Debunking the Jesuit-concocted myth that ‘the Protocols of Zion predicted Bolshevism’

Beware of coadjutors in prophet’s clothing!

Introduction

If you think you’re immune to reactionary/establishment propaganda, kindly guess again lest you are among the <1-2% minority of the population exceedingly well-educated on the workings of 1) Bismarckian syncretism of the Hegelian sense, 2) the “problem-reaction-solution” (PRS) framework and its manifestations, and 3) the “revelation of the method.” Did this “word salad” (as some of critics of mine are prone to deeming it) fly over your head faster than this insane year did? Worry not—if an autistically schizophrenic and acutely paranoid nutjob as myself can (somehow) grasp the conspiratorial machinations, so almost certainly can you! (read till the end for a special bonus on a Rothschild/Zionist link to the Jesuit conspiracy)

For starters, the infamous hoax known as the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are not merely old news of obsolete irrelevance—they were believed in the first half of the 20th century by duped catechumen masses for a reason. After the 1917 October Revolution (Bolshevik Coup) deposed the short-lived regime of Alexander Kerensky, the Jesuits’ “front” outlets—an array of hard-right clerical protofascists possessing a longstanding hatred of Jewish, democratic, and traditional “liberal” influences—rampantly presented the Protocols as a supposedly “genuine” confession of a “Judeo-Masonic” conspiracy manifested in the Bolshevist takeover of Russia.

Right-wing ultramontane Catholics comprising the rank-and-file pillars of the Jesuit movement are well-documented to have promulgated some fantastically vicious anti-Jewish propaganda post-1917. Rome’s very own La Civiltà Cattolica (“Catholic Civilization”) as a direct mouthpiece of the S.J.:¹

…concluded its (favorable) analysis of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion with this assertion: ‘Bolshevism is at base the old Judaism that tightens, with audacity and with the zeal that comes from having the better cause, the strings of world revolution in order to extend its plutocratic reign and to take advantage of Christian peoples.’

Publication networks of (political) Catholicism:²

…throughout Europe spread fears about Bolshevik disorder and the Jewish conspiracy that might lie behind it.

Whether Italy,³ France,⁴ or Poland,⁵ reactionary Jesuit Catholicism established a prominent footing propagating Protocols-derived concepts of a “Judeo-Bolshevik” scapegoat to present itself as a pillar of “anti-Communism” vowing the overthrow of all “Jewish” and Communist influence in Europe, advocating in their stead the establishment of Papal-Caesarist fascism theocratically subservient to the Roman pontiff. The cardinal Eugenio Pacelli (later known as Pope Pius XII)—in future generations to be whitewashed from the mainstream historical record of his associations with Nazi-Fascism—was steeped in anti-Jewish bigotry since at least 1919, when alongside Achille Ratti (the future Pope Pius XI) the pair refused to distinguish Communism from Judaism:⁶

Pacelli feared a ‘grim Russian-Jewish-Revolutionary tyranny.’ Ratti described Bolshevism as ‘essentially Jewish, anti-Catholic [and] anti-religious.’

In Francoist Spain, the cauldron of Catholic reactionism decidedly seized upon the Protocols in frenzied scaremongering over a phantom “Judeo-Bolshevik-Masonic” conspiracy—a 1932 Spanish print of the Protocols was disseminated by none other than a “Jesuit publishing house.”⁷

I: seeming ‘parallels’ (refuted)

As easy as it is in the modern context to dismiss such equivocations, in the immediate post-1917 years it wasn’t particularly easy to dispel a brewing mindset presuming the Protocols “warned” of Bolshevism. This is not of course to state in any objective sense that the Protocols were actually “genuine,” only that there was an outward pretense of continuity that in the second section will be exposed for its utter duplicity. Leo H. Lehmann, an Irish-American convert to Protestantism who exposed the Jesuit sponsorship of fascist antisemitism, observes:⁸

It must be admitted that there is a certain similarity between this [Protocols-depicted] revolutionary plan of action and the Bolshevist programme that followed the assassination of the Czar of Russia and the overthrow of the Kerensky regime. But of the seventeen members of the Council of People’s Commissars of the Soviet government at that time, only one, Trotsky, was a Jew. Neither have the Masons ever been the least bit influential in Russia, either under the Czar or the Soviets. A world-wide economic depression also has since happened, somewhat similar to that allegedly planned by these elders of Zion.

I will later quote additional extracts from Lehmann to help disprove the Protocols. For now, let’s briefly consider the main points studying why there was a prominent tendency post-1917 to view Bolshevism as a reflection of the Protocols (and why the narratives ultimately collapse when zoomed out).

Pt. I: socialism, anarchism, and Communism

Here are the so-called “Judeo-Masonic conspirators” speaking in Protocol 3:⁹

We appear on the scene as alleged saviours of the worker from this oppression when we propose to him to enter the ranks of our fighting forces—Socialists, Anarchists, Communists—to whom we always give support…

In the final stages of Czarist rule, it’s no stranger to anyone informed on basic history that there indeed was a transpiration of intense “leftist” terrorism from various anarchist, “socialist,” and Communist sects. Although there is brief mention of the Rothschilds sponsoring anarchism in Russia and Poland,¹⁰ these financial currents trace upward to a British—not “Jewish”—conspiracy.¹¹ And the British/Anglo-Masonic axis was operating at the behest of their Jesuit bosses, so the culprits were/are not a “Judeo-Masonic” apex at their very source.

Pt. II: protection of ‘Jews’

Under secs. 11-21 of Protocol 3 designated “JEWS WILL BE SAFE” (yes, the copy I’m browsing through uses nauseating all-caps—I’m almost surprised the font wasn’t Comic Sans…) point 12 reads:¹²

‘OURS’ THEY [the incited mobs] WILL NOT TOUCH, BECAUSE THE MOMENT OF ATTACK WILL BE KNOWN TO US AND WE SHALL TAKE MEASURES TO PROTECT OUR OWN.

So says Protocol 8 likewise:¹³

For a time, until there will no longer be any risk in entrusting responsible posts in our State to our brother-Jews, we shall put them in the hands of persons whose past and reputation are such that between them and the people lies an abyss, persons who, in case of disobedience to our instructions, must face criminal charges or disappear—this in order to make them defend our interests to their last gasp.

There is again a seeming pretense of parallelism, considering the Bolsheviks under Lenin criminalized antisemitism (this as state policy continued into the late 1930s—Zionist Chaim Weizmann said cir. 1939, “there is no official anti-Semitism in Russia”¹⁴) in late Jul. 1918, mandating harsh penalties for offenders.¹⁵

Culminated reality, however, wasn’t that particularly linear: by merely the mid-1920s, an anti-Jewish fervor swept across the U.S.S.R. as Stalin commenced a purge of Jewish Communist leaders.¹⁶ Should this be surprising when one remembers that the Soviets consolidated members of the old White Terror perpetrators—including the infamous Black Hundreds right-wing pogromists¹⁷—into its ranks?

If the Soviet Union was the embodiment of an “Elders of Zion” plot, that naturally begs the question of why they in less than a decade so flagrantly fell out of line and in such blatant terms. There’s also the fact that Protocol 14 contradicts Leninist policy on religious treatment:¹⁸

When we come into our kingdom it will be undesirable for us that there should exist any other religion than ours of the One God with whom our destiny is bound up by our position as the Chosen People and through whom our same destiny is united with the destinies of the world. We must therefore sweep away all other forms of belief. If this gives birth to the atheists whom we see today, it will not, being only a transitional stage, interfere with our views, but will serve as a warning for those generations which will hearken to our preaching of the religion of Moses, that, by its stable and thoroughly elaborated system has brought all the peoples of the world into subjection to us.

First off, the introductory sentence here sounds more akin to a one-dimensional “face-value” self-depiction of Zionism rather than Bolshevism. (before you even think about asking, no: the Protocols also did not “predict Zionism”—read the last section of this post) Did multiple S.J. coadjutors contribute segmented portions into this pathetic hoax and couldn’t maintain a consistent train of thought? Who knows? It’s very obvious that this “Protocols of Zion agenda” cannot be factually attributable to the Soviet Union because the description—if you read and note carefully—depicts the “Wise Men of Zion” as theistically adherent to Judaism.

The Bolsheviks, on the other hand, banned Judaism: synagogues and (Hebrew) schools were closed, rabbinical activities were systematically shut down, and religious Jews faced “show trial or other humiliation.”¹⁹ Once again, the allegation that “the Protocols warned of Bolshevism” falls apart after a careful study.

Pt. III: internationalism

Protocol 2 depicts a sinister plot to destroy national sovereignty:²⁰

Our international rights will then wipe out national rights, in the proper sense of right, and will rule the nations precisely as the civil law of States rules the relations of their subjects among themselves.

The Bolsheviks advocated the destruction of national identities and consolidation into an international socialist movement, and therefore constituted the fulfillment of a Protocols “revelation,” right? Again, no. The Marxists all the way back in the 1910s furiously debated their “National Question” due to such immense infighting on the issue of whether it was expediently profitable to embrace nationalism for “socialist” ends. Lenin himself announced that all “oppressed nations” held an inherent right to self-determination, including secession.²¹

Also, no Communist nation has ever perpetually lasted in a purely “international” form—all eventually embraced a form of nationalistic pride to fuel patriotic loyalty towards the state. If Bolshevism intended to serve the bidding of Protocol 2 and “wipe out national rights,” it certainly didn’t do a very good job, now did it?

Pt. IV: anti-Christian persecution

According to Protocol 17:²²

WE HAVE LONG PAST TAKEN CARE TO DISCREDIT THE PRIESTHOOD OF ‘GOYIM,’ and thereby to ruin their mission on earth which in these days might still be a great hindrance to us. Day by day its influence on the peoples of the world is falling lower. FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE HAS BEEN DECLARED EVERYWHERE, SO THAT NOW ONLY YEARS DIVIDE US FROM THE MOMENT OF THE COMPLETE WRECKING OF THAT CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

Typically at this point, the right-wing antisemitic peddlers of the Protocols hoax and like-minded umbrella propagators of “Judeo-Bolshevism” will claim that Communism somehow constituted the fulfillment of an “atheistical Jewish” agenda plotting the murder millions of Christians. Now, let’s see exactly which branch of “Christianity” the Protocols portrays as the hateful enemy of the “Wise Men of Zion,” shall we?²³

…the Jesuits alone might have compared with us, but we have contrived to discredit them in the eyes of the unthinking mob as an overt organization, while we ourselves all the while have kept our secret organization in the shade.

…

When the time comes finally to destroy the papal court the finger of an invisible hand will point the nations towards this court. When, however, the nations fling themselves upon it, we shall come forward in the guise of its defenders as if to save excessive bloodshed. By this diversion we shall penetrate to its very bowels and be sure we shall never come out again until we have gnawed through the entire strength of this place.

THE KING OF THE JEWS WILL BE THE REAL POPE OF THE UNIVERSE…

Got that? These (fictitious) “Elders of Zion” believe that only the Jesuits would ever compete vis-à-vis, and therefore the S.J. are the explicit target of a discrediting effort by these Wise Men. In addition, this “Zion” agenda is out to destroy Catholicism and install their precious “king of the Jews” as the “real Pope.”

First off, it should be obvious by now that the Protocols were forged at their “root” by ultramontane Jesuit operatives rather than the Russian Okhrana, but that’s for another day. Anyhow, the transpired reality of the Bolshevik empire in Russia yet again proves that Communism was nowhere near a “fulfillment” of the Protocols for the simple reason that Bolshevism’s anti-Christian persecution from the start was directed against the Eastern Orthodox Church, not Roman Catholicism. Here’s a quotedump poster I compiled:

If you need the links, read sec. III, pt. I, of this:

Anglosubversion 303: Jesuitry, Zionism, and the controlled demolition of Russia

TL;DR: the Jesuit/ultramontanist propagation of the Protocols hoax incorrectly portrays Bolshevism as fulfilling the Protocols’ “anti-Christian” (codeword for “anti-Catholic” since the S.J. deceptively means “Catholic” when they use the word “Christian”²⁴) agenda by launching repression of Christians/Catholics on behalf of an “atheistical Jewish” agenda; in reality, Bolshevism was aligned with Jesuit Catholicism by destroying Eastern Orthodoxy, and so its actual anti-Christian manifestation is not quite the picture Jesuit propagandists make it out to be.

II: the ‘Judeo-Masonic’ discrepancy exposed

Central to the fictitious Elders’ collective “persona” is the presentation of Freemasonry as a Jewish-controlled outlet, a longstanding staple trope of Jesuit propaganda. Protocol 4 includes this extract:²⁵

Who and what is in a position to overthrow an invisible force? And this is precisely what our force is. GENTILE masonry blindly serves as a screen for us and our objects, but the plan of action of our force, even its very abiding-place, remains for the whole people an unknown mystery.

The plot of these phantom “Judeo-Masonic conspirators” only thickens:²⁶

The words of the liberal, which are in effect the words of our masonic watchword, namely, ‘Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,’ will, when we come into our kingdom, be changed by us into words no longer of a watchword, but only an expression of idealism, namely, into ‘The right of liberty, the duty of equality, the ideal of brotherhood.’

For anyone broadly familiar with Freemasonic workings, it should be clear which organizational branch is alluded to here: the Grand Orient of France, which is historically documented to have used the slogan “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,” cir. the French Revolution.

And, according to Protocol 15:²⁷

Meantime, however, until we come into our kingdom, we shall act in the contrary way: we shall create and multiply free masonic lodges in all the countries of the world, absorb into them all who may become or who are prominent in public activity, for these lodges we shall find our principal intelligence office and means of influence. All these lodges we shall bring under one central administration, known to us alone and to all others absolutely unknown, which will be composed of our learned elders.

The Bolsheviks, quite to the contrary, did not take the initiative to “create and multiple free masonic lodges in all countries of the world”—the Comintern in 1922 announced Communism’s incompatibility with Freemasonry, and later KGB usage of Masonic lodges were primarily as expedient covers.²⁸ Trotsky similarly published a word salad in the December of the year concluding with, “Freemasonry is an ulcer on the body of French communism. This ulcer ought to be cauterized.”²⁹ Even if the Bolshevik leaders (namely Lenin and Trotsky) were clandestine Freemasonic insiders amidst publicly opposing the fraternity, it is very clear that Bolshevism did not “fulfill” the Protocols’ (spurious) objective of globally propagating Masonry.

‘33rd degree’?

Among the chief early propagators of the Protocols hoax was Russian Orthodox lunatic Sergei Nilus, who claimed the document was signed by “representatives of Zion of the Thirty-Third Degree.”³⁰³¹³² As far as I can dig up, this specific allegation first appeared no later than 1905 in the third Protocols edition, where the leading sentence of the Translator’s Note was “modified” to mention the signature of these so-called Thirty-Third Degree Zion representatives.³³

That Nilus—prolifically claiming to “unearth” the Protocols—claimed these mysterious Wise Men of Zion were of the “33rd degree” is most notable here, because this very blatantly alludes to the thirty-third degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, its highest initiation ranking. It’s also crucial to note here that the 33rd degree of Freemasonry—as far as I’m aware—is exclusively conferred within the Scottish Rite and not the Grand Orient of France.

Why is this detail important, you wonder? Remember: the Protocols’ portrayal of Freemasonry is very clerarly confined to an ostensible polemic against specifically the Grand Orient, not Scottish Rite. Yet in order for these “Sages of Zion” to have reached a “thirty-third degree,” there becomes necessitated a premise that they reached the highest rankings in SR Freemasonry—as Masonic manuals and historical records of themselves plain admit, the Supreme Council of the Thirty-Third Degree “is entirely separate from the Grand Orient”³⁴—the Grand Orient only conferred the first 18 degrees, leaving the remaining 15 for the Supreme Council to deal with.

Various questionable claims—including those of British occult “expert” Nesta H. Webster³⁵—have surfaced alleging Grand Orient Freemasonry’s influence from “the Jews,” yet none of this would substantiate the Protocols even IF proven factual because the “Elders of Zion” are said to be of the 33rd degree, obviously outside any factually traceable Grand Orient jurisdiction.

Overview of Russian Freemasonry

The origins of Russo-Masonry during the late 18th century, firstly, were associated with mystical pursuits among the aristocratic Czarist nobility, not socialist/left-wing movements (there was also a period where some sharp dissension transpired between the Grand Orient of France and Grand Lodge of England).³⁶

Let’s focus now on the relevant period when Bolshevik leaders were active “socialist” organizers in the late Czarist years prior to their instigated Red Terror: cir. 1906, the majority of a group of Freemasonic hopefuls joined two SR lodges, though this was out of merely about 15 Russians.³⁷ Prominent Russian Freemasonic networks, on the other hand, were tied to the French Grand Orient:³⁸

With allegiance to the Grand Orient of France, some forty Russian lodges made up a political organization in 1913 and 1914, which represented within itself two political parties—the constitutional democrats and the progressives, the latter more moderate. It was said that one of the lodges consisted entirely of members of the Duma. The division between the two parties forced ten of the lodges out of business by 1916. The remaining lodges ‘are credited with inspiring the first revolution in 1917 and it was said all the members of Kerensky’s government belonged to them.’

Take careful note here:³⁹

In the decade preceding the revolution and for the period immediately following, Russian Freemasonry could be carefully delineated into three phases, none of which was compatible with American Masonic practices or experiences: the French Freemasonry of the Grand Orient (1906–1910); political Freemasonry (1910–1917); and the purging of lodges (1918–1922). The initial phase stayed within the boundaries Grand Orient operations and observances. But the second phase, involving Kerensky, ‘broke ties with the Grand Orient in Paris and was much more of a political confederation using the Masonic style than a true Freemasonry’ recognizable to the Supreme Council.

In other words: during the years leading up to the Bolshevik Revolution, no era of Russian Freemasonry ever lined up with the Anglo-American form (a.k.a. the SR branch as far as I’m aware) and therefore as a corollary would not have conferred the 33rd degree to initiates. The “normal” phase hung onto Grand Orient structural procedures, and the splinter phase under Kerensky deviated from the Supreme Council’s vision of “true Freemasonry.”

Based on available information, there is a much more solidly based consensus that the short-lived Provisional Government of Alexander Kerensky and his Socialist Revolutionaries—rather than Lenin’s Bolsheviks who overthrew them in the 1917 October Coup—were Freemasonically affiliated.⁴⁰⁴¹ It is true that Matvey Ivanovich Skobelev—who later joined Soviet Bolsheviks in 1922—is documented⁴² as a member of Russia’s breakaway “Grand Orient of the Peoples of Russia” (likely the “second phase”),⁴³ though Skobelev’s Masonic allegiances were almost certainly tied to his Menshevist alliance with Kerensky’s Provisional Government at the time.

It is therefore not particularly plausible to assume that the “main” Bolshevik leadership body themselves were highly initiated Freemasons, but let’s keep digging ever-deeper down this dark abyss for now anyways!

Bolshevik leaders—33rd-degree Freemasons?

Ilyich Ulyanov and Lev Bronstei- [ahem] Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky, as the two foremost Bolshevik Red Terror organizers, are alleged to have had Freemasonic affiliations, along with other Communist figures. Let’s examine whether any of this substantiates the whole “Protocols agenda wasa manifested as Bolshevism” argument.

Round I: Lenin as 31st-degree Mason?

The (otherwise fantastic) researcher David Livingstone writes in Ordo Ab Chao:⁴⁴

The French Freemason Rozie of the Jean Georges lodge in Paris hailed his Masonic brothers Lenin and Trotsky. Lenin was a freemason of the 31º degree and a member of the French lodge Art et Travail. Lenin was a member of the most notorious lodge of the Grand Orient, the Neuf Sœurs, in 1914. Lenin, Grigori Zinoviev, a lifelong collaborator of Trotsky, (Grand Orient), Karl Radek (Grand Orient) and Yakov Sverdlov were also members of B’nai B’rith.

There are three points to note here: 1) Livingstone’s source for the Rozie assertion is La Libre Parole, a right-wing antisemitic French clericalist magazine ran by Jesuit propagandist Edouard Drumont, so probably not a reliable source to begin with; 2) if Lenin was a 31st degree Freemason—implying that was his highest initiation ranking— then he wasn’t 33rd-degree; 3) the B’nai B’rith membership claim is spurious, not to mention that B’nai B’rith was set up as a puppet of the Anglo-SR network.⁴⁵

IOWs, even if the claim is true that Lenin was a 31st-degree Freemason, this by itself would not substantiate the “Protocols predicted Bolshevism” canard because not only is this merely one individual, but it falls short of the “representatives of Zion of the Thirty-Third Degree” threshold; plus, this extract only claims that Zinoviev and Radek were members of the Grand Orient Lodge with no specific allusion to Scottish Rite, let alone the 33rd degree of SR Freemasonry. Next…

Round II: Lenin and/or Trotsky as 33rd-degree Masons?

A section from Soviet Analyst claims:⁴⁶

Both Lenin and Trotsky were Masons of the 33rd Degree, and were thus worshippers of Lucifer. It is known that, some years before the Revolution, Lenin attended a satanic event on the island of Capri, where he resorted in part to play chess with Maxim Gorky. It is also known that Lenin was inducted in Paris into the Lodge of the Nine Sisters, one of the most evil of Grand Orient lodges. The Kremlin, just like Washington, is awash in Masonic symbolism.

However, I cannot locate proper direct substantiation partially since Soviet Analyst on Google Books is locked behind snippet previews; also, this magazine appears to be steeped in “Jewish international world control” kookery, begging the question of how fabricated its specific claims are. This bizarre source also regurgitates the claim of Lenin as “31st-degree Freemason” while asserting Trotsky was a Shriner (for context, only 32nd-degree Masons can join the Shrine, last I checked) who became initiated into the 33rd degree in 1919, though once again, no substantiation.

So we have differing claims over Lenin’s alleged Freemasonic involvement, a few recycling the claim of initiation into the 31st degree and even fewer asserting he was 33rd degree, not to mention likewise spurious claims of Trotsky reaching the 33rd degree. The notion that Bronstein/Trotsky ever obtained the highest Freemasonic initiation ranking possible is almost laughable for reasons listed in the last major major subsection of this post detailing the pair’s Wall Street backing.

Round III: the remaining Bolsheviks—Masonically involved?

Estonian UFO expert and “journalist” nutjob (also apparently a Holocaust denier) Jüri Lina claims that “many of”:⁴⁷

…the bolsheviks, apart from Lenin and Trotsky, were freemasons: Boris Solovyov, Vikenti Veresayev, Grigori Zinoviev (Grand Orient), Maxim Litvinov, Nikolai Bukharin (actually Moshe Pinkhus-Dolgolevsky), Christian Rakovsky, Yakov Sverdlov, Anatoli Lunacharsky (actually Balich-Mandelstam), Mechislav Kozlovsky (Polish freemason), Karl Radek (Grand Orient), Mikhail Borodin, Leonid Krasin, Vladimir Dzhunkovsky, and many more. In the KGB archives, the historian Viktor Bratyev found a document according to which Lunacharsky belonged to the Grand Orient of France.

Let’s just suppose all of this is true. Did you see Scottish Rite Freemasonry mentioned anywhere? I sure didn’t—once again, even if all these Bolshevik figures were Grand Orient members, the question remains as to how any would’ve obtained the 33rd degree, and if they did, why were their roles this obscure relative to that of Lenin and Trotsky? If Bolshevism constituted the fulfillment of the Protocols and its leaders were the “representatives of Zion of the Thirty-Third Degree,” then which?

Fact: Bolsheviks as puppets, not stringpullers

The conservative historian Antony C. Sutton exposed the Anglo-American financiers of Russian Communism in Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution (1974), providing a superb documentation of Lenin and Trotsky’s ultra-capitalist backers.

Where did Bronstein obtain a mysterious $10,000 cir. 1917? (for context, that would be worth nearly $250,000 today if a basic calculation adjusts for inflation) The Overman Committee of the U.S. Senate examined the German-Bolshevik link two years later and almost came to a soundly declared conclusion.⁴⁸ The British side of the military-financial complex also didn’t come short of helping Trotsky—the Angloimperialists supported his release from Canadian internment (also, Pres. Woodrow Wilson gave Bronstein a passport to leave the U.S.).⁴⁹

The American International Corporation and J. P. Morgan “attempted to control both domestic and foreign revolutionaries in the United States for their own purposes.”⁵⁰ The former, alongside the “Jewish” investment bank Kuhn Loeb and racist/eugenicist Harriman family’s Guaranty Trust (Skull and Bones member Averell Harriman was later a Nazi financier in partnership with the Bush family), made sure that the Soviet Bureau’s technical expert was able to “transfer funds from the chief Soviet agent in Scandinavia.”⁵¹ The Wall Street cabal (namely Morgan and Guaranty Trust) was of course all the extra duplicitous—they formed a zealously anti-Communist “United Americans” front simultaneous to Morgan-controlled Guaranty’s (well-documented) liaison with “Bolshevik banker” Olof Aschberg.⁵² There is also:⁵³

…the statement (substantiated by a cablegram) by William Boyce Thompson — a director of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, a large stockholder in the Rockefeller-controlled Chase Bank, and a financial associate of the Guggenheims and the Morgans — that he (Thompson) contributed $1 million to the Bolshevik Revolution for propaganda purposes.

Not to mention…⁵⁴

Some international agents, for example Alexander Gumberg, worked for Wall Street and the Bolsheviks. In 1917 Gumberg was the representative of a U.S. firm in Petrograd, worked for Thompson’s American Red Cross Mission, became chief Bolshevik agent in Scandinavia until he was deported from Norway, then became confidential assistant to Reeve Schley of Chase Bank in New York and later to Floyd Odium of Atlas Corporation.

American history expert Emanuel M. Josephson would appear to build upon Sutton’s broader thesis of Communism as a mechanism for “capitalist” reaction:⁵⁵

Rome’s successor, the Holy Roman Empire, dissimulated its in¬ terest in money and its power. This was in accord with its professed tenets of Nazarene, theistic Communism. Under ecclesiastic, Canon Law, even profits in business transactions were decreed to be the cardinal sin and capital offence of ‘usury’. As late as the sixteenth century, one hundred Christian business men who held no Papal dispensation, were burned at the stake in Geneva, as a penalty under Church law, for making profits in their business transactions. Title to all wealth as well as to the persons and lives of all the earth are claimed by the Church, on the ground that their ownership is divinely vested in the Pope as the vicar of Jesus Christ on earth. Thus theistic, Nazarene Communism, and the ‘modern’ religion that goes by the name of Communism and is supposedly atheist, both are basically super-capitalist and both mask their avid grab for money and wealth. Title to all wealth was vested in the Church and in its champion ‘knights,’ who at the same time assumed the role of so-called ‘protectors,’ much like the present-day ‘labor leaders,’ of their vassals whom they mercilessly enslaved and looted.

Simply put, the Bolsheviks were far from the directors of a global conspiracy as presented in the pathetic “Protocols-Bolshevik” narrative—Communist leadership in Russia were nothing more than paid agents of Wall Street serving the interests of the ruling Jesuit Order (remember: Lenin’s Apr. 1917 sealed train journey to Russia from Switzerland was facilitated by the Jesuit Diego von Bergen⁵⁶). Not exactly elders the way the Protocols presents a phantom Jewish menace controlling all institutions.

The myth of ‘Jewish financial conspirators’

Returning to Russia, Trotsky’s journey was reportedly financed by Jacob H. Schiff of the Kuhn Loeb bank, a subsidiary of the Rothschild-Warburg network.⁵⁷ The Rothschilds, Warburgs, Ochs-Sulzbergers, B’nai B’rith, American Jewish Committee, Anti-Defamation League, Kuhn Loeb et. al, by the way, were far from the ringleaders of a/the conspiracy—the German-Jewish right-wing establishment in the Anglo-American realm was (and remains) nothing more than a proxy fifth column front taking orders from higher Anglo-Masonic directives to lead the rank-and-file Jewish community astray (looking at their modern Judeonazi direction, this author is sorry to say the pseudo-Jewish ADL/AJC apparatus has largely succeeded). And the Rothschilds are nothing more than court Jews of the Vatican nobility.⁵⁸

It’s important to take note, of course, that AJC founder and Kuhn Loeb “Jewish” banker Schiff was instructed to (apparently, as the story goes) furnish financial aid for the Bolsheviks to “validate” the pretense of Judeo-Bolshevism—Josephson notes that the actual conspirators (who forged the Protocols) were Jesuitic Illuminist patrons of papal “Nazarene Communism” ideologically rooted in the dogmas of Adam Weishaupt.⁵⁹ He writes:⁶⁰

The second approach of the conspirators to gaining control of Russian oil was their financing of Lenin and Trotsky in the Russian Communist revolt of 1905. The conspirators’ purpose was to accomplish, themselves, exactly what they falsely represented in their Protocols of Zion was being planned by the Jews and Masons. Rockefellers’ Jewish banker, Jacob Schiff, of Kuhn Loeb & Co., acknowledged at a Congressional hearing that he turned over the funds to the Communists to finance the revolt. But the questioners carefully avoided asking Schiff who had furnished the funds and for what reason. Nor was he questioned about the wellknown plot of the conspirators to steal control of Baku oil from Royal Dutch. This was all the more notable because the committee had already elicited from John D. Rockefeller that he had acquired, thus far, a total of $15,000,000 of the bonds of his competitors, Royal Dutch and Shell, with the obvious objective of trying to take them over and thus gain control of their Russian oil fields, a project in which he eventually succeeded.

Cont.:⁶¹

With the usual slimy craftiness and ruthlessness, the conspirators had undertaken to reinforce their false propaganda in the Protocols of Zion (that the Jews were conspiring to overthrow the Czarist regime and take over control of Russia and the world) by using the prominent but curiously naive, or venal, Jacob Schiff as their agent. It might be seriously questioned whether venality did not play a larger role than naivete in the service that he rendered his Rockefeller masters.

…

Bronstein, alias Trotsky, was brought by the conspirators to the U.S. where he is reported to have been maintained, without visible means of support, on Standard Oil property at Bayonne, New Jersey. The conspirators’ Communist agents were being kept in reserve for future use' for overthrowing the Czarist regime when they had created the opportunity.

Anyways: given that Trotsky was later backstabbed and liquidated, is there any reason left to assume anymore he was a highly initiated Freemason of the 32nd/33rd-degree realm? Members of the Jesuit-Freemasonic “super rite,” last I checked, probably aren’t the type who face betrayal and embarrassingly public deposing, lest anyone would like to argue Bronstein was replaced by a double. The Bolshevik leadership most definitely did not constitute a “manifestation” of the Protocols of Zion hoax.

Conclusion

1. Notions that “Bolshevism was predicted by the Protocols” in their main points—Jewish proliferation of socialism/Communism, protection of Jews, spread of “globalist” internationalism, and mass murder of Christians—ultimately collapse when the lens are zoomed in.

2. Protocols 5 and 17 describe a plot against Catholicism, yet Bolshevism explicitly targeted Orthodox Christianity and for roughly a decade sat at the same table with Vatican diplomats in mutual hatred of Orthodoxy. (it is even said that the Vatican was exulting in jubilance when the mass murderers from the Bolshevik Red Terror fold destroyed the Czarist governance of Russia⁶²)

3. Protocol 14 describes the “Elders of Zion” as religiously adherent to Judaism, while the Bolsheviks by contrast systematically (to vicious extents) closed Jewish synagogues, Hebrew education, and Torah schools alike.

4. Protocol 15 says the “Elders” intend on promoting Freemasonry at a global level; the Bolsheviks were outwardly hostile to Freemasonry and therefore did not in any sense “fulfill” the outlandish hoax.

5. The overarching “Judeo-Masonic” veneer of the Protocols represents an ostensibly suspicious “validation” of age-old Jesuit antisemitic propaganda equivocating Judaism and Freemasonry.

6. The chief propagator of the Protocols, Sergei Nilus, claimed they were signed by “representatives of Zion of the Thirty-Third Degree,” implying in essence that the Elders were 33rd-degree Freemasons. This is not only unsubstantiated but laughably near-impossible at a “collective” level from available information because both the Protocols’ own depiction of “Jewish Freemasonry” and its propagators’ allegations of Communist-Masonic confluence pertain to the Grand Orient of France that certainly does not confer the 33rd degree upon initiates. Out of the Bolshevik figureheads, one individual (Matvey Skobelev) with documented Masonic affiliation was a “late joiner” and was only a member of a splinter “Grand Orient” group due to his then-association with the Kerensky government of the Socialist Revolutionaries and Mensheviks, the same Provisional Government overthrown by the Bolshevik October Revolution.

7. Bolshevik leaders relied pivotally on excessive financing by American, British, and German reactionaries, and therefore were utterly far from actually directing a global conspiracy, IOWs remote from the Protocols’ portrayal of the Wise Men/Sages of Zion as the highest leaders of global manipulation.

So: why is any of this important to know?

Very simple: if you cannot pause and think long enough to discern true from false prophecy, you assuredly WILL NOT be able to fully resist the final global agenda. It does not matter how (depending on your location on the spectrum) zealously “leftist,” “anti-Trump,” “right-wing anti-globalist,” “anti-establishment,” “anti-capitalist,” “anti-socialist/leftist,” etc. etc. you merely imagine yourself to be: unless you are properly equipped mentally and spiritually to see through false “miracles” and how they operate in accordance with the problem-reaction-solution (PRS) model, expecting to not fall for the final deception is no less naïve than a kid expecting to win a piano competition after procrastinating all practicing until the night before.

The most deceptive and dangerous false prophets are not those whose prophecies in the immediate short run fall short, because those are conspicuously obvious.

Quite to the contrary: the shrewdly cunning false prophets in actuality are those whose prophecies provide the appearance of “premonitorily prophesied” fulfillment, when in reality the NWO Jesuit cabal merely pre-plans the very diversion they then employ a second front (as false prophet) to “predict” ahead of time so the false prophet power receives credence, able after the transpiration of the “predicted event” to lead beguiled masses astray as it promises a noble vision towards a new age.

I’m going to make this plain and clear: in the present era we live in, the final deception will employ the most cynical co-optation and hijacking of “anti-Zionism” on the Fourth Reich dimension to beguile unwitting masses into perdition. One day sure enough, old alliances with “Zionist” or “anti-Zionist” movements will cease—in their present-day form as distinctively opposite ideologies—to be relevant, both absorbed into a final planet-uniting Satanic cauldron claiming to represent “Christianity.”

Bonus: Zionist connections?

Despite its name and early allegations, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in effect was not particularly intended against the movement we know as “Zionism” (sure, Nilus claimed the Protocols was linked to Theodor Herzl’s Zionist Congress, but AFAIK the later global-level propagation was by clerical fascists and right-wing extremists post-1917 >90% against Bolshevism, not the Zionist movement). The very same (Jesuit-controlled) Nazi-Fascist parties who promoted and assumed the authenticity of the Protocols, remember, were active Zionist collaborators before and during World War II: the Third Reich colluded directly with the Anglo-Zionist “socialist” Labor Zionist federations in the Ha’avara Agreement; Fascist Italy and Nazi Poland assisted Jabotinskyite Revisionist paramilitaries; Vichy French leaders advocated the deportation of Jews to Palestine, as did Slovak’s notoriously cruel Jozef Tiso.

The Protocols of Zion in their gruesome heyday of prominent attention served as the pretext fuel for the Nazi-Fascist controlled clash with Bolshevism, not Zionism. If anything, the antisemitic pogromism generated by the Protocols ostensibly served Zionist interests by driving hounded Jewish populations into—over time—lining behind the Zionist anti-assimilationist apparatus. This begs another most fascinating question: did the (Jesuit?) forgers of the Protocols have Zionist intentions in mind when drafting their fabricated projection? The books shall one day be opened…

1. Paul Hanebrink (2018), “A Specter Haunting Europe: The Myth of Judeo-Bolshevism,” ch. I, pp. 29-30.

2. Ibid., p. 32.

3. Ibid.

4. Ibid., p. 35.

5. Ibid., p. 111.

6. John T. McGreevy (Sep. 6, 2022), “Catholicism: A Global History from the French Revolution to Pope Francis,” ch. VIII, pt. II.

7. Paul Preston (2012), “Juan Tusquets: A Catalan Contribution to the Myth of the Jewish-Bolshevik-Masonic Conspiracy,” Right-Wing Spain in the Civil War Era: Soldiers of God and Apostles of the Fatherland, 1914-45, ch. VIII, p. 177.

8. Leo H. Lehmann (1942), “Behind the Dictators: The Relationship of Roman Catholicism to Nazi-Fascism,” ed. I, ch. II, p. 13.

9. “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion,” 3:7.

10. Jan. 25, 1977, “Carter’s Zionist Lobby: A Dossier,” Executive Intelligence Review, vol. IV, no. IV, p. 34.

11. Anton Chaitkin (Jan. 2, 2015), “America’s Former Greatness: And the World’s Future,” Executive Intelligence Review, vol. XLII, no. I, pp. 52-54.

12. Protocol 3:12.

13. Ibid., 8:3.

14. Meyer W. Weisgal (Jan. 1, 1944), “Chaim Weizmann, Statesman, Scientist, Builder of the Jewish Commonwealth,” p. 306.

15. Benjamin Pinkus (Sep. 13, 1984), “The Soviet Government and the Jews 1948-1967,” p. 83.

16. Benjamin Pinkus (1988), “The Jews of the Soviet Union: The History of a National Minority,” pp. 85-86.

17. Mark Burdman (Feb. 14, 1984), “Anti-Semitism on the rise again in Russia,” Executive Intelligence Review, vol. XI, no. VI, p. 19.

18. Protocol 14:1.

19. Lloyd P. Gartner (1978), “History of the Jews in Modern Times,” p. 281.

20. Protocol 2:1.

21. David Raic (Sep. 26, 2002), “Statehood and the Law of Self-Determination,” pp. 184-85.

22. Protocol 17:2.

23. Ibid., 5:4; 17:2-3.

24. Lehmann, op. cit., p. 8.

25. Protocol 4:2.

26. Ibid., 9:2.

27. Ibid., 15:4.

28. William J. Whalen (1958), “Christianity and American Freemasonry,” pp. 182-83.

29. Leon Trotsky (Dec. 16, 1922), “Communism and Freemasonry.”

30. Lehmann, op. cit., p. 13.

31. John Spargo (1921), “The Jew and American Ideals,” p. 23.

32. Herman Bernstein (1921), “The History of a Lie: ‘The Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion’; A Study,” p. 12.

33. Cesare G. De Michelis (1998), “The Non-Existent Manuscript : A Study of the Protocols of the Sages of Zion,” p. 148.

34. J. W. S. Mitchell (1859), “The History of Freemasonry and Masonic Digest,” vol. II, p. 98.

35. Nesta H. Webster (1924), “Secret Societies and Subversive Movements,” pp. 392-93.

36. 1919, “France,” p. 386.

37. William L. Fox (1997), “Lodge of the Double-Headed Eagle,” p. 186.

38. Ibid.

39. Ibid.

40. “Encyclopedia Of Freemasonry And Its Kindred Sciences,” vol. III: M-R, p. 431.

41. Fox, op. cit., pp. 185-86.

42. Andrei Priahin, “Grand Orient of Russia’s People: a partial membership,” Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon.

43. Jonathan Davis (2020), “Historical Dictionary of the Russian Revolution,” p. 259.

44. David Livingstone, “Operation Trust,” Ordo Ab Chao.

45. Paul Goldstein (Oct. 10, 1978), “The Rothschild roots of the Ku Klux Klan,” Executive Intelligence Review, vol. V, no. XXXIX, pp. 50-54.

46. 2002, Soviet Analyst, vol. XXVIII, iss. I, p. 12.

47. Terry Melanson (Nov. 27, 2013), “‘Blatant Masonic Temple Right Next To Lenin Statue,’” Conspiracy Archive.

48. Antony C. Sutton (1974), “Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution: The Remarkable True Story of the American Capitalists Who Financed the Russian Communists,” ch. II.

49. Frederick W. Dame (Sep. 9, 2014), “America’s Indomitable Character Volume IV: From the Ante Bellum Period to the Reconstruction Period After the Civil War,” vol. IV, p. 358.

50. Sutton, op. cit., ch. III.

51. Ibid., ch. IV.

52. Ibid., chs. X-XI.

53. Ibid.

54. Ibid.

55. Emanuel M. Josephson (1968), “The ‘Federal’ Reserve Conspiracy & Rockefellers: Their ‘Gold Corner,’” ch. I, p. 3.

56. Robert Payne (1964), “The Life and Death of Lenin,” p. 286.

57. Scott Thompson (Aug. 15, 1986), “Of Felix Dzerzhinskii, Armand Hammer, and the Red Prince,” Executive Intelligence Review, vol. XIII, no. XXXII, p. 47.

58. Josephson, op. cit., p. 5.

59. Ibid., p. 72.

60. Ibid., p. 73.

61. Ibid.

62. Avro Manhattan (1983), “The Vatican Billions: Two Thousand Years of Wealth Accumulation from St. Peter to the Space Age,” pp. 124-25.