• MISSION STATEMENT
  • TERMS
  • PRIVACY
The Occidental Observer
  • HOME
  • BLOG
  • SUBSCRIBE TOQ
  • CONTACT USPlease send all letters to the editor, manuscripts, promotional materials, and subscription questions to Editors@TheOccidentalObserver.net.
  • DONATE
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

Featured Articles

When Harry Met Vibrancy: A Non-White Savage, a Butchered White and a Traitorous Future King

June 9, 2026/12 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Tobias Langdon

“Thought-crime.” That’s a famous concept from Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949). “Big Brother” is the same. But what about “crimestop”? It’s an Orwellian concept that isn’t famous. But it deserves to be, because it captures so much of what’s dishonest and demented in leftist sloppaganda. This is how Orwell describes the concept in his book:

Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc [the ruling leftist ideology], and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity. (Nineteen Eighty-Four, Book 3, chapter 9)

Victims of vibrancy: Who remembers incinerated Kriss Donald and rape-butchered Mary-Ann Leneghan in 2026?

Crimestop, “protective stupidity,” has been everywhere in the belated leftist discussion of a shocking murder at the end of last year. In the British city of Southampton, the 18-year-old White student Henry Nowak met some of the vibrancy that has been enriching the West for decades. He was stabbed by a non-White savage called Vickrum Digwa, then bled to death, handcuffed on a cold sidewalk, after disgusting mistreatment by “anti-racist” police. Back then, leftists responded to his murder in the simplest and safest way, as they saw it. Leftist politicians like Keir Starmer ignored the murder completely, leftist media like the BBC gave it minimum attention, and all leftists waited confidently for it to fade from attention and memory. That tactic has worked many times in the past when young Whites have been murdered by non-White savages. Take fifteen-year-old Kriss Donald, kidnapped, tortured, and incinerated by Pakistani Muslims in 2005. And sixteen-year-old Mary-Ann Leneghan, kidnapped, tortured, raped, and butchered by five Blacks and an Albanian Muslim in 2006. Who remembers them and their agonizing deaths in 2026? Certainly no-one in the leftist elite.

An obvious reality denied by the left: two-tier policing for the dying Henry Nowak (this is the truthful image — see discussion by John Carter)

For the left, the ordinary White victims of non-White savagery are not worth a moment’s thought or concern. Recognizing and remembering White victims wouldn’t advance the cause of leftism. On the contrary, it would retard or even reverse the cause of leftism. Accordingly, the left see those White victims as unworthy of attention, as nobodies whose deaths and suffering mean nothing when set against what really matters: power, privilege and narcissistic self-supply for the left and its pets. But the standard leftist tactic of ignore-and-minimize didn’t work for Henry Nowak. The story of his savage murder by a non-White and his disgusting mistreatment by White police got bigger rather than smaller as time passed. Leftist politicians finally had to take notice and pretend to care, leftist journalists finally had respond to “far-right” accusations about “two-tier policing” and official bias against Whites.

Crimestop kicks in

That’s when leftists began using crimestop, protective stupidity. Or maybe it was natural stupidity when it came to baboon-brained, Black David Lammy, who, as noted by Wikipedia, has served as Deputy Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Secretary of State for Justice, and Lord Chancellor since September 2025. Lammy tried to refute the American vice-president J.D. Vance, who had made the obvious point that Henry Nowak would still be alive “if the last few generations of European elites had stood their ground against the politics of self-hatred and the mass invasion of migrants.” Lammy responded that the murder was “nothing to do with migration,” because the Sikh murderer Vickrum Digwa was “a Brit, born and raised in this country.” As Orwell would have noted, Lammy had “failed to perceive logical errors” and had “misunderstood the simplest argument” because it was “inimical” to his sacred leftist dogmas of open borders and minority worship. Vance’s argument was very simple: If Vickrum Digwa’s parents had not migrated into Britain, Vickrum Digwa would not have been born in Britain and would never have murdered Henry Nowak. Q.E.D.

Recognizing racial reality is vile and “divisive”: four beautiful White victims, four ugly Black savages

Lammy’s response to Vance’s argument was ludicrous, just like the response of another baboon-brained Black, the journalist Gary Younge, to the massacre committed by the non-White Muslim Omar Mateen in Florida in 2016. Mateen’s parents were from Afghanistan and if they hadn’t been allowed to enter America, their son would not been born in America and would not have committed a massacre there. But Younge wrote this in the Guardian: “Whatever else this is, it’s not about immigration. Omar Mateen, the suspected killer, was born in America.”

High intellect at the Economist

That’s crimestop again. Like Lammy, Younge misunderstood the “simplest argument” because it was “inimical” to his sacred leftist dogmas. As you’d expect, the leftist BBC also used crimestop when it reported on Henry Nowak’s murder and Vance’s criticism of non-White migration:

The killing had been as “tragic as it is enraging” and Nowak, [Vance] said, would still be alive today “if the last few generations of European elites had stood their ground against the politics of self-hatred and the mass invasion of migrants”.

The Crown Prosecution Service has confirmed that Digwa was born British. (“Downing Street hits out after Vance post about Henry Nowak,” BBC News, 5th June 2026)

You can just picture leftists nodding with smug superiority at that confirmation by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). “Digwa was born British!” they will have said to themselves. “Therefore the murder had nothing to do with migration and Vance is an idiot!” That’s the leftist reasoning. It’s fascinating in its pathology, in its stupidity, dishonesty and irrationality. But there’s no commonly used term to describe pathological reasoning like that. That’s why Orwell’s term “crimestop” should become as famous as “thought-crime” and “Big Brother.” Below you can read another and, in some ways, even worse example of crimestop from the leftist Economist, whose journalists and readers regard themselves as highly intelligent, unflinchingly ethical and unshakeably “reality-based.” They preen themselves that their ideas and arguments are driven by data, not by prejudice or emotion. Well, try and spot the everyday word below that blows the preening self-regard of the Economist to smithereens:

So why has [Nigel Farage] embraced a new, uglier way of thinking, which explicitly casts white people as a group that now requires help? [Farage’s] Reform [party] points to a handful of genuinely concerning examples where crimes committed by ethnic minorities were downplayed out of misplaced concerns about stigma or stereotyping — notably the “grooming gangs” scandal in which groups of Pakistani-origin men sexually abused (mostly white) girls. (“Was this Britain’s George Floyd moment?,” The Economist, 3rd June 2026)

Did you spot the everyday word that revealed the intellectual and ethical bankruptcy of the Economist? Yes, the word was “handful.” I almost gasped when I read that paragraph, because the argument there was breathtaking in its dishonesty, stupidity and irrationality. It was also an example of what you might call pathological logocentrism. Let me explain what I mean by all that. First, we need to note that the so-called “‘grooming gangs’ scandal” involved and continues to involve many thousand acts of rape, torture, murder, enforced prostitution, drugging and other crimes that 1) have been committed by non-White males against White females; 2) have occurred all over Britain for many decades; and 3) have either been ignored or inadequately pursued by the authorities “out of misplaced concerns about stigma or stereotyping” of non-Whites. Each of those acts of rape, torture, murder et cetera is an “example” of a crime “committed by ethnic minorities” and “downplayed out of misplaced concerns about stigma or stereotyping.”

Therefore there are many thousands, or even millions, of “examples” of what Nigel Farage and others on the right are complaining about. And those “examples” extend very widely in both time and space. But because all of those very numerous non-White crimes can be described in a single phrase — the “‘grooming gangs’ scandal” — the Economist pretends that the whole vast scandal is a single “example” of what the right is complaining about. That’s logocentrism: the Economist can use a small number of words to describe a vast number of crimes, therefore it pretends that the crimes are part of a mere “handful of genuinely concerning examples” of pro-minority, anti-White pathology in British institutions.

Darwin’s warning: “Beware your own brain”

As I said, that argument is breathtaking in its dishonesty, stupidity and irrationality. How would the Economist and other leftists react if Donald Trump claimed that European colonialism, the Atlantic slave-trade, and Jim Crow were a “handful of genuinely concerning examples” of Whites committing crimes against non-Whites? Leftists would react with outrage and scorn, of course. It’s easy to spot dishonest reasoning when your opponents use it. But that’s why the concept of crimestop shouldn’t be used just to describe pathological thinking on the left. No, it should also be a reminder for opponents of the left, because all human beings have to be on guard against self-deception and personal bias. For example, Charles Darwin pointed out in his autobiography that he was himself like all other scientists and thinkers. He had to beware his own brain:

I had also, during many years, followed a golden rule, namely that whenever a published fact, a new observation or thought came across me, which was opposed to my general results, to make a memorandum of it without fail and at once; for I had found by experience that such facts and thoughts were far more apt to escape from the memory, than favourable ones. (The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, 1887)

We should all follow Darwin’s golden rule, but I’d say that leftists are least likely to do so. They want pious lies about non-Whites being victims, not the toxic truth about non-Whites being villains. But the left can recognize reality when it suits them. For example, if the “far right” inaccurately said that the law privileges women because men are arrested and jailed much more than women, leftists would laugh at us and point out that men commit much more crime than women. But when we accurately say that Blacks are arrested and jailed much more than Whites because Black commit much more crime than Whites, leftists shriek at us for being racist. They’re doing that again in their response to the murder of Henry Nowak. Does the mistreatment of Henry Nowak prove that the British police are biased against Whites and in favor of non-Whites? Not at all, say leftists, because policing in Britain is still, in the sorrowful words of the Guardian, “plagued by racial disproportionality, especially against black men.”

That’s crime-stop again: leftists are being “repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction,” namely, that Blacks commit much more crime, “especially” violent and sexual crime. The left would also be repelled by this heretical suggestion: that non-Whites like Vickrum Digwa have self-selected for violence over evolutionary time and therefore genetically predisposed to commit violent crime. Digwa is a “member of the Nihang order,” an order famous even in the “warrior race” of Sikhs for its love of war and skill at fighting. Sikhs are indeed a warrior race and that must have influenced their genetics, just as the “intellectual and scholarly race” of Jews have had their genetics influenced by scholarship and selection for intelligence (see Kevin MacDonald’s discussion of “Jewish Eugenics”). The Sikh murderer Vickrum Digwa was “obsessed” with knives and other weapons, just as you might expect if the Sikh culture of violence has influenced Sikh genetics and psychology.

Hit and Myth

Like violent, rape-prone Blacks and Pakistanis, Sikhs have an evolutionary history that’s quite distinct from that of British Whites. That’s why non-Whites don’t belong in Britain or any other Western nation.

But because leftists refuse to admit racial reality, they’re hitting out hard against any idea of privilege for non-Whites and prejudice against Whites in the modern Yookay. And as so often, leftists are flocking to the same script and same vocabulary. An editorial in the Guardian has lamented “the speed of social media to spread myths about ‘two-tier policing.’” In the same newspaper, the White female leftist Libby Brooks has disdained “the myth of two tier policing.” The homosexual Black leftist Jason Okundaye has bluntly stated that “two-tier policing is a myth.” And more leftist journalists have explained “How the myth of ‘two-tier policing’ took hold.” None of these leftists seem to have noticed that one small but highly significant group of non-Whites disagrees with them about “two-tier policing.”

Who are those non-Whites? The Digwa family, of course: the murderer Vickrum Digwa himself, his brother Gurpreet, his father Moga, and his mother Kiran Kaur, who hid the murder-weapon. The entire family made what even the leftist media had to admit was the “false accusation of racism” against Henry Nowak. But if “two-tier policing” doesn’t exist, why did the Digwas do that? If they weren’t trying to manipulate the police into favoring them, as non-Whites, over the White Henry Nowak, why did they make that “false accusation”? And why did their “false accusation” have the desired effect?

Following a leftist script

As Millennial Woes has described in his detailed account of the murder, when the police arrived at the crime-scene on that December night in 2025, they treated the non-White savage, Vickrum Digwa, as the victim and the White victim, Henry Nowak, as the savage. Digwa was standing unaided and had no detectable injuries, despite his further false claims to have been assaulted. Nowak was slumped on the cold sidewalk. He was complaining that he had been stabbed and that he was unable to breathe. It was dark, yes, and his bleeding was not easily visible. But blood is a liquid and has a distinctive smell. Its presence can be detected even in complete darkness. If the police had bothered to investigate Nowak’s complaints, they could easily have discovered by touch and scent alone that he was bleeding heavily.

But while they did make sure to drag him over the sidewalk and handcuff him, they didn’t bother to check him for bleeding. They were following a firmly established leftist script, just as the Digwa family knew they would on hearing the magic word “racism.” The script has been transmitted to all inhabitants of all Western nations through all channels of public entertainment and official communication for many decades. It states that non-Whites are virtuous and Whites are villainous, that non-Whites are habitually the helpless, harmless victims of White cruelty, oppression and violence. The police were following that script when they applied one tier of policing to the completely healthy savage Vickrum Digwa and another tier to Digwa’s dying victim Henry Nowak. Non-White Digwa received the higher tier, being treated with respect and left unrestrained, while White Nowak received the lower tier, being dragged across the sidewalk and handcuffed.

Murder is mere flesh-crime

Indeed, the two-tier policing may have been at work long before Nowak was dragged and handcuffed. As Millennial Woes has also described, the police may earlier have “received a call from a resident of Belmont Road [the scene of the crime] saying she thought someone had been stabbed.” If they did receive that call, they never responded to it in time. But they responded fast to a call from Digwa’s brother Gurpreet falsely alleging that Nowak had committed a racist assault.

If the police ignored a truthful report of a stabbing and responded fast to a false report of a racist assault, it’s easy to understand why. A stabbing is mere flesh-crime. Racism is thought-crime and much more serious. When leftists deny “two-tier policing” and deny that non-Whites are privileged over Whites, they are not merely denying an obvious reality. They are denying an obvious reality that they themselves have created. It’s leftists who have sloppagandized the “myth” of non-White virtue and White villainy, of non-White victimhood and White viciousness. It’s leftists who, as I said above, have transmitted a pro-minority, anti-White script to all inhabitants of all Western nations through all channels of public entertainment and official communication for many decades. In Britain, the lying leftist sloppaganda in favor of non-Whites starts right at the top. Our so-called royal family have willingly taken part in decades of photo-ops designed to portray non-Whites as lovable, harmless and highly valuable citizens. For example, here are some recent images of Britain’s future King, Prince William, at work on this explicitly pro-minority and implicitly anti-White sloppaganda:

The grin on the face of the traitor: Prince William sucks up to Jews and Blacks (see Royal Family Channel and BBC report)

Unlike the dead White nobodies Henry Nowak, Kriss Donald and Mary-Ann Leneghan, the very important Prince William and royal family don’t have to encounter vibrancy in the raw. All their encounters with non-Whites are carefully “curated” (as the smarmy leftist word has it) and there’s little chance that they’ll ever be stabbed, raped, incinerated, doused with acid or otherwise harmed by a non-White. So why should they care about the horrors inflicted by the mud-flood on ordinary Whites? The current King, Chuck the Cuck, doesn’t care in the slightest about Henry Nowak, because he hasn’t even joined the belated leftist chorus of fake concern. But Chuck the Cuck is in full agreement with the leftist sloppaganda you’ll see below, which incessantly portrays virtuous non-Whites being victimized by villainous Whites:

The Guardian’s lying portrayal of race relations: virtuous non-White victim, vicious White villain

Black victims, White villains #1

Black victims, White villains #2

Black victims, White villains #3

Black victims, White villains #4

Is that kind of leftist sloppaganda “divisive” in any way, do you think? After all, it seems to “divide” Western populations into two opposing groups: non-Whites as victims and Whites as villains. The leftist martyr-cults of George Floyd in America and Stephen Lawrence in Britain do the same. So is any of that “divisive”? No, it can’t be, because leftists hate “divisive” politics and the sowing of “division.” They’ve thrown those terms incessantly at the right during the controversy over the murder of Henry Nowak and his mistreatment by the police. For the left, it’s not at all “divisive” to incessantly portray virtuous non-Whites as the victims of villainous Whites, but it’s disgustingly “divisive” to suggest that non-Whites could ever cause direct or indirect harm to Whites.

Lying leftists will pay the price

As usual, the left are using words not to convey truth and describe reality, but to convey lies and deny reality. The left object to “division” only when it’s faithful to reality and when it’s helpful to Whites. When “division” is faithless to reality and harmful to Whites, the left can’t get enough of it. For example, it’s a lie to divide non-Whites as victims from Whites as villains, so that’s precisely what the left do. It’s the truth to divide non-Whites as wreckers of Western civilization from Whites as creators and sustainers of Western civilization, so that’s precisely why the left shriek “divisive” at anyone who speaks or hints at the truth.

And when lying leftists like Keir Starmer speak of the need for “tolerance” in the wake of Henry Nowak’s murder, what they’re really asking for is passivity and submission. The left want Whites to remain passive under invasion and submissive under attack.

Unfortunately for the left, more and more Whites are refusing to obey. They’re no longer willing to follow the leftist script and believe the leftist lies. Five years ago, the leftist tactic of ignoring and minimizing a murder like that of Henry Nowak would have worked. Today it hasn’t worked at all. As non-White savagery continues to strike — and it will, you can be sure of that — White anger will get stronger and the left’s grip on power will get weaker.

So Rest In Peace, Henry Nowak. Like Iryna Zarutska in America, you won’t be forgotten and one day the leftists responsible for your death will pay the price they owe. We’ll also deal with the left’s collaborators, the civ-nats who pretend that the solution to non-White savagery is “color-blind policing” and “equality under the law.” The impossible quest for equality only helps the left. As the mud-flood grows ever higher, the attacks on Whites will ever worsen. The solution is separation via remigration, not civic nationalism. Non-Whites and their pathologies belong in the Third World, not the White West.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Tobias Langdon https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Tobias Langdon2026-06-09 08:59:142026-06-10 04:13:44When Harry Met Vibrancy: A Non-White Savage, a Butchered White and a Traitorous Future King

Gatekeeping the Right: Inside Batya Ungar-Sargon’s Ideological Pivot

June 8, 2026/9 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Jose Nino

Batya Ungar-Sargon once mourned Hillary Clinton’s defeat so deeply that she wrote a 2016 essay for Dame magazine titled “Trump Ruined My Favorite Haunt”—lamenting that she could no longer enjoy a neighborhood bar whose regulars and bartenders had voted for Donald Trump. Fast forward to the present, she now calls herself a “MAGA leftist” and urges American Jews to abandon the Democratic Party coalition their ancestors helped build.

Back in March 2025, Ungar-Sargon stood on the set of HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher and introduced herself as a “MAGA leftist” in response to the Left’s perceived abandonment of the Jewish community after the Hamas attack on October 7. The path that led Ungar-Sargon to that televised declaration began far from the world of cable news politics.

Ungar-Sargon’s journey began in Philadelphia, where she was born in 1981 into an Orthodox Jewish family. She grew up in the affluent Boston suburb of Brookline, attended high school in Israel, earned a bachelor’s degree in English from the University of Chicago in 2004, and completed her doctorate in English at UC Berkeley in 2013 with a dissertation— titled “Coercive Pleasures: The Force and Form of the Novel 1719–1740.” She stumbled into journalism during Hurricane Sandy in 2012 and eventually became the opinion editor at The Forward, America’s largest Jewish media publication. She then moved to Newsweek as deputy opinion editor before launching her own show on NewsNation and becoming a columnist for Bari Weiss’s Free Press.

The frustration that drove her political evolution came to a head in October 2023 when she watched the Democratic Party’s response to the Hamas attacks on Israel. In a moment that went viral, she declared with exasperation: “The thing that makes this so appalling is that Jews built the left in this country. We built the labor movement. We wrote the New Deal. 70% of the lawyers who worked on civil rights cases were Jews. We’ve been at the forefront of every liberal and leftist issue in this country!”

That claim about Jewish involvement in civil rights became central to her argument. In interviews promoting her 2026 book The Jews and the Left, she elaborated further: “We were wildly overrepresented in the Civil Rights Movement—Some 70% of the lawyers drafting legislation in the South to dismantle Jim Crow were Jewish, and a third of the white martyrs to Klan violence were Jews.”

The historical record substantially supports her broader point about Jewish overrepresentation, though scholars dispute her specific figures. The Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism documents that Jews made up half of the young white volunteers in the 1964 Mississippi Freedom Summer. The Gilder Lehrman Institute states that close to half of the white lawyers working in the movement in the South were Jewish.

The list of Jewish figures in the civil rights movement reads like a roll call of American liberalism’s founding generation. Henry Moskowitz co-founded the NAACP in 1909 alongside W.E.B. Du Bois. Joel Spingarn chaired the organization in the mid-1910s, and his brother Arthur served as NAACP president from 1940 to 1965. Kivie Kaplan held the NAACP presidency from 1966 until his death in 1975. Julius Rosenwald, the president and chairman of Sears, Roebuck, funded approximately 5,000 schools for Black children across the South between 1913 and 1932. At their peak, one in three rural Black schoolchildren in the South attended a Rosenwald school.

The legal architecture of desegregation bore Jewish fingerprints everywhere. Jack Greenberg succeeded Thurgood Marshall as Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund in 1961 and argued 40 Supreme Court civil rights cases over his career. Stanley Levison served as Martin Luther King Jr.’s closest White advisor, financial counselor, and ghostwriter, a relationship so intimate that it prompted FBI surveillance. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were drafted in the conference room of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism in Washington.

It is this history that Ungar-Sargon deploys to indict the contemporary left. Her thesis holds that after Israel’s 1967 Six-Day War demonstrated Jewish military strength, progressive frameworks flipped Jews from victim to oppressor. After King’s assassination in 1968, she argues, “the ideals he had fought for—equality for all, a common American identity in which all were free—were discarded for the more radical Black separatist movement.” She contends that “being anti-white—which, in practice, meant being antisemitic, since Jews were the white Americans most involved in the Civil Rights Movement—was how you proved you weren’t still caught up in Dr. King’s more conciliatory vision.”

Her Zionism runs deep and has intensified since October 7. During her tenure at The Forward, she considered herself a liberal Zionist who supported Israel’s existence while criticizing the occupation of the West Bank and the Netanyahu government. She wrote that “In the American Jewish imagination, Zionism is the promise that Jewish safety can coexist with Jewish values like justice, welcoming the stranger, and equality.” At a 2019 Bard College conference, she walked out of an event and accused Students for Justice in Palestine of antisemitism after they protested a panel. She linked anti-Zionist rhetoric to David Duke, declaring that “David Duke thinks that talking about antisemitism hurts Palestinians.”

As a freshly anointed Jewish gatekeeper of the Right, she has made it a point to criticize conservative pundits dabbling with anti-Israel narratives. Since October 2023, she has become one of the most prominent commentators denouncing Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, and Nick Fuentes for what she characterizes as antisemitic commentary. In her November 6, 2025 column for The Free Press, she wrote that Carlson “gave basically no pushback to Fuentes, a man with avowedly pro–Adolf Hitler, proudly antisemitic, racist, segregationist views, and instead raved about how Christian Zionists disgust him.” In a separate Substack post, she accused Carlson of having “made an obsession with Israel and Jewish wrongdoing the cornerstone of his output in recent years” and of having “repeatedly hosted conspiracist Daryl Cooper… a man famous for being a Holocaust revisionist, with whom Carlson heartily agreed that the real villain of World War II was not Hitler but Churchill.”

She and Carlson have a history that complicates her current hostility. He hosted her on his Fox show in 2022 to praise Bad News, calling her “singlehandedly responsible for making that magazine worth reading once in a while.” But after his September 2024 interview with Darryl Cooper—a podcaster who called Winston Churchill “the chief villain of World War II”—and his October 2025 interview with nationalist Nick Fuentes, she became one of his most vocal critics.

While Ungar-Sargon leverages her extensive background in liberal activism to indict the modern Left, her concurrent policing of the Right reveals the true purpose of her political pivot. She is not genuinely aligning with the populism of the American Right; rather, she is performing the classic role of a political gatekeeper, patrolling the boundaries of permissible debate to protect organized Jewish interests from populist scrutiny. The post-October 7 political environment has compelled countless Jewish political operatives like Ungar-Sargon to exercise strategic flexibility to bottle up antisemitic energy emanating from the American body politic.

Should the Right begin to internalize a structural critique of Jewish influence, Ungar-Sargon stands ready to label it as intolerable antisemitism, thereby maintaining the status quo even as the foundations of the current Judeo-American order begin to crack.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Jose Nino https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Jose Nino2026-06-08 07:42:592026-06-08 07:42:59Gatekeeping the Right: Inside Batya Ungar-Sargon’s Ideological Pivot

The Protocols of the Epstein Firsters. Letter to President Putin

June 7, 2026/13 Comments/in Featured Articles, General/by Pierre Simon

If you don’t want to slip up tomorrow, speak the truth today.
Bruce Lee

Presidential Administration
Staraya Square, Moscow, 103132
letters.kremlin.ru.

Dear President Putin,

I am one of your long-time fans and a great admirer of Russian culture and achievements, but I cannot help wonder why, in your conflict with Ukraine, you have never called out the banking cartels headquartered in “The City” of London and Wall Street, together with their various global financial and economical networks such as the US Federal Reserve, the Bank of International Settlements, the International Money Fund, the World Bank, the European Central Bank, and other Central Banks and corporations dispersed all over the world.[1]

“As Lord Acton warned some 150 years ago,” writes market analyst, author, and former hedge fund manager, Alex Krainer, “The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks.”

This fight is now upon us. It might be the ultimate struggle between humanity’s emancipation or our final enslavement. To prevail, we must understand our true enemies and the financial, economic, political and social structures enabling their agenda.

In short, we must not be distracted by myriad marginal issues and false dichotomies like left vs. right, liberals vs. conservatives and so forth. The ultimate culprits, the super-predator threatening humanity are the high-level bankers: a handful of families and individuals who control and manage the present monetary system. We have no choice but to oppose and defeat them.[2]

You are not a racialist, Mr. President, and I know you like Jews, you have many Jewish friends, your mentor and judo coach, the late Anatoly Rachlin, was Jewish, and your Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin is part Jewish. You are rightly the President of all Russians, good or bad, including Jews, but I must tell you right from the start: I do not share your feelings toward Jews. I don’t hate them or mean them harm, but I don’t like them much and prefer to keep my distances.

With few notorious exceptions, I don’t see many Jews vigorously complaining in the streets or in mainstream media about the genocide in Gaza or about the sad state of my country, which is being invaded by Third-World immigrants often with the approval and help of Jewish activists and intellectuals. Many Jews vomit their hatred of Whites and their desire to kill them and cause their disappearance. And many are pushing for measures that benefit them to the detriment of my race.

The “Seal Puppy” Hunt that’s Coming: The Ache of Envy and Other Obstacles to Change

The Jewish Interest in Multiethnic Immigration and Multiculturalism

So, Mr. President, in what I call the “Epstein Firsters” described in this letter, I include all Jews that silently approve or are involved in one way or the other with what the Jewish-led oligarchs, organized international Jewry, and their non-Jewish allies and vassals, are doing to our countries.

The ability to lie to your face, a complete lack of empathy and compassion for non-Jews, which they dehumanize by labelling them as Amalek or “animals,” a lack of scruples, and a predatory drive for dominance are the character traits that define the Epstein Firsters. They are the ones manoeuvring in the background to destroy us.

They want you dead or alive, Mr. President. They want to push you out of power, loot your natural resources, steal your weapons, and dismantle your federation into dozens of smaller countries easy to control. This has been their game-plan all along. Once you are dispossessed, they will try to do the same thing to China. Their end goal is nothing less than a unipolar Jewish utopia ruled from Jerusalem in which all non-Jews will be their slaves.[3]

I have written a few articles on the subject of Jews that were published in The Occidental Observer, the most influential Internet platform on White identity, interests, and culture. In this letter, to give you an idea of where I stand on the Jewish question, I have taken the liberty to include references, notes, and the title and links to some of my articles. I invite you, or your staff, respectfully, Mr. President, to read them, if you find the time during your busy schedule, as they might help you to better understand how I have formed my opinion. And If I’m wrong, I urge you, respectfully, to lead me back in the right direction. I don’t have at my disposal one of the best secret services in the world to help me see through the complexities of this subject, which I am trying to elucidate to the best of my abilities.

Those Who Reign Supreme: The Holocaust as Linchpin of a Jewish-Ruled World

The Hidden Messages of Schindler’s List

As a White man of European descent, severely threatened by these miscreants, I feel it is my paramount duty, for reasons of self-defence, to defend my race by informing you, Mr. President, if you don’t already know, that all the Western governments that are helping Ukraine’s Jewish government with the taxes of their own citizens, are completely in their power. I am telling you this because I believe you are one of the few leaders capable of defeating the fiends at war with our countries and humanity.

For electoral, financial, ideological, and sometimes dishonest reasons, the leaders of these countries no longer serve their citizens. They serve a foreign country, Israel, and a foreign people, organized Jewry led by the money lenders of “The City” and Wall Street, aka the Epstein class. As such, they are Epstein Firsters.

Indeed, the former head of the French Situation-Intelligence-Electronic Warfare Office at the Joint Staff for Operational Planning, General Dominique Delaware, who died suddenly in a suspicious way, has shown in two damning articles that the governments and politicians of the galaxy of neoliberal democracies of the West, better known as the “International Community” are led by this rich class of Jews, Mr. President. The banking cartels, organized Jewry, Israel, and their allied governments of the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, European Union, South Korea, and Japan, are all united against you toward one goal: global governance and a Jewish-ruled world. [4], [5]

Jewish Control of the US

The following explanations, Mr. President, are by no means complete, not all presidents are covered, but they will show you how power in the US has been under the influence of the Epstein Firsters for a long time.

Teddy Roosevelt (1901–1909)

Many past and present American and European politicians were either Jewish or Jewish puppets, starting with Teddy Roosevelt, who became president in 1901 because of Jewish financial support and voting blocks[6] following the convenient assassination of the passionate advocate of the American system of economics,[7] President William McKinley.

He was an early supporter of Zionism, stating after the Balfour Declaration that it was “entirely proper to start a Zionist state around Jerusalem.” Jewish newspapers universally extolled him upon his death, with the B’nai B’rith Messenger declaring that “Jewish immigrants had no better friend than Theodore Roosevelt.”[8]

Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921)

Then there was Woodrow Wilson, a revolutionary leftist brought to power and totally manipulated by Jews such as Jacob Schiff of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. banks, Bernard Baruch, Paul Warburg, New York lawyer Samuel Untermyer, Louis Brandeis, the first Jew appointed to the US Supreme Court, Felix Frankfurter, not to mention the non-Jewish, “Col.” Edward Mandel House, “an agent” of the international financial interests of the Rothschild banking empire, according to American investigative journalist, Michael Collins Piper. [9]

  1. Wilson famously said when he declared war on Germany on the advice of his Jewish handlers: “The world must be made safe for democracy,” a political system, notes retired professor of philosophy, Thomas Dalton, used by Jewish elites to acquire wealth, control mass media, and influence politicians while remaining hidden from the public. This materialistic and anti-spiritual “judeocratie” elevates “mediocre” and easy to manipulate people, such as the present leaders of Western Europe, to serve Jewish interests at the expense of their non-Jewish citizens. [10]
  2. Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law on December 23, 1913, officially establishing the Federal Reserve System, a private bank, as the Central Bank of the United States.[11] Since then, America is an official member of the Central banking Empire of “The City” of London.[12]

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1933-1945)

Like his cousin Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who appointed more Jews to public office than all previous presidents combined, was elected because of Jewish financial and voting support. In 1932, more than 80% of the American Jewish community voted for FDR, a figure that rose to over 90% in the elections of 1936, 1940, and 1944.  This represented a tectonic shift toward the Democratic Party, with Jews constituting only 3% of the population yet making up 15% of his administration.[13]

Jewish voters were deeply impressed by Roosevelt’s occasional criticism of the Hitler regime in the 1930s and his subsequent aid to Britain. The Democratic Party’s embrace of ethnic minorities also appealed strongly to a community that had faced discrimination. A Yiddish joke stated that Jews believed in three worlds: “this world, the next world, and Roosevelt.” [14]

Harry S. Truman (1945-1953)

Then there was Harry S. Truman, who got re-elected because of Jewish and Zionist donations. Although this is controversial, writer Gore Vidal claimed that John F. Kennedy told him that Truman was the first to recognize Israel as payback for a two million dollars Jewish donation.[15]

Truman claimed that he supported Jews and Zionism mostly because he was deeply affected by the Holocaust propaganda that was broadcast by the media and Hollywood at the end of WW2. He expressed shock and disbelief upon first learning of the Nazi atrocities, stating in a 1943 speech that he “couldn’t believe it” and initially doubted Germans he knew were capable of such acts. He later condemned Adolf Hitler as a “cold-blooded, ignorant corporal,” remarking in 1945 that he hoped Hitler had been “drawn and quartered” and was “still burning somewhere.”[16]

Those Who Reign Supreme: The Holocaust as Linchpin of a Jewish-Ruled World

Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-1969)

And with Lyndon Johnson in the White House—who is believed to be personally involved with Israel in the assassination of JFK[17]—we had one of the most Jewish-loving presidents of the United States, after, of course, Donald Trump, who is in a league of his own. [18], [19]

The moment Johnson became president, on the night JFK was killed, he made sure that no one would find out what really happened. All the key people of the Investigative Warren Commission he set up were either enemies of Kennedy or hardline Zionists. He also started reversing all the JFK policies that were harmful to Israeli and Jewish interests.[20], [21]

The Holocaust had a deep impact on his policies toward the Jews and Israel. He was deeply “shaken, stunned, terrorized, and bursting with an overpowering revulsion and incredulous horror” by what he witnessed at the Dachau concentration camp in 1945. He consistently framed his advocacy for Jewish refugees and support for Israel as a moral obligation, famously stating during the Six-Day War that supporting Israel was simply “the right thing to do,” even against Soviet pressure.[22]

Those Who Reign Supreme: The Holocaust as Linchpin of a Jewish-Ruled World

Richard Nixon (1969-!974)

Richard Nixon made numerous anti-Semitic remarks in private Oval Office recordings, characterizing Jews as disloyal, aggressive, and dominant over the media and government. He explicitly told aides that “generally speaking, you can’t trust the bastards. They turn on you” and claimed, “most Jews are disloyal” and “out to kill us.” Yet, despite these private views and telling Henry Kissinger that Soviet persecution of Jews was “not an American concern,” Nixon publicly supported Israel during the Yom Kippur War and appointed several Jews to high-level staff positions, creating a disconnect between his private attitudes and public policy. Like many presidents before and after him, he was after all an Epstein Firster albeit a reluctant one. [23]

Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)

Ronald Reagon, who was not Jewish technically, certainly behaved as if he was. He was not elected solely because of Jewish financial and voting support, but Jewish support did play a significant role in his election.

Like all Post World War II politicians, in varying degrees, Reagan was deeply committed to Jewish causes and Israel because of the Holocaust. As a matter of fact, this is why politicians are so lenient with Jewish misconduct. Jewish victimhood status cemented in the holocaust confers moral capital, recognition, and resources to the Epstein Firsters. They cultivate this status to demand justice, reparations, or sympathy, “effectively ‘thriving’ on the recognition of their suffering,” according to Cambridge University scholars Alex Vandermaas-Peeler, Jelena Subotic, and Michael Barnett. [24]

Reagan consistently described the Holocaust as a comprehensible evil that must be remembered to prevent recurrence, stating, “We must make sure that from now until the end of days all humankind stares this evil in the face.” He expressed being “horrified” by claims that the Holocaust was a hoax, citing his WWII service viewing combat films of liberated camps as undeniable proof that “six million people whose lives were taken cruelly and needlessly” was not propaganda. [25]

He framed the establishment of Israel as a miracle emerging “from the ashes of the Holocaust” and pledged that the security of Israel and Jewish survivors would “never be compromised.” Reagan laid the cornerstone for the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in 1988, asserting that the museum’s purpose was to ensure the deaths of the 6 million had “posthumous meaning” so that such evil would “never come again.” [26]

Those Who Reign Supreme: The Holocaust as Linchpin of a Jewish-Ruled World

This is why, he spoke out for Israel during the 1967 Six-Day War, and maintained a strong focus on freeing Soviet Jews throughout his presidency; formalized the strategic cooperation between the US and Israel; rescued Ethiopian Jews in Operation Joshua (1985) and awarded the Congressional Gold Medal to one of the greatest liars of the Epstein Firsters, Elie Wiesel.

Joseph Biden (2021-2024)

Joe Biden’s family is notoriously Jewish by marriage. [27] His administration was staffed with a disproportionate number of Jews belonging to the Epstein class. What former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy under President Ronald Reagan, Paul Graig Roberts, says below about the Biden Government is true for most US governments since at least the time of Woodrow Wilson:

In the Biden regime, all powerful positions are held by Jews–the Attorney General (the police), the Secretary of the Treasury (money), the Secretary of State (foreign policy and war). There is not a single White Anglo-Saxon Protestant in the Biden cabinet. What explains that in a country of Gentiles a tiny minority of Jews occupy the power positions in the US government, the power positions in the media, entertainment, Ivy league administrations and faculties, and finance.[28]

Like Ronald Reagan, and Lyndon B. Johnson, Joe Biden is dedicated, one way or another, to the protection of Jews and Israel. As a matter of fact, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump are all Globo-Zionists with strong ties to the Jewish elite and to Israel, the true masters of the United States and the West.

Christian Zionists

Several American high-level politicians and presidents such as Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, Ted Cruz, and Mike Pompeo,[29] who served as director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 2017 to 2018 and under President Donald Trump as the 70th United States secretary of state from 2018 to 2021, are Christian Zionists.

On the strength of the promise God made to Abraham (Genesis 12 :3), “I will bless those who bless you and him who curses you I will curse,” they believe like 30 million American Christian Zionists, “that  if they bless Israel morally, financially, and politically,

God will reward them by favoring America. Blessing Israel for America’s sake has been motivating Christian Zionists to combat antisemitism, donate to Jewish charities, and invest in and visit Israel. But it has also involved many in opposing any peace process, in supporting the continued building of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, in funding those internationally outlawed settlements, and in backing an extreme right-wing Israeli plan to transfer the Palestinians to neighboring Arab states.[30]

They believe, moreover, that they will suddenly be plucked to heaven to be with Jesus when Armageddon the battle of end times erupts (rapture).[31]

Donald Trump’s connection to Isiac Louria’s Kabbalah and the End Time Prophesies

Donald Trump has significant and documented connections to the Chabad-Lubavitch movement, primarily facilitated by his family and political allies. In 1983, Chabad gave him the prestigious Isiac Louria’s Tree of Life award for his outstanding contributions to the Israeli-American friendship.[32] Trump has frequently displayed the award plaque in his offices, notably in Trump Tower, describing it as a “very big award” that means a great deal to him.

Furthermore, he personally engaged in Chabad religious customs, specifically visiting the Ohel (the gravesite of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson, in Queens, New York). During his presidency, Trump formalized his relationship with the movement through official acts such as the “Education and Sharing Day, U.S.A.,” honoring the birthday of the Lubavitcher Rebbe.[33]

His beloved daughter Ivanka is a Lubavitcher and her husband, Lubavitcher Jared Kushner, has a long-standing friendship not only with Benjamin Netanyhua, but with Nathan Rothschild, Jeffrey Epstein’s presumed employer. In one of his shows, Alex Jones even speculated that Jared Kushner was in fact the Messiah that Jews have been waiting for.[34]

Is this why he revealed his true nature in February 2026 when he suddenly flipped from American Firster to Israel Firster? Does he feel he has an end time role to play by declaring war on Iran? It’s an open question that I would rather not try to answer.

In any case, the Jewish billionaires of the Epstein class and various Jewish lobbies such as AIPAC control all the political parties of the US; Democrat, Republican, left, right, liberal, conservative, green, or socialist, they are all cut from the same cloth.[35] American syndicated columnist Patrick Buchanan encapsulated the US’s emasculation by AIPAC and organized Jewry in his now-famous declaration: “Capitol Hill is Israeli occupied territory.”[36]

And the situation in Europe is no different. I’ll dive deep into the British situation, Mr. President, because it concerns me most, but you can repeat the same exercise for all European stock nations. Indeed, at the establishment level, France, Germany, the EU, for instance, are as Judaized as Britain.

Jewish Control of Britain

The situation in Britain for the most part is fairly different from the situation in America, but quite similar to the situation in Europe. Jews, who have been in Britain for a very long time, had plenty of time to infiltrate this nation and seize the reins of power.

Indeed, since the days of Oliver Cromwell, Jews have long been powerful in Britain and the leaders of its establishment are often Jewish themselves, like Benjamin Disraeli, the first Jewish Prime Minister of Britain.[37]

In his book, The Jews, social critic, Hilaire Belloc (1870-1953), described the British Empire as a partnership between Jewish finance and the British aristocracy. He goes on to say that “the Jews, in spite of their small numbers, color every English institution, especially the Universities and the House of Commons.” He further asserted that “the interests of the two races began to diverge before the Great War — nonetheless a formal alliance was maintained through the control of the politicians by Jewish finance — with culmination in the attempt to form an Anglo-Judaic state in Palestine.”[38]

This partnership between rich Jews and the British establishment is confirmed by Leslie Gilbert Pine (1907–1987), a distinguished British writer, researcher, and expert in genealogy, nobility, history, and heraldry. In his book Tales of the British Aristocracy, a work detailing the lives and histories of the British upper class, he states that “the Jews have made themselves so closely connected with the British peerage that the two classes are unlikely to suffer loss which is not mutual.”[39]

This epoch is dramatized in the very popular TV series Downton Abbey (2010-2015). In short, after the Industrial Revolution, when financial power shifted away from agriculture to manufacturing, down-and-out gentry with ancient titles and large estates, but no money, began marrying the daughters of rich Jews. The 5th Earl of Roseberry, for example, who became Prime Minister in 1894, married Hannah de Rothschild, who was the only child and sole heiress of the Jewish banker Baron Mayer Amschel de Rothschild. And Sir Ernest Cassel’s granddaughter, Edwina Cynthia Annette Ashley, married Lord Louis Mountbatten, a member of the royal family. While not related by blood, Ernest Cassel was a close friend and financial mentor to the Rothschilds, the preeminent Jewish family in Europe.[40]

As shown by Arnold Leese (1878-1956) in his pamphlet, Our Jewish Aristocracy—A revelation, the British elites, who played a major role in the Maidan coup, are indeed completely Judaized.[41] A fact corroborated not only by Hilaire Belloc, H.G. Pine, and the renowned English aristocrat and philosopher, Anthony M. Ludovici,[42] but also by highly regarded author, journalist, and consultant to the British military, Nesta Webster. In her book, Germany and England. A Prelude to War in 1938, her comments on the power of Jews and how they can make or break any man are still relevant today as we all saw with our own eyes during the election campaign of Thomas Massie:

England of 1938 is not the England of 1914 because she is no longer controlled by Britons. Ever since the war the Jewish power has been growing… We are under an invisible Jewish dictatorship but a dictatorship that can be felt in every sphere of life, for no one can escape from it… Already the Jews can make or break the career of any man. As long as the Jews do not hold Germany [my comment: and now Iran, Russia and China] they can never realize their final aim of world domination. [43]

In today’s Britain, most members of the British establishment including royalty are intimately associated with the Epstein class. In 1999, Prince Andrew, for one, gave Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein — the “Jewish Fixer” of the Epstein Firsters, to put it like America Firster Nick Fuentes—[44] an unrestricted access to the Balmoral castle estate. Newly released images and trial evidence confirm the pair were photographed relaxing in the Queen’s private log cabin at Glen Beg, a location previously occupied by Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip.[45] And the new king of Great Britain, Charles III, who was circumcised in 1948 by Rabbi Jacob Snowman, has long had a good relationship with British Jews,” notes journalist Itamar Sharon, in the September 10, 2022, issue of The Times of Israel, “and in recent years has also shored up his bona fides with Israel… Charles himself has abiding ties to British Jewish leaders and institutions, and has shown a keen interest in the stories and lessons of the Holocaust… In 2022, Charles commissioned portraits of seven Holocaust survivors to be displayed at Buckingham Palace for International Holocaust Remembrance Day.[46]

As a matter of fact, Mr. President, all British Prime Ministers involved in the Maidan conflict are all in the Jewish pocket. [47] Many are either: 1. Jewish, like Baron Richard Hermer, the Attorney General for England and Wales and Advocate General for Northern Ireland; 2. Descended from Jews, like David Cameron and Boris Johnson; or 3. married to Jews, like Keith Starmer. Others, such as Liza May, Theresa Truss, and Richi Sunak identify with Jews and Zionism out of sympathy and/or financial and electoral reasons. The fact of the matter is, none of them would be elected if they were not Epstein Firsters.[48]

This certainly explains why the United States and Britain are two of the most rabid supporters of the Ukrainian war, the Gaza genocide, the Iran war, and the Greater Israel Project. What’s left of the British and American Empires, Mr. President, is British and American in name only. It is now owned by the Jewish-led predatory bankers of “The City” of London and Wall Street, together with their financial and corporate networks. We effectively transitioned from Pax Britannica to Pax Americana to Jewish hegemony and a world of chaos. Will we ever reach Pax Judaica? It’s possible but it won’t do us any good. The world Epstein Firsters want to create is a world for Jews only, as Maurice Samuel says in his book You Gentiles,

We Jews, we, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers forever. Nothing that you will do will meet our needs and demands. We will forever destroy because we need a world of our own, a God-world, which it is not in your nature to build. Beyond all temporary alliances with this or that faction lies the ultimate split in nature and destiny, the enmity between the Game and God. [49]

To sum up, Britain, the United States, and all Western NATO nations, are indeed ruled by Epstein Firsters. These are the people, Mr. President, who are arming and financing Ukraine against you. They are either allies or vassals of the Jewish-led predatory bankers of the Epstein class. Here is a brief list of the weapons they use to conquer your country and the world:

The Protocols of the Epstein Firsters:

  • Work in secret, lie, cheat, embezzle, blackmail, assassinate, bomb, jail, torture, foment, plot, destroy, scare, sanction, block, intimidate, sue, and anything else you can do to weaken those we wish to dispossess no matter what the consequences are on the nations, populations, and individuals that are in your crosshairs;[50]
  • Use the Holocaust and the anti-Semitism weapons profusely, these boogeymen, together with fear, racism and hate speech accusations, are some of our best weapons and shields against our enemies; whenever you want to discredit dissenters you can also use slurs such as “conspiracy theorist,” “Nazi,” “fascist,” and “White supremacist,” or even better, use the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” slur, but make sure you use the “fake” label; you can on top of it evoke “human rights” to bomb a country to ashes;[51]
  • Those Who Reign Supreme: The Holocaust as Linchpin of a Jewish-Ruled World
  • Demonize authoritarian types of government and promote democracy, the ideal form of government for our purposes;[52]
  • To destroy racial consciousness and national sovereignty, endorse and promote liberalism and measures such as multiculturalism, replacement immigration, critical race theory (CRT), diversity, equity, and inclusion policies (DEI), LGBT promotion, and abortion as a form of contraception;[53]
  • The Hidden Messages of Schindler’s List
  • To dumb down populations and their ability to resist, downgrade educational quality to the level of the least competent and promote and encourage consumer goods that target the limbic system, the center of emotion and motivation, with sex, drugs, and Rock and Roll;[54]
  • Work to abolish private property, race, family, and gender binarism; we want to erase all barriers and identities;
  • To weaken the police and other government institutions and businesses, staff them with women and minorities;
  • Take control of all information and media outlets: Hollywood, mainstream newspapers, TV, the Internet, book publishers, etc.;
  • Control any opposition with generous financial and career rewards;
  • Hire important influencers to promote your ideas or to defame your opponents;
  • Create false flags, false pandemics, and false climate emergencies to scare populations and force them to accept laws and policies they would normally refuse;[55]
  • Take control of the economy;[56]
  • To give them a free hand, impose legal immunity for the whole network of banks and corporations;
  • Deindustrialize and transfer all industries to third-world countries where cheap labor is abundant and taxes and regulations are optimal;
  • Make sure an American system of economy, which favors the building of infrastructure (roads, airports, trains, bridges, etc.) and economic prosperity for the “deplorables,” never sees the light of day.[57] Apply and defend the British System, which advocates for minimal government intervention, low tariffs, and reliance on global free markets;[58]
  • Create unbacked credit (money created out of thin air);[59]
  • Extend excessive debt to borrowing nations to extract political leverage or economic concessions;
  • Grab money anonymously and deposit this money in tax havens;
  • Destroy the Middle class by eliminating small community banks, the bloodline of local innovators and small businesses;[60]
  • Promote on-line shopping to further destroy the Middle class.

Ultimate goal of the Epstein Firsters: Destruction of nations and creation of a worldwide collectivist society of consumers easy to manipulate and control with the help of artificial intelligence, Central Bank Digital Currencies, digital identity, [61] and 15 minutes cities; [62] in this kind of society, the notion of belonging to a country or a race will be obsolete; no one will have any identity, other than that of consumer. This future is described as a “Jewish utopia” for the ruling Epstein Firsters, a nightmare for the millions of rootless, acculturated post-national nomads.[63]

Motivation of the Epstein Firsters: The will for power, which is the basic rule of life, with survival.[64]

Respectfully,

Pierre Simon, a concerned citizen journalist of European descent


[1] Stephen Mitford Goodson, A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Humanity, Black House Publishing Ltd, 4th Edition 2019.

[2] Alex Krainer, “Pandemics and the March of Totalitarianism,” Alex Krainer’s Substack, May 29, 2026.

[3] Michael Collins Piper, The New Babylon. Those Who Reign Supreme. A Panoramic Overview of the Historical, Religious, and Economic Origins of the New World Order, American Free Press, 2015.

[4] General Dominique Delawarde, Analysis of US/Russian-/Israeli relations, Reseau International, February 22, 2017.

[5] General Dominique Delawarde, USA-Syria-France-Israel: To better understand the Syrian conflict, Reseau international, April 8, 2017.

[6] Information obtained from LEO AI.

[7] Maurice G. Baxter, Henry Clay and the American System, University Press of Kentucky, November 19, 2004.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Michael Collins Piper, “The Making of Woodrow Wilson—An American Hero?” The Barnes Review, March 2010.

[10] Thomas Dalton, PhD, “Democracy Is an Ideal Government for Jewish Influence,” The Occidental Observer, March 25, 2024.

[11] Eustache Mullins, The Secrets of the Federal Reserve. The London Connection, Bankers Research Institute, 1993.

[12] Robert Ingraham, William McKinley. “Principles must always lead,” 2025.

[13] Information obtained from LEO AI.

[14] FDR’s Attitude to Jews in the US, Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.

[15] Information obtained from Grok AI on X.

[16] Information obtained from LEO AI.

[17] Laurent Guyénot, The Unspoken Kennedy Truth, Kindle, p. 35.

[18] Armin Rosen, “Trump’s Jews: The Republican Presidential Candidate Has Jewish Family Members and Friends. Here’s Who They Are,” Tablet Magazine, July 15, 2016.

[19] Adam Green, “Trump’s Kabbala ‘Tree of Life’ Award,” Know More News, YouTube, 2019.

[20] Laurent Guyénot, The Unspoken Kennedy Truth, Kindle, p. 35.

[21] Michael COLLINS PIPER, Final Judgment. The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy, American Free Press, 2005.

[22] Information obtained from LEO AI.

[23] Ibid.

[24] Alex Vandermaas-Peeler, Jelena Subotic, and Michael Barnett, “Constructing victims: Suffering and status in modern world order,” Cambridge University Press, December 22, 2022.

[25] Information obtained from LEO AI.

[26] Ibid.

[27] Karen David, “Joe Biden’s Very Jewish Family,” The JC News, November 9, 2020.

[28] Paul Craig Roberts, “Are Jews Again Driving the Western World into a Fatal War?” Institute for Political Economy, September 29, 2022.

[29] Edward Wong, “The Rapture and The Real World. Mike Pompeo Blends Beliefs and Policy,” The New York Times, March 30, 2019.

[30] Victoria Clark, Allies for Armageddon. The Rise of Christian Zionism, Yale University Press, 2007.

[31] Hervé Ryssen, End Times Warfare: The Eschatological Beliefs of the Great Religions, The Barnes Review.

[32] Armin Rosen, “Trump’s Jews: The Republican Presidential Candidate Has Jewish Family Members and Friends. Here’s Who They Are,” Tablet Magazine, July 15, 2016; Adam Green, “Trump’s Kabbala ‘Tree of Life’ Award,” Know More News, YouTube, 2019.

[33] Information obtained by LEO AI.

[34] Hervé Ryssen, End Times Warfare: The Eschatological Beliefs of the Great Religions, The Barnes Review.

[35] Paul Craig Roberts, article cited.

[36] Pat Buchanan: In His Own Words, Anti-Defamation League, 2013.

[37] Anthony H. Ludovici, The Jews, and the Jews in England, Ostara Publications, 2021 (first published in 1938 under the pseudonym “Cobbett.”

[38] Hilaire Belloc, The Jews, Internet Archive, p. XVII.

[39] Leslie Gilbert Pine, Tales of the British Aristocracy, Internet Archive, p. 219.

[40] Ibid, p. 220.

[41] Arnold Leese, Our Jewish Aristocracy—A revelation, Sons of Liberty, 1896. A free PDF is available on the Internet archive.

[42] Anthony H. Ludovici, The Jews, and the Jews in England, Ostara Publications, 2021 (first published in 1938 under the pseudonym “Cobbett.”

[43] Nesta H. Webster, Germany and England. A Prelude to War, 1938, Ostara Publications, pp. 58–59.

[44] The best cogent and articulate analysis of the Epstein files is by America Firster Nick Fuentes: “What They’re NOT Telling You About Epstein,” Rumble, 2026.

[45] Francine Wolfisz, “Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell are shown on Balmoral shooting trip in latest photo dump,” Daily Mail, December 20, 2025.

[46] David Israel, “King Charles III Was Circumcised by Jewish Mohel, Cherishes UK Jews,” The JewishPress.com, September 9, 2022.

[47] Marc Collet, “Britain Is Ruled by Zionists,” Bitchute, October 14, 2022.

[48] Information obtained from LEO AI.

[49] Maurice Samuls, You Gentiles, Antelope Hill Publishing, 2022.

[50] Wilmot Robertson, The Dispossessed Majority, Howard Allen, 1981.

[51] Arthur R. Butz, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century: The Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry, London: Armreg Ltd, 2024 (5th edition); Holocaust Encyclopedia, Uncensored and Unrestrained, 2025. Sponsored by the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (www.CODOH.com); Nicholas Kollerstrom, Breaking the Spell. The Holocaust, Myth & Reality, London: Armreg Ltd, 2024;

Jared Taylor, Paved with Good Intentions: The Failure of Race Relations in Contemporary America, Carroll & Graf Pub, 1993; Kerry Bolton, PhD, The Tyranny of Human Rights. From Jacobinism to the United Nations, Antelope Hill Publishing, 2021.

[52]Thomas Dalton, PhD, “Democracy Is an Ideal Government for Jewish Influence,” The Occidental Observer, March 25, 2024.

[53] Kevin Macdonald, PhD, The Culture of Critique. An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements, Antelope Hill Publishing, 3rd Edition, 2025; Anthony M. Ludovici, The Specious Origins of Liberalism. The Genesis of a Delusion, Ostara Publications, 2015.

[54] Ricardo Duchesne, PhD, “Why the West Is Replacing Its White Population. The Post-Fordist Trap,” The Unz Review, May 15, 2026; John Taylor Gatto, Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling, New Society Publishers, 2002.

[55] Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine. The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, Metropolitan Books, 2007;

Tim Ball, PhD, The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science, Stairway Press, 2014. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., The Real Anthony Fauci. Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health, Skyhorse Publishing, 2021.

[56] The best book I have read on the subject of banks and how they control the economy and destroy nations is by a French jurist and fiscal lawyer Valérie Bugault, Les raisons cachées du désordre mondial. Analyse de géopolitique économique, juridique et monétaire (The Hidden Causes of Global Turmoil: An Analysis of Economic, Legal, and Monetary Geopolitics), Sigest, 2021. She is very active on YouTube and with automatic translation you have access to her ideas. For French speakers, she also published a small pocket book, which is a synthesis of the above book, Demain dès l’aube… le renouveau (Tomorrow at dawn… a new beginning), Sigest, 2023.

[57] Maurice G. Baxter, Henry Clay and the American System, University Press of Kentucky, November 19, 2004.

[58] American investment banker and former public official with a background in finance and government service, Catherine Austin Fitts, appeared on the Tucker Carlson Show to talk about the global control grid; her February 27, 2026, appearance is titled “Catherine Fitts: Epstein, CIA Black Budget, the Control Grid, and the Banks’ Role in War.” In this episode, Fitts argues that major banks and central bankers are constructing the infrastructure of programmable money, global digital IDs, and surveillance hardware to merge monetary and fiscal policy, effectively bypassing democratic legislatures.

[59] Kerry Bolton, PhD, The Banking Swindle. Money Creation and the State, Black House Publishing, 2017.

[60] For a good explanation on how bankers start all wars and put small businesses and innovators out of the loop, see this interview of German economist Richard Werner on the YouTube Tucker Carlson channel: “Every Major War Begins Under False Pretenses & the Central Banks Are Behind It. Economist Explains,” May 22, 2026.

[61] Catherine Austin Fitts, “Catherine Fitts: Epstein, CIA Black Budget, the Control Grid, and the Banks’ Role in War,” The Tucker Carlson Show, Feb 27, 2026.

[62] The most cited and foundational reference on 15-minute cities is the work of Professor Carlos Moreno from the Sorbonne, who coined the term in 2016 and formalized it in a 2021 paper titled “Introducing the ‘15-Minute City’: Sustainability, Resilience and Place Identity in Future Post-Pandemic Cities.”  His concept defines a 15-minute city as an urban planning model where all essential services—work, education, healthcare, recreation—are accessible within a 15-minute walk or bike ride from home. Information obtained from LEO AI.

[63] Michael Higger, PhD, The Jewish Utopia, The Lord Baltimore Press, 1932; Gearóid Ó COLMÁIN, “Rothschild’s ‘Slaughter Ships.’ Coercive Engineered Migration: Zionism’s War on Europe (Part 4 of 11),” Dissident Voice, 2016. Cited by Scott HOWARD, The Open Society Playbook, Antelope Hill Publishing, p. 223.

[64] Anthony M. Ludovici, Who Is to Be Master of the World. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzche, Legare Street Press (first published in 1914 by T.N. Foulis).

 

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Pierre Simon https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Pierre Simon2026-06-07 08:06:512026-06-08 06:50:45The Protocols of the Epstein Firsters. Letter to President Putin

A Jamaican Researcher Explodes the Myths About Why Africa is Like It Is

June 5, 2026/17 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Edward Dutton

Busting African Delusions: Intelligence, Institutions and the Path to Progress
Lipton Matthews
Independently Published, 2026

We are told by our masters that there are no race differences in intelligence or personality and that countries with Sub-Saharan African populations are poor as a consequence of exploitation by Europeans. Busting African Delusions does precisely what the title states. Lipton Matthews, a Jamaican researcher, presents in tremendous detail the case that Sub-Saharan African population countries, whether in Sub-Saharan Africa or the Caribbean, are in the chaotic and impoverished state that they are because of the evolved nature of Sub-Saharan African people.

Matthews begins by dedicating his book to the late English psychologist Richard Lynn (1930–2023) who presented a huge amount of research on race differences in intelligence and personality and its causes. Lynn would present his research in a highly detached and dry fashion and Matthews follows in the tradition, though he provides some examples of such experiences of corruption in his native Jamaica.

Matthews explores national differences in socioeconomic achievement in detail and demonstrates that these seemingly come down to genetic differences in average intelligence, which is in the region of 80% genetic at the individual level. Of course, the poor environment of Africa may mean that  the genetic contribution to intelligence differences is lower there. But, even if this is so, Matthews cites studies indicating that the prevalence of alleles that are associated with intelligence is notably lower in Sub-Saharan Africa than in Europe. Accordingly, Matthews argues in favour of Richard Lynn’s “Cold Winters Theory.” This is the idea that cold winters present difficult problems to solve and, as such, select for intelligence. There are exceptions here, such as the intelligence of Arctic peoples but this may be due to a combination of very small populations, meaning less genetic diversity, and never developing agriculture, as agriculture selects for future-orientation which is a key component of intelligence.

Having carefully refuted the many criticisms of national IQs, Matthews then turns to the consequences of this low average African IQ for African economies. Most starkly, it means very poor education systems and extremely low quality teachers. Almost 80% of maths teachers in South Africa do not meet the required national standard in Maths. There are 450 schools in South Africa that do not teach maths at all. The result is an innumerate society, with obvious consequences for economic development. I once met a South Sudanese man in northern Finland and asked him how old he was. He was actually a trained teacher but could not give a firm answer: “I think I’m about 40,” he said. Not knowing his birthday, he used the date he’d arrived in Finland as a proxy. Society is also relatively illiterate, meaning that the technological revolution does not assist in creating a more knowledgeable or innovative society.

Matthews then turns to historical African wealth and highlights the way in which there were some wealthy African countries, mainly due to highly successful slave economies. We are told to believe that there was little difference between Europe and Africa until the Industrial Revolution and our supposed exploitation of Africa. Matthews shows this to be wrong: by the sixteenth century England’s wealth was at least 3 times that of many modern African countries. This contrasts with African economic systems which Matthews demonstrates were far more clannish than European ones. In other words, African systems are not based around finding talented people and employing their abilities. Instead, they are very strongly based on who is related to you and how you can assist those who are related to you in return for them assisting you. Accordingly, they are inherently nepostistic and corrupt in a way that is not so obviously true in Europe. This is a particularly original section and I learnt a great deal about pre-Colonial African economic systems. Matthews further shows that colonialism itself was far less wealth-creating for the colonial nations than we are led to believe.

Matthews, in an extremely detailed work, also looks at a series of delusions with regard to African development. Corruption and low intelligence mean that remittances will not really help Africa and nor will international aid. Leaders will always end up being corrupt and the people there tend to be incapable of planning for the future.

Matthews then shows that far from utterly exploiting sub-Saharan Africa, European colonialism precipitated rapid economic growth in the region. The situation was nuanced however. Matthews observes that, “In French Africa, monopolistic trade policies allowed European trading companies to purchase goods from African producers at artificially low prices, sometimes extracting up to 60% of the potential revenue.” Even so, Africans generally earned well above subsistence levels and there was huge investment in infrastructure and education, particularly in missionary schools.

This is a dangerously revisionist book in terms of what we’re supposed to believe and this is no better encapsulated than in Matthews’ section on the European slave trade. He shows it was nowhere near as a big a part of Britain’s economy as we are led to believe. The UK was already well into the Industrial Revolution when the slave trade reached its peak, and Caribbean goods were far from central to the British economy.

Overall, this is a fascinating and eye-opening book which genuinely debunks the key myths about Sub-Saharan Africa and the reasons for its backward socioeconomic state. It is, however, written in a highly academic style. I think one of Matthews’ key selling points as an author on this subject is that he is Jamaican, though an obvious intelligence outlier by Jamaican standards. I would relish seeing him produce another book on this topic that is far more personal in nature. How does it feel to be a highly intelligent Sub-Saharan African, whose IQ is so many standard deviations above the mean? What unusual experiences or thoughts does it lead to?

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Edward Dutton https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Edward Dutton2026-06-05 11:35:152026-06-06 08:38:36A Jamaican Researcher Explodes the Myths About Why Africa is Like It Is

Determined to Know: Free-Will, Randomness and the T.B.Q.P.

June 4, 2026/8 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Tobias Langdon

Fish swim in water; humans swim in philosophy. But I doubt that any fishes ponder what surrounds and sustains them as fish, just as I know that few humans ponder what surrounds and sustains them as humans. We humans think and know, talk and exist, yet few of us think about thought, think about knowledge, language and existence. Either way, questions are bubbling up endlessly from the depths of being, big ones and small ones, bursting and bifurcating. What is the meaning of life? What is the meaning of “meaning”? What is the meaning of “of”?

The Biggest Three

All of that is philosophy, but one of the fascinations of philosophy is the way it turns back on itself. You could say it’s sometimes omphaloskeptic — it gazes at its own navel. Take epistemology, the branch of philosophy devoted to knowledge. As humans, we know things and we seek to know things, but what do we know about knowing? How do we know what we know is true? What ways of knowing and truth-seeking are most trustworthy, efficient, refinable? And so on. As for me, I’m particularly interested in the collision between epistemology and one of the T.B.Q.P. — the Three Biggest Questions of Philosophy. What are those questions? Well, each to his own, but my T.B.Q.P. run like this:

1) Why is there something rather than nothing?[1]

2) What are the nature and mechanism(s) of consciousness?

3) What is free-will and does (or can) it exist?

I’ve ordered them by what I think is their importance, but perhaps I’ve got the order wrong. In a way, the third question is the biggest of the three, because if we need free-will to know truth and free-will doesn’t exist, we’re up a Socratic creek without a paddle. But hold on: that reasoning is absurd, because if it’s true, we couldn’t know so, because it claims we can know that we can’t know anything. In other words, it claims we can have true knowledge that true knowledge is impossible. That is, true knowledge would be impossible if free-will doesn’t exist and true knowledge depends on free-will. But does epistemology depend on free-will? Are logic, reason and true knowledge possible in an entirely deterministic and material universe? But is absurdity back when I ask that last question? The German mathematician David Hilbert was determined to know when he said “Wir müssen wissen, wir werden wissen!” — “We must know, we will know!” But was he determined to know — or not know — in another sense? After all, in a deterministic universe all questions and all answers are preordained, fixed and unalterable in advance like the routes taken by trains on a network of tracks. In a deterministic universe, the truth-trains will always go here or here, and never go there or there. But what if truth always lies there and never here? Then truth-trains would be travesty-trains. And we’d be helpless permanent passengers, never able to get off, change our tickets or influence the drivers.

“I Came, I Sawed, I Cankered”: Is arguing against free-will an absurd exercise? (image by Frits Ahlefeldt at Pixabay

Yes, some philosophers would say that “Does free-will exist?” is an ansker — an asking that answers itself, a self-answering question.[2] The answer would have to be “Yes.” Without free-will, it would be absurd to ask anything at all, let alone ask about free-will. Without free-will, we couldn’t reason or have true knowledge of the world. I don’t agree. Or I partly don’t agree. That’s because one of the compelling things about reason is that it’s a compelling thing. In clear, simple reasoning you don’t have a choice about whether to accept it or reject it. No, you’re compelled to accept or reject, by design. We can’t exercise free-will when it comes to propositions like these:

  • All men are mortal and Socrates is a man, therefore Socrates is mortal.
  • 2 + 3 – 1 = 6

Try to exercise free-will about those two propositions, rejecting the first and accepting the second. It’s impossible. Well, impossible for the sane and rational, that is. But sanity isn’t a question of free-will.[3] Even those who insist that free-will is necessary for reason and seeking truth have to accept that determinism is also necessary for those things. The point of logic is that it’s a deterministic route to truth: “If X, then Y, therefore if not-Y, then not-X.” That’s good logic, compelling belief in those who understand logic. Compare this bad logic: “If X, then Y, therefore if Y, then X.”[4] Such bad logic can compel belief only in those who don’t understand logic for one reason or another: stupidity, ignorance, insanity.

Marine Mind

And who chooses to be stupid, ignorant or insane? Well, some people choose to be ignorant. That’s a real choice if free-will exists, but I have doubts that it does. I can’t see any mechanism for it in a material brain. Or in an immaterial spirit. For me, either determinism reigns or a mixture of determinism and randomness does. But to me randomness seems as impossible as free-will. Indeed, to me the concepts of randomness and free-will seem intimately related, in part because both depend on a putative mechanism that evades or escapes determinism.[5] I can’t see how any such mechanism could exist. Then again, I can’t see any mechanism for consciousness in a material brain. Or in an immaterial spirit. Yet I know by introspection that consciousness exists. Can I not know by introspection that free-will exists?

No, not in the same way, because I can’t be fooled about consciousness. To be conscious of being conscious is to be conscious. To be conscious of having free-will is not necessarily to have free-will, because consciousness can be fooled and free-will can’t be guaranteed if something unconscious is at work too. And I also know by introspection that consciousness is not all there is inside my head. Consciousness isn’t the only thing underlying my actions, my beliefs, and my supposed free-will. The mind is like an ocean, with a sun-struck surface atop brightly lit water atop a twilight zone atop a zone of ever deepening darkness. Consciousness swims on the surface and looks down into the water. It can usually see what’s in the brightly lit water and can glimpse what’s in the twilight, but the darkness hides marvels and monsters from its gaze — marvels like the mechanism of our senses and our physiology,[6] monsters like our true selfish or self-serving motives.[7]

Light and liquid

In other words, the Mind-Mere, the Mind-Ocean, has a conscious zone, a semi-conscious zone, and an unconscious zone. It doesn’t matter that the mechanism of my consciousness is down in the dark, because consciousness of consciousness is consciousness. That doesn’t apply to free-will. It doesn’t matter that I’m not conscious of a mechanism for my own consciousness, but it does matter that I’m not conscious of a mechanism for my own free-will. If I can’t examine the mechanism, how can I know whether it’s really supplying me with free-will? I’d draw this analogy: Suppose you enter a room and find an electric lamp and a glass sitting on a table. The lamp is lit and the glass is full of a clear liquid that looks and smells (or unsmells) like water. Now, do you know that the systems supplying power to the lamp (which represents consciousness) and the systems that supply the liquid (which represents free-will) are working as they should? In the first case, yes: the proof is in the pudding. If the lamp is lit, then all is obviously working as it should be.

In the second case, no: the proof isn’t in the pudding. Just by looking at the liquid and smelling the liquid, you can’t be sure it really is water. But let’s suppose it is water. Can you now be sure the water is not contaminated with invisible bacteria or an odorless, tasteless, slow-acting poison? No, and drinking it wouldn’t immediately enlighten you either. You don’t need to confirm the credentials of the power-supply if the lamp is lit. Like consciousness, light is its own guarantee.[8] Like free-will, a glass of water is not its own guarantee, because you do need to confirm the credentials of the water-supply. With the water, you need to examine the supply to know that there’s no deliberate or inadvertent contamination and so on. Similarly, with free-will you need to examine the mechanism to know that it isn’t deterministic. But what is the mechanism of free-will? It’s as mysterious as the mechanism of consciousness. But I would suggest that perhaps the mechanism of free-will is mysterious because free-will doesn’t exist.

Reasoning that reason is impossible

If free-will exists, then there must be a mechanism of free-will, something that receives information and supplies a choice based on, but not determined by, that information. But how could that be possible? How can a mechanism receive and process information without the operation of that mechanism being in some full sense determined by the information? How could one have an indeterministic mechanism for something like free-will?[9] Standard theory in physics claims that atomic decay is indeterministic, but it doesn’t claim that atoms exercise free-will about whether or not to decay. And the marker of the supposed indeterminism is randomness. For its proponents, free-will represents the complete opposite of randomness. For opponents of the concept of free-will like me, the complete opposite of randomness could only be strict determinism.

But am I an opponent of the concept? I would once have said that I was. Nowadays I’d say that I’m only a skeptic about free-will. Or maybe an agnostic. I’m skeptical about free-will for the same reason as I’m skeptical about infallibility: because I can’t see a mechanism for it. I can’t see a material mechanism and I can’t see an immaterial one. But I’m also skeptical about the rejection of free-will. There are two reasons for that. First, I recognize the possible absurdity of arguing against free-will and for determinism or (if standard theory in physics is true) a mixture of determinism and randomness. Arguing against free-will sometimes feels like reasoning that reason is impossible. Inter alia, both determinism and randomness would seem to render agency irrelevant, yet how can we reason without being agents? I certainly feel like one as I think about these topics, apply logic and try to reach conclusions.

“The whirl of the infinite”

And thinking — or thinking about thinking — has supplied my second reason for being skeptical about rejecting free-will. I’ve thought more about epistemology and hope I understand it better. Or rather: understand better that I don’t understand it. As I asked in “White Rites: Meditations on Mathematics and Materiality,” how is it possible that a material brain, occupying a speck of space and a blink of time, can supply a human being with certain knowledge about all space and all time? The great Arthur Conan Doyle described one of his characters as a “poor impotent atom with his pin-point of brain caught in the whirl of the infinite.” Yet the pin-point of a human brain can conquer the infinite. With our minute, material brains, we can know things that are true of, say, all triangles and all circles anywhere and anywhen. And we can grasp more than trivial truths-by-definition, such as that all triangles have three sides and that all points of a circle are equidistant from its center. No, we can grasp profounder truths, such as that the internal angles of any Euclidean triangle sum to 180° and that the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter is a constant called π or pi, which is both infinitely long and infinitely complex.[10]

We can know that of all triangles and circles with our minute, material brains. How? I don’t know. Well, we know it with our immaterial minds, our immaterial consciousness, but they’re generated by our minute, material brains, aren’t they? And are they truly immaterial? Again, I don’t know. Are minds and consciousness immortal, as theology and some branches of philosophy would claim? Yet again, I don’t know. I can’t account for consciousness or universal knowledge within materialism (or immaterialism, for that matter). But I know by introspection that they exist, which is why I’m now only skeptical about free-will, not rejectional. I don’t know by introspection that free-will exists, but perhaps there’s a mechanism for it, down in the deepest dark. And whatever the ontology of free-will, there are interesting implications for politics and White nationalism. But that, as Rudyard Kipling would have said, is another story.


[1]  “Why is there something rather than nothing?” packs more puzzle into fewer syllables than anything else I know. It’s Leibniz’s puzzle, originally posed in Latin, according to Wikiquote, as Cur aliquid potius extiterit quam nihil? Heidegger later asked: Warum ist überhaupt Seiendes und nicht vielmehr Nichts? Das ist die Frage. — “Why are there beings at all rather than nothing? That is the question.”

[2] Here are two more examples of anskers or self-answering questions: “Is this question in English?” « Est-ce que je pose cette question en allemand ? »

[3] Sanity isn’t usually a question of free-will, that is. But a sane person could choose to take a drug that drives him insane. Or could he? Would not voluntarily abandoning sanity be in itself an insane or irrational act? And so on — as usual, philosophy makes me feel like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice.

[4] The bad logic commits the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Compare “If human, then mortal, therefore if not mortal, then not human” (good logic) with “If human, then mortal, therefore if mortal, then human” (bad logic).

[5] Randomness, defining it, detecting it — these are more fascinating topics.

[6] We see, hear, taste, touch and smell, but we don’t know how our senses supply our consciousness, just as we don’t know (by introspection) how we voluntarily control our limbs or involuntarily regulate our heart-beat, digest our food, monitor our hormone levels, and conduct the myriad other tasks of house-keeping a human body.

[7] One of the sorrows of owning a brain is that the mind-monsters sometimes swim up into the light, but the marvels never do. In other words, we can become conscious of our previously unconscious bad motives and so on, but we can never become conscious by introspection of how our senses work. The physical mechanism of the senses is being explained by science, but not the mechanism of how that physical mechanism supplies aphysical consciousness, which remains as mysterious as ever. As I said in my article “Magnissimum Mysterium: Pondering a Huge but Hidden Factor in Politics and White Nationalism”: “everything that science knows and understands about [consciousness] could be written on the full stop at the end of this sentence.”

[8] “Like consciousness, light is its own guarantee.” — in some sense, this statement is redundant. It really says: “Like consciousness, consciousness-of-light is its own guarantee.

[9] I’ll go further: I don’t see how there be an indeterministic mechanism for anything at all, which is why I don’t believe that atomic decay is truly indeterministic or truly random. Some companies claiming to supply truly random numbers use atomic decay and other quantum effects to generate them, one company uses lava lamps. But lava lamps are chaotic, not indeterministic, so perhaps atomic decay depends on chaos or something other pseudo-random, entirely deterministic process.

[10] The digits of pi are entirely deterministic but also, in a sense, entirely random. The decimal of 1/7 = 0·142857142857142857… is infinitely long but entirely predictable, because it falls into a repeating pattern. The decimal of pi = 3.1415926535897932384626433832795… is infinitely long and also infinitely unpredictable, because it never falls into a repeating pattern. You can compress the infinite decimal of 1/7 into “0·142857…” You can’t compress the decimal of pi like that.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Tobias Langdon https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Tobias Langdon2026-06-04 08:08:012026-06-05 04:29:03Determined to Know: Free-Will, Randomness and the T.B.Q.P.

Beware of the Anti-Qatar Narrative on the Right

June 3, 2026/7 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Jose Nino

If you criticize Israel on the American right today, expect to be labeled a Qatari shill by a network of pro-Israel commentators who have turned accusations of Gulf Arab money into a political weapon while ignoring the elephant in the room of Jewish influence in American foreign policy. This campaign has intensified dramatically since October 7, 2023, as criticism of Israel’s conduct in Gaza mounted and figures like Tucker Carlson broke with hawkish foreign policy orthodoxy.

The accusations function as a convenient diversion. Anyone arguing that Qatar possesses influence comparable to the Zionist lobby in American politics is simply living on a different planet. The overwhelming Jewish overrepresentation in think tanks, media, business, and other institutions makes the assertion of dominant Qatari influence in U.S. politics risible at best.

The history between Qatar and Israel is far more nuanced and complex than the pro-Israel influencers who accuse Qatar of causing all sorts of trouble would have people believe. Qatar’s relationship with Israel has oscillated between quiet engagement and open antagonism for nearly three decades. Qatar became the first Gulf Cooperation Council state to grant Israel de facto recognition when Israel opened a trade office in Doha in 1996 following a visit by Prime Minister Shimon Peres. That office was closed following the outbreak of the Second Intifada in 2000, briefly re-opened after Israel’s 2005 disengagement from Gaza, and then permanently shuttered again in 2009 in the wake of Operation Cast Lead.

Despite these ruptures, Qatar and Israel have regularly found areas of practical alignment. After Operation Protective Edge in 2014, Israel actively embraced Qatar’s role as Gaza’s financier and mediator with Hamas. Between 2012 and 2021, Qatar transferred $1.49 billion to Gaza—including up to $1 billion in cash—with the approval of successive Israeli governments, according to the Database of Israeli Military and Security Export. Israel itself facilitated these monthly transfers of Qatari funds to keep the electricity grid running and civil servant salaries paid, per the Israel Policy Forum. Curiously, Qatar and Israel were strange bedfellows in the dirty war against Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria, both working to undermine and eventually topple his regime by late 2024.

Further, Qatar is fully integrated in the United States’s—which is Israel’s de facto bodyguard—security architecture. Qatar hosts the largest U.S. Air Force installation outside the United States at Al Udeid Air Base, paying a significant portion of its operating costs and contributing over $8 billion since 2003. President Joe Biden designated Qatar a Major Non-NATO Ally in 2022, and both Israel and the United States have relied on Qatar as the primary mediator in all hostage release and ceasefire talks with Hamas following October 7.

At the same time, genuine tensions between Qatar and Israel do exist. Qatar has housed Hamas’s political bureau in Doha since 2012, when the group’s leadership departed Damascus following the Syrian Civil War, and has provided an estimated $1.8 billion to Gaza’s Hamas-run government over the years. Qatar’s state-owned Al Jazeera network has consistently given Hamas leaders a platform, which Israeli officials have long viewed as hostile to Israel’s interests, prompting Israel to pass legislation in April 2024 banning the network from operating in the country. Unlike the UAE, Bahrain, and other Gulf states, Qatar explicitly did not join the 2020 Abraham Accords normalization process.

The tensions reached an unprecedented level on September 9, 2025, when Israel conducted airstrikes on residential buildings in Doha’s Katara district housing Hamas’s political bureau. Hamas confirmed the strike killed five of its members, while Qatar confirmed that one member of its Internal Security Force was also killed. It was Israel’s first direct strike on a Gulf Cooperation Council member state, drawing condemnation from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.

This complicated history, however, is precisely what pro-Israel commentators, who are largely of Jewish extraction, prefer to ignore. Josh Hammer, Newsweek Senior Editor at Large, author of Israel and Civilization, and host of The Josh Hammer Show, has been among the most vocal critics. In a December 2025 Newsweek piece titled “Foreign Forces Are Sowing Discord on the Home Front,” Hammer explicitly accused Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, and others of being corrupted by Qatar’s soft power offensive, arguing that “many on the American Right spent the better part of two decades warning about the corrosive influence of Qatar’s soft-power ventures.” In a separate piece titled “Operation Divide MAGA,” Hammer wrote that Carlson had “evinced an unhealthy obsession with the Jewish people and the state of Israel,” accusing him of entertaining “Hitler/Nazi apologia” and arguing that Carlson and Candace Owens have embarked “down this dark, well-trodden path” of promoting anti-Israel narratives on the right.

Laura Loomer launched some of the most aggressive personal attacks, publicly accusing Tucker Carlson of being “controlled by Muslims” and dubbing him “Tucker Qatarlson” in a series of posts beginning in mid-2025. Her accusations were rooted in a Washington Examiner investigation revealing that Lumen8 Advisors LLC—paid $180,000 per month by the Embassy of Qatar for “media and communication coaching and consulting services” per FARA records—helped facilitate Carlson’s March 2025 interview with Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, which garnered nearly 6,000,000 views. Loomer claimed Qatar had paid over $200,000 for the interview, though the actual FARA filing showed no disbursement to Carlson or his company, and TCN CEO Neil Patel denied any payment.

Fox News host Mark Levin coined the nickname “Chatsworth Qatarlson” for Tucker Carlson and repeatedly accused him of being paid by the Qatari government in connection with the Israel-Iran conflict. Levin also questioned whether Tucker Carlson Network CEO Neil Patel should “register as foreign agents under FARA” following Patel’s appearance at the Doha Forum.

David Reaboi, a Jewish national security consultant, author of Qatar’s Shadow War, founder of Late Republic Nonsense, and a Claremont Institute fellow, has spent years building the analytical infrastructure for critiques of Qatari influence. In a 2019 speech, Reaboi stated that “Today there is no more important bankroller of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas than Qatar,” and argued that Qatar is “savvy when it comes to information warfare” as well as lobbying for favorable policies in Washington. Even Israel’s Diaspora Minister Amichai Chikli joined the chorus in early 2026, publicly stating that “Currently in America, the greatest threat is Tucker Carlson, who is most likely paid by Qatar.”

The Qatar accusations flooding conservative media represent an attempt to deflect attention from the far more extensive and documented influence of pro-Israel forces in American politics. While Qatar certainly engages in lobbying and public relations, the scale pales in comparison to organizations like AIPAC, JINSA, ZOA, WINEP and the broader infrastructure of Zionist political power that operates through campaign contributions, think tank funding, media ownership, and dense networks of organizational influence across every sector of American elite life. Those invoking the Qatar specter to discredit critics of Israel are engaged in misdirection, hoping Americans will not notice who shapes their country’s Middle East policy and silences dissent through accusations and eventual censorship campaigns rather than arguments.

To blame Qatar for America’s foreign policy misadventures is a calculated misdirection designed to insulate the real center of influence from scrutiny. The relentless focus on Gulf states is a tactical smoke screen maintained by Jewish media agents to keep the American Right from identifying the genuine sovereign in foreign policy decision-making. Until we have the courage to acknowledge that our Middle East policy is dictated by organized Jewry—not Qatar—we will remain a hoodwinked and occupied nation.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Jose Nino https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Jose Nino2026-06-03 07:40:362026-06-03 07:46:12Beware of the Anti-Qatar Narrative on the Right

When Jews ran the Gulag

June 2, 2026/19 Comments/in Communism, Featured Articles/by Karl Nemmersdorf

INTRODUCTION

Few people realize how very Jewish the government of the Soviet Union was in its first two decades. Given the realities of publishing in today’s world, those who wish to learn more could read numerous books, encounter a blizzard of unfamiliar Russian names, and never realize that many of the crucial figures were actually Jews. Anne Applebaum’s Gulag: A History is a great example of this phenomenon. Applebaum, a Jew, wrote almost six hundred pages about the Gulag, but mentioned the three Jews who headed it in the 1930s (Kogan, Berman, and Pliner) less than a dozen times, and never let the reader know that they were Jews. She did not discuss the administration of the Gulag, nor the men who staffed it. There is no “Jew” in her index, only “Jewish prisoners.” Thus, the only Jews in her “history” are victims; the fact that Jews ran the entire Gulag system and were responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of people (and the terrible suffering of millions more) is whitewashed from the record. This is nothing less than a willful and severe distortion of the historical record, and it is replicated in so much of what was published on the Soviet Union.

This article aims to provide a modest correction. We will look at the three Jews who headed the Gulag in the 1930s, and their boss, the head of the NKVD, Genrikh Yagoda.[1] These four men—full-blooded Jews all—ruled over millions of prisoners who were treated essentially as slaves with no rights, and worked them, by the hundred thousand, literally to death. They ruthlessly sent millions of Soviet citizens into some of the harshest climates on earth to create cities and industrial complexes with little more than their bare hands. The goal was to develop the country’s natural resources and carry out a breakneck industrialization, to prepare for the next world war, the aim of which was to communize the entire world. The mortality and suffering were horrifying, but these malevolent figures evidently believed it was a worthy exchange for that perfect communist future. (Or, rather, they never cared enough to even make that calculation.)

The term “Gulag” is shorthand for Glavnoye Upravleniye Ispravitelno-Trudovykh Lagerey, or “Main Administration of Corrective Labor Camps.” This agency dates from 1930, well after the Bolsheviks erected the first camps in 1918. At this time all the camps were finally brought under a central organization, within the purview of the secret police. Historians estimate that eighteen million people were sent to the camps and that 1.6 million of them died, although some admit the true number of deaths could be far higher.[2] In the history of the Gulag there existed almost 500 major groups of camps, with the total number of individual camps rising toward 30,000.[3] The Gulag administration was finally abolished only in 1960, although some camps continued in existence. The structure and method of the Gulag in these three decades were largely established by the following four men:

GENRIKH YAGODA  

Genrikh Grigorievich Yagoda was the highest-ranking Jewish secret police official in the history of Soviet Russia.[4] He headed the NKVD from 1934–1936 but was effectively in control for years before that. During his time in power, his policies and actions resulted in the murder (not “death”) of almost ten million people, with millions more enslaved in concentration camps. It is true that the real driver of policy was Stalin, but Yagoda freely chose to cooperate—participating in high-level policy-making—and implement the program. The Jewish people have never issued an apology for his actions, nor for any other Jewish Bolshevik mass murderer. (Rather, Communist criminals such as Salomon Morel and others find refuge from prosecution in Israel.)

Born in 1891 as Genokh Gershevich Yagoda, he grew up in Nizhni-Novgorod, his family closely associated with the Sverdlovs, with whom they were related.[5] Yagoda entered the revolutionary movement before the age of sixteen, participated in the October Revolution in Petrograd, and joined the Cheka. By 1920 he was a member of the ruling panel of the Cheka, the Collegium. Three years later he was second deputy chairman of the OGPU[6] and by 1926 first deputy chairman under Vyacheslav Menzhinsky, whose chronic illness placed Yagoda essentially in charge by 1929. During most of the 1920s Yagoda was deputy head or head of the important Special Department, which handled counterintelligence and surveillance of the entire country and all its institutions; it was a post that afforded him great power in the murky world of a secret police dictatorship.[7]

Yagoda as a dandified young revolutionary, age twenty, in a mug-shot from 1912. Yagoda was arrested in connection with a revolutionary bank-robbery, for which he had purportedly provided material for explosives. The senescent Tsarist government soon amnestied him, and he moved to St. Petersburg and married Yakov Sverdlov’s niece.

Yagoda and his wife Ida Averbakh in 1922. Yagoda was already a Chekist of very high rank. Two eastern European Jews—among hundreds of thousands—enjoying the trajectory from shtetl to power on a world stage. Ida became a state prosecutor in Moscow.

Since 1918 the concentration camp system had grown apace, and in April 1930 it was brought under a unified administration, the Gulag (within the main structure of the secret police).[8] Stalin had made the decision to utilize forced labor to develop the vast natural wealth of the country and spur industrialization, influenced by his secret police officers, who had been using prisoners to harvest timber in the north and touting their success. (The Jew Naftali Frenkel was instrumental in this development.)[9] Under Stalin, Yagoda worked closely with the heads of the Gulag—his subordinates—to form the economic goals of the massively expanded system of camps. One of the earliest major projects was the ill-fated White Sea-Baltic Canal, built in 1931–1933 at the cost of at least 25,000 lives. An even bigger undertaking, the Moscow-Volga Canal, followed. Both these enterprises were headed by a swarm of secret police Jews, under the overall command of Yagoda.

Another massive and lethal program he supervised was the collectivization of the farmers (1929–1933).[10] This involved skimming off the class of “kulaks,” supposedly wealthier farmers, and sending them to the Gulag or into internal exile—about two million people, of whom an estimated half a million died. Then the other farmers were forced off their lands and onto state-run farms, in order to regularize output and fuel industrialization. It was the destruction of the way of life of 120 million people. It culminated in the “Harvest of Sorrow” (1932–1933) in which the state—the NKVD—used famine to break the pervasive resistance to collectivization. Six to eight million died in Ukraine and other areas.[11]

In 1934 Menzhinsky died and Stalin made Yagoda General Commissar of the restructured security administration, the NKVD. His power was immense: the secret police, the Gulag, the border troops, special NKVD troops, the regular police, all-embracing surveillance. He accumulated great wealth at his three lavishly-decorated residences: foreign wine, clothing, guns, pornographic films, and cash.

However, Stalin wanted to get rid of Yagoda, who did not wholeheartedly support collectivization or the show trial of the Old Bolsheviks Zinoviev and Kamenev (August 1936), a crucial step in Stalin’s consolidation of total power.[12] Stalin was grooming Yagoda’s successor, Nikolai Yezhov, and wanted to break up the old leadership of the secret police. Thus, on 25 September 1936, Stalin demoted him to Commissar of Communications. For months Yagoda twisted in the wind, barely showing up to work, making paper airplanes when he did. Yezhov arrested ninety percent of Yagoda’s top men and brought in his own group, many of whom were Jews.

Yagoda at his desk in the early 1930s, apparently cultivating an aura. He was lauded in the Soviet press for his “success” in finishing the White Sea-Baltic Canal on schedule.

 

Yagoda as imperious chief of the NKVD, 1936. Despite the lofty decorations, his face clearly shows insecurity. The mustache has been trimmed into the then-popular “toothbrush” style, à la Charlie Chaplin. The uniform greatcoat is ugly and unimaginative, like virtually the entire Soviet aesthetic.

Finally, in late March 1937, NKVD officers took him into custody. Among the men who interrogated (and beat) him were numerous Jews.[13] Stalin ordered his investigators to concoct a vast fictional conspiracy and place Yagoda in the center of it: he was accused of spying for foreign nations, including Germany, plotting to assassinate Stalin, and poisoning several prominent people, including his predecessor Menzhinsky and the writer Maxim Gorky. NKVD interrogation teams put  him through lengthy and exhausting rehearsals of his “guilt.” In his cell he “wept constantly [and] fought . . . for breath.”[14] He also made a highly revealing comment to one of his interrogators: “You can put down in your report . . . that I said there must be a God after all. From Stalin I deserved nothing but gratitude for my faithful service; from God, I deserved the most severe punishment for having violated his commandments thousands of times. Now look where I am and judge for yourself: is there a God or not?”[15] Yagoda was officially an atheistic materialist, but, like Stalin, the old religion seemed to be lurking in the unconscious spaces of his mind.

The third and final show trial, featuring Yagoda and Nikolai Bukharin, took place in March 1938.[16] Yagoda admitted guilt in general while disputing details;[17] no matter, he was shot anyway, despite a final plea for clemency—to be allowed to work as a laborer on one of his canals. Stalin exterminated practically his whole family: parents, wife Ida, siblings. His son, Genrikh, grew up in an NKVD orphanage, did five years in the camps, and later emigrated to Israel.[18] A fitting coda to the family story: in three generations they went from a (probably) observant Jew in a shtetl to a (nominally) atheistic, all-powerful Bolshevik commissar, to a deracinated elderly Jew in Israel, where the fourth generation might well become militant Jewish nationalists.[19] What a trajectory!

LAZAR KOGAN

The cheerful reformer of mankind through (slave) labor.

Lazar Iosifovich Kogan was the head of the Gulag for two years (June 1930 – June 1932), the first of three Jews who consecutively held that post, and personally directed the construction of both the White Sea-Baltic and Moscow-Volga canals, at least up to August 1936.[20] Possibly a hundred thousand people under his control—in the camps and on huge forced-labor projects—died of malnutrition, overwork, and execution. He was a ruthless exploiter of forced labor who claimed he was doing it for their own good, and for a glorious future for all mankind.

Kogan was born in or near Krasnoyarsk, Siberia, in the family of a wealthy fur trader, in 1889. By 1905 he was a revolutionary (or a violent criminal—often the two overlapped) and in 1908 he was sentenced to death by a military court in Kiev for armed robbery and murder carried out in the company of purported anarchists.[21] The sentence was changed to life at hard labor because of his young age. He then served his sentence until the Provisional Government amnestied political prisoners after the fall of the Tsar, in early 1917. No lasting ill effects are recorded as a result of his sentence, unlike what befell his own later victims.

During the Russian Civil War he joined the Bolsheviks and served in the Red Army and the Cheka. He was head of the Special Department (Cheka) of the Ninth Army, handling counterintelligence and suppression of counterrevolution, which meant he ordered the execution of anyone viewed as a threat to Communist power. He held the same office for the Terek region in the north Caucasus, killing Cossacks and others en masse. Then he moved to Dagestan on the Caspian Sea and crushed all opposition there. In 1926 he became the assistant to the head of the OGPU troops and border guards, a considerable force. Then in June 1930 he became the head of the Gulag and his career as slave master began.

In 1930 the campaign of collectivization was filling the Gulag with new prisoners, and the NKVD was gearing up to align the camps with the economic goals of the regime on a more ambitious scale. The number of prisoners in the camps doubled in Kogan’s tenure, to over 370,000 in mid-1932.[22] The two aforementioned canals were initiated, and in November 1931 he took on the management of the construction of the White Sea-Baltic Canal. The following May he simultaneously took over the same position at the Moscow-Volga Canal. The next month, June 1932, he stepped down from leading the Gulag (Matvei Berman took over) but remained deputy head. He concentrated on building the canals that were viewed by the regime as so emblematic of the developing socialist society.

The White Sea-Baltic canal required digging 140 miles through a landscape “largely composed of sheer granite,” with very little machinery, which was expensive and relatively rare.[23] The workers did the vast bulk of the digging and building by hand, with shovels and wheelbarrows. Soviet publicists made much fanfare of the value of manual labor in redeeming criminals and making them fit citizens of the socialist state, and Kogan at least paid lip service to the idea. However, food supply and living and working conditions were usually awful, because of official embezzlement, negligence, and callousness, and workers died in droves. Rations were tied to work performance, with a drastic reduction to starvation level for workers who did not meet the overly ambitious production goals (Kogan and the other directors of the canal were desperate to finish on time to impress Stalin and expand their role in the economy). At least 25,000 and perhaps as many as 50,000 people died. They were often thrown in unmarked mass graves; many died in accidents, being buried in dams or falling into huge concrete pourings. The canal was finished on schedule (August 1933) and the top organizers were fawned over in the press and given awards.[24] Six administrators, all Jews—Yagoda, Matvei Berman, Kogan, Naftali Frenkel, Semyon Firin, and Yakov Rapoport—were given the highest state award, the Order of Lenin (along with two Russian engineers.)[25] Many of the prisoners and staff were then transferred to the Moscow canal.

Kogan with a delegation visiting the building site of the Moscow-Volga Canal, circa 1935–1936. The diminutive Kogan sports a leather trench coat, center.

The Moscow Canal—linking the Moskva River in Moscow with the Volga river to the north—was even more ambitious, with an estimated 600,000 prisoners cycling through in the nearly five years of construction, although the maximum at one time was 195,000. The death-toll here was another 25,000–50,000 (anonymous mass graves are still periodically found along the line of the canal)[26] and 2,500 more prisoners were dispatched to the Butovo shooting ground and executed after the project was finished in July 1937.[27] By that time, however, Stalin had relieved the pint-sized Chekist of his NKVD posts and shunted him off to the Timber Commissariat (August 1936).

An inspection of the Moscow-Volga Canal. Yagoda is front-center, Semyon Firin is on the left, and tiny Lazar Kogan is far right. Nikita Krushchev, an official in the regional Moscow Communist Party, appears behind Yagoda in a belted white tunic.  

Kogan was arrested in January 1938, accused of “having been, since 1930, a participant in an anti-Soviet terrorist organization operating within the NKVD system,” and sabotaging the timber harvest.[28] The Supreme Court of the USSR passed a sentence of death, and on March 3, 1939, NKVD executioners shot and buried him at one of Moscow’s secret execution sites, the Kommunarka shooting ground, reserved for high-ranking officials.

 MATVEI BERMAN

Matvei Davidovich Berman, a short, stocky, red-haired Chekist, was chief of the Gulag from June 1932 to August 1937, with a million slaves under his absolute control, working on gigantic building projects all over Russia, in conditions so horrific they beggar description. At least 200,000 people died in the camps during his tenure. His name recognition is infinitesimal compared to the notoriety he deserves.

Berman was born in 1898 in the Chita district, east of Lake Baikal. His father owned a brick factory; his two brothers, Boris and Yuri, would also serve in the secret police. He joined the Bolshevik Party even before they seized power, then served in the Red Army. He entered the Cheka in August 1918 and became head of the Glazov City Cheka. After only a month, the twenty-year-old was expelled from the Party for drunkenness, but was soon reinstated, and went on to hold leading posts all over the Urals, the Far East, and Central Asia. He proved himself a very effective operator, exterminating anti-Soviet elements, suppressing rebellions, sending his agents into China to conduct sabotage and kidnap expatriate White Russians. In 1927 he became chairman of the secret police (then called the OGPU) over the entire Soviet Republic of Uzbekistan. His superiors obviously trusted him, and in July 1930 they named him deputy head of the Gulag. He was only thirty-two.

Berman as a young, rather severe Cheka commissar. The gaze is weirdly intense for a formal portrait.

Berman immediately took an active role in organizing the large economic projects assigned to the Gulag, beginning with the White Sea-Baltic Canal. He showed himself a ruthless exploiter of forced labor. He fired off memoranda demanding thousands of new slaves, carried out whirlwind inspections, and presided over the full transition of the Gulag to a major economic role in “building Socialism.” After the “success” of the White Sea-Baltic Canal, a number of huge initiatives were launched or expanded: the Moscow-Volga Canal, the Baikal-Amur Railroad, coal mining in Uzbekistan, the construction of the city Magnitogorsk as a center of steel production, gold mining in Kolyma, nickel mines at Norilsk north of the Arctic circle, and even the construction of the massive factories famous from the siege of Stalingrad: Red October and the Barrikady. There were hundreds of other enterprises, in every corner of the country, and in June 1932 Berman assumed total control over them, being named head of the Gulag, succeeding Kogan. In connection with these economic projects and the collectivization campaign, Berman supervised a vast expansion in the number of prisoners. By 1937 there were many groups of camps, all of them encompassing dozens or hundreds of smaller satellite camps. These groups had separate local administrations, so there were a large number of officials ruling over the prisoners, and Jews were well-represented among their number.

Berman visiting the White Sea-Baltic Canal construction site in 1932. He is inthe center, hands behind his back. Naftaly Frenkel is on the far right. Berman radiates self-confidence and menace. On the left is another Jewish chief of construction of a sector of the canal, Grigory Afanasyev who is mentioned below as the head of military construction sites and labor camps all over western Russia until 1952.

A particularly egregious exploitation of human life was the effort to extract gold from the far northeastern region of Russia, in the Kolyma River basin. Soviet leaders coveted the gold because it could finance the import of modern industrial technology, but extreme climatic conditions meant that free labor would never move there. They would have to use forced labor, and the basic infrastructure would have to be built first: roads, a port, settlements, etc. The effort began in 1931 with the founding of Dalstroy, the Far Northern Construction Trust, under OGPU control, to direct the venture. The following summer—just after Berman became head of the Gulag—Dalstroy began sending out steamers each packed with ten thousand carefully guarded people. When they arrived at present-day Magadan on the north shore of the Sea of Okhotsk, the bosses informed them that their living quarters—cheap barracks—would have to wait; they had to build the port and the town first:

With bare hands they constructed piers for ocean steamers, setting up caissons weighing many tons under the steep cliffs where the sea was 12 to 15 feet deep at the water’s edge. They cut broad roads through the stone, leading down to the piers. They built . . . a sawmill, a brickyard, a fish-salting factory, ship repair yards, a power station. They began draining the swamp and clearing the parts of the taiga adjacent to the spot selected for the future town, felling and rooting up trees. . . . They built houses for the administrative staff . . . for the GPU troops they built “cold-resistant barracks” with double walls filled in with sawdust . . . [yet] through the summer and late into the autumn the workers lived in huts made of branches.[29]

That autumn groups of workers were sent north to begin preparatory work for the construction of a road leading to the gold deposits (the road became known as “the road of bones”). That winter the death toll was great, but Gulag administrators were supplied with plenty of ships and people. They began sending ships through the Bering Strait to deliver workers to the mouth of the Kolyma River, which empties into the Arctic Ocean (one such ship, the Dzhurma, got stuck in the ice and arrived after a year’s delay without a single one of its 12,000 prisoners still alive).[30] These parties began building a road south to meet the workers moving north. That summer they managed to begin mining the placer deposits of gold. By 1939 there were 140,000 prisoners in the area and they extracted 53 tons of gold, thirty-five percent of total Soviet production.[31] The mining of the gold was eventually mechanized and 88 tons were produced in 1941. Needless to say, the conditions of work and life were even worse than elsewhere in the Gulag. The cost in human suffering, despair, and death is incalculable. Estimates of deaths range from 140,000 to a million. (The horror of Kolyma was so great that Robert Conquest, a very judicious researcher, in his 1978 book Kolyma put the death toll at three million people.) Berman is not on record as expressing regret or sorrow over the human lives lost.

In August 1936 Berman became head of the construction of the Moscow-Volga Canal; in September he became deputy head of the NKVD, under the new man Yezhov, who replaced Yagoda. In 1938 he was a deputy of the first meeting of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. He was reaching dizzying heights, often the prelude to a fall under Stalin. On April 22, 1937 he escorted Stalin on a tour of the Moscow Canal, not long before its official opening. That August, however, Stalin removed him from his NKVD posts and made him Commissar of Communications, a radical demotion. Stalin, you recall, made the same move with Yagoda just a year before.

Berman (on left) escorting Stalin on a visit to the Moscow-Volga Canal, April 1937. Semyon Firin is on the right; within days Firin was arrested.

Stalin had Berman arrested in December 1938. Stalin had just called a halt to the sixteen-month crescendo of executions called the “Great Terror,” and Lavrenti Beria had replaced Nikolai Yezhov as secret police chief. Yet another purge swept through the NKVD, and Berman was caught in the trap. He was accused of leading a counterrevolutionary terrorist group in the NKVD, sabotaging the major projects carried out by the Gulag, and spying for Germany. Presumably he was tortured, but by March 7, 1939, it was over. He also was taken to Kommunarka and shot. Lazar Kogan had been shot there just four days earlier, and Berman’s brother Boris two weeks before.[32] The camp system and its projects continued on, however, growing ever bigger until the death of Stalin in 1953, largely on the lines laid down by Matvei Berman, one of the greatest slave-drivers in recorded history.

Berman in the hands of NKVD interrogators, his eyes moist, clearly struggling to process what is happening to him. The self-confidence is utterly gone, replaced by unconcealed anguish.

IZRAIL PLINER

Izrail Izrailevich Pliner was head of the Gulag from August 1937 to November 1938. This was the exact period of Stalin’s Great Terror with its 1.5 million arrests and 700,000 executions. Hundreds of thousands of unfortunates flooded into the camps. Immense economic endeavors utilizing Gulag labor continued apace, and more were initiated. Pliner did not last long in this post, but he perpetuated and expanded the inhumane regimen that his Jewish predecessors had established.

The clean-cut high-ranking Chekist.

Pliner was born in 1896 in what is now northern Belarus, in the Pale of Settlement. He worked in various occupations as a young man: brewer’s assistant, wagon driver, conductor on the railway, even fishing in Astrakhan. His family was religious and wished him to become a rabbi, but when the Revolution came, he plunged into the maelstrom. After the Bolsheviks took power and the Civil War began, he entered the Red Army, serving until 1926 in the supply services as quartermaster. In 1922 he entered the Communist Party. He transferred to supply roles for OGPU special purpose troops in 1926. He worked in the Moscow region and came to the attention of high officials; as a result, they tapped him as assistant head of the Gulag in February 1933, where he remained until he ascended to the head position in August 1937.

Pliner’s responsibilities as deputy head of the Gulag included supervising logistics and prisoner allocation to the various enterprises based on need. The camp population soared over the one million mark around 1936, and neared two million by the end of 1937. Pliner took measures to improve the function of the camps by ordering the release of sick and disabled prisoners, but the pressure to increase productivity prevented him from introducing a more humane regime. He, like his predecessors, urged camp bosses to drive the workers harder. In the circumstances—chaotic food supply, crowded camps, inadequate infrastructure—this meant that people were worked to death. 108,000 deaths were recorded in the camps in the year 1938; the real number must have been at least fifteen percent higher than that.[33] In 1937–38 there were also mass executions in the camps, part of the program of the Great Terror.[34]

In a group photo alongside a somewhat chubby Matvei Berman, with an enigmatic expression. He is reminiscent of Jeffrey Epstein here.  

From July 1936 to November 1938 he was also deputy head, then head of the NKVD Resettlement Department. Almost immediately he took charge of the operation to deport 175,000 Koreans from the Far Eastern border (adjacent to Korea and China) to the interior of Russia, to Central Asia. Stalin suspected the Koreans of disloyalty. Little was provided to help the Koreans resettle in the new areas, and mortality was significant.[35] Pliner was awarded the Order of Lenin for managing this great crime.

It was during Pliner’s tenure that the propaganda about redeeming criminals through labor was dropped. “As the political rhetoric grew more radical, as the hunt for political criminals intensified, the status of the camps, where these dangerous [counterrevolutionaries] resided, changed as well.”[36] Now the camps were full of deadly enemies of the state, who needed to be destroyed, not redeemed. The harder attitude was reflected in harsher conditions in the camps, and this became systematic, not merely informal. Rations were reduced, security was tightened. Correspondence was restricted and controlled. Prisoners, who had been called by their names or occupations, now became strictly a “zek,” short for the word prisoner: zaklyuchennyi. A group of prisoners became a “contingent.” Guards stopped calling prisoners “comrade,” which had a surprisingly baleful effect on the morale of the prisoners.

In the camps, “enemy of the people” now became an official term. . . . Women were arrested as “wives of enemies of the people” after an NKVD decree of 1937 made such arrests possible, and the same applied to children. Officially, they were sentenced as . . . “Member of the Family of an Enemy of the Revolution.” Many of the “wives” were incarcerated together in the Temnikovsky camp.[37]

The dislocations produced by the Great Terror damaged the efficiency and productivity of the camps. Prisoners with skills (who ran the camps to a large extent) were no longer trusted, or were killed off. The huge influx of prisoners produced chaos; 700,000 people poured into the system in 1937 alone.[38] That year and the next over 140,000 people died in the camps.[39] The economic output of the camps fell by about thirteen percent. In such conditions it was easy to get rid of Pliner.

Pliner after his arrest. He still looks defiant, nostrils flared and lips pursed, but he knows what is coming.

Pliner was arrested on November 14, 1938, as part of the transition from Yezhov’s rule to Beria in the NKVD (Beria replaced Yezhov on November 25). He was accused of spying for Germany and participation in an anti-Soviet conspiracy in the secret police. On February 22, 1939, he was sentenced to death by the Supreme Court of the USSR, and the next day he was shot. It was a dangerous occupation, this Gulag business.

Pliner was the last Jewish head of the Gulag, but his ouster was not the end of highly-placed Jews in the central administration of the Gulag, nor in the huge number of camps and construction projects that continued through World War Two and into the 1950s. A few examples: Zinovy Aleshinsky was deputy head of the Gulag administration in 1939.[40] Yakov Rapoport headed a number of camps and construction sites up until his retirement in the mid-1950s.[41] Naftaly Frenkel was deputy head of the Gulag in 1941 and up until 1947 was head of the Main Directorate of Railway Construction Camps.[42] Grigory Afanasyev (pictured above) headed military construction sites and labor camps all over western Russia until 1952.[43] Alexander Usievich was deputy head of the Gulag in the 1940s and headed camps and construction projects until he retired in 1954.[44]

SUMMARY

If the faces and deeds of these men—and other Jewish Bolsheviks—sink deeply into the popular consciousness, a dramatic change in attitude toward the Jewish Question will become irresistible, much as the recent Gaza slaughter catalyzed a powerful reaction against the Jewish state and a growing appreciation of its genocidal imperative. Hopefully this article can help raise these four representatives of the Jewish nation to the profile they deserve, in the front rank of the greatest mass murderers of history.

These men were not simply mass murderers, however; their plan was global genocide. Communism from the beginning had worldwide ambitions, and these men strove to make that a reality. Had they gained such power, they would have exterminated everyone who stood out from the common mass of humanity. It would have been (and was, in Russia, for decades) a particularly monstrous program: kill everyone of worth so the rest could be enslaved. In this sense, the agenda of communism seems identical to that of Talmudic Jewry. Thankfully, Stalin eventually handed the state over to ethnic Russians, displacing the Jews, and Communist Russia lost much of its dynamism and lethal ferocity. Yet another form of secular Jewish messianism had run its course, leaving a husk of a host nation behind, profoundly scarred and traumatized.

These examples of Jewish mass murderers are not of merely historical interest. Realize that if ever an anti-White government came to  power with unlimited power as was the case in the USSR, there would be no shortage of Jewish executioners ready and willing to engage in mass murder of the traditional American White majority. The hatred is already there—the holocaust perpetrated by a White, Christian society, the 1924 and 1952 immigration laws, the exclusion of Jews from Ivy League schools and Wall St. financial firms in the early decades of the twentieth century, etc.

From Kevin MacDonald’s review of Yuri Slezkine’s The Jewish Century:

Jewish involvement in the Communist elite of the USSR can be seen as a variation on an ancient theme in Jewish culture rather than a new one sprung from the special circumstances of the Bolshevik Revolution. Rather than being the willing agents of exploitative non-Jewish elites who were clearly separated from both the Jews and the people they ruled, Jews became an entrenched part of an exploitative and oppressive elite in which group boundaries were blurred. This blurring of boundaries was aided by four processes, all covered by Slezkine: shedding overt Jewish identities in favor of a veneer of international socialism in which Jewish identity and ethnic networking were relatively invisible; seeking lower-profile positions in order to de-emphasize Jewish preeminence (e.g., Trotsky); adopting Slavic names; and engaging in a limited amount of intermarriage with non-Jewish elites. …

Although the replacement of Germans by Jews was well under way by the time of the Bolshevik Revolution, a key consequence of the Revolution was the substitution of one Mercurian group, the Germans, by another, the Jews. The difference between the Jews and the Germans was that the Jews had a longstanding visceral antipathy, out of past historical grievances, both real and imagined, toward the people and culture they came to administer. Indeed, Russians on the nationalist right admired the Germans, at least up to World War I. For example, a statute of one nationalist organization, Michael the Archangel Russian People’s Union, expressed “particular trust in the German population of the Empire,”16 while its leader, Vladimir Purishkevich, accused the Jews of “irreconcilable hatred of Russia and everything Russian.”17

Jews disliked the Christian religion of the vast majority of Russians because of the antagonistic relationship between Judaism and Christianity over the
ages; Jews distrusted the peasants, who “fell from grace” (p. 140) with the intelligentsia after the numerous anti-Jewish pogroms, especially after 1880;
and Jews blamed the tsar for not doing enough to keep the peasants in check and for imposing the various quotas on Jewish advancement that went into
place, also beginning in the 1880s—quotas that slowed down but by no means halted Jewish overrepresentation in the universities and the professions. …

The establishment of the Explicitly Therapeutic State was much aided by yet another Jewish intellectual movement, the Frankfurt School, which combined psychoanalysis and Marxism. The result was a culture of critique which fundamentally aimed not only at de-legitimizing the older American culture, but even attempted to alter or obliterate human nature itself: “The statistical connection between ‘the Jewish question’ and the hope for a new species of mankind seems fairly strong” (p. 90).

And when people don’t cooperate in becoming a new species, there’s always murder. Slezkine describes Walter Benjamin, an icon of the Frankfurt School and darling of the current crop of postmodern intellectuals, “with glasses on his nose, autumn in his soul and vicarious murder in his heart” (p. 216), a comment that illustrates the fine line between murder and cultural criticism, especially when engaged in by ethnic outsiders. Indeed, on another occasion, Benjamin stated, “Hatred and [the] spirit of sacrifice…are nourished by the image of enslaved ancestors rather than that of liberated grandchildren.”29 Although Slezkine downplays this aspect of Jewish motivation, Jews’ lachrymose perceptions of their history—their images of enslaved ancestors—were potent motivators of the hatred unleashed by the upheavals of the twentieth century.

As for the four men described above, providence ensured that they were made to suffer and die by at least some agency, if not directly in the name of eternal justice. All of them suffered arrest, the loss of position, family, and prestige. All of them suffered intense periods of torture, agony, fear, and the quandary of making humiliating confessions to preposterous conspiracies and crimes. Then, hoping till the end for clemency or the announcement that their arrest was all a big mistake, they heard the sentence of death, were hustled to the edge of a pit, forced to kneel, and felt the bullet exploding in the back of the head. No men were more justly executed, ironically by the very power that authorized their crimes.


NOTES

[1] The NKVD was set up in July 1934 as a new security structure, replacing the Cheka/OGPU: Narodnyy komissariat vnutrennikh del (People’s Commissariat of Internal Affairs). It didn’t cover internal affairs in the way that the U.S. Department of the Interior does; it was strictly a security body, overseeing in its various departments the secret police (GUGB or Main Directorate of State Security), the Gulag (Main Directorate of Correctional Labor Camps), the border guard and other troops, regular police and prisons, and the militia. The previous head of the secret police, Vyacheslav Menzhinsky, who had been ailing for years, died in May and Stalin promoted (after some hesitation) Yagoda to General Commissar of the NKVD.

[2] Wikipedia, “Gulag,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulag#Death_toll

[3] “The History of the Gulag” at https://gulag.online/articles/historie-gulagu?locale=en

[4] The basic information on these men has been taken from two works: 1) Евреи в НКВД СССР 1936-1938 (Jews in the NKVD of the USSR, 1936-1938) by M. Tumshis and V. Zolotaryov. 2nd edition, revised and expanded. Moscow: Dmitry Pozharsky University, 2017. 2) Евреи в КГБ: палачи и жертвы (Jews in the KGB: Executioners and Victims) by Vadim Abramov. Moscow: Izdatel Bystrov, 2006.

[5] The Sverdlovs and Yagodas ran a printing/engraving shop which they put at the disposal of the revolutionary movement. Movsha Sverdlov’s son Yakov was a dynamic Bolshevik and played a crucial, albeit short-lived, role in Lenin’s early government. Until his death in March 1919 he was arguably the third most important Bolshevik. Yagoda married the niece of Yakov, Ida Averbakh.

[6] The secret police in the Soviet Union was named successively Cheka, GPU, OGPU, NKVD, MGB, KGB.

[7] The Special Department later evolved into the famous SMERSH organization in World War Two.

[8] The Gulag was headed for a few months by the Latvian Teodors Eihmans, then Jews took over. From June 1930 to November 1938, Lazar Kogan, Matvei Berman, and Izrail Pliner successively headed the massive system of slave labor camps.

[9] The man who pioneered using camp prisoners as slave labor in the northern camps, the Jew Naftali Frenkel, also introduced the infamous method of feeding people according to the work they performed. He became one of the heads of construction of the White Sea-Baltic Canal. See Applebaum, Gulag: A History, 31-37 and 53-54. Applebaum does not identify Frenkel clearly as a Jew, claiming his origins were mysterious. They were not so mysterious as to obscure his Jewish identity. Frenkel went on to head other major projects, including the Baikal-Amur Railroad with its attendant group of Gulag camps. Frenkel was noteworthy in that he was never purged.

[10] Donald Rayfield called collectivization “an act of unprecedented monstrosity.” Stalin and His Hangmen (New York, 2004), 180.

[11] Yakov Yakovlev (real name Epstein) was the Commissar of Agriculture at this time. Solzhenitsyn called him, in reference to his role in collectivization, “the murderer of the peasantry.” The Jew Boris Bak was the head of the secret police in the Middle Volga region and collectivized that region. The Jew Filipp Goloshchekin was in charge of Kazakhstan and exterminated about forty percent of the population during this time. I could go on …

[12] When Yagoda dragged his feet in producing “confessions” that would prove a far-reaching conspiracy involving Kamenev and Zinoviev, Stalin phoned him and threatened, “Look out, or we’ll smash your face in.” Donald Rayfield, 251.

[13] Among their number were N. M. Lerner, V. M. Kursky, G. N. Lulov, M. M. Gerzon, M. I. Litvin, and Ya. A. Aronson. Tumshis and Zolotaryov, 67.

[14] Donald Rayfield, 287

[15] Simon Sebag Montefiore, Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar (Alfred Knopf, 2004), 220-21.

[16] The “Case of the Anti-Soviet Bloc of Rightists and Trotskyites.”

[17] He quipped that had he been a spy, “dozens of countries could have closed down their intelligence services.” Donald Rayfield, 285.

[18] https://www.geni.com/people/Henrih-Averbakh/6000000064495308846

[19] Yagoda’s son Genrikh, who took his mother’s name Averbakh, seems to have had three children in the 1950s-1960s. The line of Yagoda perdures.

[20] The White Sea-Baltic Canal was in built between September 1931 and August 1933, and the Moscow-Volga Canal was built between September 1932 and July 1937.

[21] https://protivpytok.org/?page_id=1507  note 1.

[22] Estimates vary. I chose one I regard as likely.

[23] Applebaum, Gulag: A History, 62-64.

[24] Despite the canal being a failure. “In 1940 it was used at 44 percent of its capacity, and in 1950, only 20 percent.” Oleg Khlevniuk, The History of the Gulag: From Collectivization to the Great Terror (Yale University Press, 2004), 335

[25] Semyon Firin was a Communist since 1918 and worked in Red Army military intelligence in Western Europe in the 1920s. In 1930 he transferred to the OGPU, becoming deputy head of the Gulag and head of the labor camp whose prisoners built the White Sea-Baltic canal, and then the camp for Moscow-Volga canal. He was arrested just before the latter canal was finished, and shot in August 1937. Yakov Rapoport joined the Cheka in 1918 and headed labor camps and major NKVD construction projects, including the White Sea-Baltic canal, all over the Soviet Union from 1930 to his retirement in 1956.

[26] Cynthia Ruder. Building Stalinism: The Moscow Canal and the Creation of Soviet Space (I. B. Taurus, 2018), 72-73.

[27] Karl Schlögel, Moscow 1937 (Polity Press, 2013), 487.

[28] Tumshis and Zolotaryov, 357 note 38

[29] David Dallin and Boris Nikolaevsky, Forced Labor in Soviet Russia (Yale University Press, 1947), 119-20.

[30] Dallin and Nikolaevsky, Forced Labor, 128.

[31] Stephane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, et. al., The Black Book of Communism (1999), 205.

[32] Among the 6600 bodies buried at that site were those of Bela Kun and Yakov Yakovlev (Epstein), the Commissar of Agriculture during collectivization.

[33] Not all deaths were recorded; some camp commanders minimized deaths; and camp commanders often released sick prisoners at the point of death, to make their mortality statistics look better.

[34] Some examples: 1200 were shot in the Solovki camps in the north; 2000 in Vorkuta in the far north; 230 in one day in Belbaltlag, the camp that serviced the White Sea-Baltic Canal. The total number was obviously very great. Applebaum, 105-07

[35] The Koreans “had been highly regarded immigrants: some were Orthodox converts who had moved to Russian territory at the turn of the century after being threatened with beheading by the Korean emperor. Later waves were fleeing the Japanese, who colonized Korea in 1910. The Koreans had supported the Bolsheviks in 1917 . . .” Donald Rayfield, Stalin and His Hangmen, 371.

[36] Applebaum, 100.

[37] Applebaum, 102.

[38] Stephane Courtois, Black Book of Communism, 205

[39] Wikipedia, “Gulag,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulag#Death_tol

[40] https://nkvd.memo.ru/index.php/Алешинский,_Зиновий_Ильич

[41] Vadim Abramov, Jews in the KGB, 273-74.

[42] Tumshis and Zolotaryov, 640-41.

[43] Tumshis and Zolotaryov, 106-07.

[44] Tumshis and Zolotaryov, 627.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png 0 0 Karl Nemmersdorf https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png Karl Nemmersdorf2026-06-02 08:03:132026-06-02 08:16:07When Jews ran the Gulag
Page 22 of 526«‹2021222324›»
RSS Feed Logo RSS Feed Logo Subscribeto RSS Feed

Kevin MacDonald on Mark Collett’s show reviewing Culture of Critique

Get Our Daily Post Digest
Our latest posts emailed to you every evening.
By subscribing, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of service.

James Edwards at the Counter-Currents Conference, Atlanta, 2022

Watch TOO Video Picks

video archives

DONATE

DONATE TO TOO

Topics

Monthly Archives

RECENT TRANSLATIONS

All | Czech | Finnish | French | German | Greek | Italian | Polish | Portuguese | Russian | Spanish | Swedish
NEW: Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition

Also available at Barnes & Noble

Culture of Critique

Also available at Barnes & Noble

Separation and Its Discontents
A People That Shall Dwell Alone
© 2025 The Occidental Observer - powered by Enfold WordPress Theme
  • Link to X
  • Link to Dribbble
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top

By continuing to browse the site, you are legally agreeing to our use of cookies and general site statistics plugins.

CloseLearn more

Cookie and Privacy Settings



How we use cookies

We may request cookies to be set on your device. We use cookies to let us know when you visit our websites, how you interact with us, to enrich your user experience, and to customize your relationship with our website.

Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.

Essential Website Cookies

These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.

Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, refusing them will have impact how our site functions. You always can block or delete cookies by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website. But this will always prompt you to accept/refuse cookies when revisiting our site.

We fully respect if you want to refuse cookies but to avoid asking you again and again kindly allow us to store a cookie for that. You are free to opt out any time or opt in for other cookies to get a better experience. If you refuse cookies we will remove all set cookies in our domain.

We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.

Other external services

We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.

Google Webfont Settings:

Google Map Settings:

Google reCaptcha Settings:

Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:

Privacy Policy

You can read about our cookies and privacy settings in detail on our Privacy Policy Page.

Privacy Policy
Accept settingsHide notification only