Disraeli the Jew and the Empire of the Shopkeepers by Julius Evola

Showing 1-1 of 1 messages
Disraeli the Jew and the Empire of the Shopkeepers by Julius Evola NUR 1/23/12 9:42 PM
http://thompkins_cariou.tripod.com/id34.html

Disraeli the Jew and the Empire of the Shopkeepers

In a short article published in this journal during the period of the
sanctions (November 1935), we tried to explain the nature of the
'British Empire' from the point of view of the typology of forms of
civilisation.

On that occasion, we showed that it is nothing but a travesty and a
contradiction of a real Empire. An Empire worthy of the name is a
supra-national organisation based upon heroic, aristocratic, and
spiritual values. There is nothing of this sort in the 'British
Empire'. All normal hierarchical relations are on the contrary
subjected to a veritable inversion. England possesses a monarchy, an
almost feudal nobility, and a military caste which, at least up until
very recent years, showed remarkable qualities of character and of
sang-froid. But all this is mere appearance. The real centre of the
'Empire' is elsewhere ; it is, if we may put it this way, within the
caste of merchants in the most general sense, of which the modern
forms are plutocratic oligarchy, finance, and industrial and
commercial monopoly. The 'Shopkeeper' is the veritable master of
Britain ; the unscrupulous and cynical spirit of the merchant, his
economic interests, his desire to gain possession to the greatest
possible extent of all the world's riches, these are the bases of
English 'Imperial' politics, and the real driving forces of English
life, beneath the monarchical, conservative appearances.

We know that, wherever economic interests predominate, the Jew rapidly
rises and accedes to the commanding positions. The penetration of
Judaism into England is not a thing of recent days alone. It was the
English Revolution and Protestantism which threw open England's doors.
The Jews, who had been expelled by Edward I in 1290, were readmitted
to England as a result of a Petition accepted by Cromwell and finally
approved by Charles II in 1649. From this time forward, the Jews, and
above all the Spanish Jews (the Sephardim) began to immigrate en masse
to England, bringing with them the riches which they had acquired by
more or less dubious means, and it was these riches, as we have just
explained, which allowed them to accede to the centres of command
within English life, to the aristocracy and to positions very close to
the Crown. Less than a century after their re-admission, the Jews were
so sure of themselves that they demanded to be naturalised, that is to
say, to be granted British citizenship. This had a very interesting
result : the Law, or Bill, naturalising the Jews was approved in 1740.
Most of its supporters were members of the upper classes or high
dignitaries within the Protestant Church, which shows us the extent to
which these elements had already become Judaised or corrupted by
Jewish gold. The reaction came not from the English upper classes, but
from the people. The Law of 1740 provoked such outrage and disorder
among the populace that it was abrogated in 1753.

The Jews now resorted to another tactic : they abandoned their
synagogues and converted, nominally, to Christianity. Thus the
obstacle was circumvented and their work of penetration proceeded at
an accelerated pace. What mattered to the Jews was to keep their
positions of command and to eliminate the religious arguments on which
the opposition of that period principally rested ; everything else was
secondary, since the converted Jew remains, in his instincts, his
mentality, and his manner of action, entirely Jewish, as is shown by
one striking example among many others : the extremely influential
Jewish banker Sampson Gideon, despite having converted, continued to
support the Jewish community and was buried in a Jewish cemetery. His
money bought for his son an enormous property and the title of
Baronet.

This was the preferred tactic of the rich Jews of England from the
eighteenth century on : they supplanted the English feudal nobility by
acquiring their properties and titles, and thus mixing themselves with
the aristocracy, by the nature of the British representative system,
they came closer and closer to the government, with the natural
consequence of a progressive Judaification of the English political
mentality.

In addition, from 1745 to 1749, Sampson Gideon financed the British
government from capital which he had multiplied in a dubious manner :
by speculating on the Seven Years' War, more or less as Rothschild did
when he made a killing on stocks while only he knew from his own
agents the outcome of the battle of Waterloo.

At the same time, in order to increase their influence, the Jews
systematically allied themselves to the nobility ; the fact that in
1772 it was felt to be necessary to prevent the marriage of members of
the British royal family to Jews by means of the Royal Marriages Act,
should give us some idea of extent of the Jewish penetration.

By these two means there was brought about a convergence of interests
which became more and more apparent between British imperialism and
British capitalism, which was itself tied by more and more
indissoluble and complex knots to Jewish capitalism.

Yet, from the inception of imperialism on the large scale, what was
less apparent was that the 'British Empire' was a creature of Judaism,
which a Jew had given as a present to the British Royal Crown.

This Jew was Benjamin Disraeli, Queen Victoria's Prime Minister,
enobled under the title, Lord Beaconsfield. This development was
remarkably interesting. Until that time, it had occurred to no-one to
associate with the dignity of Empire an idea of riches like that which
attaches to colonial possessions. Even after the Ghibelline Middle
Ages, all traditional spirits would have seen this as a real
extravagance and a caricature, since the Imperial idea had always had
a sacred aura connected to a higher function of domination and
civilisation and to a right which was in a certain sense transcendent.
Only one Jew could have conceived the idea of 'reforming' the
conception of Empire and making of it something plutocratic and
transforming it into imperialistic materialism. This Jew was Disraeli
- 'Dizzy' as he was known. It was he who made of Queen Victoria an
'Empress', a colonial Empress, the Empress of India. This
indefatigable proponent of the English 'Imperial' idea modelled his
conception upon the Jewish Messianic-imperial idea, the idea of a
people whose power consists in the riches of others, over which they
take power, and which they cynically exploit and control. Disraeli
always attacked very violently those who wished to separate England
from her overseas territories, within which, as a Jewish historian has
pointed out, Jews were the pioneers. Disraeli knew who it was that
sustained this England which in turn was to dominate the riches of the
world ; it is possible that he was among those initiates who knew that
it was more than a simple British-Jewish plutocracy which was pulling
the strings. One recalls those often-quoted words of Disraeli : "The
world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined
by those who are not behind the scenes."

"What an actor the man is! And yet, the first impression that he gives
us is of absolute sincerity. Some think of him as a foreigner. Does
England belong to him, or does he belong to England? Is he
conservative or liberal? All this doubtless matters not at all to him.
The power of Venice, the imperial republic on which the sun never set,
this is the vision that fascinates him. England is the Israel of his
imagination and if fortune is with him he will be the Prime Minister
of the Empire."

The critic who wrote these words of Disraeli, when he was merely the
leader of the Conservative Party, showed himself thereby to have been
possessed of a genuine prophetic spirit. His words capture the true
spirit of 'Dizzy' in action. The reference to Venice, in material
terms, derives from the fact that Disraeli's family, originally from
Cento, near Ferrara, had sought its fortunes in Venice before setting
off for England ; it was also because of his family that Dizzy would
have recalled the 'imperial' Venetian idea, to the level of which, in
strict connection with the Jewish idea, he wished to raise England.
There also was found the imperial idea of the merchant, of the power
of a bourgeois oligarchy built upon gold, commerce, overseas
possessions, and trade. All others would serve as means and
instruments to this end. But to realise this 'Venetian' ideal, given
that Venice itself was at least nominally a free republic, it was
necessary to rob England of whatever in her organisation had retained
the ancient traditional spirit. Here we have another characteristic
feature of Disraeli's activity.

We cannot provide here a profound exposé of the party-political
conflicts of England in Disraeli's time. However, most of our readers
will know of the battles between the Tories, the partisans of the
monarch, conservative and mostly Catholic, and the Whigs, a Lutheran
aristocracy jealous of its independence and favourable to new liberal
ideas. Disraeli's master-stroke was to by-pass to some extent this
opposition by becoming the leader of a new party, to be called, in a
restricted sense, 'Conservative', which would become a powerful enough
instrument for the application of his ideas to neutralise whatever was
still good in each of these parties by means of the assistance offered
by the other. To put this differently, in Disraeli's 'Conservative
Party', the true conservatives became liberals and the liberals,
conversely, became at least to some extent conservatives, since it was
easy to show them by means of the utilitarian ideas which they already
possessed that their interests and those of their adversaries
coincided. Having thus realised, with his new party, the 'quid
medium', Disraeli turned England into a simple oligarchical republic.
His 'Conservative Party' was in reality a sort of clique, held
together by common class interests but divided internally, seized with
liberalism, and utterly lacking in ideals. Naturally, Jewish and
Masonic influences predominated in it.

It seems nevertheless that Disraeli saw even further than this. This
becomes apparent from his novel cycle, 'The New England'. 'Sybil, or
The Two Nations' reflects exactly the ideological tactic which
Freemasonry had already employed to prepare the French Revolution.
Disraeli does not conceal his enthusiasm for the lower classes of
society, stating that it is they who will create the future when they
are guided by their natural leaders, a new enlightened elite which
will have surmounted the prejudices of the past. Such ideas enthused
the younger generation of the English nobility, which dreamed of
playing this leading rôle of new 'enlightened' aristocrats, thereby
digging their own grave. In the other novel of the same cycle,
'Coningsby', the central character is a mysterious Jew of Spanish
origin, Sidonia - "a mixture of Disraeli and Rothschild, or rather, of
what Disraeli would have liked to be and what he would have liked
Rothschild to be" (Maurois). This Sidonia transmits to Coningsby, the
symbol of the new England, the doctrine of 'heroic ambition' ; here,
again, we find the pseudo-conservative ideal of Disraeli. Sidonia's
solution is a government with conservative ideas but liberal
practices. In the final analysis, once the English Tory aristocracy
had become liberal, and its ideas had become no more than simple
'principles' without practical consequences, all that remained was to
flatter their ambitions, in order that they should play the rôle of
'leaders of the people' - destined, naturally, to be made victims of
in the subsequent phase of the subversion, just as had happened to the
French aristocrats who had cherished such new ideas. On this subject,
in addition to what we find exposed in these books, we should note
that it was Disraeli who introduced universal suffrage into Britain,
at least in the rudimentary form of the suffrage of all property-
owning heads of households, which he skilfully presented as a
compromise acceptable to Tories as well as Whigs. But the destructive
labours of Disraeli did not confine themselves to politics ; they
extended also to the domain of religion. It is here that the Jew
simply throws away his mask. It was necessary for him to undermine the
elements of English society in their most interior foundation, which
was the Christian religion, and, above all, the Catholic religion. To
this end, Disraeli propounded his famous theory of the convergence and
reciprocal integration of Judaism and Catholicism. Here is what he
wrote in 'Sybil' : "Christianity without Judaism is incomprehensible,
in the same way that Judaism without Catholicism is incomplete." In
'Tancred' he adds to this, claiming that the task of the Church is to
defend, in a materialistic society, the fundamental principles, of
Jewish origin, which are found in the two Testaments. This thesis was
so extreme that Carlyle declared the "Jewish insolence" of 'Dizzy'
insupportable, and asked "For how much longer shall John Bull allow
this absurd monkey to dance upon his stomach?"

But in the matter of Judaism, Disraeli, who, because he had been
baptised, declared himself to be a Christian, was both intransigent
and ready for anything. By any and every means, without caring about
possible scandal, he maintained the thesis of the alliance between the
'conservatives', now weakened in the manner we have discussed, and the
Jews. To persecute the Jews would be the gravest error possible for
the conservative party to commit, because it would turn them into
chiefs of the revolutionary movements. There was also the moral
question. "You teach your children the history of the Jews," said
Disraeli in his famous speech to the House of Commons, "and on your
holy days you read at the tops of your voices the exploits of the
Jews ; on Sundays, if you wish to sing the praises of the Most High or
to console yourselves in your misfortunes, you search among the songs
of the Jewish poets for an expression of your feelings. In exact
proportion to the sincerity of your faith you must accomplish this
great act of natural justice ... as a Christian (?) I will not take
the terrible responsibility of excluding those who follow the religion
in which my Lord and Saviour was born."

He could have gone no further in impudence. In fact, this declaration
caused a scandal among the 'conservatives', but one without
consequences. The prudent and noiseless penetration of Jewry into the
English upper classes and into the government itself continued. It was
Disraeli who performed the coup upon Egypt in 1875 - with whose help?
Rothschild. In 1875, the Khedive had financial worries and Disraeli
managed to learn that he was willing to sell 177,000 shares of Suez
Canal stock. This was a magnificent opportunity to gain certain
control of the route to the Indies. The government hesitated.
Rothschild did not. Here is the record of the historic conversation
between Disraeli and Rothschild (Disraeli had asked him for four
million pounds sterling) : "What guarantee can you offer me?" "The
British government." "You shall have five million tomorrow." The
interest on the loan was 'extremely low' ; naturally, the real and
important interest of the Jewish clique lay on another and less
visible plane ...

Disraeli did not fail to make more convenient to the Jews of England
their ritual observance. A little-known fact is that the 'English
Saturday' is nothing other than the Jewish Sabbath, the ritual day of
rest of the Jews. It was suitably Disraeli who introduced it to
England, under an adequate social pretext.

Thus, as the Judaification of old feudal England was accomplished by
diverse means, and as the old aristocracy gradually decomposed and
underwent inoculation with ideas which would make it an easy prey for
the material and spiritual influences of Judaism and Freemasonry,
Disraeli did not forget his other task, that of augmenting and
reinforcing the power of the new 'Empire of Shopkeepers', the new
'Imperial Venice', the reborn Israel of the Promise. This he did in a
manner which was just as characteristically Jewish. Disraeli was one
of the principal instigators of that sad and cynical English foreign
policy by means of 'protected' third parties and the use of blackmail,
which it pushes to the most extreme consequences. The most striking
case is that of the Russo-Turkish War. Disraeli did not hesitate to
betray the ancient cause of European solidarity, by placing Turkey
under British protection. Turkey, defeated, was saved by Britain ; by
use of the well-known 'English' method of threats and sanctions,
Disraeli was able to paralyse the Slavic advance to the South without
a single shot being fired, and a grateful Turkey made him a present of
Cyprus. At the Congress of Berlin, the Russian ambassador, Gortshakov,
was unable to restrain himself from crying dolorously : "To have
sacrificed a hundred thousand soldiers and a hundred million of money,
and for nothing!" (*) There is a factor even more serious, from a
higher point of view. By virtue of this situation, brought about by
Disraeli, Turkey was admitted into the community of the European
nations protected by so-called 'International Justice'. We say 'so-
called' because, until that time, far from being held to be valid for
all the peoples of the world, this justice was held to be valid
uniquely among the group of the European nations ; it was a form of
recourse and of internal law for Europeans. With the admission of
Turkey, a new phase of international law began, and this was truly the
phase in which 'justice' became a mask and its 'international'
character became a ruse of 'democracy', for it was simply an
instrument in the service of Anglo-Jewry, and subsequently of the
French also. This development led to the League of Nations, to crisis,
and to actual war.

The last years of Disraeli's life were nevertheless agitated ones. The
misdeeds of the plutocracy and the pseudo-conservative cliques began
to be felt when they brought about a general financial crisis,
agricultural and even colonial, in the Empire of which Disraeli had
dreamed and which had become a reality : there followed the Afghan
Revolt, the Zulu War, and the prelude to the Boer War. The aged
Disraeli, now Lord Beaconsfield and favourite of Queen Victoria, ended
up losing his position. He was replaced by Gladstone. In spite of
everything, this was a mere changing of the guard. The cabals, the
'systems', the directives of international imperialist politics, the
false conservatism, the Jewish mentality which more and more destroyed
the remains of the old ethic of the gentleman and of fair play in
favour of a bottomless hypocrisy and materialism, all this survived
and developed, in the form of the 'British Empire', from the time of
Disraeli onwards, and always retained the mark of its author. Until
today.

Tradition requires that each year the merchants of the City of London,
home of the Anglo-Jewish plutocracy, invite the Lord Mayor to a
banquet and receive the confidences and expressions of trust of the
Prime Minister in a speech which he makes at this event. The last
speech of this sort that Disraeli gave was another expression of the
'imperialist' faith. "For the English, to be patriots means to
maintain the Empire, and in maintaining the Empire lies their
liberty." However, one should say that, in the obstinate and hopeless
war which England actually conducts, it is the spirit of the Jew
Disraeli which lives on. If the English, by following this spirit,
bring about the ruin of their 'Empire', and of their nation, it is to
this champion of the Chosen People that they must be grateful.

Julius EVOLA

(*) Many will find it strange today that a friendship sprang up at the
Congress of Berlin between the Jew Disraeli and Bismarck, the 'Iron
Chancellor', a Prussian and an Aryan. They got along marvellously.
"The old Jew, he's the man!" said Bismarck of Disraeli. There will be
less cause for astonishment after reading de Poncins and Malynski's
'The Occult War', recently translated by Evola (ed. Hoepli), which
clarifies certain aspects of Bismarck's activity, which, seen from a
traditional and genuinely conservative point of view, are highly
negative.