|
[p. 11]
II. — PLAGIARISM AT WORK.
While the Geneva Dialogues open with an exchange of compliments between
Montesquieu and Machiavelli, which covers seven pages, the author of the Protocols
plunges at once in media res.
One can imagine him hastily turning over
those first seven pages of the book which he has been ordered to paraphrase against
time, and angrily ejaculating, "Nothing here." But on page 8 of the
Dialogues he finds what he wants; the greater
part of this page and the next are promptly paraphrased, thus: --
|
Geneva Dialogues, p. 8.
Among mankind the evil instinct is mightier than the good. Man is more drawn to
evil than to good. Fear and Force have more empire over him than reason . . . Every
man aims at domination; not one but would be an oppressor if he could; all or almost
all are ready to sacrifice the rights of others to their own interests....
|
Protocols, p. 1
("The Britons" edition). It must be noted that people with corrupt
instincts are more numerous than those of noble instinct. Therefore in governing the
world the best results are obtained by means of violence and intimidation, and not by
academic discussions. Every man ai ms at power; every one would like to become a
dictator if he only could do so, and rare indeed are the men who would not be
disposed to sacrifice the welfare of others in order to attain their own personal
aims. |
| What
restrains those beasts of prey which they call men from attacking one another? Brute
unrestrained Force in the first stages of social life, then the Law, that is still
force regulated by forms. You have consulted all historical sources; every where
might precedes right. Political Liberty is merely a relative idea.... |
What
restrained the wild beasts of prey which we call men? What has ruled them up to now?
In the first stages of social like they submitted to brute and blind forces, then to
law, which in reality is the same force, only masked. From this I am le d to deduct
that by the law of nature right lies in might. Political freedom is not a fact but
an idea. |
[p. 12]
The gift of liberty to the Machiavelli of the Geneva Dialogues, of self-government according to the Protocols (page 2), leads speedily to civil and social strife, and the State is soon ruined by internal convulsions or by foreign intervention follow
ing on the heels of civil war. Then follows a singular parallel between the two books which deserves quotation:--
|
Geneva Dialogues, p. 9.
What arms will they (States) employ in war against foreign enemies? Will the
opposing generals communicate their plans of campaign to one another and thus be
mutually in a position to defend themselves? Will they mutually ban night attacks,
traps, ambushes, battles with inequality of force? Of course not; such combatants
would court derision. Are you against the employment of those traps and tricks, of
all the strategy indispensable to war against the enemy within, the
revolutionary? |
Protocols, p. 2.
... I would ask the question why is it not immoral for a State which has two
enemies, one external and one internal, to use different means of defence against the
former in that which it would use against the latter, to attack him by night or with
superior forces?...
|
Both "Machiavelli" and the author of the Protocols agree (Prot. P. 3,
Geneva Dialogues, p. 11) almost in the same words that polities have nothing in
common with morality. Right is described in the Protocols as "an
abstract id ea established by nothing," in the Dialogues as an "infinitely
vague" expression. The end, say both, justifies the means. "I pay less
attention," says Machiavelli, "to what is good and moral than to what is
useful and neces sary." The Protocols (p. 4) use the same formula, substituting
"profitable" for "useful." According to the Protocols he who
would rule "must have recourse to cunningness (sic) and hypocrisy."
In the second Dial ogue (p. 15) Montesquieu reproaches Machiavelli for having
"only two words to repeat – 'Force' and 'guile.' " Both Machiavelli and
the "Elders" [p. 13]
of the Protocols preach desp otism as the sole safeguard against anarchy. In the
Protocols this despotism has to be Jewish and hereditary. Machiavelli's despotism is
obviously Napoleonic.
There are scores of other parallels between the books. Fully 50 paragraphs of
passages in the Dialogues are simply paraphrases of passages in the Dialogues. The
quotation Per me reges regnant, rightly given in the Vieille France
edition of the Protocols (p. 29), while regunt is substituted for
regnant in the English version (p. 20), appears on p. 63 of the Geneva
Dialogues. Sulla, whom the English version of the Protocols insists on calling
"Silla," appears in both books.
After covering Italy with blood, Sulla reappeared in as a
simple citizen in Rome: no one durst touch a hair of his head. Geneva Dialogues, p.
159.
Remember at the time when Italy was streaming with blood, she did not touch a
hair of Silla's head, and he was the man who made her blood pour out. Protocols, p.
51.
Sulla, who after the proscriptions stalked "in savage grandeur home,"
is one of the tyrants whom every schoolboy knows and those who believe that Elders of
the 33rd Degree are responsible for the Protocols, may say that this is a
mere coincidence. But what about the exotic Vishnu, the hundred-armed Hindu deity
who appears twice in each book? The following passages never were examples of
"unconscious plagiarism."
Geneva Dialogues, p. 141:---
Machiavelli.—"Like the God Vishnu, my press will have a hundred arms, and
these arms will give their hands to all the different shades of opinion throughout
the country."
Protocols, p. 43:--
"These newspapers, like the Indian god Vishnu, will be possessed of hundreds
of hands, each of which will be feeling the pulse of varying public
opinion."
Geneva Dialogues, p. 207:--
Montesquieu:-- "Now I understand the figure of the god Vishnu; you have a
hundred [p. 14] arms like the
Indian idol, and each of your fingers touches a spring.
Protocols, p. 65:--
"Our Government will resemble the Hindu god Vishnu. Each of our hundred
hands will hold one spring of the social machinery of State."
TAXATION OF THE PRESS
The Dialogues and the Protocols alike devote special attention to the Press, and
their schemes for the muzzling and control thereof are almost identical – absolutely
identical, indeed, in many details. Thus Machiavelli on pp. 135 and 136 of the
Dialogues expounds the following ingenious scheme:--
"I shall extend the tax on newspapers to books, or rather I shall
introduce a stamp duty on books having less than a certain number of pages. A book,
for example, with less than 200 or 300 pages will not rank as a book, but as a
brochure. I a m sure you see the advantage of this scheme. On the one hand I thin
(je rarifie) by taxation that cloud of short books which are the mere
appendages of journalism; on the other I force those who wish to escape stamp duty to
throw themselves into l ong and costly compositions, which will hardly ever be sold
and scarcely read in such a form."
The Protocols, p. 41, has:--
"We will tax it (the book press) in the same manner as the newspaper
Press – that is to say, by means of Excise stamps and deposits. But on books of less
than 300 pages we will place a tax twice as heavy. Those short books we will
classify as pamphlets, which constitute the most virulent form of printed poison.
These measures will also compel writers to publish such long works that they will be
little read by the public and so chiefly on account of their high price."
Both have the same profound contempt for journalists.
Geneva Dialogues, pp. 145, 146:--
Machiavelli.-- "You must know that journalism is a sort of Freemasonry; those who live by it are bound . . . to one another by the ties of professional discretion; like the augurs of old, they do not lightly divulge the secret of their oracles.
They would gain nothing by betraying themselves, for they have mostly won more less discreditable scars . . ."
Protocols, p. 44:--
"Already there exists in French journalism a system of Masonic understanding for giving counter- [p. 15] signs. All organs of the Press are tied by mutual professional secrets to the manner
of the ancient oracles. Not one of the members will betray his knowledge of the secret, if the secret has not been ordered to be made public. No single publisher will have the courage to betray the secret entrusted to him, the reason being that not one
of them is admitted into the literary world without bearing the marks of some shady act in his past life."
CONTEMPT FOR THE PEOPLE
But this contempt is nothing compared to that which both Machiavelli and the Elders evince towards the masses whom tyranny is to reduce to a more than Oriental servitude.
Geneva Dialogues, p. 43:--
Machiavelli:-- "You do not know the unbounded meanness of the peoples . . . . groveling before force, pitiless towards the weak, implacable to faults, indulgent to crimes, incapable of supporting the contradictions of a free régime, and
patient to the point of martyrdom under the violence of an audacious despotism . . . giving themselves masters whom they pardon for deeds for the least of which they would have beheaded twenty constitutional kings."
Protocols, p. 15:--
"In their intense meanness the Christian peoples help our independence – when kneeling they crouch before power; when they are pitiless towards the weak; merciless in dealing with faults, and lenient to crimes; when they refuse to recognize the
contradictions of freedom; when they are patient to the degree of martyrdom in bearing with the violence of an audacious despotism. At the hands of their present dictators, Premiers, and Ministers, they endure abuses for the smallest of which they would
have murdered twenty kings."
Both the Elders and Machiavelli propose to make political crime thoroughly
unpopular by assimilating the treatment of the political criminal to that of the
felon. Both devote not a little attention to police organization and espionage; the
crea tor of Machiavelli had evidently studied Napoleon III.'s police methods and
suffered at the hands of his agents. Each proposes to exercise a severe control over
the Bar and the Bench. As regards the Vatican, Machiavelli-Napoleon, with recent
Italian his tory in mind, aims at the complete control of the Papacy. After
inflaming popular hatred [p.
16] against the Church of Rome and its clergy, he will intervene to protect
the Holy See, as Napoleon III. did intervene, when "the chassepôts worked
wonders." The learned Elders propose to follow a similar plan: "when the
people in their rage throw themselves on to the Vatican we shall appear as its
protectors in order to stop bloodshed ." Ultimately, of course, they mean to
destroy the Church. The terrible chiefs of a Pan-Judaic conspiracy could hardly have
any other plan of campaign. Machiavelli, naturally, does not go so far. Enough for
him if the Pope is safely lodged in th e Napoleonic pockets.
Is it necessary to produce further proofs that the majority of the Protocols are
simply paraphrases of the Geneva Dialogues, with wicked Hebrew Elders, and finally an
Israelite world ruler in the place of Machiavelli-Napoleon III., and the brutish
goyim (Gentiles) substituted for the fickle masses, "gripped in a vice
[sic] by poverty, ridden by sensuality, devoured by ambition," whom Machiavelli
intends to win?
|