A Review of “Revolutionary Yiddishland: A History of Jewish Radicalism,” Part 1 of 3

Introduction

Alain Brossat and Sylvie Klingberg’s Revolutionary Yiddishland: A History of Jewish Radicalism was first published in France in 1983. A revised edition appeared in 2009 and an English translation in 2016. Intended for a mainly Jewish readership, the book is essentially an apologia for Jewish communist militants in Eastern Europe in the early to mid-twentieth century. Brossat, a Jewish lecturer in philosophy at the University of Paris, and Klingberg, an Israeli sociologist, interviewed dozens of former revolutionaries living in Israel in the early 1980s. In their testimony they recalled “the great scenes” of their lives such as “the Russian Civil War, the building of the USSR, resistance in the camps, the war in Spain, the armed struggle against Nazism, and the formation of socialist states in Eastern Europe.”[i] While each followed different paths, “the constancy of these militants’ commitment was remarkable, as was the firmness of the ideas and aspirations that underlay it.” Between the two world wars, communist militancy was “the center of gravity of their lives.”[ii]

While communism in Europe in the early- to mid-twentieth century was characterized by economic dysfunction, systematic oppression, summary executions, and the elimination of entire ethnic groups, Brossat and Klingberg wistfully recall it as a time when European Jewry “failed to achieve its hopes, its utopias, its political programs and strategies.” Instead, the messianic dreams of radical Jews were “broken on the rocks of twentieth-century European history.” A product of their ethnocentric infatuation with the “romance” of Jewish involvement in radical political movements, Revolutionary Yiddishland is Brossat and Klingberg’s hagiographic attempt to resurrect a history that is today “more than lost, being actually denied, even unpronounceable.”

Alain Brossat

The unstated reason for this omission lies in the determination of Jews to absolve their co-ethnics of any responsibility for the crimes of communism, and to ensure the advent of German National Socialism is always framed in a way that conduces to a simplified narrative of saintly Jewish victimhood and German (and by extension White European) malevolence. Maintaining this narrative is supremely important for the legions of Jewish “diversity” activists and propagandists throughout the West, given the status of “the Holocaust” as the moral and rhetorical foundation of today’s White displacement agenda. Invocation of this narrative is reflexively used to stifle opposition to the Jewish diaspora strategies of mass non-White immigration and multiculturalism. By contrast, free discussion of the Jewish role in communist crimes undermines Jewish pretentions to moral authority grounded in their self-designated status as history’s preeminent victims. This polarity accounts for the fact that, since 1945, over 150 feature films have been made about “the Holocaust” while the number of films that have been made about the genocide of millions of Eastern Europeans can be counted on one hand — and none have been produced by Hollywood.

The critical importance of suppressing discussion of this unsavory aspect of Jewish history was underscored by Daniel Jonah Goldhagen in his 2013 screed The Devil That Never Dies: The Rise of Global Antisemitism (reviewed here). For Goldhagen, any claim Jews were responsible for the Bolshevik Revolution and its predations is a “calumny,” and morally reprehensible because “If you associate Jews with communism, or worse, hold communism to be a Jewish invention and weapon, every time the theme, let alone the threat, of communism, Marxism, revolution, or the Soviet Union comes up, it also conjures, reinforces, even deepens thinking prejudicially about Jews and the animus against Jews in one’s country.”[iii] It is therefore imperative the topic remain taboo and discussion of it suppressed — regardless of how many historians (Jewish and non-Jewish) confirm the decisive role Jews played in providing the ideological basis for, and the establishment, governance and administration of, the former communist dictatorships of Central and Eastern Europe.

In a recent article for the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, journalist Cnaan Liphshiz, while noting that the Goldhagen approach of absolute denial constitutes “a logical strategy” for Jews, admits the facts do “reaffirm in essence” the assessment of those like “promoter of Holocaust denial” Mark Weber who observed that: “Although officially Jews have never made up more than five percent of the country’s total population, they played a highly disproportionate and probably decisive role in the infant Bolshevik regime.” Liphshiz notes how Russia’s main Jewish museum has, since 2012, “tackled head on the subject of revolutionary Jews” in an exhibition that “underlines unapologetically how and why Jews became central to the revolution.” Knowing that outright denial of the pivotal Jewish role in the Bolshevik revolution and the murderous regimes it spawned is intellectually untenable, a growing number of Jewish historians concede the point, but insist this leading role was morally justified because it was essentially “defensive” in nature.

Thus, while freely admitting Jews had “an outsized role in the revolution,” Boruch Gorin, chairman of Moscow’s Jewish Museum and Tolerance Center, insists that “there were very good reasons for this,” with “anti-Semitism” being foremost among them. For Gorin, the revolution, while offering “Russia’s Jews many opportunities, equal rights and education and a chance to fill the vacuum left by the elite that was forced into exile,” most importantly offered a haven from a “wave of pogroms” in the Ukraine and elsewhere that “some historians call a dress rehearsal for the Holocaust.” According to this conception, a Jew in 1917 “had two choices: revolution or exile.”

Boruch Gorin

Andrew Joyce has explored how Jewish historians and activists have distorted and weaponized the history of “pogroms” in the former Russian Empire. The mythos forged around these events, crystallized in the Russo-Jewish Committee’s propaganda pamphlet The Persecution of the Jews in Russia (1881) and reporting in Jewish-controlled newspapers throughout the West, was pivotal in accelerating the development of modern, international Jewish politics. This narrative revolves around certain claims: that Jews were oppressed for centuries in Russia; that the Pale of Settlement was a virtual prison; that tsarist authorities actively organized and directed pogroms; that pogroms were genocidal and extremely violent in nature; and that Russians were uncivilized and barbaric savages. Contemporary Jewish historians like Simon Sebag Montefiore continue to credit lurid tales of pogroms where Jews were “massacred in such gleefully ingenious atrocities — disemboweled, dismembered, decapitated; children were cutleted, roasted and eaten in front of raped mothers.”[iv] Joyce notes how the dissemination of such pornographic accounts were key to ensuring “that mass Jewish chain migration to the West went on untroubled and unhindered by nativists. After all, wasn’t the bigoted nativist just a step removed from the rampaging Cossack?”

Uncritically drawing on this bogus narrative, establishment historians typically ascribe the pogroms to irrational manifestations of hate against Jews, tsarist malevolence, the pathological jealousy and primitive barbarity of the Russian mob, and the “blood libel.” The real underlying causes of peasant uprisings against Jews, such as the Jewish monopolization of entire industries (including the sale of liquor to peasants on credit), predatory moneylending, and radical political agitation, are completely ignored, despite tsarist authorities having repeatedly expressed alarm over how “Jews were exploiting the unsophisticated and ignorant rural inhabitants, reducing them to a Jewish serfdom.”[v] Initiatives to move Jews into less socially damaging economic niches, through extending educational opportunities and drafting Jews into the army, were ineffective in altering this basic pattern. With this in mind, even the revolutionary anarchist Mikhail Bakunin concluded that Jews were “an exploiting sect, a blood-sucking people, a unique, devouring parasite tightly and intimately organized … cutting across all the differences in political opinion.”[vi]

In Revolutionary Yiddishland, Brossat and Klingberg posit the “Jewish Bolshevism as morally justified ethnic self-defense” thesis, insisting that “anti-Semitism” was “an insidious poison hovering in the air of the time” that comprised “the sinister background music to the action of the Yiddishland revolutionaries.”[vii] The real causes of anti-Jewish sentiment among the native peasantry are, once again, comprehensively ignored. Rather than seeing Jewish communist militants as willing agents of ethnically-motivated oppression and mass murder, the authors depict them as noble victims who tragically “linked their fate to the grand narrative of working-class emancipation, fraternity between peoples, socialist egalitarianism” rather than to “a Jewish state solidly established on its ethnic foundations, territorial conquests and realpolitik alliances.”[viii] In other words, they mistakenly held communism rather than Zionism to be best for the Jews.

Determined to absolve their co-ethnics of any culpability for communist crimes, Brossat and Klingberg assure us that the militancy of their informants “was always messianic, optimistic, oriented to the Good — a fundamental and irreducible difference from that of the fascists with which some people have been tempted to compare it, on the pretext that one ‘militant ideal’ is equivalent to any other.”[ix] In other words, tens of millions may have died because of the actions of Jewish communist militants, but their hearts were pure. Regarding such arguments, Kevin MacDonald observed how Jewish involvement with Bolshevism “is perhaps the most egregious example of Jewish moral particularism in all of history. The horrific consequences of Bolshevism for millions of non-Jewish Soviet citizens do not seem to have been an issue for Jewish leftists — a pattern that continues into the present.”[x]

Jewish participation in Bolshevism as ethnic revenge

That their motivations were far from pure, and that ethnic animosity and desire for revenge were key factors driving the large-scale Jewish support of, and participation in, communist movements was obvious to the Jewish historian Norman Cantor who made the following observation:

The Bolshevik Revolution and some of its aftermath represented, from one perspective, Jewish revenge. During the heyday of the Cold War, American Jewish publicists spent a lot of time denying that — as 1930s anti-Semites claimed — Jews played a disproportionately important role in Soviet and world Communism. The truth is until the early 1950s Jews did play such a role, and there is nothing to be ashamed of. In time Jews will learn to take pride in the record of the Jewish Communists in the Soviet Union and elsewhere. It was a species of striking back.[xi]

This corresponds with Kevin MacDonald’s assessment in Culture of Critique that the disproportionate participation of Jews in Bolshevik crimes was, in large part, “motivated by revenge against peoples that had historically been anti-Jewish.” One of the (non-Jewish) pioneers of the Dada movement, Hugo Ball, immediately recognized the obvious agenda behind the lopsided Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution and resulting Soviet administration. Observing the make-up of the first Bolshevik Executive Committee (four out of six of whom were Jewish), he noted that “it would be strange if these men, who make decisions about expropriation and terror, did not feel old racial resentments against the Orthodox and pogrommatic Russia.”[xii]

Leading Jewish communists, like founder of the Mensheviks Yuli Martov, who became a close associate of Lenin and Trotsky, made a point of recalling his childhood experiences of Russian and Ukrainian anti-Semitism. The 1881 Odessa pogrom was his “first taste of primitive Russian anti-Semitism,” and Martov was “shaken to the depths of his being by the pogromist barbarity of Tsarist Russia.” The event left a “permanent mark on his impressionable mind,” and he later underlined the connection between this experience and his subsequent revolutionary career, posing the question: “Would I have become what I became if the Russian reality had not imprinted her coarse fingers on my plastic, youthful soul in that memorable night and carefully planted under the cover of that burning pity which she aroused in my childlike heart, the seeds of a redeeming hatred?”[xiii]

While Trotsky, the architect of the Bolshevik insurrection and creator of the Red Army, claimed his Jewish origins and Jewish interests did not guide his attraction to Bolshevism, his biographer Joshua Rubenstein disagrees, noting that he “was a Jew in spite of himself,” who “gravitated to Jews wherever he lived,” and “never abided physical attacks on Jews, and often intervened to denounce such violence and organize a defense.”[xiv] As leader of the Red Army during the Civil War, Trotsky “had to deal with the anti-Semitic attitudes among the population,” and “successfully recruited Jews for the Red Army because they were eager to avenge pogrom attacks.”[xv] At the same time, he “voiced his concern over the high number of Jews in the Cheka, knowing that their presence could only provoke hatred towards Jews as a group.” Trotsky was feted by Jews worldwide as “an avenger of Jewish humiliations under Tsarism, bringing fire and slaughter to their worst enemies.”[xvi]

Leon Trotsky

Ethnic revenge was also a motivation for Lazar Kaganovich, the Jewish member of the Politburo who presided over the forced famine that took the lives of millions of Ukrainian peasants and the mass deportation of “anti-Semitic” Cossacks to Siberia in the 1930s. Kaganovich had “battled the chauvinistic and anti-Semitic Black Hundreds, especially strong in Kyiv, both before and after the 1911 Beilis affair, the Russian version of the Dreyfus affair.”[xvii] The assassination of the Russian Prime Minister Stolypin in the same year resulted in the Black Hundreds attempting “to whip up a pogrom.” In response, the “Bolsheviks took measures to protect themselves and to rebuff this threat,” and “Kaganovich only joined the party after these momentous events.” He studied Lenin’s works at this time, and the Bolshevik leader’s article “Stolypin and Revolution” which depicted Stolypin as “an organizer of Black Hundred gangs and anti-Semitic pogroms” made a “big impression” on him.[xviii]

Kaganovich later became known as the “butcher of the Ukrainians.” As Soviet leader in the Ukraine he received reports documenting “widespread dissatisfaction among workers fuelled by high unemployment, with widespread anti-Semitism, with workers and peasants denouncing the ‘dominance of red nobility of Yids.’” Kaganovich played a “highly visible” role in suppressing this “nationalist deviation” in 1925–28, and later oversaw the forced collectivization of 1932–33, conceived as part of an “assault on the Ukrainian nationalist intelligentsia.” The country was sealed off and all food supplies and livestock were confiscated with Kaganovich leading “expeditions into the countryside with brigades of OGPU troopers” who used “the gun, the lynch mob and the Gulag system to break the villages.”[xix] The secret police, led by Genrikh Yagoda (also Jewish) exterminated all “anti-party elements.” Furious that insufficient Ukrainians were being shot, Kaganovich set a quota of 10,000 executions a week. Eighty percent of Ukrainian intellectuals were shot. During the winter of 1932–33, 25,000 Ukrainians per day were being shot or left to die of starvation.[xx]

The Bolsheviks mounted murderous campaigns against entire ethnic groups. The Soviet government killed at least 30 million people, most in the first 25 years of the regime’s existence during the height of Jewish power. The Jewish intellectual, G.A. Landau, writing in 1923, was stunned by the “cruelty, sadism, and violence” of Jewish functionaries in the Red Army and secret police “who yesterday did not know how to use a gun” but who “are now found among the executioners and cutthroats.”[xxi] I.M. Bikerman was similarly shocked at the “disproportionate and immeasurably fervent Jewish participation in the torment of half-dead Russia by the Bolsheviks.”[xxii] In response to attempts by Jews to disassociate their ethnicity from such figures, the Jewish intellectual I.A. Bromberg noted the cognitive dissonance in the Jewish “passion for seeking out and extolling the Jews famous in various fields of cultural life,” and especially “the shameless circus around the name of Einstein,” while simultaneously distancing themselves from Jewish communist criminals. D.S. Pasmanik agreed, noting how “Ethnic Jews not only do not denounce an Einstein or an Ehrlich; they do not even reject the baptized Heine and Boerne. And this means they have no right to disavow Trotsky and Zinoviev.”[xxiii]

Go to Part 2.


[i] Alain Brossat & Sylvie Klingberg, Revolutionary Yiddishland: A History of Jewish Radicalism (London; Verso, 2016), xii.

[ii] Ibid., 59.

[iii] Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, The Devil That Never Dies (New York NY; Little, Brown & Co., 2013), 291; 126.

[iv] Simon Sebag Montefiore, The Romanovs 1630-1918 (London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 2016), 50.

[v] John Klier, Russians, Jews, and the Pogroms of 1881-2 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 5.

[vi] Robert Wistrich, From Ambivalence to Betrayal: the Left, the Jews and Israel (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2012), 186.

[vii] Brossat & Klingberg, Revolutionary Yiddishland, 85.

[viii] Ibid., ix.

[ix] Ibid., 56.

[x] Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth‑Century Intellectual and Political Movements, (Westport, CT: Praeger, Revised Paperback edition, 2001), xl.

[xi] Norman Cantor, The Jewish Experience: An Illustrated History of Jewish Culture & Society (New York; Castle Press, 1996), 364.

[xii] Albert Boime, “Dada’s Dark Secret,” In: Washton-Long, Baigel & Heyd (Eds.) Jewish Dimensions in Modern Visual Culture: Anti-Semitism, Assimilation, Affirmation, (Waltham MA: Brandeis University Press, 2010), 96.

[xiii] Robert Wistrich, Revolutionary Jews from Marx to Trotsky (London: George G. Harrap & Co Ltd, 1976), 178.

[xiv] Joshua Rubenstein, Leon Trotsky: A Revolutionary’s Life (New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 2013), 67; 78; 52.

[xv] Ibid., 113.

[xvi] Wistrich, Revolutionary Jews, 199.

[xvii] Hiroaki Kuromiya, Russia’s People of Empire: Life Stories from Eurasia, 1500 to the Present (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2012), 276.

[xviii] E. A. Rees, Iron Lazar: A Political Biography of Lazar Kaganovich (Anthem Press, 2013), 6.

[xix] Myroslav Shkandriij, Jews in Ukrainian Literature: Representation and Identity (Yale University Press, 2009), 137.

[xx] Lesa Melnyczuk, Silent Memories, Traumatic Lives (RHYW, 2013), 25.

[xxi] Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century (Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006), 183.

[xxii] Ibid., 183.

[xxiii] Ibid., 184.

21 replies
  1. Lothar von Trotha
    Lothar von Trotha says:

    Another excellent article from Mr. Sanderson, one of my favorite writers. I look forward to the rest of the series.

    These people’s manner of argumentation has to be one of the most frustrating things you encounter in life. One moment, they never had anything to do with Communism, the next moment of course they joined the Bolsheviks, it was either join the revolution or be killed in a pogrom, which came from inexplicable anti-semitism and so what if they were usurers, medieval Europe prevented them from owning land!

    Only in the rarest of cases, as with Oscar Levy’s preface for George Pitt-Rivers’s “The World Significance of the Russian Revolution,” does one of the tribe flat out admit that, yes, his people are a problem element in societies, and yes, their revolutionary and subversive activities are offensive and motivated by hatred, rather than self-defense.

    (I know we should be cautious with links, but both this preface and Pitt-Rivers’s work are excellent writings about the Bolshevik revolution within recent memory of it)

    https://archive.org/details/TheWorldSignificanceOfTheRussianRevolutionWithAPrefaceByOscarLevy

  2. Ger Tzedek
    Ger Tzedek says:

    Very interesting. Too many things to comment.
    1. I know another Gorin, former friend. Gorins of a feather flock together.
    2. Einstein did in physics what Weinstein did in Hollywood. Einstein was as stupid as his high school teacher made him.
    3. Interesting that one Landau denounces Jews. Another Landau is one of the greatest physicists ever. Interesting that everybody talks about Einstein and nobody about Landau. Einstein “discovered atoms”, if you listen to Michio Kaku.
    4. I knew that Dreyfus affair was a fraud cover to cover. Now the fact that there was a Russian version of it, only reinforces the belief.
    5. Trotsky was a big fan of continuous revolution. That fit too well with Jewish plans to destroy Whites through continuous war. Trotsky prolonged the Brest-Litovsk negotiations by 6 months so that 100 German divisions wouldn’t move west to wash away French and British. Jewish-rochestrated worker strikes in Germany during WW1 were instrumental for the sabotage of German war effort.
    6. Very curious. One Jew had a chance to peek my opinion about Jews, now all Jews in two departments know where I stand. They act accordingly.
    7. Another Jewish line in their defense is this: “Jews had a leading role in Soviet Union, a role filled by the German minority in Czarist Russia.” They forget the benevolence of Germans and malevolence of Jews.

    • Seraphim
      Seraphim says:

      I probably anticipate on the future installments, but it is worth to know that the ‘father’ of the the concept-strategy of “permanent revolution” (from Marx) was the “Marxist theoretician, revolutionary, and a controversial activist in the Social Democratic Party of Germany”, Alexander Lvovich Parvus (aka Israel Lazarevich Gelfand), “born to an ethnic Jewish family on September 8, 1867 in the shtetl of Berazino, Russian Empire, now part of Belarus” (I copy from Wikipedia):
      “He communicated this philosophy to Trotsky who then further expanded and developed it. There were broad discussions on the questions of “permanent revolution” within the social democratic movement in the period leading up to 1917. The method was eventually adopted by Vladimir Lenin and the Bolsheviks in Lenin’s April Theses in 1917″

      He was the same ‘revolutionary’ cum arms dealer in Turkey who:

      “offered to the German General Staff (via the German Ambassador to Turkey) in 1915, the plan of destabilizing Russia: the paralyzing of Russia via general strike, financed by the German government. The German Ambassador Von Wangenheim sent Parvus to Berlin where the latter arrived on the 6 March 1915 and presented a 20-page plan titled A preparation of massive political strikes in Russia to the German government.
      Parvus’ detailed plan recommended the division of Russia by sponsoring the Bolshevik faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party, encouraging ethnic separatists in various Russian regions, and supporting various writers whose criticism of Tsarism continued during wartime. Basing himself on his 1905 experiences, Parvus theorised that the division of Russia and its loss in the First World War was the best way to bring about a socialist revolution”.
      He was the man who facilitated the funding of the move of Lenin from Switzerland to Russia.
      I am sure we’ll hear more about him.

  3. Franklin Ryckaert
    Franklin Ryckaert says:

    One way to deny Jewish guilt of Communist atrocities in Russia and Eastern Europe is to claim that those who committed them were not “real” Jews because they were atheists, as if Jewishness is only a religion and not an ethnicity.

    The history of Jewish destructivity in Communism is a grim warning of what happens if you combine Jewishness with state power. Another example is of course the state of Israel itself.

  4. Antony
    Antony says:

    It was good to see the anarchist Bakunin mentioned – one fact suppressed by modern day marxists is the fact that Marx actually threatened to have Bakunin killed for standing in his way, if only more of the modern day “anarchist” dupes who act as dancing monkeys for marxist/globalist organ grinders knew this and learned the lessons of history so they could be applied to the present (along with the Bolshevik suppression of the Krondstadt sailors and the Ukrainian Makhnovist insurgents).

  5. Curtis Mouser I
    Curtis Mouser I says:

    You can see the lies of omission Jews use against the outgroup here in Britain. The worst sex abuse crimes are committed by our vibrant enrichers, yet they fi everything they can to fool the goyische kopfs that White Men are the biggest threat. I must have seen one pic of John Worboy’s more times than the much worse Delroy Grant (actual murder er) and the Pakistani groomers up north put together.

    Ironic when you consider the huge effort the MSM went to NOT report on grooming & smear any native White Person who mentioned it as racist.

  6. John Walton
    John Walton says:

    If conservatives or others had been able to demonize Communism with one tenth the success with which Nazism has been demonized, the left would have been crushed, since nearly all its leading figures and ideas would be tainted by the association. It would be helpful even now to nail down these facts about Communist genocide, and to somehow bring about human rights trials for elderly Communists. A museum documenting these Communist Holocausts would also help. And the inevitable attempt to block these activities could itself be the basis of effective propaganda. Why are we so hapless and passive? The archives are open now; all the raw materials are there. I grant that some effort and ingenuity would be needed: so what? When I was a kid there was a commercial that went “You try harder when you’re only number 2. At Avis, We try harder!” Learn how to agitate effectively or shut up.

  7. Rob Bottom
    Rob Bottom says:

    One grows weary of Jewish “historians” rewriting history to paint themselves in the best possible light. No one will ever dispute their lack of shame or self-reflection. It would be funny if it wasn’t so frightening. I can already imagine the sorts of things they’ll write about the death of the West, if we fail to stop it.

  8. ARENDAsluby
    ARENDAsluby says:

    Мы готовы предоставить в своём салоне эстетики кабинеты для умельцев по массажа. Тут все оснащение и оборудование модернизированное, кабинеты с только после ремонта. В территориальной близости от торгового центра. Новый ремонт, перепланировка под ваши нужды! Сформированы все необходимые условия для покойного заезда авто. Все кабинеты рассчитаны на 4-5 высокофункциональных зон для людей разных квалификаций, которые будут у нас трудиться. Это совершенно новый бизнес-проект, рассчитанный реализовать все пожелания виртуозов. Тут мы делаем все для абсолютного комфорта в работе, и уделяем порядком много внимания подробностям.

    Салон ногтевого сервиса – арендовать кабинет для мастера по педикюру

  9. Deep North
    Deep North says:

    Take note that recently the Alt-Lite guru Jordan Peterson was too scared to talk about Jewish Bolsheviks.

    • Ger Tzedek
      Ger Tzedek says:

      You criticize him who is taking more steam than anybody in the world, all alone. And you write in the entrails of internet, with pseudonym. Who cares about what you write?

      Peterson also called Holocaust the most evil thing mankind ever committed. I think he’s paying lip service. For me Holocaust was the most helpful hand of God for mankind. Without Holocaust we’d have already been exterminated by today.

      Peterson also said that birth control pill is more important even than the hydrogen bomb. He has made a very accurate estimation. Guess who invented birth control pill?! (((Tip))).

  10. Tom Sunic
    Tom Sunic says:

    Mr. Sanderson. Good point; self-explanatory: “This polarity accounts for the fact that, since 1945, over 150 feature films have been made about “the Holocaust” while the number of films that have been made about the genocide of millions of Eastern Europeans can be counted on one hand — and none have been produced by Hollywood.”
    BTW. The once high-level Jewish communist members, authors Arthur Koestler, Boris Souvarine, had the best insight into the murderous communist mindset of their former fellow travelers– after having done themselves much damage beforehand. Likewise, one cannot rule out that US neocons will soon become vocal critics of non-White migrations– once they start feeling the non-European–Muslim migrant threat—like they do now in the EU.

  11. Sophie Johnson
    Sophie Johnson says:

    ‘… deepens thinking prejudicially about Jews.’ So we think about Jews ‘prejudiciously’ even when we contemplate their proven crimes! (((Their))) bare-faced cheek is breath taking.

  12. sheyna
    sheyna says:

    Dear Verso Books,

    I am sad to say that I recently received a defective book and I would like a full refund. The book I ordered was Revolutionary Yiddishland: A History Of Jewish Radicalism, but instead I received an incomplete version. It seems that any mention of anarchy, anarchism, anarchists, and even anarcho-communism has been left out completely from my copy. When looking in the index I found that my copy was missing even the most notable Jewish radicals, who happen to be anarchists, such as Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman. Also, there is no mention of the anarchists who participated in the 1905 uprising, the Bialystok anarchists,
    1
    or the notable anarchist group, The Black Banner. When the authors got to the assassination of Symon Petliura on page eight, there was not one mention of his assassin, Sholem Schwartzbard, a Jewish anarchist. I noticed, too, that the numerous Jewish anarchist newspapers were missing, as well as the Jewish anarchists who wrote, compiled, edited, and printed those papers, such as anarchists David Edelstadt and Saul Yanovsky.

    Ironically, the title of the book I received is “Yiddishland” and yet Baruch Rivkin is not mentioned once in my copy. Rivkin, an anarchist, diligently wrote on the subject of “Yiddishland,” and arguably coined the term. It grieves me that I was sold an incomplete version of a “History of Jewish Radicalism.” I am sure it was an honest mistake and not false advertising, since there is not one point in history when communists or socialists have attempted to erase anarchism, anarchists, Jewish anarchists, or Jews from its pages.

    For a history of Jewish anarchism in the United States please refer to Di yiddishe anarkhistishe bevegung in emerika (The Jewish Anarchist Movement in the United States: A Historical Review and Personal Reminiscences) by Joseph Cohen. Within the 557 pages of that lovely book, you will find a beautiful description of Jewish anarchism. However, there is little to no mention of Jewish communism. Maybe that is because it is a history of Jewish anarchism and not Jewish communism. If it were to include both Jewish anarchism and Jewish communism, then it could be boldly titled Revolutionary Yiddishland: A History Of Jewish Radicalism.

    I would like to return this book and be given a full refund.

    Thank you.
    Further Reading

    All the members of the first anarchist group in the Russian Empire, which was formed in 1903 in Bialystok, were Jews. Yiddish-speaking Jews participated in the International Anarchist Congress of Amsterdam in 1907. ↩

Comments are closed.