The Riddle of the Jew’s Success
THE JEW’S SUCCESS
Translated from the German by Capel Pownall
HAMMER-VERLAG / LEIPZIG
Theodor Emil Fritsch (October 28, 1852 near Leipzig – September 8, 1933) was a German antijudaist whose views did much to influence popular opposition to Jewish supremacism in Germany during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
A believer in the absolute superiority of the Aryan race, Fritsch was upset by the changes brought on by rapid industrialization and urbanization, and called for a return to the traditional peasant values and customs of the distant past, which he believed exemplified the essence of the Volk.
In 1883 he founded the Hammer Publishing House.
One of Fritsch’s major goals was to unite all Jew-resister political parties under a single banner; he wished for opposition to Jewish supremacism to permeate the agenda of every German social and political organization. This effort proved largely to be a failure, as by 1890 there were over 190 various patriotic parties in Germany. He also had a powerful rival for the leadership of the patriots in Otto Böckel, with whom he had a strong personal rivalry.
In 1893, Fritsch published his most famous work, The Handbook of the Jewish Question also known as the Anti-Semitic Catechism which criticed the Jews and called upon Germans to refrain from intermingling with them. Vastly popular, the book was read by millions and was in its 49th edition by 1944 (330,000 copies). The ideas espoused by the work greatly influenced Hitler and his party during their rise to power after World War I. Fritsch also founded a journal – the Hammer (in 1902) and this became the basis of a movement, the Reichshammerbund, in 1912.
His better known book, The Riddle of the Jew’s Success was published in English in 1927 under the pseudonym F. Roderich-Stoltheim, and dealt with the negative impact that Jewish values and the centralization of the German economy in Jewish hands had on the German people. This book was recently republished by Noontide Press, and was the subject of a media controversy after it was banned by Amazon.com and other online book sellers.
Fritsch held the publication rights to the German edition of Henry Ford’s work The International Jew.
Chapter …………………………………………………………..……………………………………. Page
I Preface ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5
II Jewish Methods in the Economic Life …………………………………………………. 10
III Particular Business Tactics of the Jew ……………………………………………….. 29
IV The International Connection and Secret League of the Hebrews …….. 39
V The Peculiar Morality of Jewdom ………………………………………………………….. 53
VI An Explanation with Sombart …………………………………………………………….. 68
VII Jewish Successes in Modern Times …………………………………………………… 72
VIII The Stock-Exchange …………………………………………………………………………. 84
IX How Sound Business Methods are Forced Out of the Field by the Jews … 98
X Jewish Trade Specialities ……………………………………………………………………… 111
XI Moral Principles in Trade …………………………………………………………………….. 141
XII The Hebrews as Supporters of Capitalism …………………………………………. 154
XIII Business and Religion ………………………………………………………………………. 183
XIV The Race Problem …………………………………………………………………………….. 200
XV Origin of the Jewish Entity ………………………………………………………………….. 220
XVI The Influence of the Jew Upon Womankind ………………………………………. 242
XVII The Jews and the World-War ……………………………………………………………. 277
Concluding Words …………………………………………………………………………………….. 283
Errata ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 290
The Hebrews as supporters of Capitalism.
Sombart advances the question as to whether the Jew possesses a special capacity for capitalism. It appears most extraordinary to us that such a question should ever have been propounded. Capitalism is not an activity, which calls for a special kind of capacity, but a condition, the cultivation or administration of which, calls for certain qualifications. Even, in the case of the Hebrew, capitalism, for its own sake, is not regarded as the main object, but rather as a means for increasing his own power, and for enslaving those, who are not Jews.
Thus, the question will take the following shape: does the Hebrew possess a special talent for amassing capital, and for giving a capitalistic formation to the economic life? Nobody has ever been in doubt concerning this fact.
Sombart claims for the Hebrews the merit of being the founders and upholders of modern world-wide commerce, of modern finance, of the Stock Exchange, in fact, of the commercialisation of the entire economic life; of being the parents of free trade, and of free competition, of being the exponents of the modern spirit in the realm of business. We will cheerfully concede all this, but, at the same time it is perfectly clear to us, that this modern spirit is by no means a good spirit, for it is the spirit of the disintegration of political economy, of the destruction of the productive nations. The explanation of the idea of capitalism, which, according to Sombart, is as follows, seems strange indeed to us:
“Capitalism is the name we give to that organisation of economic intercourse, by which two different groups of the population — the owners of the means of production, who, at the same time, carry on the work of directing, and the ordinary work-people who own nothing — cooperate, so indeed that the representatives of Capital (i.e., of the requisite store of the necessary goods) are the real economic subjects, that is to say, hold the power of deciding the nature and direction of the economic management, and bear the responsibility for the issue, whatever it may be” (page 186).
According to this, Capitalism characterizes itself as the economic method of the proletarian state, which is ruled and guided unresistingly by a few financial magnates, as a new edition of slavery in its most acute form. In actuality, this is the ideal of the Hebrew, to whom it has been promised in the Talmud, that a time will come when every Jew will possess 2800 slaves.
The only question is whether the other nations regard such a state of things as desirable, and are willing to help to bring it about.
This might be expressed in a somewhat more general fashion as follows: the capitalistic economic system regards the formation of capital as the principal aim of economic activity.
According to this system, capital, and not man, is of most importance. This system places man and his spiritual needs on a lower plane than the accumulation of capital. Moneymaking is regarded as the first principle of life. And the object of this creation of capital? — the domination and exploitation of mankind by means of loan-servitude.
Formerly the earning of money was a side-issue in the economic life; the other, and more important object was: on the one hand, the satisfaction of human needs by the production of the requisite goods, and the guaranteeing, on the other hand, of the possibility of an existence for the producer, as well as for the business or middleman. The man, and the possibility of his existence, were always the chief consideration. According to the capitalistic system of the Hebrew, the matter was regarded in a very different light. Sombart is of opinion that:
“Out of a systematic direction of economic affairs, for the purpose of making profit, which thereby provides the incentive for the effort to expand continuously all kinds of business activity, arises, as a natural consequence, a conscious guiding or directing of all trading activity towards the supreme reasonable method of establishing and maintaining economic relations.”
It is certainly true that the economic life receives a very marked warp or distortion in one particular direction, if one enquires every moment what profit can be made, but we certainly cannot recognise the method just described as the “supreme rational”; it is rather supremely irrational, because it is so busily engaged in the mad accumulation of capital that it entirely disregards the aim of all culture: namely the preservation and elevation of mankind.
In olden times the economic method was grounded firmly on the principle of organic growth and building-up, but the modern Jewish economic method aims at a ruthless extermination — at the so-called predatory culture. It drags riches together, from all directions, at the cost of human welfare; it produces wares, which, to a considerable extent, serve but one purpose, and that is simply to entice and trick money out of the pockets of the people; it creates a few rich by the indebtedness and impoverishment of the masses. But, above all, it uses up human energy to such an extent, that it must soon end in the exhaustion and decline of the nation.
It is characteristic of this capitalistic system that it is unable to realise the effects of its own action — that it is actually killing the goose, which lays the golden eggs. Impelled by the short-sighted greed for amassing money, it wrecks the organic foundations of national life. Is there perhaps design behind all this? Is this Jewish-capitalistic economic method perhaps the means to the end of fulfilling the ancient commandment:
“Thou shalt eat up all nations?”
Sombart asks the question:
“What is the meaning in the capitalistic sense of a successful stroke of business? Naturally that this activity, with its terms and conditions, should be followed by a good result. In what way however, is this successful result to be gauged? Certainly not by the quality of the performance. Just as little by the quantity. All the more, simply and solely, if. . .”
The reader expects now to hear: whether, under the operation of this beneficial, capitalistic system, Culture and Humanity are to be conducted to a still higher plane, or: whether Morality and Social Arrangement are to show a gratifying advance?
— Oh, dear no; completely erroneous! According to Sombart, the beneficial result of this economic method is to be gauged solely as follows:
“If, at the end of an economic period the advanced money is again in hand, and has brought with it something additional, which we call profit” (page 188).
The sublime blessings, to be derived from this economic system, could not be stated in a more pertinent manner, and one must infer that Sombart is a man, with a very keen sense of sarcastic humour, who, under the pretext of recognition, is desirous of exposing, in these words, the utter barrenness of capitalism. Even the question is not asked, whether an improvement in the production of goods is the result of this economic method — no:
“the sole consideration is, that at the conclusion of the transaction, the gain in money or property remains in the hands of the capitalist, who took it in hand.”
— Mankind, you have no need to be alarmed; capitalistic Jewdom is conducting you towards a splendid goal:
“. . . so that the debit and credit of the ledger shall be closed with a balance in favour of the enterprising capitalist. In this effect are included all the successes and all the transactions, undertaken by the capitalistic organisation.” (Sombart p. 188)
What is then an undertaker or contractor in the capitalistic sense?
“He is a man,” says Sombart, “who has a task to fulfill, and sacrifices his life in fulfilling it.”*
Certainly there are undertakers or contractors of this kind but, for the most part, they are not of Jewish origin. Certainly there are men, who, with the sacrifice of their entire physical and mental energy, devote themselves to some great work and who can be described as actually sacrificing their lives for these objects.
Great industrialists, such as Krupp, Borsig, Schichau, Hartmann and many others were men of this stamp, but we certainly do not find Hebrews amongst them.
*A strange formulary! Just as if the official, the officer, the doctor, the workman etc had not also tasks to fulfill, and might not with equal right be said to sacrifice their lives in fulfilling the same!
The Rothschilds, Bleichröders, Guttmanns, Hirschs have accumulated hundreds of millions, in a few decades, but we search in vain for any great and astounding work, which they have accomplished; we see, at the most, that they have known how to exploit, in the most cunning fashion, other men, who have been the real producers, in order to amass enormous riches for themselves; we are unable to perceive that they have in any way hazarded their lives, while engaged in this kind of business. They were the money-lenders and speculators, who finally pocketed the entire benefit accruing from the work of others, without themselves accomplishing anything worth mentioning. If Sombart means, that the real promoter of undertakings must be a combination of producer and dealer, it does not say much for the Hebrew capitalists as far as the promotion or origination of undertakings is concerned, for, as a rule, we find nothing of the productive element in them, only the dealer. And the latter Sombart defines in the following manner:
“The dealer is a man, desirous of lucrative business, all of whose ideas and feelings are concentrated upon the value in money of conditions and negotiations, and who therefore consistently regards all phenomena in terms of money; for whom the world is a great market of supply and demand, of crises and occasions, of possibilities of gains and losses, who is always asking: How much does it cost and what does it yield? And whose incessant questions in this respect resolve themselves into the final momentous one: What does the world cost?”
Truly, the character and behaviour of the Hebrew, as dealer, could not be better portrayed, and we have a strong suspicion that Herr Sombart is, in reality, a cleverly disguised opponent of the Jews. With still more exquisite irony, he characterises the Hebrew actually as “discoverer” — namely as the discoverer of fresh possibilities of “doing business”, who knows full well, how and where to discharge his goods, when there is not the slightest requirement nor demand for the same, and who, in order to excite new needs, provides Esquimos with bathingdrawers and niggers with hot-water bottles.
And Sombart also knows full well how to portray the tenacious importunity of the Hebrew, when he characterises the specifically Jewish talent for dealing, as the art of:
“Acquiring a pair of old trousers by cunningly wearing out the patience of a needy cavalier, to whose apartments he may already have been five times without accomplishing his purpose, in order, later on, to talk some peasant into buying the garment, by exercising all his powers of persuasion.”
According to Sombart, amongst the other requirements of the Dealer, must be included a power “to see with a thousand eyes, and to hear with a thousand ears”, and this accomplishment has been brought to perfection by Jewdom, by means of the organisation and consistent cooperation of all Jews. The German business-man can only see with his own two eyes, and only in exceptional cases has other eyes at his disposal, to help him to extend his vision. Jewdom, however, has been organised into a Hydra with a thousand heads, which are all attached to the same body, and which all follow the same instinct. This Jewish “dealing” organisation, with its thousand senses, spies upon the artless nations, never lets an opportunity slip of “doing business”, and knows how to arrange matters so that the profit always falls to its share.
According to the sound, old, time-honoured ideas, trading or dealing was an honourable exchange, in which one gave either goods for goods, or goods for money; and the sense of fairness regulated the proceeding to mutual satisfaction. In the case of an honestly conducted transaction both sides might well derive advantage and profit therefrom, because the object purchased might be worth more to the purchaser than the price paid, and, at the same time, the seller might secure a profit. It is quite different according to the Jewish perception.
Sombart’s opinion is, that trading or bargaining means “a struggle with mental weapons”, and, in reality, all Jewish trading and bargaining is made up of persuasion, overreaching, false representation and imposition. He is not desirous merely of satisfying a want but, in addition to endeavouring to secure an excessive profit for himself, he attempts to do the other side as much harm as possible. The Hebrews, as a nation, which, for thousands of years, has practised nothing but haggling, usury and overreaching, have developed the art of persuasion to the highest possible point.
How often does one not hear simple-natured people, who have been talked into buying the goods of some Jewish pedlar, excuse themselves by saying:
“I had to buy something from the man because I could not otherwise get rid of him”.
Yes, it is impossible to ignore the fact that many Jews — at any rate when they come into contact with artless and ingenuous people — possess an almost demoniacal power of suggestion, and of infatuating simple natures, so that the latter follow unresistingly the intentions of those, who are fooling them. We shall return to this particular theme in chapter XVI:
“The influence of the Jew upon Womankind.” — “One of the most effective inward means of coercion, which the Hebrew is in the habit of applying, consists in arousing the idea, that the immediate conclusion of the business in hand will prove advantageous.
Thus speaks Sombart, and the Hebrew knows full well how to utilise this means to the very utmost. It is actually a fact that some Jewish pedlars are in the habit of intimating to possible customers, that the goods they offer, are stolen property, or are taken from a bankrupt’s stock, and must, on that account, be disposed of as quickly as possible, and at almost any price.
Sombart rightly refers to the peculiar position of isolation, which the Hebrew takes up in the midst of the other national communities, as a circumstance, which confers exceptional advantages upon him in the midst of the other nations. He emphasizes that the advantages, enjoyed by the Hebrew, are rooted in the following circumstances:
1. in their extensive dispersion,
2. in their alienage,
3. in their half-citizenship, and
4. in their wealth.
Unfortunately Sombart has omitted the most important items, namely,
5. the open and the secret connection amongst themselves, and
6. the Jewish morality, which is especially adapted for trading and for deceit.
1. The extensive dispersion.
The Hebrews, thanks to their extensive dispersion over all lands, are enabled, by means, of their international and domestic connections, which they attend to with the utmost assiduity, to maintain an accurate survey of all economic occurrences in distant, as well as in adjacent territories.
By this means they are enabled to secure, at all times, the earliest reliable information concerning the prospect of the crops, concerning the production and sale of goods, concerning stocks of goods in hand, concerning the forwarding of goods, both by land and water, and concerning the circulation of money and any local deficiency of money. It is also known for certain that they mutually exchange most valuable information and hints with respect to these matters — not only by means of the reports in the Press of the various markets and exchanges, which reports are, almost without exception, under their control — but also by means of private letters and dispatches in cipher.
Important facts like these, are far too little known and appreciated at their full value in our time. Anyone, who has an inkling of these matters, cannot be in the least surprised at the success of the Jews; he, at any rate, will not gaze upwards with amazement and admiration at the supposed eminent and unusual faculties for trade, possessed by the Jews, because these faculties rest on very ordinary foundations. There have always been men with keen insight, who have seen through these inner workings; but, unfortunately the wisdom of olden times seems lost to the present generation, and it often appears to us as if our teachers and spiritual pastors, as well as our political leaders of today, put on smoked spectacles, so as not to see what is happening before their eyes.
Even in the year 1698, a report from the French Ambassador at the Hague, is devoted to a description of the activities of the Dutch Jews, and of the machinations of these people on the Amsterdam Exchange.* Amongst other things, mention is made therein of the secret brotherhoods (Congregations), which the Jews maintain, and which stand in the most intimate connection with one another. For instance, the:
“Fraternity of Saloniki, which rules over their nation in both those other parts of the world, and is surety for it,” and that of “Venice which, together with that of Amsterdam, holds sway over all the northern parts.”
* Revue historique. Vol. 44 (1890)
Mention is also made that these “brotherhoods” are only tolerated in England, and have to be kept secret in France. The result of the intercourse between these “brotherhoods” is, that the Jews are the first and the best informed concerning anything connected with trade, or of a novel nature, and out of this liaison they build up their system (The Speculation), and meet weekly on Sundays for consultation, while the Christians are occupied with their religious duties.
The ambassador continues:
“These speculative schemes, which are of a most subtle nature, and have been prepared in accordance with the intelligence, which has come in during the preceding week, are sifted and refined by their Rabbis and learned men, and are then, on the following Sunday, handed over to their Jewish brokers and agents, who are selected for their exceptional craftiness. After the latter have consulted with one another, each of them circulates, on the same day, the news, which is specially adapted to serve their purposes. The next day, they at once set to work buying, selling, exchanging and dealing in shares. As they always have large sums of money and stocks of goods at their disposal, they are always in a position to judge correctly when the right moment has arrived to carry out their ‘coups’, whether at the top or at the bottom of the market, or simultaneously in both directions.” (Sombart, page 202.)
This has been, in very truth, the secret of the Jewish brokers for centuries, and it is nothing less than astounding how neither our merchants, nor our learned political economists, nor our politicians, nor our statesmen can see through these secret machinations, and still cling to their naive belief that supply and demand determine the price. In reality, the Hebrews, combined internationally, form a clique for exploring all opportunities, and for systematically influencing all market conditions.
Even at the present day, similar conspirators and instigators of the same unsavoury plotting and scheming are to be found amongst the Rabbis, and one can soothe one’s self with the reflection that, on occasions, matters are dealt with in the Synagogues, which have nothing to do with the service of God, but which, on the contrary, exhale the very essence of trade and the money-market (compare page 74).
This Jewish system of espionage, and the secret machinations in the synagogues and on the Stock Exchange, place the Hebrew in a position to obtain quicker and more reliable information, concerning all matters, than anybody else in the country, not excepting the Governments.
And thus it comes to pass, that the latter, in their naiveté and artlessness, frequently imagine that they must make use of the Hebrew, not only for the purpose of obtaining important news from abroad, but also in order to exert diplomatic influence in all directions. They forget that by doing this, they are putting the cart in front of the horse, and that it is Jewdom and the money-market, which derive thereby all the benefit from any new political move.
Anyone, who is desirous of obtaining a correct idea of the methods and extent of Jewish interference with and intrusion into the higher political circles, should read what Emil Witte, formerly commercial counsellor under v. Holleben at the German Embassy in the United States, has to say in his book “Aus einer deutschen Botschaft. Zehn Jahre deutsch-amerikanischer Diplomatie” (From a German Embassy. Ten years of German American diplomacy). This work is rich in disclosures concerning the nature of, and the position occupied by the two telegraphic agencies of Reuter (London) and Wolff (Berlin), to whom has been assigned the chief rôle of making known important political news to the public by means of the Press.
Whilst dealing with this subject, the following remarks will be of interest, as they afford glimpses into the career of a Jewish adventurer. The founder of the “Reuter Bureau” was born in Cassel of poverty-stricken Jewish parents, and his real name is Josaphat. After an obscure and apparently turbulent youth, Reuter became partner in a bookseller’s business in Berlin; he left this position on account of certain “irregularities”, and soon afterwards founded the Reuter Bureau in London, in company with a fellow tribesman, Dr. Engländer, one of those numerous men of honour, who, by their assumed German names, bring everything connected with that country into disrepute abroad, and who was, at the same time, a pronounced Anarchist.
With the help of Oscar Meding (Gregor Samarow) the well-known Guelphic author and political agent, he was successful in inducing the blind King George V of Hannover to grant the concession of a telegraph-cable from Lowestoft to Norderney, which he disposed of, in 1869, for a profit of more than £200,000 (over four million marks) to the British Government. Raised to the grade of Baron by Duke Ernst of Coburg-Gotha, he earned large sums of money by acting as impresario to the Shah Nasr-el-Din of Persia, and paid the latter’s travelling expenses all over Europe. By so doing, he secured from the Shah, every possible concession, which Persia had to impart.
In order to put a stop to the mutual competition, engendered by the founding in Berlin in 1865 of the telegraphic bureau of Dr. Wolff — also a Jew — Reuter purchased a part share in the same, so that since then the same genius has held sway over the two bureaux. What the nature of this spirit or genius is, can be ascertained later on in this book, at the appropriate place. Here it will suffice to say, that the owner of the R. Bureau — Baron de Reuter — is portrayed as a man, possessed by a demoniacal ambition, who is enabled, by his position and his enormous wealth, to play a pernicious part on the political stage, even though it takes place behind the scenes. A man, moreover, utterly unscrupulous as to the means he employs to enrich, and to advance himself — one can read a great deal more about him in Witte’s book — and who was turned out by Bismarck on account of the hostile tone, which his news service always displayed towards Germany.
The German Baron had his revenge for this, by securing a dominating influence in the direction of Wolff’s Bureau, which is supported by Prussia and Germany, and since then has taken his part in shaping politics in both of these countries by the method peculiar to him. How and when this takes place, the public has never been allowed to learn, although it is a fact of common knowledge in all our newspaper offices, that Reuter’s Bureau is the heart and soul of all the foreign animosity towards the German Empire.*
* Anyone, who is desirous of tracking down the instigators of the World’s War, must certainly not pass Reuter by unnoticed.
Thus, this institution, which exists to feed half the world with news — in other words to influence vast masses of people — is connected by the “most intimate ties” with the telegraphic bureau of Wolff, which is domiciled in Berlin. What that means, is expressed by Witte, on page 118, in a quotation from an article in “Black and White” by a former Times correspondent—Charles Lowe — concerning the bills of exchange transactions between Reuter and Wolff, as well as the inner organisation of the telegraphic bureau of Wolff:
“‘Wolff’ is a joint-stock company, composed of some of the first Jewish bankers in Berlin, and, naturally enough, the members of this association claim the privilege for themselves of having the first look at all important telegrams, a privilege, the prodigious significance of which, for the twin worlds of international politics and international finance, is immediately apparent.
The W. T. B. is a semi-official arrangement, the recognised organ of the German and Prussian Government. ‘Doutdes’ (I give in order that you may give) or, “quid pro quo” (nothing for nothing) is the principle, which regulates its relations to both governments, of which it is, at one and the same time, henchman and mouthpiece. Many contemptuous expressions have been used concerning the ‘Reptile’ Bureau in Berlin, but, as a matter of fact, such a Bureau does not exist, or, at any rate, only in the shape of the above-mentioned telegraphic bureau.
This is not to say that Wolff receives a subsidy in money out of the ‘Reptile’ fund of the Government. In the case of a newspaper, or a similar undertaking, however, payment, in the form of important news, is just as valuable, if not more valuable, than payment in hard cash.
What does the payment to Wolff consist of? First of all, in the precedence, which the Government accords to all messages received by or emanating from Wolff’s Bureau, in order to assure to that office, whenever possible, priority in the publication of its announcements, a consideration, which is naturally of the utmost importance to a telegraphic bureau.
Moreover, the Government makes use of Wolff’s Bureau as its channel of information and mouth-piece, when it wishes to publish a “dementi” to influence public opinion, or to communicate certain information in a certain form to the world — especially to that part, which lies outside Germany; this last can be very comfortably accomplished thanks to Wolff’s international “connections.”
The W. T. B. is an institution, founded by Bleichroder, and for which Louis Schneider, formerly non-commissioned officer and later courtier, the well-known reader to King William I, was successful in obtaining the favourable notice of his august master.
In his letter to Dr. Wolff, in which he praises the Doctor’s intention, the King, in 1865, announced his expectation that “patriotic financiers like Messrs Oppenfeld, Magnus and Bleichröder” would support Wolff’s undertaking. What the shareholders in Wolff’s Telegraphic Bureau understand by “patriotism”, is disclosed by the activity of this institution, which Bismarck distinctly referred to in his famous aphorism “to lie like a telegram.” The principal shareholders according to Witte, are the chief of Bleichröder’s Bank, Dr. Paul von Schwabach, English Consul-General, and Herbert v. Reuter, chief of the English telegraphic bureau, whose enmity towards Germany is an established fact. Amongst other shareholders are the banking houses of Mendelsohn and of Warschauer.
Similar agreements to that between the Bureaux of Wolff and Reuter exist also between these two institutions and official or semi-official telegraphic agencies in other European countries, of which the best known are the French “Agence Havas” and the Italian “Agencia Stefania”. All these are in the hands of Jews. One must pause to reflect what it really means, when one learns that by means of contracts, in which high penalties have been mutually agreed upon, each of the above-mentioned “Bureaux” engages to communicate to the Press in unaltered form (that is to say without any regard for the truth) any message, received from any other agency belonging to the Union or Ring of telegraphic news-agencies! Of the two competing American telegraphic news-agencies “Associated Press” and “Laffan Bureau”, the former enjoys, thanks to the “smartness” of its representative, without any reciprocation on its side, official priority for the quickest dispatch of its news from Berlin — because one believes here in Germany that by this complaisance a “Good Press” is manufactured in America.
One must read Witte’s book, in order to learn from the actual facts of the World War, what astounding success has resulted from this policy.
“the men, who are interested in the telegraphic bureaux, know no fatherland, think and feel internationally. — War, and danger of war provide, as far as they are concerned, the most favourable opportunities for fishing in troubled waters. It has already repeatedly come to light in the Law Courts, and there is documentary evidence to confirm the statement, that Wolff’s Bureau has suppressed important news in the interests of its shareholders, so that the ‘patriotic financiers’ (to whom King William I addressed himself) might be enabled, thanks to the exclusive information, to transact profitable business on the Stock Exchange. It was established, moreover, that the Foreign Office communicates the Speech from the Throne of the Kaiser, at the opening and closing of the Reichstag, to Wolff’s Bureau, several hours before it is made known to the Reichstag and to the Press.” (Page 121 — 122).
This “national” Telegraphic Bureau was not ashamed to receive subscriptions from private individuals for the quickest possible telegraphic information of the death of the Emperor William II during the life of this monarch. Already for years (Witte wrote his book in 1907) the number of such subscribers had reached 5000.
One asks one’s sell: are the representatives of the German Empire unable to discover any means of protecting themselves against this “patriotic” Telegraphic Bureau and its dark machinations by instituting themselves a self-supporting independent news-service, which would ward off from us the insidious peril, which threatens the whole German Empire by the prejudicing of its outlook and opinions for the sake of Jewish money interests?* Sombart can also tell us something about similar secret methods of the Jews. He says:
“Their method in High Finance has frequently been the following: they first of all made themselves useful to the prince or ruler, as interpreters, by means of their knowledge of languages; they were then sent as negotiators and agents to foreign courts: then the prince or ruler entrusted them with the management of his property (which opportunity, it may be remarked by the way, was skillfully taken advantage of to lead the prince or ruler into debt, and to become his creditor), and by these means they became masters of the finances, and, in more recent years, of the Exchanges (page 203).”
* Even during the World War the W. T. B. was allowed to have a monopoly of the news-service! Who can wonder now at the way in which the war ended.
The Jews work always according to the same old receipt. It is already sketched out in fullest detail in the history of Joseph of Egypt’s behaviour towards Potiphar and Pharaoh; and thus the Hebrew does not find it necessary to develop any particular intelligence in order to repeat the same old artifice daily — especially as the Christian nations are brought up in complete ignorance of such tricks, and repeat, in good faith, the Jewish lie that the Egyptian Joseph was a pious, virtuous man and a national benefactor. Even in the earliest times the Jews played a leading part at the courts of the German princes; thus, for example, Isaac at the court of Charlemagne, and Kalonymos at the court of Otto II. Frederick Barbarossa was surrounded by an entire staff of Jews, just like Rudolph I. — Maximilian I, being an unbusiness-like man, was heavily in debt to the Jews. During the extensive German wars in the 17th and 18th centuries, espionage was carried on by the Jews, in all directions, to an enormous extent; even during the Prussian-German wars of liberation in 1813 and later (compare the Kreuzzeitung 1913 No. 209) more than half the traitors, who served the French as spies, were Jews.*
The Jews were to be found in swarms at the various Courts until the monarchs fell. The latter were blind enough to take the most dangerous enemies of the monarchy to their bosom, and to place implicit trust in them. The collapse of the monarchs is not undeserved; stupidity is a crime in rulers; there was no lack of warning.
* This much is certain: the Jewish boast, on the contrary, concerning the participation of Jews in the battles of liberation, was proved already in the year 1819 to be a lie. That the same lie flourishes today, and even to a greater extent than formerly, so that one Jewish Journalist even goes so far as to claim Eleonore Prochaska — the Potsdam heroine — as a Jewess, is only in accordance with the usual Jewish falsification of history.
In modern times, the notorious Bernhard Maimon provides a typical example of the Jewish intriguer behind the scenes on the political stage. On account of frequent thefts of documents from the Foreign Office in Paris, in 1911, various arrests were made, and Maimon, who was eventually unmasked as the leader of an extensive system of espionage, was included amongst the thieves. Concerning this talented political adventurer one could read as follows in a Jewish paper:
“Bernard Maimon, who is perhaps sixty years of age, is, without doubt, one of the most interesting adventurers of the present time, truly a modern Casanova, who, just like his famous (Jewish) predecessor, is constantly and universally engaged in politics, works simultaneously for and against all parties, brings the greatest financial operations to successful issue, negotiates the most difficult state loans, and still has time and inclination to engage in most daring love-adventures.”
Bernhard — or properly Baruch — Maimon is a Gallician Jew, which has not prevented him from playing, sometimes the Christian, sometimes the Moslem. He was well versed, not only in the Talmud, but also in the Koran and in the Bible, and understood, to a remarkable degree, how to make the most of this knowledge. The Hebrew paper full of admiration, relates further:
“His extensive public, and still more extensive secret relations with the British Embassy were in constant rivalry with his mysterious connections with other Embassies, and especially with the palace of Abdul Hamid. Tachsin, the first secretary at Yildiz Kiosk, was literally a mere tool in the hands of Maimon. And whenever Maimon stayed away from the palace in his own hotel, there was an uninterrupted exchange of letters and messages between Yildiz and Maimon, by night as well as day.
Apparently Maimon gave the first consideration to the interests of England, but it is quite certain that he had other irons in the fire. He was a spy for the whole world, and it flattered his vanity to play with the first diplomatists of the day like a cat plays with a mouse, and to converse with monarchs, in their private apartments, concerning matters, which their ministers only learnt about for the first time much later on in the day. The Winter Palace on the Neva was open to him, and Abdul Hamid had the greatest personal regard for, and placed the blindest confidence in him, in spite of, or just because Maimon was on very friendly terms with the Young Turks. Whenever Maimon was staying in Constantinople, Abdul Hamid took counsel with him daily concerning all international questions, and when he was at a distance from the Bosphorus, his advice was often sought and given by telegraph.”
“And, at one and the same time, Bernard Maimon was the counsellor — even the friend of King George of Greece, and his adviser during the Turco-Grecian War. He put in an appearance at Crete, accompanied by an entire staff of the leading French and English war-correspondents, and even the renowned American photographer, Underwood, was not wanting, for pictures of the most memorable episodes had to be provided for the great illustrated papers of both hemispheres — and Bernard Maimon naturally as the central figure in each case! The political adventurer, Bernard Maimon, travelled only by special train from one residence to the other, and lived only In the best hotels. — So much for the wisdom of the old governments, and so much for the wisdom of their diplomacy! Who can wonder that they suffered ship-wreck!”
The distribution of the Hebrews over all lands is particularly advantageous for their system of reconnoitering, and one can take it for granted that the distribution represents a carefully spread net, so that every important centre has its appointed spy or scout. When Governments so frequently gave the preference to Jews in the case of army-contracts and similar business transactions, it was always justified by the argument that the Jews, thanks to their far-flung net of agents, were in a far better position than other merchants to “assemble” rapidly provisions and other materials in large quantities — thanks again to the connections, which they maintained from town to town. In a book with the title “Über Judentum und Juden” (Concerning Jewdom and the Jews)  the author, von Kortum says:
“The Jewish contractor has no need to be scared by difficulties. He has only to electrify the Jewish community at the right place, and in a moment he has as many helpers and helpers’ helpers as he requires.”
Then again, how he emphasises the fact:
“formerly the Jew never traded alone as an isolated individual, but always as a member of the most extensive trading company in the world”,
and there is also a noteworthy petition of the merchants of Paris, in the latter half of the 18th century, which states:
“they (the Jews) resemble drops of quicksilver, which disperse themselves and run about in all directions, but which, on the slightest shock, reunite themselves into one mass.”
The fact that the Government gives the Jews still further support for their business espionage, by entrusting them with the consular representations, belongs to those incomprehensibilities, of which our administrative wisdom furnishes so many instances.
2. The “foreignness” of the Hebrews.
The fact that the Hebrew is a foreigner in all countries is of great use to him. The Jew never identifies himself with the interests of the country in which he lives. He has his own peculiar nationality, and constitutes, with those of his kind, an international nation as it were; and the interests of this nation are supreme with him; they form, literally, the base of his religious faith. Why should he break away from a community, which is not only united by the double tie of consanguinity and religion, but represents as well a gigantic business association, which, simply owing to this adherence to one another, is able not only to maintain its own existence but can guarantee an existence to each individual Jew as well!
And an alien business association of this kind, with an alien religion, will see to it that its interests are sharply separated from those of other nations, and must accordingly confront the latter both as foreigner and enemy. The leaders of the Hebrew nation recognised this fact thousands of years ago; and, for this reason, they drew up the rule:
“remain a stranger in the land, for you go there to take possession of it.”
And, as Professor Adolf Wahrmund very appositely remarks, the Jews, even at the present day, regard their journey across the world as a warlike expedition, undertaken for the purpose of conquest — certainly not by displaying courage, sword in hand, but by the weapons of financial and mental enslavement, with which they overreach and infatuate the different nations, and impose usurious spoliation and moral disturbance on them.
Just as Jacob, the ancestor of Jewry, defrauded the honest peasant Esau of his rights as first-born, and, by a trick, sneaked into possession of what should have been another’s inheritance, so, even up to the present day, Jewdom remains the professional “sneaker” of inheritance among the other nations.
The Talmudic doctrine announces:
“The possessions of those, who are not Jews, are to be regarded as property without an owner, and whoever is the first to seize the same is entitled to it.”
One must certainly concede that the Hebrews have acquired to an uncommon degree agility of mind, business circumspection, and a penetrating judgement as regards relations and persons. These capabilities are the inheritance of a race, which, for thousands of years, has not practised anything but trading, usury, espionage and overreaching of honest people.
It was, by no means, the external pressure of his environment, which converted the Hebrew into a usurer and a deceiver; he has never been anything else. This can be seen from his primordial laws and doctrines, which — apart from meaningless stories and forms of ritual, scarcely touch upon anything except how to exploit and befool that part of humanity, which is not Jewish. It must also be taken into consideration that Jewdom, which is for ever on the move, impelled by the lust for roving, and which represents the nomadism of modern times, is enabled, by constant change of relations and surroundings, to develop a keener insight into affairs, than those who never move from the spot where they were born. The Hebrews are intruders everywhere, who were obliged to capture a place for themselves by means of cunning, and who, for that reason, have always practised, in a masterly fashion, the requisite artifices. “New-settlers” as Sombart, not very appropriately, calls them:
“must keep their eyes open, in order to make themselves quickly at home in their new quarters, must be careful how they proceed, in order that they may, at any rate, make a livelihood under the new conditions.
While the long established inhabitants are resting comfortably in their warm beds, they (the Jews) are standing outside in the chilly morning air, and must first of all endeavour to build themselves a nest! There they stand — regarded by all settled inhabitants as intruders.”
And the alienage of the people of Juda, as even Sombart allows, is not only of an external but of an internal nature as well. He says:
“Israel, however, was alien amongst the other peoples since time immemorial in quite another — one might almost say psychological social sense, in the sense, of an internal contrariety to the population surrounding them, in the sense of an almost partitioned-off seclusion from the economist nations. They, the Jews, were conscious that they were something out of the ordinary, and were, in turn, regarded as such by the economist nations.”
That, in the last analysis, is the secret which stigmatises Hebrewdom: this alienage and contrariety, which they, as guests in foreign countries, feel and display towards their hosts; and it is the chief defect of our education, that not only are these peculiar relations not made clear to us, but we are actually deceived concerning them! While the Jew never allows himself to forget for one moment that he must regard us as strangers and enemies, whom it is business to exploit and overreach, we are brought up under the false impression that the Hebrew is a harmless member of the human community, just like the members of any other nation. And even more; we actually befriend and favour the most dangerous enemy of our economic and national existence, in consequence of the unlucky associations which Church doctrine has most erroneously derived from the traditions of Jewdom.
The Church ascribes a moral and religious importance to the Jew, which he simply does not possess. Out of this fundamental error on our part, Hebrewdom draws its main strength; our blindness and foolish trust provide him with the most favourable opportunities. Whilst he—certainly with the demeanour of the innocent friend of humanity — lies in wait for each opportunity to overreach us, we advance towards him with open arms, open heart and open pocket, and make his task of exploiting and harming us a very easy one. Viewing the situation, as described above, one may well ask if the Hebrew really is in need of a special intelligence department, and of superior business ability, in order to gain an economic advantage over us, when the secret alliance of his racial companions and our unlimited trustfulness have already made the game so ridiculously easy for him.
We have already seen, in section V, how the Hebrew, in his compartment-like seclusion, recognises no moral obligations of any kind toward us; and how he considers himself entitled to abuse our trustfulness in any and every way.
One must realise that the whole culture of civilised humanity rests on a foundation of mutual trust. The co-operation of a great, civilised community is only rendered possible by each honestly fulfilling his duty, and thereby justifying the reliance and confidence of others in him. The Hebrew knows nothing of fidelity and trust — at least as far as “strangers” are concerned. He knows only of a compact with his own clique, which is more of the nature of a conspiracy, and which is indispensable for the successful issue of his plans for overreaching others.
As regards strangers, however, he considers himself freed from any moral responsibility whatever. Sombart says:
“The mere fact that one had to do with a ‘stranger’ has sufficed in all times, which had not yet been tainted by humanitarian considerations, to relieve the conscience and to loosen the bonds of moral obligation.”
And this is the position taken up by the Hebrew even at the present day; all of us are strangers in his eyes, fit material for exploitation, whom it is his duty to injure, for the greater honour of Israel and of his idol Jahwe. These relations of the Hebrew with the stranger are the antithesis to the attitude and behaviour of the German under like conditions. Overstrained conceptions of humanity prompt us to display especial consideration and obligingness towards those, who are not Germans. We have had to pay dearly for this unpatriotic indulgence in the past; and to nobody more than to the Jews.
3. Semi-Citizenship of the Jews.
The Semi-Citizenship of the Jews, which has already been mentioned, proceeds from their alien nature. They are semi-citizens amongst us, because their allegiance to our national community is only feigned and superficial, for secretly they retain their separate Jewish civil community, and their separate nationality.
This causes them, however, in another sense to become double-citizens, for, according to the law, they belong simultaneously to two nationalities and states; amongst us they are, at one and the same time, German and Hebrew; they are amenable to two systems of law, and can claim protection from both; for they have the option of invoking, at one time, the German, and at another, the Jewish code, selecting whichever system appears to be most advantageous. They acquire thereby privileges over all other citizens of the state, and it is only a trait of their ancient mendacity and presumption, when they behave as if they were not treated with full justice in our country. As a matter of fact as double citizens they enjoy double rights — are actually privileged. Fichte has already called attention to this:
“Through almost every country in Europe a mighty, hostile state is extending itself, and is engaged in constant warfare with all the other states: its oppressive tyranny causes grievous suffering to the citizens of all the other countries, and it is called Jewdom. I do not believe that this fearful state of affairs has come about because Jewdom forms a separate and exceedingly compact community, but because it is founded upon hatred of the whole human race.”*
It has gone so far, in his (Fichte’s) opinion, that:
“In a country where even the King may not, of his own free will, deprive me of the cottage, which I inherited from my father, and where I have my legal rights against the all-powerful minister, the first Jew, nevertheless, who takes it into his head, can plunder me with impunity,” and he then continues:
“You are all aware of this and cannot deny it, and utter words sweet as sugar about tolerance, the rights of man and civic rights, and the whole time you are inflicting injury on our chief rights as men Cannot you recall in this case the instance of the state within the state?
Does not the intelligible thought ever occur to you that the Jews, who, apart from you, are citizens of a state, which is more firmly founded and more powerful than all of yours, will, if you once give them citizenship in your own countries, tread you, the original citizens, under their feet?”
* J. G. Fichte: “Urteile über die französische Revolution” (Opinions concerning the French Revolution)  Extracts are to be found in the “Handbuch der Judenfrage” (Handbook of the Jewish Question). 26th Edition, Pages 63—65.
The assertion that, in olden times, the Jews were denied entry into the honourable industries, and consequently were forced to resort to usury, is contradicted in the most emphatic manner by Sombart. He cites, amongst other proofs, an order of the Cabinet, dated 1790, which permitted the protected Jews of Breslau to carry on all kinds of mechanical crafts, and mentions also that, amongst these Jews, besides those who were tolerated, there were privileged and universally privileged ones, who were allowed full exercise of all Christian rights in the ordinary course of life. It is quite certain that some Jews enjoyed special privileges, which were hereditary in their families.* Sombart also lays stress on the fact, that if the Jews neither obtained nor sought for admittance into the corporations and guilds, this was to be attributed mainly to the Christian character of these organisations; the crucifix repelled them. The Jews, moreover, already in the 12th and 13th centuries, were not only on a completely equal footing with the great merchants, the shopkeepers and the leading people as regards freedom of the markets (Freitag: “Bilder a.d. Vergangenheit” II — Pictures out of the past II) but they actually had the privilege over their competitors of being protected, together with clergymen, women and pilgrims, against all action under feudal law (Schröder’s Rechtsgeschichte. I — History of Law. I). In olden times the religiousness of the Christian, and the alienage of the Jew himself, operated to the latter’s advantage, just as German cowardliness and “culture” do, at the present day. Owing to their alienage the Jews possessed one peculiar advantage, namely, that there was no need for them to take part in the quarrels of other nations, and could, on that account, all the more easily derive benefit from political complications — at the expense of the two conflicting powers.
* “Amongst themselves the Jews lived (during the 10th-12th centuries and later) according to the Mosaic-Talmudic Law, from which, later on, many legal ideas have crept into the common law of the community. In each town the Jews formed a special community by themselves” — that is to say the Ghetto — “under a Jewish bishop, who was appointed by the King at their suggestion, and who exercised judicial powers amongst them in all cases of dispute.”
“national conflicts became actually the principal source of Jewish acquisition.”
Espionage might also be included (compare page 156). Besides this, one must not forget the farming-out of the privilege to mint money, which the German Emperors, since the 13th century, had made over to the towns and to the large landowners, who, in their turn, had handed it on to single tenants — amongst them many Jews. Up to the middle of the 18th century these people secured enormous profits for themselves from debasement of the coinage alone.
“Outwardly good and inwardly bad, outwardly Frederick but inwardly Ephraim”*
was the derisive comment of the people of Brandenburg concerning the badly silvered-over groschen, issued during the Seven Years War.
4. Jewish Wealth.
The ancient complaint about the oppression of the Jews in olden times, contradicts itself alone by the fact of their indulgent mode of living, and their display of luxury. We have already mentioned how they inhabited the most magnificent mansions, not only in Holland and London, but also in Paris and Hamburg, and Glckel of Hameln discourses in the same strain concerning the princely splendour displayed at a rich Jewish wedding in Amsterdam.
Sombart furnishes long lists of the names of rich Jews in England, Hamburg and Frankfurt, during the 17th and 18th centuries, and the amounts — stated in figures — of the fortunes of these people are a sufficient refutation of the ancient fable about the “poor, oppressed Jew.” He says:
“The peculiar and interesting fact, that the Jews were always the richest people, has continued unaltered for centuries, and remains as true today as it was two or three hundred years ago. It anything, it is still more pronounced and universal at the present time than formerly.”**
* The Jew Ephraim (Itzig & O) was the head of the mintage-farmers, of whose services Frederic the Great was compelled to avail himself when surrounded with difficulties.
** Sombart’s book is especially recommended to the notice of Social Democrats, in order that they may learn who are the originators of the capitalistic system, which they pretend to hate so much, and who are the real oppressors of the people. Perhaps then they will begin to reflect whether they are justified in selecting their leaders and advisers out of this particular circle.
We possess sufficient explanation of this mystery, when we have once become acquainted with the means, by which Jewdom acquires its riches. Only we must once more oppose the erroneous idea, that the riches of the Jews, who live in our midst, are part and parcel of the national wealth. The Hebrews, of their own accord, place themselves outside the pale of the nation; their riches, therefore, are not to be included in our national wealth. On the contrary, the Jewish riches are the sum of what is lost to us in prosperity. These riches, at the present moment, are in the possession of a foreign and hostile nation, which is using them in order to oppress us. All the mighty banking foundations and gigantic Stock Exchange speculations of the Hebrews are, in reality, consummated mainly with our money. In the case of all Jewish activity there is no suggestion of the creation of sound economic values, but only of a crafty shifting of ownership. An honest Hebrew, one Conrad Alberti (Sittenfeld), acknowledged as much when he wrote as follows in the “Gesellschaft” of 1889 No. 12:
“No one can dispute that Jewdom takes a leading part in polluting and corrupting all relations. A characteristic of the Jew is the stubborn endeavour to produce values without work, and this being a matter of impossibility, it simply means that these values are artificially produced by swindling and corruption, by manoeuvres on the Stock Exchange in conjunction with the Press in order to spread false rumours, and by other and similar methods. These artificial and fictitious values are then acquired, unloaded and exchanged for genuine values, produced by real work, only to melt away and vanish in the hands of their new owners like Helen in the arms of Faust. The representatives of corruption on the Exchange, in the Press and in the Theatre in my novel ‘The Old and Young’, representatives of that class who strive to enrich themselves without working, are therefore Jews.”
When Sombart says: “Capitalism is born from the money loan”, I should like to add to this: Capitalism actually exists only in the money-loan; for, under the expression “Capital” in the narrower sense, I understand only Loan-Capital, that is to say the kind of capital which is utilised, not to generate productive activity, but solely to win interest. It cannot be disputed that the dangerous capitalism of the present day arises solely from the loaning of money, for the productive fortunes of our great industrialists must not be compared in this respect with the usury-capital of the Rothschilds and their associates.
The productive capital of industry consists, like that of the large land-owners, preponderatingly of landed property, buildings and industrial investments, and only gives a return when inventive intelligence, organising power and hard work are also brought into active operation. The distinguishing feature, however, of loan-capital — “speculative capital” — is to bring in a return without doing any work for it. Productive capital gives opportunity for work and wages simultaneously to hundreds and thousands, but loan-capital is only a steady drain on the return earned by others, taking often the lion’s share; for it makes sure of its percentage whatever happens, even when adverse circumstances or the failure of the harvest wipe out all profit.
When certain people make the simple masses believe that the farmer and the large land-owner — the hated “Agrarian” — are the real oppressors and plunderers of the people, they omit to mention that very frequently this “Agrarian” himself is grievously oppressed, and is on the rack from year’s end to year’s end, to raise the money to pay the interest on the mortgages. The workman in industrial service, or in possession of a handicraft, always remains a free man, who receives an honest wage for honest work, and who can, if he chooses, give notice and change his employer. But whoever finds himself in the bondage of Loan-capital and doomed to pay interest, is seldom, if ever, able to shake off the fetters. The landowner, burdened with mortgages, is far less free and far less of a master than the youngest proletarian from the factory.
All his life long he, and often his children and grandchildren as well, are chained to the same piece of soil, which claims all their labour in order to raise interest for Loan-capital. How crazy it is then, to direct the envy and hatred of the town bred proletariat against these supposed tyrants! In reality, many of these so-called owners — even the large landed proprietors — are themselves “owned” by the Loan-capitalists.
A new kind of secret serfdom has come into being, which is invisible to the ordinary public, and which consists in allowing the slave to retain the outward appearance of lord and master, whilst it condemns the much-envied owner to a kind of bondage.
This bondage is rooted finally in our wrong arrangement of our interest system. It is opposed to common sense, in the case of a sum of money lent on interest once only, to make, not only the recipient of the loan, but his children and children’s children liable to pay interest for all time. This “eternal interest” is, on the one side, the curse of the productive classes, and on the other, the fertile soil in which are rooted the power and dominancy of that oppressor of the nations — Judah. The interest system invests the moneylender with a relative might which, in reality, is more oppressive than the dominance and despotism of the olden times.
The despot of earlier times invariably took the part of his bondmen, and protected them against dangers from without, because their preservation and his own economic interest were inseparable. The lender of money does not recognise this personal concern for the welfare of those who pay him interest; he chases them ruthlessly from hearth and home when they are no longer able to pay him tribute. He also enjoys the advantage that the unpledged portion of his debtor’s property falls, in this manner, into his clutches as well.
Sometimes he acquires, under a forced sale, the entire possessions of his debtor in satisfaction of his claim, and thereby gains that part of the property, which had not yet been pledged. He then introduces a fresh “interest-slave” into the property, and proceeds to treat the same, who perhaps has increased the value of the property by his personal energy, in precisely the same manner should he fall into arrears.
Between the “interest-master” and the “interest-slave” all human relations have ceased; the connection between the two has become purely mechanical; it has become unhuman and soulless. On the other hand, the activity of the receiver of interest does not call for the slightest intellectual or physical exertion.
The knight of olden times protected his bondmen with spear and shield against their foes; the lord of capital has divested himself of all such responsibilities. The accumulation of capital also has become a purely mechanical process. Interest and capital accumulate in accordance with the purely mechanical law of mass-attraction — an absolutely imbecile proceeding devoid of any organic sense. Sombart says:
“With regard to the lending of money, economic activity as such has lost all meaning; the occupation of lending money has ceased to be a sensible activity of either mind or body.”
There is one, and only one object: the material result i.e., the acquisition of fresh capital, and therewith the extension of the power of the lender of the money.
In this manner loan-capital gains power over other men, and has forced itself into a dominating position, which is founded neither on physical, nor on intellectual, nor on moral superiority. This position depends entirely upon a fictitious power, and one which is devoid of any human element, namely the conception or notion of capital. It is enabled by means of eternal interest, extending into immeasurable time, to make foreign labour subject to itself, and to overpower and crush all spiritual and moral effort. The formation of capital out of interest is something automatic and spiritless, for it can be consummated just as well in the hands of an idiot as in the hands of a being destitute of all morality — simply by a fiction, by a false economic view.
“The possibility of earning money without any personal exertion by an economic transaction, makes its first distinct appearance in the lending of money. The possibility also, of getting strangers to work for one without physical compulsion, is immediately apparent.”
Thus writes Sombart on page 223; it seems to us, however, that the “scooping-in” of interest is scarcely worthy of the name of “economic transaction.”
After such illuminating reflections, it seems very extraordinary to us, that it is precisely in the capitalistic Jewish press where a bitter hatred is unceasingly fomented against the domination of olden times, and against anything which refers to, or recalls the same. Feudal-domination, Knighthood, Nobility are mediaeval ideas, and as such are exposed to incessant attacks from the so-called “liberal” press.
With what right and for what purpose? Simply with the object of not allowing the infatuated population, who are ignorant of history, to wake up to the fact that they are languishing and wasting away under new tyrants, the interest-despots, who set to work in a far more selfish and brutal manner than was ever the case even with the most ruthless Feudal-Lord of the Middle Ages.
Version 2: Added chapter links and new cover image – Sep 27, 2014
Version 1: Published May 19, 2014
Read Full Post »