El judío revolucionario y su impacto en la historia universal

Judios revolucionarios

Traduzco mal, a propósito, la palabra impact del inglés, que significa consecuencias. Impacto, en español, significa simplemente colisión, aunque no dudo de que se incorporará pronto este nuevo sentido.

“EL JUDÍO REVOLUCIONARIO” por Robert Sungenis, Ph.D.

E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and its Impact on World History (South Bend, IN: Fidelity Press, 2008) 1,200 pp, ISBN 0-929891-07-4, $48.

Me enteré de este libro en el blog de Jose María. Pedí el libro en Amazon, pero no lo tenían disponible en el momento. Me mandaron un aviso a los dos meses, informándome de que seguían a las espera de poder suministrármelo. Dos meses más tarde me informaron de que lo habían quitado de su lista. No sé si porque la editorial lo ha descatalogado o porque, dada la temática, no quieren seguir distribuyéndolo. A saber. [NB: En este momento hay dos usados a la venta, al precio de 148 dólares, cuando en la editorial lo envían por 48… ¿será para asustar a la gente con el precio? No me extrañaría.]

El libro expone la historia de la subversión judía, que ha logrado demoler la Cultura Cristiana de Occidente. Curiosamente, ahora es de buen tono hablar de cultura judeocristiana. Me pregunto si se podría hablar de subversión judeocomunista, o se enfadarían los “interfectos”.

A falta de libro he leído este artículo (The Revolutionary Jew and His Impact on World HistoryAÑADO ESTE ENLACE A UNA AMPLIA RESEÑA EN ESPAÑOL)que toca tres temas temas principales: (1) el asentamiento judío en Polonía, país que llevarían al basurero de la historia; (2) de la expulsión de los judíos de España, que evitaría ese destino, pero no convertirse en el objeto preferente del odio de la Sinagoga y (3) la influencia del judaísmo en el Protestantismo.

No voy a resumir el discurso; voy a dejar solo algunas citas del artículo:

El estatuto Kalisz de 1251 dio a los judíos de Polonia autonomía legal. Se desarrolló una casuística legal basada en el Talmud que le llevaba a la hipocresía y a la doblez, especialmente en el trato con los gentiles. Kant escribió esto al respecto:

Since by the end of the 18th century, the overwhelming majority of Jews lived in Poland, Jews in general earned, as a result, the reputation of being “a nation of deceivers,” to give Immanuel Kant’s formulation. “It does indeed seems strange,” Kant, the quintessential Enlightenment philosopher, continued, “to conceive of a nation of deceivers, but it is also very strange to conceive of a nation of merchants, the majority of whom, bound by an ancient superstition accepted by the state they live in, do not seek any civil dignity, but prefer to make good this disadvantage with the benefits of trickery at the expense of the people who shelter them and at the expense of each other. In a nation of merchants, unproductive members of society . .. . it cannot be otherwise”( Kant, Werke Bd. vii, p. 205-6). From his vantage point in Koenigsberg, the capital of what was then East Prussia, a country which the Teutonic Knights wrested by force from the Slavic natives, all Jews were Polish Jews.

Esta casuística minó el sentido de la moralidad de los judíos, criticado ya por el Cristo hace 2000 años.

Jews did not assimilate in Poland; most of them did not learn the language of the Christian Poles, because, other than rudimentary commerce and illicit sexual activity, the Jews had virtually no contact with the Poles even though they had lived in their country for centuries. The Jews established their own state within a state there; they established their own legal system and courts there as well, and, if demographic evidence is conclusive in matters like this, the Polish paradise was the most successful modus vivendi Jews ever found in the West.

A pesar de vivir cientos de años en Polonia, donde gozaron de todo tipo de privilegios, el contacto con la población local se limitó al comercio carnal ilícito (que el Judaísmo, como el Islam, permite: Patrones copulatorios de los patriarcas judíos) y a las relaciones comerciales habituales.

Between 1340 and 1772, when Poland was partitioned for the first time, the Jewish population of Poland increased 75-fold while, during the same period of time the Christian population only quintupled. The disparity in population increase is explainable in simple terms. Persecution in the west, largely during the period from the 11th to the 16th century, caused massive immigration. Jews moved to Polish territory during that period of time in unprecedented numbers. By the time Poland was partitioned for the third and final time in 1795, 80 percent of the world’s Jews lived there.

Entre 1340 y 1772 (primera partición de Polonia), el número de judíos se multiplicó por 75, mientras el de nativos se multiplicó por 5.

Polonia era una república de nobles, una oligarquía. La monarquía era electiva. El rey era elegido por el parlamento de la nobleza, no hubo una concentración “absolutista” del poder en el rey. Los nobles eran propietarios de grandes latifundios trabajados por polacos y administrados por judíos. Los nobles tenían prohibido el comercio, que estaba también en manos de judíos. Básicamente, la nobleza dejó la gestión económica en manos de los judíos, recaudadores de impuestos y alcabalas. Los polacos tenían que pagar a los judíos hasta por el uso de las iglesias para bodas y demás ceremonias.

Graetz talks about the Jew experienced in financial matters as a salutary counterbalance to the impetuous, headstrong, and ultimately child-like Polish nobleman:

“The high nobility continued to be dependent on Jews, who in a measure counterbalanced the national defects. Polish flightiness, levity, unsteadiness, extravagance and recklessness were compensated for by Jewish prudence, sagacity, economy and cautiousness. The Jew was more than a financier to the Polish nobleman; he was his help in embarrassment, his prudent adviser, his all in all.”

Una oligarquía irresponsable que usa a una minoría contra su nación. ¿Os suena?

The radical disjunction between political and economic power in Poland meant that the enfranchised noble citizens gradually lost control of their culture. The easy-going Polish oligarchs, wedded to an economic system that seemed so eminently successful in bringing new lands under the Polish crown, failed to understand that the control over those territories was being undermined from within by the very people they relied on for its administration. This happened gradually, of course, and it began to manifest itself first in the area of religion. Flush with the short-term wealth which the arenda system created and the territorial expansion which it enabled, the Polish kings ignored the biggest cultural crisis of their day, the Protestant revolt against Catholic hegemony over Europe. There was no Inquisition in Poland. As a result, what might have happened in Spain did happen there. Poland became a model for tolerance, but in doing so paved the way for its own extinction at the end of the 18th century.

At a time when the Duke of Alba was battling Calvinists and Jews in the Netherlands and in effect setting up a barrier beyond which the Reformation would not pass, saving all of southern Europe beginning at Antwerp from the rebellion which had devastated England and the North, Sigismund August II, ruler of both Poland and Lithuania, surrounded himself with Jews and the Protestant revolutionaries the Poles called Demi-Jews. The “Reformers” in Poland were largely Unitarian and Socinian followers of Michael Servetus, who, in Graetz’s words, “undermined the foundations of Christianity,” by “rejecting the veneration of Jesus as a divine person.”

Como podéis ver, el libro tiene un tono católico, antijudío y antiprotestante sorprendente en un historiador anglosajón. La Protesta (ellos le llaman “Reforma”, pero fue una protesta rabiosa y destructiva) fue la rejudaización idealizada del Cristianismo. Idealizada porque en muchos caso, como en Inglaterra, tocaban de oído: habían expulsado a los judíos hace siglos, y desconocían la calidad del material en cuestión.

By the death of Sigismund II in 1572, the Jews had attained enough power to name his successor in collaboration with the Porte in Constantinople, the Huguenots in France, and the English Protestants. The man who brokered the deal was Solomon ben Nathan Ashkenazi, adviser to Grand Visier Mohammed Sokoli. Solomon Ashkenazi was a German Jew by birth who had migrated, as so many of his race had, to the paradise of the Jews, where he eventually became chief physician to King Sigismund. He then migrated by way of Venice to Constantinople, where he served the sultan as faithfully as he had served the Polish king. Solomon Ashkenazi had succeeded Joseph Nasi, also an adviser to the sultan, as “a sort of unofficial leader of world Jewry.” Like Nasi, Ashkenazi orchestrated events following the death of Sigismund from behind the scenes. “Christian cabinets,” Graetz informs us, “did not suspect that the course of events which compelled them to side with one party or the other was set in motion by a Jewish hand. This was especially so in the case of the election of the Polish king.”

Un judío capaz de influir determinantemente en el nombramiento del rey de la católica Polonia… Y lo hace pidiendo opinión a mahometanos y protestantes. Esto es muevo para mi.

The situation in Poland during the first half of the 17th century was roughly analogous to the situation in Spain a century and a half earlier. Spain was the only other country in Europe with an equally influential Jewish population. As in Poland, many Sephardic Jews engaged in behavior that caused resentment among the lower classes. During the famine in Cuenca in 1326 Jewish usurers charged farmers 40 percent interest on the money they needed to borrow to buy grain for sowing. Blasphemy had become a Jewish custom in Spain. Moses, according to Walsh, “had condemned blasphemers to death. Yet it was a custom of many Jews to blaspheme the Prophet for whom Moses had warned them to prepare.” The Jews, as a result, “were disliked not for practicing the things that Moses taught, but for doing the things he had forbidden. They had profited hugely on the sale of fellow-beings as slaves, and practiced usury as a matter of course, and flagrantly.” Blasphemy went hand in hand with Jewish proselytizing, which often took place by compulsion. Jews would force Christian servants to get circumcised as a condition of employment. They would encourage people to whom they had lent money to abjure Christ.

Comparan la situación de Polonia en el s. XVII con la de España en el XIV. Para entender la obligación de circuncidarse impuesta a sus criados debe ser tenida en cuenta que los incircuncisos son impuros, hacen impuros los rituales y los alimentos que manejan. Sí, el judaísmo es muy parecido al islamismo; de hecho, este último es judaísmo belicista.

The Jews who defined themselves as the antithesis of Christianity had developed the habit of conspiring with Christendom’s enemies. Although they flourished under Visigothic rule in Spain, they were not long thereafter found conspiring with the Arabs in Africa to overthrow the Visigothic monarchy. At the beginning of the 8th century they used their contacts with African Jews to prepare the invasion of the Mohammedan Berbers across the straits of Gibraltar. Once the Mohammedans conquered Spain, the Jews flourished under their rule, achieving as a result one of the most sophisticated cultures in Europe at the time. The Jews excelled in medicine and brought Aristotle to Europe. However, the flower of Sephardic culture drew its economic substance from unsavory roots. The Sephardic Jews grew rich on slaves and usury.

Los judíos se hicieron ricos en España traficando con esclavos (y podemos asumir que se trataba de vender esclavos cristianos a los moros, y no al revés) y con la usura.

When the Spaniards began their reconquista, the Jews were not persecuted. According to Walsh,

“Saint Fernando, on taking Cordoba from the Saracens, turned over four mosques to the large Jewish population, to convert into synagogues, and gave them one of the most delightful parts of the city for their homes, on two conditions: that they refrain from reviling the Christian religion, and from proselytizing among Christians. The Jews made both promises, and kept neither.”

Curioso.

The man formerly known as Rabbi Solomon ha-Levi was, after all, a Jewish insider if there ever was one, and he followed up on his conversion by implicating the Jews in a conspiracy to overthrow the Christian monarchs of the Iberian peninsula. After his conversion, Levi published “two dialogues in which he categorically declared that the Jews were bent upon ruling Spain.”

Similarly, another Jewish convert Fray Alonso de Espina eventually became confessor to Henry IV and Rector of the University of Salamanca. In 1459 Espina wrote Fortalitium Fidei, one of the most bitterly anti-Jewish documents in history. In his diatribe against the Conversos, Espina “suggested that if an Inquisition were established in Castile, large numbers of them would be found to be only pretending Christians, engaged in judaizing and in undermining the Faith they professed.”

Definitivamente, tengo que leer el libro.

The king of Aragon repudiated the concept of forced conversion and made it clear to the Jews there that they could return to their ancestral religion, but that was not the case in Barcelona, which, as a result, became a hotbed of subversive activity all the way up to the time of the Spanish Civil War.

La relación del carácter rebelde de Barcelona (que no veo nada claro) con el criptojudaísmo no me resulta creíble.

Forced conversion, in other words, only strengthened the very suspicions it was supposed to allay. And the rabbis were instrumental in strengthening them. As a result, Jews were regarded as a fifth column within the state, and conversos were regarded, because of the very conversion that was forced on them, as an even more dangerous fifth column within the Church. Some conversos were precisely that. Fray Vicente de Rocamora, the confessor of Empress Maria, sister of Philip II, “threw off the mask of Catholicism and joined the Hebrew community at Amsterdam as Isaac of Rocamoro.” The Jewish community at Amsterdam in the 17th century was made up almost exclusively of conversos who had thrown off the Catholic faith shortly after escaping from Spain and Portugal and arriving there. It was made up, in other words, of apostate Catholics who had lied about their faith.

Completamente desconocido para mi.

Describing the aftermath of the forced conversions, Cecil Roth writes that

“within a generation or two, the Marranos became assimilated enough. Their worldly success was phenomenal. They almost controlled the economic life of the country. They made fabulous fortunes as bankers and merchants. They thronged the liberal professions. . . . Many of them attained high rank even in the Church. But with all their eminence, the vast majority (and those who had entered Holy Orders were no exception) remained faithful at heart to the religion of their fathers, which they handed on, despite unbelievable difficulties from generation to generation. Their Christianity was merely a mask…. They were Christians in nothing, and Jews in everything but name.”

Y Roth es apellido judío.

By condoning false conversion under duress, the rabbis created a nation of subversives. The net result was chaos and confusion so total, so demoralizing and so debilitating that medieval Judaism did not survive the crisis. Medieval Judaism, like medieval Islam, was ultimately incapable of negotiating a modus vivendi which accommodated both faith and reason. Medieval Judaism broke apart on the rock of false conversion, as manifested in the case of Sabbetai Zevi. European Jewry, which was virtually unanimous in accepting Zevi as the Messiah, attempted to repress any indication that Zevi had existed after his conversion to Islam, but the evidence of his existence was like the rock just beneath the surface which determines traffic on the river. The messianic fever which infected Europe beginning in 1648 reached its peak and denouement when Zevi converted to Islam in 1666, another Annus Mirabilis. Thereafter, the ship of medieval Judaism foundered and eventually broke into two parts, corresponding to faith and reason respectively, since their union could find in Judaism no unifying force any more. On the one hand, reason found itself represented by Spinoza’s rationalism, which led to the German Enlightenment Jew epitomized by Moses Mendelssohn, the man whom Lessing immortalized in German literature as Nathan der Weise. On the other hand, faith divorced from reason led to the Jewish form of quietism known as Hassidism, which continued to thrive in the shtetls of Poland and the Pale of the Settlement all the way up to the Nazi genocide.

El criptojudaísmo es la taquiya judía. Nótese que es relativamente reciente en el judaísmo. Los Macabeos prefirieron la muerte a la apostasía. Resumo el razonamiento de Jones. Al aceptar la conversión falsa ante la persecución, los rabinos crearon una nación de subversivos, que trasformó al judaísmo. Aparecieron dos corrientes, los racionalistas, cuyo paradigma es Espinosa, y los fideistas. Tengo que decir que no puedo dejar de sentir cierta pena por los circuncisos.

Queen Isabella’s predecessor is now known to history under the unfortunate name of Enrique el Impotente precisely because he was perceived as handing over to the unscrupulous insincere conversos the administration of both Church and state and doing nothing to curb the rioting and pillaging of the Jews and their possessions which followed in the wake of his inaction.

No. Se le llamaba impotente porque era impotente sexualmente. En todo caso:

Twelve years later, Ferdinand and Isabella, after expelling the Moors from Spain, expelled the Jews as well. In doing so, they saved Spain from the fate of Poland by exporting a problem they could not solve. Over the course of the 16th century, northern Europe inherited the problem which Spain could not solve and cities like Antwerp became, as a result, a hotbed of revolutionary activity.

Gracias, Isabel.

The fact that Talmudic teaching condoned false conversion indicated a radical break in continuity between what they taught and what Moses taught. The Marranos, if by that term we mean insincere Jewish converts to Christianity, made subversion and deceit a way of life.

In this their behavior and world view was similar to other disaffected Catholics from other parts of Europe. The German monks who violated their vows of celibacy with impunity led double lives as well. And living a lie helped create animosity toward the institution to whom they had made vows they would not fulfill. In this regard, the first Lutherans and the first Calvinists were virtually indistinguishable from each other and from the conversos, both in theology and practice. Both movements drew their leadership from the sexually corrupt lower Catholic clergy. Calvin’s lieutenant, the erstwhile Catholic, Theodore Beza was, according to Walsh,

“a glaring example of the too-common corruption. Though not even a priest, he enjoys the incomes of two benefices, through political influence, lavishes the Church’s money on his concubine, and generally leads a vicious and dissolute life. When the Church is under attack, he hastens to join the enemy. As Calvin’s lieutenant, this righteous man thunders against the [corruption of the] Old Church, of which he was partly the cause.”

Esto se lo dedicamos a Antón, protestante judeófilo que comenta regular pero discontinuamente entre nosotros.

Revolution, which is to say, a pan-ethnic coordinated attack on the cultural hegemony of the Catholic Church over Europe, emerged as a force in world history when these two groups merged in places like Antwerp in the middle of the 16th century. Revolution was, in other words, a Protestant-Jewish alliance from its inception. The Jews, as Newman shows so well, promoted every “reform” movement in Europe, from the Hussites to the Anabaptists, as a way of weakening the hegemony of the Catholic Church, reasoning—falsely in the case of Luther—that the enemy of their enemy was their friend. In places like Antwerp and Amsterdam, the Jews put their wealth as well as their considerable expertise in finance and publishing at the disposal of the libidinous German monks and their princely protectors as their way of waging cultural warfare against the Catholic Church and Spain, its defender. (…)

The revolutionary link between Jews and Reformers was theoretical as well as practical. The “Reformers” for their part could justify their criminal behavior only by cloaking it in the imagery of the Old Testament.

(…)The Puritans in England could implement the idea of revolution so readily precisely because they were Judaizers, and that is so because revolution was at its root a Jewish idea. Based on Moses’ deliverance of Israel as described in the book of Exodus, the revolutionary saw a small group of chosen “saints” leading a fallen world to liberation from political oppression. Revolution was nothing if not a secularization of ideas taken from the Bible, and as history progressed the secularization of the concept would progress as well. But the total secularization of the idea in the 17th century would have made the idea totally useless to the Puritan revolutionaries. Secularization in the 17th century was synonymous with Judaizing. It meant substituting the Old Testament for the New. The concept of revolution gained legitimacy in the eyes of the Puritans precisely because of its Jewish roots. Graetz sees the attraction which Jewish ideas held for English Puritans quite clearly. The Roundheads were not inspired by the example of the suffering Christ, nor were they inspired by the medieval saints who imitated him. They needed the example of the warriors of Israel to inspire them in their equally bellicose campaigns against the Irish and the Scotch, who became liable to extermination because the Puritans saw them as Canaanites.

Espero leeer el libro entero para conocer más sobre este vínculo entre la revolución y el judaísmo. Entre tanto, recordad: Lo que no es tradición es revolución.

Messianic politics lies at the heart of what the Jewish and Puritan revolutionaries of the 16th century had in common, which is to say, both the Puritan and the Jew shared a desire to attain the spiritual goods promised in the Bible by secular means. Messianic politics was a form of magic, since the attainment of wealth and power by spiritual means had always been the goal of Simon Magus and his followers, and as such it had a powerful appeal to a group of people who were just discovering the natural sciences at the same time that they were full of revulsion at the cross of Christ and the ideal of suffering which it embodied. “It is better,” St. Augustine wrote, summarizing the Catholic alternative to Simon Magus, “to love God and make use of money, than to love money and make use of God.” The Puritan rejection of the medieval worldview of the Catholic Church (and its Anglican surrogates) was ultimately traceable to the Jewish rejection of the suffering Christ as an unworthy Messiah. “The chief priests,” St. Matthew tells us, “with the scribes and elders mocked him in the same way. ‘He saved others,’ they said, ‘he cannot save himself. He is the king of Israel; let him come down from the cross now, and we will believe in him.’”

Una interesante reflexión teológica.

Since there had been no Jews in England since their expulsion in 1290, at least not officially, English philo-Semitism had a distinctly utopian cast to it. The English Judaizers tended to idealize Jews according to their own idiosyncratic reading of the Old Testament. They did not, as one has come to expect of the English, evaluate them according to empirical observation, at least not at the dawn of the Messianic era in 1648. If they had been less preoccupied with their own revolution at home, the English could have learned something about Christian-Jewish relations by observing the apocalypse that was brewing in Poland at the very moment the English were debating the fate of their king. An objective study of what had happened in Spain might have been helpful as well, but an objective English study of anything Spanish is the historical equivalent of an oxymoron.

La idea de la primera frase ya la habíamos adelantado. La idea de la última me ha hecho mucha gracia y me ha recordado la negligencia (quizás mala fe, pero juzgar intenciones es asunto más que espinoso) de Johnson, que da por buenas las cifras de víctimas de la Inquisición de Llorente.

Pasa ahora a tratar del Lurianismo, que es un mesianismo cabalístico que considera que la utopía vendrá tras una catástrofe. De nuevo, es una idea que también está presente en el cristianismo (Apocalípsis): el fin del mundo vendrá tras una época de gran tribulación que incluye la apostasía de las naciones.

The source of messianic fervor, according to Scholem, was “none other than Lurianic kabbalism, that is that form of Kabbalah which had developed at Safed, in Galilee, during the sixteenth century and which dominated Jewish religiosity in the seventeenth century.” According to the Kaballah, catastrophe and utopianism go hand in hand. The presence of a catastrophe like the Chmielnicki massacres and the ensuing predations of the Swedish army meant, therefore, that redemption was at hand.

Más:

Lurianic Kaballah not only prepared the way for the Chmielnicki catastrophe, it was also the result of the other great catastrophe of Jewish life at the time, the expulsion of the Jews from Spain. Isaac Luria Ashkenazi was born in 1534. By the time of his death in Safed in Palestine in 1572, he had gathered around him a group of disciples who were bent on spreading his explanation of Jewish exile, of recent catastrophes like the expulsion from Spain and how these events fit into the plan of divine redemption. In order to do this Luria had recourse to the Gnostic mythology which had been circulating in the Mediterranean world since the time of the first heresies of the Christian era. God or En-Sof had created bowls to contain the light of his understanding. The bowls, however, proved incapable of containing that light and broke scattering the light throughout creation where it remained imprisoned in matter. The purpose of man’s existence on earth became, as a result, tiqqun or healing, or restoring the lights to their original place in the universe before the breaking of the vessels had released the forces of sin and evil into the world. After the fall of Adam and Eve, each Jew had as his purpose in life the great process of re-integrating the sparks into their original place in the universe. The Diaspora of the Jews was now readily explainable. They had been dispersed over the face of the earth so as to be better able to discover the holy sparks, extract them from the matter they had become enmired in, and then return them to their rightful place in the universe. When this was accomplished, the Messiah could come, and redemption would be complete. Redemption, according to the Lurianic doctrine, was equally bound up with man’s efforts and the process of history, a combination which was incorporated, via Hegel, into Karl Marx’s revolutionary theory three hundred years later.

Impresionante. Judaísmo, masonería, comunismo… Reíos si aun tenéis ganas.

Horowitz sees much the same political meaning emanating from the Lurianic revision of the meaning of exile. Once the meaning of exile had been transformed by its incorporation into the Gnostic creed of Luria’s Kaballah, “redemption is no longer a divine release from the punishment of exile, but a humanly inspired transformation of creation itself.” What is true of Israel’s exile is a fortiori true of mankind’s exile in the qelippoth or husks of matter. Luria’s essentially Gnostic thought projects evil away from the heart of man into structures outside of himself, which is to say, political structures, which can be changed by human effort. Now instead of evil emanating from the heart, evil emanates from evil things in an evil universe, which is begging to be changed by those who know its secrets, i.e., the kabbalists. (…) The kabbalists will lead the world to redemption through magic (or applied science and technology) and trickery but not by leading good lives while waiting patiently for the redeemer to come, because “in the Gnostic view, the evil that men do emanates not from their own flawed natures, but is the result of a flaw in the cosmos they inhabit, which they can repair.” As a result of the Gnostic transformation of Jewish thought that Luria accomplished, “Man” becomes “his own redeemer” (Horowitz, p. 131). Exile of the sort suffered by Jews for over a millennium and most recently in exile from Spain is, according to Luria,

“no longer a punishment, but a mission; no longer a reflection of who we are, but a mark of our destiny to become agents of salvation. In this Gnostic vision, Israel is dispersed among the nations in order that the light of the whole world may be liberated. In the words of the Kabbalist Hayim Vital: “This is the secret why Israel is fated to be enslaved by all the Gentiles of the world: In order that it may uplift those sparks of the Divine Light which have also fallen among them. . . . And therefore it was necessary that Israel should be scattered to the four winds in order to lift everything up.” The Israelites are the first revolutionary internationalists.”

Esta es la herejía modernista expuesta negro sobre blanco. Y, desgraciadamente, ha acabado infectando a la Iglesia. Más:

Since Lurianism created the Messianic fervor of the mid-16th century, it is not an exaggeration to say that it created the revolutionary mindset which characterized the modern world as well. The modern world emerged when medieval Judaism, having fostered northern Europe’s rebellion against Rome, cracked open and fell apart itself when Lurianism found its fulfillment in Sabbetai Zevi, the false Messiah. Jewish Gnostic messianism, with the help of English puritan revolutionaries, was released from the ghetto into the nascent modern world, the world which succeeded the medieval world and was its antithesis. The Messianic age of the mid-17th century “was an age characterized by rebellion against the Catholic Church and the order which the Church had imposed on Europe since the fall of the Roman Empire. A millenium of Catholic culture was threatened by the resurgence of an old idea.”

The old idea was the notion that the millennium meant the restoration of the “terrene Kingdome of the Jewes,” the idea which had been condemned, but not destroyed, by the Council of Ephesus in 431. The new name for that old idea was revolution. When the ghetto was cracked open, but not destroyed, by the subsequent blows inflicted on it—by the Inquisition, the Chmielnicki pogroms, and, most devastating of all, the disillusionment which followed on the heels of the False Messiah’s conversion to Islam— the concept of revolution escaped through those cracks in the ghetto walls into European culture at large, where it was implemented at first by Judiaizers like the English Puritans and finally by the revolutionary Jew in propria persona, at the helm of his own political movement to produce via socialism, Marxism, Zionism, sexual liberation, or neoconservatism “the terrene Kingdome of the Jewes” or heaven on earth.

Para acabar:

On January 30, 1649, eight months after Bogdan Chmielnicki had defeated the Polish army, while the slaughter of Jews was in full swing, the Puritan Demi-Jews presided over the execution of the English king. His death warrant was signed by 59 “saints”; Cromwell’s name was third on the list. One commentator claimed that the execution of the king was “an earth-shattering event.” He would have done better to call the regicide world-shattering instead, because it shattered a number of worlds, all of them medieval. Both the Jew and the Demi-Jew presided at the birth of a new age, an age seen by Jews and Demi-Jews alike, as the dawn of redemption. That new age and the Jewish/Puritan alliance at its heart is with us still, driving American foreign policy, to give a recent example of its activity, into a war with Iraq. Like all of the wars it spawned, that new age would turn out to be every bit as bloody as the events which inaugurated it.

Señor, ten piedad. Creo que es lo mas apropiado que cabe decir. Porque yo también he sido liberal, yo también he sido un ciego judeófilo, yo también he sido un hereje modernista.

Kyrie, eleison. Señor, ten piedad. Cristo, ten piedad.

* * * * *

Acabo de comprar el libro a la editorial directamente.

Be Sociable, Share!

7 Comments

  1. http://www.losgeniosopinan.blogspot.com/

    He flipado un poco con el blog del menda este. Yo de momento paso del tema, ni quiero pensar. Llevo muchos años reeducando mi mente pensando que los judios son buena gente y no quiero liarme mas la cabeza. Y perdonad pero tanto poder no tendran esta gente cuando permiten aun zapatero y un moratinos, dos personajillos, decir lo que dicen y hacer lo que hacen, insulto tras insulto. Algo no encaja.

    • Stern, en algunos casos la opinión es injusta, incluso muy injusta. En la lista tenemos desde canallas criminales hasta un judío que llegó a Primer Ministro de Inglaterra (Disraeli):

      “Parece increíble y paradójico pero es así; el pueblo de Dios coopera con los ateístas: los acaparadores más ardientes de la propiedad se unen con los comunistas; y la raza escogida va de la mano con la escoria de las castas inferiores de Europa… Y eso porque quiere destruir esta Cristiandad que hasta el nombre les debe, pero cuya tiranía no pueden soportar más tiempo.”

      Pero si alguien es rechazado por TODOS, TODOS los que entran en contacto con él, lo lógico es pensar que se trata de un individuo intratable.

      Sin embargo, estos señores se presentan como las víctimas universales de la discriminación y la opresión.

      Lo voy a poner en el blog.

  2. Me rei un rato ayer con la del erasmo de rotterdam

    Es un robo y una explotación del hombre pobre por el judío, tal que ya no se puede sufrir —y que Dios tenga piedad. Los judíos— usureros se establecen firmemente hasta en los más pequeños lugares, y si prestan cinco Gulden, toman seis veces más como garantía y toman intereses del interés y de éste de nuevo intereses, de tal modo que el hombre pobre pierde todo lo que tiene.
    Fuente: Schenck
    Geert Geertsen

    Hay citas con detalles muy curiosos

  3. Las costumbres judías son tristes, sucias, viles y abominables, y si han sobrevivido es gracias a su perversidad. De todos los pueblos esclavizados, los judíos son los más despreciables y repugnantes…

    Para los judíos es despreciable todo lo que para nosotros es sagrado y para ellos es lícito lo que a nosotros nos repugna.

    Los judíos revelan un terco vínculo los unos con los otros, que contrasta con su odio por el resto de la Humanidad… Entre ellos, nada es ilícito. Los que abrazan su religión practican lo mismo, y lo primero que se les enseña es a despreciar a los dioses, a olvidar el patriotismo y a renegar de sus padres, hijos y hermanos.

    Tácito, historiador romano.

3 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Caridad cristiana | Los dos minutos de odio
  2. De Meccania a Atlantis. Capítulos 12 y medio. La “excepción cultural” de Europa del Este y el sano antisemitismo. | La Yijad en Eurabia
  3. Collección de opiniones sobre los judíos | La Yijad en Eurabia

Responder a Stern Cancelar respuesta

Tu dirección de correo electrónico no será publicada.


*