Europe’s Scientists and Jewish plutocrats (2)

Jewish plutocracy and its utilitarian exploitation of religion played an important role within development of materialism in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; and there is no coincidence that “Holbach”, one of the most pessimistic scientists of Europe about Judaism, was the founder of “modern Atheism”.
This wave was also prevailed among the members of Jewish communities. According to the historians of Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the phenomenon of Marranos had a very important cultural issue which it discouraged any religious beliefs among the next generations of Jews. It should be considered the rebellion of Spinoza and his deistical philosophy, and affiliation of a group of young Jewish generation to socialistic movements in the nineteenth century and interest of many of them in materialistic ideas, as the consequences of this phenomenon. Jewish materialism was the result of religion collapse to a function of utilitarian materials and interests in which Marranos were the most prominent symbols. Thus, within Jewish families, a generation of materialists was emerged overt and covert who had no faith in religious beliefs or they merely viewed to the religion as a social and political tool. Some of them cut off from Judaism and some remained loyal to ethnic Jewish ideals, values, and traditions. Among the most prominent Jewish intellectual and political figures in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, there are not rare materialists; those who are undoubtedly “Jewish” but they have not the least beliefs in Judaism as a religion. We think that many today Jewish plutocratic oligarchy’s numbers must be considered among this group.
Furthermore, the interest of West Europe’s Jewish youth to socialistic and anarchistic movements in the nineteenth century should be considered as a reaction against an isolated intellectual system, centralized and tribal structure of Jewish communities, and an absolute and powerful domination of Jewish plutocratic oligarchy. Earlier, we discussed about the ancient examples of this rebellion, “innovators”, and “apostates”. The modern wave of revolt against centralized and isolated structure of Jewish communities was begun by “Spinoza”.
The historians of Hebrew University of Jerusalem believe that “Baruch Spinoza” (1632-1677), the famous Jewish-Dutch philosopher, was the first Jew who rejected Judaism and cut off from “Jewish brothers’ society” without affiliating to another religion.
Spinoza's father was a Portuguese Jew who lived in the port of Amsterdam after emigrating. It is not mentioned Spinoza’s family had a kinship link with the members of Jewish oligarchy and therefore, it seems that he belonged to a typical household. Spinoza denied the authenticity of “Torah” in his youth by the impact of a Spanish Jew named “Juan de Prado” and he even expressed opinions in religious matters which they are not tolerated by Amsterdam’s rabbis. Therefore, on July 27, 1656, the assembly of Amsterdam’s rabbis expelled him to be a membership within “Israel’s nation”, when he was only 24 years old, and all Jews were strictly forbidden from communicating with him. It seems that the assembly of Amsterdam’s rabbis would also decide to kill him, but Spinoza saved his life by writing “repentance”. Since then, he would have to live among Protestants and he emigrated to “Hague” in 1670. In the same year, he composed an essay about the metaphysics and politics which was published without the author's name. This composition containing criticism about the “Old Testament” was banned and only a few copies were covertly sold. Spinoza was accused of atheism because of writing the composition, but he wrote a detailed letter to “Orobio de Castro”, a Dutch rabbi, in which he denied his atheism and irreligion. In 1674, he wrote his most important book, namely “Ethics”, which like many of his books, was published after his death. Spinoza had a simple and secluded life and died at 45 years old.
Spinoza's books contain the sharp criticism about the political structure of Jewish community. When he expresses about “human’s right to free thinking and free expression of his ideas” in his first treatise; in fact, it was a remonstrance against the strangulated atmosphere of Jewish communities of that era. Spinoza considered that Jewish communities’ leaders tried to maintain “Torah’s laws”, in order to maintain their hegemony over the Jewish communities. He writes:
“Jews despise other people and it becomes of a second nature to them because they reinforce it by their daily religious ceremonies. Their worship style is not only different but also is in conflict with other people.”
According to Spinoza, Even the good characteristics found in the Jews are derived by their evil nature; the unity of Jews and their support of each other are due to their hatred of all other peoples and, as a result, other people hate them. Their reign was fallen in Palestinian because [even] the God hated them.
Spinoza, in a Treatise concerning metaphysics and politics, touts that “the Pentateuch” (except for some chapters), “the book of Joshua Ibn Nun, “Book of Judges”, “Book of Samuel” and “Book of Kings” are all have been written by scriber Ezra, Spinoza believes that Ezra died at a precocious death and so he did not have the opportunity to edit the above books and thus it is thought these books have been multiple authors. According to him, the book of “Chronicles” has been compiled during Hashminian government i.e. centuries after Ezra. He knows that the books of “Daniel”, “ester”, “Ezra” and “Nehemiah” were also written by a Hashminian historian who has proceeded to develop these books based on last references. Succinctly, Spinoza believes that much of “Old Testament” has been made by “Ferrision” during Hashminian government. Spinoza stressed repeatedly that this critical review is not incompatible with belief in God; there is the unique God, independent of philosophical thought, which it calls for justice and friendship among human beings.
In the nineteenth century, opposition to the oligarchy of Jewish plutocracy was a serious phenomenon among Europe’s people. This opposition was run between two parties: the Catholics and the Socialists.
Catholic people of Europe, particularly in France, in a significant era of the nineteenth century, knew that Europe’s devastating wars and its sufferings have been caused by the intrigues of Jewish plutocrats who had recourse to secret Masonic organizations in order to achieve their financial and political domination. The relationship between Pope and Jewish plutocrats, as we have seen, was dark in two sections of the nineteenth century; one in the years of 1823-1870, especially in the era of Pope Pius IX, and another one in the years of 1878-1903 namely at the time of Pope Leo XIII.
During the nineteenth century, Pope issued announcements against Freemasonry15 times that six times were stated by Pope Pius IX and five times by Leo XIII and the worst one was on April 20, 1884. Leo XIII, in the 25-pages statement, divided the humanity into two fronts of “divine” and “demonic” and he believed that Masons are belonged to the later front. This is a cult inaugurating its way into the “world of darkness” through the “abstruse conspiracy”. Pope pointed out Masons’ cult has been developed “unprecedentedly” in the last 150 years and it has been strong that it now seems the cult is as “dominating power” in the states. Leo XIII knew that Jewish plutocrats as Masons’ collaborators and their partners in the conspiracies.
Catholics’ struggle with Jewish plutocrats led to the establishment of a Catholic bank of “General Union” in 1880 that it was naively thought it can terminate the clout of Jewish plutocrats in French economy. The bank went bankrupt by revealed machinations of Rothschilds and the outcome of this event was a wave of hatred against Jewish plutocrats.
An overwhelming majority of Europe’s socialists in the nineteenth century, particularly in France, also disagreed with Jewish plutocracy. This is different from the current state of social European democracy, which has the strong ties with Jewish plutocracy. As well as, the opposition wave of France's Socialists to Jewish oligarchy led to the establishment of “Crédit Mobilier Bank”. We will discuss about the conflict affair of this bank with Rothschilds in the future.
Many of the great founders and thinkers of European socialism had a negative attitude to the phenomenon of Jewish plutocracy. François February (1772-1837), a prominent theorist of socialism, was strongly pessimist to Jewish plutocrats; and it was derived from his political and economic view. February considered the trade as “the source of all evils” and the Jews as “the embodiment of the trade”, and therefore he perceived Jewish economic activity to be destructive for society.
In the period after the fall of Napoleon III, the theories of a follower of February, named “Alphonse Toussenel” (1803-1885), became the inspiration source for socialist intellectuals of France against the Jewish plutocrats. He wrote a book called “Jews, the kings of time” in 1845. Toussenel insisted that his theories have no racial aspect and he meant “Jewish bankers and usurers”.
“Proudhon” (1809-1865), another socialist French thinker, agreed with February on the pessimistic view to Jewish plutocrats. He considered Jews as “the origin of evil” and believed that they condemn Europe to the bourgeoisie entirely. Proudhon touted the Jews as “the enemies of humanity” in his private notes.
“Narodniks” (Russian revolutionist groups in the period before the penetration of Marxism) also focused on the phenomenon of Jewish plutocracy and opposed it. In the discussion of “pogroms” in Russia and East Europe (in volume III) will be acquainted with the attitude of Narodniks to Jewish plutocracy.
Among the most significant Europe’s intellectual movements which their thinkers have expressed negative comments against “Judaism”, it should be noted to “young Hegelians” and its three famous figures of “Bruno Bauer”, “Ludwig Feuerbach” and “Friedrich Doumer”. This is the ideology which was at the topmost of its activity in 1840s and eventually “Karl Marx” was emerged through it. In 1843, Bruno Bauer (1809-1882) wrote a treatise on Judaism issue and in the same year, Karl Marx also wrote another treatise of the same name.
Karl Marx (1818-1883) belonged to a Jewish family. His father, “Herschel Holloway” was a member of a rabbinic family. He, along with his wife and eight children converted to Christianity and was named “Heinrich Marx”. Karl Marx was six years old at that time.
Karl Marx, in 1843, at the height of Louis-Philippe and Baron James Rothschild’s authority, was in Paris for a short time and then he got familiar with Friedrich Engels (1820-1895) for the first time. However, at this time, Engels did not enter to Marx’s life and Heinrich Heine, the famous poet, was Marx's closest friend in Paris. They had the closest relationships together. “Iraj Eskandari”, the translator of Persian Capital, writes that “Marx liked Heine extremely”. Heinrich Heine belonged to a Jewish court family of Heine and he was 21 years older than Marx. At this time, he was a member of the intellectual circle that gathered in the palace of Baron James Rothschild in Paris, and they had a close relationship with Baroness Betty Rothschild, wife of James. It is quite reasonable and even likely that 25-year-old Marx with Heine have gone to Rothschild’s palace.
In published books of Marx, we could see his first encounter with the Jews in 1843, when he just returned to Germany from a trip of Paris. He wrote in a letter to “Arnold Ruge”:
“The head of Jewish community here [Cologne] came to see me and asked to sign a request for Jews’ membership in the State Council. However, I don’t like the Jewish religion, but I'm going to do it.
In the autumn of that year, he wrote a treatise on Judaism issue rejecting Bruno Bauer’s treatise.
Bruno Bauer, like Marx and other “young Hegelians”, was strongly irreligious, he laid down a condition for freedom of the Jews upon the social and political restrictions in German society following by the government would being based on the irreligion (secular) foundations and repulsing of religion into the realm of “civil community” and influenced by the theories of Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859), he considered as a model to North America.
Marx, unlike Bauer, believed that the political freedom is impossible without social justice; he thought that realization of social justice throughout the elimination of social classes and the elimination of social classes was only possible throughout the abolition of private property. He criticized French Declaration of Human Rights (1791) based on this theoretical framework, and he acclaimed the spirit of the contemporary world for “Judaism”.
The young Marx's treatise was seriously important to recognize the atmosphere of intellectual circles in Europe. However, due to severe offences to “Judaism”, it was rarely adduced and it has still remained unknown. Marx, in this treatise, including the philosophical-political writing style of Germany in which there was a complex and abstruse Hegelian prose of that day, stated “the true secret of Jewish religion” as follows:
“What is the secular basis of Judaism? It is the [Originality of] practical needs and personal interests. What is the Jewish religion on the earth? Brokerage! What is its God on the earth? Money! Alright! Freedom of brokerage and money resulting in liberation of practical and real Judaism will be our era’s freedom. The social organization eliminating the Preconditions of brokerage, and thus the possibility of brokerage makes Semitism impossible ... On the other hand, if the a Jew realizes the futility of his practical nature and strives in the way of removing it, he has separated himself from his past ... so, we could find a general anti-social element of present time in Judaism ... hence, in the final analysis, the freedom of the Jews is the freedom of mankind from Judaism.”
Bruno Bauer recognized the actual authority of Jewish plutocrats and while they still do not have the official legal status in the structure of European societies. Bauer writes:
“A Jew, for example in Vienna, forced by its financial strength, determines the fate of all of empires [Austria], and a Jew who may be deprived of any political rights in the smallest German state, decides the fate of the whole of Europe.”
Marx emphasized Boer’s statement and he adds:
“Jews have already made themselves to the free Jews in a way, because they not only have attained the financial authority, but also so that, through them and others, money has been become to a world power. The practical Jewish spirit has been turned into the practical spirit of Christian nations. Jews have already made themselves free by Judaizing the Christians.”
Marx finds the most telling example of this domination of Judaism in North America:
“In fact, in North America, the practical domination of Judaism has been realized over the Christian world, as unambiguously and as normally like it is the Gospel, and Christian religious organization has become to a commercial commodity ... [Therefore,] the contradiction between the practical political power of the Jews and their political rights is [symbol of] the contradiction between the politics and the power of money in general. Although the first is dependent to the later theoretically, but in practice, the policy has been become the rapt of financial power. [In America] the Jewish religion has earned its place alongside Christianity... because the practical Jewish spirit, i.e. Judaism, has achieved its position and even it has reached to the highest stage of its perfection in the Christian community. A Jewish person, as an individual member of civil society, is only a particular manifestation of the Judaism [general phenomenon] of civil society. Judaism continues his life, not in spite of history, but because [the necessity] of history. Civil society constantly produces the Jews within its depths.
What is the basis of Judaism? [Originality] practical need and selfishness! ... [Originality] is a practical need and selfishness is the fundamental principle of civil society and so that, the civil society creates its political state as purest form. The God of practical need and self-interest is money. Money is the vigilant God of Israel against which there is no god having the right to life. Money degrades all the gods of man and changes into the commodity. Money is an autonomous value for everything ... money is alienated essence of human existence and work; and this alienated essence dominates him, and it is worshiped by him. [Thus,] the God of Jews has been become mundane [secularized] and it has been become world’s God. “Bill” is the real God of Judaism and its God is an eerie form of “Bill”. An image of the nature dominated under private property and money is a real insult and a practical humiliation for the nature. Yes, there is the nature in the Jewish religion, but only in dreams. That is why “Thomas Montserrat” knows that is intolerable which “all creatures have been become properties, the fishes in the water, the birds in the sky, the trees on the land, the creatures of God must be free”. Insulting to the thought, art, history, and man qua man, there is in an abstract form in Jewish religion; in the real view and conscious vision, human is the rapt of money. [In Judaism] the interpersonal relationship, the relationship between man and woman, has been also become a trade issue! Women are bought and sold. Fictitious Jewish homeland [land] of merchants is the people who are rapt of money. The unfounded Jewish law is only a religious caricature of morality and its homeless rights, and it is only a formal ritual surrounded its world of own personal interests. And so the highest relationship between humans is a legal one. The law is authorized for it not because it is based on its own volition and nature, but because it is fluent over and if it is not obeyed, they will be punished ... Judaism cannot create a new world, but it only attracts the creatures and the new conditions of the world in its activity terrain ... with the completion of civil society, Judaism has reached to its tipping point; but it was only in the Christian world that civil society was completed. Just by Christianity’s rule condition - in which the human could be separated from all national, natural, moral, and theoretical elements - civil society could completely separate itself from the life of state, break all interpersonal relationships between men, replace the selfish and egotistical needs instead of interpersonal bonds, and by collapsing of the human world, create the individual majorities, which are hostile against each other. Christianity sprang out from Judaism, and now it is absorbed towards again … the true fate of Judaism has been realized in the civil society and it has been secularized generally... thus we can find the nature of modern Judaism not in Pentateuch and Talmud, but also in today society....”
Marx ends his article with this statement: “the social Freedom of Jews is the society’s freedom from the Judaism.”
To Be Continued...