Rulers of Russia, The (Fr. Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp.)

Price: $7.95

In stock

The War—September 1939—?       (from the Foreword)

    This little book and the previous portion of this Foreword had been written before war began between England, France, and Poland on the one side, and Germany on the other. For years, anyone accustomed to Judaeo-Masonic methods could easily see that the “democracies” of England, France and the United States were being urged on to war against “Fascism.” That was and is quite clear and certain. On the other hand, the world program of the Rulers of Russia involves the unceasing effort to get the capitalist countries into armed conflict. A statement made by Stalin, at a session of the Third International or Comintern in Moscow, in May, 1938, makes this manifest. “The revival of revolutionary action on any scale sufficiently vast,” said the Muscovite figurehead, “will not be possible unless we succeed in utilizing the existing disagreements between the capitalistic countries, so as to precipitate them against each other into armed conflict. The doctrine of Marx-Engels-Lenin teaches us that all war truly generalized should terminate automatically by revolution. The essential work of our party comrades in foreign countries consists, then, in facilitating the provocation of such a conflict. Those who do not comprehend this know nothing of revolutionary Marxism. I hope that you will remind the comrades, those of you who direct the work. The decisive hour will arrive.” When the “democracies” had been sufficiently keyed up by all the means at the disposal of financial forces, a non-aggression pact signed by Stalin gave Germany hope of sufficient supplies to be able to withstand the blockade. Stalin had thus done his part to promote conflict, and can now watch the growth of exhaustion in the different countries, while awaiting the decisive hour for world revolution. The attack on the Mass may even be begun by a repetition of the dismemberment of Poland. Long ago, Frederick the Great of Prussia invited Russia and Austria to a “mystic communion in the body of Poland” saying that it might not be for the good of their souls but that it would be for the good of their states. History repeats itself.
    There are rumors of an anti-Jewish drive in Moscow. Some even go so far as to say that the death or deportation or imprisonment by Stalin of many of the Jews who, since the Bolshevik Revolution of October, 1917, have controlled the world activity of Moscow, is indicative of a Russian national anti-Semitic reaction. This reasoning is very superficial. In spite of the “purges,” Jewish enthusiasm for Communism as seen, for example, in regard to Spain, has not diminished in the least, nor has there been that slacking off in the activity of Communist agents which inevitably follows quarrels in the central authority. In passing, it is worth recalling that many of those “liquidated” Jews were originally introduced into Russia by Jewish financiers acting in collaboration with the German government. So far as one can see at present, there may be some superficial reactions in Russia as a result of the German-Soviet Pact, but the fundamental orientation of Russia has not varied. The program of world revolution as outlined by Stalin in 1938, still holds. If Jewish propaganda for Communism lessens in volume and intensity, not merely in passing but in permanent fashion, and if the activity of Communist agents grows less, then we may look for the existence of some kind of national reaction in Russia. If not, then all that will have happened is that some of the figureheads will have changed, while the secret controlling authority remains the same. In the early days of the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, there was resistance to the new orientation, on the part of some Jews in Russia, but it quickly died away. In this connection, it is interesting to note the announcement that the Jew, Karl Radek (Sobelsohn), though under guard since the Zinovieff trial, has been named head of the Soviet Russian Atheist party. He is one of the ablest of the older revolutionaries.
    The reasoning outlined in the last paragraph is confirmed by the perusal of a remarkable book, excellently documented, entitled The Russian Face of Germany, which appeared in 1932 from the pen of Mr. Cecil F. Melville. Mr. Melville gives in detail the history of the collaboration between the German Army authorities and Soviet Russia. I will quote some extracts and allow them to speak for themselves. “The story I shall unfold in these pages is the story of Germany’s two faces, the one turned towards Western Europe, the other turned towards Soviet Russia. . .. It can be said, without any exaggeration, that from 1921 till the present day Russia has been able, thanks to Germany, to equip herself with all kinds of arms, munitions, and the most up-to-date war material for an army of several millions; and that, thanks to her factories manufacturing war material in Russia, Germany has been able to assure herself not only of secret supplies of war material and the training of officers and other ranks in the use of this material, but also, in the event of war, the possession of the best stocked arsenals in Russia .  . . The firm of Krupp’s of Essen—Krupp the German Cannon-King (Kanonenkoenig)—deserves a chapter to itself in this review of German war industries in Russia. It deserves a separate chapter . . .because its activity upon Soviet territory has grown to tremendous proportions. . .. The final consolidation of the dominating position Krupp’s occupy in Russia, was the formation of a separate company ‘Manych’ to which the Soviet government granted a liberal concession. . .. Negotiations concerning these concessions for the company were conducted in Moscow, for several months . . .. . Gradually there was formed in Russia a chain of experimental training camps, and artillery parks (ostensibly eliminated by the Treaty of Versailles). These are under the management of German officers, and they are invariably teeming with Germans either arriving to undergo a course of training, or leaving after the completion of the course . . .. At the time of writing (1932) interest is growing in the rising star of Herr Adolf Hitler, the Nazi Leader. Herr Hitler is regarded as the protagonist par excellence of the Right against the Left in Germany, and, as a Hitlerist regime is anticipated before long, it may perhaps be argued that the Dritte Reich of the Nazis, the sworn enemies of Communism, would not tolerate the Reichswehr-Red Army connection. Such a conclusion would be inaccurate to the last degree . . .. Stalin, the realist, would have no qualms in collaborating with a Hitlerist Germany. But more important than this are the following facts: The Reichswehr Chiefs and their political allies amongst the civilian politicians and officials have succeeded in nursing their Eastern orientation, their underground military collaboration with the Soviets, in spite of all the changes of political regime in Germany since the end of the war. It has made little or no difference to them whether the Reich government has been composed of men of the Right, the Center, or the Left. They have just continued their policy uninfluenced by political change. There is no reason to suppose that they would change their course under a Hitlerist regime, especially when it is remembered that most of the aims, in external policy, of the Nazi leaders, are identical with those of the Nationalists and the military leaders themselves. Furthermore, there are the great German industrialists, of Nationalist color, who are amongst the principal collaborators, on the war material side, with the Reichswehr Chiefs, and who are, therefore, hand in glove with the directors of the “Abmachungen” (Agreements) plot. Many of these great industrialists are contributors on a big scale to the Nazi party funds. A Hitlerist Germany would, therefore, have no qualms in continuing the collaboration with Soviet Russia . . ..The Reichswehr chiefs who are conducting the Abmachungen delude themselves that they can use Bolshevist Russia to help them in their hoped-for war of revenge against Europe, and then, in the hour of victory, hold the Bolshevists at bay, and keep them in their place. The more subtle psychologists at the Kremlin, of course, know better, but are wise enough to keep their knowledge to themselves. The fact, however, that this German-Russian plot will, in the end, bring about the destruction of Germany, will not in any way reconcile Europe to its own destruction at the hands of Germany and Russia together.”
    In spite, then, of Russia’s design to bring about world revolution, Prussia wants to make use of Russia to secure the “place in the sun” to which she thinks she is entitled. As far back as 1931, General von Seckt, the creator of the new German Army, the Reichswehr, set out the Prussian program in a speech delivered on January 24th, 1931, before the Economic Society of Münster, in Westphalia. He said: “The goal of Russia is in the first instance a world revolution. The nucleus of opposition to such plans is to be found in the capitalist powers, England and France in the first instance, with America close behind them. There follows a certain community of interests (of Russia) with Germany, which is being threatened by the demands of these powers. The most profound animosity of Russia is directed against Poland, the ally of the world powers and Russia’s immediate neighbor. Herein lies the point of Russia’s closest rapprochement with Germany . . .. The fact that the Western powers, by helping Russia, expose themselves to a great danger is too obvious to require further proofs . . ..As far as we are concerned, this danger exists considerably nearer, but nevertheless our position between France and Poland compels us to try to remain in constant touch and in close understanding with Russia in order not to fall into complete dependence upon the Western countries. This position will remain compulsory for us no matter whether the present regime in Russia continues or not.” With regard to Poland, General von Seckt added that any understanding between Germany and Poland was out of the question. He held that German hopes for the future were intimately bound up with her relations with Russia, but that Germany should ruthlessly repulse any attempt at penetration on the part of Bolshevism. It is quite clear now that the Prussians in 1939, as in 1932 and before it, are to be reckoned amongst those who think, as Mr. Melville puts it, that they can play with the devil and win.
    Russia’s aims, or rather the aims of those who control Russia, have not changed. Trotsky, on the one hand, wanted world revolution as the only secure bulwark for a strong Communist state in Russia. Stalin, on the other hand, wanted a strong Soviet Russian state as the only secure foundation for world revolution. Stalin’s point of view has been accepted by the controlling powers, and we have been allowed by the Russian Board of Censors, whose non-Russian nationality was certified to us by Mr. Douglas Reed in 1935, to peruse what they thought fit about the very elaborate elimination of the elements imbued with the Trotskyist ideals. Both Stalin and Trotsky, however, were and are instruments of those for whom Communism is a means. We must therefore bear well in mind that “the new Bolshevist orthodoxy of Stalin is probably more dangerous to Europe in the long run than the more spectacular methods of Trotsky and the more vocal methods of Zinoviev in the heyday of the Third International. I say more dangerous . . .and more formidable, because a more practical conception than the old Trotskyist idea . . .It is just the growth of this Stalinist conception which has made possible the continuance, on an ever increasing scale, of the secret relationship between ‘Red’ Russia and ‘White’ Germany.”
    Molotov’s speech on the Russo-German Pact, at the beginning of September 1939, has served as a partial foundation for the rumors of a “Russian” national reaction. Molotov, the Soviet Minister for Foreign Affairs, is reported to have said, when speaking of the Russo-German Pact before the Soviet Supreme Council: “People ask how the Soviet Union could consent to improve political relations with a state of the Fascist type (such as Germany); . . .but they forget that we hold the position of not interfering in the internal affairs of other countries . . .” Some have concluded from this that Hitler has induced the Russian government to renounce Jewish International Communism and restrict its Socialistic ideology to Russia. They forget, however, that Molotov is surely a loyal follower of Marx and Lenin. He doubtlessly follows Lenin’s instructions. “We deny all morality in the bourgeois sense,” wrote Lenin, “for according to the bourgeois, morality has its origin in the Commandments of God . . .our morality, on the contrary, is entirely subordinate to the interests of the proletariat.” Accordingly, a lie is not a lie when it serves the interests of the proletariat. Lenin admitted that he had accepted German money to make the Bolshevik Revolution, but he added: “I will make the same revolution in Germany with Russian money.” Has Lenin’s program been scrapped? Again, if the Soviet has given up interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, why has Lozovsky, a Jew whose real name is Solomon Abramovitch Dridzo, been named permanent head of the Soviet Foreign Office and principal adviser to Molotov? According to The Tablet of July 15th, 1939, Lozovsky is, par excellence, the Apostle of Revolution through war. “The truth then is,” concludes the leader-writer in The Tablet just quoted, “that the Russian Comintern is still confessedly engaged in endeavoring to foment war in order to facilitate revolution, and that one of its chief organizers, Lozovsky, has been installed as principal adviser to Molotov .  . . A few months ago he wrote in the French publication, La Vie Ouvrière,  . . . that his chief aim in life is the overthrow of the existing order in the great Democracies.”
    Anyone who had read Mr. Melville’s able study was not astonished at the ease with which the German Nazis did business with the Jewish officials of the Soviet. The tradition had long been forming. No wonder the German Bishops felt compelled to say, in a joint Pastoral Letter of 1935, that even the most anti-Bolshevist circles, in spite of their protestations, were being infected with a spiritual Communism.
    In his Letter of 2nd February, 1930, On the Soviet Campaign against God, Pope Pius XI wrote as follows: “We were also at pains to ask the governments represented at the Conference of Genoa, to make, by common agreement, a declaration which might have saved Russia and all the world from many woes, demanding as a condition preliminary to any recognition of the Soviet government, respect for conscience, freedom of worship and of church property. Alas, these three points, so essential above all to those ecclesiastical hierarchies unhappily separated from Catholic unity, were abandoned in favor of temporal interests, which in fact would have been better safeguarded, if the different governments had first of all considered the rights of God, His Kingdom and His Justice.” The governments of Europe refused concerted action for the rights of God. Now that war has broken out in Europe, Russia will make every effort to pursue her campaign against God.
    In the splendid Encyclical Letter On the Condition of the Church in Germany (March 14th, 1937), Pope Pius XI said that “the first and obvious duty the priest owes to the world about him is service to the truth, the whole truth, the unmasking and refutation of error in whatever form or disguise it conceals itself.” During the terrible conflict that is now raging in Europe, one of the greatest services that can be rendered to the cause of truth is to warn the world of the ulterior revolutionary designs of the Rulers of Russia. They aim everywhere, as in Spain, at the elimination of the love of Our Lord. Their efforts in Spain have terminated in a glorious victory for Christ, and today, the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, the Crucifix is being solemnly reinstated in the schools of Madrid and of the provinces, from which it had been banished. “Spain’s victory has mainly been a victory of the Cross, and our war was fought as a crusade against the enemies of truth.” So runs the decree of the Spanish Minister of Education ordaining this act of reparation. May the example of Spanish Catholicism nerve Catholics for the coming struggle everywhere There are ominous signs of preparations, on the part of International Financiers, under cover of the war, for a naturalistic organization of the United States of Europe and of the World. It will be a new and revised edition of that Judaeo-Masonic creation, the League of Nations. The Bank for International Settlements will develop its powers still further.


Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross - 14th September, 1939.

Softcover - 96 pages