The Synthesis of Zionism and Bolshevism: Jewish Messianic World Revolution


Michael Kelley / Non-Aligned Media

The Eastern faction of the global elite, coalescing around the nuclear armed superpower nation of Russia, has formulated the synthesis of a multitude of seemingly opposed ideas and peoples into a pragmatic power bloc, infused with its own irrational spiritual charisma. The Hegelian notion of the synthesis of dialectic opposites at a “higher level of truth” could describe the phenomenon, but not adequately answer the question of what is that truth, really. The Truth, they would probably say, is that which by virtue of its own power is capable of eliminating all of its opponents.

Zionism as it was expounded by Herzl was antagonistic to Bolshevism as Right is to Left. But the two share a fundamental commonality: they are both idols of Jewish intellectualism, and are capable of being reconciled by the ultimate belief in the destiny of a final Jewish world state led by, “the Mashiach.” The philosophy of National Bolshevism provides the theoretical framework for this synthesis, itself an incomprehensible and circular argument based on ‘doublespeak’ and illogic, it paralyzes the mind of its students with its paradoxical nonsense rendering them thoroughly brainwashed. In the end it is nothing more than the exercise of power for its own sake, and the negation of rational thought and sanity.

National Boshevists have only one major obstacle to their ‘thousand year kingdom,’ the NATO bloc, led by the United States of America. To this end they have waged a relentless campaign of cultural, economic and military subversion against her, leading up to the present moment, as the tides are now turning and the West is in steep decline and grave danger. The real enemies to this Jewish Reich are the free people of the world under any confession which rejects absolute Jewish authority, whether Christian, Muslim, or individualist.

Winston Churchill wrote about the subject of Jewish racial politics from his perspective as a Jew and a Zionist. In his widely published essay, “Zionism Versus Bolshevism,” excerpted below we can see the dialectic set up clearly. It is based on the premise that the soul of the Jewish people needs to be saved by a political movement, a fundamentally Jewish conception, indeed.

SOME people like Jews and some do not; but no thoughtful man can doubt the fact that they are beyond all question the most formidable and the most remarkable race which has ever appeared in the world…

It would almost seem as if the gospel of Christ and the gospel of Antichrist were destined to originate among the same people; and that this mystic and mysterious race had been chosen for the supreme manifestations, both of the divine and the diabolical…

Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new…There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders…

In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combating Counter-Revolution has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses. The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing…

Zionism has already become a factor in the political convulsions of Russia, as a powerful competing influence in Bolshevik circles with the international communistic system. Nothing could be more significant than the fury with which Trotsky has attacked the Zionists generally, and Dr. Weissmann in particular. The cruel penetration of his mind leaves him in no doubt that his schemes of a world-wide communistic State under Jewish domination are directly thwarted and hindered by this new ideal, which directs the energies and the hopes of Jews in every land towards a simpler, a truer, and a far more attainable goal. The struggle which is now beginning between the Zionist and Bolshevik Jews is little less than a struggle for the soul of the Jewish people. [1]

 Theodore Herzl: Jewish racial elitist.

Annie Levin, International Socialist Review:

Herzl’s “political Zionism” was secular and pragmatic. He argued that the Jewish state could only be built under the patronage of one of the imperialist powers. Because the Jews would inevitably be a minority wherever they settled, and since they would incur the hostility of whatever indigenous population they were colonizing, they could not succeed without the big guns of a big imperialist power backing them up. In fact, Palestine was only one of several territories Herzl considered for colonization. Argentina, Uganda, Cyprus, and even a couple of states in the Midwest of the United States were discussed as possible locations for the Jewish state. But the religious faction in the Zionist movement fought hard for Palestine and Herzl, never one to miss the power of a symbol, agreed that the ancient Jewish “homeland” would give the movement more emotional power. However, defining feature of Zionism was not the choice of Palestine, but the Zionists’ willingness to ally with European imperialism to achieve its goals. Herzl rejected the most progressive ideals of the 19th century–democracy, socialism, republicanism–and embraced the most reactionary– monarchy, nationalism, chauvinism, and racism.

Zionism identified with the imperialist powers who carved up the globe, and accepted racist ideas about the “civilizing” virtues of colonization and “the white man’s burden” that made up the ideology of the capitalist class… Today the media like to say that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. But democracy was not the political system that Herzl envisioned for the Jewish State. Even a historian sympathetic to Zionism admits, “He preferred a democratic monarchy, or an aristocratic republic. Nations were not yet fit for unlimited democracy.… Politics would have to take shape in the upper strata of the new society and work downwards.”8 Throughout his career, Herzl was deeply impressed by the power and authority of kings. After a meeting with the German Kaiser, Herzl wrote in his diary that the Kaiser “has truly imperial eyes–I have never seen such eyes. A remarkable bold, inquisitive soul shows in them.”9 And it is clear from his diaries that Herzl saw himself taking his place among the European rulers at the head of a Jewish state.[2]

Jewish Revisionists: The Zio-Nazis

Revisionists were openly sympathetic to fascism. Betar, the Revisionist youth movement, admired Mussolini. They wore brown shirts and did the fascist salute.30 The Revisionist newspaper carried a regular column called “From the Notebook of a Fascist,” and on one occasion when Jabotinsky came to Palestine, the newspaper ran a column called “On the arrival of our Duce.”31 In 1933 a columnist wrote, “Social democrats of all stripes believe that Hitler’s movement is an empty shell [but] we believe that there is both a shell and a kernel. The anti-Semitic shell is to be discarded, but not the anti-Marxist kernel.”32 The Labor Zionists tried at times to distance themselves from the actions of the extremist paramilitaries. But when the time came for united action they showed that their squabbles were all in the family.

As Jabotinsky put it, “Force must play its role–with strength and without indulgence. In this, there are no meaningful differences between our militarists and our vegetarians. One prefers an Iron Wall of Jewish bayonets; the other an Iron Wall of English bayonets.”33 It was Jabotinsky who founded the Haganah, and the Revisionists who formed the paramilitary organizations, the Irgun, as well as the fascist Stern Gang. In 1945 the Revisionists and the Labor Zionists united to form the “Resistance Movement” to wage war against the British and then the Palestinians. The Irgun and the Stern Gang were responsible for the infamous massacre in the village of Dir Yassin in 1948. At least until the 1980s, veterans of the Irgun still returned to Dir Yassin to commemorate their “heroism.”34[2]

Bolshevism: the Leftist universal ‘salvation’ of the human race, led by Jews.

Lance Selfa, International Socialist Review

Many Jews played active roles as founders, leaders and activists in the socialist parties in Europe. Count Witte, the Tsar’s finance minister, once complained to Herzl that Jews “comprise about 50 percent of the membership of the revolutionary parties,” while constituting only 5 percent of the Russian Empire’s population.9 One such party that earned Witte’s hatred was the General Jewish Workers League, known as the Jewish Bund. The Bund, launched in 1897–the same year as Herzl’s Zionist Congress–became Russia’s first mass socialist organization. It bitterly opposed the Zionists’ calls for a Jewish state. Over the course of the next decade, the Bund grew among Jewish workers, swelling to 40,000 members in Russia during the 1905 Russian Revolution. In the revolutionary period, Jewish socialists–both in the Bund and in the other socialist parties–assumed leadership of the working-class and communal organizations in Jewish communities.

The Bund opposed political Zionism, but it accommodated to Jewish nationalism. Because of this, Lenin and other Russian revolutionaries engaged in fierce polemics with Bund leaders. In the 1903 founding congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP), Bund leaders argued for the official right to represent and to speak for Jewish workers inside the broader Russian socialist movement. Lenin and prominent Jewish socialists such as Martov and Trotsky opposed the Bund. Lenin argued the Bund was wrong to “legitimize Jewish isolation, by propagating the idea of a Jewish ‘nation'”. Socialists’ task was “not to segregate nations, but to unite the workers of all nations,” Lenin later wrote. “Our banner does not carry the slogan ‘national culture’ but international culture.” The Bund lost the vote to represent Jewish workers and subsequently left the RSDLP.10

The 1917 October Revolution showed what the socialist strategy for Jewish emancipation meant in practice. In a country where the Tsar and his henchman used anti-Semitism to divide workers, Russian workers elected to leading roles in the revolutionary government Jewish Bolsheviks like Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev and Sverdlov. The revolution declared freedom of religion and abolished Tsarist restrictions on education and residence for Jews. During the 1918-1922 Civil War against counterrevolutionary armies which slaughtered Jews by the thousands, the revolutionary Red Army meted out stern punishment–including execution–to any pogromists in its ranks. In the workers’ government, Yiddish was given equal status with other languages.

A Commisariat of Jewish Affairs and a special Jewish Commission inside the Bolshevik Party simultaneously worked to involve Jews in the affairs of the workers’ state and to win the Jewish masses to socialism. The revolution’s early years saw an unprecedented flowering of Yiddish and Jewish cultural life. In 1926-27, over half of the Jewish school population attended Yiddish schools and 10 state theaters performed Yiddish plays. By the late 1920s, nearly 40 percent of the Jewish working population worked for the government.11 Thus, by the 1920s, the Zionists had been marginalized on all sides. The majority of the world’s Jews clearly showed their desire to emigrate to Western countries. And thousands of Jews who remained in Eastern Europe fought for a better life, winning solidarity from many of their Gentile brothers and sisters. By 1927, as many people left Palestine as migrated to it. The entire Zionist enterprise seemed in doubt.12[3]

Stalin, the right-Bolshevist, helps the Zionists win a war, but soon reverses course.

A. Kramer, In Defense of Marxism:

 We must point out that Joseph Vissarionovich (Stalin) had had some contacts with the Zionists in the past. The Russian Zionist activist Dan Pines wrote in his memoirs that he had visited Stalin when the latter was Commissar for Nationalities in the mid 1920s and got his support for his Zionist activities in Russia. This position was in total contradiction to official communist policy. It flew in the face of all those Comintern decisions and also of the policy of the Jewish section of the Comintern that had declared Zionism as a dangerously reactionary movement. In 1920 the Second Congress of the Comintern had issued a statement on the colonial and national question, in which we can read the following: “A glaring example of the deception of the working people of oppressed nations by the united forces of imperialism of the Entente and the bourgeoisie of these nations is the Palestinian adventure that is being put forward by the Zionists (and Zionism in general, which, in claiming to establish a Jewish state in Palestine, in practice is advocating the expulsion of the Arab working people from Palestine, where the Jewish workers constitute only an insignificant minority, a role that is exploited by Britain.)”

But Stalin completely ignored the genuine traditions of the Bolshevik Party and the Communist International (when it was led by Lenin and Trotsky). A sympathy for Zionism was typical of the “right Bolsheviks”. Another supporter of Zionism was Felix Dzerzinsky, the head of the GPU [aka NKVD, KGB], who was also a “right Bolshevik”. However, in line with the ultra-left turn of the Stalinists in the late 1920s, when most of Bolshevik oppositionist leaders were in prison, this sympathy towards Zionism was suddenly suppressed and it was outlawed in Soviet Russia. In spite of this, criticism of Zionism was never strong and systematic in the 1930s. In fact not all relations were bad between Zionism and Stalinism. However, after having had their hopes raised about the “positive” aspects of Zionism, by the late 1920s many left wing Zionists had been disappointed by their experiences in Palestine and they returned to the USSR. The majority of these people were later executed in 1937.

Others understood that there was no way back from the “Zionist paradise”. In the late 1930s the official position on Zionism in the USSR also began to change to a more favourable one. In the huge official Soviet Encyclopedia published in those times we find a positive attitude towards Zionism. It said that Jewish migration to Palestine had become a “progressive factor” because many of the immigrants stood on the left and were also workers and these could be used against the pro-British Arab sheikhs!…

But Stalin and Molotov had made a serious miscalculation. The Israeli bourgeoisie and the bureaucracy of the emerging Israeli state had always maintained deep economic and political links with the West and in particular with the USA. Golda Meir said at that time: “We cannot buy Soviet weapons with money that we have received from American Jews”. Thus the Israeli ruling class cynically exploited Soviet help to their own advantage when they were setting up their state, but after the so-called “War of Independence” was over they began to develop closer relations with the West…

Thus anti-Semitic hysteria was whipped up right until the death of Stalin in 1953. It was to be his last present to the Zionists. As result of this Stalinist policy of discrimination and oppression thousands of Russian Jews were pushed into the hands of the Jewish nationalists, the Zionists. Thus rather than weakening Zionism, Stalin’s policy enormously strengthened it and provided it with more recruits. It is curious to note today in Russia how some old hard-line Stalinists regard Stalin as “a great fighter against world Zionism”. This had its mirror image even in Israel itself, among some on the left. In some kibbutzim until the beginning of the 1980s it was still possible to find pictures of Stalin hanging on the walls! For some he was regarded as the man that helped realize the Zionist dream. In spite of all these myths, however, the genuine Marxists in Israel today know the real truth. [4]

Gorbachev dispels Soviet Anti-Zionism

Wikipedia, “Soviet Anti-Zionism':

In March 1985 Mikhail Gorbachev became the Secretary General of the CPSU and in April he declared perestroika. It took more than six years before Moscow consented to restore diplomatic relations with Israel on October 19, 1991, just 2 months prior to the collapse of the USSR and ten days before the Dissolution of the Soviet Union, Soviet sponsored United Nations General Assembly Resolution 46/86 was adopted on 16 December 1991 which revoked the determination in Resolution 3379, which had called Zionism a form of racism.

The New York Times:

The vote divided the Islamic and former nonaligned movements. While no Arab country voted for repeal, Bahrain, Egypt, Kuwait, Morocco, Oman and Tunisia all were absent from the vote. Algeria, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen were among those voting against repeal. But there was no indication that those Arabs voting against repeal made much of an effort to persuade other states not to go along with the United States initiative.

The 1975 statement referred to in the repeal decision said that after reviewing other international resolutions linking Zionism with South Africa’s apartheid system, the General Assembly “determines that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.” [5]

 “Israel Welcomes Gorbachev as Hero”

The New York Times:

The last three years have seen 360,000 people come to Israel from the former Soviet Union, so one more Russian arrival should probably not cause heads to turn.

But in the first two days of a visit that will take him across Israel this week, Mikhail S. Gorbachev has received a hero’s welcome, praised by his hosts as the Soviet leader who opened the gates for a vast emigration of Jews from his country.

In a burst of enthusiasm, one major newspaper, Maariv, decided editorially that Mr. Gorbachev was “the most important person who ever visited the land of Israel.” That put him well ahead of some serious figures over the millennia. On reflection, the newspaper added in sober afterthought that it had reached its conclusion after “considering the fact that Moses did not receive an entry visa.” [6]


 Announcing the Synthesis: “Radical Centrism,” Centered on What?

Leonid Savchenko,

Today at RIA “Novosti” there was a press conference at which it was announced that a new political force soon would appear in Russia. On 21 April the founding congress of the “Eurasia” All-Russian Political Public Movement will open. The agency identified among the leaders of the movement the philosopher and geopolitician Alexander Dugin, the supreme mufti of the Central Ecclesiastical Board of Muslims of Russia and European CIS Countries, Sheikh-ul-Islam Talgat Tajuddin, secretary of the Department of External Church Relations of the Moscow patriarchate, Fr Vsevolod Chaplin, and Rabbi Avrom Shmulevich.

All of these various people are united by their support of the reforms of President Vladimir Putin and the ideology of “neoeurasianism.” … As stated at the press conference at RIA “Novosti” by the leader of the new movement, Alexander Dugin, the eurasian world view can aspire to the status of a national idea in modern Russia and therefore the necessity of the creation of the “Eurasia” movement arose. “Eurasia” was created “as a world view organization supported by the religious confessions of Russia.” The new movement will function on the ideology of “neoeurasianism.” In the opinion of the movement’s leader, “eurasianism is just that national idea which answers to the interests of the ethos, culture, and all peoples of Russia.” Dugin labelled equally unacceptable a return to communism and nationalistic slogans.

The founders of the movement consider the fathers and founders of eurasianism to be Nikolai Trubetskoy and the philosoher Lev Gumilev. As regards the sympathies of the movement in the area of foreign policy, the leader considers it necessary “to support those forces that are acting against the processes of ‘American-style globalization.'” …The “Eurasia” movement “unquestionably will support the head of state,” Dugin stressed. He characterized the political position of “Eurasia” as “radical centrism.” In his turn, Mufti Farid Salman, who was at the press conference representing Mufti Talgat Tajiddin, stressed: “The ‘Eurasia’ movement is our response to the adherents of satanic wahhabism, which has established roots throughout the country and even in Moscow.” In his opinion, “participation of Muslims in the movement is a sacred duty of patriotism and a response to the adherents of wahhabism, which discredits Islam.”

Rabbi Avrom Shmulevich, representing at the press conference the leader of the hassidic Jews, Berl Lazar, reported that the participation of the Jewish population of Russia in the “Eurasia” movement is explained by the strengthening of the relations between Russia and Israel and by the fact that the idea of eurasianism finds active support in Israeli society. In Shmulevich’s opinion, “eurasianism gives the possibility of preserving for all peoples, including Jews, their identity.” “Jews living in Russia want for it to be a strong and free country,” he concluded. In Rabbi Shmulevich’s opinion, for whom “western democratic ideology that levels out national distinctives is unacceptable,” the principle of eurasianism is the most rational. “It gives the possibility of existing without denying one’s own principles,” the rabbi noted. “Now the experience of the ancient Mongol empire and the Khazar kaganate should be recalled.”   [7]

 Red Zionists

National Bolshevik Party of Israel website:

“Israel was invented and founded by Red Zionists geopolitically as part of Eurasia, from the beginning oriented toward the Eurasian continent and developed as a Red proletarian communal republic. We, the National Bolsheviks of Israel, see our global mission in the resurrection and reworking of the idea of very great social justice for the Workers of Zion in the context of an interconnection with Russian National Bolshevism and the construction of a single Imperial state free from the tyranny of mondialism. ”We see our Homeland as Mother Earth, upon which we walk and which we carry in our hearts, independently from place of location.” ”Glory to Eurasia! Glory to Israel! Yes to Death!”   [8]


 Dughin’s Duplicitous Doublespeak: Russia’s Jewish Zionist and Aryan imperialism is good, America’s is bad.

Aleksandr Dughin, “Paradigm of the End”:

The racial approach was in a general way stated in count Gobino’s works, and then taken up by German national-socialists. But the ideals of considering the history in the light of the one nation are in the most distinctive way represented in Judaic, Zionist circles, basing on the Jewish religion specificity. Besides, during the period of patriotic enthusiasm the tendencies, close to the idea of national exclusiveness, can be detected in any nation, but the difference is that almost nowhere else these theories acquire as explicit religious content, are so stable and developed, have such a long historical tradition, are the object of almost general agreement as among Jews…

The easily verified throughout the history ethnic dualism, unveiled by us – “nation of West” (Kernel: Anglo-Saxons) and “nation of East” (Kernel: Russians) – ignores two famous ethnic doctrines, which usually come to mind first of all every time the question is about the “eschatological nationalism”. We mean that “racism” of German national-socialists and Zionist conceptions of Jews. On what grounds did we put those realities aside, and examined in the first instance the American and Russian-Soviet “nationalisms”, which are not so evident and radical as the bordering on barbarity Nazism or the emphasized anthropologic dualism of Jews, refusing the right of belonging to human kind to the “gois”…

German nazism and Jewish messianism are very intensive forms of ethic eschatologism, ranged and weighty ones, having proved their large scale by the real involvement in the process of the world history. But still, neither Hitlerist nazism, nor Zionism embodied with such evidentness and obviousness, with such historical clearness the basic tendencies of the world history, as in the case of Americanism and Sovietism. Also, the purely geographical disposition is interesting. – The racism was spread in Europe, the state Israel is in the Middle East. It looks like they oppose to each other along the vertical line. As to Anglo-Saxon and Eurasian worlds, they oppose to one another along the horizontal line. If Hitler’s racism appealed to “Nordism”, the Jewry accentuates the “south”, “Mediterranean”, “African” orientation. The Eurasianism obviously relates to the East. The Atlantism relates to the West…

The Jewish messianism is parted in two ingredients. One of them holds with the Anglo-Saxon messianism. This is “westernist ingredient” in the Jewry. So are Jewish communities in Holland, which were always associated with the propaganda of the protestant fundamentalism. It can be called “Jewish Atlantism” are “the Right Jewry”. This sector identifies Jews’ eschatological expectations with the victory of Anglo-Saxon nation , with USA, liberalism, capitalism.

The second ingredient is “Jewish Eurasianism”, Bromberg called it “Jewish Easternism”. This is mostly the sector of the East-European Jewry, mainly of Hasidic trend, at one with the Russian messianism and especially with its communist version. This fact, in particular, explains such large-scale Jews’ participation in the October Revolution and their mass involvement in the communist movement, having been the cover for planetary Russian messianist idea realization. Generally speaking, the “Left Jewry”, which is so stable and large-scale reality, that Nazis just identified “communism” with “Jewry” in their propaganda, typologically associated exactly with the Eurasian conglomeration, united with the Russian-Soviet eschatological ideal. Most often “Jewish Eurasianists” appealed to the amazing historical formation – “Khazar Kaganate”, in which the Judaism was combined with the powerful hierarchical military empire, based on Turk-Aryan ethnic element. Except well-known extremely negative estimation of “Khazars” (extensively expounded by Lev Gumilyov), there exist also other “revisionist” version about the history of that formation, which strongly contrasts by its continentalist stylistics and the sharp deviation from ethnic particularism of the traditional Judaism, with others – especially western – forms of Judaic social organization. Thus, Kestler advanced an interesting version about that the East-European Jews are indeed the descendants of ancient Khazars at all, and their different from that of Western Jewry character betrays their racial difference. It is not important here, whether such view of situation is “scientific”, what is really important is that conception reflects in the mythological way the deep inner-Jewish dualism.

Now, the German racism. Here the picture is not so evident, it is not so easy to part this phenomenon in two ingredients. Firstly, because the Russophile and pro-Soviet trend in Nazism and, to a greater extent, in German national movement was almost always anti-racist oriented. This positive Ostorientierung, which is the characteristic feature of many representatives of German Conservative Revolution (Arthur Meuller Van den Bruk, Fridrich Georg Junger, Oswald Spengler, and especially, Ernst Niekiesch), was associated with Prussia and the estatist idea, rather than with some racial motives. But still, some certain varieties of racism can be attributed to the Eurasianism. Such “Eurasian Racism” was, undoubtedly, in the minority and not significant, marginal. Professor Herman Wirth was its typical adherent, he supposed that you can find the “Aryan”, “Nordic” element in most nations of Earth, including Asians and Africans, and that Germans aren’t in this respect any kind of exception, they are a mixed nation, in which there are both “Aryan” and “not Aryan” elements. Such approach denies any allusion to “jingoism” or “xenophobia”, but just because of this Wirth and his associates very soon opposed to Hitler’s regime. Besides, some representatives of this trend supposed that “Aryans” of Asia – Hindus, Slavs, Persians, Tajiks, Afghans etc. – are much closer to the Nordic tradition, than Europeans or Anglo-Saxons, and consequently, such racism displayed the obviously seen “Easternist” features.

But the most spread version of racism still was the other, “Westernist” trend, insisting on the white race supremacy (in the most direct sense), and especially on the supremacy of Germans over all other nations. The technological successes of the whites, their civilization advantages were by all means glorified. The other nation were demonized and shown as the parody “Untermenshen”. In the most radical version, only Germans themselves were considered “Aryans”, as to Slavs or Frenchmen, they were given the status of second-grate people, which was already not racism, but the extreme form of the narrow-German ethnic chauvinism. Such vulgar racism – by the way, it was characteristic for Hitler personally – was quit at one by the spirit with the ethnic eschatology of Anglo-Saxons, though it suggested the rival version, based on the specificity of German psychology and German history. Significant, that both versions of such ethnic eschatology were based on two branches of the united in the former times German tribe (Anglo-Saxons were at the beginning the German tribes), and on two varieties of Protestantism (Lutheranism in Germany and Calvinism in England). However, racism was considerably larded with the heathen elements, the appeals to pre-Christian mythology, barbarism, hierarchy. Unlike that of Anglo-Saxons, the racism of Germans was more archaic, extravagant and wild, but pretty often this esthetic contrast, the difference of styles veiled the common character of the historical and geo-political orientation. By the way, Hitler’s Anglophilia is a generally known fact.

So, the pare Zionism-Nazism turns to be not sufficiently ranged in order to be considered as the axis of the eschatological drama in its ethic dimension. Even if it is “axis”, it is only secondary, auxiliary, subsidiary one. It helps explain many points, but doesn’t cover the main point of the problem. In that perspective we can consider the “Jewish Easternism” as one of the specific varieties of the “Eurasianism” (or “nation of the East”), at one in outline with the universal formula of the Russian-Soviet messianic ideal. To the same “Eurasian” conglomeration some (minor) forms of “Easternist” racism of “Aryan” system of values adherents should be added on. And, on the contrary, the Jewish Westernism” organically fits the Anglo-Saxon ethnic and eschatological project, on what the profound alliance of the “Right Zionism” and protestant fundamentalism is in fact based. “10 lost tribes” represented by Anglo-Saxons (especially by Americans) combine with two rest tribes in the common eschatological expectation. The “Westernist” version of racism, singing the supremacy of “civilization of whites” – market, technical progress, liberalism, human rights – over the archaic “barbarian”, “underdeveloped” nations of the Orient and the Third World, also borders with that conglomeration…

Starting at the center of the ethnic eschatology not real dualism between “Roman-German”, later Anglo-Saxon, much later “American” camp, on the one hand, and “Eurasian”, Russian-Soviet camp, on the other hand, but in many aspects artificial and not self-sufficing pare of antagonists – Aryan Germans and Jews, nazis hindered the natural trend of developments, distracted attention to the false purpose, established the contradiction in the point, which wasn’t substantial and central in the historical and eschatological way. And once again the damage was caused to the “Eurasian” camp…

The fact that Jews haven’t dissolved as the nation and as the religion in the sea of other nations for long centuries of the dispersion, that they have kept the faith in their future triumph, that , having undergone so many tests, they have been able to fulfil the long-awaited dream and re-create their own state, makes a great impression on any unbiased observer. Such literal fulfillment of the eschatological expectations of Jews obviously witnesses that this tradition is, really, closely associated with the world history mystery, and ho skeptics, no positivists, no anti-Semites can dismiss the matter with a wave of their hands. Moreover, during last centuries the status of Judaism as religion improved from the peripheral unfranchised heresy in the eyes of Christian nations so much, that this confession received the vote in discussing and resolving the most important world questions. However one should notice that the confessional unity of Israelites is not so solid, as this can appear on the face of it.

In the present time one could hardly seriously speak about “Islamic factor” as about something united, enough large-scale one to suppose its own independent religious version of “end of times”. We just can note, that “anti-Judaism” or, exactly speaking, anti-Zionism” is a common factor for the Islamic world. And in this sense, exposing that ethnic and religious problem to the detriment of accentuating of the main opposition between Orthodox Christianity and Western one, reminds of the situation we came across, analyzing the German racism significance. The gravitation of many Islamic ideologists towards making out of “Israel” and “Jews” the central question of modern history, having exaggerated the Islamic-Jewish contradiction, again brings us to the deadlock and insolvable situation, which hindered so much the clarification of functions and identify main subjects of the human history, which is inevitably closing is outcome…

The Anglo-Saxon ideal, the “nation of West” inflicted a crushing defeat to the “nation of East”. The “Soviet” universalism yielded to the Anglo-Saxon one.

And what is the vanquished one? It is difficult to expect the clear and impartial reflections from it. In most cases it does not realize, what has happened with it, and the amputated organ – in the given case it is the heart – still aches and smarts, as it is in the patients after the operation. Only a few clearly realize, what has happened in the early 90s.

Or else, how can you explain the fact, that Gorbachev can calmly walk in the streets, just risk sometimes being slapped in his face by a tight hard worker?  [9]

 The End of The World and the Dawn of the Age of Mashiach

Robert Zurbin, National Review Online:

It would be our contention that Dugin’s fusion of Traditionalism and Eurasianism has become a “gnostic mass movement” of the third type, “activist mysticism.” It is not an exaggeration to state that Dugin’s intended goal, his telos, is the End of the World, and that the accomplishment of that end is dependent, he believes, on the implementation of his ideology. As Dugin has proclaimed in his recent book, The Fourth Political Theory: “The end times and the eschatological meaning of politics will not realize themselves on their own. We will wait for the end in vain. The end will never come if we wait for it, and it will never come if we do not. . . . If the Fourth Political Practice is not able to realize the end of times, then it would be invalid. The end of days should come, but it will not come by itself. This is a task, it is not a certainty. It is an active metaphysics. It is a practice.”

This desire to bring about the end of the world is not a sudden development in Dugin’s thought. As noted in the quotation at the beginning of this chapter, as early as 2001, Dugin’s intentions were being published abroad, and could be read by an English-speaking audience. In 2001, [Stephen] Shenfield observes that Dugin’s eschatological view is “Manichean” — which is to say, a dualistic form of Gnosticism which views the world as a battleground of equally matched forces of good and evil, in which spiritual forces of light contend with material forces of evil. Into this Manichaenism, Dugin admixes Christian concepts, oft repeating the notion that the West is the realm of “Antichrist.” As Shenfield quotes Dugin: “The meaning of Russia is that through the Russian people will be realized the last thought of God, the thought of the End of the World. . . . Death is the way to immortality. Love will begin when the world ends. We must long for it, like true Christians. . . . We are uprooting the accursed Tree of Knowledge. With it will perish the Universe.” Shenfield then observes: “Alexander Yanov, quoting these lines, concludes that Dugin’s ‘real dream is of death, first of all the death of Russia.’ In his reply, Dugin avoids dealing directly with the substance of Yanov’s critique, but observes that he fails to appreciate the positive significance of death . . .”

It is hard to know how to react to someone who claims to want to bring about the end of the world. When that desire is expressed with a thick Russian accent, the hearer is all the more likely to simply dismiss the speaker as some sort of “super villain” from a bad “action/adventure” movie. It is a claim which evokes the snicker — until one realizes that the man who thinks that the “meaning of Russia” is “the End of the World” is the man whose geopolitical doctrine is being implemented by the ruler of Russia. Heiser continues: Dugin is quite keen on the notion that the coming age is the third, and final, age. As Dugin wrote in “The Metaphysics of National-Bolshevism”: “Beyond ‘rights’ and ‘lefts,’ there’s one and indivisible Revolution, in the dialectical triad ‘third Rome — Third Reich — third International.” The realm of national-bolshevism, Regnum, their Empire of the End, this is the perfect accomplishment of the greatest Revolution of history, both a continental and universal one. It is the angels’ return, heroes’ resurrection, the heart’s uprising against the reason’s dictatorship. This last revolution is a concern of the acephal, the headless bearer of the cross, sickle and hammer, crowned by eternal sun fylfot.” This “Empire of the End” is marked by the “dialectical triad” which combines “Third Rome — Third Reich — Third International.” All the expectations of historic Russian messianic delusions, combined with the Joachimite aims of Nazism and Soviet Bolshevism, purportedly find their highest expression in this new ideology, according to Dugin. [10]

Judaism 101 website:

The Messianic Idea in Judaism

Belief in the eventual coming of the mashiach is a basic and fundamental part of traditional Judaism. It is part of Rambam‘s 13 Principles of Faith, the minimum requirements of Jewish belief. In the Shemoneh Esrei prayer, recited three times daily, we pray for all of the elements of the coming of the mashiach: ingathering of the exiles; restoration of the religious courts of justice; an end of wickedness, sin and heresy; reward to the righteous; rebuilding of Jerusalem; restoration of the line of King David; and restoration of Temple service.

….The term “mashiach” literally means “the anointed one,” and refers to the ancient practice of anointing kings with oil when they took the throne. The mashiach is the one who will be anointed as king in the End of Days.

The word “mashiach” does not mean “savior.” The notion of an innocent, divine or semi-divine being who will sacrifice himself to save us from the consequences of our own sins is a purely Christian concept that has no basis in Jewish thought. Unfortunately, this Christian concept has become so deeply ingrained in the English word “messiah” that this English word can no longer be used to refer to the Jewish concept. The word “mashiach” will be used throughout this page.

The Mashiach

The mashiach will be a great political leader descended from King David (Jeremiah 23:5). The mashiach is often referred to as “mashiach ben David” (mashiach, son of David). He will be well-versed in Jewish law, and observant of its commandments (Isaiah 11:2-5). He will be a charismatic leader, inspiring others to follow his example. He will be a great military leader, who will win battles for Israel. He will be a great judge, who makes righteous decisions (Jeremiah 33:15). But above all, he will be a human being, not a god, demi-god or other supernatural being.

It has been said that in every generation, a person is born with the potential to be the mashiach. If the time is right for the messianic age within that person’s lifetime, then that person will be the mashiach. But if that person dies before he completes the mission of the mashiach, then that person is not the mashiach.

Olam Ha-Ba: The Messianic Age

The world after the messiah comes is often referred to in Jewish literature as Olam Ha-Ba (oh-LAHM hah-BAH), the World to Come. This term can cause some confusion, because it is also used to refer to a spiritual afterlife. In English, we commonly use the term “messianic age” to refer specifically to the time of the messiah.

Olam Ha-Ba will be characterized by the peaceful co-existence of all people (Isaiah 2:4). Hatred, intolerance and war will cease to exist. Some authorities suggest that the laws of nature will change, so that predatory beasts will no longer seek prey and agriculture will bring forth supernatural abundance (Isaiah 11:6-11:9). Others, however, say that these statements are merely an allegory for peace and prosperity.

All of the Jewish people will return from their exile among the nations to their home in Israel (Isaiah 11:11-12; Jeremiah 23:8; 30:3; Hosea 3:4-5). The law of the Jubilee will be reinstated.

In the Olam Ha-Ba, the whole world will recognize the Jewish G-d as the only true G-d, and the Jewish religion as the only true religion (Isaiah 2:3; 11:10; Micah 4:2-3; Zechariah 14:9). There will be no murder, robbery, competition or jealousy. There will be no sin (Zephaniah 3:13). Sacrifices will continue to be brought in the Temple, but these will be limited to thanksgiving offerings, because there will be no further need for expiatory offerings.

Some gentiles have tried to put an ugly spin on this theology, claiming that Jews plan to force people to convert to our religion, perhaps based on their own religion’s history of doing exactly the same thing. That is not at all how Jews understand the messianic age. We believe that in that future time, everyone will simply know what the truth is, in the same way that we know that 2+2=4, and there will no longer be any reason to argue about it. It is much like a situation I witnessed at work once: two computer programmers were arguing loudly and at length about whether it was possible for a user to input data at a certain point in a program. Finally someone pressed a key and they all saw that nothing happened. Now they knew the truth, end of argument. When mashiach comes, theological truths will be equally obvious to mankind, and there will be no reason to argue about it.

What About Jesus?

Jews do not believe that Jesus was the mashiach. Assuming that he existed, and assuming that the Christian scriptures are accurate in describing him (both matters that are debatable), he simply did not fulfill the mission of the mashiach as it is described in the biblical passages cited above. Jesus did not do any of the things that the scriptures said the messiah would do.

On the contrary, another Jew born about a century later came far closer to fulfilling the messianic ideal than Jesus did. His name was Shimeon ben Kosiba, known as Bar Kokhba (son of a star), and he was a charismatic, brilliant, but brutal warlord.Rabbi Akiba, one of the greatest scholars in Jewish history, believed that Bar Kokhba was the mashiach. Bar Kokhba fought a war against the Roman Empire, catching the Tenth Legion by surprise and retaking Jerusalem. He resumed sacrifices at the site of the Temple and made plans to rebuild the Temple. He established a provisional government and began to issue coins in its name. This is what the Jewish people were looking for in a mashiach; Jesus clearly does not fit into this mold. Ultimately, however, the Roman Empire crushed his revolt and killed Bar Kokhba. After his death, all acknowledged that he was not the mashiach.[11]


No More Waiting for the Mashiach

Rivkah Lambert Adler, Breaking Israel News:

In a surprisingly under-reported story, one of Jerusalem’s chief rabbis, Rabbi Shlomo Amar issued a ruling on Monday that God must bring the messiah and expedite the ultimate redemption. The ruling was delivered during an all-night spiritual gathering of rabbis from the Chabad-Lubavitch movement  and a recording of the moment was posted to YouTube (in Hebrew).

During this spontaneous gathering, and no doubt influenced by the heady success of the conference that had just concluded, Rabbi Berel Lazar, one of Russia’s two chief rabbis, reminded Amar that 25 years ago, the Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the last head of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement, who passed away in 1994, had asked Amar to issue a psak din (a formal rabbinic ruling) on the issue of the redemption of the Jewish people.

In the presence of dozens of colleagues and holding the hands of the two men sitting closest to him, Amar pronounced, “We hereby rule according to the demand of the audience – we see the plaintiff but can’t see the defendant – that God Almighty speedily bring an end and reveal the Moshiach (messiah) in front of our eyes in actuality.” [12]


 King of The Jews, King of the world

Israel National News:

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday met with a delegation of rabbis, led by Sephardic Chief Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef, former Chief Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau, Chief Rabbi of Russia Berel Lazar, and rabbis of the Rabbinical Center of Europe (RCE).

Rabbi Yosef began by saying “according to the Jewish tradition, your leadership is decided by the kingdom of G-d, King of the world, and therefore we bless you: Blessed is the One who gave of His glory to flesh and blood.”  [13]


Rabbi Raymond Apple, Oz Torah:

In ancient times, few people ever saw their ruler in person, heard his voice or witnessed his glory. The Talmud (TB Berachot 58a) reported that the people were agog to see the king, Jew or gentile, and even a blind person sensed his advent. A benediction was required by halachah (Jewish law): On seeing a Jewish king and his court, it was Baruch… shenatan mik’vodo levasar vedam, “Blessed be He… who gave some of His glory to flesh and blood”; on seeing a gentile king, Baruch shenatan mik’vdo liv’ru’av, “who gave some of His glory to His creatures”.  [14]


[1]  Illustrated Sunday Herald (London), February 8, 1920, pg. 5,”Zionism Versus Bolshevism, a Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People,” Winston Churchill.

[2]   International Socialist Review Issue 24, July–August 2002, “The Hidden History of Zionism”, By Annie Levin.

[3]   International Socialist Review Issue 4, Spring 1998, “Zionism, False Messiah“, By Lance Selfa

[4]   In Defense of Marxism, 15 May, 2003, “Stalin and Zionism”, A. Kramer


[6]  The New York Times, June 16, 1992, “Israel Welcomes Gorbachev as Hero,” Clyde Haberman.

[7]   “EURASIA” FOR PUTIN. NUMBER OF CENTRISTS HAS GROWN by Leonid Savchenko,, 21 April 2001  ,

[8]  Attributed to the National Bolshevik Party of Israel,, obtained via:

[9]  Arctogaia, 2001, “The Paradigm of the End,” Alexandr Dughin.

[10]  National Review Online ,June 18, 2014, “Dughin’s Evil Theology, Robert Zurbin

[11]  Judaism 101, “Mashiach: The Messiah,” Tracey R. Rich.

[12]  Breaking Israeli News, November 13, 2015, “The Time Has Come for God to Reveal the Messiah, Says Jerusalem’s Chief Rabbi,” Rivkah Lambert Adler.

[13]  Aurutz Sheva, July 10, 2014, “Putin: ‘ I support the struggle of Israel'”,

[14]  Oz Torah, “Jewish Prayers for Government,” Rabbi Raymond Apple

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>