The Jewish Role in the Bolshevik Revolution

sHiZo963

Jedi
The Jewish Role in the Bolshevik Revolution and Russia's Early Soviet Regime:
Assessing the Grim Legacy of Soviet Communism

by Mark Weber

I'm sure much of this information is in Douglas Reed's Controversy of Zion (though I haven't gotten to that part yet), but I stumbled upon this link today and I thought the forum would be interested in its contents, even if as a kind of supplement to the historical facts addressed by Reed.

The essay is found on the Institute for Historical Review's website. From my first reading of it, the essay is quite informative and seems to be objective in its treatment of the subject.

Full-text link:
http://www(dot)ihr(dot)org/jhr/v14/v14n1p-4_Weber.html

Some notable excerpts:
Weber said:
. . .

A solid understanding of history has long been the best guide to comprehending the present and anticipating the future. Accordingly, people are most interested in historical questions during times of crisis, when the future seems most uncertain. With the collapse of Communist rule in the Soviet Union, 1989-1991, and as Russians struggle to build a new order on the ruins of the old, historical issues have become very topical. For example, many ask: How did the Bolsheviks, a small movement guided by the teachings of German-Jewish social philosopher Karl Marx, succeed in taking control of Russia and imposing a cruel and despotic regime on its people?

In recent years, Jews around the world have been voicing anxious concern over the specter of anti-Semitism in the lands of the former Soviet Union. In this new and uncertain era, we are told, suppressed feelings of hatred and rage against Jews are once again being expressed. According to one public opinion survey conducted in 1991, for example, most Russians wanted all Jews to leave the country. But precisely why is anti-Jewish sentiment so widespread among the peoples of the former Soviet Union? Why do so many Russians, Ukrainians, Lithuanians and others blame "the Jews" for so much misfortune?

A Taboo Subject

Although officially Jews have never made up more than five percent of the country's total population, they played a highly disproportionate and probably decisive role in the infant Bolshevik regime, effectively dominating the Soviet government during its early years. Soviet historians, along with most of their colleagues in the West, for decades preferred to ignore this subject. The facts, though, cannot be denied.

With the notable exception of Lenin (Vladimir Ulyanov), most of the leading Communists who took control of Russia in 1917-20 were Jews. Leon Trotsky (Lev Bronstein) headed the Red Army and, for a time, was chief of Soviet foreign affairs. Yakov Sverdlov (Solomon) was both the Bolshevik party's executive secretary and -- as chairman of the Central Executive Committee -- head of the Soviet government. Grigori Zinoviev (Radomyslsky) headed the Communist International (Comintern), the central agency for spreading revolution in foreign countries. Other prominent Jews included press commissar Karl Radek (Sobelsohn), foreign affairs commissar Maxim Litvinov (Wallach), Lev Kamenev (Rosenfeld) and Moisei Uritsky.

Lenin himself was of mostly Russian and Kalmuck ancestry, but he was also one-quarter Jewish. His maternal grandfather, Israel (Alexander) Blank, was a Ukrainian Jew who was later baptized into the Russian Orthodox Church.

A thorough-going internationalist, Lenin viewed ethnic or cultural loyalties with contempt. He had little regard for his own countrymen. "An intelligent Russian," he once remarked, "is almost always a Jew or someone with Jewish blood in his veins."

. . .

Appendix

A striking feature of Mr. Wilton's examination of the tumultuous 1917-1919 period in Russia is his frank treatment of the critically important Jewish role in establishing the Bolshevik regime.

The following lists of persons in the Bolshevik Party and Soviet administration during this period, which Wilton compiled on the basis of official reports and original documents, underscore the crucial Jewish role in these bodies. These lists first appeared in the rare French edition of Wilton's book, published in Paris in 1921 under the title Les Derniers Jours des Romanoffs. They did not appear in either the American or British editions of The Last Days of the Romanors published in 1920.

"I have done all in my power to act as an impartial chronicler," Wilton wrote in his foreword to Les Derniers Jours des Romanoffs. "In order not to leave myself open to any accusation of prejudice, I am giving the list of the members of the [Bolshevik Party' s] Central Committee, of the Extraordinary Commission [Cheka or secret police], and of the Council of Commissars functioning at the time of the assassination of the Imperial family.

"The 62 members of the [Central] Committee were composed of five Russians, one Ukrainian, six Letts [Latvians], two Germans, one Czech, two Armenians, three Georgians, one Karaim [Karaite] (a Jewish sect), and 41 Jews.

"The Extraordinary Commission [Cheka or Vecheka] of Moscow was composed of 36 members, including one German, one Pole, one Armenian, two Russians, eight Latvians, and 23 Jews.

"The Council of the People's Commissars [the Soviet .government] numbered two Armenians, three Russians, and 17 Jews.

"Ac.cording to data furnished by the Soviet press, out of 556 important functionaries of the Bolshevik state, including the above-mentioned, in 1918-1919 there were: 17 Russians, two Ukrainians, eleven Armenians, 35 Letts [Latvians], 15 Germans, one Hungarian, ten Georgians, three Poles, three Finns, one Czech, one Karaim, and 457 Jews."

"If the reader is astonished to find the Jewish hand everywhere in the affair of the assassination of the Russian Imperial family, he must bear in mind the formidable numerical preponderance of Jews in the Soviet administration," Wilton went on to write.

Effective governmental power, Wilton continued (on pages 136-138 of the same edition) is in the Central Committee of the Bolshevik party. In 1918, he reported, this body had twelve members, of whom nine were of Jewish origin, and three were of Russian ancestry. The nine Jews were: Bronstein (Trotsky), Apfelbaum (Zinoviev), Lurie (Larine), Uritsky, Volodarski, Rosenfeld (Kamenev), Smidovich, Sverdlov (Yankel), and Nakhamkes (Steklov). The three Russians were: Ulyanov (Lenin), Krylenko, and Lunacharsky.

"The other Russian Socialist parties are similar in composition," Wilton went on. "Their Central Committees are made up as follows:"

Mensheviks (Social Democrats): Eleven members, all of whom are Jewish.

Communists of the People: Six members, of whom five are Jews and one is a Russian.

Social Revolutionaries (Right Wing): Fifteen members, of whom 13 are Jews and two are Russians (Kerenski, who may be of Jewish origin, and Tchaikovski).

Social Revolutionaries (Left Wing): Twelve members, of whom ten are Jews and two are Russians.

Committee of the Anarchists of Moscow: Five members, of whom four are Jews and one is a Russian.

Polish Communist Party: Twelve members, all of whom are Jews, including Sobelson (Radek), Krokhenal (Zagonski), and Schwartz (Goltz).

"These parties," commented Wilton, "in appearance opposed to the Bolsheviks, play the Bolsheviks' game on the sly, more or less, by preventing the Russians from pulling themselves together. Out of 61 individuals at the head of these parties, there are six Russians and 55 Jews. No matter what may be the name adopted, a revolutionary government will be Jewish."

[Although the Bolsheviks permitted these leftist political groups to operate for a time under close supervision and narrow limits, even these pitiful remnants of organized opposition were thoroughly eliminated by the end of the 1921 .]

The Soviet government, or "Council of People's Commissars' (also known as the "Sovnarkom") was made up of the following, Wilton reported:
Peoples Commissariat (Ministry) Name Nationality
Chairman V.I. Ulyanov (Lenin) Russian
Foreign Affairs G.V. Chicherin Russian
Nationalities J. Dzhugashvili [Stalin] Georgian
Agriculture Protian Armenian
Economic Council Lourie (Larin) Jew
Food Supply A.G. Schlikhter Jew
Army and Navy [Military] L.D. Bronstein (Trotski) Jew
State Control K.I. Lander Jew
State Lands Kaufmann Jew
Works [Labor] V. Schmidt Jew
Social Relief E. Lilina (Knigissen) Jew
Education A. Lunacharsky Russian
Religion Spitzberg Jew
Interior Apfelbaum [Radomyslski] (Zinoviev) Jew
.Hygiene Anvelt Jew
Finance I. E. Gukovs [and G. Sokolnikov] Jew
Press Voldarski [Goldstein] Jew
Elections M.S. Uritsky Jew
Justice I.Z. Shteinberg Jew
Refugees Fenigstein Jew
Refugees Savitch (Assistant) Jew
Refugees Zaslovski (Assistant) Jew

Out of these 22 "Sovnarkom" members, Wilton summed'up, there were three Russians, one Georgian, one Armenian, and 17 Jews.

The Central Executive Committee, Wilton continues, was made up of the following members:
Y. M. Sverdlov [Solomon] (Chairman) Jew
Avanesov (Secretary) Armenian
Bruno Latvian
Breslau Latvian [?]
Babtchinski Jew
N. I. Bukharin Russian
Weinberg Jew
Gailiss Jew
Ganzberg [Ganzburg ] Jew
Danichevski Jew
Starck German
Sachs Jew
Scheinmann Jew
Erdling Jew
Landauer Jew
Linder Jew
Wolach Czech
S. Dimanshtein Jew
Encukidze Georgian
Ermann Jew
A. A. Ioffe Jew
Karkhline Jew
Knigissen Jew
Rosenfeld (Kamenev) Jew
Apfelbaum (Zinoviev) Jew
N. Krylenko Russian
Krassikov Jew
Kaprik Jew
Kaoul Latvian
Ulyanov (Lenin) Russian
Latsis Jew
Lander Jew
Lunacharsky Russian
Peterson Latvian
Peters Latvian
Roudzoutas Jew
Rosine Jew
Smidovitch Jew
Stoutchka Latvian
Nakhamkes (Steklov) Jew
Sosnovski Jew
Skrytnik Jew
L. Bronstein (Trotsky) Jew
Teodorovitch Jew [?]
Terian Armenian
Uritsky Jew
Telechkine Russian
Feldmann Jew
Fromkin Jew
Souriupa Ukrainian
Tchavtchevadze Georgian
Scheikmann Jew
Rosental Jew
Achkinazi Imeretian [?]
Karakhane Karaim [Karaite]
Rose Jew
Sobelson (Radek) Jew
Schlichter Jew
Schikolini Jew
Chklianski Jew
Levine-(Pravdine) Jew

Thus, concluded Wilton, out of 61 members, five were Russians, six were Latvians, one was a German, two were Armenians, one was a Czech, one was an Imeretian, two were Georgians, one was a Karaim, one. was a Ukrainian, and 41 were Jews.

The Extraordinary Commission of Moscow (Cheka) 'the Soviet secret police and predecessor of the GPU, the NKVD and the KGB was made up of the following:
F. Dzerzhinsky (Chairman) Pole
Y. Peters (Deputy Chairman) Latvian
Chklovski Jew
Kheifiss Jew
Zeistine Jew
Razmirovitch Jew
Kronberg Jew
Khaikina Jew
Karlson Latvian
Schaumann Latvian
Leontovitch Jew
Jacob Goldine Jew
Galperstein Jew
Kniggisen Jew
Katzis Latvian
Schillenkuss Jew
Janson Latvian
Rivkine Jew
Antonof Russian
Delafabre Jew
Tsitkine Jew
Roskirovitch Jew
G. Sverdlov (Brother of president of the Central Executive Committee) Jew
Biesenski Jew
J. Blumkin (Count Mirbach's assassin) Jew
Alexandrovitch (Blumkin's accomplice) Russian
I. Model Jew
Routenberg Jew
Pines Jew
Sachs Jew
Daybol Latvian
Saissoune Armenian
Deylkenen Latvian
Liebert Jew
Vogel German
Zakiss Latvian

Of these 36 Cheka officials, one was a Pole, one a German, one an Armenian, two were Russians, eight were Latvians, and 23 were Jews.

"Accordingly," Wilton sums up, "there is no reason to be surprised at the preponderant role of Jews in the assassination of the Imperial family. It is rather the opposite that would have been surprising."
 
Being Russian or Polish is a nationality. Being a "Jew" is not a nationality. So, listing Russian, Pole, Ukrainian, Jew is logically incorrect. It could even be said to be anti-Semitic. In order for the list to be logically consistent, the religion AND nationality of each individual should be listed.
 
I agree completely - this is how the author chose to classify his findings, however. Since the object of the study was to find out how many Jews were involved in the early leadership of the Bolshevik Revolution, this kind of classification makes sense but ONLY relative to this study.

Plus, we know from our reading about Zionist "dogma" that they (Zionist Jews) generally don't see themselves as a hyphenated anything - simply a Jew and nothing else. This is why the Zionist Jews never truly intergrated into any of the societies they inhabited, as Reed points out, and were instead in constant struggle of "captivity."

Reed in C of Z said:
The difference in the case of the Judahites was that old country and holy city were the same; that Jehovaism demanded a triumphant return and restoration of temple-worship, over the bodies of the heathen destroyed; and that this religion was also their law of daily life, so that a worldly political ambition, of the ancient tribal or nationalist kind, was also a primary article of faith. Other such creeds of primitive times became fossilized; this one survived to derange the life of peoples throughout the ages to our day, when it achieved its most disruptive effect.

This was the direct result of the experiments made and the experience gained by the Levites in Babylon, where they were first able to test the creed in an alien environment.

The benevolent behaviour of the Babylonian conquerors towards their Judahite prisoners was the exact opposite of that enjoined on the Judahites, in the reverse circumstances, by the Second Law which had been read to them just before their defeat: "Save nothing alive that breatheth. . ." Dr. Kastein says the captives "enjoyed complete freedom" of residence, worship, occupation and selfadministration.

This liberality allowed the Levites to make captives of people who thus were largely free; under priestly insistence they were constrained to settle in closed communities, and in this way the ghetto and Levite power were born. The Talmudic ruling of the Christian era, which decreed the excommunication of Jews if without permission they sold "neighbour-property" to "strangers", comes down from that first experiment in self-segregation, in Babylon.

The support of the foreign ruler was necessary for this corralling of expatriates by their own priests, and it was given on this first occasion, as on innumerable other occasions ever since.


With their people firmly under their thumbs, the Levites then set about to complete the compilation of "The Law". The four books which they added to Deuteronomy make up the Torah, and this word, which originally meant doctrine, is now recognized to mean "the Law". However, "completion" is a most misleading word in this connection.

Only the Torah (in the sense of the five books) was completed. The Law was not then and never can be completed, given the existence of the "secret Torah" recorded by the Talmud (which itself was but the later continuation of the Torah), and the priestly claim to divine right of interpretation. In fact, "the Law" was constantly changed, often to close some loophole which might have allowed "the stranger" to enjoy a right devolving only on "a neighbour". Some examples of this continuing process of amendment have already been given, and others follow in this chapter. The effect was usually to make hatred of or contempt for "the stranger" an integral part of "the Law" through the provision of discriminatory penalties or immunities.

When the Torah was complete a great stockade, unique in its nature but still incomplete, had been built between any human beings who at any time accepted this "Law" and the rest of mankind. The Torah allowed no distinction between this Law of Jehovah and that of man, between religious and civil law. The law of "the stranger", theologically and juridically, had no existence, and any pretension to enforce one was "persecution", as Jehovah's was the only law.

The priesthood claimed that the Torah governed every act of daily life, down to the most trivial. Any objection that Moses could not have received from Jehovah on the mountain detailed instructions covering every conceivable action performed by man, was met with the dogma that the priesthood, like relay runners, handed on from generation to generation "the oral tradition" of Jehovah's revelation to Moses, and infinite power of reinterpretation. However, such objections were rare, as the Law prescribed the death penalty for doubters.

Mr. Montefiore remarks, accurately, that the Old Testament is "revealed legislation, not revealed truth", and says the Israelite prophets cannot have known anything of the Torah as the Levites completed it in Babylon. Jeremiah's words, "the pen of the Scribes is in vain" evidently refer to this process of Levitical revision and to the attribution of innumerable new "statutes and judgments" to Jehovah and Moses.

"Sin" was not a concept in the Torah as it took shape. That is logical, for in law there cannot be "sin", only crime or misdemeanour. The only offence known to this Law was non-observance, which meant crime or misdemeanour. What is commonly understood by "sin", namely, moral transgression, was sometimes expressly enjoined by it or made absolvable by the sacrifice of an animal.

The idea of "the return" (together with the related ideas of destruction and dominion) was basic to the dogma, which stood or fell by it. No strong impulse to return from Babylon to Jerusalem existed among the people (any more than today, when the instinct of the vast majority of Jews is completely against "return", so that the Zionist state is much more easily able to find money abroad than immigrants).

Literal fulfilment was the supreme tenet and that meant that possession of Palestine, the "centre" of the dominant empire to come, was essential (as it still is); its importance in the pattern was political, not residential.

...

Five hundred years ahead lay a second universal religion, and five hundred years after that a third. The little nation of Judah was held back in the Law's chains from this movement of mankind; it was arrested in the fossil stage of spiritual development, and yet its primitive tribal creed retained life and vigour. The Levitical Law, still potent in the Twentieth Century, is in its nature a survival from sunken times.

Such a Law was bound to cause curiosity, first, and alarm next among peoples with whom the Judahites dwelt, or to their neighbours, if they dwelt alone. When the Judahites returned from Babylon to Jerusalem, about 538 BC, this impact on other peoples began. At that moment in time it was felt only by little clans and tribes, the immediate neighbours of the repatriated Judahites in Jerusalem. It has continued ever since in widening circ1es, being felt by ever greater numbers of peoples, and in our century has produced its greatest disturbances among them.
Knowing this, and the fact that most, if not all, of the Jews listed in the above lists were Zionists, their classification as "Jews" in place of nationality makes sense.

Generally, however, you're right - this shouldn't be done. Anyone not knowing the background of Zionism would most likely react with the "anti-Semitic" comment, and stop at that.

Thanks for pointing that out.
 
Laura said:
Being Russian or Polish is a nationality. Being a "Jew" is not a nationality. So, listing Russian, Pole, Ukrainian, Jew is logically incorrect. It could even be said to be anti-Semitic. In order for the list to be logically consistent, the religion AND nationality of each individual should be listed.
Recently a Jewish-Russian emigrant told a local newspaper that back home in either Russia or the USSR her identity card described her nationality as Jewish.
Could anyone either confirm or disprove this ?
 
Ulrich said:
Recently a Jewish-Russian emigrant told a local newspaper that back home in either Russia or the USSR her identity card described her nationality as Jewish.
Could anyone either confirm or disprove this ?
Perhaps when this person was asked about nationality, when filling the forms for Id he/she described himself/herself as Jewish? I consider it quite probable.
 
According to the 1989 census (National'nyi sostav naselenija SSSR. Po dannym vsesojuznoj perepisi naselenija 1989g) out of 114 nationalities mentioned, 1.378.344 people were registered (declared themselves) as "Hebrews" (Evrei). There even used to be a Jewish Autonomous Region near Chabarovsk.
 
In 2002 there were only 229938 registered as Hebrews - see http://www.perepis2002.ru/index.html?id=17.

The classification is somewhat special, as there are 597212 "Germans", but the Dutch etc. are also being classified as "German".

Now: what is "nationality"?

According to http://bio.fizteh.ru/student/biotech/rasa.html
"nationality" is decided based on the following factors:

1) Declaration of the given person to be of a given nationality
2) Having a separate language
3) Existence of "self-consciousness" within this language
4) Specific behavioral stereotypes etc.
 
Back
Top Bottom