Persecution Complexities: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as Presented in Behold a Pale Horse pp. 304-305

This week’s post is late because I had to have an emergency appendectomy this week. I’m recovering well. 

Protocol 14

I cannot to say that I’ve come across any real atheist globalist conspiracy theories. Sure, atheists (of which I consider myself) have some irrational beliefs. There is the Sam Harris problem of blending Islam with Islamic nationalism; there are some martyrdom issues (of which some are exaggerated, some fabricated, but there are legitimate causes of concern); but once we get into a large scale conspiracy theories they evolve (devolve?) into a weird religious position. Cooper has got his version of Christianity throughout this book. The Flat Earth conspiracy theory is fundamentalist Christian at its center (I should note that there might be a version of fundamentalist Islamic flat earth since it is flat in a literal reading of the Koran); and only the 80s and 90s UFOlogy circuits were non-religious. Cooper comes out of the circuit so I may have to revisit those writings to see if the religious stuff is just better hidden. 

The Protocols are explicitly religious. There is no way around it. It’s plagiarized by extremists looking to absolve the Christian Russian monarchs of the problems in Russia. It’s using a historical bias against one group by another group based solely in religious differences so that Western Russians will ignore that the Tsar is starving them to fund a war in the East that they will eventually lose. So far, the book has been oddly blase about anti-Semitism. It’s been littered throughout the previous protocols but Cooper’s idea that we can just swap out the word “Goyim” for “Cattle” and “Zion” for “Sion” isn’t that absurd. It’s just a standard super-conspiracy. Now we get right into the blatant and dangerous anti-Semitism.

“When we come into our kingdom it will be undesirable for us that there should exist any other religion of the One God with whom our destiny is bound up by our position as the Chosen People and through whom our same destiny is united with the destinies of the world.”

I will repeat how we are supposed to read this book. We’re supposed to hate the recommendations of the Elder, as good Russians (or Christians) this claim on the one true faith is supposed to inflame our anger. Who is this elder to claim that they are the chosen people when clearly Jesus died to free of us of the old ways (except the ones we like)? These are the thoughts that we are supposed to feel when reading these claims. 

The elder then adds that they will use the press (which they control from two posts ago) to publish all of the faults in the non-Jewish governments so that the people will turn to the Elders for their historically beneficence. I don’t like to nitpick conspiracy theorists on the details of their theories, but as of 1910 do the Jewish people have a history of beneficent rule? I’m not trying to say they were terrible rulers, but that they have a neutral presence. The history of Jewish political influence in European royalty was that of running the finances–it’s where our stereotype of the “Jewish Banker” comes from. The Elder can highlight the problems of the Christian governments all he wants, but there is no replacement that he can offer. 

I suppose that merely pointing out the issues in the Christian governments might work but then won’t people just point out the problems in the Elder’s government? No, because (and all-caps is in the original): “BUT NO ONE WILL EVER BRING UNDER DISCUSSION OUR FAITH FROM ITS TRUE POINT OF VIEW SINCE THIS WILL BE FULLY LEANRED BY NONE SAVE OURS, WHO WILL NEVER DARE TO BETRAY ITS SECRETS.” 

This is one of the most dangerous sentiments in the book. Judaism, as a religion, is easily available. Every Christian has most of it in their own book, then there’s the Talmud; but none of that is beyond reproach. The Abrahamic tradition mostly agrees with itself. The difference is the placement of the Messiah: Christians believe it happened, Muslims and Jews don’t. The rules are largely the same, and where they are different it’s fairly arbitrary. None of the three permit tattoos, homosexuality, and are fairly misogynist; Jews and Muslims can’t eat pork, but they are all supposed to pray daily. Muslims have a direction to pray in, but they all have a holy day, etc. What the protocols are claiming is that this isn’t Judaism, this the public face of Judaism. 

The hidden face of Judaism is the one that no one on the outside ever hears about. This is the religion spoken of in their weird strange language that no one can learn, or their secret books; and it’s xenophobia at its literal worst. Even the “good ones” aren’t excused because they are aware of the secrets. They will never tell you the secrets because of they are sworn to secrecy. There are parallels between this claim and what happened to the Knights Templar in 1312. There was no evidence that Jacque DeMolay was plotting against Philip IV of France, but the claim was that they were and they were sworn to keep the secret. Which is why there tortured into confession of everything but a plot against the French king. There was the same sentiment regarding Muslims shortly after 9/11; sure not all Muslims were responsible but they all secretly approved of it, and this accusation continues to the present day. The Mexican border, the caravans, etc. You’ll never find one confession but, as the Elder claims, they would never betray the secret true version of their religion. 

They are all part of the crime and this is why the Jewish population of the Western Russian Empire is going to pack up and flee into Poland.  

It took awhile, but we’ve gotten to the really bad parts of the book. It’s also the point where Cooper can no longer claim ignorance on the anti-Semitic content of this chapter. Either he knows and doesn’t care, or he doesn’t care enough to learn. 

Education: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as Presented in Behold a Pale Horse; pp. 287-288

Protocol 8

So far, the Elder, has been quite disappointing. This is, after all, a book which has done so much damage throughout the world. It was named dropped in the original Hamas Charter, it has been referred to in Mein Kempf, and fascist parties in Greece have read from it; but this book, it seems, is only giving a concentrated version of anti-Semitism. I guess, I expect more out of this (there is the possibility that I’ve read too much of these books to be surprised). 

Protocol 8 is one of those that diverge from the original source that it plagiarizes from. Protocol 8 follows an idea in Dialogue 8 (the numbers do not always match up), but the Protocols makes some shifts. Throughout our discussion of the Protocols I’ve mentioned that it is a plagiarism, and I’ve noted in the past that author Jonathan Kay argues that 60% of the Protocols is word for word (barring translation) lifted directly from the original source. I’ve referred a few times to that source and I’ve noticed that the divergence occurs because Joly understands his characters. Namely Machiavelli. 

Niccolo Machiavelli is the reason I have a PhD. I went to graduate school wanting to write about his political philosophy, I had read all of his works–minus his “Dialogue on Language” before starting. I did not get along with or have much regard for the political philosopher in my department and then…a bunch of odd things happened to get me where I am now. An aspect of Machiavelli’s writing is that he offers a hypothesis or a question (i.e. is it better to be loved or feared?); he analyzes the question a little and then goes into examples from both his time (Renaissance Italy) and ancient Rome. If one is unfamiliar with his examples, his writing comes across as boring. The Protocols mostly diverge when Joly’s Machiavelli does the historical analysis. This is important because the audience for the Protocols isn’t going to read it. 

This section of the book follows the same pattern. The Elder repeats his same schtick from Protocol 5 about taking over the administrative state. They’re not going to conquer the kingdoms and declare themselves monarchs; they’ll hide in the shadows and control every avenue of power that the official king needs to conduct business. In the Protocols, this is considered a bad thing, in the Dialogues, Machiavelli is making the point that you need jurists, administrators, diplomats, and publicists; to operate a state. They’re just important people who understand things. 

The Protocols frame this as evil. This is part of the plan, “These persons will have cognisance of all the secrets of the social structure, they will know all the languages that can be made up by political alphabets and words; they will be made acquainted with the whole underside of human nature, with all it sensitive chords on which they will have to play.”

What the Elder wants, and what the author of the Protocols wants you to despise; are educated people in charge of the various facets of society. The idea, which is a running theme throughout the Protocols, is that anyone educated in a specialized subject is part of the conspiracy. If the common rabble do not understand something it’s not because they lack education or lack curiosity, it’s because it is a secret they are prevented from learning by “them.” The sentiment is not an innocuous one either–the rebellion against advanced education continues to the present day. If teaching the kids something makes the older generation feel stupid/bad/guilty; then it needs to be banned and no longer taught. It’s part of the conspiracy that you do not understand advanced economic theory rather than the truth–that you didn’t study economics. 

The Elder claims the Goyim (which Cooper wants us to read as “Sheep”) cannot do these jobs because they are too stupid. They, “are accustomed to perform their administrative work without giving themselves the trouble to think what its aim is, and never consider what it is needed for.“

Wouldn’t it be better to have those people doing the tasks as opposed to people that do understand? The former cannot fathom the purposes and, importantly, also don’t care about it. The latter can use that information, they can try and carve out their own little fiefdom and become a challenge to the elder? In a normal conspiracy, this makes sense, but the endemic racism here claims that all Jewish people work together–they would never betray their own kind. 

The elder then claims that after some time this will establish an abyss between the elders and the common people so that this last point, about the possibility of betrayal, would never occur without the penalty of criminal charges or just disappearance. I don’t understand how this is supposed to work; if someone is going to betray the elders, they already understand the penalty for not being successful. 

In the original, the abyss language is used but it’s much different: “One must arrange things so as to give them to men whose antecedents and characters place an abyss between them and other men, each of whom only expects death or exile in case of a change of government or the necessity of defending all that exists to their last breaths.”

Machiavelli claims that special education and positions will weave themselves into the person’s character so that they will defend their state to the death. The secretary of defense, for example, will be so tied to their position in their state that by betraying it they will betray themselves. This is derived from an idea that Machiavelli had regarding the loyalty that Scipio Africanus extracted from the Roman nobility after their defeat at Cannae. Scipio made them so afraid to break their oaths that they would rather die, and then he defeated the Carthaginians. 

I still doubt that Cooper has read the Protocols with as much certainty as I doubt that many of the people who purchased this book never read past the first chapter. So far, the conspiracy is just, “they control everything” but it’s still very short on details. 

War and Education: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion presented within Behold a Pale Horse; pp. 274-275

Just to recap for new readers, this is the infamous anti-Semitic plagiarism and forgery being published in Cooper’s book. His only caveat is that we should read “Zion” as “Sion” and “Goyim” as “Cattle.” It doesn’t make the work less anti-Semitic. See the last post for what I think is happening.

“It is indispensable for our purpose that wars, so far as possible, should not result in territorial gains: war will thus be brought on to economic ground, where the nations will not fail to perceive in the assistance we give the strength of our predominance, and this state of things will put both sides at the mercy of our international agentur;”

There’s a story that Nathan Rothschild was present at the final defeat of Napolean. Upon learning of the defeat, he took the fastest horse (or hired the fastest messenger) to the coast of France, hopped on a ship, took it to England then ended up at the London Exchange where his downtrodden and tired appearance was mistaken for news that Napolean had won. Other bankers seeing him, began buying up stock (or selling) based on this news, whereupon Rothschild began selling (or buying) everything. This event laid the foundation for the Rothschild empire. This event also never happened. It’s important to note that the anti-Semitic Protocols laid the foundation for a specific anti-Semitic accusation against a specific family of Jewish bankers. 

Protocol 2, lays out the idea that all major wars benefit a secret group in charge of the world. In this case, it’s the Jewish cabal, and it does not matter what other word you substitute here. The problem with these types of theories is something I alluded to last week: they let the racist theories mingle with the non-racist theories. Cooper can claim he’s not anti-Semitic, but he believes every single thing they do, with the exception that he’s not blaming “the Jews.” In a pragmatic sense, it does not matter. Cooper could easily give a talk to a Christian Identity militia group in 1998 without changing a single word and it would fit right in. 

The original document is concerned with Napoleon III and his wars. The wars were unsuccessful. We celebrate Cinco de Mayo because of one of his losses. The Russian version of this was to claim that the Jews were responsible for WWI, and why the Tsar’s efforts failed resulting in the Bolshevik revolution. No territory changed hands for Russia, they were not winning, even against the dying Ottoman empire. Wars as finance is interesting. We’ve seen this accusation play out in 2003 as the US was ramping up to wage war in Iraq. There, were no “both sides.”

In WWI and WWII; the accusation was that the Jews made money by funding both sides of the war. They did this by financing weapons manufacturers, shipping, and basically all the wartime activity that is not the actual fighting. This accusation does not work on any level. You really have to be a Holocaust denier to agree with “the Jews” generally or the Rothschilds specifically funded both sides of WWII. Even with WWI, it’s hard to make this claim because the heads of state were all related. The English monarchs, the Tsars, and the Kaiser were cousins. 

The elders then make some claims about how education will serve as a distraction to the population. This is a more interesting claim to me because it’s a conspiracy theory I hear quite frequently from people unaware of the sentiment they are parroting: 

“The goyim are not guided by practical use of unprejudiced historical observation, but by theoretical routine without any critical regard for consequent results. We need not, therefore, take any account of them–let them amuse themselves until the hour strikes, or live on hopes of new forms of enterprising pastime, or on the memories of all they have enjoyed. For them let that play the principal part which we have persuaded them to accept as the dictates of science (theory).” 

Remember the narrator is the evil puppet master. Here, the recommendation is that they’ll distract the populace with theory so that they become preoccupied and weak failing to see the value of practical education. To understand this we have to get into the head of the audience this work is intended for. The elder claims that theories such as, and these are his examples: “Darwinism, Marxism, Nietzsche-ism;” are “successes” in disintegrating the unity of the goyim. These theories have caused schisms in society against the way things ought to be. The elder claims these theories as his invention. The audience is then supposed to reject these ideas. The point of the second half of Protocol 2 (which should be its own Protocol) is to get the regular folk to reject education that does not bear a direct consequence. 

Historical context has its place here. The Tsars spread this work to counter the revolutionary sentiment spurned on by people like Vladimir Lenin who took Marx to heart. Darwinism was seen, in the early 20th century, as a threat to established Christianity–again, an important factor given that the Tsar’s crown was divinely bequeathed to him. Nietzsche? I’m not entirely sure. Most people that demonize Nietzsche have not read it and do not understand it…although to be fair, the people that lionize him don’t understand it either. If he was popular in Russia at the time, I’d be amazed, he is certainly an addition to the original Joly text considering the timeline. 

The goal of the author is to demonize where these thoughts come from. Education, liberal ideas such as democracy, deism, and non-conformity are plots to undermine the state by the evil cabal. The remedy is to cease this kind of education and get people back to useful knowledge.

I hear this today, frequently, every time someone says that higher education is useless and that kids should only go to trade school to learn a skill. What they are afraid of, is the rejection of the old ways in favor of something new and thus frightening. Learn to insert tab A into slot B, make some money then die. Never question the way things are, never learn uncomfortable facts, and above all maintain the status quo. This is how we fight the evil cabal.