show. So, yeah, I look forward to that. It pops up right in my feed. I get a, whenever one of your things, drops i have uh oh for on on on patreon or on um on regular radio albion on radio albion yeah

oh okay okay yeah all righty picking up where we left off last time on 12th and 13th october before all other secondary schools the pupils of two business schools that of the emperor nicholas the first and that of fag ceased to attend classes being the most sensitive to revolutionary propaganda. On the 14th, it was decided to halt all the work in all the secondary schools, and business schools and students went to all the high schools of the city to force the pupils to go on course strikes. The rumor went around that in front of the Barazina High School,

three students and three high school students had been wounded with swords by police officers. Certainly, the investigation would establish with certainty that none of the young people had been affected and that the pupils had not yet had time to leave the school. But this kind of incident, what a boon to raise the revolutionary pressure. On the same day, the courses ceased at the university, 48 hours after the start of the school year. The striking students burst into the municipal doom as shouting, Death to Noidhart, and demanding that they stop paying salaries to the police. Well, that sounds familiar.

Nothing changes. It's the same people, the same agenda. and this is secondary schools. After the episode of the Potemkin, Newdhart had regained power in his hands, but until the middle of October, he did not make any measure against the revolutionary meetings. Besides, could he do very much

when the autonomy of the universities had been established? On the 15th, he received orders from the Ministry of Interior to prohibit the entrance of outsiders to the university. And on the following day, he surrounded the ladder by the army,

while ordering the cartridges be taken out from the armories until then sold over the counter. The closure of the university to the outside world provoked great agitation among Jewish students and Jewish youth, an immense crowd set out, closing the shops on its way. The American armory was plundered, overturning streetcars and omnibuses, sawing trees to make barricades, cutting off telegraphs and telephone wires for the same purpose, dismantling the gates of the parks. Nudhart asked Kachanof to have the town occupied by the troops. Then the barricades behind which the demonstrators had gathered, mostly Jews, among them women and adolescents,

they began to fire on the troops. Shots were fired from the roofs of houses, balconies, and windows. The army opened fire in its turn. The demonstrators were scattered and the barricades dismantled. It is impossible to accurately estimate the number of deaths and injuries that occurred on that day, as the health team, consisting mainly of Jewish students in red-white blouses with a red cross, hurried to take the wounded and the dead to the university infirmary, thus in an autonomous and inaccessible zone,

at the Jewish hospital and at the emergency stations near the barricades, as well as in almost all pharmacies. They had stopped delivering medicine even before the events. According to the governor of the city, there were nine deaths, nearly 80 wounded, including some policemen. Among the participants in the disorders were apprehended, ended that day, 214 people, of whom 197 were Jews, a large number of women, and 13 children aged 12 to 14. And all this still 24 hours before the incendiary effect of the manifesto was felt.

Well, we're still in Odessa. So we're in the capital of Jewish Ukraine. So this was, of course, the hotbed of the revolution for the first time you're starting to hear about women which love this sort of thing we'd get to Alexandra Colentai probably here in a little bit maybe in the next week or so

and the sexual revolution but you know how Marxism goes the claim is that there can't be a socialist revolution until the workers are so miserable he calls it a miseration that they have no choice and deliberately keeping medicines from people

creating starvation conditions even if they have to do it artificially which of course is all artificial here they'll do they want to get people as miserable as they possibly can and then come in and promise the promise the solution but Odessa

it shouldn't surprise anybody was the first place to go completely red it was probably red for years up until this point and we're you know this is this is the height of the 1905 Revolution and we see who's behind it and why and they needed the

Russo-Japanese War as a backdrop for it as an excuse for it and the lies that the press told about it one might think that by exposing the role of the Jews so frequently in revolutionary movements, the Senate's report was biased. But it must be borne in mind that in Odessa the Jews represented one-third of the population, and we have seen a very significant portion of the student population. It must also be borne in mind that the Jews had taken an active part in the Russian revolutionary movement, especially in the palest settlement. In addition, Senator Kuzminsky's report provides everything.

evidence of its objectivity in many places. On the 16th of October, when they arrived at the police station, the people arrested were victims of assault by the police and soldiers. This is quoting. However, quoting, neither the governor of the city nor the police officials responded in due course, and no investigation was carried out. It was not until later that more than 20 of those who had been in this precinct declared that, quote, those arrested had been systematically beaten.

First, they were pushed down a staircase leading to the basement. Many of them fell to the ground, and it was then that policemen and soldiers arranged in a row, beat them with the back of their sabers, rubber truncheons, or simply with feet and fists. The women were not spared. It is true that, on the same evening, municipal counselors and justices of the peace went to the scene and gathered complaints from the victims. As for the senator, he identified several culprits during his inquiry in November and had them brought to justice.

One thing that irritates me, and we all know why they're doing it, but in today's America, they want to create a standard for the police that is that none of us could ever reach. They're supposed to act like robots and have no feelings. They're seeing their men killed. They're seeing what these people are. They know where all these scumbags live. They see rapes and murders all the time. they see child molestation

and they can't do much about it unless there's firm evidence even though they may know these are the guys but without you know if they're very careful they can't do much about it

that wasn't the case here these policemen weren't beating these people and of course women like the equal rights and they were getting them here no doubt these people

people were extremely violent, and when after the police, this, again, this is before riot control, this is before the body armor and everything else. They were attacked with everything that they can get their hands on. And you could probably do that kind of thing here. Now, when I see a sword, I think of a Cossack, because again, this is Ukraine. That's probably the case. They're not known for just using the butt of the sword. They're known for using the whole thing.

But, you know, when you see policemen get beaten up, your friends, your allies, you know, you're going to want to take it out on them. That's what a normal human being would do. And that's exactly what they're doing here. And quite frankly, I have no problem with it. On the 17th of October, the whole town was occupied by the army. Patrols were crisscross in the streets and public order was not troubled all day. However, the municipal Duma had met to discuss emergency measures, including how to replace

the state police with an urban militia. On the same day, the Bunn's local committee decided to organize a solemn funeral for the victims who had fallen the day before on the barricades. But Neuthardt, understanding that such a demonstration would cause, as always, a new revolutionary explosion, gave the order to remove in secret of the Jewish hospital where they were, the five corpses and to bury them before the scheduled date, which was done on the night of the 18th. The next day the organizers demanded that the corpses be unearthed and brought back to the hospital. Due to the developments of events, the bodies were embalmed there and remained in state for a long time. And it was at this time that the news of the Imperial Manifestos spread, pushing Odessa toward new storms. Let us quote, first of all, the testimony of members of the Jewish Defense Attachment. Quoting, during the program, there was a certain coordination center that worked quite well.

Universities played an enormous role in the preparation of the events of October. The Soviet coalition of the Odessa University included a Bolshevik, Amenshevik, and SR, a representative of the Bun, Zionist, Socialists, the Armenian communities, Georgian and Polish ones as well. Student attachments were formed even before the program. During immense meetings at the university, money was collected to buy weapons. Of course, not only to defend ourselves, but with a view to a possible insurrection. That's quoting. The Soviet coalition also raised funds to arm the students. When the program broke out, there were 200 revolvers at the university, and a professor

procured another 150 others. A dictator was appointed at the head of each detachment without taking into account his political stance. And it happened that a detachment composed mainly of members of the Bund was commanded by a Zionist socialist, or vice versa, on Wednesday, October 19th, a large quantity of weapons were distributed in a pro-Zionist synagogue. The detachments were made up of Jewish and Russian students, Jewish workers, young Jews of all parties, and a very small number of Russian workers.

I like that. Very small number of Russian workers, meaning ordinary Russians or Ukrainians who work in a factory, you know, because they had absolutely no connection with these people. They talked about them all the time, but they talked about them only. as an abstraction. They knew very little about these people. Engels and Frederick Engels

himself was a business owner, factory owner. And I want to repeat myself again, and it's very important to keep pressing this point that these Jews were from the upper classes. Not only were things going well in

Russia economically and certainly in the West where we are. you know, Ukraine, Western Russia, Belarus. But these merchant families, where most of these Jews came from, these aren't working-class people whatsoever. The fact that they were using terms like dictator suggests exactly what they're... And when they say, regardless of the political background,

the only difference is whether or not they're a communist or a Zionist. And at this point, they were fighting on the same side. But for them to call this a pogrom, it, you know, this is, this is a frustration that any person who actually knows anything feels when you're trying to deal with the Jewish question. When you're trying to deal with people, normies, sometimes, especially those who pretend to know something about the Jewish question, there's no talking to them because, you know, here we have it. And, you know, there's been plenty of times, in fact, this happened to me, not. not that long ago, someone challenged me on the Jewish makeup of the early Bolsheviks. And I said, well, you know, I have all their names.

This wasn't a secret group. I have all their names. And I, you know, and this is what I've done a few times, but I've just done it recently. If I send you all the names and it's all Jews or almost all Jews, you'll change your mind, right? You'll change your mind. You realize that you were incorrect. Well, obviously not. it doesn't matter

so you know all of this stuff and I'm still like very anxious to see what they do when they do the official translation of this of this book how they're going to handle all of this because there's no getting out of it that the revolutionary movement was Jewish at this point

and they're talking about you know Georgian Polish I don't know if they're Jewish or not SR as I've mentioned before that this means your your establishment liberal types. But because it's Odessa, it is probably almost exclusively a Jewish movement. And the one thing that they were not were ordinary workers because they had no connection with them and they didn't care about them.

We've already talked about why they picked the proletariat to be their agent. That's finally been totally dropped. I think maybe it was the work of Foucault by the 70s that the sexual revolution took over from the proletarian revolution. So it was non-whites and homosexuals, et cetera. So they've completely abandoned the proletariat, showing that that was never the concern anyway. But the far left rarely talks about workers anymore,

except in the most symbolic and detached way. The postmodern, so-called radical left, even though they're the establishment, but they're really referring to is homosexuals and non-whites. And again, that, of course, is completely Jewish. You know, I had to, everyone, you know, since the last few years, I've been talking about critical race theory. I had to read in the 90s.

I had to read the mid-90s. I had to read in grad school, one of the biggest books in that field, words that wound in one of my courses. So when, so all of a sudden, people started talking about this as if it was new. This stuff has been around a long time, and it's irrational. It refuses to take account of reality, and it relies on threats. If you disagree with us, you're a racist, and therefore you're going to get into trouble. And, of course, it also relies on what the media says.

The media is the left in America. Without them, they're always citing them as if there's some authority. And if there was any real diversity in the media, maybe it wouldn't be that difficult. But I love this. The last line, a very small number of actual workers. A few years later, Jabotinsky wrote that during the programs of the year 1905, quote, the new Jewish soul had already reached its maturity. And in the still rose-tinted atmosphere of the February Revolution,

a major Russian newspaper gave the following description. quote, when during the note heart pogroms in 1905, the young militiamen of self-defense traveled through Odessa, weapons in their fist, they aroused emotion and admiration. We were heavy-hearted. We were touched and full of compassion. And this is what one of our contemporaries wrote. The courage shown by Gommel's fighters in flames tens of thousands of hearts. In Kiev, 500 people are engaged in self-defense detachments.

In Odessa, several thousands, but in Odessa, the number of combatants as well as their state of mind. And in response, the brutality of the police forces gave a much different turn to events than they had experienced in Kiev. Well, Gommel, I don't know why they shifted there all of a sudden. Gamel's in Belarus. But it's really hard for them to talk about a program when they're heavily armed. they well just like in in america cities um these jewish revolutionaries outnumbered the police had um

probably far better weapons than the police the police force was never very large there even in the big cities and it was under a mayor uh who as as the years go by is going to become a supporter of the of the bolsheviks anyway um and we're talking remember the rose tends atmosphere, the February Revolution, that's, of course, the provisional government revolution, Bolsheviks are in

October. But the one thing that the Korenski government did very well, and I've talked about this, I'm going to repeat it again, this is very by the third time, that they created the extraordinary commission to look into the government of Nicholas de Sanket, the pogroms, Rasputin, all of these issues. and they could find no fault. All of this nonsense of pogroms was completely rejected

by the commissions from the revolutionaries. And that's really all you need to destroy all the liberal opinions on what was going on at the time. Now, Jews had always been armed in Russia. But this is the first time that they're willing to admit it, this is the first time that they were going to be training in public and as I've said

whatever program you're talking about in Russia it tended to be completely provoked by the Jews but in terms of injuries in the death count there usually was more Russians killed than Jews

you know it's kind of like lynching you think of lynching you think of some clansmen and a black guy no this was a this happened to thousands of whites as well sometimes this stuff relies on emotional pictures that they implant in your brain but you see how the press

was going on and on worshipping these people and Tabatinski, you know, if you want to go to the Middle East go to the Middle East but post-February Revolution they completely absolved the czar that they had allegedly overthr

of all the faults that the revolution was based on. So you had some honest people in there who got in trouble, but they were honest, and that stuff still exists. You're not going to hear about it too much, but when I came across it many, many years ago, it changed everything. The royalists were absolutely right. Let us go back to the Kisminski report. After the proclamation of the manifesto on the morning of the 18th, General Kohlbars of commanding the military district of Odessa in order to give the population, and the possibility of enjoying without restrictions

to freedom in all its forms granted to the manifesto ordered the troops not to appear in the streets, so as not to disturb the joyous humor of the population. However, this joyous mood did not last. On all sides, groups of Jews and students began to flock toward the city center, brandishing red flags and shouting, down with the autocracy,

while speakers called for revolution. On the facade of the Duma, two of the words forming the inscription in metal letters, God save the Tsar, were broken. The council chamber was invaded. A large portrait of His Majesty, the emperor, was torn to shreds. The national flag, which floated on the Dumo,

was replaced by a red flag. The headdresses of three ecclesiastics who were in a cab at a funeral were stolen. Later, the funeral procession they conducted was repeatedly stopped. Religious songs interrupted by cheers. There was a headless scarecrow bearing the inscription, here is the autocracy, and a dead cat was showed off while collecting money to demolish

a czar or for Nicholas's death. The young people, especially the Jews, who were obviously aware of their superiority, taught the Russians that their freedom had not been freely granted to them that had been torn from the government by the Jews. They declared openly to Russians, now we are going to govern you, but also we have given you God. We will give you a czar. A large crowd of Jews waving red flags long pursued two peacekeepers, one of them managed to escape by the roofs, while on the other, a man named Gubi, the crowd armed with revolvers, axes, steaks, and iron bars found him in an attic, and heard him so badly that he died during his transports of the hospital.

The concierge of the building found two of his fingers cut by axe. Later, three police officers were beaten and wounded, and the revolvers of five peacekeepers were confiscated. The prisoners were then freed in one, two, and three police stations, where on the 16th, there had been beatings, but the detainees had already been released on the orders in Noodhart. In one of these precincts, the liberation of the prisoners was negotiated in exchange for Guibi's corpse. Sometimes there was nobody behind bars. As for the rector of the university, he actively participated in all of this, transmitting to the prosecutor the demands of a crowd of 5,000 people, while the the students went so far as to threaten to hang the police officers. Nudhart solicited the advice of the mayor of the city, Krzynovsky, and a professor at the university,

Shepkin, but they only demanded that he disarmed the police on the spot and make it invisible. Otherwise, added Shepkin, the victims of popular revenge cannot be saved, and the police will be legitimately disarmed by force. Interrogated later by the senator, he denied having spoken so violently, but one can doubt his sincerity in view of the fact that on the same day he had distributed 150 revolvers to the students, and that during the inquiry, he refused to say where he had procured them. After this interview, Newhart ordered, without even warning the chief of police, to withdraw all the peacekeepers in such a way that from the moment the whole of the city was deprived of any visible police presence, which could have been understood if the measure

had been intended to protect the life of the agents, but at the same time, the streets have been deserted by the army, which for the moment was pure stupidity. But we remember that in Petersburg, this was precisely what the press owners demanded from Vita, and it had been difficult for him to resist them. This is, again, a lot of this should sound familiar. The most striking thing in this long paragraph, by the way, we've been here already. We're kind of going back in time. We've gone over the attack on on this stuff by the Jews, or we're at least at the same time in a different place, I should say, but it's all the same. Clearly, they're coordinated. This is after Zahar Nicholas gave the manifesto which created an elected Duma with certain

powers and certain rights, which pretty much always existed, but are now formalized, you know, freedom of the press, that kind of thing, which, of course, is. a disaster so to show how much hatred they had um this this you know it was a mistake to issue this manifesto because it didn't satisfy anybody the monarchists didn't like it and the um clearly the left didn't like it now it's true we have a very biased sample in odesia um but you notice the same we talked about the attacking the duma meetings in um right after the manifesto was issued in Petersburg. And now we have the same exact thing happening in Ukraine.

Completely Jewish. This belief, and what was the phrase here, we have given you God, we will give you a czar. Now, I'll leave it up to the listener to figure out what the Jews meant by that. I don't think it's that complicated. And as far as revolutionary movement goes, All means are justified, because the end is so wonderful, especially when it affects the goyum. This is what the, so it's not like the revolutionary movement, you know, took over in October of 1917 and was a big shock to anybody.

They had shown themselves as Jewish, as violent, as immature, these people will be the last group of people to rule anything if they're going to talk like this. and this is just a sheer hatred they invented so many of these pogrom stories calling law enforcement activity a pogrom is very typical they just didn't care now I've said this before but if you read the American

press at the time the 6 million figure shows up quite often relative to this the Western press what would go wild over this stuff they would be even worse

than the revolutionaries in terms of what they would report so Americans and Englishmen were getting the most ridiculous coverage here over and this was consistent really throughout the 19th century but even worse now

and none of the revolutionary these violent and sometimes sickening actions violence for its own sake were ever really reported you could read a whole book on the 1905 Revolution and this kind of thing is not going to be mentioned, either because they don't know

or that they can't know. But this paragraph, maybe the one before it, that ends, there's no debate anymore. The revolution was Jewish, period. After the police left, two types of armed guards appeared, the student militia and the Jewish self-defense detachments. The first was set up by the Soviet coalition, which had procured arms. the municipal militia made up of armed students and other individuals placed themselves on guard instead of policemen. This was done with the assent of General Baron Cowbars and the governor

of the city, Newdhart, while the police chief, Gullivan offered his resignation in protest and was replaced by his deputy von Hobbesburg. A provisional government was set up at the municipal Duma. In one of his first statements, he expressed his gratitude to the students of the university for their way of ensuring the security of the city with energy, intelligence, and devotion. The committee itself assumed rather vague functions. During the month of November, the press took an interest in one of the members of this committee, also a member of the Duma of the Empire, O. Pergament, and in the second Duma, somebody had to recall that he proclaimed himself

president of the Republic of the Danube and of the Black Sea, or president of the Republic of South Russia, in the intoxication of those days, this was not unlikely. This is so Sabotean. It's just, yeah. Yeah, I really, I'm starting to run out of, you know, I have a substantial vocabulary, and I'm starting to run out of words. Yeah, you're absolutely right in what you're saying.

What was happening is, we already talked about what happened in Peter's, when the Duma was set up now we're talking about what happened in Odessa and Ukraine in this case and in Kiev to some extent with the municipal Duma

the manifesto meant absolutely nothing to anybody one of the things that strikes me is I mean any ruler is only as good as his advisors

and that goes for anybody and I know it's not a man matter of opinion, I know that Nicholas was getting inconsistent advice from people. I don't think Nicholas was being told the whole truth about things. I think, you know, the reaction to the manifesto shocked everybody, where, of course, a normal human being would think that that would kind of solve the problem. You notice that one thing that this has nothing to do with is the workers or the peasants.

This is about the sheer lust for power. The people who are doing this are the very last people you would want to rule anything. The kind of the vices that would allow you to murder to take power, they're not going to go away just because you're in power or just because you read a work by Karl Marx, which, by the way, isn't that far away from what Marxism says,

especially what anarchism says. You know, that all of a sudden, these violent revolutionaries are we're going to become selfless leaders. That kind of is what Marxism says, all of a sudden. And yes, there was a very, very brief separatist movement. This was going to be, you know, the Republic of the Black Sea, a Jewish separatist and communist state. But the other thing that strikes me here is this is very similar to the Maidan revolution

financed by the Americans in 2014. In terms of the extreme violence, the incomprehension of the Ukrainian leadership, Yanukovych at the time, who couldn't really, you know, you can't really blame the guy. He was far from a perfect ruler, but he was befuddled. And, of course, it was Judaic. They created all kinds of false flags and everything else. They also created a self-defense. I remember seeing pictures when they surrounded the parliament.

we're now going to be the security the police weren't allowed to really defend themselves very much John McCain was there of course Newland was there that whole bunch this was a neocon fantasy and

the neocon mentality still existed here with the exact same arguments the exact same tactics everything else that happened here this had nothing to do with anything like liberal democracy even if that even if I agreed with that kind of thing this has nothing to do with it this has to do strictly with Judaic power and in Ukraine today as I said very early on this is over 10 years now they're shutting down the churches it's a one-party state anything against the state or the war is met with either prison or or worse you get drafted

This is very, very similar. Thank God that the militias and Lwansk and Donetsk were able to defeat the Ukrainian army in 2014. And of course, don't forget, I have a book coming out on the – because that was the first act in the Ukrainian war that's sort of coming to an end now, which is why the U.S. then poured money into this country. these people could have had a fairly prosperous society there was no obvious reason for this this was about

Jewish this essentially was about Jewish demonic theology the country was growing in population in wealth in wages in every respect they created this and it's you know again as I've said that without the Jews this would not have happened

you would have had various protests for various, very specific reasons. That's okay. But the Jews created this systematic, ideological revolution where the chief goy, Tsar Nicholas, has to go. But the society really didn't have the

prerequisites for it. And that's why they looked to the proletariat, which in Russia was relatively small compared to some place like Britain. It was hard being a proletarian. But even there, they didn't capture their imagination. They just figured, well, they're, very alienated. They're not home. They're usually alone. They're the perfect target for

propaganda. We're promising the moon. And, of course, they were given nothing. This is, this is very depressing. It's, you know, and of course, the most depressing part is that no one is allowed to talk about it at the university level in the U.S. And what could happen after the streets have been deserted during these feverish days by both the Army and the police and that the power had passed into the hands of an inexperienced student militia and groups of self-defense. The militia arrested persons who seemed suspicious to it and sent them to university for examination. Here, a student walked at the head of a group of Jews of about 60 persons who fired revolver shots at random. The student militia and Jewish self-defense groups themselves perpetrated acts of violence directed against the army

and peaceful elements of the Russian population, using firearms and killing innocent people. The confrontation, quoting, was inevitable given the crystallization of two antagonistic camps among the population. On the evening of the 18th, a crowded demonstrators waving red flags and composed predominantly of Jews tried to impose a stoppage of work that the factory in Guine. The workers refused to comply with this demand, after which the same crowd, crossing Russian workmen in the street, demanded that they should uncover themselves before the red flags. As the latter refused, while here it is, the proletariat, from the crowd's shots were fired. The workers, though unarmed, succeeded in dispersing it and pursued it until it was joined by another crowd of armed Jews, up to a thousand people who began to fire on the workmen. Four of them were killed.

This is how brawls and armed clashes between Russians and Jews were unleashed at various points in the city. Russian workers and individuals, without any definite occupation, also known as hooligans, began to chase the Jews and to beat them up and then move on with the rampage and destruction of houses, apartments, and shops belonging to Jews. It was then that the police commissioner called an infantry company, which put an end to the clashes. Yeah, now you get angry. They're allowing an entire city to be taken over by revolutionaries, withdrawing troops,

you know, I guess knowing what's going to happen. The Jews are showing themselves, this is what our democracy is. We actually despise the workers when they say, uncover your meaning take your hat off, like you're going underneath an icon or something like that. They were shutting the churches down at this point to the extent that they were able to. And these self-defense groups, of course, acted like maniacs. And when actual Russians or Ukrainians fought back, that became a pogrom. and only then the police commissioner takes action.

Now, that probably comes straight from the mayor. And if you're the mayor of Odessa, you're not, you know, you have a lot of people, even the Gentiles were heavily involved in business with these Jewish criminals. And the distinction between, you know, what we would call a mafia group and Jewish revolutionaries or Jews in general at the time didn't exist. And it's always been the case. You know, this is how they replaced the cahal system. On the following day, 19th October, towards 10, 11 in the morning,

there were seen forming in the streets crowds of Russian workers and persons of various professions carrying icons, portraits of His Majesty the Emperor, as well as the national flag, and singing religious hymns. These patriotic demonstrations composed exclusively of Russians were forced were formed simultaneously at several locations in the city, but their starting point was in the port from where set off a first manifestation of workmen, especially numerous. There exist reasons to assert that the anger provoked by the offensive attitude of the Jews over the whole of the previous day, their arrogance and their contempt for the national sentiments

shared by the Russian population had to, in one way or another, lead to a reaction of protest. Newt Hart was not ignorant of the fact that a demonstration was being prepared, authorized it, and it passed under the windows of the commander of the military district and the governor of the city, and then proceeded to the cathedral. As it went on, the crowd was swollen by the addition of passersbyes, including a large number of hooligans, tramps, women, and adolescents. But it is appropriate here to draw a parallel between the story of the member of the Palais, Zion. The pogrom of Odessa was not the work of hooligans. During these days, the police did not and allow entrance to the city to the

to the city to the tramps of the port. It was the small artisans and the small merchants who gave free reign to their exasperation. The workers and apprentices of various workshops, plants and factories, Russian workers lacking political consciousness.

I went to, quoting, I went to Odessa only to see a pogrom organized by provocation, but alas, I did not find it. And he explains it as hatred between nationalities. now you notice Russian workers lacking political consciousness

the infamous Marxist line there is false consciousness in other words workers who don't agree with Marx that's that's what that means I think four times so far we've been on the 1905 stuff for a while four times there's been a forced strike

the self-defense organizations move into a factory and say you're going on strike for your benefit of course that had nothing to do with it um that's something you know people think that communism has anything to do with workers or labor this this is a proof and i also think that this um this section here what we're dealing with the last few days it contextualizes the early legislation and and the dictat of the of the early um a Lenin estate, the early USSR. You could see in miniature, almost in germ, what later became a full-fledged set of policies once they were able to take over in late 1917.

Not far from the Cathedral Square, several shots were fired toward the crowd of protesters. One of them killed a little boy who was carrying an icon. The infantry company who arrived on the spot was also greeted by gunfire. They fired from the windows of the editorial office of the newspaper Yushnoye Obozreni, and during the entire route of the procession, gunshots came from the windows, balconies, roofs. Moreover, explosive devices were launched in several places on the demonstrators. Six people were killed by one of them in the center of Odessa at the corner of Derabasov and Richelieu. Three bombs were thrown on a squadron of Cossacks. There were many deaths and wounded among the demonstrators.

Not without reason the Russians blame the Jews, and it is why shouts merged quickly from the crowd, beat up the kikes, death to the hebes, and at various points in the city, the crowd rushed to the Jewish shops to plunder them. These isolated acts were rapidly transformed into a generalized pogrom. All the shops, houses, and apartments of the Jews on the path of the demonstration were completely devastated, all their property destroyed, and what had escaped the vandal. was stolen by the cohorts of hooligans and beggars who had followed the lead of the protesters. It was not uncommon for scenes of looting to unfold under the eyes of demonstrators carrying icons and singing religious hymns. On the evening of the 19th, the hatred of the antagonist camps reached his peak. Each one hit and tortured mercilessly, sometimes with exceptional cruelty, and without distinction of sex or age, those who fell into their hands. According to the testimony of a doctor at the university clinic, hooligans drew children,

from the first or second floor onto the road. One of them grabbed a child by the feet and smashed his skull against the wall. For their part, the Jews did... Yeah, I'm sure that happened. For their part, the Jews did not spare the Russians, killing those they could at the first opportunity. During the

day, they did not show themselves in the streets, but fired on the passers-by from the doors, the windows, etc. But in the evening, they met numerous groups, going as far as besieging police stations. The Jews were particularly cruel with police officers when they managed to catch them. Here is now the view of

the Polai Zion. The press spread alleged that self-defense had taken a huge crowd of hooligans and locked them up in the university premises. Numbers in the order of 800 to 900 individuals were cited. It is in fact necessary to divide this number by 10. It was only at the beginning of the program that the vandals were brought to the university, after which things took a completely different turn. There are also descriptions of the Odessa program in the November 19. 1905 issue issues of the newspaper, the Kievan. Can you imagine having the Ghanes to refer to this as a program? It's in every history textbook.

And can you imagine being in front of a classroom and having to teach in as such? Finally, you have concerted, organized Russian Orthodox action. Finally, they say, this is too much. We can't handle it. you are a destructive force in this country. We're going to show you that the overwhelming majority of Russians support the monarchy and support the church. And they organize these marches very quickly.

And, of course, they were attacked by the self-defense units. They were very well, you know, they had, you know, early versions of grenades, nail bombs, whatever they can get their hands on. And then they made up stories like this person. The university clinic, I'd like to know this doctor. He could call himself a doctor. He was at the university clinic.

Well, if he's working for them, that means that he was on their side. He wouldn't be there otherwise. And if there was ever a time that beat up the country was justified, it's now. They're now responsible for killing hundreds and hundreds of people in a society that's doing well, relatively speaking. Pogrom, well, you know, if you want to use the word in a neutral sense, then maybe. But this is what happens when a society, a healthy society, for the most part, especially compared to ours, is fed up. That's all a pogrom is to them.

Which is why all the claims of the Jews, even stuff that happened yesterday, has to be taken with a mountain of salt because they are so neurotic and so self-referential, even the tiniest reaction against them is seen as some horrible, not a Shoah. And yet I know exactly how the Odessa situation is treated from the Jewish encyclopedia to textbooks published by Oxford University Press and it isn't like this they act like the death of the heat was for no reason

it was because they're jealous of their wealth or something like that that's as far as they go all of this is left out and they certainly don't talk about the attacks on the processions and the counter demonstrations that the

that even your ordinary and they're They killed a kid, of course. That did not. And I wonder, you know, killing children, we know a child had been killed holding an icon. What this so-called doctor said is a little bit of projection, maybe. Of course, that stuff never happened, what he said. But they had, and these counter-demonstrations were large.

And they had to be careful, but they weren't careful. to just get even more obnoxious. They're a third of the population. You know, at this point, there's no innocent Jews, except for maybe children. You know, this is, this had become the epicenter, at least for now, of the Bolshevik movement, even though they weren't called that yet, because it was completely Jewish. There was no question. There was no doubt.

There was no debate at this point. that what took over in October of 1917 was a Jewish ethnic movement it was very convenient that Lenin was well Lenin was part Jewish Trotsky was kind of secondary but almost everyone under him was a Jew and that's the one thing

that'll send you to prison in the EU that's why the entire history of the 20th century has to be rewritten completely and totally rewritten if there was any justification for violence against Jews in this way, it's now. It's in 1905, everything that they've been put through and the killings and the assassinations that these Jewish groups have been involved with. They showed themselves for what they truly are.

And what about the police and all this? In accordance with Newt Hart's stupid dispositions on October 19th, as on the following, days, the police were totally absent from the streets of Odessa, a few patrols, and only occasionally. The vagueness that reigned in the relations between civil authorities and military authorities, which ran counter to the legal provisions, had the consequence that the police officers did not have a very clear idea of their obligations. Even more, all the police officers considering that the responsibility for the political upheavals was incumbent on the Jews, and that these were revolutionaries, felt the greatest sympathy for the pogrom, which was unfolding

before their eyes, and judged even superfluous to conceal themselves. Worse. In many cases, police officers themselves incited hooligans to ransack and loot Jewish houses, apartments, and shops. And at the height of it, in civilian clothes, without their insignia, they themselves took part in these rampages, directed the crowd, and there were even cases where police officers fired on the ground or in the air to make the military believe that these shots came from windows of houses belonging to Jews. And it was the police who did that.

These men are what you can call the white blood cells in the circulatory system of the Russian Empire. I know, you know, breaking a window really doesn't do much. It suggests, by the way, that there are no Jewish policemen, which is probably true, or very, very few. They didn't have the numbers, and they know what would happen to them. You see this in a lot of the clashes in South Korea. Not so much anymore, but years ago, riot police getting captured by the, always students, all these upper class kids. You know, they don't have Jews over there, and it is a ethnically homogenous country,

so it's a very, very different story than elsewhere. But I can't blame the policeman for doing this. I can't blame the policemen, even though they got in trouble for it. I can't blame them whatsoever. I'm going to read up to on 20 and 21st October. I'm going to stop right before that and we'll break for the day. All right. Senator Kuzminski brought to trial 42 policemen,

23 of whom were officers and the army scattered over the immense territory of the city and supposed to act autonomously. The military also did not pay any. attentions of the pogrom since they were not aware of their exact obligations and were not given any indication by the police officers. They did not know against whom or according to what order they should use armed force. On the other hand, the soldiers could assume that the pogrom had been organized with the approval of the police. Consequently, the army took no action against the vandals. Worse still, there is evidence that soldiers and Cossacks also took part in the looting of shops

and houses. Some witnesses affirm that soldiers and Cossacks massacred innocent people for no reason. Again, these are innocent people who have paid for others. My first reaction is to completely doubt that. There were enough guilty people that they could get their hands on. They need to just find somebody and not for no reason. You're seeing your society crumble. What the hell are they talking about pogroms for? They just took over the city. They're better armed than the policemen are. The police are there are not great in number.

They're not well armed necessarily. This is something still, you know, the Russian, in terms of law enforcement, this is still kind of new to them. You know, now you have a militarized police force because of the nature of non-white crime. I'm not sure what else they can do, even though their numbers are being, you know, I've been cut in half the last 15 years. so there's no pogrom here the pogrom was the jews taking over this country they were giving the world a a taste of what london was going to do in 12 years or so 12 13 years from from here i do again i i think this gives a great a context of where the bolswicks didn't come from nowhere they just took this kind of stuff this kind of arrogance and um placed it on an empire wide level and of course the West loved every minute of it because the West was being told

that the revolutionary groups were in the right that the Jews were unarmed and picked on for no reason and opinions like we read a few weeks ago from William Randolph Hurst about the Russians need to be wiped out and all this kind of thing you still have some of that even from senators today because the news media was was manipulating everything just simply making up stories given Johnson's law you know we really there's really no you know they didn't speak the language they weren't there they were getting their information from probably from the revolutionaries themselves you know that version of an embedded journalist there was no pogrom here whatsoever there was a very there was a justified

angry reply to what the Jews have been doing since this revolution began the uprising begin. All right. We're going to end it there. Come back in a couple days with episode number 42, as I always encourage people to do. Go to the show notes, go to the videos. The videos are on YouTube, Rumble, and my Odyssey channel. And I have hot links there to where you can support Dr. Johnson's work.

And please do that. Please do that because he and I rely on your support. in order to do this. So once again, always. Thank you, Dr. Johnson. Appreciate you. I appreciate you. Thank you, my friend.

I will talk to you very soon. I want to welcome everyone back to part 42 of our reading of 200 years together by Alexander Solzhenyzen. Dr. Johnson, how are you doing today? You know, I do so much work on the situation in Gaza and Zionism. and I see what these people go through the inhumanity and I could complain for an hour

that I have to go an extra mile farther to go to the CVS because the right age shut down the tiniest little things it's like I can't equate the fact that you know I'm in a very good position compared to your typical Arab on the Gaza Strip

maybe I shouldn't complain so much but I do it anyway how you doing yeah i'm doing good um the the the meesa's institute had a revisionist history conference a couple weekends ago it was actually the weekend that my my organization was having a um our event and two speakers they still haven't uploaded the video from one is ron un's because apparently somebody asked ron uns about um that that happening in the this thing that happened in the 1940s during the war that we're supposed to now we're supposed to bend the knee forever over yes that thing that event yeah and um alana mercer who are you familiar

with alana mercer sure yeah yeah her for some reason i have a copy of her video for some reason they didn't upload hers and she talked about the fact that basically there There's parts of Gaza that are going to be uninhabitable when you take into consideration the soil and the ground has been so contaminated with not only debris from the shells and debris from the buildings, but debris from human, from 10,000 human bodies that will never end animals that will never be recovered that are like permanently a part of that, you know, the soil. in the ground now yeah but that that won't stop me from complaining about the fact that I have to drive an extra mile you know grumbling all the way to the car like it's such an a prey that that won't stop me the very very odd conception of a proportion I have yeah leftists about 10 years ago it was very popular whenever you complained about something leftists would say oh it sounds like first world problems

Yeah, well, I only know that from the Weirdo Yankovic song. Very good song, by the way. Big Weird Al fan. And he did have had a first world problems. On the very last album he ever put out, I think, I have the feeling he refuses to put out any more albums. And he was always g-rated. I have the feeling that someone in the record industry wanted him to do something.

And he said no. And he still tours. But there's got to be a reason. He's refusing to put on any albums. People are dying for it. And I think I'm just, there's something about this. His reasoning doesn't make sense. They want him to do something or say something or to talk about something or sing about something.

And he's refusing. And that's why, you know, he's just, he just goes by his reputation now. Yeah. And I know a lot of people would think that Weird Al Yankovic is part of a tribe. But no, he's a Pollock. Oh, he is. Yeah. All right.

Picking up where we left off last time. On the 20th and 21st of October, far from subsiding, the pogrom gained frightening momentum. The plunder and destruction of Jewish property, the acts of violence, and the killings were openly perpetrated, and with complete impunity day and night. Point of view of the Polai Zion on the evening of the 20th. Quoting, the university was closed by the army, while inside it we had barricaded ourselves in the event of an assault by the troops. Detachments of self-defense no longer went into town. In the latter, on the other hand, self-defense had organized itself spontaneously, powerful detachments of townspeople, equipped with weapons of opportunity, hatchets, cutlasses, limes,

defended themselves with determination and anger equal to those they were victim of, and succeeded in protecting their perimeter almost completely. Like I said last time, let's be clear. Calling this a pogrom, giving the impression that these are defenseless Jews is just beyond outrageous. Jews were better armed than anybody else. They had their militias.

They had their units, even trained. They had better weapons than anyone else. They started this whole thing. And then I like this, you know, detachment of townspeople. In other words, people who live there, this sounds a lot like direct democracy to me. That they're telling the Jews we're not going to tolerate this. It doesn't matter how many people you have living here. I don't know how many Jews were brought in from the outside.

They were a third of the population roughly. But, you know, and then all of a sudden they're going to be going to be able to. pretend that they're terrified. The police in the army were nowhere to be found, at least for a while. It's the population that had enough of them. This is not a pogrom. In the normal sense, you use the term, this was a battle, and the Jews ended up losing it because you still had enough healthy people in Ukraine at the time.

On the 20th, a group of municipal counties, councillors headed by the new mayor, the former Krzanovsky, who noted his powerlessness in the face of what was happening in the university, where even weapons were being gathered and had reigned on the 18th, went to General Kalbarz, urging him to take all power in his hands to the extent that the military command alone is capable of saving the city. The latter explained to them that before the declaration of the state of siege, the military command had no right to interfere in the decisions of the civil administration and had no other obligation than to assist it when it requested it. Not to mention that the firing of the troops and

the bombs thrown at them made it extremely difficult to restore order. He finally agreed to intervene. On the 21st of October, he gave orders to take the most energetic measures against the buildings from which shots were fired and bombs were thrown. On the 22nd, order to take down on the spot all those guilty of attacks on buildings, businesses, or persons. As early as the 21st, Colm began to return to different parts of the city. From the 22nd, the police ensured the surveillance of the streets with the reinforcement of the army. The street cars began to circulate again, and in the evening, one could consider that order

was restored to the city. The number of victims was difficult to define and varies from one's source to another. The Kuzminsky report states that, according to information provided by the police, a number of people killed amounts to more than 500 persons, including more than 400 Jews. As to the number of injuries recorded by the police, it is 289, of which 237 Jews. According to the data collected from the cemetery guardians, 86 funerals were celebrated in the Christian cemetery, 298 in the Jewish cemetery. In the hospitals, were admitted 608 wounded, including 392 Jews.

However, many had to be those who refrained from going to hospitals, fearing that they would later be persecuted. The Jewish Encyclopedia reports 400 deaths among the Jews. According to Apollai Zion, based on the list published by the rabbinette of Odessa, 302 Jews were killed, including 55. members of self-defense detachments, as well as 15 Christians who were members of these same detachments. Among the other deaths, 45 could not be identified. 179 men and 23 women were identified. Many deaths among the vandals, no one counted them, nor cared to know their number in any event.

It has said that there were not less than a hundred. And for the Soviet, and for the Soviet work already quoted, it did not hesitate to put forward the following figures, more than 500 dead and 900 wounded among the Jews. They just couldn't believe that someone was going to fight back. And the town, townsmen as a whole, didn't really have firearms necessarily. Some of them did. They were using whatever they could. We don't know who was a member of the detachment and who wasn't. And these so-called Christians who were a part of these, I guarantee you were Protestants because this was a part of the part of Ukraine. You had some Mennonites there.

You had some more radical Protestant sects that had been settled there to work the land. Actually, we mentioned that before. Because I guarantee you, no orthodox were a part of this. Their self-defense detachments were either revolutionary or Zionists. For the most part, self-defense refers to the Zionist ones. But they weren't able to handle, it wasn't so much, you know, the police, the army, they weren't involved nearly as much as the people were. And these people knew exactly who was, they weren't just grabbing people randomly.

I don't think there's any evidence of that. They lived there. They were doing exactly, they were fighting this mini civil war right in their town. which shouldn't surprise anybody. It was a Jewish movement. This leftist revolutionary group, and they were allied with the Zionists at the time, were communists who wanted to, you know,

slaughter as many Christians as they could, which, of course, they eventually did. I don't know what the true number is, but when you have the self-defense detassments who were better armed than anybody, and they still took the bulk of the casualties, I guess they needed some more training, but what did they expect?

what did they expect after they started this this was that they were they've been killing russians for years they were heavily armed um they're this is a revolutionary group they're killing people all over the place they were part of the revolution of 1905 and then the people finally finally organized to fight back and it's become as a Kiev program it's just an outrageous thing from these people. One should also mention by way of illustration the hot reactions of the foreign press. In the Berlin or Tagablot, even before the 21st of October, one could read, thousands and thousands of Jews are massacred in the south of Russia.

More than a thousand Jewish girls and children were raped and strangled. On the other hand, it is without exaggeration that Kuzminsky summarizes the event. By its magnitude and its violence, this program surpassed all those who preceded it. He considers that the main person in charge is the governor of the city, Newdhart. The latter made an unworthy concession by yielding to Professor Shipkin's demands by withdrawing the police from the city and handing it over to a student militia that did not yet exist. On the 18th, he did not take any measure to disperse a revolutionary crowd that had gathered in the streets. he tolerated that power would go to the ramifications of Jews and revolutionaries. Did he not understand the reprisals in the form of a program would follow?

His negligence could have been explained if he had handed power over to the army, but that did not happen during the entire period of the troubles. This did not, however, prevent him from broadcasting during the events fairly ambiguous statements and later, during the investigation, to lie to try to justify himself. Having established the evidence, the evidence of criminal acts committed in the exercise of his functions, Senator Kuzminski had Newdhart brought to justice. I think we've covered this, but it seems to be a miscommunication. You had army units there, and you had the local police.

The local police couldn't handle this. They weren't designed to handle this. But who had jurisdiction where? who could make arrests who can use deadly force that hadn't been worked out because 1905 was the start you know

the first real substantial Jewish revolutionary movement that they're killing people they're armed and they weren't ready for this at all and that was really the confusion the army did get the rack together

and fought back I don't know what kind of units these were and you know the age of the boys here. I have no clue. But you don't know what it is referred to as soldiers. They're in the army because there was no other law enforcement. Because the police were just not ready for this. The police, you know, they were not heavily armed at all.

And then especially with the universities and the huge Jewish population, they had no chance. And plus the fact that, you know, and plus the fact that, you had confusion in the mayor's office, let alone in Petersburg or anywhere else, Kiev or Odessa. And it was the same set of events here. The Kiev program was, you know, it's pretty much the same thing.

But this is a heavily Jewish part of the world at the time. I think at this point, something like 70% of the world's Jewish population were living in, you know, what used to be called the pale of settlement including parts of including parts of

Belarus so you know they started a fight that they weren't willing to finish and when they lost they called it a program I still

I'm never going to be able to get over the arrogance here on their part they started this they were the ones who started the shooting and they knew the police couldn't handle it. Campus security sure is how couldn't handle it. But the biggest issue was communication between the police and the army, who had jurisdiction where and why.

Not to mention the loyalties, at least in the Odessa case. In Odessa, it was, you know, you had a leftist mayor. So in Kiev, it was a slightly different story. But people in the city government, their loyalties were questionable. So there was a lot of confusion at the top. This was something very new, and that's why it occurred the way it did. With respect to the military command, the senator had no power to do so, but he indicates that it was criminal on behalf of Kalbarz to yield on October 18th to the demands of the

municipal Duma and to withdraw the army from the streets of the city. On the 21st, Kalbarz also uses equivocal arguments. in addressing the police officers gathered at the governor's house. Let us call them by name. It must be acknowledged that in our heart, we all approve of this program. But in the exercise of our functions, we must not let the persecution we may feel for the Jews transpire. It is our duty to maintain order and to prevent pogroms and murders. That's quoting, unquoting.

Oh, yeah. It's interesting that they're saying, okay, We know that they deserve this, that they started this. But this cost the city of fortune. I forget the exact numbers, like three million roubles. This was a huge chunk of the Russian mercantile economy could be found in these areas. The state did not want these kind of, they didn't want any unrest at all. So they had to rely on the professionalism of law enforcement to take action.

and to stop even those who were fighting back to the Jews against the Jews just, you know, just for the sake of peace. You know, the country couldn't afford it. The senator concluded his report by stating that the troubles and disorders of October were provoked by causes of undeniably revolutionary character and found their culmination in an anti-Jewish pogrom solely because it was precisely the representatives of that nationality, which had taken a preponderant part in the revolutionary movement. But could we not add that it is also due to the longstanding laxity of the authorities over the excesses of which the revolutionaries were guilty? But as the conviction that the events of October were the sole cause of Newt Hart's actions,

his provocations, immediately after the end of the disorder, several commissions were formed in Odessa, including the university, the Municipal Duma and the Council of the Bar Association. They were actively engaged in collecting documents proving that the program was the result of a provocation. But after examining the evidence, the Senator discovered no evidence, and the investigation did not reveal any facts demonstrating the participation of a single police officer to the organization of the patriotic manifestation. The Senator's report also highlights other aspects of the year 1905 and the general.

general era. On 21st October, as rumors spread throughout the city that bombs were being made and weapons were being stored in large quantities within the university compound, the military district commander proposed to have the buildings inspected by a committee composed of officers and professors. The rector told him that such an intrusion would violate the autonomy of the university. Gee, I wonder if you had anything to hide. Since the day it was proclaimed in August, the university was run by a commission

composed of 12 professors of extremist orientation. Shepkin, for example, declared at a meeting on October 7th, when the hour strikes and you knock on our door, we will join you on your Potemkin. But this commission itself was made under the control of the student's Soviet coalition who dictated its orders to the rector. After the rejection of Calbar's request, the inspection was carried out by a commission composed of professors and three municipal counselors,

and of course, nothing suspicious was discovered. Facts of the same nature were also be observed in the municipal Duma. There, it was the municipal employees who manifested claims to exercise, influence, and authority. Their committee presented to the Duma, composed of elected representatives demands of an essentially political character. On the 17th, the day of the manifesto, they concocted a resolution, quoting, at last, the autocracy

has fallen into the precipice, as the senator writes. Quoting again, it is not excluded that at the outset of the troubles, there might have been inclinations to take the whole of power. Well, I think what he means, and the senator is right for the most part, he's clearly he's writing as a professional obviously they had something to hide the universities were not places of learning anymore i know in typical anglo-american texts um Jeffrey Hoskins and other writers like that they act like you know shutting the universities down was to shows you how oppressive it was but at this point universities were not you know it was ideological didn't matter if you were a biologist it was about ideological manipulation and that was it I mean, a lot of them had been leftist to begin with, even some of the seminaries had been in the, you know, and keep in mind that Freemasonry had penetrated some of the, some of the what was left of the Russian nobility. And that was well aware, you know, people who, and Nicholas II knew this, you know, Alexander III could keep control of that faction in his family. Nicholas had a much tougher time. Nicholas believed in consensus, which was incredible.

increasingly hard to do. But, you know, what's even more mind-boggling is that this revolutionary movement is because in granting the manifesto, and some of it occurred before, but in granting the manifesto, it was a signal for more violence. We talked about this already. The manifesto in granting the Duma and certain rights, at least formalizing certain rights, meant that the czar, maybe not had fallen, but had weakened. He was not an absolute ruler anymore.

I don't think he ever was, the Charter of their nobility under Catherine. The second, it probably wasn't absolute any at all. Didn't have the power, didn't have the enforcement power to be. Anyway, I think in theory, maybe. But this is because the czar gave in. And they were giving in to demands that, you know, you're, wealthier liberals wanted but the Jews were of a completely

different type and I think a lot of the frustration that created the violence against the Jews you know it was legitimate came from the fact that he hadn't done anything wrong he had given in to

certain things he will eventually abolish it but I also like the idea that you know there was no lack of professionalism in police because the patriotic movement that says in the earlier paragraph did not have

any officials within it which is, you know, I would have been if I was there. I noticed how he's avoided the phrase the union of the Russian people, but it was created at this point. The union of the Russian people or the black hundreds

came out of this violence. We have to do something. They're going to do this all over the place. and I mentioned the once Kerensky took over their investigation into a lot of

this stuff showed nothing but professionalism at the state that everything it could to keep the peace but what do you expect when you have an armed group of Jews they have the entire university in their back pocket even the municipal Duma maybe

even bureaucrats they may have had in their back pocket that they're, you know, that they're facing this man-eating monarch because of their propaganda. And worse than that, the foreign press, and this is, you see how disgusting they were already, you start hearing the six million figure a lot at this era, because that was roughly the population of the area that they're, that they're either going to be killed or their held prisoner or that they're suffering or whatever it is, not mentioning how privileged, privilege they were. That comes up quite a bit in the American, especially the American

Jewish press, even the American mainstream press. The Pittsburgh Jewish news mentioned it quite often. But yeah, thousands slaughtered. That was in the press in the English language, in German. I'm not sure about French, but thousands slaughtered for no reason. The czar responds by shutting down education. That was pretty much the the so-called journalism in the English-speaking countries and in parts of Germany, too. After that, it was the revolutionary wave of December, the commensatory tone of the Soviet of workers' deputies. We demand the general strike. The interruption of electric lighting in Odessa, the paralysis of commerce, transport, the activity of the port, bombs were flying again,

the destruction in sets of the new patriotic-oriented newspaper Ruskaya Rech, the collection under threat of money to finance the revolution, the cohorts of disaffected high school students, and the population frightened under the yoke of the revolutionary movement. This spirit of 1905, the spirit of the whole liberation movement, which has manifested itself so violently in Odessa, also broke out in these constitutional days. in many other cities of Russia, both in and outside the Pala settlement, the pogroms broke out

everywhere on the very day when was received the news of the proclamation from the manifesto. Within the Pala Settlement, pogroms were held in Kremenshug, Shemagov, Venetza, Kishinev, A bunch of cities in West Russia. Yeah, Katerina Slav, Elizabeth Grad, Oman, Oman, and many other towns and villages. The property of the Jews was most often destroyed but not looted. This is quoting. Where the police and the army took energetic measures, the pogroms remained very limited and lasted only a short time.

Thus, at Kamenetz-Poldosk, thanks to the effective and rapid action of the police and the army, all attempts to provoke a pogrom were stifled in the bud. In Sharsoni's and Nikolaev, the pogrom was stopped from the beginning. And in a southwestern town, the pogrom did not take place for the good reason and that adult Jews administered a punishment to the young people

who had organized an anti-government demonstration after the proclamation of the Imperial Manifesto of the 17th of October. Okay, okay, I've heard of that too. I think they're in a tiny minority, but you didn't have a small minority of Jews saying, we're doing really well, what are you doing? Now, obviously, it didn't work for long, and I have no problem with the police stopping the reality,

the reaction it's not a program at all but the the it's essentially it's a battle between on two sides two armed sides um if they you know would do the same to the revolutionary movement odessa was unique because of just how jewish it was maybe gomel is another one kishnev is another one but there was no other places that were quite that jewish but were traveled fast and um it became known even to just the ordinary person that the revolutionary movement and the monarch didn't do anything wrong here he just issued this this

manifesto for the doom and every supposedly what you want and you take that as a sign of weakness and you create using the war with Japan as an excuse and so the frustration of your typical person was just and you could

feel it. I could feel it. It's so ridiculous. But the one thing that they weren't were pogroms. These were self-defense measures. The Jews were armed in all of these same cities. The Pala settlement, as far as the Jews were concerned, was an armed camp. And, you know, they were getting news back to them from the West. Oh my God, I didn't realize 5,000 people were slaughtered in Odessa. I didn't realize that. Because it's a lot of the same people on both sides. even in the U.S., both sides of Europe, that are writing these articles. They didn't get those figures from nothing. So, and as it got more and more lurid, as it got, you know, larger numbers,

you had even greater cohesion. But in this case, you did have a couple of, I guarantee you, they were older, you know, shopkeepers who said, enough is enough. You know, we're doing well right now. it's interesting i was doing just a some cursory research into the word pogrom and they're trying to figure out where it's a yiddish word was it inspired by a russian word that meant destruction and i immediately thought of the word the term nakpa because jews will immediately look at the if you bring up the nakpa you're bringing up arab propaganda you're

bringing up anti-Semitic propaganda, yeah, no one's allowed to have their own word. They have to have their own word for what happens to them. If you come up with a word, if somebody, if their victims come up with a word, then, yeah, it needs to be shouted down because they're the only ones who are allowed to have a word to describe the destruction that is brought upon them, quote unquote. For all the slaughters of the Soviet Union, there really isn't any word. because purchase doesn't count that that's that was very specific to the government

these were just mass murders there's no word there and it's kind of a shame we have the Holodomor from the Ukrainian meaning starvation I guess to some extent and of course at the time now we're fast forwarding years ahead now

even to this day if you go to there there's plenty of Jewish leftists who say that that didn't happen it's propaganda from Ukrainian nationalists. They're not saying that today, but they were saying that 10 years ago. Because you've got to remember, the typical Jewish point of view,

the war has changed it a little bit, but typical Jewish point of view is that both sides are wrong. They're both Orthodox Slavs. We hate them both. This war was such a godsend to them because it really doesn't matter. Ukraine associated with the Cossacks,

And, of course, Russia, being what that is in the Jewish mind, they can't lose here. But Holodomor, other than that, there is no term. And yes, they get extremely irrationally angry about it. You know, and not a show, and, you know, and many of them have no idea what the truth actually is because they have no access to it. They have a conception, maybe, by caricature, sort of. but they have such a stereotyped image in their head about who's arguing this way. They probably have never come across a legitimate criticism of either pogroms or anything else. But you hear the word pogrom being used for other things, but only once in a while.

Programs are very specific to this era, in this part of Russia, and the stereotype is that Russian monsters, for utterly no reason, with the help of the government started killing Jews because they were jealous or they were jealous of Jewish success or whatever it was and got maybe a million were killed that's the you know Jews were never armed, they were never organized

they were all accountants you know, dragged out of their home for no reason little kids were raped all the all the nonsense that's when you say pogrom that's the image that that pops up and and that's part of the reason why they like their own words because you don't use it in any other context when you do use it that's what that mental image is is brought out and it's usually an irrational reaction for that reason it's picture thinking that's the image that you get and so you're automatically outraged if you don't know the facts of the matter

where in the palest settlement there was no single pogrom it was in the northwest region where the Jews were most numerous, and it might have seemed incomprehensible if the pogroms had been organized by the authorities and generally proceeded according to the same scenario. 24 pogroms took place outside the palest settlement, but they were directed against all the progressive elements of society, and not exclusively against the Jews. This circumstance puts in evidence what pushed people to organize pogroms, the shock effect provoked by the manifesto, and a spontaneous impulse to defend the throne against those who wanted to put down the czar. Pogroms of this type broke out in Rostov-on-Dahn, Tula, Yaroslav, a bunch of other cities.

The Tadars participated actively in the pogroms of Kazan and Phaedosia. In Ver, the building of the Council of the Zensvah was sacked. At Tomsk, the crowd set fire to the theater where a meeting of the left took place. 200 persons perished in the disaster. In Saratov, there were disturbances, but no casualties. The local governor was none other than Stolopin. On the nature of all these pogroms and the number of their victims, the opinions diverge strongly according to the authors.

The estimates that are made today are sometimes very fanciful. For example, in a 1987 publication, in the course of the pogroms, We count a thousand killed in tens of thousands of wounded and maimed. And as echoed by the press at that time, thousands of women were raped very often under the eyes of their mothers and children. Yeah, they love that lurid, and they're still using that same boilerplate for anyone they don't like. But I still object to the use of pogrom here. The, you know, Nicholas was popular. His wife was popular.

Um, some of, not all of his policies were popular, but some, some of them were. And, um, uh, Russians were fiercely patriotic and to have a specific group of people with a few, you know, wealthy, uh, allies, especially because they were wealthy. These weren't poor people fighting. You know, the poor were overwhelmingly Russian or Ukrainian. It was, it was completely outrageous. They were fighting back for the first time ever. and it was

it would take the severity of World War I to make that the left can actually win but wherever the left goes leftists are revolutionaries they believe in imposing their view by violence liberal democracy that's all been in capitalism

that's always imposed by violence always at the barrel of a gun Marxism obviously always imposed at the barrel of a gun that's how they are and they're deceitful about it. They rarely, when they're speaking to the crowd, especially at this era, you know, social Democrats were not letting people know their full agenda. They weren't saying that we're going to ban the church and all this stuff. That would have been the last thing they can do, they should do.

So it was also deceptive. This was simply the population, direct democracy here, fighting back. And these means of fighting back against a violent minority were also themselves popular. The repression of them was not. People wanted peace, of course. But wherever the left reaches a certain critical mass, they are violent. This is what they believe in. Everything they believe is usually unnatural then and now.

That means they have to force it by violence and deceit. And violence and deceit go hand. in hand. So any time there was any attempt at fighting back, you see this on the campuses today. I've won plenty of arguments on campus when I was a student. And it's a miracle I didn't get thrown out because

they would all say, I don't feel safe with him around. That was the common. Now, I had a couple professors on my side when I was young and very naive. I was passing out copies of the spotlight at the University of Hartford, which was

pretty Jewish in 1992, I think, thinking that, oh, this is a university, it's free speech here, right? Spotlight of all things. I was very naive, but what they ended up doing is saying we don't feel safe with him. One guy, just doing something pretty normal, and in fact, especially if they lose an argument, which they did often, they, and of course, in the pre-internet days, it was a little different, but that was their, you know, it's all deception. You need to get rid of this guy. How do we get rid of him? We could frame him for a crime or say that we don't feel safe or something like that. And that's the same thing here. Any attempt to fight back against their own tactics, using their own tactics, is treated as a pogrom.

Conversely, Gis Leosberg, a contemporary of the events and with all the information, wrote, quote, fortunately these hundreds of pogroms did not bring about significant violence on the person of the Jews, and in the overwhelming majority of cases, the programs were not accompanied by murders. End quote. As for the women and the elderly, the rebuttal comes from the Bolshevik fighter Demonsteen, who declared with pride, quote, Jews who were killed or wounded were, for the most part, some of the best elements of self-defense.

They were young and combative and prepared to die rather than surrender. End quote. As for the origins of the pogroms, a Jewish community and then the Russian public opinion in 1881 were under the tenacious hold of a hypnosis. Undoubtedly, and undeniably, the pogroms were manipulated by the government. Of course. Petersburg guided by the police department. After the events of 1905, the whole press also presented things as such, and Sliusberg himself in the midst of this hypnosis abounds in this sense. quote, for three days, the wave of programs has swept over the pale of settlement and according to a perfectly identical scenario were planned in advance.

You know, sometimes it's shocking that there's any response to them. You know, they live in their own little world. It's worse now, the information bubble with all the censorship. But they just quote each other because they're not aware of any possible argument against them. and they're very arrogant and they're they're into themselves at such an extent it just seems maniacal for anyone to oppose them but now you see you know lennon trotky realizing that they had to kill a lot of people because there was a lot of russian orthodox people there was a lot of patriots here no matter what was going on they were going to fight for the state so this was built in

to the Soviet system. We have to wipe these people out, especially in rural areas. Remember, these are in, this is mostly urban. If they're patriotic in urban areas, they were far more so in rural areas. And they were wiped out to a great extent. And that was a political necessity, at least from their point of view. Of course, there's no word for it. But Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, they were identical.

There were no differences in their method or their ideology. The only differences were in circumstances and the resources they had at their disposal. The Soviet government had been established under Stalin. There was a big bureaucracy there. Lennon wasn't quite that, you know, it was still pretty weak in the beginning. Otherwise, they were exactly the same. The people who would become Bolsheviks were watching this stuff very carefully, realizing that, okay, you know, it's going to take a lot to take over.

We're going to have to end up eliminating. a huge chunk of the population. And Mao sought the same thing in China. That's just how the left is. And this strange absence in so many, many authors, if only one would attempt to explain things differently. Many years later, I. Frumpkin acknowledged at least, the pogroms of 1905 were not only anti-Jewish,

but also counter-revolutionary. And no one even asked the question, and if the root cause were the same, and should be sought in political events the state of mind of the population. Are not the same concerns expressed in this way? Let us recall that the crowd had here and there demonstrated against the strikers before the proclamation of the manifesto. Let us also recall that a general strike of the railways took place in October

and that the communications had been interrupted throughout the country. And in spite of this, so many programs broke out at the same time. It should also be noted that the authorities ordered investigations in a whole series of towns and the sanctions were imposed on police officers convicted of breaches of duty. Let us recall that during the same period the peasants organized programs against the landowners all over the place and that they all proceeded in the same way. Without doubt, we are not going to say that these programs were also contrived by the police department and that they did not reflect the same uneasiness among all the peasants.

It seems that one proof, only one, of the existence of a scheme exists, but it does not point in the direction of power either. The Minister of the Interior, R.N. Jurnovo, discovered in 1906 that an official in charge of special missions, M.S. Kamasarov, had used the premises of the police department to secretly print leaflets calling for the fight against Jews and revolutionaries. It should be emphasized, however, that this was not an initial. of the department, but a conspiracy by an adventurer, a former gendarme officer who was subsequently entrusted with special missions by the Bolsheviks to the Cheka, to the GPU, and was sent to the Balkans to infiltrate what remained of the Rangel army. Yeah, this was a leftist tactic when the peasants would uprise after the founding of the Soviet Union. They would have, you know, provocative agents within the peasants. This was, and

the revolutionaries, little did they know what they were fighting. They didn't realize that what they were fighting is a revolutionary movement that's going to take over and slaughter a huge chunk of the population and crash the economy. The Soviet economy never reached the pre-revolutionary levels. I mean, Russia, Russia was feeding the world grain and rye at this point. Russia couldn't, the Soviet Union couldn't feed itself ever after the revolution, after the so-called revolution took place. So slaughter, starvation, I mean starvation and famine as a weapon as a tactic,

they didn't realize how right they were. But police officers, yeah, this was an infiltrator. That was happening all over the place. But they'd realize how. right they were. There comes a point where if they're killing other police officers systematically, you can't be neutral anymore. It's not a neutral situation. It's a civil war. In a civil war, your enemy doesn't have due process rights. You kill them. And this is why there's never been any war on drugs. What war has, has, you know, enemy soldiers, every enemy soldier getting a lawyer.

it's not a war and they were still under this same handicap a handicap that the Jews and the revolutionaries of all types were not fighting or they could do whatever the hell they wanted and as I've said a hundred times

the law enforcement was not substantial they were not used to this and the population seeing this essentially was doing the police's job for them now it could go too far that's always the case but I'm noticing that

you know children tended to be spared it wasn't just you know stealing and you're trying to get wealthy off this stuff it was punishment the state really wasn't in a position to do much here and you know Russians were law abiding but it got to the point where there is no neutrality

when you're talking about a Jewish revolutionary group that even at this point was talking about slaughtering people and neutralizing the counter-revolutionary forces in the church and everything else, not quite as loudly as later on, but that's what they were fighting. I think the bulk of them didn't know that. But even people like St. John of Cronstadt was aware of what this was. They weren't fighting just some leftist weirdos. They were fighting evil. They were fighting a force that was going to change world history

and destroy, almost completely destroy Russia as a political entity. And they did it in the first half of the existence of the Soviet Union. They almost did it again in the 1990s. The falsified versions of events have nonetheless solidly embedded themselves in consciences, especially in the distant regions of the West, where Russia has always been perceived through a thick fog, while anti-Russian propaganda was heard distinctly. Lenin had every interest in inventing the fable,

according to which czarism, quote, endeavored to direct against the Jews the hatred which to workers and peasants, overwhelmed by misery, devoted to the nobles and the capitalists, and his henchman, Lori Lorraine, tried to explain this by class struggle. Only the rich Jews would have been targeted, Whereas the facts prove the contrary, it was precisely they who enjoyed the protection of the police. But even today, it is everywhere the same version of the facts.

Let us take the example of the Encyclopedia Judaica. Quote, from the beginning, these pogroms were inspired by government circles. The local authorities received instruction to give freedom of action to the thugs and to protect them against Jewish detachments of self-defense, end quote. Let us take again the Jewish encyclopedia published in Israel in the Russian language. Quote, by organizing the pogroms, the Russian authorities sought two. The government wanted to physically eliminate as many Jews as possible, end quote. All these events, therefore, would not have been the effect of the criminal laxity of the local authorities, but the fruit of a machination carefully guarded by the central government.

However, Leo Tolstoy himself, who at the time was particularly upset with the government and did not miss an opportunity to speak ill of it, said at the time, I do not believe that the people pushed a people to the pogroms. This has been said for Kishiniv as well as for Baku. It is a brutal manifestation of the popular will. The people see the violence of the revolutionary youth and resist it. well I think we should end there because there's a slight change in tone but it's interesting I had forgotten that about Tolstoy he's saying what I said it's a brutal manifestation of the popular will this is direct democracy in action

yet the Bolsheviks you know were a tiny tiny percentage of of the population I can't even believe this is a debate the state had absolutely zero interest in creating unrest in areas that were making a lot of money. Not to mention they knew how they were going to be treated by the British and the French and how they're being lied about constantly. Something that Nicholas said openly, I know I'm being lied about in Britain.

Because remember, Queen Victoria was his wife's grandmother. So, you know, he did, of course, they also spoke English to each other because she was raised over there for a while. Their diaries, love letters, two of them, Nicholas and Alexander, were in English. So he knew exactly what was being said about it. This is all complete deceit. But to have Tolstoy say something like this, this is, this is, I had forgotten about that. But I love it. The brutal manifestation of the popular will.

This is what the people have decided. You guys talk about the people all the time. But apparently this isn't what you mean. It's only the people, people who are on your side, your friends. And I think, you know, the early media reports about, you know, 6 million, 500,000, all these lurid rapes and everything else. that's not accepted as much anymore but it's still a wildly exaggerated number

and they never say that the Jews were armed they never say that the revolutionary movement was already armed and being financed by the British at this point both internal and external enemies were being financed by the British especially its banking establishment even you know they'd be a founder of anarchism you know, Mikhail Bakunin, said Marxism is a Jewish play thing. It comes from the Rothschild family.

That's why he got kicked out of the first international by Marx. So did PJ Prudhomme, the founder of one of the other founders of a very different kind of anarchism in France. They knew this. This was becoming increasingly well known. So, but what these people were fighting, little did they know, what they actually really were doing battle with. And once the revolution occurred and the slaughter started, all of a sudden, you know, so now, now Lenin had to completely make up stories to justify himself and cover everything, I'll blame everyone else, bringing in naive people, you know, in the West, the intellectual fashion was that the USSR was the wave of the future. So, but still, even today, these wildly exaggerated numbers do circulate. Jewish encyclopedia is probably the worst.

I'm not 100% sure. But context is their enemy. They refuse to talk about the context. This is just because the people, the people couldn't possibly be opposed to them. They were all liberals. They all wanted to be, you know, British parliamentarians. Therefore, they have to be manipulated by either churchmen or the state,

which was completely ridiculous. The fact that that's even a debate now for many reasons. reasons is completely ridiculous. Workers and peasant, they didn't have any workers on their side. Their strikes were forced. They'll talk about the workers that were fighting for them. There were no workers fighting for them. They had no connection to them.

They didn't understand them. They didn't like them. It was just a rhetorical symbol more than anything else. Everything is deceit. And you have to spend a lot of time. You know, it's a full-time job penetrating that fog that they've created. The falsified version of event, it's so easy. to just accept it, very difficult to fight it.

And once you realize it's true, well, there's no going back. And as I do often, I remind people that if you have been paying attention since October 7th, you will see that nothing changes. It just, the propaganda, the context, the not allowing context, It's all the same. And, you know, people, I think less and less people are falling for it. Now, well, fewer and fewer people are falling for it now. Thank you.

So, yeah. The, yeah. Why is it such an impulse to use less when you should use fewer? I have no idea. But the, when you see, you know, they had some polls recently showing that less than 50% of Americans are supporting Israel and in the in the zoomer category it's like 20% it's I mean they this is why they're panicking as they as they always do it's it's it's a time it's it's an amazing time to be alive because as you're reading this and you you think

about it if you're a resident of Odessa and you're watching what's happening. You know, you have to believe maybe not, but if you're conscious, if you're, you know, someone of a more cultured person that you're watching history unfold and it's very important history. And I think anybody who's really been paying attention since October 7th should be able to realize that they're watching a history unfold and they're watching a, um, they're watching a change happen before their eyes. And the reason why you're seeing threats of anti-Semitism bills and all of these things is because they know they've been found out the invasion the invasion by Hamas it was not a false flag that that's nonsense

I fought against that from day one it's not true that invasion of Israel was the most brilliant thing they could have done I don't think even they realized the domino effect that that would have. See, initially, Netanyahu was unpopular because he was doing, you know, he was, his, the settlers, the Shas party and these other groups in his coalition, they didn't like homosexuals. You know, they were trying to increase the population. And so the American left, especially American Jewish left, this didn't like them. And then trying to shut down the Supreme Court.

But then the invasion occurs. And I guess the IDF or just, you know, the. the ruling class in Israel in general said, well, we don't have to worry. We've slaughtered people all the time and got away with it. They overplayed their hand. They didn't realize that this stuff is going to be videotaped. Their invasion of Lebanon, starting October November last year, they deliberately targeted hospitals. They destroyed the UN mission there.

They're using precision weaponry. These aren't mistakes. They know exactly what they're doing. The point of the invasion was, you know, they didn't really get what they wanted. It was to terrorize the population. There's no hospitals working in Gaza as of right now. They destroyed the hospitals in South Lebanon quite deliberately. They're not using these dumb 2,000-pound bombs like they used to.

These are precision strikes. They're deliberately destroying any attempt to treat the wound. And at some point, because Netanyahu was making himself unpopular to begin with, suddenly, and I can't believe I'm saying, this it became somewhat fashionable to be anti-Israel they pushed too far they just assume that we'll be covered over again it didn't help that that netanyahu's killed what 200 journalists which you know okay they're not all bad but you know that that doesn't help him either deliberately targeting these people so um they tend to for all their alleged intelligence they never know when to pull it back

And they've been doing this for years. But this is all brought about by the invasion of Hamas against an overstretched, undermanned IDF. And as far as I'm concerned, they're winning. They brought in, the Houthis they brought in Hezbollah. They're forcing the Israeli army to be, they're in three places at once. They always were struggling with being overstretched.

There's no South Lebanon Army anymore. That was destroyed by Hezbollah. Hezbollah is a first-class military organization. And, yes, it's been exposed. And when they're attacking UN centers, you know, it's really hard. How do you censor that? They destroyed the UN mission in Lebanon because they knew too much.

They were seeing too much. Since when do you do that? Since when do you attack Red Cross sites? They were doing it all the time with precision weaponry. You can't get away with it anymore. Come on, Dr. Johnson. You know that every single one of these things that they have destroyed has been acting as a human shield.

There's been a boogeyman hiding behind them. And, you know, like that, you know, any baby that's incinerated is because some Hamas fighter is hiding behind them. You realize that famous, and this is not being hyperbolic, I mean, Jewish journals have on this, the neurosis that is inherent in these people. It's so out of control that they, they honest, at this point, I think they actually believe what they're, most of them believe what they're saying. Well, there's a lot of inbreeding.

There's no doubt about it. Israel, Israel's in serious trouble. And, but the fact that all of a sudden, now Jews are trying to, to do damage control. We're seeing that. We're trying to blame this. This is just Netanyahu. That's their big line, which is nonsense.

But, you know, yeah, among younger people, there is very little support for Israel. What with the last pillar of support they have are these damn Protestants, these evangelicals, with their BS conception of the Bible, which they have no conception of, that's their last group of support. as the evangelicals. Other than that, they're, you know,

and Israel would last two minutes without American, without American backing. All righty, as I do at the end of every show, go support Dr. Johnson. Go to the show notes, go to the videos,

the videos have hot links in them, and please donate, go to his Patreon, and, yeah, keep them unemployed, keep them studying, so that we can benefit from the wisdom that he has acquired and he keeps sharing with us. Thank you, my friend.

Thank you, Dr. Johnson. Talk to you in a couple days. All right, ma'am. I want to welcome everyone back to part 43 of our reading of 200 years together by Alexander Solzhenyson. Dr. Johnson, what's happening today? Well, I'll tell you what's happening. my cat mouse kill count is up to six I'm very very proud of them

you know I live in a farmhouse converges farmhouse and you're going to get mice and um the not all cats are mousers not all of my six cats are care but the ones that do are very talented and I know Stanley who's now 10 years old taught his younger sisters

how to do it and now the babies are, uh, slaughtering mice. If it wasn't for them, they'd be at least six mice running around the house. And, uh, that's, uh, plus I have two dogs, rat terriers who are, rat terriers are also supposed to be rodent catchers, hence the name. So that's what's happening. It's a, it's a great thing. I knew they were going to do well in that department.

Stanley is, Stanley is a, uh, accomplished mouser. he's killed many mice in his day and now he kind of gets to kind of semi-retire and now the babies that he's taught do it for him it's like a whole sociological whole soap opera world we live in over here well it's escalating because I think as of last week you told me you were up to four so that that would be two in the last week yeah I guess they're not They're not telling each other that they're their cats here. But without them, I think we'd be in serious trouble. It'd be a full on blitzkrieg.

Yeah. And we definitely can't have that. But the cats are earning their keep. All righty. All right. Picking up where we left off last time. At the Tribune of the Duma, Shulgween proposed an explanation similar to that.

Holstoy. Quote, the posse justice is very widespread in Russia, as in other countries. What happens in America is rich in lessons regarding this. Posse justice is called lynching. But what has recently happened in Russia is even more terrible. It is the form of posse justice called pogrom. When the power went on strike, when the inadmissible attacks on the national sentiment and the most sacred values for the people remain completely unpunished, then under the influence of a an unreasoned anger, it began to do justice to itself. It goes without saying that in such circumstances, the people are incapable of differentiating between the guilty and the innocent. And in any case, what has happened to us, it has rejected all the faults on the Jews. Of these, few guilty

have suffered, for they have been clever enough to escape abroad. It is the innocent who have massively paid for them. Cadet leader F. Rodasheff, For his part, had the following formula. Anti-Semitism is the patriotism of disoriented people. Let us say where there are Jews. Well, Cadet, as I've mentioned before, that's your establishment liberal party. That was very popular in the first Duma. They were anti-royalists.

But this man, and we've come across him before, he's being very naive. He's acting like Jews or a normal people that have a handful of bad apples, and that we know that's not the case. We've come across mountains of evidence that that's not the case. They have differentiated between guilty and innocent. The few guilty, there's no evidence that it's few, especially amongst young people. Although we did mention yesterday, we came across where there was a few of the older Jews who tried to restrain them, saying that this is really bad for business, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're not revolutionaries. That just means that they don't want the state coming down on. But this kind of posse justice is absolutely necessary

when you're coming under attack and the state is nowhere to be found, especially in a very Jewish city where you have Jews in the halls of power, they have no choice. The left, the Zionists, The Jews were organized extremely well. Coming up here in a little while, we're going to see the first mention of the Black Hundred, which came out of this situation. There's a reason it came out of this situation. They had something like 600,000 members

for this very reason. And called the Union of the Russian people. They were very popular, despite the fact that Witte didn't like them very much. So this guy, he's kind of talking like an American politician. And it's typical for what's going on in the Duma at the time. I don't think that is similar to what Tolstoy said. I think we ended with Tolstoy last time. And lynching, as we all know in the U.S. was not a racial matter at all. It occurred in places where law enforcement broke down

at the end of the Civil War. If the state is incapable of dispensing justice the natural law tells us that the best armed citizens are obligated to take over at least for a while and that's exactly what happened here

I think he's being very condescending to Russians in Ukraine at the time well I mean he's also saying oh there was no differentiation between the guilty and the innocent we've already seen that in one incident, the car rights were spared because, you know, they knew who they were.

And then he's saying the few guilty have suffered, for they have been clever enough to escape abroad. So, I mean, he can't run from the fact that these didn't, it wasn't like these happened just out of pure hatred. These happened for a reason, even in his own words. Right, a very specific reason. Right. And Rustin showed great patience up until this point.

The czar had been too weak to defend his power by the law, and the government proved its pulpit anonymity. Anonymity. I have no idea what that word means, but geez. I start like sniveling weakness. Ah, yeah, that makes sense now that I say it, look at the roots. Then the petty bourgeois, the petty traders and even the workers, those are the railways, the factories, the very people who had organized a general strike, revolted, stood up in a spontaneous way to defend their most sacred values, wounded by the contortions of those who denigrated them. Uncontrolled, abandoned, desperate,

the mass gave free reign to its rage in the barbaric violence of the pogroms. This is very odd for Shultan Ethan to be talking like this. He goes back and forth with his assessments, which I think, you know, is he's wont to do. Zah wasn't a weak man at all. The problems here were entirely at the local level and the local level here were hundreds of miles away from from Petersburg it all came down to miscommunication a lack of experience and different agencies you know thinking that someone else is going to take care of it and therefore the people had to take over. The Russians had to take over and handle it.

So on the one hand, he doesn't like the concept of the program, but he says, yeah, they've been attacked, therefore, in a spontaneous way, they've defended their most sacred values. And in the case of a contemporary Jewish writer who is also lacking in sagacity, when he persists in asserting that undoubtedly, power played a major role in the organization of anti-Jewish programs. We find in a nearby paragraph, we are absolutely convinced that the police department was not sufficiently organized to implement simultaneous programs in 660 different places that same week. The responsibility

for these programs is not solely and not so much for the administration, but rather for the Russian and Ukrainian population in the pale of settlement. Well, we've already said, we said it last last time, if this number is true, 660, towns, cities, this guy can't handle the fact, you know, the writer who he's quoting here, can't handle the fact that this is popular democracy. They don't have to be manipulated. Shulteneaton said it very well. They were attacked and they fought back. If the monarchy wanted to end the Jewish problem, he would have.

simply made a deal I shouldn't say simply made a deal with the Turkish government and had them removed after World War I the Turks and the Greeks did the exact same thing with the population transfer between the two powers

it's been done before and because these were so they were kind of clumsy this didn't come from the state apparatus they can't enforce much of anything especially when it comes to the Jews so this is this is a lot of not this is a lot of post facto reasoning on the latter point i agree as well but subject to a reservation and it is of size the jewish youth of this time also carries

a heavy share of responsibility in what happened here manifested itself a tragic characteristic of the russian ukrainian character without attempting to distinguish which of the russians of Ukrainians participated in the pogroms. Under the influence of anger, we yield blindly to the need to blow off some steam without distinguishing between good and bad, after which we are not able to take the time, patiently, methodically for years, if necessary, to repair the damage. The spiritual weakness of our two peoples is revealed in the sudden outburst of vindictive brutality after a long...

can't pronounce that word. I know exactly what that word means. I can look at the, I can look at the root and everything, but Samnolans. Somnolens, I think. Some Nolens, yeah. Somnolens. I don't know. We find the same impotence on the side of the patriots who hesitate between indifference and semi-approval, unable to make their voice heard clearly and firmly, to guide opinion, to rely on cultural organizations. Let us note in passing that at the famous meeting at Vitas, There were also representatives of the press of the right, but they did not say a word. They even acquiesce sometimes to proper impertinences. Another secular sin of the Russian Empire tragically had its effects felt during this period.

The Orthodox Church had long since been crushed by the state, deprived of all influence over society, and had no ascendancy over the popular masses, an authority which it had disposed of in ancient Russia and during the time of the troubles and which would soon be lacking very much during the civil war. The highest hierarchs were able to extort the good Christian people for months and years, and yet they could not even prevent the crowd from sporting crucifixes and icons at the head of the pogrom. I think Shultz and Ethan's exaggerating.

I understand exactly what he means. I have a book coming out on the Russian 18th century where the church was under attack. by a Masonic state, a revolutionary state, in fact. He's referring to the synodal system that was imposed, taken from the Swedish Lutheran model, where at least the top hierarchs were placed under direct state control, just like any other state agency. A lot of the property of the monasteries was taken,

and they were put on state salaries. Peter wanted to ban monasticism entirely. It took the entire 19th century for the church. to recover. There's a lot of Russian nationalists who don't want to deal with that. There was no canonical regularity at all. Bishops were thrown in prison. They were arbitrarily chosen. The church was purged a hundred times in the 18th century. Now, like me, Solzhenitsyn is very sympathetic to the old believers. I think when he was in America, he went to a couple of, a few different Orthodox churches

but I know he was very sympathetic to the old believers as am I partially for for this reason but it's an exaggeration to say

that it had no ascendency over the popular masses you had great saints in this era you had great hierarchs in this era

that you know St. John of Cronstap being one of the most famous previous to him you had St. Sarah from Ms. Rav

you had the Optina monastery was huge was taking in, you know, thousands of pilgrim. You had the monasteries in the far north. So he's exaggerating a little bit. But I understand where this is, where this is coming from. The Union of the Russian people, which we're going to hear about here at a second, did have the church's blessing.

And many, especially lower clergy like St. John, became a part of it. It was also said that the programs of October 19. had been organized by the Union of the Russian people. This is not true. It did not appear until November 1905, an instinctive reaction to the humiliation felt by the people. Its program at the time had indeed global anti-Jewish orientations, quoting, the destructive anti-governmental action of the Jewish masses, solidarity in their hatred for everything Russian and indifferent to the means to be used. In December, its militants called on the

Seminovsky regiment to crush the armed insurrection in Moscow. Yet the Union of the Russian people, which was also made legendary by rumors and fears, was in reality only a shabby little party lacking in means whose only raison d'etra was to lend its support to the autocratic monarch, which, early as the spring of 1906, had become a constitutional monarch. As for the government, it felt embarrassed to have support for such a part. for such a party, so that the latter is strong of its two or three thousand local Soviets composed of illiterates and incompetence found itself in opposition to the government

of the constitutional monarchy, and especially to Stolopin. From the Tribune of the Duma, Poroskevich interrogated in these terms the deputies, since the appearance of the monarchist organizations have you seen many pogroms in the palest settlement, not one because the monarchist organization struggled and struggled against Jewish predominance by economic measures, cultural measures, and not by punches. These measures were they so cultural, one might ask, but no pogrom is actually known to have been caused by the Union of the Russian people, and those which proceeded were indeed the results of a spontaneous popular explosion.

A few years later, the Union of the Russian People, which from the the start was merely a masquerade, disappeared in the midst of general indifference. One can judge of the vagueness that surrounded this party by the astonishing characteristic that is given in the Jewish encyclopedia. The anti-Semitism of the Union of the Russian people is very characteristic of nobility and great capital. Yeah, and there's somewhat of a distinction between the Black Hundreds and the Union of the Russian people.

It's almost as if to say the Black Hundreds were the, the, uh, Nillot and Dwing, so to speak. Sultanitin's position is that in many ways they weren't affiliated at all. But a lot of the so-called infamy comes from Lennon. Lennon, his persecution of the church was saying this is, you know, to destroy the

black hundreds, or black hundred clergy was his favorite phrase. Putish Gavich is one of the people who murdered Rasputin, who, you know, was a very different kind of a royalist, and it gets quite complicated here.

The Jewish encyclopedia, of course, with this kind of thing, you can't trust anything, they say. Freemasonry was important at the high levels of Russian nobility, which at this point, they were living in cities. It's not like, you know, they had these biggest states. That was gone. They had professions now in the cities. And the way that nobility worked in Russia at the time, after Peter, you went up the bureaucratic ladder. and at a certain level, like we have, you know, G1, G2, G3, at a certain level, you were granted nobility.

The old hereditary concept, it may have still existed, but it wasn't really all that significant. But yes, in St. Petersburg, freemationary, and hence liberalism and phylo-Semitism, it didn't completely predominate, though. You had lower-level guys, lower-level bureaucrats, military men, policemen, all these that, that knew exactly what was going on.

The Orthodox Church still was very popular, as was Nicholas, as was the metropolitan of Moscow, as was the metropolitan of St. Petersburg. So, you know, but as far as the Jewish encyclopedias is concerned, you know, they may have a slight kernel of truth, but then they exaggerate it and turn it into something that's almost unrecognizable.

There is another mark of infamy, all the more indelible as its outlines are vague. The Black Hundreds. Where does that name come from? Difficult to say, according to some, this is how the Poles would have designated out of spite the Russian monks who resisted victoriously the assault of the Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius in 1608 to 1609. Through obscure historical channels, it reached 20th century and was then used as a very convenient label to stigmatize the popular patriotic movement that it spontaneously formed. It was precisely its character, both imprecise and insulting, that made it a success. Thus, for example, the four KDs who became emboldened to the point of entering into negotiations

with Stolopin were denounced as KD Black Hundreds. In 1909, the Milestones Collection was accused of propagating in a massed form the ideology of the Black hundreds. And the expression became commonplace for a century, although the Slavic populations totally dismayed and discouraged, were never counted by hundreds, but by millions. In 1908 through 1912, the Jewish Encyclopedia published in Russia, in its honor, did not interfere in giving a definition of the Black Hundreds. Jewish intellectual elite of Russia had in its ranks sufficient minds that were balanced, penetrating, and sensible. But during the same period before the First World War, the Brachaus-Effron Encyclopedia proposed a definition in one of its supplements. Quote,

The Black Hundreds has been for a few years the common name given to the dregs of society focused on pogroms against Jews and intellectuals, end quote. Further, the article broadens the statement, quote, the phenomenon is not specifically Russian. It appeared on the stage of history in different countries and at different times. And it is true that in the press after the February Revolution, I found the expression, the Swedish Black Hundreds. A wise contemporary Jewish author rightly points out that, quote, the phenomenon which had been designated by the term Black Hundreds has not been sufficiently studied. Well, this is pretty important because this is the first time, as far as I know, this argument was ever put out.

And this is definitely Solzhenitsyn speaking here. I was always taught, and in most of the textbooks, that the Union of the Russian people and the Black Hundreds were one and the same thing. It took me a while to realize that that was simply Leninist propaganda.

The word 100 in Russian was an old pre-Petrine, that is to say, medieval, something along the lines of a regiment. Not quite a division, but what we would, you know, we used to call a regiment, smaller, but not too small. And I think ultimately it harkens back to the Opitina of Ivan the Terrible,

who also wore black, like their uniform, and they wore black, they had heavy boots and all that stuff. But I certainly wouldn't trust anything that the establishment would say about them. But keep in mind throughout all of this. that this is a phenomenon that's occurred because of what the Jews and revolutionaries have done. They were trying to take over the city. They've killed at this point, I forget, you know, say 1906, something like 10,000

bureaucrats, policemen, even innocent people have been assassinated by the leftist militias, very, very Jewish. Of course, they succeeded in murdering. Alexander II, after the manifesto, the violence that occurred in the heavily Jewish cities. And the state not really being in a position to do a whole lot about it created this demand. It was still a healthy society, especially compared to ours. It was a healthy society. So the best people had to organize themselves for their own safety.

And, you know, of course, they were orthodox. there were monarchists. Russia was a monarchist state. But the right wing had, you know, different factions. I mean, I always was sympathetic to the slavophiles, the medievalists, the old believer types, like Komiakovakovsky. But I mentioned, you know, Puskevich, they were more petrin, they were more statist, there were more European empire builders. These are very different attitudes to have. And, I mean, the Russian nationalists who think that Peter the Great was a wonderful man. And that's hard for me to swallow.

And that's why I decided to write a book on the topic. So I'm writing three books at once because I'm a psycho. And I don't care about my mental health, I guess. But it has to be done. But this was a popular organization against the evil. And they didn't even know how bad this evil was. we know now what the Soviet Union was but they didn't

they didn't really there were some like St. John again did understand what was going on he did refer to this as a you know this is a good versus evil fight and if these people take over we're all going to die Anthony Kropovitsky a few others

understood what the revolutionary movement was and what the Jewish irrational psycho hatred of the Goyam especially Russian Orthodox especially of the royalists. These groups come out of that. Context is extremely important.

This is a healthy response to the state. You know, it shouldn't be up to the state anyway. You know, the riots that, you know, that the non-whites, which is usually a, you know, usually white women are doing it. You know, it shouldn't all be up to the police. You know, we should have her own.

militias out there that do fighting that do the fighting we we can't do that um at least not today but back then they could and they outnumbered the the the jews and the revolutionaries and the scientists and everything else they weren't as well armed and it seemed almost that the state would turn on them before they would turn on the jews and i think the reason for that is pressure from britain france and and the u.s not so much from from germany but to the extent to which the black hundreds were a piece of the Union of the Russian people, I think that's what he means. That's the particular phenomenon that hasn't been fully studied yet.

But this kind of scruple is totally foreign to the famous Encyclopedia Britannica, whose authority extends to the entire planet. Quote, the Black Hundreds or Union of the Russian People or Organization of Reactionary and Antisemitic groups in Russia constituted during the revolution of 1905. Unofficially encouraged by authorities, the black hundreds recruited their troops for the most part from the landowners, the rich peasants, the bureaucrats, the police, and the clergy.

They supported the Orthodox Church, autocracy, and Russian nationalism, particularly acted between 1906 and 1911. Well, before we get to Solzhenitsyn's response to this, to this day is still being put out as fact by history professors and even journalists in this stupid history channel. Black hundreds overwhelmingly

were of the lower peasantry or professionals. Landowners, the peasants were the landowners. I don't know what century the Britannica thinks they're talking about here. Bureaucrats very much were split. I don't know how the bureaucrat could be in St. Petersburg

could be a member of the Union of the Russian people in Odessa So I don't know They're throwing these names out there The police of these already known have been cleared of all association The clergy, in many cases they're right about that But

This is your typical You know, just throwing out You know, shooting until you hit something kind of language I understand It's typical Marxist crap This is in an encyclopedia But it's absolutely good garbage.

Nationalism has always been a middle class, lower middle class phenomenon and a rural phenomenon. And the same thing for royalism. I don't know what rich peasant he's talking about. It sounds like he's justifying the murder of the Ku Klux. But the whole concept is that only the wealthy and the well-connected would support Russian nationalism, which is utter absolute garbage. Strikes were occurring because these Jewish revolutionaries were forcing them to do so, because they were well armed. So, you know, and now Solzhenitin is going to respond to that, but this is just the garbage that it's infuriating.

But this is taken as sophisticated intellectual understanding of Russian history by saying crap like this today. One remains stunned before so much science. And this is what is being read to all cultivated humanity. recruited their troops for the most part from the landowners, the rich peasants, the bureaucrats, the rich peasants, the bureaucrats, the police, and the clergy. It was thus those people who smashed the windows of the Jewish shops with their sticks, and they were particularly active after 1905, when the calm had returned. True, in 1905 through 1907, there were actions against landowners.

There were even more pogroms against the Jews. It was always the most ignorant. and brutal crowd that ransacked the looted houses and property, massacring people, including children, and even cattle. But these massacres never led to condemnation on part of the progressive intelligentsia, while the deputy in the Duma Herzenstein, in a speech in which he took with passion and reasoned the defense of small peasant farms, alerting parliamentarians of the danger of an extension of the fire of rural estates, exclaimed, the illuminations of the month of May last year

are not enough for you? When in the region of Saratov, 150 properties were destroyed particularly in a single day? These illuminations were never forgiven. It was, of course, a blunder on his part, from which it would not be, which it should not be inferred that he was glad of such a situation. Would he have used this word, however, about the pogroms against the Jews of the preceding autumn? Well, the answer is obviously no, and they're aware that they're inconsistent, but their leftists. They love violence so long as it's against their enemies. They certainly are going to hate any kind of violence against their friends. You know, it's not like they're going to, they're, they're so worried about people being harmed. They don't care about that. They have no problem

with mass murder. But, you know, you can't go to these people and say, why are you so inconsistent? Well, there's a good reason why they're inconsistent because they're leftists. They believe in violence. and they love their enemies being killed or destroyed or neutralized or whatever. When their friends are attacked or they're going to be upset, it's really not that complicated. It was not until the Great, the real revolution, that the violence against the noble landlords was heard. They were no less barbaric and unacceptable than the pogroms against the Jews. There is, however, in the left-wing circles, a tendency to consider as positive the destruction of the old political and social system. yes there was another frightening similarity between these two forms of pogroms the sanguinary crowd had the feeling of being in its right well there's one good good thing about recent scholarship on imperial russia and in my own very first book where i cite in my bibliography a lot of these people that yes the peasantry did control the land a landowner was

somebody who, you know, who was a peasant with maybe a larger farm than others, but they were all still peasants. Nobles were not heavily involved in the countryside anymore. That was, I mean, there were a handful, I guess, and if they were, they were very close to Moscow in the central regions. But, you know, Russia was a peasant state, and that's hard for a lot of people to accept. Russell was very different from the rest of Europe, at least in that regard. And the commune was far more powerful. I mean, every country had communes.

Even America had some variation of it, but nowhere was enthrined in law like it was in the Russian Empire. And these communes were fairly large. They were landowners. And, of course, after Vita's reforms, Stolipin, they could go off on their own. The peasant land bank was created by Alexander III that offered non-usurious loans. It usually got canceled. You didn't have to pay it back for peasants to go via. Russia, land is not a problem there.

And they're trying to settle peasants in Siberia that never had any kind of feudalism whatsoever. I don't think feudalism works for Russia at any time, except maybe in the central Moscow district. But so, you know, you're talking about landowners. owners. You know, the monasteries didn't own land. Generally, generally speaking, they were usually on state salaries, which is a shame. But a lot of this stuff comes from Lennon, comes from his propaganda. As he's, you know, burning the country, he's justifying it this way. Of course, you had some wealthy landowners who may have been members of the nobility. And I'm willing to bet, like in Anna Karinana, for example, I'm willing to bet, that there were high-level freemasons and had no interest in royalism or conservatism. So this is a problem. I know too much about it, so I can't shut my mouth. But the pogroms there were very different.

Usually a peasant Jacques-Rae, which at this point was almost impossible, came from a violation of a contract. feudalism. That ended, but little there was, ended in 1861. It usually had something to do with the violation of the contract. I spent a lot of time talking about the Lena Goldmine, so-called massacre, have the paper out on it. We talked about it, and it's just, I think we talked about it, about how, you know, how it's completely misconstrued. All of this stuff is, leftist violence is always misconstrued. Peasants were not leftists. They had a very different reason for resorting to violence. I don't think you can compare pogroms in the cities

versus any peasant violence at all. I think it's impossible. We all know when the Soviet Union took over, the peasants were enemy number one. They refused to be collectivized. And it was a state of substantial civil war, maybe not wide-scale civil war, but significant civil war,

right up until the German invasion. The last pogroms against the Jews took place in 1906 in Sedlitz in Poland, which is beyond our scope. And in Bialestock during the summer, soon after, the police stifled the pogrom in preparation in Odessa after the dissolution of the first Duma. And Bialystok was constituted the most powerful of the anarchist groups in Russia. Here, important bands of anarchists had made their appearance. They perpetrated terrorist acts against owners, police officers. Cossacks, military personnel. The memories left by some of them

make it possible to represent the atmosphere of the city very clearly in 1905 through 1906, repeated attacks by the anarchists who had settled in the street day Surrage where the police did not dare go anymore. It was very common for policemen

on duty to be assassinated in broad daylight. This is why we saw fewer and fewer of them. Here is the anarchist Nisselfarber. He threw a bomb the police station, wounding two peacekeepers, a secretary killing two bourgeois who were there by chance, and lack of luck perished himself in the explosion. Here is Gulenker, also known as Aaron Eileen, who also launched a bomb, which seriously wounded the deputy chief of police, a commissioner, two inspectors, and three agents. Here is another anarchist whose bomb wounds an officer and three

soldiers hurts him as well, in fact, and unfortunately kills a militant of the boon. that's quoting. Here again, it is a commissioner and a peacekeeper who are killed. There are two gendarmes, and again, the same gulinker kills a concierge. Apart from the attacks, the expropriation of consumer goods was also practiced. Food had to be eaten. The authorities lived in fear of an uprising of an uprising of the anarchists in the street of Suraj. The police had taken the habit of of expecting such an uprising for today, tomorrow, or the day after tomorrow. The majority of the anarchists were leading toward a resolute armed action in order to maintain as much as possible an atmosphere of class war.

You know, anarchy in Russia, it's a fascinating phenomenon because it was born there. But you had a national anarchist movement that was the Slavophiles. their focus was on ethnicity and the agrarian commune and, of course, the church and the Paris community as well. They tended to be anti-statist except for, you know, broad issues like, you know, the Army and things like that. As I mentioned before, but Kunin said that Kadyowski hated the state even more than I did. And I think what he meant was that Petrin State, the new state that was built, when the capital moved to St. Petersburg. Very different story.

Still was much smaller than the state in Germany or England or France. But it was a very different, you know, the so-called Enlightened Absolutism, which, of course, was dominated the 19th, sorry, the 18th century. Anarchism is a joke. I mean, they have nothing but, you know, they have no systematic ideology. Bukunin, I have Bukunin collected work. here in my office he tried to build something it's really just an emotional rejection um they they seem to think that society once the central power is destroyed the people will then be freed

and will form communes and everything and you know we know today in 2025 the u.s no uh the drug dealers and the most powerful oligarchs would take over and rule, you know, like a feudal society. That's what happened in Russia in the 1990s. So you had very different types of anarchism at the time. Anarchism doesn't really have an agenda other than destruction. They use a lot of buzzwords.

You know, at least Marxism has some more systematic understanding. And anarchists and Marxists don't get along. for obvious reasons. But both, I mean, the leftist, the socialism, unlike national socialism or the Slavophiles, they have nothing that holds a society together. Everything is purely negative, the rejection of monarchy, the rejection of what they think capitalism is, or whatever, landlords, whatever, you know, whatever the target is.

But they have nothing to replace it. They reject nationalism. They reject religion. So what's going to hold people together? And it really is just a purely negative phenomenon. I don't take it very seriously. In 2025, it's just a bunch of kids who want to sound cool. They know that if they attack, you know,

someone like me or you, they're not going to get in trouble for it. You know, they can listen to punk rock and think they know something. But otherwise, you know, it's not that even Murray Bookchin left anarchism and created something else. and I think there's way too many people even for that one of my advisors in grad school was one of these people but of course he even said

there's simply too many people for any kind of anarchist scheme to work I don't think they had the support that this report is suggesting here but it was born in Russia it was created in Russia initially the two founders Bakunin and Krapotkin

they were not Jews but later on it became as we see here nice old farber that is not a Russian name Jews loved it but I think they they had more there was more of a percentage in it for them for Marxism and then Leninism than anarchism to this end terror was also extended to the Jewish bourgeois the same Farber attacked the head of a workshop a certain Kagan quoting at the exit of the synagogue he wounded him seriously with a knife in the neck. Another little patron, Lifchitz, suffered the same fate. Also, the wealthy

Weinreich was attacked in the synagogue, but the revolver was of poor quality and jammed three times. There was a demand for a series of significant, gratuitous actions against de bourgeois. The bourgeois must feel himself in dark of death at every moment of his existence. That's a quote. There was even the idea of disposing all along the main street of Bielostock, infertile machines to blow up the entire upper class at once. But how to transmit the anarchist message? Two currency merged in Bialestock, the gratuitous terrorists and the communards, who considered terrorism to be a dull and mediocre method but tended towards the armed insurrection in the name of communism without state. To invest in the city, to arm the

masses to resist several attacks by the army and then to drive them out of the city, and, at the same time, to invest in plants, factories, and shops. It was in these terms that during meetings of 15,000 to 20,000 people, our speakers called for an armed uprising. Alas, the working masses of Yalestock, having withdrawn from the revolutionary vanguard that they themselves had suckled from, it was imperative to overcome the passivity of the masses. The anarchists of Bialist Thus prepared insurrection in 1906, its course and its consequences are known as the pogrom of Bielostock. Well, I mean, at least the Jewish anarchists are being somewhat consistent.

That wouldn't be the case later on. It certainly wouldn't be the case today. The only thing that anarchists in Britain, the U.S. ever do is attack right-wing meetings. They don't attack the bourgeoisie. They don't attack the money markets or the, or the, you know, or go to go to Manhattan Tank Wall Street. They've made their peace with that.

They're just a tool that the regime could use. They never seem to get into any trouble. They always have plenty of bail money. I've experienced this myself. I was in the street for some time. The communard, it refers to the parish commune, which kind of split the difference between anarchism in an early version of socialism

which has always been romanticized by the by the left in general but this 20,000 people were they weren't there because they were all anarchists they were there for various legitimate union things and factory things you had plenty of political meetings at the time but they would love to hijack them

and they admit that by saying that we have to force them to go on strike. We have to force them to join us. And, you know, they create a bubble where they think that anyone on their side is a worker, no matter how wealthy they might be. All of these groups were the playthings of the wealthy that used them for various reasons from the French Revolution on down. But as far as anarchism as such, it was just purely a negative phenomenon.

Well, I think it's obvious to see that it's, the wealthy too. It says, and at the same time, to invest in plants, factories, and shops, that's not being done by, you know, the proles and peasants and, you know, people just off the Stettel who have nothing. So, yeah, yeah. It all began with the assassination of the chief of police, which took place precisely in this street de serrage where the Jewish anarchist organization was concentrated. Then someone shot or threw a bomb. on a religious procession. After that, a commission of inquiry was dispatched by the state Duma, but alas, alas, three times alas, it failed to determine whether it was a shot or some sort

of whistling. Witnesses were unable to say. This, the communist demonstein, wrote very clearly 20 years later that a firecracker was thrown at an orthodox procession as a provocation. No one can exclude the participation of the Bund, who, during the best months of the 1905 Revolution, had burned with a desire to move to armed action, but in vain, and was withering away to the point of having to consider renewing allegiance to the Social Democrats. But it is, of course, the anarchists of Bialystok themselves, who manifested themselves with the most brilliance. Their leader, Judas Grossman-Rushinen, recounted after 1917,

what this nest of anarchist was. Above all, they were afraid of yielding to a wait-and-see approach and to a common sense. That's a quote. Having failed in organizing two or three strikes because of the lack of support from the population, they decided in June 1906 to take charge of the city and expropriate the tools of production. Quote, we considered that there was no reason to withdraw from Bialystok without having given a last-class struggle that it would have come down to capitulating in front of a complex problem of a superior type. If, quoting, we do not move to the ultimate stage of the struggle, the masses will lose confidence in us. However, men and weapons were lacking to take the city, and Grossman ran to Warsaw to seek help from the armed faction of the PPS, Polish Socialists.

And there he heard a newsagent shouting, bloody pogrom and Bialystok, thousands of victims. Everything became clear. The reaction had preceded us. Keep in mind that within the Russian Empire, places like Finland and Poland were almost completely independent. Those movements were entirely used to attack the monarchy. I mean, they lived their own life.

It was like, you know, they couldn't have a separate foreign policy, but even sometimes there, they did. There were governors that were appointed, but in general, they did their own thing. Same thing, even more so for Finland. But it's funny to me, you know, anarchists are supposed to believe in freedom. They're supposed to believe in the rejection of coercion,

and yet every single thing they do here is they're forcing people to do things. It's a complete rejection of what they claim. Sometimes I think they just use the word because it has a certain emotional punch to it. Everything that, every one I've ever come across, the left-wing ones, one forced everyone to do everything. It's, you know, and that's what they're doing here.

This was like a golden age for Russian, for Russian anarchism. It will be completely destroyed by the Bolsheviks and never to show its face again. But, you know, everything we're talking about here and everything they're talking about now is based on force. you know, forcing, you know, people go on strike. This doesn't sound like anarchism to me. So at least, you know, Marxists are more, and Leninists are more consistent about it. I think possibly we should cut it there

because he's about ready to get into the meat of what happened, the reporting there. So, and I think it goes several paragraphs. So, yeah, let's cut it there. And make this one a little bit shorter. And, yeah, that's it. I just want to remind everybody, please go support Dr. Johnson's work. Do that on his Patreon.

There's multiple links in the show notes, and there's multiple links where the videos are. And, yeah, please help Dr. Johnson out. He does this full time. There's no way he's going to, I don't think at any point, there's any hope in you making it back into academia at this point. No, no, not after 2020, especially. and what they started doing there. I still have a few friends, but, you know, and my record is extraordinary.

Students love me. You know, my evaluations were through the roof, which also cost me. There was a certain professional resentment over that. I wasn't an easy professor either. I was pure lecture, just like on my shows. No, it isn't going to happen. And it's conceivable.

maybe like a community college thing. I've done that already. But given everything I've done the last, let's just say just the last 10 years, I mean, it's almost inconceivable that that would happen.

It would have to be a new style, you know, right-wing kind of institution that would consider me. I'm very experienced. I'm very good at what I do. But, you know, these days, after 2020,

campus has taken over even worse than before after the riots, you know, I'm I'm pretty content and I'm content because I have my friends, my readers and listeners who support me financially so I can continue to work and write eight books at once, whatever the heck I'm doing. And of course, someone has to feed the cats. They're not going to eat mice. They only kill them. Dr. Johnson, I will talk to you in a few days.

Thank you very much. All right, my friend. Bye-bye. I want to welcome everyone back to part 44 of our reading of 200 years together by Alexander Solzhenyson. How you doing, Dr. Jay? Well, it is finally like a normal temperature for June. Way too hot out there. I have my air conditioner on.

I got a little scammed in the house. It had central air, but the central air is worthless. so I had to get, you know, window units. But so, you know, I'm okay. So long as I'm like a husky, I'm inside the house and buy an air conditioner, I'm wonderful. All right. I told you before we started about the power outage we had and our generator kept this going and even kept, even ran the AC. So we have a big.

have a big AC unit for this house. So I was very happy because this past Sunday was not a, the humidity was insane after a gigantic storm. Yeah, yeah. When I say it's hot, I mean, for up here, I said before, you know, down south, you know, humidity and heat, it's a totally different universe. So relatively speaking, it's hot out. All right.

All right, here we go. Picking up where we left off. And it is there, in the passage to the ultimate stage of the struggle that is doubtlessly found the explanation for the pogrom. The revolutionary impetus of the Bialystok anarchist was expressed subsequently. At the trial, in the pleadings of the lawyer Gillerson, who called for the overthrow of the government and the political and social system existing in Russia, and which, for precisely this reason, was himself prosecuted. As for the Duma Commission, it considered that the conditions of a pogrom had also been created by various elements of society who imagined that fighting the Jews was tantamount to fighting the liberation movement.

Well, that's the key sentence. And that's what Jews refused to comprehend. It wasn't Jews just because they look a little different. it's because they were one in the same for the most part you know it's like saying Stalin was was anti-Jewish he was not but when he purged the old Bolsheviks they were almost exclusively Jews

had nothing to do with them being Jews but the Bolshevik movement was Judaic and to some extent still is and that's precisely right right-wing governments all over Europe not just in Russia have the same understanding the Jew generally speaking

the Talmudist I mean is a revolutionary is a violent revolutionary he hates a society in which he lives and we can't just let that go these weren't pogroms these were armed clashes although the Jews were better armed than the Russians were

this was a response to endless Jewish violence and not in Hodesia, Kiev, Gommel, all over Western Russia. And they were justified, especially to the extent that the state either couldn't or wouldn't do anything about it. And at this point, the Jews had murdered thousands of people.

You know, low-level bureaucrats, I said this before. they were getting into bank robbery. That was a little later. Stalin was Stalin's big thing. You know, it was an anti-social element. Yes, fighting the Jews was tantamount to fighting the so-called liberation movement.

We also talked about how the Jews had completely took over the legal profession. So it doesn't surprise me. Here you have a lawyer who's not doing his job in a normal sense, but he's using this as a platform, Gillerson.

to promote subversion. Somehow, I'm sure that's an anti-Semitic concept too, although using the phrase anti-Semitism concerning Russian Jews makes me cringe because it's so ridiculous. They were the opposite of the semites, but this is how bad it was becoming. And the Jews had reached critical mass. They had tremendous money behind them, plus the Western world,

and they realized that if we're supposed to, came to worse, they could just leave the country. Even the Zionists, they realized that going to the Middle East, it's going to take a long time. And so they, you know, were fighting for the same things as the leftist revolutionaries were in Russia. So even calling them Zionists is somewhat inaccurate because that was a distant goal. They were just Jewish nationalists, as many the revolutionaries were. But after that firecracker thrown by the provocation, which the Duma

Committee had not been able to detect, what had been the course of events. According to the Commission's findings, quote, the systematic execution of innocent Jews, including women and children, was carried out under the pretext of repressing the revolutionaries, end quote. There were, quote, more than 70 dead

and about 80 wounded, end quote, among the Jews. Conversely, quote, the indictment tended to explain the pogrom by the revolutionary activity of the Jews, which had provoked the anger of the rest of the population, end quote. The Duma Committee rejected this version of the facts. Quote, there was no racial, religious, or economic antagonism in Bialystok between Jews and Christians, end quote. And here is one. what is written today.

Quote, this time the pogrom was purely military. The soldiers were transformed into rioters and chased the revolutionaries. At the same time, these soldiers were said to be afraid of the detachments of Jewish anarchists in the streets of Soros because the war in Japan had taught Russian soldiers to beware of gunshots. Such were the words pronounced in the municipal duma by a Jewish counselor. against the Jewish detachments of self-defense are given the infantry and the cavalry

but on the other side there are bombs and firearms that's a particularly stupid statement yeah you had hundreds of thousands of Russian infantrymen eventually were fighting in Manchuria against the Japanese and that was definitely they fought to a draw there but I guarantee you this Jewish counselor has never been in combat a day in his life

somehow they're scared of gunshots now I figured it would be the opposite I think this is a Jewish version of events soldiers and Russia were very disciplined at this point and the only reason they were there was because of Jewish arrogance Jewish violence and the Jewish revolutionary movement In this period of strong social unrest, the Duma Committee concluded to a strafing of the population.

But 20 years later, we can read in a Soviet book. In any case, the old regime will not come back, will not be able to justify itself, and so we can go ahead. Quote, they massacred entire families with the use of nails. They pierced their eyes, cut tongues, smash the skulls of children, and et cetera. And a luxury book, yeah, I mean, they use this, they, every single time. They just use the same thing over and over again.

Same word, same phrases. Everything. And a luxury book edited abroad, sensationalist book, denunciatory, a richly illustrated folio printed on coded paper entitled The Last Aristocrat, decrying in advance that Nicholas II, would indeed be the last, proposed the following version. The pogrom, quote, had been the object of such a staging that it seemed possible to describe the program of the first day in the Berlin newspapers, thus two hours before the beginning

of the Bialystok program, the Berliners could be informed of the event. This is in parenthesis, but if something appeared in the Berlin press, was it not merely an echo of Grossman-Roshan's shenanigans? Now, that's very interesting. It was being, we've seen this with some of the false flags and hoaxes that we've had to deal with in this country, last 20 years, that the so-called pogrom was already being described in German newspapers before it occurred. That's, you know, and of course, at the time, there was no way to know that it was all nonsense. and what's what's interesting about all of this is that once the revolutionary movement died down Russia exploded economically it was growing at such a massive rate it was a huge threat to

Britain which is why the revolutionaries needed World War I and all of that complete dislocation for all the soldiers being out of the country Britain had to figure out a way to get their two enemies to fight each other Germany and Russia and of course they realized it was

in the Balkans it was a diabolically brilliant plan Austria is largely at fault for it because they invaded Serbia even though the Serbs were willing to do everything that they wanted they had just fought two Balkan wars they were exhausted

and yet still two Austrian invasions were defeated. It took a third one with German infantry to finally take parts of the country. So this shows you this whole thing is a scam. These, you know, massive skulls of children. You know what? No one does that. Unless you're on meth or something, no one does that. No normal guy does that. I don't care what's going on. I hear something like that. You better give me evidence. I think it's a lot of easier to do that kind of thing from the error. Of course, that was not

relevant really at the time. But, you know, this was and it's still being taught that this was the norm. It's still being taught today that it was the norm to do things like this. They had no good reason to attack the Jews. There was no connection between the Jews and the revolutionary

movement. And this is a sort of thing that they did for no reason. you know, the last autocrat, I'd heard of this before, you know, if World War I didn't happen, it would have been a false prediction. No war, no revolution. That goes for the Vietnam War in the U.S. They tend to need wars to create a suggestible and frightened population. But the fact that it was described before it happened, this is, well, we've heard this before. They've been doing this for a long time.

Moreover, it would have been rather absurd on the part of the Russian government to provoke pogroms against the Jews, even as the Russian ministers were lobbying among Western financiers and the hope of obtaining loans. Let us remember that Vita had great difficulty in obtaining from the Rothschilds, who were ill-disposed towards Russia because of the situation of the Jews and the pogroms, as well as other important Jewish establishments, with the exception of the Berliner banker Mendelssohn. As early as December 1905, the Russian ambassador to London, Benkendorf, warned his minister, quote, The Rothschilds are repeating everywhere that Russia's credit is now at its lowest level, but at that it will be restored immediately if the Jewish question is settled, end quote.

That really, that is, you know, I wrote a paper of more, on more recent events, where the credit rate rating agencies, like, you know, Moody's, standard and poors, they're very politicized. Yeah, they give Russia a bad rating despite, and this is years ago, despite it being a purely creditor nation with no debt whatsoever. In fact, they paid whatever debt they had early. Still, credit is as much political as it is economic. Now, the short-term loans, I mean, Russia was a creditor nation then, too.

not a debtor nation but these were short-term loans to finance the war in Japan and the war in China and so it's like me they were broke they needed money

this was a very expensive war there were probably about a million men total fighting on land in any given you know in that in that year-long land battle maybe half a million I should say Still huge numbers for the era.

But there was no other option. If you're a country and you needed loans to finance something like this, you had no choice with you go to the Rothschilds. The Mendelssohn's, I guess, were their last choice and they got it there. But given the fact that they had discovered oil, everyone knew that they would get it back with interest very quickly. That wasn't the point. The Rothschilds were already, you know, in today's terms, trillionaires.

They didn't need the money. They didn't need the business. they were using their wealth to promote revolution the take over of and revolution to them meant the destruction of the monarchy and the take over the currency

turning Russia into a debtor nation but you know and nothing has changed even there you have the credit rating agencies give a grade not always on economic criteria

often it's on political criteria You can't even trust that. You can't trust anything that any of these people do. But the fact that they were forced to go to the Rothschild, after everything that's happened, shows you there were very few options, and that the Jews had completely taken over any large-scale credit. They were the, you know, there was nowhere else to go.

Now, Vita tended to be a bit more phylo-Semitic, I would say. And that's why he was sent. He knew some of these guys. But it had to do with the perceived, the lies of the press, had nothing to do with reality. But the Rothschilds, the Jews, he called Marx personally. I've talked about that for some length before. Despise the Russians.

They were the bulwark against revolution. There were the bulwark against revolution. If Russia went, everything's going to go. And that's why World War I was so important. But the Jews were so powerful now in Europe that you had no choice to fight a war like that, that large, and that far away, you needed the Jews for this short term credit. That's how powerful they had become. And that's why the Russian government had to be very careful in what they did. At the beginning of 1906, Vita disseminated a government community case saying that

finally a radical solution to the Jewish problem is a matter of conscience for the Russian people, and this will be done by the Duma, but even before the Duma unites itself, the most stringent provisions will be repealed insofar as they are no longer justified in the present situation. He begged the most eminent representatives of the Jewish community. of St. Petersburg to go as a delegation to the czar, and he promised them the most kind welcome. This proposal was discussed at the Congress of the Union for the Integrality of Rights, and after the fiery speech of I.B. Bach, editor of the Wretch newspaper, it was decided to

reject it and to send a less important delegation to Vita, not to provide answers, but to make accusations to tell him clearly and unambiguously that the wave of pogroms was organized at the initiative and with the support of the government. Well, they're talking about pogroms as counter-revolutionary measures. So to that extent, local commanders were, but anything that fought the revolutionary movement was considered a program. The newspapers weren't saying that, though. Nicholas and Vita, you know, given Nicholas's personality, he would have given them the most kind. He would have heard them out.

That was his personal, despite everything, that absolutely was his personality. He spoke every European language. So it didn't matter what, you know, how, where they came from or how they spoke to him. But even that, they were so arrogant, their power had got to their heads to such an extent that they said, screw you. We're just going to sit here and make accusations. We have the international finance. never underestimate the fact that the state, the Tsar, personally, controlled the Russian rouble.

Russia was huge. It was a massive market. It was potentially autarkic. It didn't have to trade very much with people. Capturing that market was the goal. And in my papers on the Bolshevik Revolution, supporting the revolutionary from the Western point of view was precisely that to be able to take over that market and the Tsar was not permitting that to happen

or very much so at you know in Russia's in Russia's interests Russia was not a you know Russia was part of the European economy sort of the gold ruble though was extremely stable only because of state control and this massive economic growth. Now, whether they knew or they're just reading the papers, they actually believed it or they knew that they were full of it, either way, it was in their interests. Now, Vita, you know, when he says it's a matter of conscience,

I don't know what a radical solution means to him, but he's the guy that was rebuffed by the Rothschild. So it wasn't a matter of conscience. And for the Russian people, I don't know who he's, referring to there. The Duma, the first few Duma's was very, was very liberal. And he saw an ally there. Nicholas didn't.

Witte was very good at what he did. But because he was the one who was rejected by the Ross Childs, he becomes very interested in the Jewish question. Any future war, anything like that, we're still going to have to go to the Jews. so it certainly wasn't a matter of conscience and the Russian people were victimized by it it's not their obligation whatsoever after two years of revolutionary earthquake

the leaders of the Jewish community in Russia who had taken the upper hand did not for a moment contemplate accepting a progressive settlement regarding the question of equal rights they felt that they were carried by the wave of victory and had no need to go to the czar in the position of beggars and loyal subjects.

They were proud of the audacity displayed by the Jewish revolutionary youth. One must position oneself in the context of the time when the old Imperial Army was believed to be immovable to perceive the significance of the episode during which, in front of the regiment of Rostov Grenadiers, standing at attention, his commander, Colonel Szymanski, had been arrested by a volunteer Jew. After all, perhaps these revolutionaries had not been guilty of national treason, as Dubnov had accused them. Perhaps they were the ones who were in the truth. After 1905, only the fortunate and prudent Jews were left to doubt it. And that was the situation of the, as far as the Jews were concerned, they really thought that they were on the cusp of something.

They really believed that Russia began and ended in Odessa and Gommel. As we said from the very beginning of this project, where 45 episodes ago, the Jews hated, especially the Slavs, the Jews hated the people who they lived among them. They were only there to exploit and to manipulate. If they were given any kind of power, they were going to use it. and it was never going to be in their interests. So even someone like Vita, the only reason he was interested in the problem was the banking issue. It wasn't much of a victory.

The Tsar was still there. But I want to remind everyone again, freemationary, I don't want to exaggerate how powerful it was in the upper reaches of the bureaucracy, especially in Petersburg. But it was significant. So they had allies there.

And certainly was in their financial interest to do it. But as I said, Nicholas was in a rough position as far as domestic issues were concerned. The only real solution was to get them out of the country, but at the moment, that seemed to be impossible. But this is a level of arrogance, violence, murder, and then they respond to it, and that's a pogrom, and then you're going to be attacked for it. it's a it's a very collective collectively narcissistic thing and way to think it's purely neurotic what was the record of the year 1905 for the entire jewish community in russia on the one hand the revolution of 1905 had overall positive results it brought to the jew's political equality even when they did not enjoy civil equality never as after the liberation movement did the

Jewish question benefit from a more favorable climate and public opinion. But on the other hand, the strong participation of the Jews and the revolution contributed to the fact that they were henceforth all identified with it. At the Tribune of the Duma in 1907, V. Shulgin proposed to vote a resolution to find that, quoting, the western half of Russia from Bessarabia to Warsaw is full of hatred toward the Jews whom they consider the responsible for all their misfortunes. That's one of my pet peeves.

You get this a lot. It tells you from uneducated people. They say that we blame immigrants or whatever for all of our problems. I've never heard anyone say that. I've never known anyone who believes that. We're very specific as to what they do and what a problem they are.

but trying to make it trying to make them seem irrational and when you have control of a good chunk of the press that's pretty easy to make irrationality seem normal but I don't know where he's getting this the Jews had this positive public opinion I don't know what what public he's referring to maybe in Petersburg parts of Petersburg I think overwhelmingly

especially where you had daily interaction with Jews The Palo Settlement, the western part of Russia, the former parallel settlement, people actually dealt with Jews every day. And that's where the contempt was coming from. So I suppose what he means is in parts of Russia that don't have daily interactions with the Jews, they had no problem with them. It was only, and even there, I have a problem with that because they were extremely violent. And the Jews didn't dominate the press entirely. but when you actually had to deal with the Jews every day, even the most normal person

held them in contempt and a certain degree of fear. But no one ever said they're responsible for anyone, all of everyone's misfortunes. This is indirectly confirmed by the increase in Jewish emigration from Russia. If in 1904 to 1905, there was still an increase in emigration among mature men, the whole age pyramid is concerned from 1906 onwards.

The phenomenon is therefore not due to pogroms of 1881 to 1882, but indeed those of 1905 to 1906. From now on, for the United States alone, the number of immigrants rose to 125,000 people in 1905 to 1906, and to 115,000. thousand in 1906 to 1907. Lucky us. But at the same time, writes B.I. Goldman, in the short years of agitation, higher education institutions did not rigorously apply the numerous clauses to the Jews, a relatively large

number of Jewish professional executives, and as they were more skillful than the Russians in placing themselves on the market, without always being distinguished by a great moral rigor in their activity, some began to speak of a hold of the Jews on the intellectual professions. And in the project for universities, prepared in 1906 by the Ministry of Public Instruction, no mention was made to the numerous clauses. In 1905, there were 2,247, 9.2% Jewish students in Russia. In 1906, 3,702, 11.6%, and in 1907, 4,277.7, 4,277. 66, 12%.

Well, we spent a lot of time on what the institutions of higher education really were. It didn't take much. I mean, this was sufficient 10% roughly to turn these into revolutionary strongholds, both in the administration, as well as in the student body. They purged, you know, during the revolution itself, they purged many students. who didn't agree with them. This was their home base. And that was the reason for the numerous clauses,

the limitation on the number of the Jews, because they were well aware of what they were doing. Everything was either a violent revolutionary activity or a scam. We've been through this in great detail already. But I suppose they could have another commission and maybe they'll solve it. In the program of reforms announced on August 25, 1906, by the government, the latter undertook to re-examine among the limitations to which the Jews were subjected, those which could be immediately lifted insofar as they were merely provoked dissatisfaction and are obviously obsolete. However, at the same time, the Russian government could no longer be affected by the revolution, which was pro-legged.

long for another two years by a wave of terrorism hardly contained to Stolopin, and by the very visible participation of the Jews in this revolution. To these subjects of discontent was added the humiliating defeat against Japan, and the ruling circles of St. Petersburg yielded to the temptation of a simplistic explanation. Russia is fundamentally sound, and the whole revolution from beginning to end is a dark plot hatched by Jews, an episode in the Judeo-Masonic plot. Explain everything by one and the same clause, the Jews. Russia would have been at

the zenith of glory and universal power if there were no Jews. I need to repeat myself here. Tulsa Nietzscheon is wrong on one thing. It was not a humiliating defeat. It wasn't a defeat at all, let alone a humiliating one. and it certainly wasn't seen as a defeat in Japan Japan it was seen as you had you had civil unrest because it was seen as a defeat as Japanese they didn't get anything they wanted

or what they got was very ephemeral yeah Tushima yeah they sank a whole bunch of Russian battleships that's true but the war was mostly on land and it was all to a draw Japan was completely exhausted, I mean, completely exhausted and broke when the war was over. Russia was nowhere close to it.

And as I've said, I have a lengthy article on the Russo-Japanese War, but it just got repeated so many times in the press both then and now that it's seen as a blatant, a humiliating defeat, not just a defeat, a humiliating defeat. And there is some truth to the statement that Russia would have been a very different country, without Jews. You wouldn't have had these revolutionary movements whatsoever. You may have had protests, you know, labor unrest in certain places. That's, you know, normal.

But there's some truth to that last statement. It sounds crazy when you put it that way. But given what we've read so far, it's true. They were the, they were the, you know, it doesn't take much poison to kill somebody. It takes a little bit. You put it in someone's soup and they're gone. And there is some truth to that. I don't like putting it in such a simplistic way.

Judeo-Masonic plot, well, that's what a revolution is. Revolutions, by definition, are conspiracies. Masons, again, by the very structure, were secret. Yes, you know, it's not all on the Jews. That's ridiculous. I don't know anyone who says that. I don't know anyone who believes that, who has argued that. but the Jews were a critical element in all of this.

They were, they're the ones who that took protest and made it into a revolutionary. They hijacked some legitimate protests and made it something completely different. Yes, Russia would have been in a very different position without Jews. It would have been far more powerful than it was. That's true. And clinging to this short but convenient explanation, the high spheres only brought the hour of their fall even closer. The superstitious belief in the historical force of conspiracies, even if they exist, individual or collective, leaves completely aside the main causes of failure suffered by individuals as well as by states. Human weaknesses.

It is our Russian weaknesses that have determined the course of our sad history, the absurdity of the religious schism called by Nikon, the senseless violence of Peter the Great and the incredible series of countershocks that ensued, wasting our strength from. causes that are not ours, the inveterate sufficiency of the nobility and bureaucratic petrification throughout the 19th century. It is not by the effect of a plot hatched from the outside that we have abandoned our peasants to their misery. It was not a plot that led the great and cruel Petersburg to stifle the sweet Ukrainian culture. It was not because of a conspiracy that four ministries were unable to agree on the assignment of a particular case to one or the other of them, they spent years in exhausting squabbles mobilizing all levels of the hierarchy. It is not the results of a plot if our emperors, one after the other, have proved incapable of understanding the evolution of the world and defining the true priorities.

If we are preserved the purity and strength, which were formally infused into us by St. Sergis of Rodinich, we should not fear any plot in the world. There is no way to disagree with him here. This is a very powerful paragraph. He has said similar things in other books, especially near the end of his life. Yes, Jews were not involved in the Nekonian schism, which was made worse by Peter the Great. Very few Jews were involved in that too.

That was a revolutionary movement in and of a very different sort. he is completely he is completely correct so the Jews however took advantage of Russian human weakness

and were able to almost mobilize it and weaponize it that's what I said no one no one thinks that the Jews have caused all of these problems no one has ever said that it's a stupid thing to say it's a stupid accusation to make

against someone like me. He's absolutely right, though. And the examples that he uses, I know extremely well. I have a book on each of them. The Peter, the Great One, hasn't come out yet. You know, the 18th century, the violence of the 18th century, Jews were not really involved because that part of Poland hadn't come to Russia yet. He's absolutely correct.

but when that section of Jews came in to the Russian Empire, everything changed. No, it cannot be said in any case that it was the Jews who organized the revolutions of 1907 or 1917, just as one cannot say that it was this nation as a whole that fomented them. In the same way, it was not the Russians or the Ukrainians taken together as nations who organized the pogroms. It would be easy for us to all to take a retrospective look at this revolution and condemn our renegades. Some were non-Jewish Jews. Others were internationalists, not Russians, but every nation must answer for its members in that it has helped to train them. On the side of the Jewish revolutionary youth, but also of those who had formed it, as well as those of the Jews who constituted an important revolution, Revolutionary force, it seems that the wise advice Jeremiah addressed to the Jews deported to Babylon was forgotten.

Quote, Jeremiah 29-7, seek peace for the city where I have deported you. Pray to Yahweh in its favor, for its peace depends on yours. While the Jews of Russia who rallied the revolution only dreamed of bringing down this same city without thinking of the consequences. in the long There's some exaggeration There's some exaggeration There's some exaggeration I think he just

He doesn't like the idea of just putting a label on things These simplistic explanations The government control the program The Russian people are evil and hate the Jews But there's no getting away from the fact That the only real Dominant parts of the Revolution of 1905 were in Jewish areas.

Jews were a massive part of this. I don't know how he's defining Jews as, you know, internationalists, not Russians. You know, I don't care. They were Jews and they thought like Jews. You don't, you know, being a Jew is a secular ethnic membership and has nothing to do with religion, or the religion is really just very secondary.

It's a form of mobilization. And Jeremiah, like, or, you know, I know at least Isaiah is burning in hell according to the Talmud. I can't imagine that Jeremiah would be, although I don't know specifically off the top of my head if he's included, Isaiah is. Because they were, you know, all they did was criticize Israel. And, of course, these are two very different groups of people regardless. Jeremiah would be totally irrelevant to the Khazars who were creating this revolution. Jews have to. I mean, at least there's got to be some that realize the misery that they brought on Russia

and to take account of themselves and understand that they are at fault for a lot of this. Not entirely. That's, again, the simplistic stupidity that no one says. We say things like that as just, you know, as abbreviations. We realize it's far more complex than that. Jewish Revolution of 1905, well, to some extent, it was. Because it occurred most violently in places where the Jews dominated. It's not a coincidence.

The arrogance of the Jews is found in the Talmud that does have the prophets, like Isaiah, burning in the same pool of hot seamen that Christ is in, according to them. And about the last thing, I remember, you know, the notorious card, the anti-Zionist Jews, I used to know, I used to know David Weiss, Rabbi Weiss for many years. I haven't spoken to him in a long time. But that line is repeated by them all the time. You know, they're really apolitical. They want to be the best neighbors possible. I'd exploit anybody. Seek peace for the city. you know, and which is why they're very easy to deal with, very different. And I grew up in a Jewish area or, you know, largely Jewish area in New Jersey. That's almost by definition. Just outside of Manhattan, just outside of Staten Island, actually. So this isn't something that I just discovered the other day on a personal level.

But of course, none of this is personal. This is all about their aggregate effect. If you take away the Jews from Russia, or let's just say that Poland was never disintegrated, was never partitioned, this wouldn't have happened. Or if it would have happened, it would have been nothing like this. Russia was doing very well. The media was fanning the flames. There was no censorship, contrary to what all these people say. Or if there was, it wasn't enforced.

And as I've said a hundred times, the royalists, the nationalist didn't have their act together in terms of a full, solid movement that could fight back, which is, you know, a common problem. You know, Russia was a healthy society outside of the old pale of settlement, saying that, you know, Poland shouldn't have been partitioned and Russia shouldn't have absorbed this area. Yeah, but there's no way they could have known that. at the time. In the long and chaotic human history, the role played by the Jewish people, few but energetic, is undeniable and considerable. This also applies to the history of Russia.

But for all of us, the role remains a historical enigma. For the Jews as well, this strange mission brought them everything, but happiness. Well, there's a few things maybe that are mysterious. Why they don't realize, what they don't realize their limits. They don't back down once they reach a certain level of power. They keep wanting more. You know, the refusal to recognize their control over things, that any reaction to them is not a violent pogrom.

they don't you know somehow their brain doesn't work that way there's a there's a miscommunication in their synapses that just doesn't work i mean jews are notoriously neurotic in general i don't see the jewish role as an enigma at all i'm a professional historian you know i think it's very clear they act more or less the same way wherever they go russia was just you know brought to the second or third power Jews are intensely neurotic. They're never going to be happy. They have everything it takes to live like Rabbi Weish wanted, a very peaceful life and prosperous life in the countries in which they live. But that is never enough. How intelligent can they be if they don't understand that simple thing?

But rather, they need to rewrite history. They need to rewrite everything. They need to lie in order to make it seem like there's no good reason to dislike it. There's no hatred here. I mean, sometimes I was there at the time. I would. but none of this is personal this is talk we're talking about them as a group we're talking about Talmudis and their role in Russia which has been absolutely nothing but negative even for them

yeah their mission has brought them everything but happiness they rejected logos they embrace revolution happiness can't be found there they rejected Christ and that is their entire identity

Their entire identity is the negation of Christianity, and there was no country, more anti-revolutionary, or strictly Christian or royalist, than Russia was. It was the belly of the beast as far as they were concerned. It was the last manifestation of Rome, and if you know the Talmud, they condemn Rome all the time. It's their enemy. It's, you know, the super goyam in Rome. the land power, the virtues of the settled agricultural estate, they despise that. But they could simply reach a certain level of prosperity and stop, but they never do. They push and push wherever they go.

They don't know their limits. Why there is this short circuit? That's a separate issue. I know in some places like in Ukraine in 1648 they really believed that because their power was so absolute there that the Messiah was coming and therefore they would have no reason to back down they got Kimmonitsky instead

I've been talking about him for many many years now he was a great man But that's not the case everywhere. They simply don't know. They would rather lie. They'd rather, you know, make up an entire false world and all that work that it takes to do that, rather than simply enjoy a certain level of prosperity, which they can do very easily. There's something wrong there. There's something spiritual about this that's wrong.

and being the rejectors, I mean, the manifestation of the rejection of Christ, this has something to do with it. Their passions have no limits. Their intellect is only used in various specific things, except for that. If there's power to be had, they're going to take it. Despite the fact that they know that it's going to piss a lot of people off, they don't care. And they don't care, even when they realize it could be a huge reaction against them. There's a short circuit in there.

That, to me, that's the enigma. But as far as their behavior is concerned, I don't find them mysterious at all. All right. Let's end it there. Done with Chapter 9. Moving on to Chapter 10 on the next episode. As always, please go to the show notes. Please go to the videos where there are hot links.

Please donate to Dr. Johnson. There's links to the Patreon, links to where you can do one-time donations, Bitcoin as well. And, yeah, keep Dr. Johnson, keep Dr. Johnson working for us because we appreciate them. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Johnson. See you in a few days. Okay, my friend.

I want to welcome everyone back to part 45 of our reading of 200 years together with Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson. How you doing, Dr. Jay? have you seen this this 500 pound behemoth that the navy promoted to e9 it's it have you have you seen her i have not seen the picture no um it's it you know i took a look i mean it's all over the place in in certain circles anyway and there was a few you know militarists i i i follow and you know this is all over russia this is all over china this is all over all over Iran.

This is what they're promoting. I don't know how she ever fit on a submarine. But she's at now the top of the enlisted ranks for something. I don't even remember. I don't get everyone so distracted by her size. Purely DEI promotion. They're still doing it. And,

and, and, and, is there anything more off-putting than a female drill instructor? Is there anything more, more off-putting than that. You don't anything more but there's a little Muppet. It's 5-1. With girls, I guess it's it makes sense, but

is there anything that's very off-putting is the word. It's bizarre. It's twisted. It doesn't make any sense. But there's something wrong with the world where they can act like a, and these aren't usually like the real tough girls, like

biker girls. They're little tiny things. I don't know. how you don't she's so she's a master chief petty yeah top of the top of the heat that's just crazy uh you should see you can find the pictures she could barely fit into the lens it's um but it's you know he you can't all of these purges in the military have it totally unstable as purges tend to do and it's it's really hard to um to undo all of that there's purges every few years i mean it's it's a terrible U.S. military is a disaster as it is. And now with this kind of thing, you can't just get rid of the DEI mentality overnight.

No. All right. Starting a new chapter here. Chapter 10. Ready you go? I mean, I can complain about this stuff all day, too. It's just, it's ridiculous to think. We have a country with no military.

And not only that, I mean, China makes parts for our most important weapons and our most important platforms. The U.S. isn't an industrialized country anymore. No. It's a post-modern post-industrialist society dependent on outside country for everything. It doesn't have to be that way. It was made that way. And as Lut-Walk, Edward Lut-Walk said in Kud-A-Tal, you said, if you're a country that relies on other countries for your defense, for your equipment. You're not a sovereign nation. Yeah, you're not. And the Russian defense

procurement, all state-owned, high-end scientific and factory institutions. They're way ahead of the U.S. China's the same way. You know, they aren't going to the lowest bidder. Anyway, we've got to get going. All right. All right. Chapter 10, the period of the Duma. The manifesto of the 17th of October marked the beginning of a qualitatively new period in Russian history, which was later consolidated by a year of Stoliopin's government, the period of the Duma or of limited autocracy, during which to previous principles of government, the absolute power of the czar, the opacity of the ministries, the immutability of the hierarchy, were rapidly and sensibly restricted. This period was very difficult for all the higher spheres and only men with a solid character and an active temperament could enroll with dignity in the new era.

But public opinion also found it difficult to get accustomed to the new electoral practices, to the publicity of the debates in the Duma, and even more to the responsibility of the latter, and, in its left wing, the enraged Leninists, as well as the enraged of the Bund, simply boycotted the elections to the first Duma. we have nothing to do with your parliaments we will achieve our ends by bombs blood convulsions and so the attitude of the bun towards jewish deputies of the duma was violently hostile well he's right this is a a qualitatively different time the duma never did anything constructive it didn't pass any you know landmark legislation or anything like that you know um the russian monarchy sometimes what was limited the power that they had was often based on personality rather than laws you know the um freeing of the nobility from state service charter on the nobility by katherine the second that automatically limited um the monarchy uh there was no real

functional monarchy uh throughout after after peter's death up until um you know it was very weak in that sense. Alexander III, though, very different story. So they left Nicholas who's just enough power so they could blame him for everything that went wrong. But the Duma just ended up becoming, in and of itself, a political party, at least the first two versions of it, and he eventually was going to abolish it, that just became the opposition, heavily financed by the British. But it did nothing positive at all in its existence. It was a source for revolutionary thought.

And the only reason the Leninists would ever boycott it is because they knew that they had like four people, like a hundred Jews that were involved. They didn't want to expose their weakness that way. But the Jews of Russia, led by the Union for the Integrality of Rights, were not mistaken and expressing their sympathy for the new institution, participated very actively in the elections, voting most often for the representatives of the cadet party who had placed the equality of rights for the Jews on its agenda.

Some revolutionaries who had regained their spirits shared the same dispositions. Thus, Isaac Gorvich, who had immigrated in 1889, an active supporter of the Marxist left, was the co-founder of the American Social Democrat Party, returned to Russia in 1905, where he was, was elected to the Dumas Electoral College. There were no limitations on the Jews in the elections, and 12 of them sat in the first Duma. It was true that most of them came from the palest settlement, while the Jewish leaders of the capital, who did not have the property qualifications, could not be elected. Only Winnever L. Bramson and the converted Jew M. Herzenstein, to whom Prince P. Dolgurikov had given his place.

As the number of Jews in the Duma was significant, the Zionist deputies proposed forming an independent Jewish group, abiding by the discipline of a real political party, but the non-Zionist deputies rejected this idea, contenting itself to meet from time to time to discuss matters of direct concern to Jewish interests, agreeing, however, to comply already to a genuine discipline in the sense of strictly abiding by the decisions of a college composed of members of the Duma and those of the Committee for the Integrality of Rights, the Political Bureau. Yeah, the cadets were the,

were like Yabloka today in Russia. They were your general basic liberals. I don't know. electoral platforms couldn't have gone as far as they would like to have gone because they needed popular support and the monarchy was popular they ultimately wanted to abolish it um but um you know and it got more conservative as the as the there's only four of them elected um so um that's that's that's that's the concept the cadet party is your basic they were not Marxists.

They often defended the Marxists. They were like the idiot fellow travelers types. I don't know if they were they were something like what would take over in 1917 and the provisional government.

And they were, so it comes up, but it has nothing to do with the military. They're not military cadets. It's just an abbreviation of their name. And they dominated for a while. The the monarchists really didn't form a political party at all. The Octoberus were the only thing, the closest thing, you know, they supported a constitutional monarchy.

They're called octobus for this very manifesto. They think this proves the brilliance of the monarchy that he's capable of doing this. At the stroke of a pen, another country you need to fight a war for this, that he was willing to give in. This is, I guess, the one victory that they had in the 1905. revolution

there was a property qualification the electoral rules changed as the years went on in my very first book the third Rome I go into a strange

amount of detail on it I can't remember if it's up in my head about how complicated the last two Dumas were elected from or through but you had the equalized peasants, townsmen. The peasants were so overwhelming in numbers, not to mention

regions. So it was a fairly complex system. And as it says, no limitations on the Jews, but the left, because they were already organized. They were already fighting. They were able to get candidates into the Duma, I'm sure telling all kinds of stories, but what they believed, not what they really believe, and so you have a good chunk of this legislature wishing that the man who created it, the monarch, would go away. At the same time, a solid alliance was formed between the Jews and the cadet party. It was not uncommon for the local chapters of the union for the integrity of rights and the Constitutional Democrat Party to be composed of the same people. Some teased Winnever by calling him the Mosaic Cadet. In the pale of settlement, the overwhelming majority of the cadet party members were Jews.

In the interior provinces, they represented in number of the second nationality. As Vito wrote, almost all Jews who graduated from higher education joined the party of the people's freedom, that is, the cadets, which promised them immediate access to equal rights. The party owes much of its influence on the Jews who provided it with both intellectual, and material support. The Jews introduced coherence and rigor into the Russian liberation movement of 1905. It's important to note that what liberalism was in Russia, I mean, even today in Russia, you'll hear the word cadet being used to refer to a liberal, which throws a lot of people off who don't know the history of it.

the two issues that they had were they couldn't say this openly, but the overthrowing of the monarchy or the tight limiting of the monarchy and the support of Jewish supremacy. Their total liberation, everything else, condemning anti-Semitism, wanted to pass all kinds of laws like that. That was the two things that made you a liberal at the time. However, A. A. Cercova, an important figure in the cadet party,

Notes in his memoirs that the chief founders and leaders of the cadet party were not Jews. There were not, among the latter, any personality sufficiently prominent to drive the Russian liberals behind it, as a Jew-Disraeli had done for the English conservatives in the middle of the 19th century. The people that mattered most within the Cadet Party were Russians. This does not mean that I deny the influence of these Jews who have joined our masses. They could not fail to act upon us if only they're in it. only by their inexhaustible energy. Their very presence, their activity did not allow us to forget them, to forget their situation,

to forget that they had to be helped. And further on, reflecting on all the networks of the influence of the Jews within the cadet party, one cannot overlook the case of Milayakov. From the beginning, he became their favorite, surrounded by a circle of admirers, more precisely feminine admirers, who cradled him in muted melodies, cajoled him, covered him with restraint of praise so excessive that they were comical. And he's one of these guys, by the way, who wrote on Russian history that's still being quoted in the West as if it's true. But, yeah, I think if Jews never existed in Russia at all, the cadet party would be your opposition.

you know, they were very nihilistic, you know, they were positivists, they were nominous, you know, they believed in empirical science, or so they say, you know, some version of Darwinism, there were individualists, you know, monarchy church and Jews, those were the three things, but that, but if there were no Jews, that would have been as far as any kind of opposition, would have come, a limitation on the monarchy, or something like that, you're always going to have radical weirdos in every society, maybe some anarchists, I don't know, but that's how far I would go. The Jews, of course, brought it to a whole different place. V.A. Obelensky, also a member of the party, describes a cadet club during the time of the First Duma at the corner of Serviskaya and Potemkenskaya streets. The elite of the secularized Jewish society and the elite of the Russian politicized intelligentsia were mingled. There were always a lot of people, and the public composed mostly of

wealthy Jewish Petersburgers, was very elegant. The ladies wore silk robes, shiny brooches and rings. The gentleman had the heirs of well-nourished and self-satisfied bourgeois. Despite our democratic convictions, we were somewhat shocked by the atmosphere that prevailed in this cadet club. One can imagine the embarrassment experienced by the peasants who came to attend the meetings of our parliamentary group. A party of gentlemen. That is what they said to each other when they ceased to attend our meetings. Yeah, I should also mention that as this reminds me, the cadets were by far the party of the wealthy. You know, sometimes I think Rasputin was brought in as a way to remind Russians where they came from. These people, whether Jews or not, we're not

not speaking Russian. They were completely alienated from the countryside. But as far as, as close to Jacobin Buzois, liberals, this is their party. And so you had a lot of wealth, a lot of people in the professions like lawyers. And the peasants were just, you know, we'll pretend to like you, but just stay away. At the local level, cooperation between the union for the Integrality of Rights and the cadet party was manifested not only in the presence of as many Jews, candidates as possible, but also in the fact that the local factions of the union was instructed to support non-Jews who promised to contribute to the emancipation of the Jews.

As explained in 1907, the cadet newspaper, Retch, in reply to questions repeatedly asked by other newspapers, Retch has, in its time, formulated very precisely the condition of the agreement with the Jewish group. The latter has the right to challenge the electoral college and to oppose nominations to the Duma. Yeah, this group were financed. You had all kinds of leftist groups there, including some non-party people, but they were also very, very, I mean, Anglophile isn't the word. Anglomaniac. They saw, you know, Russians were just, um, British people just waiting to be set free. That was their, that was their mentality as well. A lot of money came from London to support them.

And of course, those much farther to the left of them. During the parliamentary debates, the Duma, following the logic of the Imperial Manifesto, raised the question of equal rights for Jews within the general framework of granting the same rights to all citizens. The state Duma has promised to prepare a law on the full equalization of the rights of all citizens and the abrogation of any limitations or privileges associated with membership to a social class, nationality, religion, or sex. After adopting the main guidelines of this law, the Duma lost itself in debates for another month, multiplying thunderous declarations followed by no effect to be utterly dissolved, and so to be

ultimately dissolved. And the law on civil equality, especially for the Jews, remained pending. I have the comment about Milukov with his female admirers. I think that has something to do with why sex was just added to the end. Gender was added to the end of that. but as far as, you know, the marriage wasn't the institution anymore. Remember, there was a lot of masons in that party. It was a deeply Masonic party, deeply wealthy, a cosmopolitan party.

I think there's a connection there because there's some small rumbling. I mean, you didn't have a version of this. I have a paper out on it. I think Michael Jones published it on the sexual revolution of the upper, upper classes of St. Petersburg. prior to the revolution. So when you start talking about when you put gender in there, there's definitely a

another another, it's a double entendre in essence. However, we've also seen how democracy, the people, have operated. If given the choice, they will burn down Jewish doors.

If you ever saw any, you know, if that's spontaneous democracy. Well, we've seen it already, especially if you're a non-Jew living in the pale of settlement. So these limitations on right, they're not, you know, they're, they're well aware that this is a tiny minority position. They bought these seats with, with money, with English money, with their own money, and with Jewish money. But, you know, they, they know what democracy would really be. I mean, complete participatory democracy would be the Jews to be gone. So we've got to keep that in mind when they start talking about the people. Like most cadets, the Jewish deputies of

the first Duma signed V-Borg's appeal, which meant that it was now impossible for them to stand for elections. Winnever's career particularly suffered from it. In the first Duma, he had made violent remarks, although he would later advise the Jews not to put themselves too much in the spotlight to prevent a recurrence of what had happened in the revolution of 1905. The participation of the Jews in the elections of the second Duma was even more marked than during the first election campaign. The Jewish populations of the Palis Settlement showed the strongest interest in this election. The political debate reached all levels of society.

Nevertheless, as the Jewish Encyclopedia published before the revolution indicates, there was also an important anti-Jewish propaganda carried out by right-wing monarchs. circles, particularly active in the western provinces. Quote, the peasants were persuaded that all progressive parties were fighting for the equal rights of the Jews to the detriment of the interests of the ethnic population, that behind the masquerade of the popular representation, the country was governed by a Judeo-Masonic union of spoliators of the people and traders to the fatherland, that the peasants should be alarmed at the unprecedented number of new masters unknown to the elders of the village

and whom he henceforth had to nourish with his labor, that the Constitution promised to replace the Tardar yoke by that injurious of the international cahal. And a list of the existing rights to be abrogated was drawn up. Not only were Jews not to be elected to the Duma, but they all had to be relegated to the palest settlement, prohibiting them from selling wheat, grain and timber, working in banks or commercial establishments,

confiscating their properties, prohibiting them from changing their names to serve as publisher or editor of news organization, to reduce the palace settlement itself by excluding the fertile regions, to not grant land to Jews within the province of Yakutsk.

In general, to regard them as foreigners, to substitute for them military service by attacks, etc. The results of this anti-Semitic propaganda spread both orally and in writing was the collapse of progressive candidates in the Second Duma throughout the Pala settlement. There

were only four Jewish deputies in the second Duma, including three cadets. Well, there's, everything I've seen here is true, but the Jewish encyclopedia wrote. Most of this was a quote from that. By the way, this isn't Schultzhenitsyn writing here for 90% of it, and the anti-Jewish propaganda was absolutely correct. They were well aware, and the peasants were aware. in a very strong sense that, yeah, there were all of these new masters

that they didn't know existed because they aren't out in the open. You still had a healthy society, especially in the countryside. They still had plenty of white blood cells who were going to go fight the infestation. And so you did finally, finally have some right-wing propaganda coming out.

Finally, they started publishing, and it worked. they didn't really have to do much. People kind of knew something was wrong, but only in a general sense. Propaganda had been in the hands mostly of the left, almost exclusively, but now the doom is changing, primarily because of some of their work. Now, We've come across Viborg's appeal already. That was a group of exiled Russians, mostly Jews, Viborgers in Finland. And I forget which Duma it was, I guess it was the first Duma that was dissolved.

I can't remember off the top of my head now, which is strange, because I usually know all this. And they called for the overthrow of the monarchy. And which was, you know, you got some people in the Duma saying that, but not too many. Freemasonry was coming out in all of its demonic glory at the time. And of course, these people couldn't function politically. anymore, at least legally, if you sign something like that. They talked about a violent revolution. They talked about creating the French revolution in Russia.

The Duma had the mentality, what Nicholas thought, I guess, was, you know, this was going to be a virtuous civic and nationalist institution that is not going to be allowed to go too far. because a monarchy still maintained a tremendous amount of power. It's not just going to be a debating society either. But, of course, that's not how these people think. You have the factions or the factors of wealth, Freemasonry, Judaism, and liberalism in general, not to mention the money coming in from Western Europe,

especially Britain, that encourage this kind of thing. So the Finland Viborg appeal Was I guess it was kind of what what people in the first or second Duma thought The first Duma Thought but couldn't really say legally So they had to be out of the country

Or they started to say And that's why they got kicked out of the country And they wrote this manifesto And it showed the Cadet Party for what it really was And what liberalism for what it really was And the things were already heating up then And as that became better known, the Dumas became more conservative as time went on. But even before these elections, the government addressed the issue of equal rights for Jews.

Six months after taking office as prime minister in December 1906, Stalupin had the government adopt a resolution, the so-called Journal of the Council of Ministers, on the continuation of the lifting of restrictions imposed on Jews, and this in essential areas, thus orienting itself toward integral equality. They considered to eliminate the prohibition of Jews from residing in rural areas within the palest settlement, the prohibition of residing in rural areas throughout the empire for persons enjoying the right of universal residence, the prohibition of including Jews and the directory of joint stock companies holding land. But the emperor replied in a letter dated 10th

of December, despite the most convincing arguments in favor of adopting these measures and inner voice dictates with increasing insistence not to take this decision upon myself. As if he did not understand or rather forgot that the resolution proposed in the journal was a direct and inescapable consequence of the manifesto he had signed himself a year earlier. Even in the most closed bureaucratic world, there are always officials with eyes and hands, and if the rumor of a decision taken by the Council of Ministers had already spread to the public opinion, and here we are. We will know that the ministers want to emancipate the Jews while the sovereign he stood in its way. And this is why Nicholas was, you know, I said this

a hundred times, but the state was always in a very awkward position. He knew that prohibitions on Jewish, well, everything that we've heard, you know, joint stock companies, land ownership, all this, that these were absolutely necessary for the health of the society. But he knew what could happen if these were just associated with him, including his own death. So it was a popular move. But those within the upper reaches of the Masonic bureaucracy in Petersburg, they often had business dealing with the Jews. These are very wealthy men, landowners in certain places, and they always had something. And many of them were in debt to Jews, both Russian and Western.

And so many of them weren't exactly operating from a place of freedom. So everything that they're talking about here sounds good. It's necessary. The prohibition of including Jews and the directory of joint stock companies, that makes a lot of sense with the land ownership. Residing in rural areas, well, we know what that means. If you've been following this, we know exactly what that means. because wherever they go, they act as a crime syndicate.

They act as a, regardless of what it might be, everything from smuggling weapons to alcohol, to prostitution, to usury, both public and kind of private. Always the same complaints, always the same problems. To some extent, these limitations were for the Jews' own protection because they don't know when to stop. They cause half their own troubles. they don't know when to pull back and it was often promoted that way this is for the Jews' own safety people hate them

and there's good reason for them to hate them that's why you had pogroms to the extent that they existed in the way that you said they did you'd certainly had you know burning down of Jewish shops and all that stuff you had that all the time so us limiting you

means that you can't do the things that are obnoxious and sick to everybody else so we're really doing you a favor, which is true, unfortunately. On the same day, December 10th, Stalepin hastened to write to the emperor a letter full of anxiety, repeating all his arguments one by one, and especially the dismissal of the journal is for the moment not known to anyone. It is therefore still possible to conceal the equivocations of the monarch. Your Majesty, we have no right to put you in this position and shelter ourselves,

behind you. Stalin would have liked the advantages, according to the Jews, to appear as a favor granted by the Tsar. But since this was not the case, he now proposed to adopt another resolution. The emperor made no objections on the merits, but did not want the law to be promulgated over the head of the Duma. It must be done by the Duma. Secretary of State Essie Krzynovsky said that the emperor then adopted a resolution which went along in this direction, that the representatives of the people take responsibility both for raising the issue as well as resolving it. But no one knows why this resolution received little publicity and on the side of the Duma, absolutely nothing happened. I think the idea is

knowing the power of the Jews both domestically and outside of the country, it wasn't one person. I mean, whether it be destroying the limitations or increasing the limitations, you didn't just want one person to be able to point the finger. This has to be a collective decision. This has to sound like it's a popular thing. Now, most of the Second Duma wanted the restrictions lifted, but Nicholas II was very much like us. He knew the Jewish issue completely.

But remember Stolipin's position. He's the one who had to go to the Rothschild, to raise money because you couldn't go anywhere else. No one had that kind of cash to fight the Russo-Japanese War. He eventually found somebody else. But he was rejected by the Roth trials.

And he said, you know, if something happens again, we have to do something to placate these people. And, of course, it never worked. Any kind of dislocating is seen as placating and not as a sign of strength at all. Russell was prosperous enough to finance its own war fighting. It could be completely altarctic, completely self-sufficient. Szilipin didn't see it that way.

But he was always put in this terrible position too. And he was more phylo-Semitic, certainly far more so than Nicholas. But whichever direction the decision would be, they would like it to be a collective one rather than a personal one. widely to the left, penetrated by progressive ideas and so vehement towards the government, the Second Duma was free. Yet in the Second Duma, there was still less talk of the deprivation of rights suffered by the Jews than in the first. The law and equal rights for Jews was not even discussed, so what can be said about its adoption? Why then did the Second Duma not take advantage of the opportunities offered it?

Why did it not seize them? It had three entire months to do it, and why did the debates the clashes relate only to secondary tangential issues? The equality of the Jews, still partial but already well advanced, was abandoned. Why? Indeed, why? As for the Extra-Parliamentary Extraordinary Commission, it did not even discuss the plan to repeal the restrictions imposed on the Jews, but circumvented the problem by focusing on integral equality as quickly as possible. Difficult to explain this other than by a political calculation. The aim being to fight the autocracy.

The interest was to raise more and more the pressure on the Jewish question and to certainly not resolve it. Ammunition was thus kept in reserve. These brave knights of liberty reasoned in their terms to avoid that the lifting of restrictions imposed on the Jews would diminish their ardor in battle. For these knights without fear and without reproach, the most of the same thing, important was indeed the fight against the power. You know, this is somewhat equivalent to saying, we know that the Jews are almost exclusively on the left. We're non-Jewish leftists.

So if we want more power, we have to stage a pogrom. We have to make things worse for the Jews, just for the sake of greater, greater power, greater cohesiveness, greater, more money, more violence. That's essentially what's being said here to not resolve the issue at all, to leave it in abeyance. That's precisely the idea, because if it was completely taken care of, you know, fully quality like Napoleon, you know, it would be disastrous for the country. And these people knew that. Even the masons knew that. But also it would maybe create, maybe create a patriotic class that's connected to the, you know,

Russian state like it never had been before. That's very naive. But they didn't want anything good that the Jews can say, well, thank you for our freedom or something like that. I mean, that's very ridiculous to even think it that way. But that's how they thought it, that, you know, don't, you know, make sure that there's still limitations. We need something to fight for.

We need a cudgel to bang the czar over the head with. All this was beginning to be seen and understood. Bergiev, for example, addressed the whole. spectrum of Russian radicalism with the following reproaches. You are very sensitive to the Jewish question. You are fighting for their rights. But do you feel the Jew? Do you feel the soul of the Jewish people? No, your fight in favor for the Jews does not want to know the Jews. Then in the third Duma, the cadets no longer had the majority. They did not take any more initiatives on the Jewish question, fearing that they would be defeated. This caused great disconsent among the Jews, discontent

the Jewish masses, and the Jewish press did not deprive itself of attacking the party of the people's freedom. Although the Jews had participated in the electoral campaign with the greatest ardor and the number of Jewish voters exceeded that of the Christians in all the cities of the palest settlement, they were beaten by the opposing party, and in the third Duma, there were only two Jewish deputies, Nasselovich and Friedman. The latter succeeded to remain up to the fourth Duma. beginning in 1915, the Council of State included almost among its members a Jew, G.E. Weinstein of Odessa. Just before the revolution, there was also Samuel Samolovich Kreme, a Karam. Do you know what that is, the word Karam?

Is that a Karate, I think. Is that a Karate? Okay. I think so. Yeah, I think that would just be a certain form of the plural. But you notice, this is very interesting. Talk about popular sovereignty and elections of leaders. Remember, all the cities of the palest settlement,

the most Jews were one-third of the population of Odessa. That was the most in one spot. That means Christians weren't going to the polls. If there was a majority that were voting in all of these cities, that means either Christians, didn't want any part of it, didn't like it, didn't support it, they were being kept at home, or there was a lot of fraud going on. You know, at this time, you know, voter fraud almost taken for granted.

I don't know. It wasn't any anything, there was no international observers or anything like that, like you have today. I think, I think that's what's going on here. The Christians just weren't going to the polls at all. And of course, when they would go, they would never vote for. cadet party or anything else, especially at this point, after the Vyborg manifesto and everything else, they came out. They hated the monarchy. The Jews were right there with them. They were very careful about what they said in public. And it shows you how much freedom the Finns had,

even though technically it was a part of Russia. It had its own foreign policy. It recognized the crown, and that was it. They felt safe there. And they knew that when an exes exile beyond that, they wouldn't be sent by. There was no extradition. Even violent terrorists, convicted terrorists, were never sent back because Western Europe just apparently, with the exception of the Germans, supported them completely. But the less Jewish, the more conservative. That's the math of the Duma. As for the Octobus, whose party had become a majority in the third Duma, on the one hand, they ceded, not without hesitation, to the pressure of public opinion.

which demanded equal rights for the Jews, which led to the criticism of Russian nationalist deputies. We thought that the Octobus remained attached to the defense of national interests, and now, without warning, they had relegated to the background both the question of the granting of equal rights to the Russians of Finland, which meant that this equality does not exist in the Russian colony, and that of the annexation by Russia of the Koln region in Poland, with all Russians that inhabit it, but they have prepared a bill. to abolish to pale a settlement. On the other hand, they were attributed statements of manifestly anti-Semitic character.

Thus, the third Duma on the initiative of Gukov issued in 1906, the wish that Jewish doctors not be admitted to work in the Army Health Services. Likewise, it was proposed to replace the military service to the Jews by attacks. In the years preceding the war, the project of dispensing the Jews for military service was still largely and seriously debated. And I.B. Heson published a book on this subject entitled The War and the Jews. Do you remember a couple of months ago? Apparently we've been on this book for years now. A couple of months ago, we were talking about Jews in the draft.

I think it was under Nicholas I first, which was a stupid idea. Why give them an issue? If they're not patriots, then why have them in the army at all? The Jews were just using it to get rid of their criminals. And so you had right-wingers at the time saying, well, no, no Jews in the military, but they should pay something extra if they're not going to be drafted. And I've always agreed with that. They shouldn't have been in, you know, they shouldn't have been in the army at all.

That whole draft issue was ridiculous. in short neither the second third nor fourth dumas took it upon themselves to pass the law on the integral equality of rights for the jews and every time it was necessary to ratify the law on the equal rights of peasants promulgated by stolopin as of the fifth of october 1906 it was blocked by the same dumas under the pressure of the left on the grounds that the peasants could not be granted equal rights before they were granted to the jews and the polls and thus the pressure exerted upon this execrated, exocrated Tsarist government was not relieved, but doubled, quintupled. And not only did this pressure exerted on the government not be relieved, not only were these laws not voted upon by the Duma, but it would last until the February Revolution.

when they use the phrase popular opinion be very careful when anyone like the Marxists are notorious for this they use words like workers and bourgeoisie and owners you know these huge classes that can't possibly act like an individual act

it's the it's the absolute same thing here popular opinion meant elite opinion, the elite opinion of those with money in Petersburg and maybe a few other cities, Moscow, Kiev, a few other places like that. That's what popular opinion meant. It had nothing to do with the population of Russia. While Stalepin, after his unfortunate attempt in December 1906, quietly took administrative measures to partially lift the restrictions imposed on the Jews, An editorialist from Nouvehremia Menchikov condemned this method.

Under Stolopin, the palest settlement has become a fiction. The Jews are defeating the Russian power by gradually withdrawing all its capacity to intervene. The government behaves as if it were a Jew. Such is the fate of the Middle Way. The general outcry of the parties of the left against a policy of progressive measures, this tactical refusal for a smooth evolution toward equal rights was strongly supported by the Russian press. Since the end of 1905, it was no longer subject to prior censorship.

But it was not only a press that had become free, it was a press that considered itself a full-fledged actor in the political arena, a press, as we have seen, that could formulate demands such as that of withdrawing the police from the streets of the city. Vitsa said it had lost its reason. yeah and he he paid for it unfortunately um you know equal rights sounds very good but in practice not necessarily the peasants were still the owners of russia as far as land ownership was concerned that got better um after stolipan but his um uh freeing or equal rights

to peasants just meant that they could own land uh as individuals not just as members of a commune. That wasn't particularly popular. And I think that was the core of the Kulak class that the Soviets used later on. But the press rarely had to worry. There's only a few things they couldn't do. The consensorship of the American press

is infinitely worse than anything that existed in Tsarish Russia, calling for, you know, the murder of the Tsar, any kind of, you know, pro-terrorist stuff, calling for the overthrow of the czar. That was pretty much it. Certain, you know, blasphemies couldn't be said. That was about it.

Otherwise, they were left alone, especially the press that was outside of St. Petersburg. And yes, they're absolutely right. It was corrupt. It saw itself somehow as the voice of the people, meaning the voice of the left. I'm going to read the next two paragraphs and we'll finish right there.

It looks like there's a natural break. Okay. In the case of the Duma, the way in which Russia, even in its most remote provinces, was informed of what was going on there and what was said there, depended entirely on journalists. The shorthand accounts of the debate appeared late and with very low circulation. So there was no other source of information than the daily press, and it was based on what they read that the people formed an opinion. However, the newspaper systematically distorted the debates in the Duma, largely opening their

columns to the deputies of the left and showering them with praise, while the deputies of the right they allowed only a bare minimum. A Tercova says that in the second Duma, the accredited journalist formed their own press office, which depended on the distribution of places among the correspondence. The members of this office refused to give his card of accreditation to the correspondent of the Journal of the Kolokal, favorite newspaper of the priests of the countryside. Tarkova intervened, noting that These readers should not be deprived of the possibility of being informed about the debates in the Duma by a newspaper in which they had more confidence in those of the opposition.

But my colleagues, among whom the Jews were the most numerous, got carried away, began shouting, explaining that no one was reading the Kolokal, that that newspaper was of no use. What a shock. That's, you know, it was just wishful thinking on their part. it's such a shame you know of course this is way before the web I don't know how we function before the internet I really I remember it but I feel like we must have been all idiots

I mean I was just reading books like a fool you know you couldn't get instant information you couldn't get instant updates you know prior to the web everything moved a lot more slowly then so anywhere else in Russia they were getting the be leftist-censored view what was going on in these four Dumas. Again, nothing was ever done

of significance. American academics make a big deal about this, this democratic world. They never did anything. It was nothing but contempt heaped on the czar, blaming the czar for things, fighting back and forth. It really was a joke of an era, showing that liberal democracy has no connection to sovereignty or freedom whatsoever. Typical peasant under czarism was quite free. It didn't mean he didn't have a lot of responsibilities inherent in his class, but he was free as far as he was concerned, and he was a landowner for the most part. He didn't have to worry.

He was taken care of. But this is very typical. No one reads that, meaning that we don't know of anyone who reads that, therefore we should just forget about it. Now, I don't know whatever came of that debate. Again, Russian nationalists were a little bit behind the left and organization. The Duma was leftist from the beginning because they were very ahead of the nationalist and royalists in an organization. It took a while.

They took the Duma back. But again, it didn't matter who ran it. It didn't matter what happened. There's no legislation of any value that ever came out of there whatsoever. And that's the key to this whole era. There's really nothing to say. And it's just a way to flex their power and to show how weak or how strong Tsar Nicholas was. And there was only four of them.

So, and to some extent, it did force the left to expose itself. But if it's the case that everyone's dependent on journalists for their summaries of things of what happened, Well, there's nothing worse. Nothing worse than to be dependent on journalists for anything. Because, like all journalists, they're not there. They didn't go to Columbia Journalism School to say what they see and what they hear. Any idiot could do that. They're there because they have an agenda.

They usually have a liberal agenda. Not to mention they have to get readers and supporters. They have to create these social interests, these human interest stories. Something to drag the reader in. That's their job. It has nothing to do with truth or reality. They have no obligation to educate you either then or now. So have a lot of very naive normies who talk about journalists.

Like they're not doing their job. No, they are. In their twisted minds, they are doing their job. They know exactly what they're doing. They know how biased they are. They don't care. That's the whole reason they became journalists. And it's no different here.

It's the exact same thing here. The Jewish press was very well, tremendously well financed. And, again, left, Jew, it was really the same thing, as far as anyone else was concerned. And the left was always veering into violence, wanting to kill more bureaucrats, even murder the czar himself. And this is why no one really trusted it. But I don't care even if they had these journalists that were distorting everything. It was never quite accepted. Because the Union of the Russian people,

they had far more in terms of numbers than the cadet party ever had than certainly the Bolsheviks ever had and the Mensviks ever had. Any other party, even the Octopus ever had. They were the popular party in the Western Russian Empire. It didn't fool anybody at the time.

When you have a healthy society, you don't have to worry about this so much. So all that meant was that, you know, peasantry, clergy, they just kind of said all the press is worthless. I've come across this and, you know, various monasteries at the time, you know, the press is just another agent of liberalism, of the Jewish cahol. They used the word, even though it didn't exist, but they used it as like a nickname. You know, any Jewish organization was a Jewish cahol, you know. So, Uptonah especially was like that. royalism but you know the monarchy especially was still leap in there monarchy didn't do itself

any favors by not developing the white army too the white army which was supposed to be defending the provisional government not the royal government you had royalists in there but and um they were the same way they never developed a firm ideology that would appeal to the peasantry clergy, the soul of Russia, this nationalist and royalist and very religious concept. They never developed it. The left, on the other hand, although they were often fractured, not during the Civil War, but they were fractured before then. They were obsessed with ideological uniformity.

And the Jews taught them that numbers don't matter. It's cohesiveness that matters. It's money that matters. Of course, the right wing in Russia had the people. it has the numbers by far but when you're as well organized as the left was as the Jews were you know

I don't care how many people you have it's not really going to matter but at this point in time Tsar Nicholas was an extremely popular man right ended there and pick up in a couple days I'm going to say we're on episode 45

if you've been consuming this and you haven't at least donated once to Dr. Johnson, I call you a freeloader at this point. So go over to the show notes, go to the links in the videos, and donate anything because you're getting a college course for free. We could probably put this behind a pay wall and sell it, and people would pay for it. But we're not doing that. This is all out in the public for free.

So go donate to Dr. Johnson. today. I thank you, my friend. Appreciate it. See in a couple days. Thank you. All right, man. Bye-bye.

I want to welcome everyone back to part 46 of our reading of 200 years together by Alexander Solzhenyson. Dr. Johnson, how are you doing today? Well, their kill count is up to nine. I know some of our listeners are very, very concerned with this. There was some guy who put Stanley in between the name Stanley in between two. crowns, who is obviously a very brilliant man, a man of culture and understanding. But it wasn't him. It was his little sister, Scully, who turned out to be a mouser probably by watching him.

But, you know, in an old farmhouse, you know, you're going to get some of this stuff. I don't care. I just wonder how it would be if we didn't have cats. We'd be drowning in mice, but that, you know, they are. they are um and this one was huge what thing i noticed a mouse and a rat oh wow one thing i notice is we have these really little mice around here and you know my big cat will get at them every once in a while ever since this five foot rat snake showed up who just crawls around i mean this this thing is so bold i'll be on the lawnmower and it'll just come out and be like hey

how are you doing and just look at me it's like you know i run you over and kill you right now It's like, no, you won't. Ever since that guy showed up, and I see him go back and forth between the field next to us and under the house, haven't seen any mice. So I let them live. Yeah, that might be a good, there might be a good reason for that. But, you know, cats have to earn their keep, you know. True, true. It just can't be all cuteness all the time.

Yeah, it's a whole thing with them. I think they have it. I have different sections of the house. You know, they play zone defense. you know, it's, I think, I think this really, it's, it's, it's like a formation. They're doing great. They're very happy with it. It's one of their favorite things, apparently.

Like a Panzer division. Yeah. All right. We move onward. For the Russian nationalist circles, responsibility for this conduct of the press was simply in solely the responsibility of the Jews. They wanted to prove that almost all journalists accredited to the Duma were Jews, and they published whistleblowing lists listing the names of these correspondents.

More revealing is this comical episode of parliamentary life. One day, answering to the attacks of which he was the object, Parishkovich pointed in the middle of his speech, the box of the press, located near the tribune, and delimited by a circular barrier, and said, but see this pale of settlement of the Jews. Everyone turned involuntarily to the representatives of the press, and it was a general burst of laughter that even the left could not repress.

This pale of settlement of the Duma became an adopted wording. Now, I can't say, I mean, Perch Kavich was a right winger in general, but he was in on the murder of Rasputin. he's definitely not he's not one of my favorites but if he says the pale of settlement and everyone just looks at the media people

you know that there's something going on you know that what these guys are saying is absolutely true it is simply the press is an ethnic thing I think it was getting pretty obvious to most people at that point you know everyone in the left is too apparently involuntarily goes oh you mean the media

onward among the prominent jewish publishers we have already spoken of s m proper owner of the stock exchange news an unfailing sympathizer of the revolutionary democracy cyrusburg evokes more warmly the one who founded and funded to a large extent the cadet newspaper rech i bach quote a very obliging man very cultured with a radically liberal orientation end quote. It was his passionate intervention at the Congress of the Jewish Mutual Aid Committees at the beginning of 1906 to prevent a conciliation with the Tsar. Quote, there was no Jewish organization devoted to cultural action or beneficence of which I. Bach was not a member, end quote. He was particularly distinguished by his work in the Jewish Committee for Liberation.

As for the Wretch newspaper and its editor-in-chief, I.V. Heson, they were far from limiting themselves to Jewish questions alone, and their orientation was generally more liberal. Heson subsequently proved it in immigration with the role and the archives of the Russian Revolution. The very serious Ruski Vedamosti published Jewish authors of various tendencies, both Jabotinsky and the future inventor of war communism, Lori Lorraine S. Melganov, noted that the publication of this body of articles favored to the Jews was explained, quote, not only by the desire to defend the oppressed,

but also by the composition of the newspaper's managing team. There were Jews even among the collaborators of Nouveauvremia of Sovoren. The Jewish Encyclopedia quotes the names of five of them. The newspaper Ruski Vermosti was long dominated by the figure of G.B. Ayelos called there by Gorsenstein, who had been working there since the 80s. Both were deputies to the first Duma. Their lives suffered cruelly from the atmosphere of violence engendered by political assassinations, these being the very essence of the revolution, a rehearsal of 1905 to 1906. According to the Israeli Jewish Encyclopedia, the responsibility for their assassination

would rest with the union of the Russian people. For the Russian Jewish Encyclopedia, if the latter bore responsibility for the assassination of Gersenstein, Ayalos, him, was killed by black hundreds terrorists. Yeah, that's kind of like what's good for the goose, that kind of thing.

Jewish publishers and journalists did not restrict their activities to the Capitol or to highly intellectual publications, but they also intervened in the popular. press, such as Kopeca, a favorite reading of the concierges, a quarter of a million copies in circulation. It played a major role in the fight against anti-Semitic denigration campaigns. It had been created and was led by M.B. Gordetsky, the very influential Kievskaya

Miesel, to the left of the cadets, had as editor-in-chief, Yona Kugel, there were four brothers all journalists, and D. Slavatsky, Zaslavsky, a wicked rascal, and what seems to us very moving, Leo Trotsky. The biggest newspaper of Saratov was edited by Avekbar Sr., brother-in-law of Svardlov. In Odessa appeared for some time the Novorowski telegraph, with strong right-wing convictions, but measures of economic suffocation were taken against it. successfully. As I've mentioned before, the right-wing reaction, when I say right-wing, I mean, the either Orthodox monarchists, and I think inherent to that is Russo-Ukrainian nationalists, just speaking very generally. That includes Belarus. That they were located in Ukraine because

this is where the Jewish population was. Ukraine was the center of Jewish domination. So you're not going to get this developing in Siberia, but there were only a handful of Jews, but within the old pale settlement in much of Ukraine, especially on the Black Sea, the Jews have dominated for a long time. And I think what he means here is just, you know, boycotts and people suddenly disappearing, whatever it was, to get rid of it. Because if he's, you know, he's, you know, he's, you right-wing newspaper in Odessa had to have been a very difficult job. And we all know about economic suffocation. I don't know. It could have been the paper. It could have been the printers.

You know, I'm not sure who had a monopoly on that stuff. But I also like to note that both Karl Marx and Leon Trotsky were journalists or pretended to be journalists. they all had no problem writing for Western newspapers you know Trotsky did it in in America it's like this is like almost like a write of passage for these Jews to work for a newspaper somewhere this was their method of corruption and denigration the Russian press also had migrant stars thus L.I. Goldstein an inspired journalist who wrote in the most diverse newspapers for 35 years

including the scene Otishevka and it was also he who founded and directed the Rosia, a clearly patriotic newspaper. The latter was closed because of the particularly virulent chronicle directed against the imperial family. These

Obmanovie gentlemen, the press was to celebrate Goldstein's Jubilee in the spring of 1917, as well as a discreet Garvei Altus, who had a moment of glory for his chronicle, The Leap of the Passionate Panther, in which he poured a torrent of calumnies on the minister of the interior, N.A. Makulikov, but all this was nothing compared to the unheard-of insolence of the humoristic leaflets of the years

1905 to 1907, which covered in muck in unimaginable terms, all the spheres of power and of the state. The chameleon, Zinovi Grubin, in 1905, he published a satirical leaflet, the Jupil. In 1914 and 1915, he directed the right-minded Otis Chesvo. And in 1920, he set up a Russian publishing house in Berlin in collaboration with the additions of the Soviet state. Yeah, parity, I think that's what he's talking about here. Parity was very important to them. It prevented them from having to deal with facts on the ground. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't.

Going after the royal family was a huge problem. You really just, you couldn't do it. You couldn't do it in any royal states. And I've said this before, but sometimes they would go after Rasputin in later years almost as a substitute. And that's why so much of the stuff about him is concocted out of nothing as a way to attack the

attack Nicholas indirectly so and this was but this is what journalism is is about this kind of you know leftist hatred

and hence Judaism you know so And all of these Jews did very well when the Soviets took over. Nothing changed for them. I still can't believe, you know, the, what's his name? The head of their leading of gold mine combine was given a high position in mining by the Soviet government.

As if to say that, you know, Jews are almost by definition proletarians. But Sontire has been used by the Jews for the right winger. Today, our people do it very well. The left in the U.S. doesn't have any sense of humor. I don't think they know what a sense of humor is. They really are, and when they try, it's stupid. We have some very creative people in the meme wars, which I'm a veteran, by the way,

2015, 2016. But it's difficult for the left since they're always in power. I mean, the system as a whole is leftist. it's very difficult for them to, from that point of view, and they hate the fact that they're being reminded that they are the old men with the cigar chomping, all their old 1920s stereotypes of people in power. Well, that's them.

And they rule in the exact same kind of a way. But I think that was really the only time that you got in trouble is if you went after Nicholas. And these guys, like they did in the U.S., after the World War II, they're pushing against the codes in Hollywood, seeing how far they can go. And they were trying to do the same thing here. But if the press reflected all sorts of currents of thought, from liberalism to socialism, and as far as the Jewish thematic was concerned,

from Zionism to autonomism, it was a position deemed incompatible with journalistic respectability, which consisted in adopting a comprehensive attitude towards power. In the 70s, Dorsayevsky had already noted on several occasions that the Russian press is out of control. This was even to be seen on the occasion of the meeting of March 8, 1881, with Alexander III, newly enthroned emperor, and often afterwards, the journalists acted as self-proclaimed representatives of society. Yeah, this is a big one for me. he was absolutely right you know journalism was just coming into its own

it was Jewish almost by its very structure and when he means out of control he said if they would they would concoct whatever they needed to there was no difference between an editorial and a in a news article that's the same like you know for the Jewish New York Times today but you know there was no concern in the press isn't there to educate anybody

this is now a hundred years over 100 years they're not there to tell you the truth that's not their job that's what a scholar might do so when a scholar reads a newspaper article the handful of us that are left

our first reaction is to be very skeptical but this is why a state-owned press is important you know it's like Sana in Syria well it doesn't exist anymore because of these people people. If the Jews dominate the press, then you have the, you know, sometimes I can, in the Burmese case, where I just, you know, formulated Johnson's law, the state, oh, there's a difference between state own and state control or state influenced.

That's the only media that's actually saying what's going on, rather than just one-liners and, and, uh, uh, pious, uh, moralizing because journalists are leftists. they're especially in the U.S. and Western Europe coming out of Colombia and everything. They are out of control. They've always been out of control. They'll do anything. They'll say anything. But for them then to say that we are representative of society. So a journalist will say the public, you have the need to tell us things because the public has a right to know.

But you're not the public. You have no connection to the public. You probably don't even like the public. In fact, I'm sure you don't even like the public. So you are part of the leftist structure, and that's all you are. Donald Trump, you know, throwing some of these guys out of, you know, press briefings and things like that is perfectly legitimate. That these are weapons of war. Information is far more powerful than anything else.

And it wasn't just Dostoevsky saying that Russian press is out of control. And as I've said before, the nonsense that they were coming up. with, especially about, you know, major issues like what happened in 1905, what happened in the gold mines, what happened in Russia-Japanese War, that became standard Western dogma, and none of it's true, or very little of it's true. It's true by accident. And it's not just, they just would invent things. Even the Soviet press was better. The Soviet press, you read the Old Pravda. They would say what happened? but they would then editorialize vehemently against it

if it was something they didn't like. So even in that sense, it's more trustworthy than, like, say, the American press. Soviet press just would then condemn it at the end of an article. But they'd be accurate up until that point. They'd editorialize. The Soviets, the Lennon was very clear.

The press is an agent of revolution. And it will, if they're to defend the revolution, afterwards. But I think this is a very good argument for a state-owned or controlled press corps. I'm not talking about PBS or anything else because, especially in this case, that would not be under Jewish control. That would provide the state's point of view. I'm not talking about this, you know, today, but in, you know, in foreign countries, Syria

Burma State-owned press is really the only place I go because everything else half the time they take from the American press State-owned press is actually much more sober

they do criticize I mean Sana Sana criticized Assad all the time but they certainly didn't make anything up so this this is huge for me self-proclaimed representatives

of society, and then self-reclaimed representatives of the revolution. This was big for the left. This was big for Lenin. Journalism was born, was created as a corrupt enterprise. The following statement was attributed to Napoleon. Quote, three opposition papers are more dangerous than 100,000 enemy soldiers. End quote. This sentence applies largely to the Russo-Japanese War.

The Russian press was openly defeated. throughout the conflict and in each of its battles. Even worse, it did not conceal its sympathies for terrorism and revolution. This press, totally out of control in 1905, was considered during the period of the Duma, if we are to believe Vita, as essentially Jewish or semi-Jewish. Or, to be more precise, as a press dominated by left-wing or radical Jews who occupied key positions. In November 1905, D.I. Pinckno, editor-in-chief for 20, years of the Russian newspaper, the Kievan, and a connoisseur of the press of his times, wrote,

quote, the Jews have bet heavily on the card of the revolution. Those among the Russians who think seriously have understood that in such moments the press represents a force and that this force is not in their hands, but in that of their adversaries, that they speak on their behalf throughout Russia and have forced people to read them because there is nothing else to read. and as one cannot launch a publication in one day, has been drowned beneath the mass of lies incapable of finding itself here or there. We're talking about the major press organs.

And unless they went after the royal family directly, they were allowed to function. In fact, there was a confrontation between czar Nicholas and Queen Victoria Queen Victoria did like things that were being said about her concerning the early years of the war

and Nicholas said well I don't do what you do over there we have a free press here you don't have one I'm not going to interfere despite the fact that that was his wife's grandmother. Napoleon is absolutely correct. I've read the Russian media a bunch of articles over the years on the Russo-Japanese

war. I can't find, I can't corroborate anything that they're saying in any historical record whatsoever. But by saying that the Russians are losing, like the American press did in the early years of the Russo-Ukrainian war, which is all a lie, or at least, you know, mostly a lie. and they're making up stuff about the

Iranian-Israeli war now that actually then has people thinking that maybe the system isn't good after all that if we can't win a war they do the same thing in Crimea the press wasn't quite what it became but it was identical in every other way

that the point is this is a revolutionary idea Russians are dying and there is no real chance at victory here because of bad leadership or whatever it is and hence people question the system that was the point of this defeatism and after a while

I see the same thing the American press in Vietnam the American press still hasn't dealt with the fact that the U.S. was defeated and driven out of Afghanistan or Somalia for that matter you know so that's you know he's exactly this is what I was saying before this is precisely openly defeatist the point of being openly defeat us of course is to lie because they're going to be defeatist whether or not the Russians had cleaned up

one totally or lost totally they were going to say the exact same thing remember the press journalists aren't specialists in anything You know, if they cover situation in Syria, where they're not Syria scholars. They're not historians. They don't know international relations. That's not their job. Their job is to tell a story.

And in this case, we all know what that story is. The story is far more important than any truth. They're sophists. Truth doesn't exist. The only truth is the revolution. And now the Jews are totally associated with the media, as we said before. It's almost like going into journalism is inherently an ethnic matter. You look at the list of the dominant personalities in New York Times.

Almost every single one is Jewish. I'm pretty sure this is not a coincidence. Helta Kamerov did not see the national dimension of this phenomenon, but he made in 2010 the following remarks about the Russian press, quote, they play on the nerves, they cannot stand contradiction, they do not want courtesy, fair play, they have no ideal, they do not know what that is, end quote. As for the public formed by the press, quote, it wants aggressiveness, brutality, it does not respect knowledge. and lets itself be deceived by ignorance, end quote.

Tickamirov himself was a leftist terrorist, one of the few non-Jews in the people's will. I've read, I think I'm pretty sure I've read everything he's written at some point or another. And he knew how the leftist revolutionary, even early on, depended on the press to cover for them. I'm not sure if you would have much of a leftist movement at all. I mean, it's not a movement. They dominate.

I don't care who's elected president. That's, you know, that's temporary as far as the system and the regime as a whole. It's leftist by, you know, by its very structure, by its very definition. And yes, they're very arrogant about it, but this isn't about knowledge. This is about power. And being deceived by ignorance, well, it's because they know how to put together a good story. Sometimes the truth is just not, it's too detailed. the good versus evil crap that they were trying to do in the Russo-Ukrainian war

you know white hat black hat and half of the time these people were you know embedded in military units everything centered they were told what to say and somehow this this became the truth for millions of people the Russians didn't even do that half the time during the war the media was in Moscow or St. Petersburg. They knew what they were going to say regardless of what happened. At the other end of the political spectrum, here's the judgment that the Bolshevik M. Lemke passed on the Russian press.

Quote, in our day, ideas are not cheap, and information is sensational, self-assured, and authoritative ignorance fills the columns of the newspapers. End quote. More specifically in the cultural sphere, André Belli, who was anything but a right-wing man or chauvinist, wrote these bitter lines in 1909. Quote, Our national culture is dominated by people who are foreign to it. See the names of those who write in Russian newspapers and magazines, literary critics, musical critics. They are practically nothing but Jews. There are among them people who have talent and sensibility, and some, few people.

a number, understand our national culture perhaps better than the Russians themselves, but they are the exception. The mass of Jewish critics is totally foreign to Russian art. It expresses itself in a jargon resembling Esperanto and carries on a reign of terror among those who try to deepen and enrich the Russian language, end quote. Yeah, Bele was one of the leaders of the symbolist movement on the turn of the century. I've read him, it's been a long time, but I've read a lot of the stuff. He was he was vaguely a nationalist. I'm stressing the word vaguely. Symbolism was very interesting.

I had a lot of pagan elements to it. But there were a lot of fun to read. But when you have people from every angle, every walk of life, people who know saying that this is a Jewish thing, and today in the EU you go to prison for mentioning it, you have a little bit of a problem. and even in art.

You know, Willis Cardo, and I know, I don't know if this is true, but Willis Cardo, one day I walked into his office, and he held up a Jackson Pollock picture in a book, and he said, you know, I don't think Jews see the same things that we see when we look at the world. I think there's some truth to that, that their filters are completely different from ours,

that somehow this mess, You know, Jackson Pollock did all the crazy abstracts, though. Not like the symbolist did it. That was a different story. But they're just a crazy line. You know, Jackson Pollock paintings. And he said, how there has to be a completely different, well, he didn't put it this way, but I think what he was trying to say was that the filters that they had to look at the world are very different from ours.

We don't see the same things. And I think I don't think it's completely. true, but I think there is some truth to it. Well, I will say this. It's pretty well known to that Jackson Pollock was working hand in hand with the CIA. That's not a conspiracy theory anymore. That's been revealed. And I think it was just to put garbage art in front of, in front of the public, just to, you know, it's like brutalist architecture.

I mean, that's the people who make this kind of stuff, they just hate us. Yeah. Well, it's like Andy Warhol, even though he's from Pittsburgh, I'm, I can't find one significant thing he ever did. He set up a camera across from the Empire State Building and ran it for nine hours up high. What is, what is this man done? And yet he's considered a genius and a God and these and these works of his. are sold for ridiculous amounts of money. I can't find anything interesting that he did.

The only reason that anyone takes him seriously is that the media is in the hands of Jews. He claims to have not been a Jew. I know some people who think he was. His family was from Carpathoros. Maybe he wasn't. But he certainly thought like them. And I agree with you completely.

Andy Warhol from a true aesthetic point of view produce nothing of value and that's not necessarily an opinion especially when you know you have these ridiculous long films of literally nothing and that's considered genius because he you know I just was reading something about him recently is how does this man ever become famous

But you have brilliant artists who can't get a gig. I can say the same about musicians, you know, garbage art, you know, aesthetics is so important. That goes for music, too. And how we come to understand the world, Plato made such a big deal about it. Art is so important. So it would make sense for the regime, whatever it is. Would it be a CIA, whether it be corporations. It's all one ruling class as far as I'm concerned.

Of course they hate us. They don't understand us. They don't want to understand us. But to alter our default settings and how we see the world is exactly what all this garbage is. Pornography is a big part of a big part of this. Right down into the bedroom, it's totalitarian. There's nothing that they leave out. Aesthetics is extremely important.

And, yeah, like, there are many that we could mention like that. that if society were normal, no one would ever have heard of them. At the same time, Jabotinsky, a perspicacious Zionist, complained of, quote, progressive newspapers financed by Jewish funds and stuffed with Jewish collaborators

and warned, quote, when the Jews rushed en masse into Russian politics, we predicted that nothing good would come of it, neither for Russian policy nor for the Jews. End quote. The Russian press played a decisive role in the assault of the cadets and the intelligents against the government before the revolution. The deputy in the Duma, A.I. Shinagaryov, expresses well the state of mind that reigned there. Quote, this government only has to sink.

To a power like this, we cannot even throw the smallest bit of rope, end quote. In this regard, it may be recalled that the first Duma observed the minute of silence in memory of the victims of the Bialystok, Houghgram, refusing to admit, as we have seen, that it was an armed confrontation between anarchists and the army. The second Duma also paid tribute to Ayulos murdered by a terrorist, but when Poroskevich offered to observe a minute of silence in memory of the officers and soldiers who had died in the city of their duty, he was removed from the sitting, and parliamentarians were so manic that they thought it unthinkable to pity those who insured security in the country, that elementary security, which they all needed. You remember when, uh, sorry, you remember when, uh, Pelosi and a few of the others were on their

knees for their moment of silence for, uh, what's his name, George Floyd? Yep. I said, these people won't worship anything, but they will be on their knees for him. this lavish funeral that went all over the country and no one bothered to ask who paid for this where this money come from but the first two

Dumas were like this and remember this is a time in Russian history where things were going very well and and so that means that these people lived in their own little bubble but when you control the press

you know, especially if you're in the professions, you're literate, you're in the cities, you had tons of literate people in the countryside, too. That's an old myth, but literacy was like 70%, 65% at the time overall.

That becomes your public, that becomes reality. And they even, you know, start using language in their own way. you know, everything's a pogrom if the left doesn't like it. You know, um,

uh, but it's always, when I first read that, it reminded me of, of that moron. Oh, remember she was wearing her African, uh,

sash across her, you know, uh, this, this, this, this, this,

this, this, both Pelosi and George Floyd. Um, she hasn't got on her knees for, well, maybe a poor choice of words, but she hasn't worshipped anything in her life except for that moment. A. Kulashar drew up a fair assessment of this period, but late, but too late in 1923, in emigration.

Quote, before the revolution there were, among the Jews of Russia, individuals and groups of individuals. The activity could be characterized precisely by the lack of sense of responsibility in the face of the confusion that reigned in the minds of the Jews. Through the propagation of a revolutionary spirit, as vague as it was superficial, all their political action consisted in being more to the left than the others. Confined to the role of irresponsible critics, never going to the end of things, they considered that their mission consisted of always saying, it is not enough. These people were Democrats, but there were also a particular category of Democrats. Moreover, they referred to themselves as the Jewish Democratic group who attached this adjective to any substantive inventing any

unsustainable Talmud of democracy with the only end to demonstrate that the others were not yet sufficiently Democrats. They maintained an atmosphere of irresponsibility around them of countless, of contentless maximalism, of insatiable demand, all of which had fatal consequences when the revolution came. The destructive influence of this press is undoubtedly one of the weaknesses of great vulnerability of Russian public life in the years 1914 to 1917. Yeah, I like that unsustainable talmud of democracy. I'd like to unpack that at some point.

But this is exactly why giving in, as Nicholas did with the Duma, is a terrible idea. Public honesty of the mentality of Alexander the third. They were right because it is never enough. If they're going to, you know, if you give them an inch, they're going to demand a mile and they're going to force it. You can't keep giving in like this. And it did nothing but give these groups the view that they're weak.

The state, you know, is falling apart or else they wouldn't be doing this. And the press was a huge part of it. The press is what created this bubble of reality. And it was a case then, and it's the case in America now. It doesn't matter whether the Internet was there or not, or the radio or TV. And you had this notion, especially in the cities, that if you don't read the big newspapers, you're not civilized. You're not educated. So you had to be a part of this bubble or you were some kind of lunatic.

But what became of the reptilian press, the one that laid down in front of the authorities, the press of the Russian nationalists? The Ruskoje Zamnia of Dubrovin. It was said that things fell from your hands so much he was rude and bad. Let us note in passing that it was forbidden to circulate it in the army at the request of certain generals. The Zamchina was hardly better. I do not know. I have not read any of these papers. As for the Moscovaya Zeta-Mosti, out of breath, they no longer had readers after 1905. But where were the strong minds and sharp pens of the

conservatives, those who were concerned about the fate of the Russians? Why were their new good newspapers to counterbalance the devastating whirlwind? It must be said that in view of the agile thought and writing of the liberal and radical press so accountable for its dynamism to its Jewish collaborators, the Russian nationalist could only align slow, rather soft, spirits who were not at all prepared to fight this kind of battle. But what is there to say about this state of affairs today? But what is there to say about the state of affairs today? There were only a few literary types exasperated by the left press, but totally devoid of talent. Moreover, right-wing publications were facing serious financial difficulties. While the newspapers financed by

Jewish money, as Jabotinsky used to say, offered very good wages, hence the profusion of wordsmiths and above all, all these journals without exception were interesting. Finally, the left-wing press and the Duma demanded the closure of the subsidized newspapers. That is to say, supported in secret and rather weakly by the government. First thing, whenever any of these groups, these Democrats of any type take power and they always take power at the barrel of a gun the first thing they do is shut down their opposition media

they're well aware now it isn't just like there was no you know they lost readers after 1905 but they they didn't have massive Jewish money being poured into them yeah the state financed a couple of

newspapers partially but it was nothing the Jews understood propaganda and journalism in a way that especially back then, the state didn't. There were plenty of brilliant right-wingers.

But, you know, it's like going to a university today. We see what the universities and rush to work back then. You know, a handful of Jews automatically it becomes a bulwark of revolution. That's all it takes. And they surely should have been excluded entirely. And not just from

from Jews, but also from the British government, from the French government, and the Rothschilds themselves. And then later on, the Americans. And really, not much has changed. The regime finances, you know, they've created a popular opinion, a norming opinion. But that's been done by force. I've dealt with it. You've dealt with it. but they're facing serious financial difficulties because they didn't have all of these forms of subsidy

running a newspaper. I was there at the very end of the spotlight with Willis Cardo. It's very hard. It's very expensive, even if you have a lot of subscribers. It's very difficult. And you didn't get that same sense that you're a cultured man by reading these things. as you would, you know, the Kyivians and the other liberal papers. They started to get the idea, and the Freemasons had a lot to do with this.

The Masons created this idea that to be leftist was to be scholarly, was to be critical, and in fact it was exactly the opposite. State Secretary S.E. Krasjanovski acknowledged that the government was providing financial supports to more than 30 newspapers in various parts of Russia, but without success, both because the right-lacked educated people prepared for journalistic activity and because the power itself did not know how to do it either. More gifted than others was I.I. Gorland, a Jew of the Ministry of the Interior, a unique case who under the pseudonym of Vassiliev wrote pamphlets

sent in sealed envelopes to prominent public figures. Thus, the government had only one organ which merely enumerated the news in a dry and bureaucratic tone, the provostveni Vesnik. But to create something strong, brilliant, convincing to openly go to the conquest of public opinion, even in Russia, let us not even talk about Europe, that the imperial government itself did not understand the necessity of it or was incapable of doing so, the enterprise being beyond its means or intelligence. Then the revolution comes, both February and October, the Reds take over, and then there's

this massive explosion of Orthodox, nationalist, anti-communist writers all over the place. I've been through mountains of it And of course the question was And very few of them were Some were attached to the church But not many The church had plenty of that But the church also didn't give you the impression

That you were an educated man You were kind of from the village So yeah I love this dry dry tone. It's exactly what the white armies did during the during the Civil War. No propaganda, no ideological unity whatsoever. You know,

they were fighting for Karenski, really, you know, not the crown. And what, you know, the Nekin used to say is that we'll, we're going to have to wait. If we win, we'll call the Democratic assembly and then we'll let the people tell us what they want to do that that's as far as you went um and that doesn't win it doesn't win wars one of the huge reasons the bolsheviks won was their absolute insistence on dogmatic uh conformity there was something to fight for something to believe in and yes some of the state organs at the time were just you know it didn't

have to be like that. But then the revolution occurs. Then all of a sudden, these guys come out of the woodwork. And Zoltenessens asking, where to hell were they? The Nouveau Vremia of Savoren long maintained a pro-governmental orientation. It was a very lively, brilliant, and energetic newspaper. But it must be said, equally changing, sometimes favorable to the alliance with Germany, sometimes violently hostile to it. And alas, not always knowing how to make the difference between national revival and attacks on the Jews. Its founder, Old Savoren, sharing his property among his three sons before dying, gave them as a condition to never yielding any of their shares to Jews. Vitter ranked Novoi Vremia among the newspapers, which, in 1905, had an interest to be

of the left, then turned right to become now ultra-reactionaries. This very interesting and influential journal offers a striking example of this orientation. Although very commercial, it still counts among the best. It provided a great deal of information and was widely disseminated, perhaps the most dynamic of the Russian newspapers, and certainly the most intelligent of the organs of the right. And the leaders of the right and the deputies of the right and the Duma? Do we want to end right here? Because it looks like we're starting a new...

Yeah, I have no problem with that. So, yeah, but, you know, I pretty much said everything I was going to say here. There's a few things that bear repeating because it comes up again and again. But I think our listeners may be surprised about how similar, if not identical, the situation with the press and the Jews and the media and the so-called public opinion was in at this point, And what was a healthy society as it is now in the U.S. And what's considered right then versus what's considered right now are two very, very different things. All right.

Well, let's do a short one. I think we were looking at this before it started. And it was like there is no natural stopping point. I think this is probably the most natural or we'd probably be going an hour and a half here. So that is true. The other thing is, you know, one of the big differences between right and left in Russia at the time was the Jewish question. Being on the right and not being anti-Judaic or be telling the truth about the Jews, that that didn't make any sense. Of course, that's gone now.

Both major parties want to, although that might be changing, one who serve the Jews as wildly as possible. And, of course, in Britain and the EU, you go to prison, if you don't. You don't know what happened to Moldova and Romania. You know, if you get too powerful, they get rid of it. Same thing in France. You know, the right-wing leaders are mostly in prison and much of it. They're going to do the same thing in Germany, I'm sure. They haven't started already.

So that was. So, you know, the czar, the church, and the Jews, those were the three big issues that would differentiate a rightist and a leftist in 1906. All right. I know I said this at the end of the last episode. I say at the end of every episode. Go over to the show notes. Go over to the videos.

I have the links in the comments. Donate to Dr. Johnson. We're 40, what is this? 46 episodes now? 46 episodes. Every single one of these has been. and put out publicly on all the platforms, including Twitter, for free. I think that at this point, we could probably sell these, but that's not the point of this.

The point of this is to get this information out and to educate people. So please, go donate to Dr. Johnson and the work he's doing. And, yeah, we'll keep this going. It's 200 episodes together, as some people are calling it. Oh, I haven't heard that one yet. all right dr johnson i appreciate you very much yep all right bye bye i want to welcome everyone back to part 47 of our reading of 200 years together by alexander solzhenyson dr johnson what are you doing today you know what i was just doing before before you called i was reading

the 2025 threat assessment from the intelligence community that tulsi gobbard put together it is it is the most ridiculous thing. It's taken from CNN, mine as well as well, I've written it. Apparently now, Gabbard and her people are

repromoting the Russian electoral manipulation scam. They've mentioned it again. That RT needs to be banned because they're trying to change people's minds about things. All in here.

This is now an official publication of the intelligence community in the U.S. but there's no insight to it. They've made some ridiculous. The only smart claim that they made was that the Iranians weren't pursuing nuclear weapons, but you don't have to have specialized knowledge to know that.

Otherwise, it's absolute garbage. I feel stupider. I feel less accomplished for having read it. We don't have, there's nobody impressive really in government anymore. There's no George Tenet. There's no, I mean, even Henry Kissinger. I mean, you could say whatever the motivations of these people were, you knew that they,

they knew, like, you know, Ted Cruz the other day, doesn't know the population of Iran. You knew that, like, Senator John F. Kennedy knew the population of Vietnam. When he was a senator, he would know what it was. I mean, these people are just, they're just basically. drafting and you know drafting you get behind uh racing car gets behind another car and gets in his traffic gets pulled they're they're just drafting off of like how powerful zionists were in the past you know as people are like oh ted cruz who's paying him and who's you know who has a sex tape you know where he's having sex with a kid i'm like they don't need that anymore that's just who

these people are. It's what they believe. An expert walks into their office, you know, from A-PAC and tells them, oh, you know, this is, Iran's going to do this. And they're like, they look at their experts around them, which aren't experts, their basic retards. And they go, oh, well, that must be the truth. And they just believe it. And there's no one anymore, you know, there's no James Forrestall anymore. There's no one who is going to ask questions. there's not a they're doing bibliography there are no footnotes we have to take their word for it doesn't say where they got this information from it's just asserted paragraph after paragraph it's it's mostly a propaganda piece maybe the real threat assessment has been is classified and this one is it's it's written on maybe an eighth grade level i wasn't expecting that for something you know official like this i wasn't expecting how awful it was and how it just recycles media slogans from years ago. So this is, you know, I was the first person who noticed Tulsi Gabbard

when she first started talking about Syria. I was the first one to mention that she's, wait a minute, she's not saying what she's supposed to say. She might be halfway decent. And I almost regret that now. everything other than even though it says that yes the Iranians are not

making a nuclear weapon which of course I already knew however they are making biological and chemical weapons again no evidence but you know so this is this is useless and this is what

but I have the feeling this is just a propaganda piece that they put out for the masses and the real one is classified well we shall see I mean, I've heard so many different stories about Israel as down to six days worth of missiles and rockets at this point. And, you know, it's just all anybody is waiting for right now is to see whether the United States is going to get involved in this in a way that isn't behind the scenes. And, you know, we basically, we're at the point where the United States could completely ignore Israel and Israel could be.

I wouldn't say destroyed, but they could be changed forever. Like, they'll be changed from the inside forever. They'll be forced to change themselves and how they interact with the world. Because even their power that's in Europe, you know, city of London, NATO, EU, they're clueless. These aren't impressive people. I mean, the city of London doesn't even have the kind of gold reserves it used to have. So, you know, there's a lot going against. these people. There's a lot going against Israel. So, you know, I don't want to see Israel destroyed

because then all those people come here. I want to see them become a Western democracy where they celebrate transgenderism and, and homosexuality in every corner, in every corner of the country, not just Tel Aviv. All right. All right. Ready to go? Yes, sir. And the leaders of the right and the deputies of the right in the Duma? Most often they acted without taking into account the real relationship between their strengths and their weaknesses, showing themselves both brutal and ineffective, seeing no other means of defending the integrity of the Russian state than calling for more bans on Jews. In 1911, the deputy Balakoff developed a program that went against the current and the times, reinforcing the palestead. removing Jews from publishing, justice, and the Russian school. Deputy Zamislavski

protested that within the universities, the Jews, the SRs, the Social Democrats, enjoyed a secret sympathy, as if one could overcome by decree a secret sympathy. In 1913, the Congress of the Union of the nobility demanded, as had already been done in 1908 under the third Duma, that more Jews be taken into the army, but that they be systematically, but that they be symmetrically excluded from public functions, the territorial and municipal administration and justice. Well, I know it sounds when you have a name like the Congress of the Union of the nobility, it sounds very traditional, but they were not.

they were all over the place politically and mationary had penetrated pretty deeply into it a lot of this stuff trying to keep Jews protecting Jews from their own actions has a lot to do with this too

because they were pushing way too hard and the reactions were just going to continue to happen until of course they had no idea the Soviet Union was coming the only person that predicted the Soviet Union was St. John Kronstadt, roughly around this time, saying that, you know, one day they are going to take over, and I know what they're going to do.

I had that in a paper I wrote long ago, but there were a tiny handful of others, but Shulton, not Shulton, Rasputon, sort of. But St. John of Kronstadt, it was the only one who knew what the state was up against here. In the spring of 1911, Poroskevich. striving with others against an already weak Stullopin proposed to the duma these extreme measures formally forbid the Jews to take any official duty in any administration, especially in the periphery of the empire. The Jews convicted of having tried to occupy these functions will have to answer before justice. Thus, the right reproach Stollopin for making concessions to the Jews.

When he had taken office in the spring of 1906, Stullopin had had to consider the manifesto of October 17th as a fait accompli, even if it had to be slightly amended, that the emperor had hastily signed it without sufficient reflection. It no longer mattered. It had to be applied. The state had to be rebuilt in the midst of difficulties in accordance with the manifesto and in spite of the hesitations of the czar himself.

And this implied equal rights. for the jews that was one of the you know i said before there really only a handful of issues that separated um left from right at the time it was the crown of course the monarchy the church and the jews um maybe to a lesser extent um their their uh opinion of great britain and that's you know that's really about it but at this in this era it's pretty much the Jews. How you view the Jews was where you, you know, stood, politically speaking. Yes, he's right here.

You know, it was hastily signed. It was something that it was a mistake. Nicholas II was an actual statesman. He was extremely well educated. He knew personally, every leader in Western Europe, he spoke all European languages. And it was just something that he thought would, would prevent any further violence in the midst of a very nasty war in the Far East. And as I've said a hundred times before, nothing happened from it.

Nothing came from it. It didn't pass anything. And it was just a useless, really talking until the very last one, a talking shop for the left. Of course, the restrictions imposed on the Jews continued, not only in Russia. In Poland, which was considered, as well as Finland, be oppressed, these limitations were even more brutal. Jabotinsky writes, quote, the yoke that weighs heavily on Jews in Finland is beyond measure, even with what is known of Russia or Romania. The first Finnish man, if he surprises a Jew out of a city, has the right

to arrest the criminal and take him to the police station. Most trades are forbidden to Jews. Jewish marriages are subject to compulsory and humiliating formalities. It is very difficult to obtain permission to build the synagogue. The Jews are deprived of all political rights, end quote. Elsewhere in Austrian-Galicia, quote, the Poles do not hide that they see in the Jews only a material used to strengthen their political power in this region. There have been cases where high school students were excluded from their establishment for cause of Judaism. One hinders in a thousand and one way, a thousand and one way is the functioning of Jewish schools manifest hatred towards the jargon, Yiddish, and the Jewish Socialist Party itself is

boycotted by the Polish Social Democrats, end quote. Even in Austria, although a country of Central Europe, hatred toward the Jews was still alive and many restrictions remained in force, such as the Carlsbad Baths. Sometimes they were simply closed to the Jews. Sometimes they could only go in there in the summer, and the winter Jews could only access it under strict control. I don't know how many Jews were in Finland at the time.

As of 15 years ago, there were about 400, and yet the major newspaper there is owned by a Jew. His last name is Arno. But I don't know why Jabotinsky is bringing this up. These are very vague aspersions. Everyone knew what the Jews were, but so many of them had business dealings with them or really didn't know what to do with them. They thought that they somehow contained them, that you can turn them into,

a normal group of people, which has been the theme, I think, so far. We're on page 252. That's been the theme that these Gentiles think they could turn Jews into normal people, rather than the mafia organized criminal enterprise

that they really were. And I think Jabatinsky, you know, he came the closest and saying, we need to get out of here. every right wing party as this developed in the 20th century including the Union of the Russian people just wanted them removed and sent to

somewhere in the Ottoman Empire their presence in but at the same time you had financial considerations there was a lot of money there was a lot of money to be made despite they're not paying taxes very often they did bring a huge amount of money into the treasury chances are though I bet you, that they took more than they, at this point, certainly, they took more than they

contributed. And you had just enough, just enough patriotic Jews to make people think, well, maybe, you know, they're not, you know, they're, some of them are okay, and we could use those to, to move forward. There was always just enough, decent ones that, that, that, you then question yourself. And I think that's the role of those, of those guys, just to give people pause, but the Jews had no pause. They knew exactly what they were doing. And Jabotinsky, you could say, was a spokesman for the most extreme Jewish nationalism at the time.

But, yeah, bringing up Finland, you know, Poland, that's where Jews got their, you know, that's where they earned their wings. You know, that was, you know, they became the most powerful group in Europe, largely, in Poland. But I don't even know what he's talking about here. I mean, it was sort of under Russian control, sort of. Again, these aren't countries.

Russia wasn't a nation state. It was an empire. So they have a lot of these gradations of relationships, just like Austria. So I don't know, I don't know what he's talking about there. Austria, you know, you had the Christian Socialist Party that grew very well. This is a lot of anti-Rostchild, starting in the 1848 revolution, and then again in 1872, the contempt for the Rothschild was continuing to grow. They couldn't really hide anymore. And so I think that's the basic context of what Jabokitinsky is talking about.

But as far as a Russian right, you know, clearly they weren't doing anything worthwhile, not in the street and not. intellectually. I mean, they were writing. They were putting together, but as far as state policy is concerned, they had limited influence over the emperor. But the system is the system of limitations in Russia itself fully justified the grievances expressed in the Jewish encyclopedia as a whole. Quote, the position of the Jews is highly uncertain and as much as it depends on how the law is interpreted by those responsible for applying it. at the lowest level of the hierarchy, or even simply their goodwill. This blur is due to the extreme difficulty of achieving uniform interpretation and application of the law is limiting

the rights of the Jews. There are many provisions have been supplemented and modified by numerous decrees signed by the emperor on the proposal of various ministries, and which, moreover, were not always reported in the general code of laws, end quote, new quote. Even if he has an express authorization issued by the competent authority, the Jew is not certain that his rights are intangible. A refusal emanating from a junior official, an anonymous letter sent by a competitor, or an approach made in the open by a more powerful rival seeking the expropriation of a Jew suffice to condemn him to vagrancy. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that they've had all these commissions that led to laws being passed in different periods that now sometimes

contradict each other. We've talked about this maybe a couple of months ago that if you go through the statutes on the Jews and the Russian Empire this era, you know, it's actually a Jewish playground. They love the fact that they can interpret this stuff however they want. This is a little bit of projection here. But it was so confused. is there were so many of these stupid commissions. And it's not just the law code of the empire, but also the decrees of the emperor and traditions, canon law, all these other sources,

going back really to the Byzantine Empire and the Bulgarian Empire, Kiev and Rus and all that, it was very confusing law code, or a set of regulations, I should say. and no one was quite sure what they really were. All they knew is that they had certain limitations and that Zarniglis supported them

and his father even more so. But, you know, it was what happened in 1905, 1906 was a disaster for Russia, not so much in the Far East, but domestically, and it was Jewish from top to bottom. Stalupin understood very well

the absurdity of such a state of affairs and the irresistible movement that then pushed for a status of equality for the Jews, a status had already existed to a large extent in Russia. The number of Jews established outside the palest settlement increased steadily from year to year. After 1903, the Jews had access to an additional 101 places of residence, and the number of these was still significantly increased under Stullopin, which implemented a measure which the Zahar had not taken in 1906 and which Aduma had rejected in 1907. The former Jewish encyclopedia indicates that the number of these additional places of residents amounted to 291 in 2010 to 1912. As for the new encyclopedia, it puts the number

to 299 for the year 2011. The old encyclopedia reminds us that from the summer of 1905 onwards in the wake of revolutionary events, the governing body. did not take into account the numerous Klossus for three years. From August 1909 onwards, the latter was reduced from what it was before in the higher and secondary schools, now 5% in the capitals, 10% outside of the palest settlement, 15% within it, but subject to compliance. However, since the proportion of Jewish students was 11% at the University of St. Petersburg in 24 at that of Odessa, this measure was felt to be a new restriction. A restrictive measure was adopted in 1911, and numerous classes was extended to

the outside world. For boys only and in girls' institutions, the real percentage was 13.5% in in 1911. At the same time, artistic, commercial, technical, and vocational schools accepted Jews without restriction. After secondary and higher education, the Jews rushed into vocational education, which they had neglected until then. Although in 1883, Jews in all municipal and regional vocational schools accounted for only 2% of the workforce, 12% of the boys and 17% of the girls in 1898. In addition, Jewish youth filled private higher education institutions. Thus, in 1912, the Kiev Institute of Commerce had 1,875 Jewish students and the Psychoneurological Institute thousands. Beginning in 1914, any private educational institution could provide courses

in the language of its choice. Well, the context here, remember, is that because there was a, you know, Russia was a creditor nation, it had huge gold reserves like it does today. It was spending a very large amount of money on education. Both boys and girls and at all levels. So new schools are constantly being established

from the countryside right into the biggest of, cities. Now, of course, to refresh our memory, the numerous clauses was the restriction or the proportion that Jews were allowed to have in various educational institutions dependent on the location. But I even think that was a problem because even if it was enforced, it didn't take very many of them to turn the school into a revolutionary outpost. That's what they did the entire time. but that's at least the foundation of this. The Jews would love for you to believe that they do it because

the Russians are so stupid. You know, we all know that, and Jews are so superior. They couldn't take it. And so they tried to keep Jews under schools. We know the truth. Zelentia knows the truth. We've been talking about this for a very long time. I guess to some extent, the universities and even the secondary schools

are kind of actually teaching now. this is kind of post 1905 but the very fact that they were the center of the 190506 rebellion that they were taken over

by Jews and used as their basis throughout the country but especially in the panel settlement shows what they really were and the professors

often were right there with them but that also puts the czar in a very difficult position how much could he do you know how did he have it

in his capacity to totally clean. He could do whatever he wanted. But he also didn't want to give the appearance of being oppressive in that regard. And he said this many times. And of course, I had to smile when the Jewish students at the Psychoneurological Institute, you know, not as shocked to anybody. I'm not sure what they got out of that.

But anyway, the general point was massive amounts of money were being shoveled into education at the time. Had Russia survived, World War I, it would have been extraordinary. It would have borne fruit, no question. But we'll never know. We'll never know that for sure. And the Jews were trying to take advantage of it. It is true that compulsory education for all was part of the logic of the time. Stalepin's main task was to carry out the agrarian reform, thus creating a solid class of peasant owners.

His companion in arms, Minister of Agriculture, A. Krivashin, who was also in favor of abolishing the palest settlement, insisted at the same time that be limited the right of anonymous companies which shares to proceed with the purchase of land, and to the extent that it was likely to result in the formation of a significant Jewish land capital, indeed, The penetration into the rural world of Jewish speculative capital risk jeopardizing the success of the agrarian reform. At the same time, he expressed a fear that this would lead to the emergence of anti-Semitism, unknown then in the countryside of Greater Russia. Neither Stalepin nor Krivosin could allow that the peasants remain in misery due to the fact of not owning land. In 1906, Jewish agriculture settlements were also deprived of the right. to acquire land belonging to the state, which was now reserved for peasants. I'm not really sure what he's aiming for here.

First of all, there was a lot of anti-Jewish thinking in the countryside. That's an odd statement. I guess he means it wasn't politicized. There was no union of the Russian people in the rural commune or anything like that. But he does make a very important point. that allowing Jewish capitalists full rights of buying and selling land would lead to a total oligarchy,

especially in southwest Russia, where the paleos settlement was, where the old Khazar Empire was, and the peasants would be totally landless. That is absolutely true. So there had to be control over it. That was the key. Russian land policy was an amazing success

up until the war, up until it collapsed because at this point peasants were the landlords and they were allowed loans with no interest even those with interest it was usually

after a certain amount of years canceled you know no repayments were I mean that you know a czar could do that but what Sulepin was trying to do was build essentially an individual approach, you know, a yeoman

mentality, which did not exist in Russia, was not popular, where individuals can then own land in their own name. But if you do that at the same time as full Jewish emancipation, or in other words, allowing them to become

oligarchs even more than they were, that would have been a total and complete disaster. Going back to the Djerjavan Commission, we know how the Jews interacted with peasants and what they did and how they manipulated them. the state had to be there the czar had to be there

in order to make sure that their land was inalienable one of the great aspects of the Russian version of feudalism was that no one could take their land from them and that's that's the core of of peasant interest and of course don't forget too Russia was feeding the planet

the Midwest of the U.S. in Russia we're in competition of feeding the rest of of the world. The Soviet Union never reached this level of agricultural production. Not even close, I should say. Not even close throughout its entire existence. So Russia was dealing with a tremendous success in this regard. But when we talk about things like Jewish emancipation or equal rights or other, other slogans, that's what they're referring to, the permissibility of buying and selling land sealing it from peasants

pulling the rug out from under the peasants keeping everyone in debt as I had done elsewhere that that was impossible so long as the Tsar was alive and Szilipin would recognize that contradiction now his permit it was allowed for

individual Russian peasants to buy and so land under certain circumstances but only a handful did I think it was 7% left the commune the commune was so Russian one of the most Russian things in the world

it was an orthodox it was almost a religious institution it that's how Russia survived that's a Russia survived everything and of course that would have been completely destroyed

but trying to impose some kind of individualism was a disaster the Jews would have loved that because the last thing Jews like are you know support of individualism

they are completely cohesive cohesiveness is their is their weapon so even after Stolipin though peasants 96% of the land was owned

by the peasants who tilled it Of course, the Soviets were to take that all away. The economist M. Bernadzky cited the following figures for the pre-war period. 2.4% of Jews worked in agriculture. 4.7% were liberal professionals. 11.5% were domestic servants. 31% worked in commerce.

Jews accounted for 35% of merchants in Russia. 36% in industry. 18% of the Jews. Jews were settled in the pale of settlement. In comparing the latter figure to the 2.4% mentioned above, the number of Jews residing in rural areas and occupied in agriculture had not increased significantly, while according to Bernadzky, it was in the interest of Russians that Jewish forces and resources were invested themselves in all areas of production.

Any limitation imposed on them represented a colossal waste of the productive forces of the country. He pointed out that in 1912, for example, the Society of Producers and Manufacturers of an Industrial District in Moscow had approached the President of the Council of Ministers so that the Jews would not be prevented from playing their role of intermediary link with Russian industrial production centers. Well, Bernadzky is full of it. And it wasn't, you know, economic growth as this liberal Judeaic concept. it was stability it was having enough

for your family and for the commune it was it was justice it had nothing to do with growth there was certainly enough land

that peasants were so close to it I know I said this before but when you had people from the cities observing the peasants they really thought that they can speak to animals

and that suggests that they knew these animals so well you know, from, you know, as long as the animal's been alive, that it seems like they could talk to them, that they knew every aspect of, you know, the weather, the soil, where they lived. Yeah, they might not have been able to write a scientific treatise on it, but they certainly knew more than any scientists in Russia at the time.

And it blew their mind. There was a book that I can't think of the title of it. I had to, um, years ago, I had to make a Xerox copy of it of how urban Russians viewed the peasants. And overwhelmingly, it was incredible. They thought these peasants were absolutely brilliant in what they can do,

what they knew how to do with both draft animals and the land and how they figured out, you know, this has been, the mirror has existed for generations and generations and generations. This isn't something that you can mess with. This is why Stolipan's reform didn't really work, but it did allow your more energetic peasants to buy land on its own. But, no, the commune is what anchored Russian land and kept it Russian. That's the important thing. B.A. Kamenka, chairman of the board of directors of Azov Bank and the Don, turn to the financing of the mining and metallurgical industry and sponsored 11 important enterprises in the Don.

in the Donets and Eurals region. There was no restriction on the participation in Jews in joint stock companies in the industry, but the limitations imposed on joint stock companies wishing to acquire property triggered an outcry in all financial and industrial circles. And the measures taken by Krivashin were to be abrogated.

V. Shulgin made the following comparison. Quote, the Russian power seemed very, ingenuous in the face of the perfectly targeted offensive of the Jews. The Russian power reminded one of the flood of a long and peaceful river. An endless expanse plunged into a soft sleepiness. There is water. Oh my God, there is, but it is only sleeping water. Now the same river, a few versed farther away, enclosed by strong dikes, is transformed

into an impetuous torrent whose bubbling water precipitate itself madly into turbines. It is the same rhetoric that is heard on the side of a liberal economic thought. Russia, so poor in highly skilled workforce, seems to want to further increase its ignorance and its intellectual lagging in relations to the West. Denying the Jews' access to the levers of production amounts to, quote, amounts to a deliberate refusal to use their productive forces. I know I said this before, but even after the February revolution, Kerenzky's government was forced to admit that Russian, whether they be peasants or your mid-to-high-level urban workers, were treated better than anywhere else in Europe.

And not just because of how much they were paid, but also because the cost of living was fairly low. And taxes were extremely low. There was no reason to complain. These people are talking about, you know, Russia is so poor. And it wasn't poor. Although I don't know how he's defining poor here. Ignorance, intellectual lagging. And that goes back to Peter the Great.

That peasant who wants to maintain what he has and keep what he has and not give his land over to the turbines mentioned above for the sake of progress is ignorant. And there is no truth to that. And that's why the Soviets had to deal with the peasants the way that they did. Stolopin saw very well that this was wasteful, but the different sectors of the Russian economy were developing too unevenly. And he regarded the restrictions imposed on Jews as a kind of customs tax that could only be temporary until the Russians consolidated their forces in public life, as well as in the sphere of the economy. these protective measures secreted an unhealthy greenhouse climate for them. Finally, but after many years, the government began to implement the measures for the development of the peasant world,

from which were to result a true and genuine equality of rights between social classes and nationalities, a development which would have made the Russians fear of the Jews disappear, and which would have put a definitive end to all the restrictions of which the latter were still victims. He's talking about Stolipin's point of view because this is nonsense. Alexander III, Isaac II for that matter, brought the peasantry

into its own, with its own banks and its own systems, its own rights and its own responsibilities. And obviously, they were immensely productive, given the fact that, at least in most of Russia, it was very hard to farm.

Weather-wise, soil, southern regions were a different story of course where the pale of settlement is but elsewhere farming was very difficult you didn't have the kind of return that you would get in the black soil regions

obviously but they still made it work one of the reasons they made it work was the concept of Sabonos the idea of the commune using everyone's labor to the maximum but because it didn't lead to what they considered progress,

they were ignorant and stupid. So equality of rights, those are the slogans. The reality was already there. There were plenty of reasons to dislike the Jews at this period of time. Stolipin is, his heart was in the right place. Let me put it that way.

Stolipin. Stephen was considering using Jewish capital to stimulate Russia's economy by welcoming their many joint stock companies, enterprises, concessions, and natural resource businesses. At the same time, he understood that private banks, dynamic and powerful, often preferred to agree among themselves rather than compete, but he intended to counterbalance Yeah. Yeah. Gee, what is that?

Yeah, they prefer to agree. Okay. Sorry. That's okay. Let's read that again because that is a good one. At the same time, he understood that private banks, dynamic and powerful, often preferred to agree among themselves rather than compete. But he intended to counterbalance this phenomenon by nationalizing credit. That is, strengthening the role of the state bank and the creation of a fund to help entrepreneurial peasants who could not obtain credit elsewhere. I don't know what he's talking about. The peasant land banks still exist. existed. They were the creation of Alexander III and his finance minister, Bunga. You know, I think he had something else in mind here. But then again, you know, Ushri was something not, you know, it existed, but it was not looked upon favorably.

And we all know what debt is. It's a method of control. It's a method of domination. It's better than any weapon out there. but this stuff already existed. I don't know what he's talking about. But Stalipin was making another political calculation. He thought that obtaining equal rights would take some of the Jews away from the revolutionary movement. Among other arguments, he also put forth at the local level, bribery was widely used to circumvent the law, which had the effect of spreading corruption within the state apparatus.

Among the Jews, those who did not give in to fanaticism realized that, despite the continued restrictions, in spite of the increasingly virulent but impotent attacks on right-wing circles, those years offered more and more favorable conditions to the Jews and were necessarily leading to equal rights. Just a few years later, thrown into emigration by the Great Revolution, two renowned Jewish figures meditated on pre-revolutionary Russia. Self-taught out of poverty at the cost of the greatest efforts, he had passed his bachelor's degree as an external candidate at the age of 30 and obtained his university degree at 35. He had actively participated in the liberation movement and had always regarded Zionism as an illusory dream.

His name was Iosov Menechievitz Bikerman. From the height of his 55 years of age, he wrote, quote, despite the regulations of May 1882 and other provisions of the same type, despite the palest settlement and numerous clauses, despite Kishenev and Bialestock, I was a free man and I felt as such a man who had before him a wide range of possibilities to work in all kinds of fields, who could enrich himself both materially and spiritually, who could fight to improve his situation and conserve his strength to continue the fight. The restrictions were always diminishing under the pressure of the times and under hours and during the war of a and during the war a wide

breach was opened in the last bastion of our inequality it was necessary to wait another five or 15 years before obtaining complete equality before the law we could wait i don't know if this is someone who he you know kind of like like when the president does his um state of the union he has people out in the audience that he likes to point to I think this is like someone that still even like to point to saying, you see they all don't despise us as if this is relevant

I'm sure there were plenty of Jews who thought this way the way he he doesn't seem to understand where the so-called pogroms came from or where the numerous clauses came from of course he was a free man whether or not he actually wanted to work

you know we've been through this a generation earlier the Jews refused to work or paid taxes you know in the last days of the Kahali did the same thing it's amazing how these restrictions didn't apply to anyone else not the handful of Arabs

that were quite successful down south the Tartars not the Armenians who were of course heretics the Germans, it didn't apply to anyone else but the Jews, and he will never ask himself why that's the case. Belonging to the same generation as Bikerman, he shared very different convictions and his life was also very different. A convinced Zionist, a doctor, he taught for a time at the Faculty of Medicine in Geneva, an essayist and a politician, Daniel Samoyevich Pasmannik, and immigrants as well, wrote at the same time as Bikerman the following lines.

Quote, under the Tsarist regime, the Jews lived infinitely better, and whatever may be said of them, their conditions of life before the war, both materially as well as others, were excellent. We were then deprived of political rights, but we could develop intense activity in the sphere of our national and cultural values, while the chronic misery that had been our lot disappeared progressively. The chronic economic slump of the Jewish masses diminished day by day, leaving room for material ease, despite the senseless deportations of several tens of thousands of Jews out of the front areas. The statistics of the mutual credit societies are the best proof of the economic progress enjoyed by the Jews of Russia during the decade preceding the coup.

and so it was in the field of culture. Despite the police regime, it was absolute freedom in comparison with the President Bolshevik regime. Jewish cultural institutions of all kinds prospered. Everything was bursting with activity. Organizations were booming. Creation was also very alive

and vast prospects were now open. He's comparing the lot of Jews or anyone in, say, 1910 versus under the Bolsheviks? He's not exactly out on a limb here You know, he's making very obvious statements They weren't deprived of political rights They couldn't handle the fact That they didn't dominate the currency

They didn't dominate banking And they were forbidden To control the liquor trade As they had in the past But You know, we've been over this before in this many, many episodes that the previous generation was not interested in work. They may be officially listed as craftsmen or even agriculturalists or something like that, but they

weren't. I don't know. I don't know off the top of my head. I don't remember what Osmonic really did. But pointing these guys out just to say that all Jews weren't revolutionaries is silly. of course you're going to find people like this but everything these two men have said is very obvious they've done extremely well

better probably than any other minority maybe except the Germans in the northern part of the country so what kind of misery is he talking about here no more than any other group ethnic group in the population it's just this malignant narcissism they're constantly self-absorbed and they can't see anything outside of their bubble of information.

To say that, yes, we were better off, I mean, even though the Bolsheviks were massively Jewish, it was extremely difficult. You never knew when you were going to end up in front of the Cheka. That's true, no matter what you were. To say that that was worse than the time he had. lives, he's not saying anything, no kidding. But the very fact that they were doing well, extremely well, apparently didn't dawn on him, why does the revolutionary movement exist?

Why is it so heavily Jewish? So, you know, they'll talk like this. It sounds real nice. They don't really say anything, but the obvious questions aren't asked or answered. In a little more than a century under the Russian crown, the Jewish community had grown from 820,000, including the Kingdom of Poland, to more than 5 million representatives, even though more than 1.5 million chose to emigrate, an increase of a factor of 8 between 1,800 and 1914. Over the last 90 years, the number of Jews had multiplied by 3.5, going from 1.5 million

to 5.25 million. Whereas during the same period, the total population of the empire, including the new territories had multiplied by only 2.5. However, the Jews were still subject to restrictions which fueled anti-Russia propaganda in the United States. Stalepin thought he could overcome it by explaining it, inviting members of Congress and American journalists to come and see in Russia itself. But in the autumn of 1911, the situation became so severe that it led to the denunciation of a trade agreement with the United States dating back 80 years.

Stalepin did not yet know what the effect of a passionate speech of the future peacemaker Wilson might be, nor what the unanimity of the American Congress could mean. He did not live long enough to know. Yeah, well, Stilipen, it's like, it's like he's learned nothing. Over and over again, we come across Russians who think that if we treat them a certain way, give them whatever they want, they're going to like us and maybe become Russians or become normal people. That never works. That's not in their in their psyche. It never will work. The Wilson was vehemently anti-Russian. They all supported the revolutionary movement,

whether February or or October, at least in part for for, for, uh, this reason, maybe almost entirely in some cases for this reason. That's why by the time of the Russian Civil War, the propaganda against Russia was so ingrained that there was no attempt to give a bullet, a penny to the white armies, despite the endless mythology to the contrary. No aid ever went to the white armies. In fact, much of the time they function based on battlefield where they were able to get from the from the from the always were running out of ammunition uh the bowl's fixed though never had a problem we have a drastic change in the subject here even though we're still talking about still leap and so i think

we should cut here and uh continue on the next episode that sounds good yeah i think you're right yeah all right so um thank you dr johnson and as i do at the end of every episode please go over to the show notes, go to the video, the description in the videos, and there will be links to ways that you can support Dr. Johnson and his Patreon's on there, and then there's links to his website. So please do that. Please keep Dr. Johnson flush, so we can keep this going, even though we may be doing it for another year or two. Yeah, and from here on in, maybe, different books, but the same process. I love it. And I think our listeners, love it too. Yeah, I actually mentioned a book to you at the end of the last episode that we both

like. Yes, that's right. And let's not say what that one is, but that is a, that is a, I've read that book twice and I think I'm going to reread it again because it's just, there's so much in it in such a short book. All right. Thank you, Dr. Johnson. Talk to you, talk to you in a few days. All right, my friend. Bye-bye. I want to welcome everyone back to part 48. of our reading of 200 years together by Alexander Solzhenyson. Dr. Johnson, how are you today? You know, if you ever feel stupid or useless, just go to any documentary about the Afghan National Army. I just, I stumbled across one from Vice, which is useless normally, but it's really funny how these guys are all high.

They're all illiterate. They drop their weapons and run at the tiniest thing, even when they're not being shot at and and you know it really it boosts your self-esteem you know I've always been very pro Taliban in general given the state of the country and just to have them take over once the Americans were they were defeated and pushed out I think it was what 10 minutes before the government fell 15 minutes just kind of walked in so if you're ever feeling low or depressed just go right to the documentaries and you're going to feel like like an MMA guy by comparison. I have a friend here who actually trained some of them.

He said, first of all, they're not athletic at all. They can't do jumping jacks. That was a funny one, yeah. Yeah, they can't do jumping jacks. He also said that you don't want to discuss over a meal what they do with each other on Thursday nights. Yeah, well, and that's the more serious thing. on that years ago and the Americans were told to just look the other way the Taliban of course shot these guys for that reason among others this is why they're the most popular force in the

country but it's just I've never come across this level of incompetence before and and to hear presidents talking about how how strong they are it just you know it makes you feel better about yourself is what I'm what I'm this is a mental health this is a mental health issue here You ever have that problem? All right, let's get into it. Picking up we left off last time. Stolopin, who imprinted its direction, gave its light and name to the decade before the First World War. All the while, he was the object of furious attacks on part of both the cadets and the extreme right,

when deputies of all ranks dragged him in the mud because of the law of the Zemstva, reform in the western provinces was assassinated September 1911. The first head of the Russian government to have honestly raised and attempted to resolve in spite of the emperor's resistance, the question of equality for the Jews fell irony of history under the blows of a Jew. Such is the fate of the middle way. Seven times attempts had been made to kill Silippin, and it was revolutionary groups more or less numerous that had fermented the attacks in vain. Here it was an isolated individual who pulled it off. It just goes to show, I mean, such as a fate of the middle way, and it's true, he satisfied absolutely nobody.

And for all of his philosemitic talk, and I knew what happened to him, as we're reading before, And I said, oh, should I, should I spoil it for people who don't know? And, yeah, they eventually killed him. They would have killed him anyway, because given his high position, he certainly was under attack. But this just makes it more bizarre because of his kind of semi-liberalism. He wasn't a liberal, but he leaned in that direction and was always telling Nicholas to go easy on the Jews and stuff like that. Apparently he had learned nothing from Russian history, and unfortunately he had to learn in the hardest possible way. At a very young age, Bogroff did not have sufficient intellectual maturity to understand the political importance of Stalepin's role.

But from his childhood, he had witnessed the daily and humiliating consequences of the inequality of the Jews and his family, his milieu, his own experience, cultivated his hatred for imperial power. In the Jewish circles of Kiev, which seemed ideologically mobile, no one was grateful to still leap in for his attempts to lift the restrictions imposed on the Jews. and even if this feeling had touched some of the better off, it was counterbalanced by the memory of the energetic way in which he had repressed the revolution of 1905, 1906, as well as by the discontent with his efforts to nationalize credit in order to openly compete with private capital. The Jewish circles in Kiev, but also in Petersburg, where the future murderer had also stayed, were under the magnetic influence of a field that, of absolute radicalism, which led young Bogroff not only to feel entitled, but to consider it his duty to kill Stilipan. The field was so powerful that it allowed the following combination. Bogrov Sr. rose in society.

He is a capitalist who prospers in the existing system. Bogroff, Jr. works at destroying the system and his father after the attack publicly declares that he is proud of him. in fact bogroff was not isolated he was discreetly applauded in the circles which once manifested their unwavering fidelity to the regime well that's what these people are even those who pretended to be patriotic jews you know these were these were mostly wealthy people especially in Kiev um bogrov which doesn't strike me as immediately as a jewish name but he certainly was his father who had done for these jews all had done very well The revolutionary movement was all from at least middle-class capitalists.

And again, whether he was smart enough or mature enough to understand the ideology here, it really didn't matter. He did what many Jewish leftists were trying to do, seven attempts before this. Now, I noticed that you paused ever so slightly when you talked about the nationalization of credit. which have been going on long before Stolipin, the thing being, and this has been going on at least since Alexander, Alexander the second and Alexander the third,

trying to compete with private capital. It wasn't just Jewish capital here. There were other sources, but to a great extent it was, and the state was the only entity powerful enough to make that happen. And, of course, the interest rates, if they existed at all, were very low. The peasant land banks were, had been around for a long time at this point, he just wanted it to increase.

So the very fact that people who had somehow, did they didn't, you know, Jews didn't support the system, but they were, you know, condemning radicalism. These were also the same people who said how wonderful he was when he shot Stolipin. So you can't even trust them in that department. We have a lot of these patriotic Jews in the U.S. today. And we know where they come from. They come from the neocon movement.

Almost really there to be able, the Gentiles, to say, see, they're not all leftists, not really understanding what their purpose is. They do come from the left. They came from an anti-Soviet faction, Jewish anti-Soviet faction against Stalin. They invented the myth of Stalin's anti-Semitism, et cetera. And, you know, if there was any movement against, them, you see how radical they would become very quickly. And so many of them have taken over, you know, 11, you know, this, this, these type of guys

taken over the mainstream, um, conservative movement largely, or the, you know, the neocon movement, largely for the sake of Israel. The only reason they're there, you know, um, they'll, they'll, they'll say something about, you know, they, they, they don't like the trannies or something like that. Like, what's his name? That little, that little midget, can't think of his name. Ben Shapiro. Ben Shapiro. You know, he'll say one or two things about that, and that somehow makes him a right-winger.

But he's really there when it comes to Israel, making sure that, like a whip in Congress, he's there to make sure that everyone falls in line, which is getting harder and harder these days. This Bogrove thing teaches us a lot about what even the so-called good Jews were. You always had exceptions, but they really didn't matter. And I know I've said this many times, but the very fact that's the very fact that's the so-called good Jews were. the Bolsheviks and other Jewish revolutionary movements came from the upper classes. I don't know why Solzhenitsyn is talking about this humiliation. I mean, everyone's, you know, humiliated at one time or another. You know, you go to the DMV for five minutes.

You know, it certainly wasn't a collective matter here. You know, the restrictions didn't stop them from becoming very wealthy. In fact, it may have helped them in many ways. So this episode tells us a lot about Russian Jews. and what they were eventually going to do in October of 1917. Yeah, that Ben Shapiro character is a particular. You can learn a lot from him in that. Yeah.

He made his bones attacking identity politics while being a Zionist and not mentioning that Jews were the ones they gave us identity politics, and they brag about it. Yeah, I mean, no one's worse than Jordan Peterson. And the two of them are kind of mentioned a lot in the same breath. And I think their purpose really is to channel any kind of, they'll say once in a while they'll say something against the fags or they'll say something against the trannies.

But for the most part, you know, their purpose is to support Israel, to support the wars, to condemn racism, as Peterson does all the time. You know, they're paid a lot of money to channel the raids of white people into what they would consider more productive areas. And you see, you had a lot of that even back then. Nothing seems to change. Yeah, just as another aside, they're freaking out on Twitter. Jews are freaking out on Twitter because a Muslim Marxist got elected mayor of New York.

No one can get elected mayor of New York without having the Jewish vote. You're guessing as good as mine. I haven't really been following, but... Yeah, yeah, it should be. Yeah, onward. This gunshot that put an end to the hope that Russia ever recovered its health could have been equally fired at the Tsar himself, but Bogrov had decided that it was impossible for, as he declared himself,

quote, it might have led to the persecution against the Jews, unquote, to have damaging consequences on their legal position. position. While the prime minister would simply not have such effects, he thought, but he was deceived heavily when he imagined that his act would serve to improve the lot of the Jews of Russia. And Menshikov himself, who had first reproached Stilipin with the concessions he had made to the Jews, now lamented his disappearance, our great men, our best political leader, for a century and a half, assassinated, and the assassin is a Jew, a Jew who did not hesitate to shoot the Prime Minister of Russia. The gunshot of Kiev must be considered as a warning signal. The situation

is very serious, but we must not cry revenge, but finally decide to resist. I'm not sure what that line means. But not cry revenge, but decide to resist what? resist the urge to avenge him or to resist the left, to resist the Jews. I don't know what that means. It doesn't seem to make any sense. And what happened then in Kiev, the reactionary, where the Jews were so numerous? In the first hours after the attack, they were massively seized with panic and began to leave the city. Moreover, the Jews were struck with terror, not only in Kiev, but in the most remote corners of the palestine.

settlement and of the rest of Russia. The club of Russian nationalists expressed its intention to circulate a petition to drive out all the Jews of Kiev, which remained at the stage of intentions. There was not the start of a beginning of a pro...

There was not the start of a beginning of Pogrom. The president of the youth organization, the two-headed eagle, Galkin, called for destroying the offices of the local security and for busting some Jew. He was immediately, New neutralized. The new Prime Minister

Kukovstov urgently recalled all Cossack regiments they were maneuvering away from the city and sent a very firm telegram to all the governors to prevent pogroms by any means, including force. The troops were concentrated

in greater numbers than during the revolution. Sliospurg, if pogroms had broken out in 1911, Kiev would have been the scene of a carnage comparable to the, comparable to the horrors of the time of Bogdan Kemalnitsky. No, nowhere in Russia there was the slightest pogrom. Despite this, there has been much written and insistently that the Tsarist power had never dreamed of anything but one thing to organize an anti-Jewish pogrom.

Yeah, that's, I mean, he's being sarcastic, obviously. That's what the Jews were saying. but there's a few reasons for this. You know, the pogrom, assuming, you know, the Jews are not telling the truth about what the programs were. But the very concept is never productive. This kind of wanton violence really doesn't do anything. Ultimately, it increased the power of the Jews. That kind of wanton violence doesn't work.

There needed to be a political movement to either, you know, send them somewhere or to neutralize. them politically rather than just bust some Jew or some nonsense like that. That never works. Not to mention they would have had to deal with so much so many attacks from the British and the Americans if that were to happen

because the press was still saying, I'm surprised that they just didn't invent one, invent a program, but they really wasn't anything. They really didn't help. And as we've read many times before, the Jewish revolutionary movement, despite the fact that they created the need

for these pogroms, they provoked them, it still was the method to unify Jews behind the leftist movement that they helped create. So ultimately, they're counterproductive, especially in areas that were making quite a bit of money for the empire. But they weren't going to tolerate it. It doesn't really do anything. But even without the program, that didn't do anything either, since their minds had already been made up. Plus the fact that Stolip and many, on the far right, or we would call the far right of the Russian political spectrum, they weren't big fans of him anyway. But the very fact that he was prime minister, and they had the arrogance to shoot him very much like they did, Sir Nicholas II, that was outrageous enough, his office

more than his person. And, but he was, as far as the state was concerned, probably one of the better friends that the Jews had, at least if for no other reason, than for practical and financial reasons, if not ideological ones. Of course, the prevention of public disorder is one of the primary duties of the state, and when this mission is fulfilled, it does not have to expect recognition. But that under such extreme circumstances, the assassination of the head of government, that it was possible to avoid pogroms, the threat of which caused panic among the Jews, it nevertheless merited a small mention, if only in passing.

Well, no, we did not hear anything like that, and no one spoke about it. It didn't help anything because assassinations continued anyway. So, like I said, a program helps the Jews in that it creates a sense of unity, even though they've caused them, they're the cause for them. On the other hand, the lack of one didn't change anything. so either way it doesn't matter they had their minds made up and the assassinations continued right up until right up until the revolution difficult to believe but the kiev jewish community did not publicly express condemnation nor regret regarding this assassination on the contrary

after the execution of bograv many jewish students were ostensibly in mourning however all this the russians noted it thus in december 1912 Rosanov wrote, After Stolipin's assassination, something broke in my relationship to the Jews. Would a Russian ever have dared to kill Rothschild or any of their great men? If we look at it from a historical point of view,

two important arguments prevent the act committed by Bogrov from being considered on behalf of the powers of internationalism. The first and most important, it was not the case. Not only the book written by his brother, but different neutral sources suggest that Bogroff really believed that he could work this way to improve the lot of the Jews. And the second, to return to certain uncomfortable episodes in history, to examine them attentively to deplore them, is to assume one's responsibilities, but to deny them and wash one's hands, that's just low.

Yet this is what happened almost immediately. In October 1911, the Duma was arrested by the Octobrists on the murky circumstances of the assassination of Stilipan. This provoked an immediate protest from the deputy Nisselovich, why, when formulating their interpolation, did the Octumbrus not conceal the fact that the murder of Sleepin was Jewish? It was there, he declared, anti-Semitism. Well, I do like the point about, you know, shooting a Rothschild at the time. And I like that that's the first person he goes. goes to. You know, they're great men for, you know, it's a major banker, you know. And as far as

I know, there were no attempts on him. I might be wrong on that. I don't remember hearing about it. But that certainly would have been more productive than a pogrom, you know, although someone else would have just taken his, his place. Now, for those who don't know, the Toberus were the moderate right of the Duma. They were royalists of a sort. They were royalists in the sense that they liked the idea of the limited monarchy that gave birth to the Duma. So they weren't monarchists in the true sense of the word, but they still supported the monarchy and they were Orthodox and everything else. But I never realized they had the power to arrest anybody.

this Duma was more right wing than previous ones but of course there was some cheering by leftists in the Duma not necessarily on the Duma floor they had been calling for some of them especially in the Viborg missive and other places they've been calling not just for the death of the head of government but also

the destruction of the monarchy so they had enough finally of these people That's a constructive thing to do rather than just, you know, burning down a store somewhere. To the extent that that's true, that a legislative faction, you know, or at least they went to someone who could carry that out, that's more constructive than anything else. It's not a pogrom, but it's getting rid of some of these people who are only in the doom and to destroy Russia as they knew it. I shall have to endure this incomparable argument myself. 70 years later, I was the object of a heavy accusation on the part of the Jewish community of the United States.

Why, in my turn, did I not conceal? Why did I say that the assassin of Stalipin was a Jew? It does not matter if I have endeavored to make a description as complete as possible. It does not matter what the fact of being Jew represented in the motivations of his act. No, non-dissimulation betrayed my anti-Semitism. And we know exactly what he's talking about there. not only were the Jews very suspicious of Solzhenits, and they didn't like him. They knew what he was ideologically.

The FBI had a file on him. They followed him. A lot of the more right-wing dissidents they had lengthy files on. Not the communists so much, but people like him. But they were shocked that he even mentioned that he was a Jew at all. That continues to happen today. Anti-Semitism was to not lie by omission. and many more things happen to Sultanese in the U.S.

concerning this issue, but this is just one small example. The fact that he revealed that very obvious fact, something that any historian should reveal, was enough to get him into a lot of trouble. And attacks on him throughout his life continued about being anti-Semitic. And despite him winning the award many years earlier, Jews had gone after him many times in journals and stuff

for being a monarchist and anti-Semite and the rest of it and most of it came down to stuff like this you know revealing that the left was mostly Jewish well that's a historical fact but you're not allowed to talk like that hence he must hate the Jews that's the level that he had to deal with level of thought he had to deal with at the time

at the time Gukoff replied with dignity I think that there is much more anti-Semitism in Bokro's very act. I would suggest to the deputy Nassilovich that he should address his passionate words not to us, but to his fellow co-religionists. Let him use all the force of his eloquence to convince them to keep away from two profane professions, that of the spy and the service of the secret police and that of terrorists. He would thus render a much greater service to the members of his community. But what can one ask of the Jewish memory when Russia itself has allowed the murderer to be effaced from its memory as an event without great significance, as a smear as marginal as it is negligible.

It was only in the 80s that I started to pull it out of oblivion for 70 years, for 70 years to mention it was considered inappropriate. As of the years go by, more and more meanings come to our eyes. Well, in most of the English language, literature, you know, of the last, I don't know, 50 years, any survey history or history of the time period, they do mention it. I can't say at the top of my head if they mentioned, if he was a Jew, they mentioned his name because it's not like Goldberg. It, you know, it's almost hiding his identity. I don't remember them mentioning that he was a Jew and that he clearly was motivated by Jewish issues to do what he did.

I mean, he clearly was a hate crime and to use modern terminology because it was Jewish nationalism that had him kill the best friend the Jews had in the government. But I think maybe I don't know about the older Soviet literature. I don't remember off the top of my head,

but they didn't hide it. in the English language, but they certainly didn't mention that he was a Jew, and it was helped by the fact that his name was Bogrov. More than once, I have meditated on the whims of history, on the unpredictability of the consequences it raises on our path. I speak of the consequences of our actions. The Germany of William II opened the way for Lenin to destroy Russia, and 28 years later, it found itself divided for half a century. Poland contributed to the strengthening of the Bolsheviks in the year 1919, which was so difficult for them, and it harvested 1939, 1944, 1946, 1980.

With what eagerness Finland helped Russian revolutionaries, she who could not bear, who did not suffer from the particular freedoms at her disposal, but within Russia, and in return, she suffered 40 years of political humiliation, Finlandization. In 1914, England wanted to put down the power of Germany, its competitor on the world stage, and it lost its position in great power, and it was the whole of Europe that had been destroyed. In Petrograd, the Cossacks remained neutral both in February and in October. A year later, they underwent their genocide, and many of the victims were these same Cossacks. In the first days of July 1917, the SR of the left approached the Bolsheviks,

then formed a semblance of a coalition, a broad platform. A year later, they were crushed as no autocracy could have had the means to do so. Well, these are questions that I myself have brought up and I've written on many times. The support of the Bolsheviks during World War I from Germany is probably the most short-sighted policy maybe in the history of wartime. Same thing goes for the polls,

same thing goes for all of these examples are excellent ones. But that may, because this is prior to them taking any kind of power, it may be a total ignorance of what Bolshevism really was. I don't think, especially in the U.S. written, I don't think a lot of them, like Woodrow Wilson, probably couldn't define what a Bolshevik was, despite the fact that he was very well educated. The Bolsheviks were very good about hiding their agenda. And especially in the midst of wartime, you're going to make a coalition with whoever's going to help very short-sighted.

and the Germans actually assisted Lenin's faction, not so much Trotsky's faction. Trotsky's faction came more from Britain and America. But what he's talking about is this short-sighted mentality that comes from just, you know, struggling in warfare and also just from plain old ignorance. Now, the ignorance was dispelled once they took over, and it didn't seem to matter. because as many of our listeners know the Soviet Union was built by Western Capital they didn't have anything by the end of two wars so much was destroyed

their intellectual class technical class had left the country they needed foreign investment to build the workers' paradise and there's been so much I've written on this to a great extent their whole industrial base came from the West with the U.S. being in the lead Anthony Sutton has a multi-volume work on this.

He has receipts and everything. I mean, there's absolutely no denying this fact. But they knew at that point what Bolshevism was. So profits came before anything. And now you have a nationalist or a Eurasianist government in Russia. And that's nowhere to be. Now they're sanctions. No matter how much is lost, I say the Germans, for example,

no matter how many profits are lost, matter how bad the economy becomes in this fight against nationalism, anything goes. But there certainly was no fight against bolivism. It was a banker's dream to have the economy centered in one place, you know, a planned economy. What could a banker want more than that?

And the fact that so much needed to be built there, that this was just a blank slate for the... Russia was industrialized, relative to its size, prior to the war. in many cities but not afterwards if that technical class really wasn't there

they'd been killed or in prison or whatever they needed to import it and there you know you didn't have any sanctions on the Soviet Union ever until of course the Jewish question the Jackson Vannock Amendment in 19 I think it was 1974 only to

allow Jews to emigrate to Israel the only time there ever any sanctions on the USSR the minute a nationalist government comes in, then it has to be destroyed at all cause. So this is extremely important but that again

so Henry Ford built the largest Ford truck plant in eastern Ukraine in Karkov for the Soviets during the Great Depression. All of the Soviet vehicles

that were built afterwards came from this one plant. There were all versions of the Ford. Henry Ford of people showing you that that profits you know come before everything unless of course nationalism is involved so um these were all these short-sighted things that ignorance really can't be ignorance is no excuse once the bolsheviks took over and if anything you had more support showing that the whole 20th century history has to be rewritten the the cold war um wasn't nearly it had no ideological component to it it wasn't anti-communist by any means although

sometimes in the government you had it, not in the ruling class as a whole, but this one paragraph, we could talk about this for hours, because the left was always of great interest for the capitalist class, or just as revolutionary as anybody else, nationalism, especially national socialism, that was a completely different matter. These distinct consequences, none of us are capable of foreseeing them, ever. the only way to guard against such errors is to always be guided by the compass of divine morality, or, as the people say, do not dig a pit for others, you will fall into it yourself. Similarly, if the assassination of Stolipin had cruel consequences for Russia, the Jews neither

derived any benefit from it. Everyone can see things in his own way, but I can see here the giant footsteps of history, and I am struck by the unpredictable character of its results. Bogrov killed Stalipin, thus thinking of protecting Jews from oppression. Stelipin would in any case have been removed from office by the emperor, but he would surely have been recalled again in 1914 through 16 because of the dizzying deficiency in men able to govern, and under his government, we would not have such a lamentable end neither in the war nor in the revolution, assuming that with him in power we would have engaged in this war.

First footstep of history. You got something? Yeah, no, I think that's self-explanatory. But even from a Jewish point of view, it was a very stupid thing to do. But this destroys any Jewish claim that the government was behind any program, precisely what we've said already. And, you know, you did have... a lot of turnover in government when the war began.

Nicholas was extremely, ultimately he was surrounded by traitors, especially when, you know, the war started going, it went well after the breakthrough, after the crushing of Austria, Hungary. So, but then, you know, it was his abdication was not real. It was a forgery. But it was his own generals who, who wrote. it. And their ideology, of course, is a separate matter. But there was a lot of turnover. And a lot of these guys ended up murdering Rasputin

because everything that he had said up until that point had turned out to be true. Not that he was a statesman by any means. And there were all of these, you know, civic nationalist sort of that ended up murdering him. These were people on the right of the political spectrum. But Rasputin said, if you enter this war, you're not going to come out of it alive. among many other things like that and a lot of these that type of nationalists was in favor of going to war

many of the true nationalists as Slavophiles or their successors were not many of them thinking that you know Germany was a natural ally why are we getting involved here but then of course there was the it was a diabolical brilliance to get

Russians involved against Germany using the Balkans as the as the lever this was this was pure Rothschild and British demonic brilliance to do that, because those are the two big competitors of Britain.

But as far as the quality of people in government at the time, I don't have a whole lot to say. But there was a reason that Nicholas kept resputeing around. Usually his predictions came true, although he never really got credit for it. First footstep of history. Stalepin is killed. Russia works its last nerves in one.

war and lies under the heel of the Bolsheviks. Second footstep. However fierce they are, the Bolsheviks reveal themselves as being more lame than the imperial government, abandoning half of Russia to the Germans a quarter of a century later, including Kiev. Third footstep. The Nazis invest in Kiev without any difficulty and annihilate its Jewish community. Again, the city of Kiev...

I don't know what he means by invest exactly. I don't know what he means by invest. You know, the Germans certainly went after the communists, especially with, you know, the partisans, which had, you know, started right away, you know, Hitler had no intention of invading the USSR until the USSR was going to invade Central Europe. He wasn't prepared for this war. It wasn't a blitzkrieg by any means. He had something like 400,000 horses. I don't know what kind of blitzkrieg you could have with 400,000 horses. He was delayed because of Mussolini's incompetence.

the incompetence and Mussolini tend to go together but but he you know the SS didn't annihilate the Jewish community it's just that so many of either the partisans or these um the political commissars that were attached to every army unit in fact attached to every officer they were they had to go and they were shot almost immediately but the fact that most of them were Jews

is no coincidence but you can't call that necessarily an anti-Jewish concept it was an anti-communist idea again, the city of Kiev, once again a month of September, but 30 years after Bogrov's revolver shot. And still in Kiev, still in 1911, six months before the assassination of Stalepin, had started what would become the Bailas affair. There's good reason to believe that under Stilipin, justice would not have been degraded as such. One clue, one knows that once examining the archives of the Department of Security, Stolipan came across a note entitled

the Secret of the Jews, which anticipated the protocols, in which was discussed the international Jewish plot. Here is the judgment he made. Quote, there may be logic, but also bias. The government cannot use under any circumstances kind of method. As a result, the official ideology of the Tsarist government never relied on the protocols. Well, I'm one of these people who rejects the protocols entirely. You know, if I were a Jew, I would be outraged about people thinking that the protocols were real, not necessarily because of what it said, but because that the implication is that this is the best that the learned elders of Zion could do. You know, it's written at a fourth grade level.

I'm familiar with Jewish political writing at the time, and it bears no resemblance to that disaster area. Most people knew what, you know, things that the protocols claimed, you know, no one's going to call themselves evil. You know, they think that they're doing the right thing. They're not going to call themselves wicked and destructive, as their protocol suggests. That's how you know there's nothing real about it. But people who were, you know, so many Russians already knew, and people in Austria, hungry, they knew what the Jews were. They didn't need protocols for that. There was tons of writing on the Jews.

The protocols were just such a very crude, you know, some. someone who, it didn't even mention, it hardly mentioned Zionism, which was the number one issue at the time. Now, I have an article which I've not published on the, on the protocols, and I connected to actual Jewish political writing at the time, and there's no, it was quite sophisticated, and it sounded nothing like what came out of the protocols. I think it's more the insult that this is what the learned elders would, would say rather than actually actually the content. It's so badly written. But people who understood the Jewish issue, which were a lot more people back then than now, they didn't need it. All the stuff in there, or most of this or some of the stuff in there, was already fairly well known. The Rothschild alone, let that, you know, the Jewish revolutioners, all that stuff was known. The secret of the Jews, there were a lot of stuff that predated the protocols. It just seemed to be absolutely an unnecessary. edition. And if anyone believes that Jews actually wrote like that, you need to get their head

examined. But it's just so bad. And it doesn't cover, you know, it doesn't mention any of the great, you know, Jewish sages. It doesn't mention any of the Greek philosophers, which most of their political stuff did, their own sages, you know, Mendelssohn and people like that, doesn't mention any of them. It's so crude. But, yeah, there's certain things to agree with in there, but it's certainly not a legitimate document. There were tons of real documents that existed.

And, you know, even Moses Hess wrote, but he wrote in such a high level, very typical of Jewish political writing, although, of course, much earlier, that used all of the messages that I mentioned. And I connect, so I compare it to actual Jewish political writing like 20 years before, 20 years after, that was allegedly said,

and of course there's no there's not even a remote connection it wasn't the basis of any kind of policy but there were plenty of Jewish writings about their political future at the time

which in a much more sophisticated way say at least some of the things that you would find in things like the secret of the Jews or the protocols it just wasn't necessary all right we have three pages left in this chapter, and it's all about the bailist trial. I suggest we call this a short episode and finish up this chapter on the next one.

I agree, partially because I've written on this trial. As you know, there's a Jewish professor, Ariel Tooff, we've mentioned him already, who wrote on it, at least partially on it, in his, the blood libel book, there's good reason to believe, even though he was acquitted, there was good reason to believe that this was a absolutely fanatical crazy sect however tiny it was amongst the Jews

so I want to I want to actually reread some of that stuff before we come back and talk about it so it was very complicated and it was one of these it was as far as the Jews coming together it did more than any program

to unify the Jews at the time and it was condemned by the entire Western world Jewish and non-Jewish, the very fact that he was even put on trial. And, you know, you had Jewish revolutionaries talking about taking vengeance on Russia and murdering the Tsar and all this because of this trial. It's almost like the programs have been forgotten, and this took center stage. So I completely agree with you. I want to spend a lot of time on this on Saturday and just let me reread my paper on it.

I wrote it a couple of years ago. And that's why I could have a lot more to say about it than I would right now. now awesome awesome all right all into the way i always do go to the show notes go to the uh the video the video description um click on the links donate to dr johnson and um yeah show him some show him some love for the education that he's given us here uh we are we're close next week will be six months of reading this 49 we're getting We should do something special for the 50th. I don't know.

Well, the 50th, they'll be starting a new chapter. So, yeah, let's think about something. Yeah, yeah, six months. It blows my mind. It doesn't feel like it. But we're going to have to continue this because this is just part of life now. I'm going to have some kind of intellectual withdrawal. If, you know, we have to have another book.

We have to just keep this going, this method, way we're doing it going. Because now this is, I'm not going to know what to do. on Wednesdays and Saturdays, if we don't have to talk about a book this way. All right, Dr. Johnson. I'll talk to you on Saturday. Thank you. All right, my friend. Bye-bye. I want to welcome everyone back to part 49 of our reading of 200 years together by Alexander Solzhenison. How are you doing today, Dr. Johnson? I'm doing much better. Once I discovered on YouTube, a channel called Abandon Media,

and they have a very brief video the most Jewish man in the world and I am recommending you drop whatever you're doing and watch it. It's like two minutes, but it is hilarious. And I can't believe it's still there. I mean, he has some other ethnicities and stuff too.

But that will, if that doesn't make you laugh, then there's something wrong with you, probably physically. Someone sent me the link to that yesterday. morning and I immediately downloaded it from from YouTube being worried that it might disappear rather quickly I watched it like 17 times if anyone who hasn't gotten it yet this is you know I think the only reason it's on still is because he's spreading it out he has the most British man most Canadian man most confrontation most Italian man and if they say okay he's He's doing everybody, so it's not, you know, it's not a political site.

So maybe he's going to get away with this. The one, as somebody who grew up in New York, I also really appreciated the most Italian man. That was a good one. I think, yeah. And from central New Jersey, I also appreciated it. You know, that was my whole neighborhood. You're either Jewish or Italian or us. Well, some people will say that once you really get into neighborhoods like that, it's kind of hard to tell the Jews and Italians apart.

That was very interesting. It might be worth a talk one day about how, you know, back then, you know, when I was a kid, say early mid-80s, how they divided, you know, local responsibilities between them, you know, much stronger, you know, at least. You know, both groups had a very strong sense of self, and they ran specific aspects of the town. And I guess we were, because we own the funeral home, we were honorary Italians. I mean, Irish and Italians always got along anyway. And probably 60% of our business were Italians. So we were kind of absorbed into that, you know, Jews had their own thing going in North Jersey. but I was given a lesson in ethnicity from babyhood.

Yeah, yeah. You grew up in the metropolitan New York area. You were definitely growing up in multiculturalism. That is for sure. Yeah, Union County. Well, in multicultural, with the Italians and Irish, that's a good sense of multicultural, especially for America.

You know, but the old Italian or Irish neighborhoods have long since been destroyed. What's Little Italy now? I think it's just one street. It used to be 50 square blocks. You know, and that was quite deliberate. All right. Onward, this is a subject that will always raises the ire of those who belong to the tribe of those who call themselves.

Jews. So we will move on with this. Thousands and thousands of pages have been written about the bailist trial. Anyone who would like to study closely all the meanders of the investigation of the public opinion of the trial itself would have to devote at least several years to it. This would go beyond the limits of this work. 20 years after the event under the Soviet regime, the daily reports of the police on the progress of the trial were published. They could They can be commended to the attention of amateurs. It goes without saying that the verbatim record of the entire proceedings was also published, not to mention the article is published in the press.

Andre Ushinsky, a 12-year-old boy, people of a religious institution in Kiev, is the victim of a savage and unusual murder. There are 47 punctures on his body, which indicate a certain knowledge of anatomy. me. They were made to the temple, to the veins and arteries of the neck, to the liver, to the kidneys, to the lungs, to the heart, with a clear intention of emptying him of blood as long as he was still alive. And in addition, according to the traces left by the blood flow, in a standing position, tied and gagged, of course. It can only be the work of a very clever criminal who certainly did not act alone. The body was discovered only a week later,

in a cave on the territory of the factory of Zytezev, but the murder was not committed there. Well, I never cared for the longest time. It was sort of like the protocols to me. I didn't care that much for years and years and years about the ritual murder issue until Ariel Tov's book came out, which is something the Jews did not expect, you know, especially being a professor in Israel.

Um, but as we go along, now I have a paper that I'm still in the process of cleaning up that you are going to put on your site, you know, for everyone to be able to read, um, because I could read Russian. Okay. I wrote it a couple years ago. Um, or right. I mean, I, I stress okay, you know, sort of. Um, I was very impressed with the, uh, evidence for the prosecution. Now, keep in mind, there was no such thing as ritual murder as a crime in Imperial Russia. It was a simple matter of murder, and it had different types of degrees like you would have in any normal judicial system. It turned out that it was the Jewish lawyer for the accused, Beelis, that brought it up, and it revealed as much about Jews as a whole. It almost symbolized. It crystallized everything we've been talking about in the Jewish life in Russia up until this point. And it's very difficult in academia to even talk about it. Almost every of the reasoning of thousands of pages, most of them are unreadable.

They're all saying the same kind of thing. It's mostly Jewish authors, which is often the case in Jewish questions. I would think that a Gentile author would be terrified to publish anything that isn't just falling all over itself to venerate their social superiors. But one of the things that struck me when I first started reading these very same proceedings was how quickly they forgot about the kid. Now, this kid was loved by everybody. And I think that was part of the problem.

He wanted to be a priest. Everyone liked them. You know, he was excellent in his studies. in other words he was the perfect target you know a land without blemish that kind of thing and um but it was the Jewish lawyers

that brought up the ritual part of it not the state they thought somehow that would that would help their case most of these thousands and thousands of pages are nothing but propaganda and it's it shows you how the Soviet media worked

that they would publish this stuff you know but they'll editorialize afterwards but they'll publish it in full it's very typical of the Soviet media they'll they'll tell the truth about what's going on and then editorialize completely afterwards or even within it

you know they're more trustworthy than the American press is certainly so this kid was you know dumped in a place where everyone's going to find him a few days later he was alive throughout all of this so he was tortured to death

his mouth was clamped throughout obviously these guys as we see here knew exactly what they were doing I guess at some point as a blood drained out he passed out but yeah they kept them in a standing position but the I mean the local people kind of brought up the the ritual aspects because that's the only thing that could explain the nature of these wounds and what the, you know, and so many of the witnesses were killed, including two of this poor mother, Eusan Skaia, no, that wasn't her name, I forget.

She lost two other children who saw the kidnapping of this kid, two of them, after eating cakes from friends of Beelis died so obviously there were murder so many people were murdered or just disappeared witnesses wouldn't testify this really was the very fact that they pulled out all the stops here suggests that they had a lot to hide

and this is what got me into this issue I don't know a lot about some of the other cases there's been a lot in Russian history and certainly Western European history but this one in particular because it was put under the microscope

of your typical modern legal system and that's something you know the Jews themselves tried to make center stage it wasn't supposed to be it was a Jewish lawyer I think you'll mention it here in a little bit that brought the ritual case

because there was no such crime in Russian law as ritual murder savage murder I guess we would translate a savage murder that was I guess something along the lines of first degree but anyway, that's, you know, that's what got me into ritual murder. And then when Ariel Toa's book came out, what, 10 years ago, and he gives credence to some of this stuff.

I mean, most Jews, you know, this is obviously oral teachings, but, you know, most Jews are not aware of it. But, of course, there's always going to be fanatics. And especially when you connect that with the hatred of Gentiles, especially in Russia and especially in Ukraine, You know, it's a perfect storm. And it only surprises me that, you know, there were more cases than there were. The first accusations do not refer to ritual motives, but the latter soon appears. The connection is made with the beginning of Jewish Passover and the construction of a new synagogue on the grounds of Zytsiv. Four months after the murder, this version of the accusation leads to the arrest of Monachem Mendel Beilis, 37, employed at the Zytsv factory.

He is arrested without any real charges against him. How did all this happen? The investigation into the murder was carried out by the criminal police of Kiev, a worthy colleague, obviously of the security section of Kiev, which had gotten tangled up in the Bogroff affair, and thus caused the loss of Stilippin. The work was entrusted to two nobodies in all respects, similar to Kuliabko, Bogroff's curator,

Michouk and Krozovsky, assisted by dangerous incompetence. They cleaned the snow in front of the cave to facilitate the passage of the corpulent commissioner of police, thus destroying any potential indications of the presence of the murderers. But worse still, rivalries settled between the investigators. It was to whom the merit of the discovery of the guilty person would be attributed by whom the best version would be proposed. And they did not hesitate to get in each other's way, to sow confusion in the

investigations put pressure on the witnesses to stop the competitor's indicators. Krasowski went so far as to put makeup on the suspect before introducing him to a witness. This parody of inquiry was conducted as if it were a trivial story without the importance of the event even crossing their minds. When the trial finally opened two and a half years later, Mishuk had run off to Finland to escape the charge of falsification of material evidence, a significant collaborator of Krassovsky had also disappeared. And as for the latter, dismissed of his duties, he had switched sides and was now working for Bayliss's lawyers.

Oh, Lord. The snow thing, I had kind of forgotten about that part of it. Maybe it was incompetence, maybe it wasn't. Because at this stage, the minute they got Bealus in, once they arrested him, Jews, and not just in Kiev, got very upset. I think they were very upset very quickly. News traveled very quickly with this very cohesive group.

And the process of getting rid of people started. They spent a fortune. There was an entire committee for the defense of Belis set up in, I guess it was Kiev, maybe even in the capital. And more than one in different capitals in Europe. I've never read the like the English language press at the time for if I did I've forgotten

I'm sure it was a complete distortion of everything but the the lengths that organized jewelry around the world went through to destroy this case you know including you know bribery and murder I just wonder if some of this incompetent It wasn't really incompetence at all.

And no one was going to switch sides like this unless they were given a, you know, Andre's mother was offered a huge, I think it was 50,000 gold rubles and safe passage out of the country if she copped to it, which of course was a failure. That was one of their first strategies. She couldn't possibly have done this. Now she's lost three children, you know, two, and they were clearly all murdered. and people forgot very quickly that there's a dead boy here the best of of of uh the best of russian uh russian orthodox young people which is i think why he was killed you know it's not just some guy who's going to be a a baker or something this this is why because he was a a pure boy this was a perfect person the perfect target and i don't think that gets stressed enough because of what kind of kid he was

he was the best of old Russia and God knows what he would have been like if he actually grew up became a priest and maybe a bishop or something like that so this was really reading about this from even a purely objective point of view which is very hard to find is terrifying knowing that in 1911, 12, 13

the length that they went through to destroy this trial, this case and the people connected to him for nearly two years we went from one false version to another for a long time the accusation was directed to the family of the victim until the latter was completely put out of the question it became clearer and clearer that the prosecution was moving towards a formal accusation against bailus and towards his trial he was therefore accused a murder even though the charges against him were doubtful because he was a Jew

but how was it possible in the 20th century to inflate a trial to the point of making it a threat to an entire people. Beyond the person of Bayliss, the trial turned, in fact, into an accusation against the Jewish people as a whole, and since then the atmosphere around the investigation and then the trial became superheeded. The affair took on an international dimension, gained the whole of Europe, and then America. Until then, trials for ritual murders had taken place rather in the Catholic milieu. Grodno, 1816, Bellish, 1825, Vilnius, de Blond's case, 1900, Kutais case, 1878, took place in Georgia, Dubasar, 1903 in Moldova.

While in Russia, strictly speaking, there was only the Saratov affair in 1856. Slaisberg, however, does not fail to point out that the Saratov affair also had also a Catholic origin, while in Bayliss's case it was observed that the band of thieves, who was suspected at one time, was composed of polls, and the ritual crime expert appointed at the trial was a Catholic, and the attorney, Schaplinsky, was also Polish. Yeah, as this trial, you know, given the Jewish defense strategy of actually bringing up the ritual side of this, you know, he thought that this was going to be some sort of a weapon he could use. I mean, you had threats against a jury right in the courtroom.

Now, I love the fact that, you know, the charges were fall. well because he was a Jew obviously he's doing that tongue in cheek but you have plenty of people who were saying that at the time I have I don't know if it's in here but I have a quote from the Batinsky saying

that how dare the Gentiles even question us they have no right to question us it just brought out the absolute worst in powerful Jews all over the planet but especially in Russia

in Russia and Ukraine but yeah the names now both sides had experts you had scholars in various areas and the names you know were interesting they clearly weren't Russian names maybe they could be but yes there were there were polls

and so much that didn't have to be a part of the trial the ritual side of things were brought brought up the Jews themselves I want to repeat brought up the ritual claims, not the prosecution side, not the Russian side. And that was actually a defense strategy, which didn't really work out, even though, I mean, it was like in America

it would be called a hung jury six to six. But in Russia, that was sufficient to, you know, he certainly wasn't, he wasn't called innocent, but there just wasn't enough, quote, unquote, direct evidence. Well, that's what happens when witnesses were either dead or refused to testify or disappeared. God knows what would have happened otherwise. Plus, the jury, and I think this was the case inside the Charlottesville stuff in America in 2020 in Minneapolis, I think juries are threatened more than we realize, not even directly, maybe indirectly. So it was Jews themselves, defense counsel for Bielis, that brought up the ritual side of things

and had this incredible explosion on the world stage. Even to the point you have Jewish writers saying, okay, Zard Nicholas has signed his death warrant, as if he had anything to do with any of this. He didn't. The findings of the investigation were so questionable that they were only retained by the Kiev indictment chamber by three votes to two.

While the monarchist right had sparked an extensive press campaign, Perishkevich expressed himself in the Duma in April 1911. Quote, we do not accuse the Jews as a whole. We cry for the truth about this strange and mysterious crime. Quote, is there a Jewish sect that advocates ritual murder? If there are such fanatics, let them be stigmatized. As for us, we are fighting against many sex in Russia, our own. But at the same time, he declared that, according to him,

the affair would be stifled in the Duma by fear of the press. Indeed, at the opening of the trial, the right-wing nationalist Shulgin declared himself opposed to it being held and to the miserable baggage of the judicial authorities in the columns of the patriotic Kievan, for which he was accused by the extreme right to be sold to the Jews. But in view of the exceptionally monstrous character of the crime, no one dared to go back to the accusation in order to resume the investigation from scratch. On the other side, the liberal radicals also launched, a public campaign relayed by the press and not only the Russian press, but that of the whole

world. The tension had reached a point of no return. Sustained by the partiality of the accusation, it only escalated and the witnesses themselves were soon attacked. According to Vy Rosenov, every sense of measure had been lost, especially in the Jewish press. Quote, the iron fist of the Jew falls on venerable professors, on members of the Duma, on writers, end quote. I don't want anyone to think that these two press campaigns were remotely equal. Yeah, the right wing newspapers. They did talk about it, but even they were very deeply divided.

But that was a footnote compared to the massive avalanche that the Jews were financing, whether it be their own press or the press that they owned, either directly or indirectly, even outside of Russia. you know, there weren't two equal sides here. And the only way, and, you know, throughout all of this, the poor boy gets, gets forgotten about. You know, typical.

You know, the Jews made this whole thing about themselves. They didn't give a damn that there was this dead Gentiles. It was going to be a priest. You know, that's a good thing. It's almost like a symbol of what was to come. So, but if, if I have a whole book on this, If Zorn Nicholas was murdered in a semi-ritualistic way, which he was, then the concept of ritual murder is a legitimate question.

And you imagine my shock when Tooff's book came out. I can't imagine, you know, how the man was treated. I've read it more than once. It's, and he mentions the Beelous case quite often. He says, yes, there are some good reasons to believe that ritual murder exists. but as far as what we're seeing so far is there's reason to believe it precisely because of this hysterical reaction

and the ritualistic side hadn't even been brought up yet they were already going bonkers the ritualistic side that you know I mean people thought it maybe but as far as the state was concerned they couldn't bring it up

the judge in the case didn't want it brought up at all because again there's not a legal category it was a defense that brought it up. But even if it wasn't brought up at all, they still would have had because how dare they bring a a Jew to trial that not only murdered Gentile but a virtuous Gentile who wanted to be a priest.

His name got forgotten about throughout all of this. And it shows you the mentality that they tried to bribe the mother you know, I think it was 40,000 gold rubles and free passage abroad and they were going to sneak around to the country, which just in and of itself shows you that they're, you know, there were smugglers from the beginning. You know, they're just a, it was just, you know, a massive crime syndicate in one of their strongholds in Kiev, in Ukraine. But the state apparatus in St. Petersburg, I think the majority opinion is that the rich, the rich, side of things wasn't relevant either they had no opinion or they didn't think it was

but when you go over the patterns of the you know why did they kill them this way you had two Jews showing up the kids saw them in you know ritualistic you know investments there was a small synagogue

that they had built at that the brick factory which by the way burned down shortly after all this I'm sure there's just a coincidence and then those two people disappeared. So many people disappeared here. But you can't bring that up in Western society today.

There's one area that, you know, other than, I don't think of the Holocaust, which there's one area other than that, that is just loaded with censorship and fear. It's this issue, especially this particular case. However, the ultimate attempts to get the investigation back on track had failed. The stable near the Zytezav factory, which was initially neglected by Krasovsky and then assumed to have been the scene of the crime, burned down two days before the date fixed for its examination by Hacy investigators. I'm sure that's coincidence.

Total coincidence, yes. A brazen journalist, Brajul Brzevskovsky, conducted his own investigation assisted by the same Krozovsky, now released from his official duties. It must be remembered that Bonch Brouvich published a pamphlet accusing Brazul of venality. They put forward a version of the facts, according to which the murder was allegedly committed by Vera Shiberiak, whose children frequented Andrei Ushinsky, herself flirting with the criminal underworld. During their long months of inquiry, the two Scherberiak sons died under obscure circumstances. Vera accused Krasowski of poisoning them, who in turn accused her of killing her own children. Ultimately, their version was that Yushinsky had been killed by Cherberiak in person with the intention of simulating a ritual murder. She said that the lawyer Margolin had offered her $40,000 rubles to endorse the crime,

which he denied at the trial, even though he was subject at the same moment to administrative penalties for indelicacy. Well, I'm happy they brought it up here. I kind of forgotten what they mentioned or what they didn't mention. But at one point or another, there were several versions that were created

in the Jewish press. A gypsy murder? I don't know where they got that one from. Of course, the Tribiak, you know, his own mother. a gang of thieves, which I think the press largely, you know, there are men involved, but it was, you know, they weren't a gang until the press said they were. There were several others, you know, certain other individuals that they pointed to who were not Jewish.

But in the early days, you know, of the investigation, the press was doing everything it could to throw at least the public mind, any possible juror off as to what may have, may have happened. But again, because of witnesses either being murdered or quickly disappeared, kidnapped or disappeared, whatever, the prosecution was really doomed from the start. And sometimes I wonder if, you know, the jury just didn't say, look, let's at least put an effort in. Let's have, I guess, they didn't have the concept of a hung jury, but let's just, you know, break evenly just so we don't get murdered later on. because the, it's like very Hillary Clintonish, the number of people killed or just disappeared

in this case is very, very, that list is very long, and they didn't want to be added to it. So on the one hand, they could let him go. On the other, they at least could give a showing that, you know, six of them voted for. Trying to disentangle the innumerable details of this judicial imbroglio would only make the understanding even more difficult. It should also be mentioned that the metas of the revolution and the secret police were also involved. In this connection, mention should be made of the equivocal role and strange behavior during the trial of Lieutenant Colonel Jandarmerie Pavel Ivanov, the very one who, in

defiance of all laws, helped Bogroff already condemned to death to write a new version of the reasons which would have prompted him to kill Stolipin, a version in which the full weight of responsibility fell on the organs of security to which Ivanov did not belong. The trial was about to open in a stormy atmosphere. It lasted a month, September to October 1913. It was incredibly heavy. 213 witnesses summoned to the bar, 185 presented themselves, still slowed down by the procedural artifices raised by the parties involved.

The prosecutor Vipper was not up to the standard of the group of brilliant lawyers. Grusenberg, Karabetschewski, Malikov, Makulikov, Zarudni, who did not fail to demand that the blunders he uttered be recorded in the minutes. For example, the course of this trial, he is hampered by Jewish gold. They seem to laugh at us. See, we have committed a crime, but no one will dare to hold us accountable. Talking about the Jews in general. Not surprisingly during the trial, Vipper received threatening letters on some were drawn a slip-knot,

And not just him, but the civil parties, the expert of the prosecution, probably also the defense lawyers, the dean of the jury also feared for his life. There was a lot of turmoil around the trial, selling passes for accesses to hearings. All of Kiev's educated people were boiling. The man in the street, him, remained indifferent. I tend to doubt that last part, unless, again, this is also tongue-in-cheek, because a boy was murdered. I don't know if he means indifferent to how this trial was going. There certainly was tons of outrage, whether they had different, you know, there weren't a whole lot of places

to go to get rock-solid information. But this is an impressive list of lawyers. These are all private lawyers now. Oscar Grusenberg was the chief. He had been involved in actual ritual murder cases before. And he got many Jewish murderers off in the past. A few, anyway. That's why he was elite. That's why they went for him. This was your, you know, this was like O.J., you know, the dream team.

These were the best, were the best. We already talked about the Jewish control of the bar by that point. And Gruzenberg was the one, as I mentioned, who brought up the ritual thing where he didn't have to. So out of 213 witnesses, 185 showed. And of course, they did everything. And now with a guy named with Hipper, he ended up being a total non-entity. He was not the person who should have been doing this.

But I can't imagine being in his position. I'm not entirely sure what I would do. You know, I guess I'd just end up a martyr, I suppose. But I reject the idea that people were indifferent. people were outraged that this boy had been killed. I think what he means is that they were indifferent to what was going on in the courtroom. But this was being covered heavily in probably every language in Europe. It doesn't escape me that right around this time,

something similar is happening in New York down in Atlanta. I mean, in the United States down in Atlanta. I mean, basically at the same time, you're dealing with the Leo Frank case is coming to light. Right. Spirit of the... Yes, and this is roughly the same time period. Spirit of the age.

All right. A detailed medical examination was carried out. Several professors spread their differences as to whether or not Yishinsky had remained alive until the last wound and how acute were the sufferings he had endured. But it was a theological scientific expertise that was at the center of the the trial. It focused on the very principle of the possibility of ritual murders perpetrated by Jews, and it was on this that the whole world focused its attention. The defense appealed to recognize authorities in the field of Hebraism, such as Rabbi Mays, a specialist in the Talmud.

He must have been a joy to be around. The expert appointed by the Orthodox Church, Professor I. Trotsky of the Theological Academy of Petersburg, concluded, his intervention by rejecting the accusation of an act of cold blood attributable to the Jews. He pointed out that the Catholic Church had never made such accusations that these were peculiar to the Catholic world. Beekerman later... The Orthodox Church had not... Go ahead.

The Orthodox Church hadn't made those, yeah. It was the Catholic thing, is what they were saying. Bikerman later recalled that in Imperial Russia, the police officers themselves, cut short almost every year rumors about the Christian bloodshed during the Jewish past. Otherwise, we would have had a case of ritual murder, not once every few decades, but every year. The main expert cited by the prosecution was the Catholic priest, Pranitis. To extend the public debate, the prosecutors demanded the previous ritual murder cases be examined, but the defense succeeded in rejecting the motion.

These discussions on whether the murder was ritual or not ritual only further increased the emotion that the trial had created throughout the whole world. the judge was very clear the the ritual concept again was first brought up by the defense the ritual concept was only permitted to come up relative to um beillus's motivation and yet because of the nature of the defense strategy the ritual side of things became the core of it all i vehemently disagree with troitsky rejecting the accusation. No, what he actually said was that he's not entirely sure. Rabbi Mays, you know, the prosecution were excellent cross-examiners. They eventually ended up saying we're not 100% sure. It's conceivable, although unlikely, that such a thing could exist.

So even though Vipper wasn't one of the greatest, When it came to this kind of thing, he had a mind such that he really could get to the heart of the matter very quickly. His cross-examination was first class, at least in this particular case, this army of experts that came out, ultimately the consensus was that we don't think it exists, but given what's said in the Talmud, what's said in the Zohar view of these other things, it is conceivable that some sect, that some whatever. But the newspapers at the time, whatever was happening in the courtroom, the Committee for the Defense of Bealus and there were so many other, there were just so many organizations like Leo Frank, you know, helped create the ADL in the U.S. We're doing everything they could to, you know, throw people off the trail. Yeah, you don't have a whole lot of orthodox. cases of this, although you do have a few, in fact, a few who are in the calendar of saints, but long enough ago where you didn't have a modern system like this and not that many Jews in

the country, this sort of thing. And now what the police are saying here, that, you know, if we really went after ritual murder, we wouldn't do anything else. The implication here that this happens a lot, but we simply can't afford. the chaos of bringing it up all the time. You know, so this is bringing out the worst. But I do want to point out, well, he might not have been the best prosecutor. His cross-examination of defense witnesses was actually pretty good. They didn't, you know, coldly reject, but they did say it was a possibility.

But it was necessary that a judgment should be pronounced. On this accused and not another. And this mission went to a dull jury composed of peasants painfully supplemented by two civil servants and two petty bourgeois. All were exhausted by a month of trials. They fell asleep during the reading of the materials of the case, requested that the trial be shortened. Four of them solicited permission to return home before its conclusion and some needed medical assistance. Nevertheless, do you... Well, first of all, I don't like...

I don't like the insult to the peasants. It was a representative jury that no doubt had been threatened by this point. He's making it sound like they're being irresponsible. I think they had been threatened individually and collectively. There were cases of that right in the courtroom, reminding them of the power that Jews have, you know, right there. and the press, of course, you know, made matters infinitely worse. No, a juror can't request that a trial be shortened, not in Russia, not in the U.S.,

but it's hard to blame these people, given what was going on outside the courtroom and the possibility that they may never be seen again. Nevertheless, these jurors judged on the evidence. The accusations against Bellis were unfounded, not proved. and Bayliss was acquitted, and that was the end of it. No new search for culprits was undertaken, and this strange and tragic murder remained unexplained. Instead, and this was in the tradition of Russian weakness, it was imagined, not without

ostentation, to erect a chapel on the very spot where the corpse of young Yoshinsky had been discovered, but this project provoked many protests because it was judged reactionary, and Rasputin dissuaded the Tsar from following up on it. The trial, heavy and ill-conducted, with a white-hot public opinion for a whole year, in Russia as in the rest of the world, was rightly considered a battle of Tsushima. It was reported in the European press that the Russian government had attacked the Jewish people, but that it was not the latter that had lost the war. It was the Russian state itself.

That's sort of what I meant when there were a few writers who were saying that this is it, you know, somehow the state is involved here. The czar is personally bringing this about, you know, stupid things. Like he, you know, personally paid someone to make it look like a ritual killing, I mean, idiotic things. And they're not going to prison for lying. That doesn't happen. So they pretty much made up whatever they want.

The Jews tightly controlled the information. And the only real outlet were, you know, right-wing pay. papers, ecclesial papers, that were coming out, and they themselves, you know, there was a huge amount of money spent here. The stuff that was invented, I know in the German press and the, well, I shouldn't say the English and the French press were absurd. I'm not sure about the American press, although I think the American press just took from the British press. But it doesn't surprise me here that, no, it's somehow this case, the very fact that you dared bring a Jew to trial was the death warrant for the Russian state, that is to say, Tsar Nicholas, that the Jewish nation had been attacked. How dare you even accuse us of anything? That this was worse

than the alleged loss of the Russo-Japanese War. That, you know, if you thought that the so-called pogroms unified Jewish opinion, well, now you have this very close to the start of World War I. and it's interesting because, yeah, it was a hung, well, we would call a hung jury six to six. But keep in mind that, yes, he was acquitted, but there was no such thing then or now of calling him innocent. The evidence wasn't half bad against him. I mentioned a lot of it already. But so many people had been murdered. You know, and they weren't followed up on, especially the children who actually saw him get kidnapped by Bealers personally are gone.

Someone came around, a Jew came around with cakes that looked really good. Kids ate them and they were dead. I'm sure there's a connection there. We talked about the mother already. There were so many other issues, some of the policemen. I don't know if it's incompetence or if they were being paid to be incompetent. And there was no question. There was, you know, financial pressure.

The British government was watching this very, very carefully. And I think we've shown in all of our work on this book that, you know, the British government was heavily Judaized. And because of the Rothschild family saw itself as a defender of, of Jews worldwide. And all of this stuff led ultimately to Britain, despite them being on the same side, oh, that was, you know, a matter of convenience.

In World War I, of course, Russians who were anti-I... I mean, sorry, the English were as anti-Russians you can get. This all eventually developed into their support of the revolution, the loathing of the white armies, and their ultimate acceptance of Trotsky especially. Lenin, secondarily, but Trotsky especially, as I think Wilson said, the only true statesman in Russia. White hot public opinion, you know, that was very artificial.

And it really showed not so much the state, the state in Petersburg, they didn't, they had nothing to do with any of this. and somehow they're dragged into it the way that the Jewish mind in all their neuroses processed it was that this is now a beillish innocence

according to them means that the Russian state stands convicted now the mental gymnastics you need to get there I don't even know but that's what the press was talking about and you know you had Jewish writers and non-Jewish writers you know this was a big left-right issue

it also exposed though the weakness of the Russian right wing who really didn't have a solid opinion one way or the other some accepted it that he was that he was a killer at least if not a ritual killer some rejecting it and all of it though was done in a state of fear the worst thing that happened to Russia was the and I think we've shown that at this point the worst thing that happened to Russia was the destruction of the Polish Empire and the partitions of Poland that brought this huge number of Jews within Russia's borders

the country would never be the same again this shows just how powerful the Jews had become and how wealthy they had become and the state was as completely neutral as you would expect in these cases but the way that you know journalists journalists or that that discipline is you know corruption just almost inherently especially back then dragging Nicholas into this

and trying to connect the two and then making his own murder or at least a semi- ritualistic enterprise So that's, you know, we know that for a fact. And showing the nature of the Russian government, they were actually hearings on the ritual nature of the murders of Tsar Nicholas under, you know, like 10 years ago in the Russian Duma. You imagine that happening in the U.S.

So, you know, this was, how they got to that conclusion is another matter. But if anything brought both the Western world and the Jews to be purely revolutionary, it was this, more so than the so-called pilgrims. The chapter, the paragraph after the sentence, I'm going to read the two sentences I'm going to read is about the Leo Frank case. I just want to prepare people that there's a lot wrong in this paragraph. but I will read. As for the Jews, with all their passion, they were never to forgive this affront to the Russian monarchy. The fact that

the law had finally triumphed did nothing to change their feelings. It never does. It would be instructive, however, to compare the bailist trial with another that took place at the same time 1913, 1915, and Atlanta, USA, a trial which

then made great noise. The Jew Leo Frank also accused of the murder of a child, a girl raped and murdered and again with very uncertain charges they were not uncertain he was guilty he was condemned to be hung and during the proceedings of of cassation and armed crowd snatched him from prison and hanged him that's not true either he had been condemned he had been found guilty he was condemned to be killed by the state and the governor set aside his debt sentence. And that's when the crowd went in and took him out and hung him.

Okay. On the individual level, the comparison is in favor of Russia. But the Leo Frank affair had but little echo in public opinion and did not become an object of reproach. It's been a long time since I read in detail about the Leo Frank case. Can you briefly lay out the evidence for his guilt? Well, the evidence for his guilt was he was seen with the girl the same day. The person who they tried to blame it on was not even in the building. When they tried to interview him, when they tried to take him in the next day so that they could show him around,

he was completely incoherent. He was shaking. He, you know, just every, every bit of evidence. And I've gone over this on my show with E. Michael Jones. And I've also gone over it with a lawyer friend of mine who looked at the trial. And just every piece of evidence pointed to him. He was the only one. It was after hours. They were the only ones there. He was the only one who possibly could have done it. Even the Ku Klux Klan said, yeah, the black guy didn't do it. It was this guy. So he was put on trial. He was found guilty. They sentenced him to death. Rich Jews from up north, the same one's, the same Benet Brith, the same ADL. Because he was actually, Leo Frank was actually the president.

If I believe, check me on this, was the president of the Benet Brith in Atlanta. They poured the equivalent of 30. million dollars into this trial and to propaganda in Atlanta. And they still found him, they found him guilty. Numerous, numerous appeals to try to get, try to get him out of prison and at least to try to get the death sentence overturned. None of them worked. Finally, some rich Jews bribed the governor and he commuted his sentence. The governor was get ready to get out of office. As soon as he left office, he went to New York. and was sent on a world, like a cruise around the world to get him out of the country and everything.

I mean, it was a, it was a, it was an open and shut case that was turned into a side show because he was the president of the B'nai Bereth. Well, the one big difference, I mean, clearly there's a lot of similarities here and not just a time period. but Beelis was not nearly a Leo Frank in terms of the Jewish hierarchy He owned a What was called at least a brickyard So But otherwise

And of course There was rape involved in the Frank case There wasn't with With poor Andre And there was no ritual Accusations made against Frank this was just simple straight out rape and murder well of course that wasn't the case with

right was there accusations of ritual stuff with Frank no there wasn't um but okay but what I will say in in the social needs and defense here is that he may get a couple things wrong but he's getting them wrong in the direction of assuming the best intentions If he was getting it wrong by saying, oh, this, you know, everyone knew, the Jews abandoned him because they knew he was, because they knew he was guilty, yada, yada. If he went in that direction, you could say that there's a bias here.

But it seems like either social needsons just, you know, reading what is, his sources on this are at the time he's writing it, or probably just. just mainstream sources. So, yeah, I mean, he's basically parroting the mainstream, the mainstream line here that most Jews who would actually listen to this and read this would be like, yeah, that's exactly what happened. Yeah, he was, the charges were uncertain. A lynch mob took care of him. So it's not like he's just, he's giving you what the mainstream says, which is completely

untrue. And honestly, the best, the best investigation into this with, it's a book with diagrams and court documents and everything into this was put out by the nation of Islam. Oh, again. Okay. Yeah. So, all right. Moving on, because we're almost done with this chapter. Well, yeah, because there was a black guy involved, I guess. So they, that was their excuse to talk about it because, you know, the Patsy that they pretended did it. Okay. Yes. Yeah. All right. There is an epilogue in the Bealus case. Threatened with revenge by extreme right-wing groups. Beelis left Russia and went to Palestine with his family. That's a precursor to what we see today when when one of them rapes or murders someone or commits, commits espionage and just runs to

runs to Israel because they won't extradite. Yeah. So to speak. Yeah. In 1920, he moved to the United States. He died of natural causes at the age of 60 in the vicinity of New York. Justice Minister Schleggloch, wow, I can't pronounce that. According to some sources, he had given instructions for the case to be elucidated as a ritual murder was shot by the Bolsheviks. Schleglovvvvvvv. I think I should try to pronounce his name, considering he was a martyr. In 1919, the trial of Vera Sheberiak took place. It did not proceed according to the

aboard procedures of czarism, no question of popular jury, and lasted only about 40 minutes in the premises of the Czech of Kiev. A member of the latter who was arrested in the same year, by the whites, noted in his testimony that Vera Cheveriak was interrogated exclusively by Jewish Czechists, beginning with Soren, the head of the Blumstein Cheka. Commander Fairman subjected her to humiliating treatment, ripped off her clothes, and struck her with the barrel of his revolver. She said, you can do whatever you want to me, but what I said, I will not come back on it. What I said at the Bellis trial, nobody pushed me to say it.

Nobody bribed me. She was shot on the spot. You know, I wonder if that was, you know, I can't imagine the pain she was in. And, you know, they don't tear her clothes off just to slap her. There clearly is that there's a, there's a spot missing here where she was sexually assaulted. But, you know, being shot, she may have been, that may have been a relief for her to some extent. I can't imagine her life

after losing what now three children and being loathed by the Jews she you know her life

had to have been just absolutely absolute misery from Tomt de Barb yeah it's a common theme if you study

the check they'd interrogate a man bring his 10 year old daughter and rape her in front of him kill her in front of him so that he could watch that and then kill him.

It was something they did all the time. It was pretty common. In 1919, Vipper, now a Soviet official, was discovered in Kaluga and tried by the Moscow Revolutionary Tribunal. The Bolshevik prosecutor Kralinko pronounced the following words, whereas he presents a real danger to the Republic that there be one Vipper less among us. This macab joke suggested by R. Vipper, a professor of medieval history, was still alive. However, the tribunal merely sent Vipper to a concentration camp until the communist regime by definitively consolidated. After that, we lose his track.

Baylis was acquitted. I'm sorry, go ahead. This is a, oh, okay. Okay, go ahead. Okay, I didn't realize we're at the end. Go ahead. Bellis was acquitted by peasants. Those Ukrainian peasants accused of having participated in the pogroms against the Jews at the turn of the century,

and who were soon to know the collectivization and organized famine of 1932 to 1933, a famine that journalists have ignored and that has not been included in the liabilities of this regime. Here is yet another of the footsteps of history, of these footsteps of history. Can you imagine being, you know, a tenured American university professor who pretends to specialize in this stuff, he is not permitted to mention any of this. He has to simply spout, and I guess he could rationalize it one way or the other. I suppose younger ones don't know any better because everything is censored now.

But these people simply have to lie. And even then, they may not be sufficiently phylo-Semitic enough, especially on something like this. that's you know thanks to our listeners my listeners my readers i don't have to live this kind of a life i don't have to live in fear like these people do um these two cases well of course andre and then of course um the leo frank case if you ever want to argue about the nature of jewish control and the sheer power that no other group of people have ever done this uh if you were an arab or if you were a German or if you were an Armenian, or if you were a poll, in either case, or any other

group, you wouldn't have this kind of response. There's one group of people that do this. And these are slam dunk arguments when it comes to Jewish control and Jewish domination to the point where Western governments were doing their bidding. Also, you know, that the Soviet Union was a Jewish enterprise, especially at this early stage. They must have, in terms of Vipper, he must have, you know, because he didn't have like background checks, especially back then in 1919 and so much had been destroyed. You know, he was working for the Soviet government in some capacity.

And eventually someone said, oh, isn't he the guy in the, in the Belisca? But, you know, but I heard they merely sent it to a concentration camp. Of course, the Soviet concentration camps from the second they, took over in late 1917. I hate it when people say that this is just a Stalinist thing. It was created from the nanosecond they took over all the way up and really only Gorbachev dismantled them. But yet, of course, none of these were trials at all. The trial that

B.L.S. got was far superior to anything that anyone else got, especially his poor mother. but um you know this this will this there's no way you could write this stuff i'm a little disappointed in sultan is i have to say because there's a lot of evidence against bailiffs that he doesn't mention um you know he's he's pretty good on this he clearly soes doubt in in the mind of the reader but there was a lot that i've mentioned that he he didn't and i'm glad i was able to will go back to my paper on that I will publish it in a few days.

I just have to clean it up. There's some translation stuff that I have to do. And I have a bunch of sources. Oh, and don't forget. Also, the provisional government looked into this case. There's a substantial literature there where they had to come to the conclusion that despite everything, they couldn't really refute the prosecution. Of course, they didn't come out and say he was a ritual murderer. But clearly, you know, they couldn't refute what the prosecution was saying.

And again, before we go, I want to repeat, the defense brought up the ritual part of this. The Jews brought up the ritual part of this. And because they brought it up, it created this furor, this tremendous outrage. And it was a hung jury. It wasn't like it was unanimously like you would have in the U.S. but in all of this we have to remember this poor kid who would have been a credit to Russia was tortured to death by these Jews some God-forsaken reason and the only thing Jews cared about they made it all about themselves

that's that's this this group of people in a nutshell all right we're starting a new chapter next episode Jews and Russians before the World War, the growing awareness. As Dr. Johnson mentioned, there's no way he's going to be working in academia, probably ever again. I don't know. Maybe the title change one day. But in the meantime, please make sure you go and you donate.

I'm going to be including in the show notes now, from now on, his cash app, so you can send them a one-off, one-off thank you. And, yeah, go to his Patreon. go to his website and donate please all right dr johnson see in a couple days i really appreciate that yes sir appreciate it all right my friend bye-bye want to welcome everyone back to part 50 of our reading of 200 years together by alexander solshinison dr johnson how are you doing today i feel a great sense of relief that p ditty has been uh acquitted of the most serious charges.

I mean, this has been weighing on me and bothering me, you know, really, it's just, I'm just so happy, at least the worst of the charges, not all of them, but the worst of them, he's been fully acquitted. So I should be feeling better, but it may take some time to recover from the stress of it all. Well, I mean, you would expect somebody who is an asset of intelligence and probably not only our own intelligence to, you know, be acquitted of the worst charges, but because that's just the way this works. You know, I'm kidding, right? Of course. Okay, okay, okay. I'm just checking. I'm just checking. I couldn't tell.

we're both trying to deadpan each other to death here it's brutal yeah you only can have one straight man all right uh part 50 and we have a new chapter to start i'm sure a lot of people are really ramped up to get to the uh the bolshevik revolution in 1917 but um you know we need all this background before we can get to what most people probably want to hear. Ready? Yes, sir. Let's do it. Chapter 11.

Jews and Russians before the First World War, the growing awareness. In Russia, for another 10 years, it escaped its ruin. The best minds among the Russians and the Jews had had time to look back and evaluate from different points of view the essence of our common life to seriously consider the question of culture and national destiny. The Jewish people made its way through an ever-changing present by dragging behind it the tale of a comet of 3,000 years of diaspora, without ever losing consciousness of being a nation without language nor territory, but with its own laws, Solomon Lurie, preserving its

difference and its specificity by the force of its religious and national tension in the name of a superior, meta-historical providence. Have the Jews in the 19th and 20th centuries sought to identify with the peoples who surrounded them to blend into them? It was certainly the Jews of Russia who, longer than their other co-religionists, had remained in the core of isolation, concentrated on their religious life and conscience. But from the end of the 19th century, it was precisely this Jewish community in Russia that began to grow stronger, to flourish.

And now the whole history of the Jewish community in the modern age was placed under the sign of Russian Jewry, which also manifested a sharp sense of the movement of history. It's not an exaggeration to say that the Jews, now it's not 3,000 years, but Russia was really the central element, once Poland fell and was partitioned. and there's such a huge number of Jews

lived in the Russian Empire that Judaism and Russia or Russian Jews, I should say, were really one in the same thing. That's what I was going to say. We're essentially one in the same thing. I mean, you had Jews everywhere, of course. You know, Germany had a huge group. But, I mean, I think you mentioned one time before that Israel, there's this one, you know, Russian Jews are

a huge proportion of them. These Khazars going down to Israel with, with rifles, pretending that they're, that they're, you know, descendants of Abraham. It's got to be so absurd for the, for the Arabs who lived there at the time. But sometimes, sometimes I think Solzhenitin is trying to be conciliatory by saying things like, you know, 3,000 years. And it's, it's, it certainly hasn't been. There's been so many interruptions and changes and alterations

and convert groups and everything else that it's not this straight line like many of the Zionists would like you to believe. For their part, the Russian thinkers were perplexed by the particularism of the Jews. And for them, in the 19th century, the question was how to overcome it. Vladimir Saloviev, who expressed deep sympathy for the Jews, proposed to do so by the love of the Russians toward the Jews. Before him, Dostoevsky had noticed a disproportionate fury provoked by his remarks, certainly offensive, but very scarce about the Jewish people.

Quote, this theory is a striking testimony to the way the Jews themselves regard the Russians, and that, in the motives of our differences with the Jews, it is perhaps not only the Russian people who bears all the responsibility, but that these motives, obviously, have accumulated on both sides, and it cannot be said on which side there is the most. I'm not sure. I mean, we could only assume Dostoevsky is talking about, you know, we all know what he thinks about the Jews, what he's thought about the Jews throughout his career in Dye River Ryder and lots of other places. But, you know, he's been maybe not even on both sides. You know, Russians were a victim. They weren't victimizers. Jews were the victimizers throughout despite the Russian

I mean God now we're talking about a hundred years of attempts to bring them into the mainstream to you know make of them a normal people I wonder if up until the revolution that that could be the slogan of this of this summary of this part of the of the book Russians trying to make Jews normal people but fail

I don't think there's equal on either side the Jews were so well organized and so violent and so criminal from the beginning and the Russians didn't know what they were getting into despite the fact that as you remember the Dershavin committee

laid it all out for as early as the Emperor Paul so um and how many commissions have there been i can't even keep up there's like been like 30 and all that's meant is that the laws governing the jews have been um so it's such as a mishmash of things you could you could find anything in them and that comes from all of these commissions all of these elite people and as the time goes on it's just it gets more and more phyllosemitic as jews become more and more powerful from this same end of the 19th century, Title reports the following observation.

Quote, the Jews are in their majority materialists. Strong of them is the aspiration to acquire material goods. But what contempt for these material goods whenever it comes to the inner eye to national dignity? Why, in fact, the mass of Jewish youth, who has completely turned away from religious practice, which often does not even speak its mother tongue, why did this mass, if only for the sake of form, not convert to orthodoxy, which would have opened to it wide the doors of all the universities and would have given it access to all the goods of the earth, end quote. Even the thirst for knowledge was not enough, while science, superior knowledge, was held by them

in higher esteem than fortune. What held them back was the concern not to abandon their co-religionists in need. He also adds that going to Europe to study was not a good solution either. Quote, Jewish students felt very uncomfortable in the West. The German Jew considered them undesirable, insecure people, noisy, disorderly. And this attitude was not only that of the German Jews, the French and Swiss Jews were no exception. Well, the title is obviously a Jewish name.

I don't know if he's a convert or what. I don't know much about him. But they didn't become orthodox because, you know, it was. wouldn't be Jews anymore. There was always a stream of converts. I've known many of them. And orthodoxy has been the beneficiary largely because, you know, the overwhelming majority of Jews in the world at the time were living in Russia and Ukraine and Belarus.

So, but that was a, that was a completely separate matter. They weren't going to, you know, open up to them all the doors of the universities and all the goods of the earth. I guess she means the goods of the Russian earth. No, they, they, they, they, they're not going to convert to something that they despise. And, and, and I think that's the obvious answer here. This section of the book goes through a lot of the literature here, the classic literature in the field. Title is, I don't know what it means, what held them back with a concern of their, not to the And then, um, and then nothing.

Oh, unless this whole thing, wait, wait, this whole thing is a, a, um, um, parentheses all the way down to, um, footnote four, but he still doesn't say, you know, um, you know, uh, he still doesn't say much. The only thing I, I could, comes down to, we said this before, is, uh, It's that they hate them. They're not going to convert to something they hate. You know, they, they, they, their, their, their ticket to the, all the goods of the earth is being a Jew, not converting to orthodoxy. And I think they knew that.

I think titles being exaggerating here. And, yes, it's true that there were certain quotas on the university. We all know why now by now. But, yeah, I think, I think I'm trying to get something out of this. It should, there should not be a paragraph, uh, says. separation here, because it's all one parentheses section, right up until the Robeson returned to Judaism. But I think, you know, he's not going to say that openly, but we all know that that's the case. And there were noisy and disorderly everywhere that went. As for De Pasmanic, he also

mentioned this category of Jews converted into distress, who felt only more resentful toward the power and could only oppose it. From 1905, conversion was facilitated. It was no longer necessary to go to orthodoxy. It was enough to become a Christian, and Protestantism was more acceptable to many Jews. In 1905, was also repealed the prohibition to return to Judaism. Another writer bitterly concluded in 1924 that in the last decades preceding the revolution, it was not only the Russian government, which definitely ranked the Jewish people among the enemies of the country. But even worse, it was a lot of Jewish politicians who rank themselves among these enemies radicalized in their position and ceasing to differentiate between the government

and the fatherland, that is, Russia. The indifference of the Jewish masses and their leaders to the destiny of Great Russia was a fatal political error. But there wouldn't be Jews then. You know, that's, of course they are. If the government, the government didn't start off, just hating Jews for no reason they were pushed into it and we've spent a lot of time six months going through why they were pushed to it

no matter what they did everything was just an opportunity to scam every attempt that subsidizing their moving here moving there you know the state eventually even even these liberal the cadet types in private

they needed Jewish money so they were going to say in public how wonderful they are, but in private, I mean, no one really likes them. It's just that they have to do business with them once in a while. Same thing for the Senate and the later commissions are the same way. They're going to say nice things because they're, or possibly even indebted to them, if not in business with them.

But the indifference of the Jewish masses, the leaders, that's great Russia. No, that's what great Russia isn't Judaism. it's in fact it's the polar opposite of what being Jewish is it's a third Rome it's the ultimate Christian entity I don't know you know this is it's it's almost an absurd thing to say here of course like any social process this and moreover in a context as diverse and mobile as the Jewish milieu did not take place linearly it was split in the hearts of many educated Jews, it provoked rifts. On the one hand, belonging to the Jewish people confers a

specific position in the whole of the Russian milieu, but to observe immediately a remarkable ambivalence, the traditional sentimental attachment of many Jews to the surrounding Russian world, their rootedness in this world, and at the same time an intellectual rejection, a refusal across the board, affection for an abhorred world. Don't forget, it's just like in the last 20 years in this story here that they learned to speak Russian. Overwhelmingly, they were just speaking Yiddish. They had no concern of being Russian whatsoever. They just learned to speak Russian just very recently.

This generation here learned to speak Russian. Once the Kahul fell apart, that was just to make themselves even greater, especially the young people, even greater revolutionaries and scammers. This approach, so painfully ambivalent, could not fail to lead to equally painfully ambivalent results. And when Ivy Hessen, in an intervention in the Second Duma in March 1907, after having denied that the revolution was still in its phase of rising violence, thus denying right-wing parties the right to arise as defenders of the culture against anarchy exclaimed, who are we teachers, doctors, lawyers, statisticians, literary men? Would we be enemies of

culture? Who will believe you, gentlemen? They shouted from the benches of the right. You are the enemies of Russian culture, not of Jewish culture. Enemies, of course, why go so far, but as the Russian party pointed out, are you really unreservedly our friends? The rapprochement was made difficult precisely by this. How could these brilliant advocates, professors, and doctors not have in their hearts primarily Jewish sympathies? Could they feel? feel entirely and unreservedly Russian by spirit. Hence, the problem was even more complicated. Were they able to take to heart the interests of the Russian state in their full scope and depth? Yeah, I'm assuming Heston, I'm not sure. I mean, Heston, I don't know much about him either.

It's clearly a German name. It could be a Jewish name. And I'm not 100% sure what he's even saying here. He's talking to the right wingers saying, you're not, you're not an enemy of the Jews, your enemies are yourselves. But I think that, you know, could they feel entirely unreserved Russian by spirit? The answer was no. During the same singular period, we see on the one hand that the Jewish middle classes make a very clear choice to give secular education to their children in the Russian language. And on the other, there is a development of publications

in Yiddish and comes into use the term Yiddishism. That the Jews remain Jewish that they do not assimilate? I thought that's what assimilation really was in general. That they present themselves as Russians on the outside, but of course everything at home and at their festivals and everything is Yiddish on the inside. That's, I think, is as far as they're going to go. They're not going to convert to orthodoxy. They're not going to see themselves as Russians.

There's always going to be your occasional. a weirdo exception. But when I think of Jewish assimilation, like, for example, in Germany, too, that's what I think of. They're not going to abandon who they are, because who they are is a source of their power. There was still a path to assimilation, doubtlessly marginal, but not negligible, that of mixed marriages, and also a current of superficial assimilation consisting in adapting artificial pseudonyms to the Russian way.

And who did this most often? The great sugar producers of Kiev, Dobry, Babushkin, prosecuted during the war for agreement with the enemy. The editor Aosni, that even the newspaper of Constitutional Democrat orientation, Wretch, called an avid speculator, an unscrupulous shark, or the future Bolshevik D. Goldenbach, who regarded all of Russia as a country without worth, but disguised himself as Riazanov to both the readers of his Marxist theoretician rachiosanations until his arrest in 1937. And it was precisely during these decades, and especially in Russia, that Zionism developed.

The Zionists were ironical about those who wanted to assimilate, who imagined that the fate of the Jews of Russia were indissolubly linked to the destiny of Russia itself. And then we must first turn to V.I. Jabatinsky, a brilliant and original essayist who was brought in the years preceding the revolution to express not only his rejection of Russia, but also his despair. Jabatinsky considered that Russia was nothing more than a halt for the Jews on their historical journey and that it was necessary to hit the road to Palestine. I think that's being extremely diplomatic for him. He treated Russia the same way. as Goldenbach did, they despise the Slavic people. I said Karl Marx, for that matter. So being very nice about it, this was just a means to an end. Russians are to be used.

They're not ends in and of themselves. Passion ignited his words. It is not with the Russian people that we are in contact. We learn to know it through its culture, mainly through its writers, through the highest, the purest manifestations of the Russian spirit. And this appreciation, we transpose it to the whole of the Russian world. Many of us, born in the Jewish intelligentsia, love the Russian culture with a maddening and degrading love,

with a degrading love of swinekeepers for a queen. As for the Jewish world, we discover it through the baseless and ugliness of everyday life. He is merciless towards who seek to assimilate. Many of the servile habits that developed in our psychology as our intelligentsia became russified have ruined the hope or the desire to keep Jewishness intact and lead to its disappearance. The average Jewish intellectual forgets himself. It is better not to pronounce the word Jew. The times are not longer than that.

We are afraid to write, we the Jews, but we write, the Russians and even we the Ruskovs. The Jew can occupy a prominent place in Russian society, but he will always remain a second-class Russian. And this, all the more so because he retains a specific inclination of the soul. We are witnessing an epidemic of baptisms for interests, sometimes for stakes far more petty than obtaining a diploma. The 30 pennies for equal rights. When abjuring our faith, strip yourself also of our nationality. Well, that was really hard for me to split up faith, so-called. I mean, most Jews are not religious people, but it doesn't mean their rituals don't hold a tremendous amount of, for the sake of nationality.

It's nothing like Spain where you had, you know, huge numbers of, and we know it's perfectly okay for Jews to convert to the dominant religion, you know, for some purpose. we don't have a massive movement like that in Russia like you did in Spain I don't think they were afraid to write and saying we the Russians it's kind of like Jews saying today we as white people these were revolutionaries they they contoured their message to whoever they were talking about or if they were purely in the economic realm there were scammers it was you know again the same same thing

but as far as politics legality or concern they certainly weren't afraid right we the Jews is one thing and they did do that sometimes but they didn't want if they said something nasty they don't want to get even more contempt heaped on them but we the Russians is very similar to like us white people

need to need to need to look closely at our behavior towards non-white or something something like that. You hear all the time today. The situation of the Jews in Russia, and not at any time, but precisely after the years 1905 to 1906, seemed to him desperately gloomy. The objective reality, that is, the fact of living abroad has turned itself against our people today, and we are weak and helpless. Already in the past, we knew we were surrounded by enemies. This prison, Russia, a pack of dogs, the body lying covered with wounds of the Jewish people of Russia, tracked, surrounded

by enemies and defenseless, six million human beings swarming in a deep pit, a slow torture, a pogrom that does not end. And even, according to him, newspapers financed by Jewish funds do not defend the Jews in these times of unprecedented persecution. At the end of 1911, he wrote, for several years now the Jews of Russia have been crammed on the bench of the accused, despite the fact that we are not revolutionaries, that we have not sold Russia to the Japanese, and that we are not Ezev's or Bogroffs and in connection with Bogroff. This unfortunate young man, he was what he was at the hour of such an admirable death was booed by a dozen brutes from the cesspool of the Kievan black hundreds come to

ensure that the execution had indeed taken place. And this has nothing to do. You know, Russians, again, Russians didn't start off this way. the monarchy of the state didn't start off saying we're going to harm Jews. In fact, they were planning on make a lot of money from them. This is a hysterical, typical Jewish nationalist hysteria here. Yes, they did defend the Jews. There hasn't been this nonstop pogrom because the best pogromers were Jews.

This is the same guy who's talking about being defenseless. This is the same man who created the self-defense forces, who created their militias. of course these were mostly offensive units self-defense is just propaganda and they had been heavily on for a very long time so there's this cognitive dissonance here he knows he's anything but weak and helpless and that jews had a huge influence over the press and um and economics uh he this was just a a hysterical rant of his but not too surprising and returning again and again to the Jewish community itself. Today we are culturally deprived, as at the bottom of a slum, of an obscure impasse. What we suffer above all is contempt for ourselves. What we need above all is to respect ourselves. The study of Jewishness must become for us the central discipline.

Jewish culture is now the only plank of salvation for us. All of this we can. Yes, we can understand it, share it, and we, Russians, can do it, especially today at the end of the 20th century. It does not condemn those who, in the past, have campaigned for assimilation. In the course of history, there are times when assimilation is undeniably desirable when it represents a necessary stage of progress. This was the case after the 60s of the 19th century,

when the Jewish intelligentsia was still in its embryonic stage, beginning to adapt to the surrounding environment to a culture that had reached maturity. At that time, assimilation did not mean denying the Jewish people, but on the contrary, taking the first step on the road to autonomous national activity, taking a first step towards renewal and rebirth of the nation. It was necessary to assimilate what was foreign to us in order to be able to develop with new energy what was our own. But half a century later, many radical transformations took place both inside and outside the Jewish world.

the desire to appropriate to appropriate universal knowledge the desire to appropriate universal knowledge has become widespread as never before as it is then now that must be inculcated to the younger generations the jewish principles it is now that there is a threat of an irredeemable dilution in the foreign environment there is no day that passes in which our sons do not leave us and do not become strangers to us enlightened by the Enlightenment. Our children serve all the peoples of the earth, except ours. No one is there to work for the Jewish cause. The world around us is too magnificent, too spacious, and too rich. We cannot admit that it diverts Jewish youth from the ugliness of the daily existence of the Jews. The deepening of national values of Jewishness must become the main axis of Jewish education. Only the bond of solidarity allows a nation to hold.

ourselves would need it. While denial slows down the struggle for the right of the Jews, one imagines that there is a way out, and we leave lately in compact masses with lightness and cynicism. I assume he means leaving for the Middle East. That's going to take, you know, it's going to take a little while. But, you know, he lays out what any nationalist of any ethnicity would put out as legitimate. It's just in this case, it's for a very different, very bizarre group of people. The Enlightenment, meaning the, you know,

the Jewish Enlightenment, starting in Germany. And again, there's so much hysteria here. You know, in the beginning, I couldn't tell who's, is Solzhenitsyn speaking or is this Jabotinsky speaking? but much of this you just put any ethnic ethnic group in there it sounds perfectly legitimate

and only the bond of solidarity allows a nation to hold well the whole point of creating these bonds was in their case to lie to invent stories about these awful pogroms and the savage Russians that will kill us at a moment notice unless we stick together.

The Cajal elders did the exact same thing, you know, 80 years earlier. And when you hold the press in your hands, well, it's much easier to pull off. And I think they truly believed it. Then, letting himself be carried away, quote, the royal spirit of Israel

in all its power, its tragic history and all its grandiose magnificence. Who are we to justify ourselves before them? who are they to demand accountability end quote that's exactly what he said given the um the the the beeless case his his quote was you know how dare they uh judge us under any circumstances whether rich will murder murder or any other crime they have no right we are a royal people he uses the word royal a lot We are the aristocrats of the world. We are simply superior.

And who are you Slavs or anyone, any Gentile, to dare demand accountability or justice or anything like this? This is exactly what he said in the Billy's case. The latter formula, we can also respect it fully, but under the condition of reciprocity, especially since it is not up to any nation or religion to judge another. The calls to return to Jewish roots did not remain unheeded in those years. In St. Petersburg, before the revolution, we could note in the circles of the Russo-Jewish intelligentsia a very great interest in Jewish history. In 1908, the Jewish Historical Ethnographic Commission expanded into a Jewish historical ethnographic society,

headed by M. Winiver. It worked actively and efficiently to collect the archives on the history and ethnography of the Jews of Russia and Poland. Nothing comparable was established by Jewish historical science in the West. The magazine, The Jewish Past, led by S. Dubnov, then was created. At the same time began the publication of the Jewish Encyclopedia in 16 volumes, which we use exclusively in this study, and the history of the Jewish people in 15 volumes. It is true that in the last volume of the Jewish Encyclopedia, its editors complained that, quote, the elite of the Jewish intelligentsia has shown its indifference to the cultural issues raised by this encyclopedia, end quote,

devoting itself exclusively to the struggle for the equality, all formal, of rights for the Jews. Meanwhile, on the contrary, in other minds and other Jewish hearts, there was a growing conviction that the future of the Jews of Russia was indissolubly linked to that, of Russia. Although scattered over an immense territory and among a foreign world, the Russian Jewish community had and was conscious of being a unique whole. Because unique was the environment that surrounded us, unique its culture, this unique culture, we absorbed it throughout the whole country. The Jews of Russia have always been able to align their own interest to those of all the Russian people. And this did not come from any nobility of character or a sense of gratitude, but from a perception of historical realities.

Open controversy with Jabotinsky. Quote, Russia is not, for the millions of Jews who populated, a step among others on the historical path of the wandering Jew. The contribution of Russian Jews to the international Jewish community has been and will be the most significant. That's for damn sure. There is no salvation for us without Russia, as a, there is no salvation for Russia without us.

Well, that's bad news for everybody. Well, it's bad news for Russians. I think is this the last part of the Jewish encyclopedia, or is this Dubnov? Well, anyway, it's in opposing Zionism saying we're going to stay here is probably the worst news that Russia ever got. because in connecting itself to the Russian people that just means that we are now going to revolutionize it this is a clarion call

in a very weird way for the Bolshevik revolution or at least the Mensific revolution Russia can't be Russia as there is no salvation for Russia without us I don't know what he's talking about you know salvation I think He means revolution.

No salvation for us without Russia. You need those human resources. No salvation for Russia without us, meaning we have to remake what Russia is. That's why I read that. This interdependence is affirmed even more categorically by the deputy of the second and third Dumas O.E. Pergamon. Quote, no improvement of the internal situation of Russia is possible

without the simultaneous enfranchisement of the Jews from the yoke of inequality. End quote. And there, one cannot ignore the exceptional personality of the jurist, G.B. Sliceberg. Among the Jews, he was one of those who, for decades, had the closest relations with the Russian state, sometimes as a deputy to the principal secretary of the Senate, sometimes as a consultant to the Ministry of the Interior, but to whom many Jews reproached his habit of asking the authorities for rights for the Jews when the time had come to demand them.

He writes in his memoirs, quote, From childhood, I have become accustomed to consider myself above all as a Jew. But from the beginning of my conscious life, I also felt like a son of Russia. Being a good Jew does not mean that one is not a good Russian citizen. In our work, we were not obliged to overcome the obstacles encountered at every step by the Jews of Poland because of the Polish authorities. In the Russian political and administrative situation, we Jews did not represent a foreign element insofar as, in Russia, cohabitated many nationalities. The cultural interests of Russia did not conflict in any way with the cultural interests of the Jewish community.

These two cultures were somewhat complementary. He even added this somewhat humorous remark. The legislation on Jews was so confusing and contradictory that in the 90s, quote, it was necessary to create a specific jurisprudence for the Jews using purely Talmudic methods. Well, that's what I just said. There's all of these commissions and a constant writing on them. You know, Jews always are the center of attention for a whole bunch of reasons. And these commissions and these laws and these regulations, court decisions, Senate decisions, you know,

it turned out to be a mess. Now, the G is actually his name was Henrik pronounced in the Russian Gennrick was a lawyer. We've quoted him many times before. I've quoted him many times before. He wrote a lengthy history of the Jews at some point.

You know, he was clearly privileged. This is one of the few times. the Talmud even comes up and even this is just kind of backhanded yeah you did represent a foreign element in Russia

were many nationalities well that's true but Russia was an empire it was not a country and to say that the cultural interest of Russia didn't conflict in any way with the cultural interest of the Jewish community I don't know what planet he's been living on and they're not complementary

and I think when he was working in the Ministry of Interior or whatever he was doing he was a lawyer but he never never was on the bar but he certainly had a privileged life he comes from a very wealthy family but this just shows you I don't know if he's tongue in cheek I don't know if he knows why I'm sure he does

that there has to be a specific Talmudic school about all these Russian commissions we've been talking about this almost from the beginning because there's so many of them there's so many laws and all this stuff and we need the good Talmudis to interpret it for us because there's simply so many of them which in and of itself is something that

Jews excel at and you know right at this point you could find whatever you wanted in those commission or court decisions or laws or whatever you want and they certainly took advantage of it but this is just you know he's he's

he's fooling himself if he really believes some of this stuff and again in a higher register quote the easing of the national yoke which has been felt in recent years shortly before russia entered a tragic period in its history bore in the hearts of all russian jews the hope that russian jewish consciousness would gradually take a creative path that of reconciling the jewish and russian aspects in the synthesis of a higher unity and can we forget that among the seven authors of the incomparable milestones three were Jews

M.O. Gershon, A.S. I. I. X. Zoyev Land and S.L. Frank. Well, they were converts. Or at least Frank was. Frank of that three, Frank is the only one who I've read with any depth. You know, he was extremely you know, pro-Christian. He was a convert in one way or another. I'm not sure it's called land. I don't know who that is. But

Gerson, of course, is relatively well known. The milestones were a conservative I don't want to say, it's more of a religious approach to things. I've read tons of stuff in those in that series.

It's still on, it's uploaded to many websites and even the Russian Church has a few of those. But I think Frank by far was the biggest name of those three. But they were either converts or very close to it. But there was reciprocity. In the decades preceding the revolution, the Jews benefited from the massive and unanimous support of progressive circles. Perhaps the amplitude of the support is due to a context of bullying and pogroms, but it has never been so complete in any other country, and perhaps never in all the past centuries. Our intelligentsia was so generous, so freedom-loving, that it ostracized anti-Semitism

from society and humanity. Moreover, the one who did not give his frank and massive support to the struggle for equal rights of the Jews, who did not make it a priority, was considered a despicable anti-Semite. Gee, that sounds familiar, doesn't it? Yeah, yeah. Sultan Eaton himself was thrown into that pit. With its ever-awakening moral consciousness and extreme sensitivity, the Russian intelligentsia sought to understand and assimilate the Jewish views of priorities affecting the whole of political life.

Is deemed progressive, all this is a reaction against the persecution of the Jews, all the rest is reactionary. Not only did Russian society firmly defend the Jews against the government, but it forbade itself and forbade anyone to show any trace of a shadow of criticism of the conduct of each Jew in particular. And if this bore anti-Semitism within me, the generation formed at that time retained these principles for decades. Yeah, it is very familiar. They created their own world, this left-right, without, you know, a whole lot of distinction. But that's the one thing that united them. They ostracized it, as if the Jews were.

beyond reproach. And Sultanesean personally was considered an anti-Semite in his life because he wrote this book among many other things. But the Russian intelligentsia idealized

them. Depending on where they lived, their contact with them wasn't, you know, significant. Starting with Slovia. But, you know, I don't think they were ever scammed by them. I don't think they were ever shot by them.

And, you know, the so-called pogroms, which were the results of Jewish rioting. We've been through this. You know, Jews create a riot and force people to strike. And then when Russians respond, that's the program. But that's certainly how many of the newspapers had described it. So all of this is completely artificial. It was artificial then and it's artificial now. V.A. Makulkov evokes in his memoirs a significant episode that occurred during the Congress of the Zemstvost in 1905.

When the wave of pogroms against the Jews and intellectuals had just swept through and began to rise in strength, the pogroms directed against landowners. Quote, E.V. de Roberte proposed not to extend the amnesty demanded by the Congress to the crimes related to violence against children and women. end quote. He was immediately suspected of wanting to introduce a class amendment, that is to say, to concern himself with the families of the noble victims of pogroms. I de Roberti hastened to reassure everybody. I had absolutely no plan in regard to the property of the nobleman. Five or 20 properties burned down. This has no importance. I have in view the mass of immovable property and houses belong to Jews, which was burned and pillaged by the black hundreds. During the terror of 19... This is... Well, I'd do the next one. Go ahead.

During the Terror of 1905 through 1907, Gersonstein, who had been ironic about the property fires of the nobleman and Yolos were considered as martyrs, but no one among the thousands of other innocent victims were considered so. In the last autocrat, a satirical publication that the Russian liberals published abroad, they succeeded in placing the following legend under the portrait. of the general whom the terrorist Hirsch Lekert had attempted in vain to assassinate. Quote, because of him, the czar had executed the Jew Lekert. The way this is, you know, coming, it's no different than intellectuals today.

You know, pogroms don't come from nothing. The contempt from the Jews, these people will talk about, you know, they don't want to overthrow the czar for some kind of democracy, but they despise what the people actually think. when the people themselves took over in places like Odessa and showed exactly what they think, in huge numbers. Of course, they're vehemently opposed to it. This is how the left somehow justified having these, you know, millionaire Jews as not part of the proletariat.

I'm sorry, it's not part of the bourgeoisie. remember it wasn't that long ago there were some leftist groups that were burning down you know they were talking about the you know Jews as as as exploitors but because of this stuff it's gone

and it's extremely important to note not the BELIS case as well as the so-called pogroms but by now it was in the mainstream press in Russia at the time it was impressed there that the Jews had done absolutely nothing wrong this was done for

jealousy or something like that. What these people believed was based, was purely artificial. It was based on media mythology and their own self-interest. You know, so in the black hundreds became a boogeyman.

You know, Lenin even used black hundred clergy to justify certain executions and things like that. But this is, you know, This was a battle between two groups of people, Jews being very well-organized and wealthy, and your typical Russian, especially in a specific region, being unorganized and not wealthy. It was not just the parties of the opposition. It was the whole mass of middle-class civil servants who were trembling at the idea of sounding like non-progressives.

It was necessary to enjoy a good personal fortune or possess remarkable freedom of mind to resist with courage to pressure of general opinion. As for the world of the bar of art of science, ostracism immediately struck anyone who moved away from this magnetic field. Only Leo Tolstoy, who enjoyed a unique position in society, could afford to say that, for him, the Jewish question was in the 81st place. The Jewish Encyclopedia complained that the pogroms of October 1905,

quote, provoked in the progressive intelligentsia a protestation that a protestation that was not specific, i.e. exclusively Jewish-centered, but general, oriented toward all manifestations of the counter-revolution in all its forms. And that became Soviet dogma, that anti-Semitism is to be opposed to the workers' society, the workers' paradise. He said this over and over again. That's why those laws were passed. And it was very bizarre. you know, for him to say, and they all said it, that being anti-Semitic is to be anti-revolutionary.

In the Belish case, the same way, you had these Jewish leftists saying, this was an attack on the workers' revolution as it was developing in Kiev and Odessa at the time. You know, yeah, the 1905 revolution failed, but it succeeded in a lot of other ways, and it created this mythos that so-called progressive Russians were living under

and it became, you know, it's very similar to today. You weren't a member of that Russian intellectual class despite the fact that, you know, Dostoevsky and Gogol in years past, unless you, you know, saw the Jews as essentially incapable of wrongdoing. It looks like we're coming to a place where they're going to start talking about czarism so it'd probably be a good place to cut for today that sounds great to me all right well um as i do at the end of every episode uh please go to the show notes please go to the videos and look

in to in the description and there are links i've recently added uh dr johnson's uh cash app link um let's let's make sure dr johnson gets uh gets compensated for all the good work he's putting in here and um you know we'd really appreciate that thank you thank you my first friend. I really do appreciate it. And donations have gone up. And I'm pretty sure it's mostly because of people who are listening to this. And I thank you very much. That's awesome. The feedback so far is just I mean, not a negative comment. Definitely about the content for sure. All right. I will talk to you in a couple days. Thank you. Okay, my friend. See you then.