Join Date: Nov 2003
The Jew is our Enemy
Even if education has been successful in persuading people that the Jew is different than we are, and that his manner, his nature, thinking, etc., remain so even after a long stay in Germany, one encounters the reply that that really does not mean much. The Jew may be different than we are, and perhaps cannot adjust to us, but that does not give us the right to persecute him or think him a bad person, or even an enemy. If one says that "the Jews are our misfortune," one makes a reproach against people who do live with us, and who cannot do anything about the fact that they are Jews. Such accusations as these only make the Jew bitter, forcing him and those like him, along with people who think him an equal, to wall themselves off against the surroundings, coming to have hate and enmity toward those who make these accusations.
Our age, however, is not the only one to see the Jew as an enemy and as a destructive element. In truth, the battle against Jewry is as old as Jewry itself. The battle against this foreign parasite runs through the centuries like a red thread. Ever since Tacitus, the Roman historian who lived in the first century A.D., there have always been voices warning against this miscarriage of humanity. The histories of all peoples record the ever-recurring acts of defense, the desperate battles of host peoples against these interlopers, which are the inevitable result of the arrogance of Jewish power and of Jewish influence. Everywhere the Jew surfaces, he is not satisfied with equality, but rather claims dominance over the people that has accepted him as a guest. His goal was to force this people under his thumb, and to become its absolute and complete ruler. He sees himself as the people called and chosen to rule, whose goal is "to devour the peoples of the earth," i.e., to bring them under his power.
To understand the Jewish battle against everything non-Jewish, we must understand his thinking, which is to us wholly foreign and revolting. We will then know why there can never be the least cooperation between the German people and the Jew.
Such Jewish thinking, with all of its subversive elements, is written down and given form in the Talmud, the Schulchan aruch, etc., the racial and religious writings of the Jews. Existing for centuries, they determine the life and actions of the Semitic race. Studying these writings, which guide Jewry, reveals to us a deep gulf that has been eternally established.
[Lieferung 21 (September)]
Much has been written about the Talmud by Jewish and non-Jewish authors. References to these books for the purpose of illuminating the nature of the Jews are usually met with the answer that these books do indeed exist, but that the larger part of the Jews pay little attention to them, and do not guide their lives by them. At most, it is granted that "strict religious" Jews follow these old teachings, just like "strict" Christians follow the teachings of the Bible, but that the overwhelming number of Jews have nothing to do with the teachings of the Talmud and the Schulchan aruch.
It is not our intention to dispute the fact that there are Jews who know just as much or just as little about the Talmud and other works related to it as the overwhelming number of Christians know about the Church fathers, the writings of the Catholic scholastics, or those of the Protestant Reformation. More important, and essential for our observations, is that these writings, the Talmud above all, mirror the Jewish character, which cannot be disputed from the Jewish perspective. The Talmud, etc., do not show us how the Jews should be, how they should think, but rather they give us a picture of how the Jews really are and how they really think. If we wanted to know what the Jew is, what his nature is, we must study his writings, for they show him to us. Let us let the Jew himself speak to this:
The Allgemeine Zeitung des Judentums declared that the Talmud "characterizes the Jewish psyche (nature) in a way as sharp as it is accurate."
The Jewish philosophy professor and Talmud expert Cohen went beyond this and swore as an expert witness in a Marburg court:
"The Talmud statements about faith and customs are binding on Jews; they are laws."
The contents of this book, which according to Jewish judgment characterizes them "in a way as sharp as it is accurate," whose precepts are binding for the Jews in their faith and customs, reveals to non-Jewish, and especially Aryan, readers a concoction filled with arrogance, hypocrisy, licentiousness, and perversity that probably has no equal in all of the non-Jewish world. It seems to us more the miscarriage of a hysteric and diseased mind in the last stages of mental illness than a book of faith and customs, especially when we are told that that it reveals the nature of "fellow human beings" living in our midst "in a sharp and accurate way." Walter Rathenau, himself a Jew, surely knew why he described his racial comrades in Germany as "an Asiatic horde on the sands of the Mark."
God, who is holy to all peoples, who is infallible and unreachable, is described in the Talmud as a creature who is like a human, capable of error, changeable, unjust, dishonest, revengeful, and terrible, calling down troubles on himself. The Talmud gives Jew permission to do anything he likes to non-Jews, without any punishment. He may cheat non-Jews, hurt them, rob them, he may rape non-Jewish women and children, in short, do anything he wants, for according to the Talmud, a non-Jew is not a human being, but an animal "who is of the same flesh as a donkey." On the other hand, the cheating of one Jew by another, or of his women or children, is harming or attacking God himself, for the Jews are royal children.
In the Schulchan aruch, the real Jewish law book, these things are affirmed and intensified. This book, too, is essentially concerned with how and in what ways non-Jews can be harmed, how they are to be treated, and especially how the "children of God," the "royal children," or as the Jew Rathenau put it, the "Asiatic horde," can bring their plans for world domination closer to reality.
When one remembers that these writings are put in the hands of fifteen-year-old Jewish boys and girls, and in part must be even memorized by them, even the last people's comrade will understand that between us and the Jewish element there is an unbridgeable chasm of racial differences, both in nature and character.
The Baptized Jew
There are other people who see the Talmud, etc., as religious books that are held to only by religious Jews and even average Jews, but are rejected by the Jew who has converted to "the Christian faith." Through conversion, the Jew has left Jewish religious doctrines and accepted Christian doctrines. This Jew has become "Catholic" or Protestant."
A Jew always remains a Jew, and must remain so, for his Jewishness, as already discussed, is not a question of religion, but a racial problem. The spiritual direction of Jewry is determined exclusively by his genetic inheritance. Changing over to another religion may alter outward appearances, when religious rituals are performed, but have no impact on the inner nature, which is determined by genes and nature's racial laws. It would be the same if one demanded than an Aryan, a member of a Christian church, convert to Judaism and become a Jew. That would not succeed, since even the limited remains of his Aryan honor and morality would make it impossible. We need only recall what happens when, for example, someone who marries a Jewish partner converts to the Jewish "faith." Despite their "membership in the faith," they are always rejected by their Semitic "relatives," to whom they are and remain "Goyim." The descendents of Abraham indeed put them to good use for "advertising purposes," but want nothing else to do with them. This has always been so, but now that the new state also demands racial separation, Judah is whipping up its racial instincts.
What the Jew thinks about "conversion," by the way, is shown my countless statements:
"One can neither leave nor convert... I have discussed that thoroughly with ethnologists. They always agree completely with me: imagine that a Negro declared that he was converting from being a Negro to being a German! ... One can see being a Jew as an advantage or a disadvantage — that is merely a matter of taste... But there is one thing one certainly cannot do: one cannot change, even if one is baptized every Sunday."
Chaim Bückeberg, alias Heinrich Heine:
"Beware of demanding that the Jew be baptized. It is only water, and dries easily."
The Jewish Professor Gans:
"Baptism and conversion mean nothing. We remain Jews unto the hundredth generation, just as we were 3,000 years ago."
That takes care of the chatter of those somewhat backward people today who speak of a person who has been baptized as no longer a Jew, but rather a "Catholic" or "Protestant."
But if that is not enough, the following can be said: it would never occur to a non-Jew to play fast and loose with, or to take revenge on, a person who took the solemn step of joining a Christian church and being baptized. This, too, is reserved for Rathenau, that representative of the "Asiatic horde." The Jews Börne and Heine let themselves be accepted into the Christian religious community. The church rejoiced in these two rescued souls. The Jewish Professor Graetz, who was surely well-informed about the reasons both Jews had for converting, wrote in his book Geschichte der Juden:
"They both outwardly turned from Judaism, but only as soldiers who wanted to seize the enemy's weapons and flags in order to strike them more surely and destroy them more thoroughly."
One should not believe this to be in isolated example. Jewry is filled with deep hatred of Christianity, a hatred that has continued undiminished over the centuries. If, despite this hatred, Jewry does not include in its hatred those from its ranks who have converted to this hated community, it proves to us that it does not see these converts as people who have left its community. It knows that a change in religious membership is only an external matter, that membership in the Jewish race is not affected, that he who made this change is and remains a Jew, and must remain so.
Famous church fathers and bishops such as Ambrose, Chrysostom, and St. Augustine saw through the Jews, and realized the danger represented. In writing and speaking, they called for battle against the Jews. There were even times when the Church stood in battle against Jewry. When the church father Heironymus secretly learned Hebrew from a rabbi, he was forced to explain in public his contact with the Jews, and had to promise that he detested, despised, and hated the Jews because they cursed Christ in the synagogues.
In the book Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums (vol. 1), it is said that this was the early Church's view of the Jews:
"The Jews are the worse, the most godless, the most god-forsaken people there is, the real people of the Devil, the synagogue of Satan, the community of hypocrites."
And today? In its Good Friday liturgy, the Catholic Church asks "pro perfides Judaeis" (for the perfidious, disloyal Jews) that God in his mercy accept them and remove their blindness.
The following Catholic dogma also applies to the Jews:
"The Jews must fulfill the task given to them by Providence until the full number of heathen have entered the kingdom of the Lord, and them they also may enter."
"They (the Jews) with their holy books are a witness for the truth of Christianity; they should continue to the end, and then join the Church."
Our knowledge of the Church's spiritual position means that we are not surprised when these circles see the Jew as an innocent, persecuted lamb, as for example in a 1920 edition of the Missionszeitschrift für entschiedendes Christentum:
"It gives us bitter pain to see this poor people chased hither and yon, and constantly persecuted... The Jews have never done us any harm..."
One has to ask what the Jews would still have to do to finally wake up people like those at that Missionszeitschift, making them see that the Jews have "done us harm." What happened in the past apparently was not enough, nor the fact that in Jewish religious books Christ is called a "magician," a "fool," "a godless man," "bastard," "dog," "idol worshipper," "child of passion," "son of a whore," etc., or that an issue of the Vössische Zeitung described Christian doctrine as "the new doctrine of brotherly love that flowed from the ecstatic lips of a sublime Galilean tramp."