The Protocols without Zion


The (((Soros))) leaks, a series of internal communiques from the Open Society Foundations (((OSF))), are going to go down the memory hole very, very fast. (((George Soros))) is a leading bankroller of “progressive” causes, sponsor of color revolution attempts in Europe, check writer for #blacklivesmatter, and a multi-million dollar donor to the Clinton presidential campaign. In other words, the guy is pretty untouchable. Moreover, bringing him up gets you labeled a tin-foiler or a conspiracy theorist. Using big money to sway elections and manipulate politics is wrong and we’ve got to get money out of politics, but if you complain about leftists doing it you’re just a paranoid lunatic. Oh and anti-semitic too.

Speaking of which, a sizable amount of people on the deeper end of our political pool like to bring up the Protocols of the Elders of Zion when talking about (((Soros))) or the JQ. There are two huge problems with this though. First of all, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a plagiarized hoax. The text is a Russian revision of an anti-papal treatise originally written in 19th century France. Get over it. You can explain the JQ without resorting to a debunked document that is rightly associated with cranks. But wait—don’t people like (((George Soros))) seem to render the authenticity debate moot? What does it matter if the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is real or not if he’s behaving in accordance with it anyway? So this is where we get to problem number two. (((George Soros))), while seemingly the platonic form of an anti-goy kayak who funds and shills far-left moral causes, open borders immigration for Europe and the United States, and anti-nationalism in the service of a global financial capitalist agenda, is actually more of a principled third worldist and rootless cosmopolitan than a likudnik.

In other words, he is not a Zionist. He’s undoubtedly part of a long tradition of ethnic Jewish activism against White societies, but he does not fit the pattern of “open borders for thee, not for me,” or “nationalism for Israel, cosmopolitanism for everyone else.” He’s the Protocols without Zion. There is an important nuance to his anti-zionism, however, which I will get to later. First I want to give a quick overview of someone whose life couldn’t possibly be more Jewish.

(((Soros))), born György Schwartz, grew up in Hungary during WWII and was taught (((Esperanto))) by his father, a non-observant Jew. According to (((Soros))), the family changed its name because of anti-semitism. Some hyper-neocon websites like (((FrontPage Mag))) allege he was a “nazi collaborator,” which is probably vaguely correct as the occupying German forces did employ segments of the Jewish population in administering ghettos. Then again, we have to take their narrative with a grain of salt, since the intention is to connect his anti-zionism to “being a nazi collaborator.” In other words, they are attempting to frame (((Soros))) as a lifelong traitor to the Jewish people in order to explain his anti-zionism, because they don’t understand how cosmopolitan elitism and third worldism work. I think it goes without saying that the man who wants Germany converted into multicultural dystopia is not a national socialist.

After the war, he emigrated from Hungary and went to England, and later the United States. In the demesne of the eternal Anglos, he had a successful career in volcanic services/financial firms like (((Singer and Friedlander))), (((F.M. Mayer))), (((Wertheim & Co.))) and (((Arnhold and S. Bleichroeder))), before finally founding the (((Soros Management Fund))). Yes, nearly every lucrative job he’s ever had has been the result of ethnic networking.  In 1992, he would make $1 billion in a single day from currency speculation in Britain, cementing his image as a Der Sturmer cartoon villain. In 2014 Forbes reported that (((Soros))) was the 27th richest person on earth, the wealthiest hedge-fund manager, and the seventh richest person in the United States, with a net worth of $23 billion.

There’s no need to get into the specifics of what he has funded over the last twenty years with all those shekels—we know and you can find it elsewhere. But to tease  just three examples, the leaks show he tried to influence the outcome of the Sanhedrin ruling earlier this year on Obama’s executive orders regarding immigration, funded opposition research on counter-Islamic activists, and called the ongoing third world invasion of Europe “the new normal” and “an opportunity” for his organization to push its immigration agenda. What I want to focus on are his ideological concerns regarding Israel, which are a bit more complex than throwing money at anti-white and regressive left causes in Europe and the United States.

The (((OSF))) and the New Israel Fund, which receives shekels from (((Soros))), fund a Palestinian organization called Adalah. Adalah describes its mission as “work[ing] to promote and defend the rights of Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel, 1.2 million people, or 20% of the population, as well as Palestinians living in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT).” If this sounds like training Palestinians to sue the Israeli government and grievance-monger it’s because it is. Adalah also has ties to the decidedly anti-zionist Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) movement, which aims to treat Israel like apartheid South Africa. The Times of Israel reported that the recent (((OSF))) leaks “show Jewish-American billionaire contributed millions to combating Jewish state’s ‘restrictive measures’ against minorities,” $10 million since 2001. An op-ed in Bloomberg titled “A Soros Plan, a Marginalized Israel” complains that “Open Society is treating Israel the way it treats autocratic countries like Russia or Iran, as an adversarial abuser of human rights. In the case of Iran though, the group has also supported Obama’s outreach to the country.” And the Washington Times reports that the (((Soros)))-backed Color of Change organization signed the Movement for Black Lives platform, which accuses Israel of “apartheid” and “genocide.”

So what’s going on here? Give his approach to issues of identity and nationalism in Europe and the United States, (((Soros))) is a staunch third worldist. If something puts Whites back and vibrants ahead, he supports it. He supports accelerationism when it comes to the third demographic transition, and as a donor to non-white Democrat causes he must obviously recognize that the coming minority-majority society is a huge boon for his politics electorally speaking. And according to the leaks, he does. As highlighted in Radix Journal:

North Carolina now has roughly nine million residents, slightly larger than the population of New York City, making it the third most populous southern state (after Texas and Florida). The state is now the nation’s tenth most populous and continues to grow. It is changing rapidly, with one third of the population now people of color and a tri-racial population dynamic – African-American, Latino, and white –replacing the Black/white dominance of old. North Carolina through the 1990s had the fastest growing immigrant population and in the 2000s had the fastest growing Latino population. This is no Mayberry (and taking TV fiction for what it is, the state likely never was Mayberry).

Black is capitalized and “white” is not. Not a mistake given the celebratory nature of the demographic shifts. But what about his anti-zionist attitude towards Israel? If (((Soros))) is really a true kayak, why is he applying third worldism to Israel? The answer may surprise you.

Reading between the lines on his Wikipedia entry (sorry, I’m lazy), I found that he was very concerned about the relationship between anti-semitism and Israel. In 2003, at a  Jewish forum in New York, Soros said:

There is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe. The policies of the Bush administration and the Sharon administration contribute to that. It’s not specifically anti-Semitism, but it does manifest itself in anti-Semitism as well. I’m critical of those policies… If we change that direction, then anti-Semitism also will diminish. I can’t see how one could confront it directly… I’m also very concerned about my own role because the new anti-Semitism holds that the Jews rule the world… As an unintended consequence of my actions… I also contribute to that image.

In a 2007 article for The New York Review of Books, he writes:

I do not subscribe to the myths propagated by enemies of Israel and I am not blaming Jews for anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism predates the birth of Israel. Neither Israel’s policies nor the critics of those policies should be held responsible for anti-Semitism. At the same time, I do believe that attitudes toward Israel are influenced by Israel’s policies, and attitudes toward the Jewish community are influenced by the pro-Israel lobby’s success in suppressing divergent views.

I have no doubt (((Soros))) is a true believer in third worldism and views the nationalistic Israel as a Western aggressor against people of color. This is, after all, a key talking point of the (((New Left))) that became popular during the wave of decolonization and reinforced by the anti-apartheid campaign. And those are both things he would unequivocally support. And yet, it seems quite clear to me that (((Soros))) cares a great deal about the reputation and status of Israel in the eyes of the international community, and moreover about how this reputation can influence global attitudes towards Jews. After all, Israel bills itself as a Jewish State, and considers all Jews wherever they may be in the world to be potential citizens. Even if they denounce Israel, Israel claims them as its own. There is indeed a relationship, and so the reputation of the state matters.

What makes a good state for (((Soros)))? One that promotes the most equality, democracy, and gibs to people of color. So what does he want Israel to be? A Palestinian-friendly society that just happens to have a large number of Jews, but which doesn’t seek to elevate them to the status of a prime national community at the expense of its minorities. You know, since that makes Israel look like an evil colonizer to the third-worldist international community.

So on the one hand (((Soros))) is a very consistent globalist, cosmopolitan anti-nationalist. He presents as a true social justice altruist, who seems selflessly devoted to the cause, even at the expense of his nation-state. He doesn’t like borders, he doesn’t like resistance to globalism, and he doesn’t like discriminating between categories of goyim—he wants an “open society.” But on the other hand, he is very much concerned with the ability of Jews to live in Europe or the United States without Israeli policies hung around their necks like an albatross. If Israel misbehaves too much, it ruins his ability to operate in a decreasingly pro-Israel United States and an increasingly pro-Palestine Europe. The sooner the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is resolved in favor of the latter, the sooner it will stop being a source of anti-semitism, and a threat to overseas Israelis like (((Soros))). He might look like he’s fulfilling the Protocols, but he is doing it without Zion.

Dank meme courtesy of forum goy Boatsinker.

This entry was posted in Foreign Affairs, Ideology, Immigration, Politics and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to The Protocols without Zion

  1. BroncoColorado says:

    Jews trade both sides of the street so we shouldn’t be surprised by Soros’ bit of theater in acting his part as an anti-Zionist globalist Jew.
    Henry Ford when asked why he was giving away copies of The Protocols with every Model-T, said he wasn’t concerned about the document’s provenance or lack thereof, but how accurately they described current and past events (from a 1920s perspective). In his view The Protocols were almost prophetic and that alone validated giving them serious study.


  2. The protocols are no hoax. They are what is called a translation. A man copied and translated the minutes of a high level meeting of the Satanic Cabal now called The New World Order. He presented it to the Tsar, which led to the arrest and roundup of many jewish saboteurs by Cossacks. That’s why the Tsar and his family were murdered. Anyone reading the protocols can see that everything in them has either come true or is now being done. If this is a hoax, it would beggar the imagination as to how it so closely matches what Internationalists and Globalists have for their agenda Today.


      • Bar Tar says:

        This is hearsay, but I believe that the “Protocols” which were debunked were in fact fabricated. That is, they produced a false copy and proceeded to debunk it.

        I haven’t really looked into it, but that sort of trickery would in no way surprise me.


    • GeeBee36.6 says:

      The Jews have, as usual, doe an excellent propaganda job on getting the Protocols dismissed as a forgery. I mean, if they can get something on the scale of the Holohoax written into history, the hatchet job on the protocols is child’s play. Revilo P Oliver wasn’t fooled, however:


  3. Ryu238 says:

    “North Carolina now has roughly nine million residents, slightly larger than the population of New York City, making it the third most populous southern state (after Texas and Florida). The state is now the nation’s tenth most populous and continues to grow. It is changing rapidly, with one third of the population now people of color and a tri-racial population dynamic – African-American, Latino, and white –replacing the Black/white dominance of old. North Carolina through the 1990s had the fastest growing immigrant population and in the 2000s had the fastest growing Latino population. This is no Mayberry (and taking TV fiction for what it is, the state likely never was Mayberry).”
    Considering there is no link this was likely made up…


  4. It’s linked in the Radix article I linked file:///C:/Users/CO2%20Staff/Downloads/-dp%20tx%20nc%20context%20strategies%20first%20grantees%20063010%20(1).pdf


  5. Joe Putnam says:

    Hello Lawrence,
    I enjoyed this piece. I reminded my why I often refer to International Jewry, not the “Zionists”. While they love Israel, it is not necessary for their world dominion -as evidenced by their activities from 70 Ad until 1948!
    I do have one question. I have read the Protocols and mentioned them on my own little (recently discontinued) blog. I assumed that they were a forgery written by a studied Russian man trying to warn his countrymen about the Jewish threat through allegory. I was unaware that some people claim that it was originally written against the papacy and then redrafted against the Jews. Do you have an older post up on this that I may have missed? If not, is there an article you would recommend on this theory on another blog or website?


  6. Halford Mackinder says:

    Its unfortunate to see Atlantic Centurion repeating the lazy and vapid lie/kvetch that the Protocols were “plagiarized” from “Machiavelli and Montesquieu in Hell” – which I am assuming is the reference in paragraph 2. Maurice Joly’s work, as anyone who has read it knows, has very little in common with the Protocol except for a few lines of dialogue. I would really like to know if the writer of this article has actually read Joly or if he is just repeating something he heard somewhere. Also, why did the writer specifically fail to cite by name the work he referenced? Messy, messy, messy….


    • The point is that to normal people that kind of literature is completely discredited and that referencing it is pointless. Moreover, Soros is not a very good Zionist. And thirdly if one cannot explain the JQ without relying on muh sekret cabal they sound like a crank.


      • Edmund says:

        This is extremely true. Continuing to insist on hoaxes and disproven documents convinces nobody who wasn’t already on the far conspiracy orbit, and accomplishes nothing except providing our adversaries with a superb knee-jerk refutation that will convince the vast majority of listeners.

        People should stop referencing the Protocols. At all. They do nothing but attach a “blathering insanity” label to any other material they’re attached to, regardless of how cogent this additional material may be.

        There’s more than enough real-world evidence, including actual recent statements by people like Soros on mainstream media, that supports a logical argument for the existence of a virulently anti-white, hypocritical, Zionist/(((globalist))) movement of immense influence and unanimity. Citing those blasted Protocols merely reduces us to refighting a battle that was permanently lost long ago rather than launching a fresh offensive.

        Liked by 1 person

  7. Joe Putnam says:

    As I have mulled it over since reading this blog post yesterday, I think it is probably correct in ignoring the Protocols. As when Laurence mentioned ‘muh sekret cabal” and one commentator already mentioned, the Protocols rally make one seem a bit on the edge, and probably do not convince anyone not already open to conspiracies and probably even already looking into the JQ. There is enough good documentation out there -from David Duke to the late George Lincoln Rockwell to a bunch of decent websites- that we really do not need to encumber ourselves with a disclaimer before introducing the Protocols to explain something that good non-fiction that already exists does explain.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Mark M. says:

    Caroline B.Glick, Senior Contributing Editor of Jerusalem Post wrote an article about Soros, exposing him for what he is and saying essentially the same thing. Worth reading. Article is titled: Our world: Soro’s campaign of global chaos.


  9. Pingback: Alt-RINOs, Those Who Incur the Wrath of Kek | ATLANTIC CENTURION

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s