Does “International Jewry” Exist?

Editor's note: In the summer of 2006, the prestigious Belknap Press of Harvard University Press published Dr. Jeffrey Herf's, The Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda During WWII and the Holocaust. A reviewer in the Los Angeles Times wrote that it may be the most important book on the Holocaust in a generation. For this reason, a detailed Holocaust revisionist rebuttal to it is necessary. Paul Grubach's review of it is forthcoming. In the meantime, Grubach sent the following email to Dr. Herf in the hope that he will do what a scholar is supposed to do: defend his work in public debate.

For Dr. Jeffrey Herf from Paul Grubach

Subject: The distortions, omissions and falsehoods in The Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda During WWII and the Holocaust

Dr. Herf,

I am in the process of writing a thorough analysis of your book, The Jewish Enemy, for Internet sources. In the interests of fairness, you will be allowed to view my rebuttal prior to its publication.

If you are interested, you can get an idea what my review will look like by viewing some of my other writings. Go to Paul Grubach's entry in our authors' index and to VHO's database entries for Paul Grubach.

In a word, your book is simply “ideology” in the Marxist sense of the term. What you put forth is a body of ideas, distorted and untrue in the main, but promoted because it serves the political, psychological and economic needs of a power elite. In this case, the power elite your book serves is Jewish-Zionism.

The Jewish Enemy is chock full of distortions, omissions, falsehoods, fallacies, etc. It is in the long line of books that attempt to downplay and distort the Jewish role in producing anti-Semitism.

Let me give you one simple example. Please keep in mind that this is not even the best example, just the simplest to explain in a short amount of time.

A key component of your thesis is as follows: “Radical anti-Semitism rested on the belief that the Jews were a cohesive, politically active subject—that is, a group united on a global scale by racial bonds that transcended any allegiance to nation-states (p. 7).” Elsewhere, you state that Hitler spoke of world or international Jewry as an “actually existing political subject with vast power that was hostile to Germany (p. 3).” You imply this view is false.

You insinuate that the entity “International Jewry” had no existence whatsoever before or during WWII. According to Jeffrey Herf, “International Jewry” (i.e., powerful and influential groups of Jews who owe their ultimate allegiance to the world Jewish community and not to the nation-states where they live) is only a paranoid fantasy of Nazis and anti-Semites. Let me point out just a small sample of evidence to prove you wrong.

Dr. Stephen Wise, past president of the American Jewish Congress and one of the most important Jewish leaders in the US before and during WWII, confirmed in speech in June of 1938 that the entity of “International Jewry” does in fact exist! He stated: “I am not a citizen of the Jewish faith. I am a Jew.” He continued: “I am an American. I have been an American for sixty-three, sixty four years of my life, but I have been a Jew for 4,000 years.”

Dr. Wise added that “any Jew who speaks of 'Americans who are Jews' is going back to cowardice of the German Jews who spoke of themselves as German citizens of the Jewish faith.” Dr. Wise then said that these German Jews were woefully and tragically punished for their error.

“Hitler was right about in one thing,” Dr. Wise said. “He calls the Jewish people a race, and we are a race.” (This all comes from the New York Herald Tribune, June 13, 1938, p. 12. I have the entire article in front of me.)

Here, directly contradicting Jeffrey Herf, Wise is confirming that “International Jewry” does exist. He is simply expressing the widely held sentiment among many Jews that they are indeed ONE PEOPLE, and their ultimate allegiance is to the Jewish people. Directly undermining Herf, Wise is saying that many Jews were a cohesive, politically active subject—that is, a group united on a global scale by racial bonds that transcended any allegiance to nation-states where they may live.

In 1933, Samuel Untermyer, elected president of the World Jewish Economic Federation, was a leader in the world attempt to bring on an economic boycott against Germany. In a speech in August of 1933, he condemned those small numbers of Jews who were still willing to travel on German ships. In his own words: “They are traitors to their race.” Once again, directly contradicting Herf, he is expressing the widely held sentiment among many Jews that they were indeed a “race,” a group united on a global scale by racial bonds. See New York Times, 8/7/33, p. 4 L.

You may try to dismiss the evidence of these quotes with the following rebuttal. These two statements by just two Jewish leaders don't apply to all Jews. You used this argument on page 119.

What Wise and Untermyer were expressing were widely-held sentiments among many Jews that don't necessarily apply to all Jews. However, the fact of the matter still remains is that Wise and Untermyer were expressing the deeply held beliefs of large numbers of Jews.

As the Jewish historian, Yuri Slezkine, has recently pointed out in The Jewish Century, by the time of World War II, most Jews “knew that they were, in some sense, Jews. They may never have been to a synagogue, seen a menorah, heard Yiddish or Hebrew, tasted gefilte fish or indeed met their grandparents. But they knew they were Jews in the Soviet sense, which was also—in essence—the Nazi sense. They were Jews by blood (p. 286).”

Directly refuting Jeffrey Herf's ridiculous claim that “International Jewry” does not exist, Slezkine goes on to show how Jews from the Soviet Union solicited the support of American Jews to pressure the US government to enter the war and provide aid to the Communist state. Soviet Jewish spokesmen proclaimed that “the Jewish people—'ethnic' or religious, Communist, Zionist, or traditionalist—were one family.” (p. 290)

This political entity called “International Jewry” existed in the 1930s and 1940s, and there is evidence that it still exists today. Herewith.

In the late 1970s an important survey was conducted of committed Jews participating in Jewish leadership development programs. Those participating in the survey–while not representative of American Jewry in general–were described as representative of “that portion of American Jewry which has been socialized toward a positive Jewish commitment within the American context.” The survey results showed there was broad agreement with attitudes that put Jewish-Zionist identification above all other identifications, including their identification with the United States. Seventy percent agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “I feel more emotional when I hear Hatvikah [the Israeli national anthem] than when I hear the Star Spangled Banner.” Eighty Five percent agreed or strongly agreed with the statement: “Assimilation is the greatest threat to Jewish survival today.”

And finally, here is one of the most interesting findings. Less than 34 percent of the Jewish respondents agreed with or strongly agreed with the statement: “The primary loyalty of American Jews must be the United States and their fellow Americans.” Less than 20 percent answered “not sure” to this question, while greater than 50 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement. Thus, greater than fifty percent of the committed Jewish people in this study rejected the claim that US Jews should be more loyal to the United States than to Israel. In a word, they are saying that US Jewish loyalty to Israel is more important than loyalty to the United States.

(You are encouraged to check my numbers by consulting the actual study. Jonathan S. Woocher. (1986) Sacred Survival: The Civil Religion of American Jews. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 110-113)

Dr. Herf relies upon the work of the Jewish historian, Benjamin Pinkus. So, it is only appropriate that we should quote what he wrote in 1988 in regard to the question as to whether or not “International Jewry” actually exists. He wrote: “All Jews are aware that they belong to an ethnic group with common character traits, a common past and a common destiny (p. 135).” See The Jews of the Soviet Union.

Finally, psychology professor Kevin MacDonald has, in a three volume trilogy, fully documented that the socio-political entity–International Jewry–does in fact exist. See his A People That Shall Dwell Alone, Separation and Its Discontents, and Culture of Critique.

Now, to be sure, one must avoid negative stereotyping. There are a significant number of Jewish people that would reject the concept of “International Jewry” as defined here. However, the fact of the matter still remains is that there are large numbers of Jews and powerful Jewish organizations (but not all Jews) that can be classified under the title of “International Jewry.” They are Jews that form a cohesive, politically active subject—that is, a group united on a global scale by genetic/racial bonds that transcend any allegiance to nation-states, except Israel and the Jewish people.

It appears to me that Jeffrey Herf wants to squelch all criticism of the powerful socio-political entity, International Jewry. What better way to do this than by simply proclaiming “International Jewry does not exist, and anybody who says that it does is a paranoid Nazi and anti-Semite?”

If a belief such as this is widely accepted, this alone will discourage anyone from criticizing International Jewry. After all, who wants to be labeled a “paranoid Nazi and anti-Semite?”

Even the respected Jewish weekly, Forward, hinted that Dr. Herf has a political agenda in mind. In the July 21, 2006 issue (pp. 16-17), the reviewer states: “There is no question that Herf researched and wrote “The Jewish Enemy” with the recent proliferation of conspiratorial thinking at the forefront of his mind.” The review's closing statement is most revealing: “[Herf's book, The Jewish Enemy] might also affect how literally we interpret the paranoid antisemitic rhetoric so prevalent today.”

Indeed, this may very well be the ulterior purpose of the book. That is, to render any criticism of International Jewry taboo and off limits in public debate.

Dr. Jeffrey Herf is either engaging in the Freudian defense mechanism of outright denial, or he is consciously distorting reality to serve an ulterior Zionist political agenda.

Or maybe he is doing both.

Sincerely,

Paul Grubach

The Mythic World of Jeffrey Herf

Subject: Distortions and Omissions in Dr. Herf's, The Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda During WWII and the Holocaust, and the mythic mental world of Zionism.

From Paul Grubach to Dr. Jeffrey Herf

Dr. Herf,

This is another follow up to my last email to you of 12/4/06. I am trying to be fair with you by giving you a chance to view my arguments, evidence and claims prior to my publication of my review of your book, The Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda During WWII and the Holocaust.

In regard to evidence that does not fit your thesis, you “sweep it under the rug.” This is shown by your treatment of the famous Fortune magazine 1936 report on Jews in America. If the evidence fits your thesis, you quote it; if the evidence undermines your thesis, you conveniently ignore it.

On page 81, you rely upon the famous Fortune magazine report of February 1936 on Jews in America to “prove” your point that Jewish power and influence in the United States was miniscule. Let me quote you:

“In the corporate world as the editors of Fortune magazine stated in 1936, there was 'no basis whatsoever for the suggestion that Jews monopolize US business and industry.' Their review of directors of leading banks indicated that Jews were underrepresented in leading institutions of finance and banking and had even less of a presence in heavy industry, transportation, power utilities, communication and agriculture.”

What you fail to point out is that the Fortune editors, while decrying the views of Americans who exaggerated Jewish economic power in banking and heavy industry, declared without qualification that Jewish ownership of the public opinion forming, taste-making and taste-influencing media in America was possibly as much as 50%, which, I believe, included publishing. Here is what they wrote on page 136:

“It is difficult on these figures to conclude that American organs and instruments of opinion are predominantly Jewish. Granted the great power of the movies in the influencing of modern society and the great influence of Jews in the movies, it still remains true that the Jewish interest in journalism and advertising is extraordinarily small and that journalism and advertising also have their persuasiveness. With the radio and the theatre standing midway between, each about half owned by Jews, it may perhaps be guessed that they more fairly reflect the actual situation. At the very most, half the opinion-making and taste-influencing paraphernalia in America is in Jewish hands.” (emphasis added)

The editors are clearly stating Jewish influence in the opinion-forming mass media was very substantial and pervasive. But you totally ignored this.

In your attempt to “prove” that Jewish influence upon the Roosevelt administration was “miniscule,” you again quote the editors of Fortune: “Jewish influence in Mr. Roosevelt's Washington is minor (p. 81).”

Let me give you just one small piece of evidence to undermine this claim. From an editorial in The Washington Post, July 6, 1945, we learn how important the Jewish Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., was in creating the pro-war policies of the Roosevelt administration:

“Secretary Morgenthau, in the 12 years of his service to the Roosevelt administration, made contributions to his country far beyond the scope of his official duties. He was among the earliest and most earnest advocates of American preparedness for war. Long before Pearl Harbor he manifested an imaginative grasp of the need for drastic expansion of our armament production facilities. He significantly promoted the expansion through the vigorous assistance he gave to the British and French purchasing missions here. He daringly prodded the old National Defense Advisory Commission into enlarging our airplane output. It was his Treasury Department which impounded Axis assets in the United States–over the protests of the Department of State. The lend-lease law was conceived and written in his legal division–and he did much to promote its enactment…No nation has ever before entered into so gigantic a finance program as that undertaken by the Treasury Department for the financing of American participation in the present World War…The war bond program gave millions of Americans, as Secretary Morgenthau desired that it should, a sense of direct participation in the national cause.”

Morgenthau did in fact play an important role in driving the US into war with Germany, and you chose to downplay this role.

In regard to the Nazi world view, Jeffrey Herf writes:

“[N]azi propaganda had created a mythic world by 'transforming the political universe into a conflict of persons and personifications' in which a virtuous young Germany fought manfully against evil schemers, above all the Jews.” (p. 2)

The view that you present in The Jewish Enemy is a mirror image of this Nazi view, simply with the roles reversed. That is, Herf transforms a political universe into a conflict of persons and personifications in which a virtuous, powerless, and innocent international Jewry, along with the Allied powers, fought manfully against the personification of all evil, the National Socialist regime of Germany.

In this sense, The Jewish Enemy truly is “ideology” in the Marxist sense of the term: a body of ideas, distorted and untrue, but promoted because it services the political, psychological, and financial needs of the power elite of Jewish Zionism.

Paul Grubach