Lenin, Stalin, and Hitlerio

Is this any different than what Ian Kershaw, Gordon Craig, or numerous court historians have written? I’ve heard all this stuff in undergraduate history courses decades ago.

What’s new here?

“They forgot the fourth monster of the 20th Century:  Franklin Roosevelt.”

Gellately also forgot the fifth one.  This was the Zionist Man of Blood, Neocon Winston S. Churchill.  He deserves to be remembered as the Destroyer of Western Civilization.  And owning a First Edition collection of most of his major works, and having studied his career in depth, I’m ready to engage on that with anyone, English or otherwise.

What about Mao Tse Dong?

He is missing from the list

“Churchill considered blocking all immigration”

‘Considered’?  Considered??  Is this the best you can do?  Why didn’t he and the rest of his - ahem, ‘Conservatives’ - follow through?  He was Prime Minister then.  He and the ‘Conservatives’ did possess a Parliamentary majority in the House of Commons at that time. 

“Yet, apparently, not harbouring, unlike FDR, a desire to replace his own people.”

“Mission Control to Desmond Jones, come in, over… Desmond, this is Houston, are you there?”

If he didn’t ‘harbour’ the desire, then why he didn’t he follow through with ‘action’?  Remember the famous ‘Action This Day’ label?  I guess this particular piece of policy didn’t get that label.  Maybe WSC also had a “Take No Action” label he used, and which we haven’t heard about yet.

I rate that right up there with WSC’s worries about war causing the English people an economic catastrophe.  Worries that didn’t start expressing themselves on paper until early 1944. 

By that time WSC had been writing historical novel series based on his periods in office for over 30 years.  His first series was titled “The World Crisis”.  His fourth series of historical novels, titled the “History of the Second World War”, was greatly enhanced by his knowledge he was going to write it if he lived long enough.  The credibility of that framework of fantasy has been sustained by keeping all his non-published memoranda secret from everyone except Jew Martin Gilbert.

“Undoubtedly, that speech could play today, without changing a single word.”

So can his 1930s article where he praises Adolf Hitler as a great leader of national revival, and saying he hoped that England would find such a leader if she were ever cast down.  The case of Abigail Howarth makes it look like now is the time.

Your mentally ill (he was a clinical maniac-depressive) deadbeat drunk was a Jew tool from the very start of his career, if not a crypto Jew himself.  He began that career in Court Jew “Sir” Ernest Cassel’s pocket.  And on this policy front WSC didn’t confine himself to ‘consideration’.  He always acted, consistently and in one direction.  One of his premier concerns while nominally supporting Kolchak and Denikin during the Russian Civil War was to suppress all manifestations of anti-Semitism among their forces.

Zionism versus Bolshevism: A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People

Winston Churchill

Some people like Jews and some do not; but no thoughtful man can doubt the fact that they are beyond all question the most formidable and the most remarkable race which has ever appeared in the world.

And it may well be that this same astounding race may at the present time be in the actual process of producing another system of morals and philosophy, as malevolent as Christianity was benevolent, which, if not arrested would shatter irretrievably all that Christianity has rendered possible. It would almost seem as if the gospel of Christ and the gospel of Antichrist were destined to originate among the same people; and that this mystic and mysterious race had been chosen for the supreme manifestations, both of the divine and the diabolical.

The National Russian Jews, in spite of the disabilities under which they have suffered, have managed to play an honourable and successful part in the national life even of Russia. As bankers and industrialists they have strenuously promoted the development of Russia’s economic resources, and they were foremost in the creation of those remarkable organisations, the Russian Co-operative Societies. In politics their support has been given, for the most part, to liberal and progressive movements, and they have been among the staunchest upholders of friendship with France and Great Britain.

In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish effort rise the schemes of the International Jews. The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd), or of Krassin or Radek—all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combating Counter-Revolution has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses.

The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.

Needless to say, the most intense passions of revenge have been excited in the breasts of the Russian people. Wherever General Denikin’s authority could reach, protection was always accorded to the Jewish population, and strenuous efforts were made by his officers to prevent reprisals and to punish those guilty of them. So much was this the case that the Petlurist propaganda against General Denikin denounced him as the Protector of the Jews. The Misses Healy, nieces of Mr. Tim Healy, relating their personal experiences in Kieff, have declared that to their knowledge on more than one occasion officers who committed offences against Jews were reduced to the ranks and sent out of the city to the front. But the hordes of brigands by whom the whole vast expanse of the Russian Empire is becoming infested do not hesitate to gratify their lust for blood and for revenge at the expense of the innocent Jewish population whenever an opportunity occurs. The brigand Makhno, the hordes of Petlura and of Gregorieff, who signalised their every success by the most brutal massacres, everywhere found among the half-stupefied, half-infuriated population an eager response to anti-Semitism in its worst and foulest forms. The fact that in many cases Jewish interests and Jewish places of worship are excepted by the Bolsheviks from their universal hostility has tended more and more to associate the Jewish race in Russia with the villainies which are now being perpetrated.

Zionism offers the third sphere to the political conceptions of the Jewish race. In violent contrast to international communism.

Zionism has already become a factor in the political convulsions of Russia, as a powerful competing influence in Bolshevik circles with the international communistic system. Nothing could be more significant than the fury with which Trotsky has attacked the Zionists generally, and Dr. Weissmann in particular. The cruel penetration of his mind leaves him in no doubt that his schemes of a world-wide communistic State under Jewish domination are directly thwarted and hindered by this new ideal, which directs the energies and the hopes of Jews in every land towards a simpler, a truer, and a far more attainable goal. The struggle which is now beginning between the Zionist and Bolshevik Jews is little less than a struggle for the soul of the Jewish people.

Illustrated Sunday Herald, February 8, 1920, page 5.

David Irving’s freely downloadable masterpiece Churchill’s War recounts in detail the Jewish schemers that worked from the mid-1930s to elevate Churchill to the prime minstership. 

Why did World Jewry shrewdly pick Churchill? Because he meant war.

considering Professor Ebeling the Ludwig von Mises Professor of Economics

Quoting libertardians who…

… suggest that Churchill was, in fact, a holocaust enabler

Why? Because Churchill sought nothing less than the annihilation of Germany:

...Churchill’s refusal to countenance any attempt to bring the conflict to any end short of a total Nazi defeat

Yet the same libertardian acknowledges Hitler’s plan involved relocating Jews:

“[Hitler] intended to evacuate all Jews from Europe after the war.” In the middle of August 1940, a new memorandum prepared under the supervision of Adolf Eichmann called for “the project to settle around four million Jews on Madagascar.”

It was Chamberlain that declared war, not Churchill.

Ah, but it was the cabal of Rothschilds, Hore-Belishas, Bullitts, Baruchs, and Amerys that maneuvered France and Britain into a guarantee for Poland, and organized the half-decade-long propaganda barrage in the Anglosphere. 

is how the Nazi plan to deal with European Jews, transfer out of Europe, so closely parallel’s Churchill’s.

And what did Churchill do to the Jews? I mean, other than take their money, their counsel, and hobnob with the Morgenthaus and Baruchs coordinating the anti-Germany effort?

Why did World Jewry succor Churchill instead of Chamberlain? Because Churchill was a hot-blooded nationalist whose 19th-century worldview (balance of power on the continent, maintained by war) would collide with Germany.

Therefore, Churchill needn’t be a hand-puppet in the strict sense.

The point being that if universal nationalism is Salter’s solution to ethnic survival then belligerent nationalism cannot be condoned.

Salter’s intent must have been to provide a “morally justifiable” alternative to the genocide versus mass immigration dyad. He must know UN is theoretically leaky.

And why Poland? Why not the Rhineland, Austria or Czechoslovakia? WWI killed tens of millions of Europeans, why allow Germany to abrogate the Treaty of Versailles?

My argument has been this: perhaps it benefited Britain to bottle up Germany, but only after dealing with World Jewry first as the primary threat. Then, and only then might Brits and Germans do a toughman contest see who is the most virile of the European races.

Interesting, if it wasn’t for the fact a Polish-French alliance already existed in 1934...

It is doubtful the French would have gone to war without the backing of the British, or without a reaffirmation of the defense pledge in March 1939. The French people did not want war for many good reasons…

Dear Friends,

I came into this discussion a long time ago when someone mentioned my book “Lenin, Stalin and Hitler.” I look in from time to time, but see few comments on which I can usefully comment. Most have strayed from the topic.

It seems to me that some of you are re-running the history of the world. You need some new fuel, new in-puts, i.e. fresh information and new points of view. The history of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany is already complicated enough without dragging in Churchill, Zionism, and God knows what else into the matter.

My suggestion is, again, to read my book, “Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler.” There’s no sense talking about what is or is not in it or should, could, or might be in it, unless and until you have read it.

My suggestion: Narrow the focus to a subject that is feasible and useful to discuss and then go for some new data and alternative perspectives. You could start by taking a look at one attempt to deal with my effort of comparing and contrasting Soviet Communism and German National Socialism. It’s just one click away at:

http://www.economist.com/books/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9616751

We could even start a new discussion about the topic. But an informed discussion is so much more fruitful, don’t you think?

Robert Gellately