Nicholas II and Anti-Semitism.

[AlexP@asia.com]

GuangZhou, PRC
2006.06.24

Dear Fellow Posters,

This is an excellently delivered thread on what could have been a highly volatile and emotional issue.

Just a few points.

1.  Jewess.  Until the  mid-20th Century, the English language still possessed female declensions for many nouns - doctor, doctoress, Jew, Jewess, abbot, abbess, poet, poetess, etc.  I would refer anyone to an etymological dictionary of the English language.   This word form is still present today in the comprehensive Oxford.  Whether a poster or posteress on this Board ascribes a negative connotation to this word is simply a matter of personal linguistic preference.

2.  David Pritchard has put up an excellent historical summary of the reasons for, and the background of, the Emperor's purported antiSemitisim.  Again, all concepts need to be considered in the light of their historical moment.

3.  Rob Moshein's very intellectual reasoning, and spirited defense of, the Emperor's comportment cause me a great deal of uneasiness of conscience.  I personally knew many of the (elder) members of the great nobility of the First Emigration, and their sons and daugthers, and now their grandsons and granddaugthers, and I can easily say that antiSemitism runs rampant from one to the other.  Consideration is always given to the role of the Jews in fomenting the Revolution; in the role of the Schiffs and the Warburgs in financing the Revolution; in the role of the Jewish German bankers who paid for Lenin's sealed train; in the composition of the first ranks of the Cheka; in the nearly entirely Jewish composition of Lenin's first government; and of the composition of those who murdered the Imperial Family at Ekaterinburg.

     There is much on both sides of the argument here, indeed much, and this is an issue that will not go away, neither on one side, nor on the other.

4.  The posters and posteresses seems to be overlooking the tremenduous influence of the Grand Duke Sergei upon the Emperor.  As this person could not come to terms with his own homosexuality, he turned his self-hatred loose on the Jews of Moscow.   Has anyone ever read the reports that he submitted to the Tsar?  I have and the language and actions and deed are violently antiSemitic.

     Then there was the role of Pobedenostov in all of this during Nicholas's earlier formative years, and of Sturmer, and of Goremykin -- all of them rapid antiSemites of the most extreme fringe.  Pobedenostov consistently quoted to the Emperor in his "verucheniya" lessons the passages from the New Testament where it is written about the Jews during the Crucifixion of Christ "and may their blood be on the hands of their progeniture for all ages".

     Next, for all of Rasputin's sins before God, and surely they are innumerable, antiSemitism was NOT one of them.  That also caused him to incur the wrath of the governing classes.  We have learned through many sources that he consistently referred to them as the Children of God.

4.  Finally, in spite of all of the finely tuned arguments both then and now seeking to convince that the Emperor was not antiSemitic, they are not persuasive.  As David Pritchard pointed out, he was a man of his time, both in spirit and body, and he was also head of the Church, and finally he was a man of an extremely clipped erudition.

All the best,


Alex P.
GuangZhou, PRC
    

[ferngully]

ironic that rasputin bothered about jewish rights when the tsar's close aquaintences didn't could that be put on his list of crimes too? i'm fighting with about 3 people for nearly a year to convince them that just becuase jews made up the majority of communism, doesn't mean all jews are evil and therefore control the rest of the world. looks like old rumours never die

[AlexP@asia.com]

GuangZhou, PRC
2006.06.26


Dear Ferngully:

I quite don't know how to read nor "take" your previous posting, so if I stray or misinterpret, please correct me.

1.  It is a known fact that Rasputin, who was guilty of nearly felonious sin that can, or has or did exist in the annals of Christianity, was not guilty of antiSemitism.  His detractors wrote about this and his supporters wrote about this.  There were numerous short conversations with both the Emperor and the Empress in this regard.

     I do not add this to his sins. How could anyone?  Frankly, the man is a very, very dark figure, a "debauchiron" as we say in Russian of the first order, but in all of this, there was the soul of a man.  He opposed the battle of Baranovichi as a useless slaughter of Russian peasants and he repeatedly urged Nicholas to go light on the Jews.  All to no avail.

2.  As for your second comment, I am not even going to give it dignity.  Yes, there were many Jews in the first ranks of the Revolution -- but there were also numerous Balts, Ukrainians and about every minority that Russian contained.  And no, I am not Jewish, let's just say that for the record.

    I remember growing up in the ranks of the Emigration and hearing comments like the one that you wrote (Commies are evil, all Jews are Commies, therefore all Jews are evil) and these kind of comments revolted me then and revolted me now.

    Yes, the rather predominant role of the Jews in the Revolution needs to be studied coldy and scientifically but as AGRBear wrote (I think it was him) that if every Jew in Russia wrote up against the Emperor in 1917, the Empire would have hardly trembled.

3.  Lenin's Jewishness has been debated ad infinitum.  We do know that his original birth record went missing during the Revolution so that the debate will never have closure.  But the Jewishness of one man does not a Revolution make.

     Accordingly, many of the French Revolutionaries were actually Huguenots but does that mean the Reign of Terror in 1792 was inspired by the Calvinist Church?  I hardly think so.

     As I said before, this is a very, very murky subject and it raises hackles on all sides of the audience.

4.   Let me tell you a totally unrelated tale from China but one that will demonstrate man and his goodness.  

      When the British came to China, they introduced opium and they established the Opium Commission.  They directly contributed to the deaths of at least 25,000,000 persons.  We never forgot.

      When the French came to China, they opened brothels, they opened gambling dens and brought all of the Western vices to China, including sexually transmitted diseases never seen here before.  We never forgot.

      When the Catholic Church came to China, it opened factories and warehouses and some precious few hospitals, in each of which the orphans under its custody worked for no money.  We never forgot.

                                                     BUT

       When the stateless European Jews came to China over the last 100 years, they opened synagogues, business, hospitals, infirmeries, etc.  And do you know what?

        This very much maligned people, who came here as the poorest of the poor, opened their hospitals, their infirmeries, their schools to the Chinese people, and in many cases, treated them or school them for no money.

        AND WE NEVER FORGOT THIS.

        So,

        In 1949, when the New China was created, all of the properties of the British, the French and the others were nationalized and these people were thrown out of China.

        BUT

        In recognition of what they had to the Chinese people with so little resources, the Chinese Government gave the Jewish community the right to liquidate all of their properties at a fair price, withdraw their monies from the bank accounts that had been frozen, leave for Israel or the West, or finally remain in China as Chinese citizens.

        AND Do you know...that when the thaw began about 10 years ago in terms of religious practice, the restrictions on the synagogues were lifted and as opposed to every other Western religion that must have Chinese clergy, the Jews of China are allowed to bring in their own rabbi.

        Because the people have a long memory.  And an act of kindness is an act of kindness.

        So that is what I have to sayaa.

[ferngully]

guang zhou, do excuse me for writing so much sarcasm in order that you don't understand. if you read my post carefully, you will see that i wrote about fighting people who belived the statement i wrote about. and i do know about china becuase i am jewish and i make it my business to know about other jewish people from around the world. there are very few native chinese jews who make it known that they are as judiasm is not yet officially recognised in china, nevertheless, your story stands to reason.  thanks for replying but it really was unecessary

[AlexP@asia.com]

guang zhou, do excuse me for writing so much sarcasm in order that you don't understand. if you read my post carefully, you will see that i wrote about fighting people who belived the statement i wrote about. and i do know about china becuase i am jewish and i make it my business to know about other jewish people from around the world. there are very few native chinese jews who make it known that they are as judiasm is not yet officially recognised in china, nevertheless, your story stands to reason.  thanks for replying but it really was unecessary

Dear Ferngully,

Please excuse me before I answer your post...but in the light of your post above,  I can now see that English is not your native language so perhaps I did miss your sarcasm..but I actually I didn't ... which is why I took the time to write such a detailed response.

It is good to make it "your business to know about Jewish people all over the world", but as we all learn, no one person is a walking encyclopaedia and sometimes the things we can learn from other people, if we take the time to listen, can bring us additional knowledge...and I must write this..HUMILITY.  Birthright does not confer universality of knowledge.

While you adjudged my posting unnecessary, it is not of your purview to do so, and since I took the time to write it, I adjudged it necessary.  I also had to say that.

All of that being said, I remain with best regards from GuangZhou, (and my name is NOT GuangZhou, please check your geography)


Alex P.

[ferngully]

you need to understand english sarcasm, english is actually my native language, can you see it now? i apologise for getting your name wrong. now getting back to the topic at hand, please read my first post and then decide weather it was necessary to post about it. i was talking about other people who use the communists who were born jewish as the reason for russia's downfall. i was being sarcastic when i listed it as rasputin's crime to defend jews, using the viewpoint of the people who vilified him to such an extent (the russian royals)

[AlexP@asia.com]

you need to understand english sarcasm, english is actually my native language, can you see it now? i apologise for getting your name wrong. now getting back to the topic at hand, please read my first post and then decide weather it was necessary to post about it. i was talking about other people who use the communists who were born jewish as the reason for russia's downfall. i was being sarcastic when i listed it as rasputin's crime to defend jews, using the viewpoint of the people who vilified him to such an extent (the russian royals)

Dear Ferngully,

Thank you for your kind post.  Now let me explain what I was wondering if English was your native language...in the above posting, english should be English; i should be I; there are numerous mistakes in English grammar that a European might make; communists should be Communists; jewish should be Jewish; russia should be Russia; rasputin should be Rasputin; etc., etc.  It was the same in your previous posts.  Frankly, it's a small matter for me whether or not English is or is not your native language, but knowing that it is not just allows one to spend a little more time reading your posts a little more carefully -- that's all.

Next, you have raised for the second time an issue which I thought that I had settled in my previous post.  Yes, for me it was necessary to answer your post in detail -- and so I did.  And your caustic remarks were well-noted (I mean in terms of the worldwide Jewish Bolshevik conspiracy).

Thank you for taking the time to answer.  All of the very best and I look forward to more of your ideas on this subject,


Alex P.

[james_h]

The idea that Jews were responsible for the revolution or WWI or the other consipiracy theories is, in my opinion unlikely. As far as I can ascertain the Tsar's one true competitor on the European continent was......

Clearly there can only be one Universal (In the temporal sense) sovereign.





Ideologies:
      
Western Rome ( Vatican )
GENS ET REGNUM QUOD NON SERVIERIT MIHI PERIBIT
Translates:  THE NATION AND KINGDOM THAT WILL NOT SERVE ME WILL PERISH  
Aka: Single Earthly Sovereign      
 
Eastern Rome (Russian Empire)
[ch914][ch945][ch963][ch953][ch955][ch949][ch8058][ch962] [ch914][ch945][ch963][ch953][ch955][ch941][ch969][ch957] [ch914][ch945][ch963][ch953][ch955][ch949][ch973][ch969][ch957] [ch914][ch945][ch963][ch953][ch955][ch949][ch965][ch972][ch957][ch964][ch969][ch957]
Translates: King of Kings Ruler of Rulers
Aka: Single Earthly Sovereign


Financially      

Vatican net worth approx.
$77,470,000,000.00 (USA real estate alone)
Suffice to say, regardless of the actual amount almost unimaginably wealthy      

Tsar’s approx.
modern day net worth USD$1.8 Trillion.
Suffice to say, regardless of the actual amount almost unimaginably wealthy



Rank      
Pope = Above an Emperor HEAD of western Roman Christianity      
Tsar = An Emperor but more importantly HEAD of the eastern Roman christianity. The Eastern Roman Pope ( Effectively )


Now, to explain the Jews power….. as infantile as my reasoning might be. Of the three Abrahamic religions 1.Hebrew  2.Islam  3.Christianity (Messianic Judaism) only Hebrew was not scripturally forbidden to practice usury.

Lending money –> Usury –> Profit –> Power.
Clearly nothing endemically evil.

Although I have not a shred of evidence I hypothesize that ultimately the Pope must be responsible for the Russian Revolution as it removed his single largest competitor…..the Russian Tsar. Of all in Europe who would have benefited from the Tsarist fall, The pope had the most to gain and was the single most powerful, ideological arch nemesis the Tsar had.  Plus the timing, if it hadn't happened when it did, even as late as 1950 would have made the Tsar effectivly impervious to vatican power and influence.
This will probably make me violently unpopular but I believe if Jews were responsible for the revolution the Pope was the Puppet
Master.




I suspect that the Russian Revolution was a strategic move by the Vatican toward ending The Great Schism. I've no doubt amending that historical breach has been on the Vatican agenda for 800+ years. If that is the case it was a remarkable political move. In virtually one action the Eastern Church was irreversibly weakened, bankrupted, outlawed and ceased to exist. Now in it's weakened state a well trained and well equipped catholic retinue will move in and poach as many Russian as possible. Really it's genius, I doubt any other political institution on earth is so well eqquiped with machiavellian minds.

[james_h]

4.  The posters and posteresses seems to be overlooking the tremenduous influence of the Grand Duke Sergei upon the Emperor.  As this person could not come to terms with his own homosexuality, he turned his self-hatred loose on the Jews of Moscow.   Has anyone ever read the reports that he submitted to the Tsar?  I have and the language and actions and deed are violently antiSemitic.

    

Speculating about Sergei’s sexuality is such a futile exercise. According to the Kinsey institute the results of their study Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948)
Sampling 6,300 of these sexual histories were of men and, of those, 5,300 were utilized in the Male volume




0                    Completely Heterosexual
1                    Mostly hetro / Incidental Homo
2                    Mostly hetro / occasional homo
3                    Equally hetro/ homo
4                    Mostly homo / occasional hetro
5                    Mostly homo / incidental hetro
6                    Completely Homosexual


Grand Duke Sergei may well have been a 5 or 6. But it’s unsubstantiated conjecture, open to so many variables that makes speculation absurd.

To relate his sexual orientation, whatever it amounted to with his attitude toward a local ethnic group is pseudo science at it’s best.... it’s ridiculous.


If you read the report there is no clear consensus as to what constitutes a homosexual, clearly then you cannot call someone one, particularly retroactively.  




Link: http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/


Results:

“They don't really tell us much, to think that a person is a homosexual or a heterosexual, as opposed to saying that a person sometimes engages in same sex behavior, or sometimes that a person engages in opposite sex behavior. In fact, he found in using his 0 - 6 scale that there were a lot of men and women who were 4's and 5's and still identified themselves as homosexual, but had in their behaviors opposite sex contacts when that felt perfect to them. It wasn't all black or white.”

“For instance, the high incidence of subjects, up to 50% of the men and up to 25% of the women, who were reported to have had some kind of same sex contact or fantasy or thought after the onset of adolescence was not saying that up to 50% of men and 25% of women had practiced homosexuality. It was saying, that childhood and adolescent same sex play, as well as having same sex fantasies that may or may not have been acted out, were very common.”

[ferngully]

you need to understand english sarcasm, english is actually my native language, can you see it now? i apologise for getting your name wrong. now getting back to the topic at hand, please read my first post and then decide weather it was necessary to post about it. i was talking about other people who use the communists who were born jewish as the reason for russia's downfall. i was being sarcastic when i listed it as rasputin's crime to defend jews, using the viewpoint of the people who vilified him to such an extent (the russian royals)

Dear Ferngully,

Thank you for your kind post.  Now let me explain what I was wondering if English was your native language...in the above posting, english should be English; i should be I; there are numerous mistakes in English grammar that a European might make; communists should be Communists; jewish should be Jewish; russia should be Russia; rasputin should be Rasputin; etc., etc.  It was the same in your previous posts.  Frankly, it's a small matter for me whether or not English is or is not your native language, but knowing that it is not just allows one to spend a little more time reading your posts a little more carefully -- that's all.

Next, you have raised for the second time an issue which I thought that I had settled in my previous post.  Yes, for me it was necessary to answer your post in detail -- and so I did.  And your caustic remarks were well-noted (I mean in terms of the worldwide Jewish Bolshevik conspiracy).

Thank you for taking the time to answer.  All of the very best and I look forward to more of your ideas on this subject,


Alex P.

thanks for the interest, but i am here to discuss ideas, not grammar. can you understand my post without the grammar and capital letters? its not my habit to use them on forums unless for a special reason, which it isn't here

[james_h]

Dear Ferngully,

Thank you for your kind post.  Now let me explain what I was wondering if English was your native language...in the above posting, english should be English; i should be I; there are numerous mistakes in English grammar that a European might make; communists should be Communists; jewish should be Jewish; russia should be Russia; rasputin should be Rasputin; etc., etc.  It was the same in your previous posts.  Frankly, it's a small matter for me whether or not English is or is not your native language, but knowing that it is not just allows one to spend a little more time reading your posts a little more carefully -- that's all.

Next, you have raised for the second time an issue which I thought that I had settled in my previous post.  Yes, for me it was necessary to answer your post in detail -- and so I did.  And your caustic remarks were well-noted (I mean in terms of the worldwide Jewish Bolshevik conspiracy).

Thank you for taking the time to answer.  All of the very best and I look forward to more of your ideas on this subject,


Alex P.

Alex P.

I would rather not get involved in these squabbles  but if only to point out.... poison wrapped in candy is still poison.

James

[Johnny]

FORUM ADMINISTRATOR! PLEASE HELP! LOCK THIS THREAD! IT IS GETTING OUT OF HAND.

[Forum Admin]

ummmmmmm Johnny,

Your request seems a bit odd, please look at the date of the last posting. Nothing has gone on here for like three months now. You seem to have over reacted.

[Johnny]

Sorry FA. I guess I just get too jittery when I feel people are getting (not to use a strong word) impolite to each other.
You were right, I didn't notice the date, although it's more like seven weeks since the last posting.
I haven't kept up with the forum the past couple of months. Remember, I'd been having a hard time logging on?
Thanks to your help it all worked out. I am now catching up with all I've missed and this topic for some reason wasn't so far down the list. Therefore I thought it was being discussed recently.

[Paul]

Why then were the Crimean Tatars -- who were Muslim -- viewed as good and loyal subjects of the tsar and allowed to keep their own religion, dress, and traditions?  No one -- and certainly not Nicholas -- viewed their non-Orthodox faith as mutually exclusive of loyalty to the throne or as a signal of a desire to be excluded from the body politic of Russia.  

The Christ Killer Myth aside, Christians have always had a weird sort of emotional fixation with the Jews: "We love you. Care about what we think or we'll be hurt and we'll kill you".  A frantic compulsion to convert them to various forms of Christianity has always dogged Christian-Jewish relations. It's as though certain Christian leaders (Martin Luther, for example) needed a mass Jewish embrace as validation for their own arguments.

Christians who weren't trying to kill or to convert Jews were often trying to cut-and-paste odd facets of Judaism into their own sects. If they weren't doing that, they were proclaiming themselves the descendants of one Lost Tribe or another. A certain prominent American church was not the first to incorporate this concept into their canon, so I'm not picking on them, btw.

All of this has struck me as more than a little sick, but oh well....

Perhaps Islam was just alien and "Other" enough (like Buddhism or Native Siberian tribal faiths) that the emotional investment wasn't there. The perceived kinship didn't exist in their minds, so the twin antagonism was mercifully absent as well? Who knows?