In his novel Coningsby (London, 1844), Disraeli drew a picture
form the life of the Jews ruling the world from behind the thrones as graphic
as anything in the Protocols of Nilus.
Many believe, and it has been proved to most, Coningsby was a
plagiarism of a Byzantine novel of the XVIIth century. The passage in which
Rothschild (Sidonia) describes this is as follows: "If I followed my own
impulse, I would remain here," said Sidonia. "Can anything be more absurd
than that a nation should apply to an individual (or group of Jews) to
maintain its credit, and with its credit, its existence as an empire and
its comfort as a people; and that individual one to whom its laws deny
the proudest rights of citizenship, the privilege of sitting in its senate
and of holding land; for though I have been rash enough to buy several
estates, my own opinion is that by the existing law of England, an Englishman
of Jewish faith cannot possess the soil.' 'But surely it would be easy
to repeal a law so illiberal.'
'Oh! as for illiberality, I have no objection
to it if it be an element of power. Eschew political sentimentality. What
I contend is that if you permit men to accumulate property, and they use
that permission to a great extent, power is inseparable from that property,
and it is in the last degree impolitic to make it in the interest of any
powerful class to oppose the institutions under which they live.
The Jews, for example, independent of the capital qualities for
citizenship which they possess in their industry, temperance, and energy
and vivacity of mind, are a race essentially monarchical, deeply religious
and shrinking themselves from converts as from a calamity...The Tories
lose an important election at a critical moment; 'Its the Jews who come
forward to vote against them. The Church is alarmed at the scheme of a
latitudinarian university, and learns with relief that funds are not forthcoming
for its establishment; a Jew immediately advances and endows it...every
generation they must become more powerful and more dangerous to the society
which is hostile to them. Do you think that the quiet humdrum persecution
of a decorous representative of an English university can crush those who
have successively baffled the Pharaos, Nebuchadnezzar, Rome, and the feudal
ages?
The fact is you cannot destroy a Pure Race of White Organization.
(Here is the secret, and a Rothschild is telling us why the Jews are trying
to destroy the White Race. It is because the Jews know, if the race is
kept pure, it cannot be destroyed; because it will be protected by Almighty
God and the Lord Jesus Christ!.) It is a physiological fact; a simple law
of nature, which has baffled Egyptian and Assyrian kings, Roman emperors,
and Christian inquisitors. No penal laws, no physical tortures, can effect
that a superior race should be absorbed in an inferior, or be destroyed
by it. The mixed persecuting races disappear, the pure persecuted race
remains. And at this moment in spite of centuries, or tens of centuries,
of degradation, the Jewish mind exercises a vast influence on the affairs
of Europe. I speak of their laws, which you still obey; of their literature,
with which your minds are saturated; but of the living Jewish intellect.
You never observe a great intellectual movement
in Europe in which the Jews do not greatly participate. The first Jesuits
were Jews; that mysterious Russian diplomacy which so alarms Western Europe
is organized and principally carried on by Jews; that mighty revolution
(of 1848) which will be in fact [be followed] by a second an greater Reformation,
and of which so little is as yet known in England, is entirely developing
under the auspices of Jews, who almost monopolize the professorial chairs
of Germany.
Neander the founder of Spiritual Christianity,
and who is Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Berlin, is
a Jew. Benary, equally famous and in the same university, is a Jew. Wehl,
the Arabic Professor of Heidelberg, is a Jew. Years ago, when I was in
Palestine, I met a German student who was accumulating materials for the
history of Christianity and studying the genius of the place; a modest
and learned man. It was Wehl; then unknown, since become the first Arabic
scholar of the day, and the author of the life of Mahomet.
But for the German professors of this race,
their name is legion. I think there are more than ten at Berlin alone.
I told you just now that I was going up to town tomorrow, because I always
made it a rule to interpose when affairs of state were on the carpet. Otherwise,
I never interfere. I hear of peace and war in the newspapers, but I am
never alarmed, except when I am informed that the sovereigns want treasure;
then I know that monarchs are serious.
A few years back we were applied to by Russia.
Now there has been no friendship between the Court of St. Petersburg and
my family. It has Dutch connections which have generally supplied it; and
our representations in favor of the Polish Jews, a numerous race, but the
most suffering and degraded of all the tribes, have not been very agreeable
to the Czar. However circumstances drew to an approximation between the
Romanoffs and the Sidonias.
I resolved to go myself to St. Petersburg. I had on my arrival
an interview with the Russian Minister of Finance, Count Cancrin; I beheld
the son of a Lithuanian Jew. The loan was connected with the affairs of
Spain; I resolved on repairing to Spain from Russia. I traveled without
intermission. I had an audience immediately on my arrival with the Spanish
minister Senior Mendizabel; I behold one like myself, the some of Nuevo
Christiano, a Jew of Aragon.
In consequence of what transpired at Madrid, I went straight to
Paris to consult the President of the French Council; I beheld the son
of a French Jew, a hero, an imperial marshal and very properly so, for
who should be military heroes if not those of the Jewish faith.'
'And is Soult a Jew?' 'Yes, and others of the French marshals, and the
most famous Massna, for example; his real name was Mannasheh: but to my
anecdote.
The consequence of our consultations was that some northern power
should be applied to in a friendly and meditative capacity. We fixed on
Prussia, and the President of the Council made an application to the Prussian
minister, who attended a few days after our conference. Count Arnim entered
the cabinet, and I beheld a Prussian Jew. So you see, my dear Coningsby,
that The World is Governed by Very Different Personages from what is imagined
by those who are not behind the scenes.' (pp. 249-252)
Rollin, Pierred Leroux, and a group of socialists, among whom
was Maurice Joly. His father was Philippe Lambert Joly, born at Dieppe,
Attorney-General of the Jura under Louis-Philippe for ten years. His mother
Florentine Corbara Courtois, was the daughter of Laurent Courtois, paymaster-general
of Corsica, who had an inveterate hatred of Napoleon I. Maurice Joly was
born in 1831 at Lons-le-Saulnier and educated at Dijon: there he had begun
his law studies, but left for Paris in 1849 to secure a post in the Ministry
of the Interior under M. Chevreau and just before the coup d'etat.
He did not finish his law studies till 1860. [Committed suicide
in 1878]. Joly, some thirty years younger than Cremieux, with an inherited
hatred of the Bonapartes, seemed to have fallen very largely under his
influence. Through Cremieux, Joly became acquainted with communists and
their writings. Though, until 1871 when his ambition for a government post
turned him into a violent communist, he had not in 1864 gone beyond socialism,
he was so impressed with the way they presented their arguments that he
could not, if the chance were offered, refrain from imitating it. And this
chance came in 1864-1865, when his hatred of Napoleon, whetted by Cremieux,
led him to publish anonymously in Brussels the Dialogues aux Enfers entre
Machiavelli et Montesquieu. In this work he tells us, 'Machiavelli represents
the policy of Might, while Montesquieu stands for that of Right: Machiavelli
will be Napoleon, who will himself describe his abominable policy.' It
was natural that he should choose the Italian Machiavelli to stand for
Bonaparte, and the Frenchman Montesquieu, for the ideal statesman: it was
equally natural that he should put in the mouth of Machiavelli some of
the same expressions which Venedey had put in it, and which Joly had admired.
His own view was: 'Socialism seems to me one of the forms of a new life
for the people emancipated from the traditions of the old world. I accept
a great many of the solutions offered by socialism; but I reject communism,
either as a social factor, or as a political institution. Communism is
but a school of socialism. In politics, I understand extreme means to gain
one's ends, in that at least, I am a Jacobin."
