The Pete Quiñones Show - Reading Solzhenitsyn's '200 Years Together' w/ Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson - Part 30

Episode Date: April 26, 2025

66 MinutesPG-13Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson is a researcher, writer, and former professor of history and political science, specializing in Russian history and political ideology.Pete and Dr. Johnson continue a project in which Pete reads Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's '200 Years Together," and Dr' Johnson provides commentary.Dr Johnson's PatreonRusJournal.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.

You catch them in the corner of your eye. Distinctive, by design. They move you, even before you drive. The new Cooper plugin hybrid range. For Mentor, Leon, and Terramar. Now with flexible PCP finance and trade-in boosters of up to 2,000 euro. Search Coopera and discover our latest offers. Coopera.

Design that moves. Finance provided by way of higher purchase agreement from Volkswagen. Financial Services, Ireland Limited. Subject to lending criteria. Terms and conditions apply. Volkswagen Financial Services Ireland Limited. Trading as Cooper Financial Services is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Ready for huge savings?

We'll mark your calendars from November 28th to 30th because the Liddle Newbridge Warehouse sale is back. We're talking thousands of your favourite Liddle items all reduced to clear. From home essentials to seasonal must-habs. When the doors open, the deals go fast. Come see for yourself. The Lidl Newbridge Warehouse Sale, 28th to 30th of November.

Lidl, more to value. Discover five-star luxury at Trump Dunebeg. Unwind in our luxurious spa. Savour sumptuous farm-fresh dining. Relax in our exquisite accommodations. Step outside and be captivated by the wild Atlantic surrounds. Your five-star getaway, where every detail is designed with you in mind. Give the gift of a unique experience this Christmas,

with vouchers from Trump Dunebag. Search Trump-Ireland gift vouchers. Trump on Doonbiog, Kush Farage. If you want to support this show and get the episodes early and ad-free, head on over to freeman Beyond the Wall.com forward slash support. I want to explain something right now if you support me through Substack or Patreon. You have access to an RSS feed that you can plug into any podcatcher including Apple, and you'll be able to listen to the episodes through there.

If you support me through Subscrib Star, Gumroad, or on my website directly, I will send you a link where you can download the file, and you can listen to it any way you wish. I really appreciate the support everyone gives me. It keeps the show going. It allows me to basically put out an episode every day now, and I'm not going to stop. I'm just going to accelerate. I think sometimes you see that I'm putting out two, even three a day. And yeah, can't do it without you.

So thank you for the support. Head on over to freeman beyond the wall.com forward slash support and do it there. Thank you. I want to welcome everyone back to part 30 of our reading of 200 years together by Alexander Solzhenyson. Are you doing now today, Dr. Johnson. I haven't mowed a lawn in 11 years. But now I have this new place. I got one of these lawn mowers that has a battery. I've never had one of those before. I used to have a ride on,

which was great. It was like a go cart. I don't have as much property as I used to. So I'd never use one of those, the battery powered ones. I got to go out and do it after this show. So I'm, I I'm not sure how it's going to go. So, but it absolutely has to get done. The packet was lost in shipping, as pretty much everything is in USPS these days. So it's going to bring, it's going to bring back some memories, I think. Yay, summer. I lucked out today.

I was supposed to mow the lawn today, but it started branding. So I get to put it off until tomorrow. That is lucky. All right. Jumping in, picking up where we left off last time. And again, let us repeat, the limitations on the rights of the Jews never assumed a racial character in Russia. They applied neither to Karites nor to the Jews in the mountains, nor to the Jews of Central Asia, who, scattered and merged with the local population, had always freely chosen their type of activity.

The most diverse authors explained to us, each one more than the other, that the root causes of the restriction suffered by Jews, and Russia are of an economic nature. The Englishman Jay Parks, the great defender of these restrictions, nevertheless expresses this reservation. Before the war of 14 through 18, some Jews had concentrated considerable wealth in their hands. This had led to fear that abolishing these limitations would allow the Jews to become masters of the country. Professor V. Leontovic, a perfectly consistent liberal notes, until recently, we seem to be unaware that the restrictive measures imposed on Jews came much more from anti-capitalist tendencies than from racial discrimination. The concept of race was of no interest to Russia in those years, except for specialists in ethnology. It is the fear of the

strengthening of the capitalist elements which could aggravate the exploitation of peasants and of all the workers which was divisive. Many sources prove this. Let us not forget that the Russian peasantry had just undergone the shock of a sudden mutation, from the transition of feudal relations to market relations, a passage to which it was not at all prepared and which would throw it into an economic maelstrom, sometimes more pitiless than serfdom itself. Yeah, using these Western European words,

including market relations or serfdom, it's, it distorts them a little bit. Other than in the 18th century, for very specific reasons that we've dealt with, serfdom was not a terrible institution. It was necessary. The only thing peasants really care about is land, and it guaranteed that. And they were freed. They really, it only affected like, there's only 30% of the peasantry was peasant, in any kind of feudal system, maybe 40%.

So many of the rest have been freed long before. In 1861, it didn't apply to everybody, but they were, the commune was empowered and their land holdings were, you know, through discussion and it usually had to do with the size of the family, how much you needed. And these things were always, so that's not exactly a market relation. Around this time, though, Yvita Stripin,

you know, that changed just before the war. But you notice, besides that, I've said that the Karaits would never be involved with any of these restrictions. The Jews of the mountains, I don't know what they're talking about. Unless, are they Samaritans?

Jews of Central Asia also Karaits to a great extent. They were kind of cut off from Jews. It was Talmudis. And it's very clear, you know, the Jews would love everyone to believe that you're just jealous or that they're so much better than you. You hate them. You blame all your problems on them. They don't control anything.

You're crazy. But in all the famous 109 places, and I've looked at so many of them over the years in detail, it's shocking how. similar at all is. Unfair, competitive practices, prostitution, various types of, you know, what we would call pornography, you know, white slavery, that comes up now and again, abuse of Christian servants, people working for them, abuse of employees. But for the most part, you know, what we consider the market today in this cutthroat competition, that's very recent. And that comes from, as Jews themselves will tell you from the Jewish mentality

that really came into its own around this time. The guild system specialization, you know, advertising that didn't exist and wherever the Jews went they brought a lot of these you know, underselling,

dumping, you know, these terms that we use now that came from one place and time after time after time after time, this is the complaint. And it always seems that the Gentiles didn't know what they were getting into. Jews had been mastering these Machiavellian tactics that did not exist in the Christian world. I don't know about it, in other places. But it's shocking how consistent. It's the same thing. The accusations were over the last 1,500 years. And of course, it's identical here and it's identical

now. V. Shulgin writes in this regard as follows. The limitation of the rights of the Jews and Russia was underpinned by a humanistic thought. It was assumed that the Russian people taken globally, or at least some of their social strata, was, in a way, immature, effeminate, that it allowed itself to be easily exploited, that for this reason it had to be protected by state measures against foreign elements stronger than itself. Northern Russia began to look at the world. Northern Russia began to at the Jews with the eyes of southern Russia. The little Russians had always seen the Jews, whom they knew well in the days of their coexistence with Poland, under the guise of the pawnbrokers who suck the blood of the unfortunate Russian. The restrictions were designed by the government

to combat the massive economic pressure that put the foundations of the state at risk. Parks also detects in this vision of things a part of truth. He observes the disastrous effect, which the faculty of exploiting one's neighbor may have, and the excessive role of inkeepers and usurers in the rural areas of Eastern Europe, even if he perceives the reasons for such a state of affairs in the peasants' nature more than in the Jews themselves. In his opinion, the vodka trade, as the main activity of the Jews in Eastern Europe, gave rise to hatred, and among the peasants even more than among the others. It was he who fed more than one pogrom, leaving a deep and broad scar in the consciousness of the Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples as well as in the

memory of the Jewish people. Well, you know, those memories, you know as well as I do, that they're very different and they're not interpreted even remotely in the same way. But what Chilgain is saying here is very odd. I, that it can be easily exploited, but we've gone through that. Any Christian population or really anyone that doesn't have experience with Jews is going to, you know, not be prepared for what happened. I don't have time to get into it now, but the Jewish kosher abattoir in Postville, Iowa. I was one of the few people to talk about it. The Jews went in, completely destroyed the town. I have a paper on that. The people that were living in this little town, rural America, had no idea. They thought the Jews were like Jerry Seinfeld.

So it's not specific to Russia. I'm not sure what he really means here. And we've already discussed that peasants were anything but stupid. They were knowledgeable and they could be very devious. You know, they knew their interests. But tactics. And again, the other thing that keeps showing up over and over again is alcohol. What they do, you know, it's not just taverns.

We talked about that too. There's a lot that went on in taverns. That was the locus of prostitution, both rural and urban. They were out to destroy the family. That was no problem for them. The Jewish connection to pornography is overwhelming on both sides of Europe and the U.S. But, and the use of alcohol is another one, especially, I'd say the last 7, 800 years, alcohol comes up. increasingly. I'm not sure

about, I don't remember about the Roman ones but even in the late Roman Empire, there were everyone saying Cicero, you know, even Republicans were saying the exact same things about Jews as everyone else. The alcohol is something that really came into its own in Russia

and that was just another form of manipulation that no one is prepared for. And um talking about southern Russia, what you mean roughly Ukraine in the Caucasus, because most of Ukraine was under the polls

prior to the partitions of Poland, they know the Jews extremely well. That's why the Cossacks came into existence. Central regions, not so much. And even certain parts of the northern regions and in Siberia, they weren't aware. There was no serfdom in the north

or in Siberia, ever at any time. and whatever existed in Ukraine came from the polls. But there's nothing humanistic about it. I remember Karl Marx, the whole anti-capitalist thing, it doesn't exist now because socialism has been taken over by these people. There's been a lot of versions of socialism that were not Judaic and that were not materialist. But the Udayan Fragha, I've got to do something on that.

I've read it many times. And, I mean, if you're going to oppose capitalism, especially finance capitalism and somehow claim that the Jews are not the dominant player, then either you're lying or you just shouldn't have any opinions at all about this because you're an idiot. And Karl Marx wasn't afraid to talk about it. So, you know, that's something that Marxists, I think, would rather forget. Same thing for the anarchist under Bakunan. Marx changed his tune later with Rothschild money, at least according to the anarchist movement. So there's a lot going on here, but I don't think there was anything specifically

effeminate or weak about the peasantry that they needed protection. It's true. Every society needs protection from the Jews. But what we've been reading for the last 30 episodes suggests mostly there have been failures to do it. Every attempt to try to make them into normal people has failed because they're not normal people. It's not a racial matter, as we've already discussed, it has simply to do with their behavior, their survival strategies in the culture

that was built in the Khaal and even as early as the Khazar Empire. You catch them in the corner of your eye. Distinctive. By design, they move you, even before you drive. The new Kupra plug-in hybrid range for Mentor, Leon, and Teramar. Now with flexible PCP finance and trade-in boosters of up to 2,000 euro. Search Coopera and discover our latest offers. Coopera. Design that moves. Finance provided by way of higher purchase agreement from Volkswagen Financial Services Ireland Limited. Subject to lending criteria.

Terms and conditions apply. Volkswagen Financial Services Ireland Limited. Trading as Cooper Financial Services is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Ready for huge savings? We'll mark your calendars from November 28 to 30th because the Liddle Newbridge Warehouse sale is back. We're talking thousands of your favourite. Leidel items all reduced to clear. From home essentials to seasonal must-habs,

when the doors open, the deals go fast. Come see for yourself. The Leidel Newbridge Warehouse Sale, 28th to 30th of November. Leadle, more to value. Discover five-star luxury at Trump Dunebeg. Unwind in our luxurious spa. Save her sumptuous farm-fresh dining.

Relax in our exquisite accommodations. Step outside and be captivated by the Wild Atlantic rounds, your five-star getaway, where every detail is designed with you in mind. Give the gift of a unique experience this Christmas with vouchers from Trump-Dunbeg. Search Trump-Ireland gift vouchers. Trump on Dunbiog, Kush Farage. We read in many authors that the Jewish innkeepers lived very hard, without a penny, that they were almost reduced to begging.

But was the alcohol market as narrow as that? many people grew fat with the intemperance of the Russian people and the landowners of Western Russia and the distillers and the drinking housekeepers and the government. The amount of revenue can be estimated from the time it was entered as national revenue. After the introduction of a state monopoly on spirits in Russia in 1896, with the abolition of all private debits and the sale of beverages by excise tax, the Treasury collected 285 million rubles in the following year. to report to the 98 millions of the direct tax levied on the population.

This confirms not only was to manufacture of spirits a major source of indirect contributions, but also that the spirits industry revenues, which until 1896 only paid four copex of excise duty per degree of alcohol produced, were much higher than the direct revenues of the empire. Now, this comes up every once in a while in discussions in this topic. What I say is that there's, you know, the difference between a country like Russia or Germany or even the Byzantine Empire, we have a strong centralized monarchy, I mean strong relative to the time period, is that the monarchy was strong enough to take action even when there was a lot of money involved.

Nicholas II tried to eliminate this trade, especially just before the war and even as the war began. Now, if this were the West, there'd be no way that the government could take action. it wasn't the same in prohibition where you had this this huge amount of income it was a very different story and that came for actually that was the first thing that when women were given the vote

it's probably the first thing they did was demand prohibition but and that was popular at the time here you have a strong monarchy saying I don't care how much money is being made I don't care if it hurts our income this is hurting us and when the war started, it ended. It was very difficult to enforce, and I don't think it was, but the intent was certainly there.

But what was it at the time the Jewish participation, at the time that, let me start that again, but what was at that time the Jewish participation in this sector? In 1886, during the works of the Pallin Commission, statistics were published on the subject. According to these figures, Jews held 27%, the decimals do not appear here. The numbers have been rounded up everywhere. Of all distilleries in Eastern Europe, 53% in the paleless settlement, notably 83% in the province of Pardosk, notably 83% in the province of Pardosk, 76% in that of Grotna, 72% in that of Kerson. They held 41% of the breweries in European Russia, 7,000. percent in the pale of settlement, 94% in the province of Minsk, 91% in the province of Vilnius,

85% in the province of Grodna. The proportion of manufacturing and sales points in Jewish commerce is 29% in European Russia, 61% in the pale of settlement, 95% in the province of Grodna, 93% in Mogulov, 91% in the province of Minsk. It is understandable that the reform was established, which established a state monopoly on spirits was greeted with horror by the Jews of the Pala settlement. As it should have been. But we've talked about the inability, especially when it comes to the Jews, of the state, especially in rural areas, to enforce anything. Russia was too big, and the bureaucracy was too small. People think the Russian bureaucracy was huge and overwhelming. It was tiny. when you, you know, would you control for population and the size of the country compared to Britain or France?

And that's why taxes were so low in Russia. But wherever Jews existed in any numbers, they dominated this trade. So the destruction, and, you know, there was a lot of usury done out of taverns. Actually, in America, one of the arguments for prohibition initially was that the tavern keepers were, were loan sharks. That had a lot of cash on hand. And it was almost, you know, certainly, what else can you use back then?

So wherever the Jews existed in any numbers, they completely dominated that trade. And I bet you these numbers may even be higher because the Russian state never could quite get a handle on how many Jews were in the Russian Empire. And that was because the Jews didn't want to be counted for very obvious reasons. So the state monopoly was a blow to them, but whether that actually worked out in practice up until the war is another matter.

It is incontestable. The establishment of a state monopoly on Spurts dealt a very severe blow to the economic activity of the Jews in Russia. And until the First World War, it ended at that time, this monopoly remained the favorite target of general indignation, whereas it merely instituted a rigorous control of the amount of alcohol produced in the country and its quality. Forgetting that it reached the Christian tenets in the same way, see the statistics above, it is always presented as an anti-Jewish measure. The introduction at the end of the 90s of the sale of alcohol by the state and the pale of settlement has deprived more than 100,000 Jews of their livelihood. Power meant forcing the Jews to leave the rural areas, and since then, this trade has,

has lost for the Jews the importance it once had. Well, the point I was making before was that only a strong monarchy could do this. The Western, you know, republics and democracies could never do it. You simply were too powerful, especially now. But only in a monarchy can you simply take a whole sector over. And it was a popular measure too. So that's really the point I was trying to make before. there was an attempt to strictly limit it, especially when the war started.

Again, how successful, I'm not sure. But if it wasn't successful or it couldn't be enforced in a rigorous way, Jews were also at the heart of it. It was indeed the moment from the end of the 19th century when Jewish emigration from Russia grew remarkably. Is there a link between the emigration and the establishment of the state monopoly on the sale of spirits? That is difficult to say, but the figure of 100,000, quoted above suggests so. The fact is that Jewish emigration in America remained low until 1886 to 1887. It experienced a brief surge in 1891 to 1892, but it was only after 1897 that it became massive and continuous. Thanks, Tsar. And it's very important that organized crime, which was

heavily Jewish, really came into its own when prohibition was passed in the early 20s. Organized crime was Judaic. I mean, the Italians existed. Lucky Luciano was heavily Judaized and the later mafia was created by him. And he was under, you know, Lansky and was financed by him. But so on the one hand, you know, a strong state could limit alcohol sales, especially in times of emergency. On the other hand in America, prohibition was a huge benefit. And you had millions made by Jewish organized crime figures, which really were mainstream in Jewish society at the time, unlike the Italians. So it benefited them that way, too. And that's why I think that once there was an attempt to ban it during the war in Russia, Jews were simply doing what they did in the U.S. after prohibition

or during prohibition. The provisional regulations of 1882 had not prevented further infiltration of Jewish spirits into the countryside. Just as, in the 70s, they had found a loophole against the prohibition of selling elsewhere than home by inventing street commerce. It had been devised to circumvent the law of May 3, 1882, which also forbade the commerce of vodka by contract issued with a Jew. Leasing on the slide to set up an end there, one rented a land by Orrude. and not written contract in order for the taxes to be covered by the owner, and the proceeds from the sale of drinks went to the Jews. It was through this and other means that the implementation of Jews in the countryside could continue after the categorical

prohibition of 1882. As Leersburg writes, it was from 1889 that began the wave of expulsions of the Jews outside the villages of the Palis settlement, which resulted in a pitiless competition generating a terrible evil, denunciation. In other words, Jews began to denounce those among them who lived illegally. But here are the figures put forward by P.N. Milukov. If in 1881, there were 580,000 Jews living in villages, there were 711,000 Jews in 1897, which means that the rate of new arrivals and births far outweighed those of evictions and deaths.

In 1899, a new committee for Jewish Affairs, the 11th of the name. Oh, my God. Yeah, right. With Baron Luxor von Hildebrand at its head was set up to revise the provisional regulations. This committee wrote Milikov rejected the proposal to expel from the countryside, the Jews who illegally established themselves there and softened the law of 1882. Let's have a new commission. That'll solve the problem.

The 11th. While recognizing that the peasantry, which is not very developed, has no entrepreneurial spirit and no means of development must be protected from any contact with the Jews. The committee insisted that the landowners have no need for the tutelage of the government. The limitation of the right of the owners to manage the property as they see fit depreciates said property. and compels the proprietors to employ, in concert with the Jews, all sorts of expedients to circumvent the law. The lifting of prohibitions on Jews will enable landowners to derive greater benefit from their assets.

But the proprietors no longer had the prestige, which might have given weight to this argument in the eyes of the administration. Yeah, I think what he means by entrepreneurial spirit. I think that's the Jewish spirit. Russian peasantry, especially in the central regions, the north, even some of the southern regions too. They stressed cooperation and community over competition. And my very first book, The Third Rome, I make the argument that Russia became what it became because in a good chunk of the country, you had a short growing season, you had rough sort of not Ukraine of course but elsewhere and therefore cooperation made a lot more sense in in bad times which were somewhat common and that's why the nobles had to have their granaries all of these kind of monasteries did it too have all kinds of reserves that means a person like that or a people like that having to deal with Jews for the first time in a sense yes they should be protected but that goes for anybody

Anyone who's not used to it should be protected. A country like the U.S. today did not protect the people of Postville from this awful invasion and exploitation, which got to this. I haven't thought of the Postville case in a long time. I think am I the only one who wrote on it? I might be that town is destroyed now. But of course, in a Judaic society, that's perfectly normal and perfectly acceptable. So, but he's right, at least. The peasantry was involved, it was orthodox, was communal, cooperative.

You know, they were a single person. The way that they acted. Uniminity was what they wanted. That's how they functioned. The Jews come in, and the only thing they could be seen as is an enemy because they were. You catch them in the corner of your eye. Distinctive by design. They move you.

Even before you drive. The new Cooper plugin hybrid range. For Mentor, Leon, and Terramar. Now with flexible PCP finance and trade-in boosters of up to 2,000 euro. Search Coopera and discover our latest offers. Coopera. Design that moves. Finance provided by way of higher purchase agreement from Volkswagen Financial Services Ireland Limited.

Subject to lending criteria. Terms and conditions apply. Volkswagen Financial Services Ireland Limited. Trading as Cooper Financial Services is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Ready for huge savings? We'll mark your calendars from November 28 to 30th because the Liddle Newbridge Warehouse Sale is back. We're talking thousands of your favourite Liddle items,

all reduced to clear. From home essentials to seasonal must-habs, when the doors open, the deals go fast. Come see for yourself. The Liddle New Bridge Warehouse Sale, 28th to 30th of November. Liddle, more to value. five-star luxury at Trump-Dunbeg. Unwind in our luxurious spa. Sayver sumptuous farm-fresh dining. Relax in our

exquisite accommodations. Step outside and be captivated by the wild Atlantic surrounds. Your five-star getaway, where every detail is designed with you in mind. Give the gift of a unique experience this Christmas with vouchers from Trump-Dunbeg. Search Trump-Ireland gift vouchers. Trump on Dunebiog, Koshvarega. It was in 1903 through 1904 that the revision of the regulations of 1882 were seriously undertaken. Reports came from the provinces, notably from Zviotapolk-Merski, who was governor-general and soon to become liberal minister of the interior, saying that the regulations had not proved their worth, that it was imperative that the Jews should leave towns and villages where their concentration was too high. And that, thanks to the establishment of a state monopoly on

beverages, the threat of Jewish exploitation of the rural population was removed. These proposals were approved by Sapiegan, the minister, who was soon to be shot down by a terrorist, and in 1908, endorsed by Plev, soon assassinated in his turn. A list of 101 villages have been drawn up and published to which 57 others would soon be added, in which the Jews acquired the right to settle and purchase real estate and to lease it. In the list of, in the list of, in the The Jewish Encyclopedia dating before the Revolution, we read the names of these localities, some of which already quite important were soon to spread. There is a whole list of names here that I'm not going to read.

Outside this list and Jewish agricultural settlements, Jews did not get the right to acquire land. However, the regulations were soon abrogated for certain categories, graduates of higher studies, pharmacists, artisans, and former retired soldiers. These people were given the right to reside in the countryside to engage in commerce and various other trades. This is another form of naifte, where you have this claim that, okay, if we take, somehow take the ability of Jews to sell alcohol away,

they won't exploit anyone anymore. A lot of these libertarians say that, you know, when you legalize drugs, all drugs, that somehow the cartels are going to go away. And I say, you know, it's not true. The mafia didn't go away when Prohibition was overturned. These are extremely wealthy organizations. They won't go away, and they haven't gone away, all of the places where it's been legalized. Back then, maybe they have someone of an excuse.

I don't know what he means by, maybe it's just in these areas, the rights to land. land. Well, they were granted land many, many, many times. God knows how many commissions ago. That wasn't the question. They were, I don't really know. And at this point, all these commissions and laws and both at the local level, the national level, were so complicated that I don't know if they could or not. I don't know what they could do or not. Everything was so contradictory given the fact that it was just one commission after another, after another, after another after another. in the beginning they were all saying the same thing. One of the first things that the Dershavan Commission said a hundred years earlier

was that Jews use alcohol to manipulate peasants into signing things that they wouldn't sign otherwise. Now today, you could argue that in court. Back then it was very difficult to prove. And then the Jews would go around saying that, oh, Russians are so ignorant, they're alcoholics, as if they had nothing to do with it. So at this point,

the laws and regulations and attitudes at all levels were so concerning the Jews, were so complex and contradictory, it's very difficult to tell what they could and couldn't do, but that's exactly the kind of environment where the Jewish mind, the Talmudic mind, really thrives, finding loopholes. And this was perfect for them.

While the sale of spirits and the various other kinds of farming, including that of the land, were the main sources of income for Jews, there were others, including notably the ownership of land. Among the Jews, the aspirations to possess the land was expressed by the acquisition of large areas capable of harboring several types of activities rather than by the use of small parcels, which are to be developed by the owner himself. when the land, which gives life to the peasant, reaches a higher price than that of the purely agricultural property, it was not uncommon for a Jewish entrepreneur to acquire it. Let me make something clear.

That first line, the sale of spirits and the various kinds of farming, that of the land, were the main sources of income for the Jews. It's not true. They refused to farm, even when they were given land. I don't know what it means when they say various kinds of farming, including that of the land. I don't know where else you would farm unless they're talking about tax farming. They mean it metaphorically, but farming was not a main source of income unless they're talking about Jews acquiring land and bringing in the goyam to work it for them while they work in the tavern and the bar.

Maybe that's what they mean, but Jews did not farm in old Russia. As we have seen, the direct leasing and purchasing of the land by the Jews was, not prohibited until 1881, and the purchasers were not deprived of their rights by the new prohibitions. This is how, for example, Trotsky's father, David Bronstein, possessed in the province of Kersan, not far from Elizabethrod, and held in his possession until the revolution an important business, an economy, as it was called in the south. He also owned, later on, the Nadajda mine in the suburb of Krivoi Rogue. on the basis of what he had observed in the exploitation of his father, and as he heard it, in all farms it is the same.

Trosky relates that the seasonal workers, who had come by foot from the central provinces to be hired, were very malnourished, never meat nor bacon, oil but very little, vegetables and oatmeal, that's all. And this, during the hard summer work from dawn to twilight, and even one summer an epidemic of hamerolopea was declared among the workers. For my part, I will argue that in an economy of the same type in Kuban, with my grandfather Schwerbach, himself a member of a family of agricultural workers, the day workers were served during the harvest, meat three times a day. I'm going to dismiss everything that Trotsky said there. I'm not sure how the owner of a mine is

exploited. And Trotsky, if he's saying that this is a bad thing, the seasonal workers, well, he helped create a system that was 50 times worse with workers like that. Now, I've never read, I mean, there's a, I mean, I know he must have written somewhere. There's a, there's a, there's a footnote for it. But, but I think, I think Trotsky is really full of it as far as, how, how teary-eyed he must have been over it. But a new prohibition fell in, 1903. A provision of the Council of Ministers deprived all Jews of the right to acquire immovable property throughout the empire outside urban areas, that is to say, in rural areas. This limited to a certain extent the industrial activity of the Jews, but, as the Jewish

Encyclopedia points out, by no means their agricultural activity. In any case, to use the right to acquire land, the Jews would undoubtedly have delegated fewer cultivators than landlords and tenants. It seems doubtful whether a population as urban as the Jewish population was able to supply a large number of farmers. In the early years of the 20th century, the picture was as follows. About 2 million hectares, which are now owned or leased by Jews in the Empire and Kingdom of Poland, only 113,000 are home to Jewish agricultural settlements. Although the provisional regulations of 1882 prohibited the Jews from buying or leasing out of towns and villages, devious means were also found there, notably for the acquisition of land intended for the sugar industry. In other words, it doesn't make any difference.

Whether they were forbidden or not, I mean, they were granted huge tracts of land, exploited everyone around them, stole all of the subsidies, produced nothing. owning land was just simply another matter of exploitation. They got around it anyway. And it wasn't even in the whole empire. Yeah, Jews dominated the sugar industry, which was mostly centered in Ukraine, and sugar beets. At the time, Jews were not farming.

Any income that they received from the ownership of land was from some sort of exploitation or speculation. They owned it. If the area developed, they could sell it for a profit. But you've noticed something. In the reigns of Alexander, the third, and Nicholas II, which is the era that we're talking about now, these are two men who fully understood the Jewish issue, absolutely understood the Jewish issue, but realized that they could take action, but they had to watch what they do, not just because of the British, not just because of the French, not just because of Jewish power,

not just because of what they can do, but also their enforcement mechanisms. Jews, Jewish leftists, were murdering people right and left, especially after Alexander III's death. Under the reign of Nicholas II, they murdered thousands of people. Sometimes there's ordinary people, low-level bureaucrats, policemen, whatever they can do. They were a terrorist group.

Stalin got his start in the bank robberies. the southern part of the empire, the Bolsheviks, the left, the Jewish movement showed what it thought of, the country, what it thought of the people around them by murder, exploitation, theft. They functioned like an organized crime syndicate. I've said that before, and I'll continue to say it, because in a real way, that's what they were. Thus, the Jews who possessed large areas of land were opposed to the agrarian reform of Stylopen, which granted land to the peasants on a personal basis. They were not the only ones. One is astonished at the hostility with which this reform was received by the press of those

years, and not only by that of the extreme right, but by the perfectly liberal press, not to mention the revolutionary press. The Jewish Encyclopedia argues the agrarian reforms that plan to seed land exclusively to those who cultivated it would have harmed the interests of a part of the Jewish population, that which worked in the large farms of Jewish owners. It was not until the revolution passed that a Jewish author took a look back, and already boiling with proletarian indignation, wrote, the Jewish landowners possessed under the Tsarist regime more than 2 million hectares of land, mainly around Ukrainian sugar factories, as well

as large estates in Crimea and Belarus, and moreover, they owned more than 2 million hectares of the best land, Black Earth. Thus, Baron Ginsburg, possessed in the district of Junskoy 87,000 hectares. The industrialist Brodsky owned tens of thousands of hectares for his sugar mills, and others own similar estates so that in the, so that in total the Jewish capitalists combined 872,000 hectares of arable land. By the time World War I broke out, and I've proven this, I've written on this until I can't write anymore,

the peasantry overwhelmingly owned something like between 92 and 95% of the land of Russia depending on who you read that's that's the number they owned it either within the commune or or personally this is why when the bolsheviks were took over in certain areas the peasantry and the cossacks were their worst enemies this is why the peasantry had to be liquidated in in various places but you had a limited market. The Stilippan reform that allowed peasants to own land on a personal basis.

Everything that I've seen says the maximum that took advantage of that is like 7 to 10%. And that, I think, is very high. Most peasants were very satisfied and very secure in their communal arrangements because that was an entire institution. That was the institution that made rules and laws for the majority of the population.

And that was something that the Jews didn't like. Any land that the Jews owned was worked by someone else. They were absentee landowners. It wasn't worked by Jews unless we were being punished for something. They didn't know how to farm. We've been through that in the past. But Russell was unique, maybe even unique in world history, of having a peasant class that were owners.

The competition that they had were people like Baron Ginsburg. After the landownership came the trade of wheat and cereal products. Let us remember that the export of grain was chiefly carried out by Jews. Of the total Jewish population of the USSR, not less than 18% before the revolution, more than a million people, one million people, were engaged in the trade of wheat, bosses and members of their families alike, which caused a real animosity of the peasants towards the Jewish population, because the big buyers did everything to lower the price of the wheat in order to resell it for more profit.

In the western provinces and in Ukraine, the Jews bought in bulk other agricultural commodities. Moreover, how can we not point out that in places like there's five Russian city names that I'm not going to pronounce, the old believers, workers, and industrious never let trade go by other hands? Beekerman believes that the prohibition of Jewish merchants to operate throughout the territory, of Russia fostered apathy, immobility, domination by the Koolocks. However, if Russia's trade in wheat had become an integral part of world trade, Russia owes it to the Jews. As we have already seen, as early as 1878, 60% of wheat exports from the Port of Odessa were by Jews. They were the first to develop the wheat trade of Nikolaev, Kurson, Rostovandan, as well as in the provinces

of Orel Kursk and Shernigof. They were well represented in the wheat trade in St. Petersburg, and in the Northwest region, out of 1,000 traders of cereal products, there were 930 Jews. I should mention that in communal ownership of land, communes could be anywhere between 20 and 100 families, depending on the region. they certainly own the land but they did it communally

that's very much a part of the Russian mind that was not exploitation they were very secure no one could just come in and buy it was no one could take it from them this was something that irritated the capitalists they would redistribute

once in a while land as people came and went as people died someone was killed in a war you had to take care of the family it was a very just very humane institution. That's why there were very few that took advantage of the single ownership, because they were going up against these people. He does mention old believers, and I don't know if I've mentioned this or not, but the old believers, because of their pariah status in much of the empire, it was a little different now. That was changing by now. They created a

very strong merchant class, but it's one of the few merchant classes that was not exploitative. All of their profits went back to the community. They were completely shocked by Jewish behavior. They were good. They knew their interests. They knew how to negotiate. They were competition. But personal profit was absolutely out of the question. It was a very strict, very communal and cooperative movement. There's a lot to be said for old believer merchants. I have a book out on the old believers. I've always been very sympathetic to them because they're Orthodox in every way. So if Jewish merchants had competition, it was from the old believers. That existed in large numbers, mostly in the outskirts of the empire, various parts of Siberia,

the northern parts, and near the Caucasus mountains near the Black Sea. And many of them went to Turkey as well. By now, there wasn't really any persecution against them, but they had created an identity. But by the beginning of the 19th century, I was thinking, about this the other day, I'd say a third of the Russian peasantry were old believers, of one form or another. However, most of our sources do not shed light on how these Jewish merchants behaved with their trading partners. In fact, they were often very hard in practice procedure that today would be considered, we would consider illicit. They could, for example, agree among themselves and refuse to buy the crop in order to bring down prices. It is

understandable that in the 90s farmers cooperatives, under the leadership of Count Hayden and Bechtdeyev, were set up in the southern provinces for the first time in Russia and a step ahead of Europe. Their mission was to thwart these massive monopolistic purchases of present wheat. Let us recall another form of commerce in the hands of the Jews. The export of wood came second after the wheat. From 1813 to 1913, these exports were multiplied by 140. and the communist laranus fulminated, the Jewish proprietors possessed large forested areas, and they leased a part of it, even in the provinces where the Jews were not normally allowed to reside. The Jewish Encyclopedia confirms it.

The Jews acquired the land, especially in the central provinces, chiefly to exploit the forest wealth. However, as they did have the right to install sawmills in some places, the wood left abroad in the raw state for a dead loss for the country. There existed out other prohibitions, access for export of timber in the ports of Riga, Ravel, Petersburg, the installation of warehouses along the railways. The Jews also, as we've said a hundred times, were completely obsessed with cohesion. Once they got powerful and owned tremendous amounts of resources, they, um, were able to gather together like any monopoly and set prices, manipulate the market.

They were the mirror image of the old believers. Old believers were a positive kind of cohesiveness. The Jews were a negative kind of cohesiveness. I mean, it was a sin to exploit your neighbors. For the Jews, it was demanded that you exploit your neighbors. Again, this is something that comes up over and over again in the complaints against them. is that they support one another solely to pool their resources to exploit and even gain more wealth at the expense of everybody else. And this is something that it says he was talking about bringing down prices, setting prices.

They acted like an oligarchy would or even a monopolist would. And my former anarcho capital's libertarian self would be like, oh, we just need a free market. In a free market, everyone can compete. I mean, this is ridiculous. That people think that a free market can actually exist. Can you imagine these people without government restrictions? Yeah, they would be slaves. They'd be slaves to the most powerful drug dealer in the neighborhood.

I mean, people form groups. It's not only that. They'll make the argument that monopoly only exists. exist because government exists. Outside of a government and regulations, monopoly can't exist. That's all that would exist. Yeah. Yeah, it begs the question. How was it that the state was able to do this or had the drive to do this? They had to be powerful already and simply privatize the state. If they're going to be concerned with egotism and self-interest, well, when a conglomerate buys off the state, uses the state for its own purposes. Well, on what basis are they complaining? The state just ends up being their

bodyguard. It's very naive. That libertarianism is based on the naive proposition that the state and the private sector are sealed off from each other. That are two very different things. In 2025, they're not. That's why I use the term regime with the capital R, because the traditional language to describe various sectors and interests that it doesn't work anymore. It's a unified power structure where the lines have been blurred between private

and public and all the combinations. Yeah, the state is controlled by these people. That's also in their interest. So they're right in a sense, but what they don't understand it was only in places that had a strong monarchy or a strong state say military government that these were broken up and because the state was stronger than these oligarchs in the west of course the state is the oligarchy the state is

dependent on them for you know servicing their debt you know the state is in debt to these people so who's who's the strongest actor it's a very naive understanding a lot of conservatives, the Republican types, believe in this nonsense, without really understanding how political economy is today. Such is the picture. Everything is there. And the tireless dynamism of Jewish commerce, which drives entire states. And the prohibitions of a timorous, sclerotic bureaucracy that only hinders progress. And the ever-increasing irritation these prohibitions provoke among the Jews and the sale of the Russian forest exported abroad in its raw state as a raw material.

And the small farmer, the small operator who, caught in a merciless vice, has neither the relationships nor the skills to invent other forms of trade. And let us not forget the Ministry of Finance, which pours its subsidies on industry and railways and abandons agriculture, whereas the tax burden is carried by the class of the farmers, not the merchants. One wonders under the conditions of the new economic dynamics that come to replenish the treasury and was largely due to the Jews, was there anyone to worry about the harm done to the common people? The shock suffered by it from the break in its way of life in its very being. You know, there's a reason that liberal parties in Russia over the last 30 years, 25 years,

get at most, despite all the subsidies they get from Washington and the media that they control, they can't get any more than 5 to 7% of the vote. And that's because of the 1990s. The 1990s should cure libertarians of their delusions. I mean, the typical ordinary libertarian because the state did collapse. The state did get out of the way.

And what happened? Essentially organized crime groups became the state. they created organizations that dominated huge sectors of the economy just to liquidate it. That's why Putin was so popular. He took over and his agenda was to arrest these people, to break them. It was only in the resuscitation of the state, which he had done most by 2002-2003, when I was alone in praising him, that the oligarchy was broken. It took a while, and there's still some of it left, but he broke it.

It didn't happen in Ukraine. It happened in Belarus and it happened in Russia. It was only the state that was able to save the country. The Soviet Union collapsed suddenly. That means the people who were already, the strongest, already had the connections and the power, were able to monopolize huge parts of industry and everything else. That was, of course, the overwhelmingly Jewish oligarchs. That's what happens when the state gets out of the way.

Here you have an example of a rapid collapse of the state, a very strong state, and that's what you got. So I don't know what these people are talking about. I think that Putin understands that the greatest enemy of Russia is liberalism. It will liberalism will destroy Russia. And that's why, even though it only gets five to seven percent, every once in a while there may be a liberal a liberal voice that rises up, that has to be silenced. And I don't apologize for that, because liberalism is the death of Apalus. There's no question.

Yeah. I've been saying that for a long time. For half a century, Russia has been accused from the inside as well as from the outside of having enslaved the Jews economically and having forced them to misery. It was necessary that the years passed that this abominable Russia disappear from the surface of the earth. It will be necessary to cross the revolutionary turmoil for a Jewish author of the 30s to look at the past over the bloody wall of a revolution and acknowledge, quote, the Tsarist government has not pursued a policy of total eviction of the Jews from economic life, apart from the well-known limitations. In the countryside, on the whole, the Tsarist government tolerated the economic activity of the Jews.

The tensions of the national struggle, the Jews did not feel them in their economic activity. The dominant nation did not want to take the side of a particular ethnic group. It was only trying to play their role of arbiter or mediator. Besides, it happened that the government was intruding into the economy on national grounds. It then took measures which, more often than not, were doomed to failure. Thus, in 1890, a bulletin was diffused under which the Jews lost. the right to be directors of corporations that intended to purchase or lease lands. But it was the childhood of the art of circumventing this law remaining anonymous.

This kind of prohibition in no way impeded the activity of Jewish entrepreneurs. Quote, the role of the Jews was especially important in foreign trade where their hedge money was assured and their geographical location near borders and their contracts abroad and by their commercial intermediary skills. As regards to the sugar industry, more than a third of the factories were Jewish at the end of the century. We have seen in previous chapters how the industry had developed under the leadership of Israel Brodsky and his son, Lazar and Leon. At the beginning of the 20th century, they controlled directly or indirectly 17 sugar mills. Goparin Moses in the early 20th century had eight factories and three

refineries. He also owned 50,000 hectares of sugar beet cropland. hundreds of thousands of Jewish families lived off the sugar industry, acting as intermediaries, sellers, and so on. When competition appeared and the price of sugar began to fall, the syndicate of sugar producers in Kiev called for a control of production and sale in order for prices not to fall. The Brodsky brothers were the founders of the refiners union in 1903. I think this is a, it's a natural place to stop, sort of, because we're talking about a different industry in the next paragraph. but this Jewish rule over these areas had nothing to do with the state whatsoever it occurred despite the state

so again more errors from the libertarian or really the individualist individualist mentality despite these people and only despite these people Russia at this period of time Alexander III Nicholas II was growing very rapidly

And the only reason you didn't have inflation was because the state maintained control over the gold and hence the currency, which was something that drove the Rothschild's crazy. The state was always more powerful than even these Jews and these economic actors all put together. When Bolsheviks took over, essentially just meant

that all the wealth of the empire went to this very tiny group. That's what the revolution was for. War communism and then eventually central planning. Well, if you have central planning, you then have to own everything. The party owned every productive little bit of the Soviet Union. The party early on was heavily Judaic, usually coming from wealthy families. And Stalin, as we'll talk about in this book, didn't change anything.

It was the exact same thing. It's one of the reasons that they had to pass the anti-Semitism law, which was enforced right up until the 80s, 1980s. But despite all of this, peasant production, this was all going through the roof at the time. Industrialization, sometimes foreign, but often Russian, was going through the roof at the time. These monopolists, yeah, they were a part of it, but they were just a part of it. Russia was feeding the world at the time. The Soviets could never do that. The Soviets couldn't feed themselves at any point.

The massive overproduction of wheat and grain and oats, barley, in old Russia, it was extraordinary. So that's all in my book on the Soviet experiment, the Barnes Review published, that one of the the thesis is that that's all, the revolution was a tiny clique, mostly Jews, that then through central planning took over the entire country it was a totalitarian system you can't have central planning and not be a totalitarian system meaning that all aspects of life

were under party control and so it had nothing to do with labor had nothing to do with the peasants labor was exploited beyond belief beyond anything that we could even understand certainly everything that

that capitalists were ever capable of. But anytime one of these people says, oh, that wasn't real socialism, then say, oh, well, America isn't really real capitalism. Anyone can say that. It's stupid. They have to take responsibility. But that's the system that the left advocates

and keep in mind throughout the Western world. And during the Stalinist era, really up until the late 60s, intellectual after intellectual all the thousands of intellectuals in the West were saying this was the wave of the future that's why the U.S. was heavily invested in the U.S.S.S.R. built

their economy, knowing full well what was going on. New York Times was covering over for Stalin's crimes because it was also run by Jews. Salon wasn't but he was surrounded by them. That's all that revolution was.

It had nothing to do with labor. We talked about why they picked the proletariat and what was different about it. The peasants they couldn't do that with, though they were liquidated in massive numbers, and not just in Russia, but Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and it was Karl Marx himself that said the enemy of Marxism, of revolution, is Russia and Russians. I have a lot of papers on this, the condemnation, Karl Marx and his followers that Russians are savages and have to be destroyed, have to be liquidated. That comes straight from the middle of the 19th century, not just from the Bolsheviks.

It was always this Marxist, revolutionary, and Judaic mind that said the ultimate goiam that have to be destroyed are Russians and Eastern Slavs in general. That's what the revolution was. I don't think I'm ever going to be able to get over people arguing that their behavior of exploitation of, oh, they're just smarter than those people, so they have a right to rule over them. It's not that they're smarter, they're just more devious. They don't care about the idea of a people, except their own. And even in those cases, they abuse their own in the Stettel.

Sure. Willis Cardo always used to say, Willis Cardo always used to say that if somehow we would all disappear and there were only Jews left in the world, they'd slaughter each other within a month. Yeah. Yeah.

I've always wondered and had my opinions about why they kept the people in Gaza and the people, and the people in the West Bank because they need an enemy. They need an enemy nearby. Very neurotic people. So much of their identity is negative. We are superior to them.

We are the aristocrats of the world. The Hasidics always call this mud. In other words, there's no soul. That's common in Judaism and Kabbal as well as the town that we don't have a soul. We're simply here for labor. and it should be in limited numbers. And that was put into practice in the USSR. Yeah, there's many forms of socialism that actually worked.

They weren't materialists. They weren't based on all that nonsense. But that's not the socialism that Karl Marx and Lenin and everyone else at that time was talking about. Pierre Joseph Prudhon had a very different attitude towards this. The family was at the center room. It was very, you know, Karl Marx was able to completely silent all these other forms of socialism that were very Christian in their orientation. Russia,

the Brotherhood of the Holy Cross, I have several lectures on that. If you want to talk about socialism, there's Christian an idealistic version that was very successful because it wasn't opposed to private property. So, and when the communists would run, kind of run for elections after 1905, they absolutely, and when Salernan and his people would make public statements, He would lie through his teeth about what he wanted. Giving land to the peasants. Well, you don't believe in private ownership of land. So what are you talking about giving land to the peasants for?

Food was their weapon. That's why they ended up controlling all the land during the revolution because they decided who got fed and who didn't. And Trotsky would admit this in exile, but he was the architect of it. That's what the revolution was. There are many other forms of socialism, but when we use the word socialist today, people immediately think Marxism, Leninism.

Those are evil, Judaic ideologies and mentality. If you read early Marxist, early poetry, you see the demonism there. And you notice that so many of these people come from the upper classes. They're not poor. Marxism for them, or Leninism, I should say, was a way that Jews finally could take over because they are the superior people. It's not uncommon, especially in the Ivy League's that they say, well, we're just, their IQ isn't higher than white people or Asians, but on average. But they're cohesive.

They support one another because they have this eternal enemy. And that's what Judaism really is in terms of the day-to-day functionality. All right. We'll be back in a few days for episode 31. As always, please go to the show notes. please donate to Dr. Johnson to keep him unemployed and keep him educating us. I really appreciate that. If you guys would go and do that, this is the way we live, this is the way we're able to study,

and this is the way we're able to pump out this amount of work. So go support Dr. Johnson, please. Thank you. All right, Dr. Johnson. Talk to you in a couple days. All right, my friend. Bye-bye.