Three Aspects of the Jewish Problem (Afterword)
Three Aspects of the Jewish Problem is a critical analysis of inter-war anti-Semitism. We will examine it with the same sense of discrimination, constructive attitude and objectivity with which it was written.
Just as Julius Evola examines the Jewish question historically and doctrinally, so does this examination. Historically, the key issue is the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in 587 BC, and the aim is to identify whether or not, as is argued, it led to a Jewish spiritual collapse; furthermore, the Jewish religion
in its ritual and scriptural aspects, the Jewish monarchy and the Jewish conception of the king, as well as that of the Messiah, are compared, as they are in the study, in their pre-exilic and post-exilic states. The doctrinal premises are examined in the second part. Only the main points are dealt with here, as concisely as possible (1).
The first period of Israelite settlement was characterised by a strong tendency towards syncretism with the religion of the Canaanites, who in turn had borrowed heavily from their neighbours. The oldest Jewish religion is, generally speaking, a mixture of a Canaanite element and a later Semitic element brought by the Yahwist Hebrew immigrants, both allegedly carrying Indo-European residues. They quickly blended easily, whether in the northern or southern kingdoms (2). The Yahwist priestly caste was modelled on that of the Canaanites and the ritual system, sacred sites and sanctuaries of Yahwism were borrowed from the Canaanite religion; the tribal religion of the Patriarchs had previously been noncultic.
The Jewish sacrificial system
The purpose of the primitive rituals, composed of rites of adoration and rites of purification, was to remember, celebrate and maintain Israel's relationship with Yahweh (3). These rites are characterised by two elements: atonement and faith. Although the Day of Atonement took on greater importance only in the Second Temple period, it is thought to have a very ancient origin, having "far more in common with the conception of the atoning suffering of Baal at the hands of the Devourers and the Destroyers in the desert than with anything else with which we are familiar in the religion of Israel in the Middle Ages". historical times". (4) The sin-offering, the sacrifice in which the idea of atonement was most clearly marked, though only directly enjoined in Leviticus, is mentioned in the pre-exilic period (2 Kings 12:16); it became increasingly central to Jewish religion in the post-exilic period, during which "the priestly code of the sacrificial system developed into an ordinance of atonement, reflecting the growing consciousness of sin and the desire for atonement. " (5) Atonement and the sacrifices of supplication already played a central role in pre-exilic worship. of Israel (6). Moreover, pre-Mosaic sacrifices were directly linked to faith (7). It is therefore improbable that the "formalism" of the rites "had the same active and decisive anti-sentimental spirit that [...] was characteristic of primordial and even Roman virile Aryan ritual". (8) Even in the purified, Yahwist form of the Old Testament tradition, the forms and ideas associated with monarchy, which were originally adopted in the court ceremonial of David and Solomon, were influenced by Eastern conceptions.
As for the Jewish scriptures, although the Old Testament contains "elements and symbols of metaphysical and thus universal value", they were "taken from elsewhere". The Jews never had "a tradition of their own, owing to other peoples, whether Semitic or non-Semitic, the positive elements as well as the negative elements that they were able to develop particularly subsequently." There is almost nothing in the oldest parts of the Jewish scriptures that cannot be found in the myths, poems and hymns of the ancient literature of Mesopotamia, Egypt and Canaan. These, however, were transferred from the cosmological to the historical plane in such a narrow manner that it has been said that "in the hands of the Semites, the mythologies they borrowed from foreign peoples became flat historical narratives". (9)
The Israelite monarchy itself is the result of the fusion of the traditions of the ancient chieftaincy and the laws, customs and ideas of the Canaanite kingship; they were in turn a development of the Canaanite monarchy.
The Canaanite kingship was not an indigenous creation, independent of foreign influences: the country's culture as a whole was influenced by the Canaanites.
Syrian culture itself, however, was subject to strong influences from Mesopotamia, Babylon and Assyria, Asia Minor (Hittite) and Egypt. The tension between the traditions of chieftaincy and those of kingship was always present. On the one hand, rulers such as David and Solomon belonged to a stock of priest-kings, but, on the other, "the Jews perceived in the full and traditional conception of royal dignity a denigration of God's privilege (whether historical or not, Samuel's opposition to the establishment of the monarchy is very significant)". (10) From the outset, however, the Eastern conception of kingship underwent fundamental changes in Israel under the influence of Yahwism and the nomadic tradition, and most of the borrowed forms acquired a modified or new content.
The Israelite king, like all kings everywhere else in the Ancient East, was the mediator between his God and his people. His subordination to Yahweh was more strongly emphasised than usual in the Eastern conception of kingship. Two points express what distinguishes the Israelite ideal: the king is absolutely subordinate to Yahweh and dependent on Him and on the blessing of His covenant; the king's essential task is to submit to Yahweh and to preserve "Yahweh's justice" and not to "destroy Yahweh". pretend to be more than what he is (11). The content of the messianic concept derived from the royal ideal, from the Israelite and, ultimately, Eastern conception of kingship, which was very old: it was already fully developed in Sumerian times. The Persian influence on Eastern religion and culture did not begin until the sixth century.
From the beginning, the ideal of kingship in ancient Israel was linked to the future. The ideal of kingship belongs to the present, but it is also clearly oriented towards the future (2 Sam. 7). The Messiah is the future eschatological realisation of the ideal of kingship; he is the ideal king transferred to the future who will not is no longer identified with the specific historical king, but with the one who will one day come, even though that day may come in the immediate future. Originally, hope in the future was twofold: it was a hope of restoration of an essentially worldly, national and political nature, but with significant religious elements and a tendency to give a mythical, supernatural colouring to the divine miracle that would bring it about. From the point of view of the daily reality of national and political life, it is the ideal of kings of the line of David who will once again govern the people of Yahweh, but from the religious point of view Yahweh is king of the restored kingdom. From the first point of view, the Messiah is a an active figure, endowed with all the superhuman characteristics of the ideal of kingship of the historical kings of the period after the destruction of the Second Temple (12), but without being a supernatural being who comes from above. From the second point of view, insofar as the emphasis is This leaves little room for the Messianic king, in whom worldly and human characteristics predominate; and the Messiah is then portrayed as a passive figure (13), up to the notion of the "suffering Messiah", adopted in late Judaism under the figure of the Servant of the Lord (Deutero-Isaiah).
This is consistent with the original conception of the king as Yahweh's slave in every respect and, after all, the cult of kingship in its original form necessarily led to this (14).
Jewish hope in the future became eschatological in the strict sense of the term when it was linked to a dualistic view of life and the world, and to wisdom. This dualism was developed during the earlier Hellenistic period under the influence of Persian religion, which was dualistic from the outset. But the influence was that of Persian ideas, not in their pure form, but in the form they acquired as a result of the influence of Babylonian culture, philosophy and worldview, i.e. syncretistic Chaldean religion, cosmology and speculative thought, when, from the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, Babylon was the most important spiritual centre of Judaism (15). On closer examination, however, dualism was contained in nuce in early Judaism, both in the ethical sphere and in the individual sphere as the distinction between "the righteous and the wicked", as well as in the ontological sphere as the antithesis between flesh and spirit.
It was applied to the cosmological sphere, albeit with a strong moral component, to everything that was cosmological in the Jewish belief system and ritual, only in the post-exilic period, when Judaism, having considered that the power of evil in the world had been embodied in the successive great pagan powers which had ruled over the Jews, no longer distinguished between them but saw them as the effect of a cosmic, transcendent principle of evil, to be finally destroyed by Yahweh. But, once again, the notion of the destruction of this world stems from the cosmic imagery of pre-exilic Hebrew prophets such as Zephaniah (16). The development of eschatology was affected by two other important factors, one intellectual, the other historical. Firstly, out of the Jewish mentality (combined with elements of ancient Eastern knowledge of cosmography, astrology, angelology and medical magic) arose an apocalyptic literature with the following centres eschatology.
Then, "[w]hen Israel's military successes declined, the defeat came to be understood as a punishment for the "sins" committed and so a hope developed that after a conscientious atonement Jehovah would again help his people and restore their power [...] But since this did not happen, the prophetic hope degenerated into an apocalyptic, messianic myth and into the fantastic eschatological vision of a Saviour. But since this did not happen, the prophetic hope degenerated into an apocalyptic, messianic myth and into the fantastic eschatological vision of a Saviour who would redeem Israel; this marked the beginning of a process of disintegration. " It must be borne in mind, however, that a disparity always existed in Israel, in the pre-exilic and post-exilic periods, between the promise of Yahweh and the historical reality of evils and sufferings: apocalyptic literature was born of its exacerbation in the Hellenistic period.
Supernatural, universalist eschatology is found particularly in apocalyptic literature. The influence of dualism led to a considerable strengthening of the transcendental element, in eschatology. But the fact that the starting point for hope in the future was faith in the restoration of Israel on Earth, in the land of Canaan, was never forgotten. And so it persisted in eschatology an unresolved tension, a gulf between the political, national and worldly elements and the transcendental, supernatural elements, between which the Jews oscillated according to historical conditions.
Another thing was also never forgotten. The king, as the son of Yahweh, the God of the whole earth (Exod. 19:5), "has a just right to dominion over the whole earth [...] the universal dominion of peoples [...] as a goal and promise was implicit in the election of the king as Yahweh's Anointed and deputy on earth." The concept of Messiah may have undergone some changes Throughout Jewish history, the messianic task remained the same: world domination. This theme is present throughout the Old Testament, in all the "covenants between the parties", from the Abrahamic covenant to Deuteronomy 11:et al; 30:1-10, 2 Samuel 7:8-16 and, finally, Jeremiah 31:31-34. Not that it cannot also be found in the Adamic covenant (Genesis 1:26-30; 2:16-17; 3:16-19).
Thus, while objectively two periods "must be distinguished" in Jewish history, this distinction is one of degree and not of kind (17). The conclusion that "[i]t is not the original Jewish messianic idea but its corruption and materialisation which constitutes the real point of reference of the forces of subversion which aim to destroy our civilisation once and for all and to exercise satanic domination over all the forces at work on Earth" (18), refers to implicitly, even more so than Marx's assertion that "The god of the Jews is the god of the world". secularised and became the god of the world", to a process that will be fully expressed in the future. later in The Road to Cinnabar: "I have tried to show that this action [that of modern Judaism] was carried out, for the most part, by a secularised Jewish element which had separated itself from its ancient tradition and in which aspects of that tradition had become deformed and materialised, in In fact, it is not the previous messianic idea, but the pursuit of its corruption and materialisation, that constitutes the real point of reference for the forces of modernity. In fact, it is not the previous messianic idea, but the pursuit of its corruption and materialisation, that constitutes the real point of reference for the forces of the subversion: in fact, the previous Jewish messianic idea already bears witness to a materialistic conception of messianism, and materialism means corruption.
Fundamentally, the intimate link between the Jewish messianic idea and the thirst for earthly goods and riches from the beginning, and not just from the Mosaic period onwards, is recognised by Evola in later writings: "[...] the very way in which the Jews conceived the relationship between man and divinity, a relationship which was based on a mercantile mechanism of services and rewards, shows, de do ut est, a mercantilism which must already have constituted the essence of Judaism in antiquity [....As we know, in the ancient Law, the Torah, the messianic idea was already intimately linked to earthly goods and wealth, which would give rise to capitalist speculation and, ultimately, to the economy as an instrument of power in Israel's plans. " (19)
Two other points need to be made from a historical point of view. As regards prophetism, the first historical references to it in the history of the Hebrews (1 Sam. 10:5-13) indicate On the other hand, the statement that the "prophet" (nabi) type "replaced the 'clairvoyant' (roeh) type" may be due to a misreading of the text. (20) On the other hand, the statement that the "prophet" (nabi) type "was substituted for the "clairvoyant" (roeh) type" may be due to a misreading of 1 Sam. 9:9. The term nabi was substituted for roeh and there does not seem to have been any major difference between the functions of these two figures. Various biblical passages show that a prophet could be interchangeably called by either of these terms (21). As for "that style of deceit, slavish hypocrisy, and persistent and disruptive underhand infiltration", which would have remained "characteristic of the Jewish instinct in general" following the collapse of 587, it seems that the not be acquired but be congenital (22).
Doctrinally, the two main points raised against contemporary anti-Semites are the futility of "referring to race in the narrow sense of the term in order to speak of a universal Semitism" and the danger of making the Jew a scapegoat.
The first point is highlighted at the spiritual level, where it is argued that "Semitism as as a typical attitude towards the spiritual world [...] can be defined in the abstract and can be identified even where, in a civilisation, there is no clear and direct ethnic link with the Semitic races and the Jews".
Culturally and socio-economically, it is stressed that Jewish characters can also be found in "those nations which have remained least affected by Jewish infiltration."
(23) In the scientific field, it is carefully specified that "one can still speak of a disintegrating Jewish spirit expressing itself through rationalism and calculation [...] but only by using the term "Jewish" in an analogical sense, without making any literal reference to race." The premises are false, however. Generally speaking, there is a link dating back at least to Antiquity between the Semitic races and certain white European peoples, due either to racial mixing (24), and not just in the "Mediterranean race", or to a change of race (25). Racial mixing goes some way to explaining why "an anti-Nordic soul can very well be incarnated, for example, in a racially Nordic body, and vice versa."
These incorrect premises lead to certain errors in the analysis of the two main characteristics of the Jewish people: internationalism and rationalism. Evola's systematic distinction between "internationalism" and "universalism" turns out to be problematic. "Universal" means "This is precisely what Alexander's universal state was aiming for, The inclusion of everyone in the empire presupposed the belief in a "common human essence" (logos), which was thought to be innate or capable of being acquired through intermarriage. Social distinctions were preserved since this belief was based on the philosophical conception of reason, and natural differences in the ability to reason were postulated between masters and slaves (26). Racial distinctions were not: in his view, "Asians were not to be dominated by European conquerors, but Europeans and Asians were to be governed equally by a monarch who was indifferent to the distinction between Greek and barbarian and who was regarded as their own king by the Persians as well as by the Macedonians". (27)
The ideal of a universal state, the kosmopolis (28), was later revived by the Stoics (29), and Stoicism "was a Semitic philosophy" (30), with all its anti-racial tendencies implies (31). It is also in the context of a rational natural law that all peoples It should follow that the idea of the kosmopolis was transformed into the idea of the Roman order itself (32) and, later, into Pauline universalism, culminating in the idea of a religion common to all ethnic groups as the unifying basis of the empire. In the twelfth century, the theory of a universal state formulated by Frederick I (1122-1190), and cherished by Frederick II and Dante, was modelled on the Universal Church. In the Middle Ages, the more the ideal of a universal State gained ground, the more the State was desacralized by the Church (33), in accordance with Tertullian's statement (Apology, 37) that "Nothing is more alien to us than the State. We know only one State, of which we are all citizens: the universe". Following in the footsteps of Stoicism, early Christianity denied "any primordial duty of loyalty to the State and appealed to a higher loyalty to another homeland." (34) The civilisation of the Middle Ages betrayed certain Semitic and, more particularly, typically Jewish characteristics (35).
A Judeo-Christian twist was given to everything borrowed by Christianity from what was intrinsically "Aryan" in Rome and, more generally, in Greco-Roman civilisation. If there was any Romanisation, it was only superficial and parodic. Similarly, the "Germanisation of Christianity in the early Middle Ages" was only formal; in substance, everything points to a "Christianisierung des Germanentums" (36). If "[...] in the most Rome [the Catholic Church] remains the only relatively positive point of reference for any universal tendency", this tendency turns out to be essentially Semitic. "[...] [T]he internationalist phenomenon surely goes beyond what can reasonably be attributed to the influence of the Jewish people [...]" insofar as the Jews are not the only nomadic people: this extends to precisely to the Semitic and Mongoloid races, whose blood is to be found in the Jewish people. And so, the assertion that "internationalism is an effect [...] of the very structure of modern civilisation and life, and not merely of ethnic influences as such" and that "the struggle against the Jew often conceals a struggle against general structures dominant in modern civilisation, as well as against what can be seen as an anticipation of such structures in [...] modern civilisation". the ancient world" is a vicious circle, since the anticipation of the general structures dominant in modern civilisation turns out to be, if not purely Jewish, at least largely Semitic.
The same applies to rationalism. "The first anti-traditional, critical, anti-religious and "scientific" upheavals in ancient Greek civilisation were not fostered or initiated by Jews alone, but more generally by Semites. Almost all the schools of philosophy in ancient Greece were founded by non-Greeks, most of them and their followers coming from Asia Minor or Syria (37), and it was in this way that the spirit of scientific research was brought to Athens.
The second point, namely the "extremist" tendency to make the Jew a scapegoat and, at the same time, to bring Jewish action "into line with a pre-established plan", on the cultural, social and economic levels. Evola claims that "[i]n the concrete process of the development of modern civilisation, the Jews can be considered as a force acting in concert with others in the engendering of rationalist, scientistic and mechanistic 'civilised' modern decadence, but not as its only distinct cause", the "others" being the Semitic forces as a whole and, in the final analysis, all the forces at work in the non- and anti-Aryan races (38). The "scapegoat tactic" argument, as developed in Men in the Midst of Ruins, is not as convincing as it might at first appear: if, indeed, the Jews were instrumentalised by the "occult forces of subversion", the latter would have every reason to direct and focus the attention of their adversaries on elements which, only in part, or only in a subordinate manner, can be considered to be responsible for their misdeeds, namely to confirm the Jews in their "traditional role" of habitual suspects, of scapegoats. Far from it. No effort is obscenely and grotesquely spared by the Jewish-controlled media in order to divert people's attention from anything in any way connected with the Jews to elements that contribute to the crisis of the so-called world (39).
Finally, the three central themes of anti-Semitism are gradually addressed in the form of the following questions: Is there a real plan for world domination? If so, is it being carried out by the Jews, and if so, is this underground action conscious?
The question of whether there is a global conspiracy and whether it is led by the Jews has been settled by the simple and realistic conclusion reached by the document that raised this issue to. even if we assume that the Protocols are not 'authentic' in the strict sense of the term, it is the same as if they were [...] 1) because the facts show that they truthfully describe the actual state of affairs; 2) because their correspondence with the guiding ideas of traditional and modern Judaism is indisputable".
Moreover, it is not necessary to refer to this controversial document to be sure of the existence of a plan for world domination; Gen. 1:28, unless
God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth". As for the assertion that, if we can speak of a real plan, the Jewish element "plays only a subordinate role [...] probably only an instrumental one" in it, this is definitely not what recent history has taught us.
This has been particularly true since the end of the Second World War. "The Second World War was fought in defence of the fundamental principles of Judaism" (40), and following the overthrow of the Soviet Union, the Jewish people were forced to flee.
socialist Germany by a bloc of nations supported by the Jews in 1945, it was natural to that Europe, "occupied by non-European forces", "by Mongols, Turkmens and Kirghiz from Asia, Negroes from America, Senegalese from Africa, Jews from the four corners of the world "Europe, "economically dependent on them like a slave on his master" (41), would be rebuilt, with the complicity of political puppets, according to the fundamental principles of Judaism, i.e. as a two-class communist society like in the "good old days", by what is known as the European Union (42). And, racially speaking, what happened in the USA and the USSR, the two main instruments of the Jew against Europe, the former having been referred to as a "melting pot" (43), the latter having been a "racial sewer" long before Marx called it so, and it was praised as such by the historian Stepan Eshevsky (1829-1865) (44), also happened in Europe: although the indigenous European peoples were far from free from mixing with the non-white races before National Socialism, determined to combat racial mixing by prophylactic measures, came to power (45), the fact is that, a few decades after the United States and the USSR defeated Germany, Europe now looks more and more like the Tower of Babel as a result of mass immigration of non-whites and the ensuing mixed marriages.
The Jews, excluded - to a certain extent and as far as possible - in National Socialist Germany and in all its allied countries, from the key positions they massively held in all fields, from finance to politics, from the media to the judiciary, from medicine to culture, from the professions intellectuals and liberals in the state apparatus, have returned, except this time they have brought with them the widest variety of non-whites with the aim of racially mixing European populations. Just as "the organized Jewish community has been the most important force in favor of unrestricted immigration to the United States" (46), that is, to put it bluntly, of With the mass immigration of non-Whites, all that remained for Lenin and his equally racially mixed successors to do was to further stimulate, through the mass deportation of minorities, the hereditary tendency of the peoples of Russia to racial mixing. In 1922, the Bolshevik leader Selenkov declared in Moscow: "We must create a climate of anti-nationalism and anti-racialism among Whites. We must reduce patriotism and racial pride to senseless abstractions and make racialism a vile term." (47)
Throughout the so-called In the West, Jews are in the vanguard of the mass immigration movement, the integration' of non-whites and racial mixing.
On the other hand, the Jews can be seen as "mere instruments", obedient however not to any other human entity, whether collective or individual, but to influences of a "demonic" nature: the Jewish instinct, "the force that has been used at certain historical moments to weave a much wider web, the threads of which, in our minds, come from behind the scenes of the
But it is always the Jewish racial substance which constitutes their "hunting ground": the fact that this racial substance is the result of the most unfavourable racial mixtures is certainly not unrelated to this.
The Jews may not be aware of the real reason why they have been "chosen".
As for the third concomitant question, that of whether a plan for world domination was consciously formed or, as Evola, with Revilo Oliver, maintain, this will to dominate the world is instinctive, Gen. 1:28 enjoins us to be less categorical. In any case, these allegations are not mutually exclusive for a reason that can be inferred from Evola's own remark on the composition of the Jewish people: "in the first place, there is the more or less modernised and gentrified Jew of a shapeless middle class; in the second place, there is the Jew as cultural agent, the Jew as writer, artist, ideologue, sociologist, scientist and so on; in the third place, there is the Jew as creature of Jewish law and conscious instrument of Jewish law.
" (48) He it may be possible, as a working hypothesis, that what develops purely instinctively in the first and second strata may be consciously at work in the third stratum (49).
Despite all the clarifications, reservations and criticisms to which it lends itself from the same radical antisemitic point of view from which it was written, Three Aspects of the Jewish Problem still remains the highest point of reference for antisemitism for at least two reasons. The first is that the main errors of contemporary antisemitic arguments are clearly identified, rightly judged to be counterproductive and even damaging to antisemitism, and, on the whole, properly rectified; the most worrying is that their points of reference not only "constitute historical ideas that post-date the original Semitic civilisations", but "are in fact the very basis of the antisemitic argument". partly influenced by elements stemming from the latter" (50), going so far as to be affected by the very evils they claim to be fighting, to the point of unconsciously adopting, in their struggle against Judaism, a Jewish point of view (51) and even Jewish values, such as analytical intelligence.
Secondly, the need for anti-Semitism to be doctrinally and historically grounded is emphasised, and the only real principle in this area is recognised as being an "ideal antithesis" between Aryanism and Semitism which, although claimed to be "without ethnic prejudice", is one between the so-called "races of the mind" in Synthèse de doctrine de la race. In an effort to praticism, which is characteristic of Evola's perspective, the need to establish the "truly general point of view and [...] the premises that are necessary to really justify, by a deductive procedure, any practical anti-Semitic policy, that is to say social and political," is asserted.
At the beginning of the 1960s, Evola stated in his autobiography that "it would be completely absurd today to tackle similar problems again on a practical level" since "the majority of Aryans display the negative attitude attributed to the Jews, including anti-Semites, whose arguments generally remain equivocal, confused and polemical, "without the latter having the former's excuse of a hereditary predisposition" and, certainly, leaving aside an underestimation of non-Aryan hereditary characteristics as a result of racial mixing with non-whites, this is not wrong.
Rather than 'absurd', it would simply be impossible to address these issues on a practical level in the present circ*mstances, where all the levers of power in the so-called 'Western countries' are controlled by representatives, whether overt or covert, of non- and anti-Aryan races. On the theoretical level, on the contrary, it is not useless.
B. K., translated from the English by J. B.
(1) For a more thorough and complete examination, see B. K., Charles - "the Great"? (2),
https://elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/charles-le-grand-2/ ; Les Bijoux de la
papauté, https://elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2014/11/24/les-bijoux-de-la-papaute/ ; La
liberté : un concept d'esclaves, https://elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/laliberte-
un-concept-desclaves-1/, https://elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2013/10/01/laliberte-
un-concept-desclaves-2/, https://elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2014/07/01/laliberte-
un-concept-desclaves-3/, https://elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2022/08/31/laliberte-
un-concept-desclaves-4/, https://elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2022/09/30/laliberte-
un-concept-desclaves-5/, https://elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2022/10/31/laliberte-
un-concept-desclaves-6/.
(2) The northern kingdom "has been described as the chief offender in its adoption of or defection
from the Canaanite cults", but the southern kingdom "was far from free" of the mixture of cults that
characterised the north: "Even David [...] began his reign by establishing an influence [...] that was not
confined to the Canaanites".
Phoenician influence in the country and Solomon [...] not only reinforced this influence, but increased it
by having a Phoenician temple built by Phoenician craftsmen as his royal chapel. He also established the
worship of Moabite and Ammonite deities". (R. K. Yerkes, Sacrifice in Greek and Roman religions and
early Judaism, 1952, pp. 118-119).
(3) On the historical development of sacrifice in the Old Testament, see Dr. William Smith's
Dictionary of the Bible, Volume IV, 1872, entry "sacrifice", p. 2770.
(4) Margaret Barke, Risen Lord, p. 62; see also Rainer Albertz, A History of Israelite Religion in the Old
Testament Period, Volume 2, p. 463.
(5) S. Mowinckel, He That Cometh, 1956, p. 240. This fundamental work on the concept of the
Messiah or, as the author more aptly calls it, "hope in the future", is used as the basis for reflections
on this subject.
(6) "It was thought that the effective and fervent prayer of a righteous man did a great deal to help the
poor.
guilty. (Burton, Smith, Biblical ideas of atonement: their history and significance, 1909, p. 16).
(7) Richard Watson, John McClintock, Theological Institutes; see "Primitive sacrifices".
(8) "Abraham had no specific outcome in mind when he prepared to sacrifice his son. He felt bound to
his God by "faith". He did not 'understand' the meaning of the acts that God had just asked of him,
whereas those who sacrificed their first-born to a divinity were perfectly aware of the meaning and
power of the magico-religious ritual." (Mircea Eliade, History of Religious Ideas, chap. XIV).
(9) Julius Wellhausen, Israelitische und jüdische Geschichte, in Houston Stewart Chamberlain, The
Foundations of the Nineteenth Century, p. 418.
(10) Julius Evola, Révolte contre le monde moderne, 2009, p. 294. The constant friction between the
Levites and the kings, encouraged by the fact that the latter encouraged the combination of religious
ideas and practices that were those of the two sections of the population, the Israelites and the Jews,
was a source of great concern to Evola.
Canaanites, are reminiscent of the medieval conflict between the emperor and the pope over the
question of superiority.
of spiritual authority in relation to temporal power.
(11) "The very conception of the character of "justice" and "grace" had a different basis in Babylonia
and Assyria [as well as in Persia] from that, for example, of Israel. We can put it this way: the gods stand
above justice; 'justice' or 'grace' is the goal of the gods; but it is often incomprehensible. All too often it
seems that what seems wise to man is contemptible to the god, and that what seems evil according to
man's judgement is good to his god. In Israel Yahweh is also the source of justice and grace, and in the
mind of the pious He is supreme in these qualities. But the true belief of the learned is that Yahweh is
not arbitrary. There is a standard in His relationship to humanity." (S. Mowinckel, op. cit., p. 94) This
explains why the Israelites believed in Yahweh's superiority over all other gods and, at the same time,
why exclusivism and universalism go hand in hand in Yahwism and its offshoots.
(12) See Royal Psalms; Sons of Man, Book of Enoch (xxxvii-lxxi), 1st century BC and apocalyptic
rabbinic literature.
(13) Ezekiel, 17:23; Trito-Isaiah; Malachi, Joel and the post-exilic Revelation of Isaiah, 24-27; the Messiah
of Deutero-Zechariah is described (Zech. 9:9-10) as a Prince of Peace who will rise from the ranks of the
pious and oppressed, who will go to Jerusalem not in military splendour, but on a donkey.
(14) Oscar Cullmann, The Christology of the New Testament, 1959 p. 56. Many examples of the king's
humiliation and rededication are found in the Psalms (A. C. Brunson, Psalm 118 in the Gospel of
John: An Intertextual Study on the New Exodus, p. 32).
(15) It is precisely from a related source that the "type [Zoroastrian] of the future 'universal master',
Shaoshyant, a king of kings, is derived". Zoroastrianism is itself a mixture of Aryan conceptions and
the priestly science of the Medes, a people who, judging by the rock of Behistun, bear all the traits of
a race distinct from Semites and Aryans, an autochthonous brachycephalic race physically close to
modern Tajiks. See Sigismond, Zaborowski-Moindron, Les peuples aryens d'Asie et d'Europe, leurs
origines en Europe, la civilisation protoaryenne, 1908, p. 158.
(16) Kenneth L. Barker, D. Waylon Bailey, The New American Commentary - Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk,
Zephaniah, p. 487.
(17) The threefold repetition of "more and more" in the 16th paragraph of Part I inadvertently
testifies to this. The intractable difficulties of dating the various books of the Old Testament,
illustrated by the Deutero-Asaiah controversy, extend to the question of whether some of them were
written in pre- or post-exilic times. Nevertheless, the corpus as a whole
Jewish scripture, with a few exceptions corresponding to passages unanimously considered dubious, will
be taken, as it was by Evola, as it is, as the Jews want non-Jews to perceive their tribulations.
(18) Transformazioni del 'Regnum', La Vita Italiana, 1937.
(19) L'Ebraismo nel mondo antico, in I testi de La Vita Italiana. Volume 1, 1931-1938, Ar. See also Il Mito
del sangue; the "Kingdom" supposedly promised to the Jewish people was in no way considered in a
mystical, supra-terrestrial sense, but as the one that would possess all the riches of the world.
(20) See J. Jensen, God's Word to Israel, p. 149.
(21) 1 Sam. 7:7; see Ernest B. Gentile, Your Sons and Daughters Shall Prophesy: Prophetic Gifts in
Ministry Today, 1999, chapter 3.
(22) The archaeological and literary evidence gathered by Albrecht Alt (Die Landnahme der Israeliten in
Palestina) proves that the conquest of Canaan "was not a blitzkrieg, but a gradual infiltration of a new
people, some of whom may have come from Egypt under the leadership of an obscure figure named
Moses. In fact, the traditional 'blitzkrieg' theory is contradicted by the Bible itself, which shows that the
accounts of conquest apply only to the territory of the tribe of Benjamin and are tempered by biblical
admissions that Israel could not have conquered the major cities of the land until the times of David and
Solomon." (Henry Wansbrough, The Book of Genesis).
(23) On the contrary, research has shown that almost no European nation has been spared Jewish
infiltration, and that this infiltration began in pre-modern times; for example, Jews
Scandinavians of the Middle Ages "are now largely forgotten" (Norman Roth, Daily Life of the Jews
in the Middle Ages, p. 4).
(24) Ellen Levy-Coffmann: A Mosaic of People: The Jewish Story and a Reassessment of the DNA
Evidence, http://www.jogg.info/11/coffman.htm. The same is affirmed, in scientific terms, by one of the
latest genetic studies of Jewish DNA: "[...] a major portion of NRY biallelic diversity present in most of
the contemporary Jewish communities studied can be traced back to a common Middle Eastern
population of several thousand years ago. The implication is that this population comprised a large
number of distinct paternal and maternal lineages reflecting established genetic variation in the Middle
East at that time. This diversity was in turn maintained in Jewish communities despite numerous
migrations during the Diaspora and long-term settlement as isolated subpopulations in many
geographical locations outside the Middle East". (Hammer et al., Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish
populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes, PNAS, vol. 97, no 12, June
2000, p. 6769-74)
(25) Ernest L. Martin, The Race Change in Ancient Italy! 300 B.C. and 300 A.D.,
http://www.giveshare.org/babylon/racechange.html.
(26) See Ian Angus, Border Within: National Identity, Cultural Plurality, and Wilderness, chapter 4.
(27) L. J. Cheney, The World of Man: Prose Passages, Chiefly from the Works of the Great, p. 37.
(28) This neologism was itself a distortion of the two Greek words of which it was composed: "kosmos".
("order") originally applied only to the specific rules of a given tribe, to its
polis' refers to a tribal and lineage state, then to a community of individuals or a body of citizens defined
and united by language.
(29) It is often claimed that the Stoic kosmopolis, a term coined by the non-Greek cynic
Diogenes, is only "ethical", that it is the privilege of the wise, etc., and, originally, it was "ethical".
This is certainly the case, but it means forgetting that the intellectual expression of a concept always
precedes its political expression; that any subversive doctrine is concealed as much as it is revealed until
minds have been prepared to accept it, first ethically, then in its political applications.
(30) Franz Cumont, Astrology and Religion among the Greeks and Romans, 1912, p. 99.
(31) "Aristotle's doctrine that certain nations are by nature made only for slavery found no echo in the
Stoic world. In it we look in vain for any trace of that instinctive feeling of national difference, that
sensitivity to race and colour which we can easily recognise in the primitive history of Greece and Rome
[...]" (E.V. Arnold, Roman Stoicism
being lectures on the history of the Stoic philosophy, 1911, p. 271); see also Leo Strauss, On Tyranny:
Corrected and Expanded Edition, Including the Strauss-Kojève Correspondence.
(32) Jeffrey C. Herndon, Eric Voegelin and the Problem of Christian Political Order, p. 117.
(33) This work of desacralisation is well described in Révolte contre le monde moderne, 2009, p. 343-
345, as well as in Les hommes au milieu des ruines.
(34) George Burton Adams, Civilization During the Middle Ages, 2004, p. 47.
(35) See B. K., Charles - "the Great"? (2),
https://elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/charles-le-grand-2/.
(36) D. H. Green, F. Siegmund, Continental Saxons from the Migration Period to the Tenth Century, p. 5-
6.
(37) The physical description given by Socrates' contemporaries indicates a racially mixed individual. It
was from Ionia, "in which the old Aegean blood and spirit [mingled] best survived" (H. R. Hall, The
ancient history of the Near East, from the earliest times to the battle of Salamis), that Socrates was
born.
The spirit of scientific research was brought to Athens, and the physical type of the Aegeans clearly
indicates their racial pedigree: "the colour of the men's skin is dark reddish-brown; some of them have
straight noses, but aquiline or eagle-beaked noses are not uncommon; their hair is curly". (S.
Wachsmann, Aegeans in the Theban Tombs, p. 41).
(38) The term "Aryan" must be understood in a typological sense, as in Evola's work.
(39) For example, in France, now a Tower of Babel with a non-white population estimated at between
15 and 20 million and around 400,000 new non-European immigrants every year, the small, pestiferous
group of 'gypsies' is used as a scapegoat without anything being done to expel them - far from it - while
in England, where there are cities where you can walk for miles without seeing a single white person
because they are literally occupied by people from all over the so-called Third World, "Romanian" and
"Bulgarian" immigrants are almost considered a national threat. As for the so-called "settlement
immigration" of non-Europeans of Asian or African origin into so-called "European" countries, as
disastrous as their increasingly invasive presence is in the social, economic and cultural spheres, it is
nothing compared to the psychological threat it represents. "A study of the presence of "marabouts" in
France shows a "grid" that provides information about this "takeover" of subtle powers.
attached to certain local knots [...]" (B. Bruno-Piaud, Sectes : un fléau contre-initiatique, L'âge d'or,
Spiritualité et Tradition, no. 7, Winter, 1987): they "serve as instruments and passive 'supports' for
certain influences belonging to the 'lower depths' of the subtle world, influences which they carry
everywhere with them, and which do not fail to affect dangerously all those, learned or otherwise, who
come into contact with them and who, through their ignorance of what lies at the bottom of all this, are
totally incapable of defending themselves against it.
"(R. Guénon, Le Règne de la Quantité et les Signes des Temps, Gallimard, 1945, p. 289)
(40) Rabbi Felix Mendlesohn, Chicago Sentinel, October 8, 1942.
(41) Francis Parker Yockey, The Proclamation Of London, 1948, p. 25.
(42) As Werner Sombart has shown, the Jewish people were originally divided into two sections, a
wealthy upper class and the great mass of agricultural workers, as was already the case three
millennia earlier among the Ubadians, a proto-sumerian matriarchal society from which it seems that
interest-bearing loans originated, in which the two social classes were called the awilum - the haves -
and the muskenum - the have-nots.
(43) And so it was with Israel, which is today a fully multiracial state (see, for example, Majid Al Haj,
Immigration and Ethnic Formation in a Deeply Divided Society; Shulamit Reinharz, Sergio Della
Pergola, Jewish Intermarriage Around the World; as for antiquity, see Michael L. Satlow, Jewish
Marriage in Antiquity). It is only natural that "[t]he Jewish people, [as] a mixture of races, not to say a
detritus of mainly non-Indo-European races" (Julius Evola, Sulla Genesi
dell'ebraismo come forza distruttrice, La Vita Italiana, July 1941), is trying to reproduce in the outside
world, including in its own state, so to speak, its inner racial landscape, in all its mixedness. So, contrary
to preconceived ideas that border on myth in certain right-wing circles, far from wanting to impose on
Whites what they themselves refuse, Jews are trying to impose on Whites what they are used to: racial
mixing through, for example, mixed marriages; Jews are not trying to maintain a "racial purity" that they
do not have; on the contrary, they are trying to maintain their "racial impurity" and make it universal - all
instinctively.
(44) See Pitirim Aleksandrovič Sorokin, Russia And the United States, 1944; James Forsyth, A History of
the Peoples of Siberia: Russia's North Asian Colony 1581-1990, 1994.
(45) For example, "the Portuguese intermarried freely with their slaves, and this infusion of foreign
blood profoundly altered the character and physique of the nation. It is no exaggeration to say that the
Portuguese of the 17th and subsequent centuries constitute two different races.
"(1911 edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica).
(46) Kevin MacDonald, Was the 1924 Immigration Cut-off "Racist"?
http://www.vdare.com/articles/was-the-1924-immigration-cut-off-racist.
(47) James Tyndall, Spearhead, n° 419 to 438, p. 14.
(48) Julius Evola, Presentation of the Jewish Problem, Bibliografia Fascista, August-September,
1939, https://evolaasheis.wordpress.com/2016/04/14/presentation-of-the-jewish-problem/.
(49) In Antiquity, these three elements of Jewish substance can be considered to have been
respectively the ordinary people, the prophet and the king/priest. Incidentally, in modern times, it is
not ordinary Jews who have become gentrified; on the contrary, it is ordinary non-Jewish Europeans
who have become Judaized, or at least Semiticised. It is hardly necessary
to indicate what the type of lustful pleasure-seeker who constitutes the post-proletarian white masses in
Western Europe and the United States owes to the "Levantine soul".
(50) A caricature of this trend is the German philosopher and politician Artur Dinter. A former
member of the völkisch movement and supporter of scientism, he was a Catholic by name and
committed to "
As one of the first members of the NSDAP, he established a Geistchristliche Religionsgemeinschaft
(Spiritual Christian Religious Community) in 1928, in an attempt to transform National Socialism into a
religious sect. As Hitler had formally banned religious sectarianism, this led to his expulsion from the
Party the same year; the newspaper he began publishing in 1934 (Die Deutsche Volkskirche als Dienerin
des nationalsozialistischen Volksstaates) was banned by Himmler in 1937; he was expelled from the
Reichsschrifttumskammer two years later and was banned from public speaking or writing.
(51) This is particularly evident in their judgement of the Jewish religion from a purely moral point of
view and in their confusion between universalism and internationalism. Several convincing examples of
the first tendency are provided but, however, the argument that "mythologies of pure Nordic-Aryan
stock could 'hardly' be considered tolerable if religions were to be judged according to 'such a
contingent element,' must be qualified: these mythologies were not supposed to be morally edifying,
whereas the god of the Old Testament claims to be a moral god. By
Moreover, it is of the utmost importance in this respect to bear in mind that Norse mythology, partly
collected in a manuscript known as the Codex Regius, which allegedly suddenly resurfaced at the end of
the 17th century, betrays, even in the opinion of some Christian scholars, a strong Christian influence.
