Dugin and “the Jews”
www.nimrodderosario.com
Dugin and “the Jews”
Foreword
It is worth looking at the sort of people Dugin has actually invited to join the leadership Council of his “Eurasia Movement,” while he is delivering his fantastic essays and lectures (1) on the end of the world (2) and similar cosmic themes. The two Israeli Jews Dugin has invited to join the Council, who are presented in the latter part of this chapter, are exploiting race and religion for generically right-wing imperialist purposes which might equally be those of the CIA or of the FSB. There is a professional type of member of the Black International whose loyalties must necessarily be to one or another of the great imperialist blocs of his time, but who is quite incapable of actually believing in the apocalyptic, eschatological fantasies which Dugin puts forward to mass audiences. An example of the type of agent I have in mind, a top-ranking member of the Black International with a half-century history of going back and forth at will between neo-Nazism and NATO, is Stefano della Chiaie, whose multifarious intelligence links are explored in Stuart Christie’s “Portrait of a Black Terrorist” (3). Dugin’s Jewish Israeli recruits are not quite in that class, but they are clearly ‘operatives’, and they both dismiss Dugin’s flirtations with Iran, Venezuela and other Israeli enemies as irrelevant to their own affiliation with “Eurasia”. Indeed, these flirtations are irrelevant, since they are nothing but window-dressing. This could equally be true of Dugin’s ‘anti-Americanism’. After all, the CIA has always been happy to employ right-wing activists whose writings are full of ‘anti-Americanism’. The secret to this is that the CIA case officers pretend to agree with them that the USA would be much improved by a fascist coup. This sordid underworld of ‘operatives’, of course, is in complete contrast to Dugin’s outwardly respectful attitude to Putin, and to the Russian Orthodox Church. On the Evrasia.info website (4), Dugin appears to be following Putin’s petit-bourgeois line very assiduously. But he continues to expand his metaphysical vision, to attract the idealists, currently along apparently Heideggerian-Guenonian lines. He is careful not to defend Israel openly, or even to mention it.
What I offer below is, first of all, one of Dugin’s characteristically brilliant essays which is not widely known or generally available, but can be found in the Internet Archive (the ‘Wayback Machine’). URLs for all the texts are at the end of this essay. In “The Jews and Eurasia”, Dugin uses a dialectical technique which I would describe as ‘juggling’. Broadly speaking, he groups the European Jews of the modern world into two opposing psychological and cultural camps, in order to create the hopeful illusion in the minds of non-Jewish readers of an eschatological, mystical bent that Jewish ‘messianism’ converges with Christian ‘messianism’ in a universalistic way, which it in reality does not. This essay is highly illuminating if you read it with some knowledge of what Jewish ‘messianism’ is actually all about, and rather than offer various fragmentary texts to illustrate this, I shall recommend that you watch this brief youtube video (5) to gain an inside understanding of the actuality. There is no resemblance, indeed there is an antithesis, between Jewish ‘messianism’ and ‘messianism’ in the Christian sense of the word. This antithesis is illustrated pretty clearly by the two Israeli Jews Dugin has invited to join his Council, Avram Shmulevich and Avigdor Eskin, who are presented below, following Dugin’s wonderful dialectical fantasy. The general type of Israeli Jew who is most likely to feature in Russian life is the Lubavitcher or ‘Chabadnik’. Lubavitch could be described as ‘Messianic’, but their ‘Messianism’ has nothing at all in common with that of the Russian Christian, except possibly its extreme right-wing orientation, which has made Lubavitch into a useful adjunct to the CIA over the decades. But Dugin’s own recruits, Shmulevich and Eskin, are far to the right even of Lubavitch. They are, in fact, Kachists. This may mean that they are too loopy to be useful as agents of influence to imperial intelligence services, or it may not.
EXCERPTS FROM ‘THE JEWS AND EURASIA’
Alexander Dugin, Polyarni Israil (Polar Israel), Feb 2000 (6)
Previously published by Arktogaia. Translated from Russian by M Conserva.
1. Insufficiency of the explanatory schemes
The Jewish question continues to excite the minds of our contemporaries. This issue cannot be solved neither by artificially overlooking it, nor by some hasty apologetic shrill, nor by primitive Judeophobia. The Jewish people is a unique phenomenon in the world history. They clearly follow an absolutely special religious-ethical path, peculiar only to themselves, carrying out through the millennia a mysterious and ambiguous mission. What is the sense of this mission? How to solve the enigma of the Jews? In what consists the so much gossip-raising Mission des Juifs? The theme is too vast to make an attempt at dealing with it in full. Therefore we shall limit ourselves to the role of the Jews in Russian history of the 20th century, since this question painfully touches a very large set of people, irrespective of the ideological camp they belong to. We shall immediately notice that today there is no convincing, completely satisfactory treatment of this theme.
First version: Some historians are generally inclined to deny the relevance of the Jewish factor in Russian and Soviet history, which means doing rough violence to truth. One must only look at the lists of surnames among the main Bolshevik figures and the political elite of the Soviet State, and the disproportionate quantity of Jewish names will catch the eye. To ignore this fact, getting off cheaply with meaningless statements, is incorrect even from the purely scientific, historical point of view.
Second version: This theory concerning the function of the Jews in Russia (USSR) in the 20th century is typical of our national-patriotic circles. Here the role of the Jews is represented as having been only negative, subversive, destructive. It is the famous theory of the «Jewish conspiracy», which was especially popular among the Black Hundreds and later the White-Guardist circles. From this point of view, the Jews, following their unique ethno-religious tradition and considering themselves as a single community revealing a messianic status, consciously organized the destructive Bolshevik movement, held in it a dominating position and brought to pieces the last stronghold of conservative Christian statehood, culture and tradition. Diehard conservative Judeophobes transfer the same pattern also to the destruction of the USSR, laying this blame too on the Jews, referring to the huge number of representatives of this nation among the ranks of the reformers. The weakness of this concept is that the same people are simultaneously charged with creating the Soviet State and then shattering it, with being the main bearer of the socialist, anti-bourgeois conception, and then with acting as the main apologist of capitalism. Besides, an unbiased acquaintance of the fates of the Bolshevik Jews proves their absolutely sincere belief in the communist ideology, up to being ready to sacrifice their own life for it, which would be impossible, should we seriously accept the version about a group of «cynical and false saboteurs». As a whole, such anti-Semitic version is unconvincing, though it is a little bit closer to the truth than the former, as unlike the former, it recognizes the uniqueness of the Jews’ role in the historical process. Curiously enough, such acknowledgement unites the anti-Semites to the most conscious and consequent Zionists.
Third version: This belongs to the Judeophile (in some definite cases, Zionist) circles. They insist that the Jews always and in every case are on the right side, victims of unfair persecutions on the part of various peoples, bearers of all positive, moral, cultural and social values. This position acknowledges the guiding role of the Jews in all the important historical processes in Russia, but obviously states that, either during the Revolution, or during the Soviet history, or during the perestroika, the Jews are the positive pole personifying the eternal truth, kindness, wit, humanity. If for the anti-Semites the Jews act as as an unequivocal evil, and this diagnosis is not put into doubt even when it leads to logical and historical absurdities, for the Judeophiles the strictly reverse picture appears: here the Jews are always good, even if this categorically contradicts the objective picture of things. Therefore also this extremely apologetic approach cannot be exhaustive, as it is built from the start on a-priori forced interpretations. Let us remark that both the anti-Semitic and Zionist versions of the issue (the Jews’ role in modern Russian-Soviet history) derive from some supposed deep-rooted unity of the Jews, a unity of historical reflection and will. In other words, there appears the tendency to consider the Jews not simply as an ethnos along with the others, but as some kind of organization, party, order, lobby etc. of its own.
2. A new version
A different version, on the contrary, recognizes that there is no unity of the Jews and that, as well as for any other people, each Jew acts in history on his own, from his own «ego», as a personality, which only in a background, minor, psychological sense is defined by ethnic factors, and consequently the term «Hebraism» itself, as both anti-Semites and Zionists understand it, has no right to existence. Leaving aside all these approaches because of their almost evident negativity, we offer here a different version. If we are not satisfied neither with the personalistic approach, nor with the all-encompassing approach – that is, neither with the concept of an indefinite plurality, nor with the concept of a compact unity – it is natural to suspect the existence of some intermediate pattern. It is meaningful to speak about an internal duality of the Jews, about the presence inside this unique ethnos not of any single will, but of two wills, two «organizations», two «orders», two centres of historical refection, two scenarios of messianic path. Such a dualistic approach will give us a completely new, and in many respects unexpected perspective in the description of this very complex phenomenon. But our starting point in this assumption was due only to a deductive, formal logical method. Let us now verify to what such duality corresponds in reality.
3. Easterners and westerners in the Jewish ranks
The well-known Eurasist author Jacob Bromberg some time ago put forward a very similar idea in the paper «About Jewish Orientalism». His argument was that in the environment of the Russian Jews two antagonistic groups could be clearly distinguished, representing polar psychological and cultural archetypes. One group has a Hassidic-Traditionalist attitude. Its features are mysticism, religious fanaticism, extreme idealism, spirit of sacrifice, profound contempt for the material side of life, for eagerness and for rationalism. In some extreme cases such mystical Jewish type shifts from ethno-religious particularism to universalism, diffusing its own ideals of national Messianism to different peoples. But apart from its orthodox religious environments, the same psychological type gave birth to secularized, fervent revolutionaries, Marxists, Communists, Populists. And one of the branches of mystical Hebraism distinguished itself not simply for its abstract Marxism, but for a deep sympathy and sincere solidarity toward the Russian people, especially to the Russian peasantry and the Russian workers, i.e. with elements not belonging to the official, Czarist Russia, but to the native, parallel Russia, the Russia of soil and land, the Russia of the Old Believers and mystics, the «enchanted Russian pilgrims». Hence the classic types of the Jews: SR (Socialist Revolutionary Party), whose features were always and everywhere an open Russian Nationalist tendency and a consequent and deep-rooted National Bolshevism. Bromberg consolidates this Hassidic-Marxist, mystic-socialist environment into one single group: «Jewish Orientalism». It is the «Eurasist fraction» within Hebraism.
Another celebrated historian, the Soviet Mikhail Agursky, comes to similar conclusions in his epoch-making work «The ideology of National Bolshevism», where he goes to the sources of so the Russophilia so spread in the Jewish revolutionary circles and typical of many figures of Jewish origin among Soviet National Bolshevism — in particular, the greatest ideologists of this current, Isaiah Lezhnev and Vladimir Tan-Bogoraz. Many Jews saw in Bolshevism a possibility to merge, at last, with a large people, to leave the ghetto and their boundaries in order to eschatologically unite Russian Messianism to Jewish Messianism under the common aegis of the Eurasist revolution, of the destruction of the alienating laws of capital and exploitation. Thus, the extreme circles of the mystically oriented East-European Jews (from the Hassids up to Sabbatists) represented a nutritious environment for Bolsheviks, SRs and Marxists, and not incidentally the majority of the Red leaders came from Hassidic families and enclaves wrapped in a mystical, eschatological Messianic pathos. In spite of all the exterior paradoxicality of such rapprochement, some inner typological and psychological connection existed between the Hassidic types of Jewish fundamentalist and the builders of the atheistic Bolshevik society, since both the former and the latter belonged to the «Eurasist», «Orientalist», mystical-irrationalist part of Hebraism.
The opposite group united in itself a completely different Jewish type: rationalist, bourgeois, cool towards religion but, on the contrary, passionately sinking into the elements of greed, personal benefit, accruing, rationalization of economic activities. This is, according to Bromberg, «Jewish Occidentalism». And again as in the case with Jewish Orientalism, we see here a combination of externally polar positions. On the one hand, to this category belong the religious circles of the extreme Talmudists («Rabbinists»), inheriting the orthodox Maimonidean line, i.e. the Aristotelian-rationalistic line in the Judaic religion. At its times this Talmudic camp actively struggled against the propagation in Hebraism of Kabbalistic, passionately mystical tendencies contradicting the spirit and the mythological form of arid creationist Jewish theology. For more in detail, see the wonderful analysis of this theme in Gershom Scholem: «The Kabbala and its symbolism», «The sources of Kabbalah», etc. Later its leaders sharply reacted against the pseudo-Messiah Sabbatai Zevi, Messianic leader of Jewish mystical heterodoxy. In the 18th and 19th centuries from their environment the party of the so-called «Mitnagedim» (literally the «opponents», in Hebrew) was formed, desperately struggling against Hassidism and the revival of extreme mysticism among the Eastern European Jews. This camp was based on religious rationalism, on Talmudic tradition cleared of any mystical-mythological sedimentations. Strangely enough, to the same category of Jews also belonged the figures of «Haskalah», of the «Jewish Enlightenment», which called for the modernization and secularization of the Jews, refusing religious practices and traditions in the name of «humanism» and «assimilation» to the «progressive peoples of the West». In Russia this Jewish type, though inclined to extreme opposition in relation to the conservative nominally monarchist-Orthodox regime, stood on Western, liberal positions. The top of the expectations of this group was the February Revolution, completely satisfying all their bourgeois, rationalistic and democratic aspirations. After the Bolshevik Revolution, «Jewish Occidentalism» as a whole backed the White side, and despite its racial affinity to the Bolshevik leaders, it did not recognize itself in the universalist and mystic-oriented «Jewish Orientalists».
Just as the Russians were divided during the revolution between «White» and «Red», also on the basis of deep-rooted archetypal features (but this requires a separate discussion), Hebraism too was broken in a political sense, along a deep-rooted line much earlier outlined, in two inter-Jewish camps: Hassidic Kabbalists (Bolsheviks), on the one side, and Talmudist rationalists (Illuminist, bourgeois capitalist) on the other. So, the typology of Bromberg-Agursky based on historical examples reconfirms that conclusion to which we came following a purely logical path: Hebraism, though representing an ethno-religious unity (which is not so obvious yet!), is nevertheless essentially divided in two camps, two «orders», two «communities», two types, which in definite critical situations show not only difference, but also fundamental hostility. Each of these poles has both religious and secular expressions, remaining essentially uniform. «Jewish Orientalism», «Jewish Eurasism» (according to Bromberg) or «Jewish National Bolshevism» (according to Agursky) comprises in itself a religious level — Hassidism, Sabbatism, Kabbalah — and a secular level — Marxism, revolutionary Socialism, Populism, Bolshevism. «Jewish Occidentalism» also is dual; in it the religious plan coincides with Maimonidean, rationalistic Talmudism (later shown in the Gaons of Vilna, the «Mitnaged» centres, the anti-Hassidic circles), and the secular version is expressed in liberal-democratic, «Enlightened» humanism.
4. Two examples
The fundamental duality we discovered instantly explains a set of factors which remained unclear and paradoxical according to different interpretation methodologies. In particular, a logical explanation is found for the mysterious phenomenon of the so-called «Jewish anti-Semitism». So, Marx’s criticism of Lassalle, in which Marx used extremely Judeophobic expressions, and also the considerably anti-Jewish passages in Marx as a whole, identifying Judaism with capitalism, become completely clear, as the Jew Marx from every point of view unambiguously belongs to the mystic-Hassidic, Messianic type, which traditionally sees in bourgeoisie and capitalism — where the relevant role both in philosophical and in common sense is played by the Jews — the main enemy. In his paper «On the Jewish Question», Marx wrote:
What are secular bases of Hebraism? Material needs, self-interest. What is the earthly ideal of the Jew? Selling. Who is his earthly god? Money. Money – here is the zealous deity of Israel. The empirical essence of Hebraism is trade.
Let’s notice this underlining of the terms «secular», «empirical». Marx as though hints at two sides. One of them is the material, immanent side, which he, without much ceremony, labels and throws away as the incarnation of negativeness (let us remind of that truly demonic, anti-Christian role, which Marx attributed to Capital). The second side — not secular, not empirical, transcendental. This represents, according to our reconstruction, the Communist-oriented Jewish mysticism. Another example. In its times, a group of Kabbalist Zoharites (admirers of the book «Zohar»), followers of the mystic Kabbalist Jacob Frank, collectively converted to Christianity, contemporarily «exposing» the odious rites of the Talmudists (Rabbinites), primordial enemies. The Jewish historian G L Shtrak in the book «Blood in Beliefs and Superstitions of Mankind» so describes the conflict between the followers of Frank and the Talmudists:
In 1759 they (Frankists) have pronounced to the archbishop Bratislav Lyubensky, that they craved for baptisms, as a deer for a source of water, and tendered to demonstrate «that the Talmudists spill more innocent Christian blood than the pagans, crave for it and use it.» At the same time, they asked him to designate for them dwelling places east of Lemberg, so that they could live there by the work of hands, while «Talmudists cultivate drunkenness, drink the blood of the poor Christians and squeeze them up to last dime.» Soon after the dispute, under the insistence of the Polish clergy, they accepted baptism for about a thousand Zoharites.
In these two examples we see the unity of spiritual opposition at various levels. The atheist Marx identifies Capital with the figure of the «Jew», and on this basis curses also the Jews and their «empirical deity». Mystical «Frankists» curse the Talmudists on a completely different basis, accusing them — according to the level of the whole polemic — of «drinking the blood of the Christians». It is striking how in the Zoharites the social motive emerges: «Rabbinites squeeze the Christians up to last dime», and Zoharites are going to «to live by the works of hands». The spiritual conflict of mystical mythologists, gnostics, zealots and spiritualists against religious moralists, supporters of pure rite, cult formalists, as though unconsciously and naturally is shifted to the opposition of socialists and capitalists, Bolsheviks and liberal-democrats. In Bromberg’s terminology, it is already not difficult at all to identify Marx and Zoharites with «Jewish Orientalism», and capitalists and Rabbinites with the «Occidentalists». Everything converges.
5. Jews against Jews
Now we shall project the outlined scheme on the Soviet history and discover there too the role of the Jews. As a whole, Hebraism on the eve of the revolution was united in its opposition to the existing regime. It concerned both sectors. The Jewish Orientalists were opposed to capitalism and religious conservatism, alienation and formalism in the sphere of culture, craved for a revolutionary change and the opening of the magic aeon of the Messianic kingdom. The Jewish Occidentalists did not accept Czarism for completely different reasons, including its backward, insufficiently capitalist, civilized and humanist regime, subject to perfecting up to the level of the Western civilization. All Hebraism as a whole was in solidarity in the necessity of overthrowing the dynasty, and of the revolution. In it, they found allies both among the nationalist Russian periphery, dreaming about shattering the «prison of the peoples», and among the «left-wing nationalists» from the same Russian environment, perceiving the Romanov-Petersburg regime as an anti-national, anti-patriotic, anti-spiritual parody of the genuine Sacred Rus. Besides, enough Occidentalists were also among the Russian nobility and Russian merchant class actively busy with contemporary Russian capitalism, spoiling the last «cherry gardens» of a quickly degenerating aristocracy. The united action of all these forces, once a favourable situation was present, accomplished the February Revolution. But immediately after it, the unsolved contradictions within the winning camp emerged. After the overthrow of the imperial regime, with a second line of fracture (this time internal) appeared very clearly, and this predetermined all the following events.
After the February Revolution, on the foreground there was an opposition of revolutionary and evolutionary forces, Left-Orientalists and Left-Occidentalists, Eurasists and Europeanists. This fundamental dualism of kinds was very clearly evident also in the Jewish environment itself. The Bolshevik pole had gathered in itself the representatives of «Jewish Orientalism», the Hassidic-kabbalist kind, Jews-Communists, Jews-Socialists — those, which at the end of the 18th century wanted «to live by the works of hands». This labour, eschatologist, universalist, mostly Russophile Hebraism solidarized with the National Bolshevik Russian current of «Left-Imperialists», seeing in the October Revolution not the end of the national dream, but its beginning, a new red dawn, the second coming of the Soviet Rus, of the secret Kitezh of the Old Believers, lost in the dark bicentenary of St Petersburg’s Synodal unsacred parody. Bolshevism had gradually absorbed in itself not only the orthodox Marxists, but a large number of SRs, specially left-wing SRs, which could be defined as the Russian analogues of the National Revolutionaries. In a word, the Jewish organizing into the Bolshevik ranks represents the logical and triumphal conclusion of the historical path for the enormous organic Jewish sector, the roots of which lay in the distant religious disputes of a grey Middle Ages. As the enemies of this eschatological community of «Jewish Orientalists» stood all the capitalists of the world, and specially the Jewish bourgeois, secular, empirical (on Marx’s expression) incarnation of the the ancient Rabbinites. From here also the paradoxical Bolshevist «anti-Semitism», not alien also to many Jewish Communists. Agursky refers in his work a most interesting case, when the Jew Vladimir Tan-Bogoraz intercedes for a Russian Bolshevik who has afforded a rough anti-Semitic tirade, not only intercedes, but fully justifies him. How this resembles the quoted story of Zoharites!
By the way, we find something similar also in other spheres. So, for example, the famous founder of the Bavarian lodge «Thule», preparing the birth of the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany, Baron von Sebottendorff, in his time was initiated to the «Egyptian Masonry» in Turkey by a married couple of Jews-Sabbatists and from them received the bases of esoteric science. But thus he himself differed from manifest anti-Semitism (not to mention the about ordinary nazis). A Jewish (specially Sabbatist) trace can be found and in a number of other strongly nationalist, sometimes openly racist or anti-Semitic organizations — both European (masonic), and Eastern (Young Turks). On the other hand, anti-Semitism could be directed also to the opposite side, and and in this case its bearers could quite be either Jews or politicians controlled by them. So, for example, are widely known the anti-Semitic expressions of Churchill, who, referring to the Jewish origin of the majority of the Bolshevist leaders, spoke about «the Jewish menace threatening civilization from the East». Thus, Churchill in his political career leaned on the right-wing Zionist circles of Great Britain and the US, as Douglas Reed convincingly shows. Hence, just as there exists «Right» and «Left» Hebraism, so there is a «Right» and «Left» anti-Semitism. Thus also in this question we come to a more complex pattern. From February to October, there passes the watershed between the two halves of the Jewish world, and since a definite moment this opposition acquires its most severe forms. In extreme cases the representatives of both camps resort in their polemic to argumentations almost not dissimilar from the rough vulgar speech of the anti-Semites. But this is not all. At the climax of confrontation, the collision acquires the nature of war of physical destruction, as we see in the history of Stalin purges among the ranks of the Soviet government.
6. To live by the work of hands
There is no doubt that the Jews differ by their unique ability in some social, economic and cultural areas. Centuries of diaspora have taught a lot to a small but resistant, persistent people wishing not to miss their ancient dream, their millennial religion, their remote promise. Looking at everything around as something temporary, distant, transitory, the Jews have worked out a number of striking dynamical features allowing them to be instantly guided into social dynamics, in the rapidly ongoing processes of a state and national scale, flowing into the environment of the «big peoples», which, «being always at home», understood everything with a definite lag, with slow, a-posteriori reflection. But these skills could be differently used in the different situations. So, the Jewish Bolsheviks have gathered all efforts, all national talents, all spiritual powers to the creation of the most powerful Soviet state, the empire of social justice, the Eurasist bastion of overland geopolitics. And the manifold elements of the Jewish diaspora in Europe, America, Asia, coming from the same religious-spiritual, mystical, spiritually «Orientalist», «Eurasist» environments, were for long decades a structural support for the Soviets, the geopolitical agents of the Great Eurasia, the guides of Bolshevist Messianism. It was just them who basically formed the Third International, later Comintern, the powerful Eurasian network, the subtle agency of Moscow in every corner of the planet. But again, we shall stress that we are not simply talking about the Jews, but about a special category of Jews, about a special Jewish camp, about the «Jewish Eurasists». By the way, at a definite stage they, these «red-brown» Jewsish Eurasists also have prepared the creation of the state of Israel, having started under the direction (and the approval) of Moscow a hard fight with the English Atlantists, with the forces of capital and liberal democracy. They formed the axis of the Israeli left-wing forces, a fruit of whose efforts were the famous kibbutz. Again, the same Zoharite «to live by works of hands».
The apologists of Hebraism as such, exhibiting all Jews as extremely innocent victims, can find no way to explain why, in times of severe repression as the Leninist and Stalinist purges, Jews were not only the victims, but also the jailers; and not only individually, as single persons, but just as a group, a party, a faction. This circumstance – never explained either in the anti-Semite, or in the Judeophile framework – can be actually explained, since under the Soviet power the internal fight within Hebraism did not cease. Bolshevik, «Hassidic», «Zoharite» elements well knowing the skills and the snake-like moods of their own co-nationals, their taste for intrigues, chameleonism, conspiracies, mercilessly fought the bourgeois elements of Hebraism, together with the residuals of «Jewsish Occidentalists», the heirs of the «Rabbinite» spirit, the ideological descendants of the «Mitnagedim». From here also stems the paradox: why, at the centre of purges of clear anti-Semitic accent, there stood always and everywhere also Jews? A classic example of such position can be found in Lazar Kaganovich, most loyal follower of Stalin, convinced and staunch National Bolshevik, whom the Russian nationalists, completely misunderstanding, have unfairly turned into an emblematic figure of «Jewish conspirator». It would be difficult to invent a greater «anti-Semite» (in its anti-Talmudic sense). How the internal drama of Soviet Hebraism evolved in the times of Lenin and Stalin – this was a passionate, heroic epoch, full of ups and downs, which (we have no doubt) one day will be conveniently and detailedly described.
7. From crisis to collapse
The critical point in the history of Jewish Eurasism is 1948. In this moment Stalin and his entourage come to the conclusion that with a creation of the State of Israel, which right at the beginning had been enthusiastically supported by the Soviet government as a Hassidic-Socialist construction, proved an instrument of the bourgeois West, as the line of the capitalist «Mitnagedim» gained supremacy in it. Zionist tendencies began to be awoken also in Soviet Hebraism, and it meant that the initiative was passing to the residuals of the «Occidentalist» sector, whose total eradication was only apparent and whose damage aroused even the vigilant suspicions of the Jewsish Eurasists. This moment was fatal for the whole Soviet state, for socialism all over the world, as shown by the last events of the end of our century. When the anti-Semitic tendency within the Soviet government grew beyond definite limits — especially scandalous was the destruction of the Jewish anti-fascist committee, entirely made of convinced Eurasists and direct agents of Lavrenti Beria (which speaks only to their benefit) — only the most resistant Jewish National Bolsheviks (the same Kaganovich) could remain unshakable on Russophile, Soviet-Imperial positions. As a whole, in the eyes of the Jewish masses, the influence of the Eurasists was sufficiently weakened, and their basic geopolitical and ideological line essentially discredited. On the other hand, from the party and military environment the highest power positions began to be restricted to the Great-Russian and Small-Russian (Ukrainian) elements, who were far from being able to clearly understand the Messianic path of left-wing nationalism, Messianic National Bolshevism, founding the spiritual union of Jewish and Russian Eurasists since the beginning of the century. This new generation felt itself more as étatistes than apostles of a New Truth, inheriting either the military «Romanov» spirit of the Czarist caste of war-specialists, not fully eradicated by the Bolsheviks, or as simple populists, manifesting worker-peasant chauvinism with a definite component of unreflective, instinctive anti-Semitism. These army cadres, not knowing the Revolution and the supreme spiritual, historical effort that accompanied it, did not penetrate into the subtleties of national politics. A singular deafness to this issue was a typical mark of those from Ukraine, who since a definite time — together with Khrushchev — began to occupy more and more tightly the supreme powers in the USSR. And, though immediately after the death of Stalin, Beria completely stopped the anti-Semitic «affair of the doctors», the irreparable had occurred.
Further there happened the fatal crisis. The Russian-Jewish, Eurasian-continental, international-Imperial, Messianic, revolutionary current being the vertebral column of the Soviet Power, was weakened, cracked, deformed at its base. State, authority, economic organisms began to operate inertially. The purges, at whose roots always invariably the fundamental ideological, metapolitical reasons laid hidden, were over, and in their place came the fuzz of clans, the gradual «embourgeoisement» of socialism, its sliding into philistinism, into meanness. Revolutionary eschatological pathos vanished. The Soviet state was left to keep on only inertially. The world base of the eschatological Eurasist Revolution had essentially turned into a normal state. Powerful, great, original, but deprived of the heat of its original ecumenical mission. At the level of Hebraism this meant the full defeat of the «Hassidic-Sabbatist» camp and the gradual coming to primary roles of the Jewish rationalists, Kantians, humanists, Mitnagedim, Occidentalists. The secret alliance to National Bolshevism was terminated, Jewish Orientalism was quickly marginalized. Its influence, its positions catastrophically fell. Gradually the type of the Jewish Bolshevik was pushed to the edge, and within the leadership of the Jewish community in the USSR the representatives of the Maimonidean, Talmudic brand were put forward. More often in a secular humanist liberal version. This bourgeois, right-wing Zionist flank henceforth worked only to the collapse of the Soviet formation, prepared the great collapse of socialism, undermined this giant geopolitical construction from the inside. By the way, in unison with this destructive anti-Eurasian tendency worked also definite anti-Semitic circles within the KGB. This only aggravated the dissolving of that spiritual, cultural and ideological synthesis, which was the mysterious propellant of the original Bolshevism, of National Bolshevism. Anyway, the collapse of the Soviet State was the direct result of the withdrawal of the Jewish lobby from the creative statist Bolshevik position and its direct or indirect complicity with the hostile anti-Soviet Atlantist capitalist West.
8. Towards the Eurasian future
The model we described in its general contours, allows us to look with new eyes at many problems linked to the obscure levers of Soviet history. Let us remark that this approach can also be applied to different geopolitical systems, since something similar can also be met in other countries and other political contexts. By the way, the great writer Arthur Koestler pointed to the theme of the fundamental duality of Hebraism, offering a thesis which was questionable from the ethnological point of view, but rather expressive from the typological point of view, about the «Turkic» racial origin of the East European Jews, «Askhenazi» as a whole, being the heirs of religious Judaized Zoharites – whence also the known dualism between Ashkenazim and Sephardim (pure Semites). In the case of the Karaites, i.e. another anti-Talmudic direction in Hebraism, the fact of a derivation from the Khazars is considered as unequivocally proved (see L Gumilev). It is curious that Douglas Reed agreed with the theories of a Turkic derivation of the «Ashkenazim», considering this kind of Jews as a ramification of the «Turkic-Mongolian race»!
It is important to stress a different aspect. Jewish Orientalism is not an especially modern, exclusively Soviet phenomenon. It is rooted in the depths of national history. Probably behind it there is some terrible religious or racial secret. Anyway, there is no doubt that the victory of the «Mitnaged» lobby, of the Jewish Occidentalism, is not and cannot be an irreversible and accomplished event. It is impossible to deny that the positions of Jewish Orientalism are weak and marginal now as never before. But it might well be just a temporary phenomenon. The national identification of a definite part of Hebraism is inconceivable without the spirit of sacrifice, great compassion, agonizing and idealistic search for truth, without deep mystical contemplation, without disgusted scorn for the dark slavish laws «of this world», for the laws of the market and of egoistic interest. Jewish Orientalism, the deeds of humbleness and sublime insensateness of the first legendary Tzaddiks, the sincere compassion toward our fellow creatures, irrespective of their racial and religious origins, the fanatical belief in equity and the honest building of society, and at last, that vaguely-guessed solidarity with another tragic and beautiful people of history, too elected, chosen by God, the Russian people – all this cannot be uprooted from a definite part of Hebraism, it is inseparable from its unique destiny. Pressed between the (partly justified) anti-Semitism of the Russian patriots and the westernist, rationalist, market-oriented, destructive and anti-statist material matrix of the present Russian Jewish liberals, Jewish Orientalism experiences hard times. But we must not despair. In the life of this people there have been worse trials. It is important only to realize its choice, to interpret its place in history, to consistently find out its geopolitical and spiritual orientation. And from their side, obliged by their responsibility, and in the light of all this tragic historical experience, all consequent eurasists proclaim: there will always be a place for «Jewish Orientalism» in the ranks of the builders of the Great Eurasian Empire, the Last Empire. But the betrayal of the Great Idea we shall not forgive and we shall not forget, never and nobody. Neither ours, nor the others.
THE SITUATION ABOUT THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT
Alexander Dugin, Polyarniy Izrail (Polar Israel), Nov 2000 (7)
This text from an interview to part.org.ua (Ukraine), translated from Russian by M Conserva
The situation holds an enormous historical meaning. We are at a fatal turn: the US surrender Israel, which served them as a strategic bastion in the Near East during the “cold war” period. The Jewish diaspora – the part which identified itself with the destiny of globalism and Atlantism – appears in the rôle of betrayer of the Messianic impulse laying at the basis of Israel. When the Russian-Jewish messianic, eschatological alliance laying at the roots of the USSR was broken, the first to suffer was the Union, the active, passionate and united Jewish minority joined in undermining the bases of Sovietism. As a result – perestroika and the ruin of a superpower. Israel and the Jewish “software” in the US, in Europe and the insider layer in the USSR, unitedly have brought down a great Eurasian empire. But the great collapse of the Union revealed the substance of the US, now calculating the Atlantist surrender of Israel – since in the absence of the USSR, the Arabian world, whose petroleum allows to hold side by side Europe and the US, is more relevant than “a handful of zealots”. And the Jewish lobby, AIPAC etc. show themselves as the spokesmen not of the Jewish National Religious interests, but as simple globalists and fawners at the service of Washington. The situation in Israel once again proves of the absolute correctness of geopolitical analysis. I foretold all this. Now it is clearly visible. Contrary to the almost anti-Semites, evil is not the Jews, evil is Atlantism. And within it, those Jews who work for Atlantism, but not only them. Today the Jews are brought as a victim by Atlantism. The fact itself of such a possibility is the proof of the correctness of the Eurasist analysis. The US are not governed by the Jews, they are governed by Leviathan*, “Great Confusion” and “sacred demon”, this rogue outside of nation and religion. While the US exist, evil exists. I am convinced that the situation in Israel will change the balance of power in the Eurasist camp, reorienting many Jews to Russia and depriving many Russians of their anti-Semitic prejudices. The situation with the Serbs and with the Israelis is analogous. The US play the Islamic card to their own benefit.
The pro-American attitude of many Jews as a matter of fact stems from widespread anti-Semitism, than from the modest uproar of Russian nationalists, confused with the historical moment. Who outraged Joseph’s tomb? Pamyat? The Russian National Unity Party? No, it was outraged by Gusinsky and Yossi Beilin, Albright and Eagleberger, the sponsors of the “peace process”. Everything fits in its place. I think this terrible situation will make a lot of people recover their wits. As always and ever, the blame goes only to the Atlantists, who want to impose to the world their order – without religions, races, hierarchies, cults, cultures, languages, rites. Probably, the Israelis believed that they could deceive the devil, and the cosmopolitan world without religions and castes would make an exception for the small Middle East state. It did not. It is time to go back to the origins – to Eurasia, to where we belong, to where we draw force. And at last, the situation in Israel got fire too early, before a serious force could rise from the side of Russia and the anti-American sector of the Islamic world to the rigorous and proper Eurasist solution of the situation. Events do anticipate geopolitical reflection. Considering how slowly and with what internal buzz the truths exposed in my works on geopolitics reach the necessary people, I begin to understand what Cassandra must have felt.
* “Leviathan” in the terminology of geopolitical science symbolizes a maritime, “mobile”, commercial civilization (examples – Athens, Carthage, England, the US) in contraposition to “Behemoth” – symbol of a continental, “static”, non-commercial civilization (examples – Sparta, Rome, the Golden Horde, Russia) – note by V Bukarski.
Communiqué from the web-site of Arktogaia
ArchivEurasia (Wayback Machine), Apr 2001 (8)
On Apr 21 2001 in Moscow the constituent congress of the All-Russian Political Social Movement “EURASIA” was held. It was attended by delegates from 51 regions of the Russian Federation. The following members were elected to leading positions
Chairman of the Political Council: Alexander Gelevich Dugin.
Vice-president of the Political Council: Petr Evgenevich Suslov.
Have entered the direction of the Movement:
Supreme Mufti of Russia, Sheikh-ul-Islam Talgat Tadzh’ud-Din.
Rector of the Russian Orthodox University, Ioann Bogoslov
Prior of the Aginsky Datsan, Andrey Lupsandashievich Dondukbayev;
Hassidic rabbi, founder of “Be’ad Artzeinu” Party, Avram Shmulevich.
The movement is created on the basis of the Eurasist ideology and inter-confessional harmony in support of the reforms of the President of Russia Vladimir Vladimirevich Putin, and is built on democratic foundations. Anyone can be member of the Movement who wishes to share the principles of Eurasism, patriotism, social justice, and to support the purposes and the tasks of the Movement.
The website of “Be’ad Artzeinu” (For our Homeland) is here (9), almost entirely in Russian. Now let us examine the ideas of the aforesaid Avram Shmulevich:
AVRAM SHMULEVICH: THE MAN OF THE COUNTER-ÉLITE
Vasily Zharkov, Jewish.ru, Jun 2001 (10)
The dissident from Hebron – They say that he never parts from his automatic gun. And this is not surprising, since he lives in Hebron. It is not necessary to explain that such is life in Hebron, where Arab bullets and rocks are as normal as crowd in the Moscow underground. I shall say honestly, in his place I would rather live in any green suburb of Tel Aviv. But he considers that the land on which he lives belongs to the Jews, and leaving his own land leads nowhere. The mysterious Avram Shmulevich was known to the Russian public after his article on Nezavisimaya Gazeta, in which he told about war events in Hebron. Then came the sensational interview on the newspaper Zavtra. The movement he is leading, Be’ad Artzeinu, picketed the Latvian embassy in Israel. Finally, Alexander Gordon himself invited him to his broadcast “Gloomy morning”. Hastily uttered in the receiver a friend, journalist of one of the main newspapers: «Couldn’t you find us, Shmulevich?» But he was already back in Hebron. And still our conversation took place, at midday on a hot Jun 4. From the windows, the noise of Moscow in a working day. Into the editorial office enters a tall, sturdy man. One might think he had come out of an old photograph taken at the beginning of the century: kipa, beard, black suit. To say the truth, in his arm he held a suitcase, no automatic gun. Avram Shmulevich calls himself a Traditionalist and says he fights against globalisation. He supports his arguments by quoting the Torah and Lenin. But, one way or another, they make sense and, by common judgement, he has his own supporters. Having read our interview, everyone can come to his own conclusion. At the centre of our talk was contemporary Israel.
Q: Every day we receive alarming reports about the events in Israel. How do you personally evaluate the present situation? How much acceptable is, from your point of view, what the Sharon government is doing?
A: Unfortunately, the Sharon government, and all the so-called right-wing camp, already formed at the times of Netanyahu, once again has fully shown its weakness. As a matter of fact Sharon differs in nothing from the Labour government. He even seems to be much worse. I would rather Barak were still at the power. With him, at least, the terror did not reach the present level.
Q: And what happens in the Jewish settlements?
A: The day before yesterday at night, a good friend of mine was killed. He was 51 years old, he was shepherd in the Jewish settlement of Susa. He leaves nine children. He lived in faraway farm and led the lifestyle of the traditional Jew. They attacked him in a field, hit him with knives and then shot him. And so it is practically each day, but the Sharon government does not react in any way. In the country the national spirit is broken, and the present government has no reasonable exit plan from the ongoing crisis.
Q: Which political forces inside Israel do you consider most negatively?
A: We stand against those forces which have open anti-Israeli positions. There are now three such parties: the ultra-leftist Meretz, Shinui and Democratic Choice. The Shinui party, like it is called, is strongly anti-clerical. It is not simply anti-religious, it is anti-Semitic and, as a matter of fact, makes use of images and rhetoric from nazi Germany. Let’s recall that the known journalist and party leader Tommy Lapid recently stated that Haredim are as much enemies as Hamas. At the latest elections many Russian Israelis voted for Shinui. Against the Jewish tradition is also Democratic Choice, headed by Roman Bronfman. This movement appeared in more times, having broken away from the “Russian” party of Sharansky, Israel ba-Aliya. They have not passed the election test yet, but the European Council has already given some $400k to their support. This money will be spent on leading seminars among the Russian public. As to the Meretz party, it is made of homosexuals, Arabs, supporters of legalisation of soft drugs, etc.
Q: How much popular are they among the immigrants from Russia and the CIS?
A: It is necessary to say that the Russian public is rather sensible to such rhetoric. All the more so, since right-wing parties and traditionalists practically carry no activities in the “Russian streets”. In one of such organisations, for example, the office charged with connections with the Russian press was recently shut. No wonder, then, why they look through left-wing glasses.
Q: And what do you think about those politicians oriented to the “Russian street”, like Natan Sharansky and Avigdor Liberman?
A: You know, it is first necessary to ask what I think in general about politicians. Churchill in his time said that the politician differs from the statesman in that the former thinks of the next elections while the latter thinks of the next generations. Unfortunately, in Israel not only there are no statesmen, but the majority of the players on the present political scene do not even correspond to the definition of politician.
Q: Does really everything “stink”, in today’s youth slang?
A: The Israeli political élite experiences now a deep crisis. Such a situation was created, as was labelled by Lenin (following Italian sociologists) with the formula: “Those at the bottom do not want; those on top cannot.” Mass media, special services, analytical structures are completely slaves of the left-wing philosophy. Those who do not share left-wing, anti-religious and anti-national views, cannot reach beyond some definite level in their career. Let’s say, in the army one is stopped somewhere at the level of major. In journalism it is simply impossible to find a job. In the Israeli media, there is the unwritten rule according to which a man sharing national views can appear on the TV screen or the radio broadcasts only in the event that he is either a full moron, or an extremist, whose ideas are certainly unacceptable to the majority of the people. The same is true of the universities’ humanistic branches. For example, when an acquaintance of mine, senior lecturer in Jewish literature, got a teaching post at the Tel Aviv university, the managing teacher said to him:
For us the only question is between those who like Jerusalem and those who hate it. So, here we all hate it.
The Tel Aviv university is some kind of a citadel of anti-national forces. There is even no synagogue. And when the students tried to open one, the management of the university refused, considering such step as “favouring religious intolerance.” Thus they put Christmas trees. There is no need to explain that in West this is an integrating part of the main Christian festivity.
Q: Of whom is then formed the contemporary Israeli élite?
A: From laical, anti-religious, mostly Ashkenazi forces. Among the whole population of Israel they amount to no more than 10%. But they really hold in their hands the control levers of the country, be it in business, in the government posts, in the management of the army and the special services, in the media, and, accordingly, among the politicians. This closed élite also leads the Israeli society. It does not receive the information from the outside and is cooked in its own juice. Worthy people, enterprising and independent in their views, have no chance to make their way through this sieve and to reach the top level of power. This is one of the causes of that crisis experienced by Israel.
Q: What does this crisis consist of?
A: The country does not practically have any development strategy. Neither in the field of security, nor in the economy, nor in the social sphere. The gap between the poor and the rich widens. During the years of the Labour government this division grew even stronger. Earlier Israel was a really socialist country, which had taken all the best from the socialist model: help for the needy, state care for the interests of the entire population, etc. Since the end of the 1970s, on the one hand, in many respects due to Likud’s fault, the erosion of the socialist frame began, but, on the other hand, a true capitalism was not built either.
Q: Are you not afraid that some your expressions might drive back the majority of the Russian Jews, who hear in your words the rhetoric of the leaders of irreconcilable opposition here, in Russia?
A: Firstly, what I say is not my own fiction, but objective facts. Secondly, the present situation begins to be perceived by broader and broader layers of the population, and by the people who stand at the top. That for the first time Israel has no strategy, I heard say a few years ago from one of the high-ranking servicemen of the Israeli special services. Within a definite circle, among the technocrats responsible for concrete solutions, this issue is known and debated already for a long time. But very seldom there is someone who calls things by their names, talking about the whole picture. The man I mentioned, for example, had in mind the conditions in the field of national security, defence and foreign policy. However in the economic and social sphere the situation is exactly the same. So, unfortunately, it is an objective process.
Q: Does this mean that Israel and Russia have now common problems?
A: As a matter of fact, many processes now taking place in contemporary Israel are similar to what may be observed in Russia. However, on the whole it is necessary to realise that we are talking about different countries. Israel, in spite of everything, is a prospering country with a GNP amounting to $100b and one of best armies in the world in terms of strength and readiness to combat. According to the leading British magazine on military issues, Jane’s, the fighting power of the Israeli army exceeds that of all the European member countries of NATO taken together. Therefore the scale of Israeli crisis, certainly, is much lower than that of Russia. Nevertheless, the difficult conditions of both countries have common roots. First of all, the process of globalisation. I am not against new information technologies, but they enable to quickly and totally export any ideology and to impose it to all the rest of the world. Properly speaking, it already happens: through soft methods the American philosophy, the American lifestyle and the American political pattern are imposed, and, most important, US economic influence is spread. Any country, any company wants to increase its own profits and aims at holding a leading role. This can be achieved by exporting ideology and social model. So America imposes its will to the majority of the countries of the world. The world conforms itself to a common standard: the people, the ideas, even nutrition become standardised. To this are also interested the transnational corporations oriented to world-wide mass consumption.
Q: But what if the Americans provide economic and military aid, including to the Israeli state?
A: Everyone knows that Israel receives aid from the US in the range of $3b/yr. It means only 3% of our GNP. $2b go on military requirements, $1b on civil requirements. And the defence orders can be placed only to US factories. As a result, the Israeli army has an expensive dollar and an expensive shekel, and our own war industry suffers a loss. It happened that the Israeli company “Rafael” elaborated a new kind of “air-ground” missiles, yet buys them in the US. The matter is that the Americans, participating to the financing and joint elaboration of new technologies, have the right to veto the sale of such technologies to other countries and demand that they should be made only in the US.
Q: You will agree, however, that it is possible to provide a mass of critical examples, yet it is much more relevant to work out an adequately positive program. Can you propose something in exchange?
A: A structural reshaping of the Israeli society is indispensable. Besides, it is necessary to change the political system, making it more open and dynamic. The ageing ruling élite, established in Israel since the 1930s, should be set aside, and in its place new forces should come. But to this purpose it is first of all important to understand what kind of situation has developed. Israel tried to use an alien development model, which, certainly, is completely unacceptable. We have our own civilisation and culture. Properly speaking, every people is unique, and the political system of each country should be built according to a pattern which is adequate to its own national traditions. This also concerns the Jewish people.
Q: What should be the “national pattern” in Israel?
A: We have the Torah. Without entering the debate about its Divine origin, we see a simple fact: the Jews exist for 4,000 years, they are the most ancient people in the world, having passed many times through repression and persecution on very continent. The Talmud compares the Jews to a lamb living among 70 wolves. But thus there is a regularity: there, where the Jewish communities based their life on the Torah and the Halacha, they proved capable to resist external oppression. There, where the Jews deviated from tradition, either destruction or assimilation was waiting for them. That is, we have patterns developed through the millennia, which respond to our national character and our national features. The state needs to be built not according to the prescriptions of Hollywood or the Chicago school, not according to Turkish, English or American patterns, as it is being done now in Israel, as on the basis of our inheritance, Jewish law. In this consists also the philosophy of traditionalism, which we profess.
Q: And what about such concepts as “democracy” and “human rights”? Are they stipulated by the Halacha?
A: Democracy is a very broad concept. It is not simply that parliamentary kind of state structure which prevailed in the West after WW2. By the way, Judaism does not contradict at all the principles of democracy in its wider meaning. You know that in the ancient Middle East there were despotic regimes: Egypt, Babylon, Persia, etc. As to ancient Israel, there was, one might say, a constitutional monarchy. In the Tanach it is told how Queen Jezebel, one of most evil governors of Israel, wanted to get a vineyard, laying near her palace, from a simple Jew. When the master refused to sell the lot of land, Jezebel commanded to kill him. This roused terrible indignation in the country, and, eventually, as the prophet Isaiah writes, the queen was sentenced to death. Dogs tore her into pieces. In any Eastern despotism the land would have simply been confiscated, while here we are talking about the need to buy it. That is, already 3,000 years ago in Israel there existed the laws which could not be broken by the rulers. And when King David bought a place for the Temple from non-Jewish people living there, he too did not start by simply seizing it, he paid money. Therefore in Israel, as we see, there always existed an order, influencing the way the people took their decisions. Democracy is not an alien concept for us. But democracy should be Jewish.
Q: Say, how many belong today to your movement?
A: For a rather long time we simply existed as a circle of intellectuals, sharing the same ideas and elaborating all these problems. In the near future we do not plan yet to get out into the political arena and to become a party with all its indispensable attributes. There is no use in entering now the Knesset. The people have not yet fully realised the situation. But we are ready to co-operate with all political forces, as in all camps there are forces interested in the conservation of the Israeli state. If today’s negative tendencies will develop further, the country could have to face problems which it would not be able to solve. Even within the so-called left wing, there appeared people who start to realise it. I think that if we can show ourselves as a mighty force and draw to our side the proper political circles, there is a chance for the alternative we propose to be realised.
Q: Now in Russia such concepts as PR and political technology have become very fashionable. Without them no political movement can count on real success. And how do you feel about political technology?
A: A strange question. It is like asking how do I feel about atmospheric pressure, whether it influences a man’s health. There is a mass consciousness, a psychology of the masses, and there are the ways to influence this psychology, the methods for manipulating mass consciousness. This is, by the way, one of the weak points of the present model of democracy. It would seem that everyone comes to his own decisions. But the development of technologies and the mass media, such a powerful information flow began to fall on the people, that if you are the most ordinary man, as not a specialist in the field of politics, you are no more in the condition to understand how the real political process is going, to see those complex mechanisms which govern the modern world. Into mass consciousness only shreds of information are thrown, as a matter of fact, clips. Look at today’s television – we are back to the times of pictography! By creating this or that image, the media manipulate the philistines’ consciousness.
Q: Does political technology exist among the participants in your circle?
A: Certainly. Political technology is for a party what the studio is for the internet web designer. Any political man, declaring anything about himself, must do this in a form which can be understood by the masses. Now, unfortunately, gone are the days when Marx issued his many volumes of Das Kapital.
Q: Which Russian political technologist deserves your respect?
A: I would prefer not to answer to this question…
RUSSIANS AND JEWS AGAINST THE OLIGARCHS
Polyarniy Israil (Polar Israel), Jul 2000 (11)
Avrom SHMULEVIC’s interview to Aleksandr PROKHANOV, editor of the newspaper Zavtra
Q: Not often rabbis go to the newspaper “Zavtra ”. What is the purpose of your arrival in Russia?
A: I was invited by the government of Tatarstan in Kazan to participate in an international conference on Eurasism at the threshold of the 21st century. The invitation was originated by the distinguished Russian philosopher Alexander Dugin, advisor of the chairman of State Duma Seleznev. I presented there a report on the theme “Israel, Jews and Eurasia in a geopolitical outlook”. Now I am going back home in Israel.
Q: And, probably, you have noticed, how in the context of political events of these last days in Russia again there was a Jewish theme. Completely unexpectedly. There is a growing feeling, that both Russian and world Hebraism will be torn by some new conflict. The illusion about the consolidation of Hebraism is vanishing. We see that Hebraism is shocked by crises — both in Israel, and in America, and in Europe. And it is especially sharp here, in Russia, when two factions of Hebraism act in sharp conflict. What are the bases for this drama?
A: I think that at first is necessary to explain on a broader scale what is Hebraism in Russia. Many simply do not understand it. As a result of which some myths dominate, which have no relation at all to reality. In my opinion, these two factions, as you said, of Russian Hebraism do not show at all the true interests of Hebraism. What is Hebraism as such? The Jewish civilization is one of the most ancient civilizations in the world. It is possible to say that we exist as long as the world exists. The Most High God talked to Adam, obviously, in hebrew. And everyone, I think, realizes the contribution which the Jewish people has made to the development of the world civilization. The Jews have religion, specificity, traditional values, and during centuries, through all persecutions, through two terrible catastrophes, the expulsion and destroying of the First, and then also the Second Temple, the Jews always saved their national identity, sentiments of unitary purpose and unitary values. The Jews always resisted to cosmopolitan tendencies, which were directed to the dilution of the Jews among other peoples.
But during the last 200 years the Jews were touched by the problems of all world. In the last 200 years on the world scene, at first in Europe and then also everywhere, there arose new ideologies. They are often called cosmopolitan. In Russia the term “globalist” will be ever more used. Within the framework of these currents there is a mixture of cultures and traditions, nations reincarnating. The concepts of national honour, denomination become confused. And religious values become but a toy. All this touched also the Jewish side. More than a few Jews have been departing from national traditions and attempting to merge with other peoples. Thus they first of all acted against the people, against the tradition. In these 200 years began the mass withdrawal of the Jews from Judaism, as of Russian from Orthodoxy. That ended with a complete atheization. In Europe the same happened, only to a lesser degree. As opposed to anti-national, cosmopolitan forces, inside Hebraism has arisen Zionism. Its basic idea is to gather the Jews on their historical native land. And their life under the law of religion. Not in America, not in Russia, but in Jerusalem, Hebron, Shechem and so on. This tendency met a strong reaction among the cosmopolitan part of Hebraism and among other peoples. There is such term: “nomad-people”. Now in connection with the propagation of the international capital all borders between nations, religions, cultures appeared completely superfluous. They are confounded by transnational corporations which have no face. Never mind, who stands at the head of such corporations — Chechen, Jew, Russian or Chinese. On their “premeditation”, it is possible to convert all the world in ” nomad-people”. Today you dwell here, tomorrow — absolutely another place. In the West it was possible to build life just that way.
The same forces which stand behind the idea of the “new world order” want to impose such style of life also to Hebraism. From the psychological point of view, maybe, with the Jews it can even be made more easily. When a man finds himself among another people, even if he tries to merge with this people, more often such merger fails in the end. And then a feeling of national discord is being shaped. And such peoples are always a fertile ground for cosmopolitanism. If you look at many leading figures of international transnational corporations, at the ideologists of globalism, frequently you will meet there people belonging to national minorities, grown in another environment. Certainly, it is not their fault, it is a simple result of a psychological factor operating. Zionist religious ideology, once again I want to stress, is not a cosmopolitan ideology, which is often assigned the purposes of capturing the whole world. On the contrary, Zionists consider that all Jews should live in Israel and be occupied first of all with Jewish problems, not interfering in the businesses of the surrounding peoples, adjusting with them a mutually advantageous, if possible, relation. As it was defined by Vladimir Jabotinsky, perfect Russian writer, by the way, celebrated stylist, one of the chiefs of Zionism in the first half of the century, the relation of the Jews to other peoples should be expressed by the formula: “polite indifference.” That is, first of all, we should solve our problems, and then only think of the solution of other peoples’ problems. If they will ask us about it.
The cosmopolitan fraction in world politics sticks to a different approach. It interferes with businesses of all peoples, destroying all traditions to make something like a melting pot. It can result in a second world deluge. What is such world deluge? It is when the waters have rushed on earth, because that partition which separated sky and earth was breached, wherefore there was a universal mixture of all with all. The modern world in the epoch of globalization stands before such a danger. That is, all national cultures are threatened with an inundation of globalist “waters”. Not without reason the centre of the globalist world are the US, a country without nationality, without a definite religion, which became the embodying of the globalist dream. This process is favourable to America. The patriotic forces in Israel consider the situation so grave, that they tender to unite with patriotic forces of all peoples, forgetting our differences. Though on principle we have nothing to share. God has given a definite place to each people. Nothing happens in the world accidentally. The most important thing is to understand what your people wants. And to not attempt to hold another’s place. If each people will sit under a fig-tree, as the Bible says, then true peace is possible. Only on this ground cooperation is possible. Differently, if everyone will interfere with another’s businesses, it will result, I repeat, the second deluge.
Q: You wanted to explain why inside Israel, Jews kill Jews. Why the Israeli society is not monolithic. Why it is divided not on parties, but at a fundamental level. It seems like in Russia the conflict between the oligarch Gusinsky and President Putin is somehow linked to the Israeli conflict.
A: Really, everywhere the fight is reaching its climax between two tendencies: National-Zionist and cosmopolitan, whose representatives find themselves in the US government. The Jews to some extent are a “soft power” safeguard of peace. And to capture this “soft power” is then to seize power over the whole world. As a result the Jews too will appear dispossessed of national roots. You see in what consists the so-called “peace process in the Near East”, when lands are returned in exchange for peace. The first colonists in Israel died for these lands. They came on a land which was not developed at all, which was occupied by hostile peoples. They have won, have mastered it. And now it is returned simply for a piece of paper. Why? Because such words, as a native Land, honour, religion, have ever less meaning in our world. One of the leading forces in this process is the extreme left-wing party Meretz. Globalist and pro-American. It is necessary to mark that in Israel the concepts of “left” and “right” designate political forces rather different than in Russia and in the remaining world. Our left-wing forces are anti-national, cosmopolitan. A similar ambiguity of concepts between the Jews and all the remaining world is rather often met. Israel is always very severe referring to the army, to the people who died defending state interests. We always tried not only to redeem the prisoners of war, but also to find the dead. In 1968 there was such a case, when a submarine built in England was lost in the first immersion on the way to Israel. During 45 years the search did not cease. And last year it was found in the Mediterranean sea at the depth of 2000m. It was lifted. It was a festival for the whole country. There was also a television broadcast, with many politicians participating, and one of the leaders of this party Meretz, Shulamit Aloni, said literally the following:
It is perfectly useless to have lifted this boat. It was not necessary. Because it results in a display of militarist moods. And we now are in the era of peace. The army is absolutely not necessary to us.
Our anti-national tendency reaches such a point. As to Gusinsky, it is necessary to understand that he does not represent the interests of Israel and the Jews. On the contrary. All mass media belonging to Gusinsky in Israel, also there are leading the same anti-state processes, as in Russia. They act also at us as the instrument of denationalization. If in Russia they act against war in Chechnya, in Israel they act against war with the Arabs. If you change the word Russia to the word Israel, and translate the texts from Russian to Jewish, you will see the same: Gusinsky — a representative of the new Atlantist, globalist movement.
Q: Is it not a contradiction that the globalist pro-American élite created the Zionist Israel, and, constantly warranting the existence of Zionist, National Hebraism in Israel, will use it at the same time as an instrument of globalism?
A: America did not create the state of Israel. It was created by the forces of wide Jewish mass. America began to support the state of Israel already in the last stages of its building. If we remember historical facts, this is how it went. In 1954, in Egypt with the support of CIA there came to power the so-called young officers led by Nasser. Then there was a struggle between England and America. The American neo-colonialism made all efforts to shatter the English colonial system and to rise on its place. And the basis of the English colonial system was the Suez Canal. The CIA had prepared this revolt against King Farouk. And Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, and hammered the last tack into the remains of the English colonial system. Then Khrushchev, having bought Nasser’s anti-Imperialist slogans, began to send him massive deliveries of weapons. And though Nasser had been an officer of the Wehrmacht, fighting on Hitler’s side, all the same he was given the rank of Hero of the Soviet Union. As a result, Israel found itself in a very difficult situation. Only eight years had passed since its birth. The was no war industry. The Israelis were compelled to search for allies. The strategic union was concluded with France. It was the basic weapon supplier to Israel before the war of 1968. Enormous efforts were made to observe a neutrality policy.
Israel, despite the pressures of the Americans, has not entered in NATO. We never had permanent US bases. Though the Americans offered enormous money, and the economy of Israel was in state of building. The US Sixth Fleet really went and goes on repair in Haifa, but has no permanent base. That is Israel tried to manoeuvre. And the USSR with all its policies kicked it towards America and staked on the Arabs. But remember, in 1972 they rather perfidiously expelled the Soviet military advisors from Egypt. The break took place after all Arabian officers had been instructed for tens years in USSR military institutions. That is, they knew all secrets of the Soviet Armed forces. After the break of the relations with USSR all this knowledge in an eye-blink was transmitted to the US. But even after that, the leaders of the Soviet Union, following, on my sight, suicidal policies, did not enter in any contact with Israel. That was completely inexplicable from the point of view of elementary political logic, and maybe became one of the reasons of the crash of the Soviet Union. As against the Soviet Union in relation to Israel, in Israel anti-Soviet, anti-Russian propaganda was never conducted. Prime Minister Ben Gurion even at the end of his life, and he died at 70, talked with delight about Lenin. In Israel, they always talked with respect of Russian culture. And that Israel was compelled to become a strategic ally of the US was attributable not to internal political processes in our country, but to Soviet Union policies. Take the same question with Jewish emigration. You know that the Jewish religion and culture was completely suppressed in the Soviet Union. Practically at the beginning of the 1970s in the USSR there were no rabbis left with a proper education. People either were deported, or had left, or were at the time of repressions. That is, the national life was in every possible way stifled. As a result the “persons of Jewish nationality” felt like in another’s country. And became the guides of the globalist ideology.
Q: It seems to me that, apart from the political situation, Russian Hebraism (I realize, not unanimously, but I leave this term for convenience) always considered America as a baseline country for itself, a country where there are many Jews, where they hold strong financial and political positions, where, as a matter of fact, the Jewish community is dominant. And at the same time it is known that this community feels the strategic instability of its stay in America, above which hang serious threats. It feels that the Black, Muslim majority, anti-Jewish in spirit, is growing. Israel finds itself in an Arab encirclement. Various forms of pressure by the state are being increased. There too is getting uncomfortable. Probably the hour is coming when will arise the problem of moving the centre from the US to here, to Eurasia. Some Jewish figures already openly talk about it. France was offered as a baseline country, but France is too close to Germany. And there there is the threat of national revanchism, which, if it materializes, cannot be but anti-Semitic. Also there is the idea of moving such centre to Russia, a country with huge space and enormous resources. With the Russian people, which once mobilized can perform prodigies, defeat Hitler and construct the tower of Babel. According to this idea, moving the centre to Russia, the creation of the so-called “new Khazaria”, would provide the Jews with safety, and the sum of efforts would convert the country into a superpower of the 21st century. This conspirological conception cannot but alarm Russian patriots, which see in it straight expansionsim. Though eschatologically the community of Jews and Russians was felt by many philosophers and intellectuals in Russia. For example, patriarch Nikon. Russia he treated not only as the Third Rome, but also as the second Jerusalem. He believed that the second coming would take place in Russia. He created the New Jerusalem under Moscow and has transferred there not only geographical coordinates, but also great symbols: Tabor, Golgotha, road to Calvary. Maybe it was the first attempt of moving the Jewish tablets to Russia. What can you say about it?
A: A most original concept. Sounds very beautiful. But it leaves out at least two fundamental things. First, the Jewish tablets can only lie in Jerusalem. The same as Moscow for Russians. Zionism, on the contrary, in every possible way contributes in the Jewish emigration not only from Russia for creation of the Jewish state from the Nile to the Euphrates, according to the Lord’s testament. Second, I do not think that America in the near future is threatened with great danger. America is an extremely stable country. Everyone who governs America, well knows the business. Geopolitics is studied there by all power structures of the country. Read the books of Brzezinski or Clinton — precise strategy everywhere is devised, in which there is a place for Negroes as manpower, there is a place both for globalist Jews, and Anglo-Saxons, and Russians. America definitively linked its destiny to the realization of the globalist project. It is and will be the centre of transnational capital. All the best in the world should flow to this country. And it happens. Capital and the best intellectual forces are attracted there. And as to the Jews, once again I shall repeat that for them departing from tradition, religion, native land is a national death. If a Jew changed to another belief, all the family should refer to him as he had died. It is the religious law. As to Berezovsky, I remember what about him was told in Tatarstan, where he recently paid a visit. When they invited him to visit a synagogue, a mosque and a church, he said that his first wife was Jew, the second Russian, and the third Tatar. Therefore, they say, he feels connected to all religions. Such a frivolous type has no interest for me. He is simply a player, and plays any game he knows. And Gusinsky, undoubtedly, is a personification of transnational groupings. Therefore the conflict between these two people cannot be considered as inter-Jewish.
Q: In Russia in the last 7 or 8 years anti-Jewish moods were boosted. The reason is that the majority of the population has found itself in poverty, has lost the forms of self-display, and among the oligarchs the overwhelming majority are Jews. The social disaster has appeared coloured in a national tone. Oligarchs, which apparently have nothing in common with National Hebraism, have devised the scarecrow of “Russian fascism” as a means of neutralizing the social protest.
A: All this plays in the hands of globalism, and is the means with the help of which globalism is spreading. Really, all these new-Russian “persons of Jewish nationality” have only a genetic relation to Jewish culture and traditions. Nobody among them knows hebrew or respects Jewish rites. The same Berezovsky — he is simply a convert. For you Berezovsky may be also a Jew, but for me he has no relation to Hebraism. The same is true of all these “new Russians” of Jewish nationality. Certainly, they can return to the roots, become rigorous Jews, but now they are representatives of the “nomad-people”. Dispossessed of national roots. While those Jews who have these roots should leave for Israel and live there. On the other hand, they feel their vulnerability, and naturally, though not being at all conscious agents of globalism, they become guides of its ideology. That in turn, naturally, calls for the reaction of nationally-oriented Russians, who, lacking knowledge, understanding of the situation, direct their negative attitude on all the Jewish people, in particular on the representatives of the Zionist movement, who are actually allies of the Russian patriots. It alienates the patriots of Israel from the patriots of Russia, and boosts the globalist tendency. In Israel the epithet “fascist” is recently being used as well for the Jewish patriots. And those Russian patriots, who fix their attention not on our common enemy, globalism, but on the Jewish patriotic Zionist movement, they too play in the hands of the founders of the “new world order”. In this sense they are even worse enemies of Russia than the globalists. Because they as it were kill Russia from inside. They fight against windmills. And the actual enemy remains behind brackets. And keeps on doing what he wants.
AP: The Soviet Union was traditionally pro-Arab. Since there were so many Turks, Orthodoxy and Islam in the Soviet epoch had as though a common enemy — Hebraism. Now there is a striking transformation. I do not know where it will lead us. Somehow, incidentally or according to the logics of national development, or with the help of the system of strategic provocations, it was almost possible to sow discord between Orthodoxy and Islam. Maybe this began even in Afghanistan. With the Chechen war all this aggravated. The basic relations between Orthodoxy and Islam began to crumble. But the Orthodox did not become allies of Judaism. They remain as though alone in the face of these two metaphysical opponents.
A: Why do you consider that Orthodoxy and Judaism are metaphysical opponents? And why do you consider that Judaism and Islam are such opponents?
Q: Because all practice of deliveries of weapon, practice of conducting battle operations, expansion, intelligence services, historical practice tells me that exactly in these areas there are collisions. Because each Orthodox person feels hidden anti-Biblical moods. Also hopes for the New Testament as his true Book.
ASh: That the Russians feel detached from the Old Testament, it is very symptomatic and nice. From my point of view, the Old Testament belongs only to the Jews. That is, like each people should mind its own business. You have your tradition, we have ours. Naturally, these traditions can be incompatible. If we make them compatible, we shall get the American variant of religiosity, when there is no discrepancies between Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Jew. The union of tenets and religious concepts is impossible. Clearly, from the point of view of the search for truth these religions are incompatible. But it does not mean that if these religions are incompatible from the point of view of metaphysics, they should be incompatible from the point of view of earthly practice. From this point of view, the end of your last question seems to me very wise. Either we should put to ourselves the purpose to destroy each other, so that the Orthodox should eradicate the whole world, except for Orthodox, or we should understand that we should coexist. A man has a family. A man is one thing with his parents and children. But he feels a definite distance in relation to other families. It does not mean that he is in conflict with them. Together with you the neighbours do live. You do not let them into your deals, into your house. But you can perfectly coexist with them. All of us are neighbours. It is not necessary to blend with each other. It is not necessary to mix into each other’s business. Everyone should live under a fig-tree. Therefore that tendency, about which you spoke in your question, does not worry me at all.
Judaism has no unremovable metaphysical contradictions with Islam too. We have a conflict around a definite lot of land, which we lawfully, on the basis of the Bible, consider as ours. And the Muslims simply have been living there a long time and they would not like to leave. Such conflicts can be decided both through peaceful and military ways. In history they always are combined. But these conflicts do not concern fundamental things. And the unions are concluded not with Islam or with Judaism, but with definite regimes. The Islamic world is absolutely not uniform. And look – in Chechnya you are not at war against Islam. The relations with Turks and Arabs are very miscellaneous. And there is still India, Pakistan, Indonesia. Wahhabis act in Chechnya, Uzbekistan. But they act also in Israel. America’s globalists use the religious tendencies for their purposes. A bright example — Kosovo. This hotbed is necessary to America to press on Europe, as on a competitor. Kosovo, crowded with narcotics, as a small growling hound, which the globalists can release at any moment, if Europe “behaves herself badly”. Palestinian autonomy plays the same role for us. America presses Israel to leave the conquered lands, and now from the hills of Judea it will be possible to fire from guns at Tel Aviv. Encircling Israel, the Arab world finds itself completely under control of America. And in case Israel would show obstinacy, buses in the streets of our cities will be blasted. But a big mistake would be to attribute these blasts to the results of a metaphysical conflict between Judaism and Islam.
Q: You have formulated an enemy image. Conditionally speaking, it is globalism. Transnational capital. That is a threat both for the Russian and for the Jewish patriot. How the patriotic forces of Israel and patriotic forces of Russia could interact?
A: They can interact very well. Russia and Israel have a lot in common. In the sphere of foreign policy there are no points where interest would be opposite. Israel and Russia are interested in each other economically. The basic money is now nested in precision technology. In rifles, which one stand $7k. Helmets provided with night vision devices. Light bullet-proof vests. Laser guidance systems for firing automatic weapons. Revolutionary technological changes are required. In the Soviet Union even in the last years of its existence there appeared a technological lag vis-à-vis western countries. Now war industry is completely disorganized. There are no cadres. No schools. I do not think that Russia by its own forces could liquidate this breakthrough. And Israel now in military know-how holds a leading place in the world. For example, I repeatedly spoke with our tankists, and they affirm that from the point of view of mechanics and armour Russian tanks are better. What a field for cooperation! Uniting the military potentials of the two countries, it is possible to create a magnificent 21st century weapon. And more – if America offers military help to Israel, this is not absolutely what could be from Russia. 6%, no more, from the national budget, and at such condition that most of the commissions is allocated to US enterprises. As a result Israeli industry is wrecked. By uniting our efforts, we can achieve independence from America.
Q: What are you doing at home? What is your occupation?
A: I am a man of religion and historian. I teach. I study the history of the Jewish-Russian interaction. History of the Russians, who accepted Judaism and now live in Israel. The history of Russian sectarianism is a high, original, beautiful spiritual search.
«HERE EVERYTHING AS USUAL: THEY SHOOT»
Alexander Sherman, Nezavisimaya Gazeta, May 4 2001 (12)
Avram Shmulevich considers that Russia and Israel have interests in common, both strategically and as civilisations. Avram Shmulevich is a Chassidic rabbi, historian, known publicist and public figure. He lives in the ancient city of Hebron, where the Tombs of the Ancestors lie. There were buried Abraham, Sarah, Isaac and Jacob. The word “Hebron” is related to the hebrew word hubur – “union”. According to the legend, through Hebron runs the axis connecting the world of the mountains with the world of the valleys. Today the front line between Jews and Arabs also runs through Hebron. This interview with Avram Shmulevich was given one month before the recent Hebron tragedy, when a Palestinian sniper shot a 10-month-old girl and wounded her father. The victims were neighbours of Avram Shmulevich.
Q: Avram, what is there now in Hebron, what is the situation?
A: Here everything as usual: they shoot. We are constantly under fire from Arab snipers. And besides, if in the beginning of the present outbreak the media informed about it, now 90% of cases on the whole do not reach the media. We represent a convenient target. The city of Hebron lies in a valley. All the hilltops around are Arab. Thus they constantly fire against us from dominant heights, the approaches to the Jewish quarter are exposed to snipers’ fire. Some days ago my wife got under fire, the bullet of the sniper came half a meter from her. They shot against my children too.
Q: They purposely shoot on civilians?
A: In the evening we pull the shutters down, so that what happens in a flat cannot be seen from the outside. The external walls around of my windows are covered with tracks of bullets. Under the Oslo Agreement the Israeli army has the right to pursue terrorists in the territory monitored by the Palestinian Authority. But practically it never happens. And in the first days of war (and even the Israeli authorities recognised that this is war) the shots were rather casual, then they have learned, they made experience, and the fire became aimed. A couple of months ago the Arabs changed their tactics – they have begun each day to mine and to fire at roads.
Q: Who exactly fires? Which among Palestinian organisations takes responsibility for conducting battle operatings?
A: They do not take responsibility, they simply shoot. Actually this organisation is called “Government of Palestinian Authority”. The Palestinian Authority represents a semi-state. There are various forces in it. First, the so-called “Palestine Liberation Army”, which Israeli mass-media bashfully continue to call as “Palestinian police”. Actually they are professional troops. At the moment of the creation of the PA, already there were armed formations deployed in the neighbouring Arab countries. The citizens of these countries, calling themselves “Palestinians”, enlisted in them. For example, that crew which entered in Hebron after the signing of the agreement about the surrender of Hebron, was earlier deployed in Iraq. It was a subdivision of the Iraqi army. They took part in warfare in Kurdistan (where they killed Kurds), participated in the Iran-Iraq war on the side of Iraq. They are Iraqi Arabs, who called themselves “Palestinians”. Besides there are forces made up with local residents. They are called “Tanzim”. There are also terrorist organisations, such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Palestine Liberation Front. Hebron is a traditional stronghold of the Islamic organisation Hamas. They have no regular armed formations, as the PA governments does not suffer competition. There are subversive groups. The shooting from mortars and automatic weapons is made, as a rule, by regular PA forces.
Q: Now 56 Jewish families live in the centre of Hebron, as a matter of fact in conditions of blockade, in the middle of battle operations. Why do you live there, why don’t you leave?
A: We live here for the same reason for which people live in Moscow or Paris. They live in their cities. And Hebron is our city, a Jewish city. Why should we leave it to go anywhere? If misfortune has come to your native city, yet it does not mean that is necessary to run from it. Hebron is a city in which the Jews lived during 4,000 years. From it began Jewish history.
Q: You are known as a public figure taking unconventional positions for modern Israel. You act against union with the US and for union with Russia. How is such position motivated?
A: As to my relation to Russia, it just the traditional relation for Israel. Here you see two global civilisational tendencies in action: the first one is called globalism, or the New World Order. It is the tendency described, in particular, in the works of Jacques Attali and Brzezinski, translated into Russian. They affirm that we now enter an epoch of globalism: a world without borders and nations, but under centralised control of the US. The second tendency is “Eurasism”, that is preserving the originality of the peoples and nations dwelling in the Eurasian continent. In particular the Jewish people. As a Jewish traditionalist, I am a supporter of the Eurasist line.
Q: As an historian, could you outline for our readers the historical roots of today’s situation in the region?
A: Israel always tried to follow autonomous policies and not to be oriented towards any single force. It is impossible to forget about the role of the USSR and Stalin in the creation of the State of Israel. Only thanks to the support of the Soviet Union the United Nations adopted a resolution about the creation of the state. America backed it and recognised Israel first, but some time later withdrew its consent to the creation of this state, and besides Western countries (the US, France, England) imposed an arms embargo against the country. As a result, immediately after the declaration on the creation of the State of Israel, the regular armies of five neighbouring states – Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq – invaded its territory. The Trans-Jordanian army was exhibited as the “Arab legion”, while it was simply part of the armed forces of Great Britain. Israel could resist only because Czechoslovakia, following the USSR decision, gave weapons to Israel. Stalin could be possibly accused of everything, but not of mistakes in foreign policy.
This was accomplished in full correspondence with the laws of geopolitics. Stalin rightly considered that Israel would follow independent policies and become a backweight to then existing English influence in the Near East. Despite of his anti-Jewish initiatives (the “doctors’ affair”, the “anti-fascist committee”), relations with Israel were saved. A short time before Stalin’s death they were interrupted, then again repaired by Beria, and maintained until the end of 1956, that is before the coming of Khrushchev. Khrushchev undertook a revision also of foreign policy. Never before him did either Russia or the USSR count on Islamic states. The Soviet leaders clearly understood the problem of Islamic extremism, in consideration of the large Islamic presence within the same Soviet Union. Also Arab regimes were never considered by Russia as allies, as they were strongly linked to England, France and – subsequently – to the US. The Arab élites not only kept their money in the West, but also sent their children there to study. The financial system of the Arab world was, and remains to the present day, part of the Western financial system. This situation did not arise yesterday, nor accidentally. The English long worked upon it. According to their tactics, the élites of the colonial peoples were included in the ruling élite of the Empire. They granted them complete freedom to deal with their peoples the way they considered necessary.
Democracy has nothing to do with it. The English were interested to preserving to the highest possible degree the social and political formation usual for these countries (contrary to the legend about “the White Man’s burden”). Till 1952 in Egypt there was a monarchic regime. De jure Egypt was independent, but actually everything there was administered by the English. The country had an enormous relevance for the whole West because of the Suez Canal. In 1952 there came to power a group of young officers led by then-Colonel Gamal Abd’el-Nasser. Nasser, it is necessary to say, was pro-Hitlerite, co-operated with the Abwehr, and in the cabinet of his closest associate and heir Sadat, Hitler’s portrait was hung until his last days. The coming to power of the “young officers” was helped by the CIA. Then the representative of CIA in Egypt was the grandson of Roosevelt: this gave him wide possibilities in the sense of access to the political summit. In that time the English empire already was at its last gasp, and the US struggled with England for domination. Probably, there was also a more far-sighted policy, as we may judge from further events, because when Nasser came to power under the slogans of social justice, he established contacts with the USSR. Khrushchev decided to change its strategic line and made a bet on the ruling regime in Egypt, the “Arab socialists”. But you know how socialist they were.
This bore consequences for Israeli-Russian relations. So, at the beginning of 1956 an agreement about deliveries of Soviet oil to Israel was concluded. All oil stocks then were under control either of the West, or of the Soviet Union. In Israel, as everyone knows, there are no fields. This agreement meant the full exit of Israel from the sphere of geopolitical influence of the West and, hence, the possibility to lead independent policies. It is necessary to remark that, in spite of the fact that the then recently formed NATO block was extremely interested in having military bases on Israeli territory, the Jewish state rejected the invitation of the western alliance to conclude an agreement directed towards co-operation against Russia. And then the array of forces was such, that practically all countries in the region – Turkey, Iran, Iraq – entered the anti-Soviet coalition. Israel refused to grant the bases for deploying NATO troops. All Israeli governments stuck to this rule. In territory of Israel there have never been any foreign military bases, including Americans.
Q: But nevertheless, in 1956 Israel allowed England and France to use itself as a picklock for Suez, nationalised by Nasser, and moreover Ben Gurion wanted this war and this alliance.
A: I would say that it is just Israel who used them. After the Arabs’ defeat in 1948 war actions went on. In the border regions – in Sinai and in Gaza training centres of fedayyin-saboteurs were created. And these fedayyin penetrated in the territory of Israel practically each day, they reached the suburbs of Tel Aviv, committed assassinations, assaults on the civilian population. In the year 1956 alone 256 civilians died by their hands. It was impossible to accept such a situation, and Israel started war operations, having obtained co-operation from England and France. Nasser then nationalised Suez, straightforwardly encouraged by the Americans. The Americans thus drove in the last nail in the coffin of the British colonial empire. As a result of joint war action by England, France and Israel, the Sinai peninsula and the Gaza sector were completely cleared of Egyptian troops and fedayyin bases. The US and the USSR have then exerted an enormous joint pressure on Israel. US warships were moored along its shores. It was an open threat of embargo on part of the Americans – the blockade of the country. And Khrushchev stated that he would send troops to help Egypt. Eisenhower let Israel know that the US would not oppose this. Therefore Israel sent its troops to Sinai after half-year of occupation, but the military operation achieved its purpose: Israel was free from subversive bases on its borders. At the end of 1956, Khrushchev broke the agreement on oil deliveries, without a warning, unilaterally, setting Israel in a completely desperate condition. The country was compelled to conclude a viable agreement with the Americans. The economic and strategic co-operation between Israel and the US started from this moment. Israel entered its sphere of geopolitical influence.
Q: But you see, Ben Gurion aimed at this union, didn’t he?
A: Ben Gurion did not aim at strategic union. On the contrary, he tried in every possible way to avoid it. Before the Six Days War in 1967 the basic weapon supplier to Israel was not America, but France. There’s more. The Six Days War began with the sinking the US ship Liberty in the Red Sea (no, in the Med – RB). Then, it’s true, Israel apologized for it, they said it was a mistake. But today historians consider that it was not a mistake, but a purposed action. America has always been the basic partner of the Arab countries. The Arab élites oriented themselves towards the Americans after the dissolving of the British empire. But after the Six Days War, France broke its agreement on military cooperation with Israel. At that time it had already lost in Algeria, and from there came the flow of Arab emigration. They were compelled to come to terms with the Arab countries. By the way, well-known is the case of the torpedo-boats which Israel should have received from France under agreement. France decided not to give these boats, after money for them had been already paid. The ships, held back by the French, were stolen from Marseilles by Mossad agents. The Americans started massive weapons deliveries to Israel after the end of the Six Days War, when the country once again proved to be the strongest in the region. And after the Six Days War the USSR was practically in a state of war with Israel. The Arab armies were trained by Soviet advisers. Israel had no choice. After the coming of the Americans, certainly, the expansion began not only in the military sphere, but also in the spheres of ideology and culture. The Americans tried to educate the population in their spirit, to buy the ruling élite. This is especially evident of the judicial system, the mass media.
Q: Similarly, nowadays the whole of the political and the financial system of Israel is americanised and incorporated in the globalist system.
A: No, not the whole. A portion of the spectrum is. First of all, the Labour and the Meretz parties. The latter is an extremely globialist party, they are more globalist than the Americans themselves. But it is impossible to say that the national and especially the religious camp are incorporated in the system. A significant part of the Israeli people belong to religious traditionalism, to which the US system is alien. Besides, a significant part of the Israeli political and military establishment refers rather critically to the US influence. An often debated issue is US military help to Israel. This help stands at about $3b.
Q: Yes, it is a lot for a country of five million citizens.
A: For a country whose GNP is $100b, it is little, 3% of GNP. Israel GNP is comparable with the GNP of Russia. From the economic point of view, Israel is one of leading countries of the world. Militarily, according to a recently published estimate of a leading world source of expertise in the military field, Jane’s Review, Israel’s military power exceeds the battle power of all NATO countries taken together. According to foreign estimates, Israel has about 300 nuclear warheads. The readiness of its pilots is the best in the world. Israel is a developed country, and those $3b granted by the US have no particularly great significance for it.
Q: Then it’s not clear, taking them, what for?
A: The question here is: America gives them, what for? It gives nothing for free. On contract clauses most defence jobs from this money must go to US enterprises. The US helps itself, thus creating jobs, and Israel’s own industry is wrecked to its roots. Thus, one “cheap dollar” which lays idle buys an “expensive shekel” which can be deducted from taxes. Therefore, many weapon systems that could be produced by Israeli enterprises become simply unprofitable if produced in Israel. Besides, thanks to its involvement in military projects, the US has the right to impose its veto on weapon deliveries to countries which they are not interested to sell weapons to. Thus, they get a chance to control not only the domestic, but also the foreign policies of Israel. One of the points of Netanyahu’s program was to gradually get rid of US help. But Israel cannot refuse, just because most of its ruling élite, as you correctly said, is incorporated into the US system. They live, to put it mildly, under a strong influence from America. For example, some time ago suspicions flashed about the destination of the funds released to the PA for some social works (it seemed, for the repair of water drains). It was discovered that this money had been transferred to the accounts of some Knesset deputies. As the Americans began to check into this, Arafat said: «Excuse us, it was a mistake, we will make amends», and the deal was hindered. In a normal country such an event would call for investigation. According to the report of the state inspector, before the last elections Labour received grants from the Jimmy Carter Fund, a significant quota of whose capital, by the way, comes from an Anglo-Pakistani bank. Left-wing parties have spent for election campaigns much more than those of the right-wing. In particular, there appeared to be grants being transferred from America. All of us remember the pressure which Clinton exerted on Israeli electors, pronouncing himself for Barak. The Americans have played a significant role in Labour’s victory in 1993 elections, exploiting the issue of the so-called “warranties”, that is money which should be granted to Israel for receiving the flow of immigrants from former USSR countries. The Americans directly stated that they would not give the money to the right. A whole brainwashing campaign was put up by the press. They told things as if Israel could not survive without this money. Then, true, they found out that this money for receiving the olim (immigrants) was absolutely not needed, and it was spent on completely different purposes. Yes, in Israel there is a number of “élites” (politicians, academic establishment, mass media, the judicial system) with which the Americans actively work. At the same time, giving a serious basis to strengthening US positions demands also that they support Israel during United Nations votes. If not for the US veto, the Arabs, owning more than 20 votes, would be able to pass practically any anti-Israeli resolution. Russia till now votes with the Arabs. Of course, the US administration profusely makes use of this arm.
Q: How do you evaluate today’s socio-political situation in Israel? Are there forces able to overcome this situation become pathological?
A: Israeli society is in a state of crisis. The élite does not express the interest of the people, it is alien to them. A significant case occurred some years ago, when a couple of hundred activists of the Hamas organization were deported from Israel to Lebanon. When they had already been set on buses, Israeli attorneys produced to the High Court of Justice a request to revoke the decision on deportation. While the claim was considered, they stood some days at the border, then they were sent all the same. It is interesting that at that moment a poll was conducted among the people. From all those asked, 93% supported the decision on deportation. The poll among journalists gave similar result, but with the opposite sign. That is, 93% of the representatives of the mass media were against deportation! Spectacular opposition. The ruling élite fully solidarises with US policies. This concerns also a significant part of US Jewry, which represent the vanguard of globalism. According to the tendency of the NWO, national traditions must vanish, a “new man” (“nomad-man”, according to Jacques Attali’s expression) will be educated, not being linked in any way to the land, to tradition or to religion. This tendency meets a strong resistance in Israel, but nevertheless is successfully put into practice. The NWO is interested in forces of the Jewish people. If the Jews after Rabin, Peres and ultra-globalists like Meretz will abdicate to their tradition, Judaea, Samaria and Jerusalem will count only as military and strategic values, which we give or not depending on the political situation, but the history and tradition of the people will not mean anything for them, which of course will very much help strengthening the NWO. For this reason the Americans spend large efforts directed on the subordination of Israel to their ideology. But, I repeat, a significant part of the people do not support these attempts.
Q: We are in a situation where the ruling élite of Israel is oriented to America, and on the other hand the Russian political élite educated in Soviet times refers to Israel practically with hostile moods. What will be the outcome, and what are the chances of “reorienting” Israel in these conditions?
A: The problem of Russia is that until now it does not have a strict national foreign policy line reflecting national interests. There is no understanding of the geopolitical role of the state. In the best case the foreign policies of Russia in the last years were guided by momentary reflexes, in the worst case they directly contradicted national interests. In that New World Order about which we spoke, there cannot be a place for Russia as a great power. In the world there cannot be two superpowers. But Russia is too large and original a country to suppose that it might be satisfied with the role of England, which completely forgot about its former imperial majesty and now is the compliant executive of the Americans’ will. Somewhat it is possible to say that the Russians and the Jews swapped their places. During WW2, Hitler swore the Jews total physical destruction. As to the Russians, their destruction was not supposed, but they would be lowered to the role of slaves, servants of the Third Reich, servants of the dominant nation. Just about the same happens also now concerning Russians and Jews. In the plans of the NWO, Israel and the Jews can exist, but only as a serving force, having lost their independence. They can be allowed no further than the anteroom of the NWO. As to Russia, according to this plan it should be erased, at least as an independent imperial force. We all know the extent of depopulation occurring now in Russia. We see how its economy collapses. In these conditions it would be reasonable to expect from the Russian government, from the Russian establishment, to really realize the threat hanging above the country and try to prevent this threat. But unfortunately this does not always happen. If we look at the Arab world, we see the Arab countries now simply practically waging war against Russia. Arab mercenaries form the main part of the forces now fighting in Chechnya. The Arab countries are the basic force supporting Islamic fundamentalism in the territories of the Central Asian republics.
In these conditions a community of interests of Russia and Israel is created, both strategically and as civilisations. It is also necessary not to forget about those old connections existing between the Russian and Jewish civilizations. The Jews from ancient times live in territories afterwards included in the composition of Russia. Strictly speaking, the same Kiev was built as a Kazakh fortress on the Kahanat border. The Russian state was originally called as Russian Khanate. Russian culture had an enormous influence on the formation of the Israeli culture. On the other hand, very few know, for instance, that “Katyusha” is a Jewish national melody. The prospects for developing relations do exist. As both the Russian and the Jewish peoples value their authenticity, it would be natural to expect that we become allies in the fight against Atlantism. This does not mean that we together should declare war on someone, but it would be very logical to join intellectual and political efforts in the issue of protecting our interests. The question is whether there will be forces inside Russia which can go in this direction. The second question is whether there will be forces capable of countering to pressure of the Atlantists inside Israel.
Q: What can we expect from the Sharon government? How personally close is he to these ideas?
A: Sharon himself substantially understands the essence of ongoing geopolitical processes. The conclusion of a strategic union with Russia stands among his tasks. Whether he can make it, it is difficult to say. The Sharon government has a big problem, as does in general the whole right-wing camp. This problem is the absence of a precise ideology, which would dot one’s i’s. I am talking about a new civilisational impulse. the Israeli Right should precisely state that the ideology of globalism and cosmopolitism threatens the existence of the Jewish state, that the Jews want to build their state on the basis of the Jewish national tradition and values. But the Sharon government has not made this declaration, it is not in the condition to do it. Nor has his government univocally stated that the “peace process” is finally stopped.
Q: «Is there anything are more important than peace»? Why do you consider that the peace process should be terminated?
A: The so-called “peace process”, as a matter of fact, is but one of the instruments of strengthening US influence in the region. It is necessary to understand that the PLO already for a long time belongs to the sphere of influence of US interests. Tight contacts between the PLO and the CIA began in 1982. In the present moment the situation is that the PLO is to a significant degree armed with NATO weapons. PA special forces and security services are trained and armed by the CIA. The CIA is one of the participants of this “peace process”. CIA officers act as intermediaries between the Arab and Israeli sides. The same concerns also Egypt. Syria too substantially stands in the US orbit. America applies the known principle “divide and rule”, controlling both conflicting sides. Therefore the “peace process” exclusively benefits the Americans, serves to strengthen their strategic position. Of course, at the cost of weakening Israel.
Q: And how do you evaluate the chances of Russia as “co-sponsor of the peace process”?
A: I cannot say that I see a significant understanding of the situation from the Russian side. Russia did not act against the plan of introducing United Nations forces on Israeli territory. Israel itself did not accept this plan, but the precedent of posing the question took place. The dynamics of development of events in the last years shows that after Yugoslavia the next object of application of “international force” can become the territory of the Russian state (Chechnya, other regions). I talked with some Russian politicians. They think that this situation is not similar to the Israeli-Palestinian problem. They speak approximately so:
Well, Chechnya is all the same Russian territory, it does not have a status fixed by international law.
These references to “international law” surprise me, since “international law” today is the right of the strongest. In this case, what America will say, that is “international law”. Who could suspect some years ago that against the UN Charter, NATO forces would start acts of war in Yugoslavia? It would be possible to bring the leaders of NATO countries to an international tribunal for starting war operations contrary to the decision of the United Nations. There was no mandate of the United Nations for this NATO operation. However the “international community” has swallowed these things. The partition of sovereign Yugoslavia is actually complete. Kosovo has separated from it. Now, being under protection by NATO forces, Albanian guerrillas invade Serbia’s own territory, and in the last days war began also in Macedonia. Therefore references to the fact that Chechnya is territory of sovereign Russia are inconsistent. When the possibility will appear, they will not stop anybody. Nevertheless Russia did not act against sending troops in the region of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Let’s remind that Israel is the only country whose parliament adopted a resolution supporting the position of Russia concerning the Chechen conflict (in spite of the opposition of “left-wing” forces). Israel also backed Yugoslavia. The Israeli volunteers fought on the side of the Serbs. Israel refused to grant troops and bases for NATO operations in the Balkans. But, for instance, it granted the Serbian government the communication satellite AMOS (domestic production), after the international embargo was imposed on Serbia. The Americans sometimes referred to this issue with protests. Israel answered them, “yes, we did not notice,” and kept maintaining the Serbian connection. Russia continues to support (anyway, verbally) the “peace process,” which, I repeat, is extremely unprofitable for itself. I was especially depressed and surprised by the reaction of the so-called “National Patriotic Camp”, which fully backed the PLO in the arisen conflict.
Q: And why were you surprised? It looks objective. Some Russian “National Patriots” probably look for financial support there.
A: They cannot ignore that the sponsor of the “al-Aqsa Intifada” is Saudi Arabia. The same country that also supports Chechen guerrillas. It seemed that from the “National Patriots” it would be possible to expect a greater understanding of the national interest. It has not occurred. Let’s hope that the Russian politicians will have enough courage to understand that now the moment of truth has come. In the near future the problem of the political future of Russia will be decided: whether it will be united and independent, or will completely fall under the influence of the West, and the process of its fragmentation begun ten years ago will irreversibly proceed. In these conditions Russia, even more than Israel, should be interested in any allies which could help it counter this process. The same process of subordination to western influence of the political élite and mass-media which happened in Israel now happens also in Russia. It also handicaps mutual rapprochement. The future will show whether the Russian government will be wise enough to take the initiative in its hands.
Q: Now you and your supporters in Israel look as original “Eurasist partisans”. Do you plan to pass to open political activity in the near future?
A: Yes, we do. The country is in a severe political crisis. Now in the Israeli political arena there must be a movement directly affirming that Israel should change its foreign policy priorities and system of values. In Israel there are real forces interested in quitting the orientation to the unipolar world, the one-sided orientation to America. But in today’s conditions a significant part of Israeli society (its overwhelming majority) does not have a political force expressing its interests. There is no force possessing a precise, motivated ideological line of opposition against the NWO, against that one-sided geopolitical orientation by which the Israel establishment is guided now. Our movement, that for a long time existed as a non-political, cultural-civilisational social force, enters at present also the political arena. This movement will voice new principles of Israeli politics, escaping from the above-said, and will achieve their realisation.
Finally, as if the above were not bad enough, we find an even more obnoxious ultra-Zionist involved, if this anonymous and undated (2004?) communication (13) to the admittedly erratic Barry Chamish is to be believed:
Hello Barry, There has been a recent important development in this. Avigdor Eskin has been elected (in absentia) as a member of Political Council (leadership) of “Eurasia” Movement based in Moscow, Russia. The Eurasia socio-political movement is financed and structurally supported by Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) and Russian Presidential Administration. Although it is officially a “patriotic”, “neo-Eurasian”, “anti-American” organization, it serves the purpose of NWO and is paid by its emissaries in Russia. Basically, it is a pro-NWO party which hides behind a pseudo-patriotic facade. The official organizer is talented Russian geopolitician and political philosopher Alexander Dugin. It seems they are trying to use Avigdor Eskin and his cohorts to smooth the relations between pro-Western Russian elite (Putin, etc.), criminal oligarchs (Deripaska, Abramovich, Chubais, etc.) with Israeli business elite and political circles. It is known that Avigdor Eskin has connections with Israeli lobby in Washington, with the late Republican Senator Jesse Helms, and with head of Committee on International Relations of Russian State Duma Dmitri Rogozin, and has been used to make contact between Russian and US administrations.
This admiring feature in VDare (14) confirms Eskin was involved with Jesse Helms. It is also quite recent, Jun 2011. Here are the more pertinent sections (minus quite a lot about his white power activities in south Africa, which he holds to be a natural ally of Israel):
Avigdor Eskin (15), the hard right Israeli activist, is a fascinating figure. Eskin, who makes his living consulting for Israeli companies that do business with Russia, has been an ally of 1980s US conservatives, Russian nationalists, and Afrikaner rights activists. He has been attacked and harassed by both the Soviet KGB and the Israeli Shin Bet for his activities. He is probably the only Zionist activist who has been declared persona non grata and deported from the USA. He’s a case study of the National Question: whether a nation, an ethno-cultural entity, can find political expression in a state, in a particularly intense context. Eskin was born in 1960 at the height of Soviet power and raised in a secular Moscow Jewish family. But at the age of eleven, Eskin began covertly to listen to the “Voices”: Western radio stations like Voice of America, Voice of Israel, and the BBC Russian service. Eskin began attending synagogue soon afterwards, becoming interested in religion under the influence of a Ukrainian Catholic friend. The young Avigdor became an Orthodox Jew and a dedicated Zionist activist determined to leave the Soviet Union for Israel. Despite harassment from the KGB, Eskin persisted in his activism, becoming the youngest underground Hebrew teacher in Moscow and translating Rabbi Meir Kahane’s hard-line Zionist manifesto Never Again into Russian via samizdat.
After years of trying, he was allowed to leave for Israel in 1978. Right after arriving to Israel, Eskin became active in the late Rabbi Meir Kahane’s Kach Party, which called for the annexation of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, Israel’s permanent refusal of US and any other foreign aid, and the removal or “Transfer” of the Palestinian Arabs from Israel. Eskin makes Avigdor Liberman look like a milquetoast peacenik. He has even accused Liberman of selling out, by coming up with a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that involves Israel giving up land for peace, Arab-majority towns inside pre-1967 Israel for large settlement blocks, as well as handing over parts of Jerusalem. Eskin also accuses Lieberman of being more concerned about the standard of living in Israel than maintaining it as a Jewish state. Eskin says he does not see anything “racist” or “inhumane” about the Transfer. Unlike so many US Zionists, who fight Israel’s wars from the comfort of an Upper New York East Side penthouse, Eskin volunteered for combat duty when he came to Israel. As a member of an artillery support unit for a paratrooper detachment, he participated in the 1982 invasion of Lebanon and was wounded in battle against the PLO and the Syrians on the shores of Lake Qaraoun in the Bekaa Valley. In the 1980s, Eskin visited the US and met the late Jesse Helms, one of the most conservative members of the Senate. Originally, Helms was an acerbic critic of Israel. He demanded that Israel return the West Bank to Jordan and wanted the US to break off diplomatic relations with Israel after its invasion of Lebanon. But after befriending Eskin, Helms became a supporter of Israel, seeing in the Jewish State, an ally against communism and the anti-Western Arab regimes. He visited Israeli settlements in 1985 and became a dedicated supporter of Israeli control over the West Bank and Gaza. It must be emphasized that Eskin, like his mentor Rabbi Kahane, has always opposed foreign aid for Israel from any country, and is forthrightly critical of the current US role in the world. Eskin admires true USAian conservatives like Jesse Helms, but criticizes the US for its globalist, interventionist, Wilsonian foreign policy, as manifested in the bombings of Yugoslavia, and in pressure on Israel to give up land to the Palestinians. Further, Eskin blames US liberals for exporting leftist, multi-culturalist ideas and destroying traditionalist values all over the world. As Eskin told me in an email exchange:
I saw in the past and I see today US conservatives as close allies and dear friends. Unfortunately, the foreign policy of the USA and the world policy of economic and pop-culture expansion are prevailing and not the ideas of US patriots. But I hope for the day when the school of the late Jesse Helms will dominate US politics and we will be your real allies.
Eskin characterizes the current multi-culturalist consensus as the sign of what is known in Judaism as the erev rav (the mixed multitude), a time of widespread immorality and deracination, when individuals devoid of all tradition and values are in power. Avigdor Eskin is also active in the Eurasia movement of Russian traditionalist conservative philosopher Alexander Dugin, whose ideas are strongly influenced by Alain De Benoist of the French New Right. The Eurasianists believe in an alliance between traditionalist Christians, Jews, and Muslims (especially Shi’ites and Sufis) against the “Atlanticist” leftist-liberal-neocon ideology represented by the rulers of the US and the EU. Dugin believes in a greater Russia that will be closely allied with Iran, to which peripheral territories like Ukraine, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia will be annexed. Dugin’s views led the Hoover Institution’s John Dunlop to accuse him of “fascism.” Of course, Eskin, as a committed Zionist, does not agree with all of Dugin’s ideas; for example, Dugin’s support for anti-Israel regimes like Venezuela and Iran. However, Eskin has always been strongly pro-Russian. He argues that Israel needs to be more closely allied to Russia and end its “passionate attachment” to the US. He argues that Israel should deal with the US from the position of a strong independent state, not that of a heavily subsidized and groveling military colony. Needless to say, Eskin’s uncompromising views raised the ire of both Israeli and Western liberals. Eskin characterizes the current climate in the West thus:
Unfortunately, there is no full freedom of speech in the West today. The liberals feel their intellectual impotence and simply silence those who try to tell the truth.
The Israeli authorities had harassed Eskin ever since the mid 1990s, when he dared to criticize the secular saint of Israeli society, Yitzhak Rabin, and campaigned against the Israeli surrender of the West Bank and Gaza to Yasser Arafat’s PLO. In 2000, Eskin was declared persona non grata and deported from the US, most likely at the suggestion of the Israeli government and its US supporters. In 2001, Eskin was accused of plotting to bombard the al-Aqsa mosque with pig heads, to place a pig’s head on the tomb of Palestinian guerrilla Izz’ed-Din al-Qassam, who fought against the Jews and the British in the 1930s, and to set fire to the offices of a far-left Israeli organization, Based on the allegedly torture-induced “confessions” of another right-wing activist, Eskin was sent to jail for two and a half years. He was placed in the same cell with a convicted rapist and an Ethiopian immigrant serving time for beheading his wife. During the first months of his imprisonment, Eskin was forced to sleep on the floor because the prison administration claimed they could not find a bunk for him. After worldwide protests, especially vocal in Russian nationalist circles, eg Eskin’s friend Alexander Dugin, Eskin’s prison conditions were somewhat improved. Even now, Avigdor Eskin is subject to periodic campaigns of harassment from the Israeli authorities. Eskin is not afraid to acknowledge the large role Jews have had in left-wing and liberal movements worldwide. He had the following to say on the issue, echoing the late Rabbi Kahane:
Most of the Jews in the West are not observant and far from being ardent Zionists. So, it is natural that a person who has no national and traditional identity cannot understand the people who do have it. The solution is very simple. All the Jews must be encouraged to go home to Israel.
Unlike many other right-wing activists, Avigdor Eskin is optimistic about the future of Israel and the West as a whole. He concluded his email exchange with me by predicting the inevitable weakening of the Arab world, the end of US dependence on Arab oil, and the victory of Israel. Given his experience as a believing Orthodox Jew, the survivor of both communist and Politically Correct oppression, Eskin’s optimism is understandable, if idealistic.
Can we confirm Eskin was elected to the leadership Council of ‘Eurasia’? Well, Grigory Nekhoroshev wrote (16) in Nezavisimaya Gazeta on Apr 24 2001:
In the Central council were elected representatives of culture: publicist Avigdor Eskin, writer Yuri Mamleev, TV journalist Mikhail Leontyev, Ambassador Plenipotentiary of the Russian Federation in Uzbekistan Dmitri Ryurikov, Talgat Tadzhuddin etc.
Maxim Sevchenko wrote in the same paper (17):
Among the others, also sounded the greeting message from the Israeli movement “Be’ad Artzeinu”. Let’s remind that it gained notoriety as an organization invoking total war against Arabs and Muslims in the territory of Palestine. Its members are so radical by words and deeds, that even the Israeli justice condemned some of them for the profanation of Muslim sacred places and vandalism against Muslim tombs. The message was signed by the leaders of this radical nationalist Zionist party: rabbi Avram Shmulevich, the “political emigrant” Avigdor Eskin, and the journalist, editor of the Internet version of “NG”, Alexander Sherman. The movement “Be’ad Artzeinu” was introduced to the congress as one of the major collaborators of “Eurasia” on the side of Judaism and “Israeli traditionalism”. Let’s remind that the same Mr Avigdor Eskin, paying homage to the Congress, was convicted by the Israeli court for instigation to throwing pork heads on territory of al-Aqsa mosque and profanation by pork remnants of the tomb of a dead fighter of the Palestinian Resistance movement, which radical Zionists and their friends in the Russian media call no differently than “terrorist”.
Mark Sedgwick (18) says:
Be’ad Artzeinu in 2002 claimed several hundred members, all of Russian origin. Two of its leaders were in Moscow for the founding congress of the Eurasia movement, Rabbi Avrom Shmulevich and Avigdor Eskin, both Israeli citizens of Russian origin. The Neo-Eurasianist approach to the Palestinian question is well illustrated by the activities of Avigdor Eskin, another Hebron settler of Russian origin, an associate of Shmulevich, and a member of Dugin’s Eurasia movement. Shmulevich and Eskin are Neo-Eurasianists rather than Traditionalists, and even their Neo-Eurasianism is a consequence rather than a cause of their other activities. Eskin’s stance preceded by the development of Neo-Eurasianism, and his first known political activity was in 1979, when, at age 19, he and three other young settlers were arrested for breaking into Palestinian houses in Hebron, where they “overturned furniture and assaulted inhabitants.” Three years later, in 1981, Eskin was again arrested, this time during a protest in front of Soviet airline Aeroflot’s offices in New York, and charged with “rioting, unlawful assembly, disorderly conduct and attempted criminal mischief.”
This is Eskin, so awful as to be perversely entertaining:
Reuters, May 28 1997 – Avigdor Eskin, the man who put a curse on Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin a month before he was assassinated, was convicted in an Israeli court on Wednesday of violating the Prevention of Terrorism Act. According to local news reports at the time, Eskin stood outside Yitzhak Rabin’s house on the eve of Yom Kippur 1995 and cursed him with the ancient curse of pulsa denura, Aramaic for “lashes of fire.” The curse read in part: “And on him, Yitzhak, son of Rosa, known as Yitzhak Rabin, we have permission to demand from angels of destruction that they take a sword to this wicked man to kill him, for handing over the Land of Israel to our enemies.” Jerusalem District Court spokesman Moshe Gorali told Reuters: “The conviction relates to the interview he gave on television, in which he said the curse generally worked within 30 days. This was judged to constitute incitement to violence. He will be sentenced next week.” The Justice Ministry said he could receive a maximum sentence of six years.
Feb 6 1998 – Jewish extremist Avigdor Eskin was released on bail last week by a decision of an Israeli court. Avigdor Eskin, who was accused of planning to throw the head of a pig wrapped in pages of the Qur’an inside al-Aqsa mosque, atop Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, made bail of 1/2 million shekels on Jan 21 1998.
Oct 18 1999 – Jewish extremist Avigdor Eskin was convicted last Tuesday of placing a pig’s head on the Muslim grave of 1930s Palestinian nationalist fighter Izz’ed-Din al-Qassam. The Jerusalem District Court, however, found insufficient evidence that Eskin was guilty of conspiring to catapult a pig’s head into the al-Aqsa mosque. No date has been set for sentencing, but prosecutors will allegedly ask that Avigdor Eskin serve jail time for his pork-related crimes.
Nov 19 1999 – Jewish extremist Avigdor Eskin was sentenced to 2-1/2 years in jail today for placing a pig’s head on the grave of Palestinian nationalist fighter Izz’ed-Din al-Qassam. The court last week also gave Avigdor Eskin an 18-month suspended sentence for conspiring to torch offices belonging to Israeli peace activists. Eskin was cleared of charges of plotting to catapult a pig’s head onto the Temple Mount. On Nov 12, Avigdor Eskin was sentenced to two years in jail for “orchestrating” the placing of a pig’s head on the grave of Izz’ed-Din al-Qassam.
Afterword
I’d like to add a few words here which I have left to the end so as not to confuse the general train of thought. In the Foreword, I mentioned Dugin’s attitude to Putin and to the Russian Orthodox Church, and I also mentioned the Lubavitchers. I would like to fill in here with a memoir by a Ukrainian Reform Jewish organiser who had the misfortune to fall under the wheels of the Lubavitch take-over of Jewish organisations throughout the FSU. So disgruntled was he that he wrote a remarkably revealing memoir (19), which like everything else in this essay I rescued from oblivion, in this case from a now-defunct Russian Orthodox Christian web page. The burden of it is that Putin is pretty much in the pocket of the “Lubavitcher werewolves”, as he calls them, and this may very well be true. The other thing I want to leave with you, which may seem quite paradoxical given the immediately preceding, is a US Lubavitch page for Noahides (20), that is to say, non-Jews who wish however humbly to attach themselves to the skirts of the Jews and improve their spiritual station thereby. The paradox is that this page is the most dementedly anti-Russian thing one could easily imagine. It isn’t just anti-Communist, it’s anti-Russian, because it denies that Russia has ever stopped being Communist. The author, Boruch (Bryan) Ellison, is clearly not an official Lubavitch spokesman, but he has the support (21) and endorsement (22) of a very large number of Lubavitcher Rabbis, and can be taken as a valid representative of the right wing of the Lubavitcher movement in the US, and he is not disavowed by Lubavitcher officialdom, any more than are the Lubavitcher wildcat messianists currently running many of the most violent religious settler communities in the Palestinian West Bank. So, what we have here is a global Lubavitcher discourse which is as bent as a corkscrew. It may well be that only Jews can get away with this sort of media ju-jitsu, because Jews, and especially Jewish organisations like Lubavitch, enjoy a sort of charmed life. But the reason I mention it is that I want to set Jewish religious politics firmly in the context of the global, corporate Right, as opposed to the sort of anarcho-fascist apocalypse that one might imagine from Dugin’s discourses. I dare say the same argument could be made regarding Evola’s post-WW2 recruits in Italy, but this requires a separate discussion.
URLs for plaintext readers
(1) http://www.4pt.su/en
(2) http://www.endofthepresentworld.com/
(3) http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0946222096/
(4) http://www.evrazia.info/article/4271
(5)
(6) http://web.archive.org/web/20030211055026/http://utenti.lycos.it/ArchivEurasia/dugin_jews.html
(7) http://web.archive.org/web/20011230013942/http://utenti.tripod.it/ArchivEurasia/dugin_israel.html
(8) http://web.archive.org/web/20020617114126/http://utenti.lycos.it/archiveurasia/eurasia_210401.html
(9) http://www.zarodinu.org/
(10) http://web.archive.org/web/20020617110411/http://utenti.lycos.it/archiveurasia/shmulevic_jwru.html
(11) http://web.archive.org/web/20020214214402/http://utenti.tripod.it/ArchivEurasia/shmulevic_zavtra.html
(12) http://web.archive.org/web/20020617114152/http://utenti.lycos.it/archiveurasia/shmul_ng010405.html
(13) http://www.yitchakrabin.com/Barry%20Chamish/html/avigdor_eskin.html
(14) http://www.vdare.com/articles/avigdor-eskin-and-the-national-question-in-israel
(15) http://avigdor-eskin.com/
(16) http://web.archive.org/web/20021002070111/http://utenti.lycos.it/ArchivEurasia/levkin_congress.html
(17) http://web.archive.org/web/20021002070111/http://utenti.lycos.it/ArchivEurasia/levkin_congress.html
(18) http://www.zarodinu.org/site/sedgwick.htm
(19) https://niqnaq.wordpress.com/2009/03/05/selected-reminiscences-of-eduard-hodos/
(20) http://www.noahide.com/plo_updates/plo12_0226.htm
(21) http://www.plo.attacreport.com/procl_1.php
(22) http://www.plo.attacreport.com/response_list.php?procl_num=1