Part I: The Causes
La Civiltà Cattolica, Series XIV, Vol. VII, Fascicule 961, 23 October 1890
Introduction
Introduction
The nineteenth century will close upon Europe, leaving it in the grips of a very sad question, from which, in the twentieth century, there will possibly be such calamitous consequences that they will cause Europe to bring it to an end by a definitive resolution. (i.) We mean the unhappy so-called Semitic question, which is better called the Jewish question, and intimately linked to the economic, moral, political, and religious conditions of Europe's Christianity.
How urgent it is at present and how much it is upsetting the major nations becomes evident from the collective outcry against the invasion of the Israelites into every sector of public and social life; from the associations having formed in France, Austria, Germany, England, Russia, Romania, and elsewhere in order to stop it; from the outcrys which are beginning to make themselves heard within the parliaments; finally, from the great number of newspapers, books, and pamphlets continuously appearing in order to point out the necessity of stopping and combating the spread of this plague, and stressing its most pernicious consequences.
For some time here in this review, we also have been dealing with the specific question, which is the social one, under more critical, historical, and scientific viewpoints, and have indicated the true causes of the lamentable effects that are now increasingly deplored. But the great number of publications which lately have come to our attention, among them some quite important ones, invites us to revert it by summarizing in a few pages the many aspects involved; and we think that it fully deserves to be considered in Italy where Judaism rules as lord but where, in spite of the rich material available, still no one has emerged to write a treatise that could compete with the respective one of Edouard Drumont and, as we believe, would be devoured with great profit.
Judaism turns its back on the Mosaic Law
Judaism turns its back on the Mosaic Law
The Jewish question of our time doesn't differ greatly from the one which affected the Christian peoples of the Middle Ages. In a foolish way it is said to arise from hatred towards the Jewish tribe. Mosaism in itself couldn't become an object of hate for Christians, since, until the coming of Christ, it was the only true religion, a prefiguration of and preparation for Christianity, which, according to God's Will, was to be its successor. But the Judaism of the centuries [after Christ] turned its back on the Mosaic law, replacing it with the Talmud (ii.), the very quintessence of that Pharisaism which in so many ways has been shattered through its rejection by Christ, the Messiah and Redeemer. And although Talmudism is an important element of the Jewish question, it cannot be said, strictly speaking, to give that question a religious character, because what the Christian nations despise in Talmudism is not so much its virtually non-existent theological element, but rather, its morals, which are at variance with the most elementary principles of natural ethics.
Defining Semitism
Defining Semitism
Nor does the question originate in aversion for a race, as apparently expressed by the improper adjective Semitic that is attached to it. In the first place, the Israelite tribe is not the only one in the world springing from Sem's most noble blood. Nor can any reason be found why the Aryans, who derive from Japheth, should harbor an inherited hatred for Sem's offspring, in whose tabernacles, according to Noe's solemn prophecy,(iii.) they even were to live in fraternal harmony. Thus we take the designation Semitic whenever applied to the Jewish question, and Semitism, whenever applied to Judaism, to be inappropriate because in exceeding the scope of their meaning, substituting the whole for a part, they produce a false [if not inflammatory] concept.
Nevertheless, aversion to the tribe adds to it and constitutes one of the chapters of the question, the religious codex of the Talmud being another one. Moreover, the Jewish race, in as far as it is a nation, though as such without a fixed fatherland and without a political organism, lives dispersed among the nations, perhaps not without getting mixed with them here and there, but keeping aloof from them in all things which might develop into social union, and regarding them as enemies or even as victims fallen to its greediness. Thus it is that the great Israelite family, dispersed among the peoples of the world, forms a foreign nation within the nations in which it resides, and the sworn enemy of their prosperity, since the cardinal point of Talmudism is the oppression and spoliation of the very peoples who extend hospitality to its disciples. Because of which St. Paul, at the end of his days, characterized the Jews as displeasing God and hostile to all men: Deo non placent, et omnibus hominibus adversantur. [Who (killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and have persecuted us) please not God and are adversaries to all men.]
And that the sinister codex of the Talmud, even beyond the rules of an execrable morality, commands hatred of all men who don't have Jewish blood, and especially Christians, and makes it licit to spoliate and ill-treat them like noxious beasts, isn't any longer one of its doctrinal points that can be denied. It is not the work of Rohling, whom we too acknowledge to be a writer who in part indulges in fancies and invents arbitrary quotations, but the most careful and most serious study of the Mishna, which is the Talmud's text, and the Gemara, which is its annotation, besides the study of several rabbis, including the most notable ones of past and present times (iv.), that does away with any doubt whatsoever. It would be enough to consult the work of Achille Laurent, which the Hebrews have taken nearly out of circulation because it masterfully reveals the secrets of Talmudism regarding the extermination of Christian civilization and which is thus able to persuade even the most unwilling and the most doubtful.3 We have, for the rest, adduced incontestable proof of that already in the past, which to repeat would be superfluous here.
Portalis: Religious Tolerance vs. Civil Status
Portalis: Religious Tolerance vs. Civil Status
Besides it will be of use to refer to two documents which very clearly establish the true condition of the Israelites in the countries extending them refuge, as well as the main reason for the problems they create there, and thus for the aversion they incur there. The first one stems from the famous legal consultant Portalis, written at the beginning of this century, when Napoleon I intended to legally acknowledge full civil equality of the Jews with the French. The erudite man who drew up a respective memorandum, of which the day will still come when meminisse iuvabit [it will help to remember], observed that the question being the Hebrews, religious tolerance towards them didn't need to be confused with granting them civil status. He said:
"For the Jews are not simply a sect, but a people. This people, who in antiquity had their own land and government, were dispersed, but not destroyed: they roam about the earth in order to look for a refuge, but not a homeland; they are to be found within all the nations but meld with none of them; they settle as strangers in a strange land. This is due to the nature of Jewish institutions. As conquest was the very goal of Rome's power, war the goal of the republic of Sparta, culture the goal of the state of Athens, commerce the goal of the dominion of the Carthaginians, so religion is that of the Hebraic tribe for whom religion is everything, the basis and law of its society. Hence follows the evident fact that the Jews everywhere form a nation within a nation; and although they live in France, in Germany, in England, they never become French, German, or English. Rather, they remain Jews and nothing but Jews."
A truth later being harshly confirmed by Crémieux, the great vassal of the reigning Judaism, and by the Jewish review L'Alliance Israélite, that defined the Hebrew as the man of an inexorable universalism.
Whence Portalis concludes aptly that it is perfectly in accord with justice that this kind of foreign body, which, by virtue of its institutions, its principles, and its customs, yet always remains aloof from the common society, would remain subject to laws of exception.
The Romanian Experience
The Romanian Experience
The other document is the manifesto of thirty-one members of the legislative chamber of Romania, addressed to the powers who, in 1868, arrogated to impose to their state the law of civil equality of the Hebrews: In substance these members of parliament say,
"The Jews, obedient to necessity, ostensibly comply with the authority of the non-Jewish state; but they are never able to consent to become an integral part of it, because they are unable to shed the idea of their own state. They not only form a religious sect, but also a complex of indelible uniqueness of birth and of resolute belief in an always exclusively Jewish nationality, which all of them without exception maintain amidst other peoples. Because of this, it is impossible for them to unite in blood with other peoples, and impossible to partake with them their sentiments, which are directly opposed in all things to those of Christians. And the biggest obstacle lies in religion, which is their religious and civil law alike, thus constituting the political and social cult and organism. Hence Judaism, wherever it gains a footing, necessarily establishes a state within a state.
Concerning gratitude towards the peoples who shelter them, the Israelites regard themselves as absolved, since they believe them to be usurpers. Just to the contrary, they use every sort of means in order to gain supremacy over them, of which they believe to have been assured by the Old Testament. The time they pass within the bosom of other people is for them, so to speak, a time of penance, punishment and exile; and the inhabitants of the countries harboring them pass for enemies which, as soon as the promised hour of universal Jewish dominion over the world will have come, are to be subjugated."
The Question of Patriotism
The Question of Patriotism
The corollary of this situation is that the Jew nowhere has his fatherland, i.e., the land of his fathers, and therefore that corollary is the patriotism of which he permanently boasts and for whose apostle he passes himself off, but only in order to reach his goal of ruining and devouring the nations which have accorded him the right of citizenship. A bold imposture. That is also the reason why the most hateful trade of being a traitor and spy is one of their characteristics. Well known is Bismarck's dictum: "God created the Hebrew in order to serve the man who needs him as a spy", and the other one of Count Cavour, who used to say of a certain Hebrew, his confidant:
"He is most useful to me, in order to let the public know what I wish it to know. The very moment I have finished speaking with him he has already betrayed me."
In July, the Kreuz-Zeitung [Journal of the Cross] of Berlin published this account of an army officer:
"During the 1870 war, I was assigned to the 10th Corps, commanded by General Voigts-Rhetz. He was granted 100,000 thalers to pay spies. He returned to Berlin, that sum not having been touched, because he hadn't succeeded in recruiting any Frenchmen. However, in 1866, in the war against Austria, things went differently: the Jews showed up in great numbers and sold us for a small price all news concerning the movements of the imperial army; these Jews were Austrian citizens and so, voluntary spies."
History is replete with treason committed by Hebrews to the detriment of the state as well as of public or private persons. A few years ago the Jew Goldsmit stole and sold the top secret documents of the Great-Prussian state. The Jew Klotz betrayed the English general Hicks and his troops, who then were killed by the Mahdi's barbarians in the Sudan. The Jew Adler abused the trust Krajewski had put in him and handed him over to the Prussians. The Jew Deutz betrayed the Duchess of Berry for 500,000 francs. And so has it been already in past centuries, beginning with the Jew Sedecia, who poisoned Charles the Callow, up to the Jewess Païva, who of late was busy to acquire the battle plans of the French army in Paris, in order to sell them.