Here is "The Britons" translation of the complete text of the notorious Nilus "Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion."
PROTOCOLS OF THE MEETINGS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION
. . . Putting aside fine phrases we shall speak of the significance
of each thought: by comparisons and deductions we shall throw
light upon surrounding facts.
What I am about to set forth, then, is our system from the two
points of view, that of ourselves and that of the goyim (i.e.,
non-Jews).
It must be noted that men with bad instincts are more in number
than the good, and therefore the best results in governing them
are attained by violence and terrorisation, and not by academic
discussions. Every man aims at power, everyone would like to
become a dictator if only he could, and rare indeed are the men
who would not be willing to sacrifice the welfare of all for the
sake of securing their own welfare.
What has restrained the beasts of prey who are called men? What
has served for their guidance hitherto?
In the beginnings of the structure of society they were subjected
to brutal and blind force; afterwards-to Law, which is the same
force, only disguised. I draw the conclusion that by the law
of nature right lies in force.
Political freedom is an idea but not a fact. This idea one must
know how to apply whenever it appears necessary with this bait
of an idea to attract the masses of the people to one's party
for the purpose of crushing another who is in authority. This
task is rendered easier if the opponent has himself been infected
with the idea of freedom, SO-CALLED LIBERALISM, and, for the
sake of an idea, is willing to yield some of his power. It is
precisely here that the triumph of our theory appears: the slackened
reins of government are immediately, by the law of life, caught
up and gathered together by a new hand, because the blind might
of the nation cannot for one single day exist without guidance,
and the new author merely fits into the place of the old already
weakened by liberalism.
In our day the power which has replaced that of the rulers who
were liberal is the power of Gold. Time was when Faith ruled.
The idea of freedom is impossible of realisation because no one
knows how to use it with moderation. It is enough to hand over
a people to self-government for a certain length of time for that
people to be turned into a disorganised mob. From that moment
on we get internecine strife which soon develops into battles
between classes, in the midst of which States burn down and their
importance is reduced to that of a heap of ashes.
Whether a State exhausts itself in its own convulsions, whether
its internal discord brings it under the power of external foes
- in any case it can be accounted irretrievably lost: IT IS IN
OUR POWER. The despotism of Capital, which is entirely in our
hands, reaches out to it a straw that the State, willy-nilly,
must take hold of: if not - it goes to the bottom.
Should anyone of a liberal mind say that such reactions as the
above are immoral I would put the following questions - If every
State has two foes and if in regard to the external foe it is
allowed and not considered immoral to use every manner and art
of conflict for example to keep the enemy in ignorance of plans
of attack and defence, to attack him by night or in superior numbers,
then in what way can the same means in regard to a worse foe the
destroyer of the structure of society and the commonweal, be called
immoral and not permissible?
Is it possible for any sound logical mind to hope with any success
to guide crowds by the aid of reasonable counsels and arguments,
when any objection or contradiction, senseless though it may be,
can be made and when such objection may find more favour with
the people, whose powers of reasoning are superficial? Men in
masses and the men of the masses, being guided solely by petty
passions, paltry beliefs, customs, traditions and sentimental
theorism, fall a prey to party disension, which hinders any kind
of agreement even on the basis of a perfectly reasonable argument.
Every resolution of a crowd depends upon a chance or packed majority
which in its ignorance of political secrets puts forth some ridiculous
resolution that lays in the administration a seed of anarchy.
The political has nothing in common with the moral. The ruler
who is governed by the moral is not a skilled politician, and
is therefore unstable on his throne. He who wishes to rule must
have recourse both to cunning and to make-believe. Great national
qualities, like frankness and honesty are vices in politics for
they bring down rulers from their thrones more effectively and
more certainly than the most powerful enemy. Such qualities must
be the attributes of the kingdoms of the goyim, but we must in
no wise be guided by them.
Our right lies in force. The word "right" is an abstract
thought and proved by nothing. The word means no more than: -Give
me what I want in order that thereby I might have a proof that
I am stronger than you.
Where does right begin? Where does it end?
In any State in which there is a bad organisation of authority,
an impersonality of laws and of the rulers who have lost their
personality amid the flood of rights ever multiplying out of liberalism,
I find a new right - to attack by the right of the strong, and
to scatter to the winds all existing forces of order and regulation,
to reconstruct all institutions and to become the sovereign lord
of those who have left to us the rights of their power by laying
them down voluntarily in their liberalism.
Our power in the present tottering condition of all forms of
power will be more invincible than any other, because it will
remain invisible until the moment when it has gained such strength
that no cunning can any longer undermine it.
Out of the temporary evil we are now compelled to commit will
emerge the good of an unshakable rule, which will restore the
regular course of the machinery of the national life, brought
to naught by liberalism. The result justifies the means. Let
us, however, in our plans, direct our attention not so much to
what is good and moral as to what is necessary and useful.
Before us is a plan in which is laid down strategically the line
from which we cannot deviate without running the risk of seeing
the labor of many centuries brought to naught.
In order to elaborate satisfactory forms of action it is necessary
to have regard to the rascality, the slackness, the instability
of the mob, its lack of capacity to understand and respect the
conditions of its own life, or its own welfare. It must be understood
that the might of a mob is blind, senseless and unreasoning force
ever at the mercy of a suggestion from any side. The blind cannot
lead the blind without bringing them into the abyss; consequently,
members of the mob, upstarts from the people even though they
should be as a genius for wisdom, yet having no understanding
of the political, cannot come forward as leaders of the mob without
bringing the whole nation to ruin.
Only one trained from childhood for independent rule can have
understanding of the words that can be made up of the political
alphabet.
A people left to itself, i.e., to upstarts from its midst, brings
itself to ruin by party dissension's excited by the pursuit of
power and honours and disorders arising therefrom. Is it possible
for the masses of the people calmly and without petty jealousies
to form judgments, to deal with the affairs of the country, which
cannot be mixed up with personal interests? Can they defend themselves
from an eternal foe? It is unthinkable, for a plan broken up
into as many parts as there are heads in the mob, loses all homogeneity,
and thereby becomes unintelligible and impossible of execution.
It is only with a despotic ruler that plans can be elaborated
extensively and clearly in such a way as to distribute the whole
properly among the several parts of the machinery of the State:
from this the conclusion is inevitable that a satisfactory form
of government for any country is one that concentrates in the
hands of one responsible person. Without an absolute despotism
there can be no existence for civilisation which is carried on
not by the masses but by their guide, whosoever that person may
be. The mob is a savage and displays its savagery at every opportunity.
The moment the mob seizes freedom in its hands it quickly turns
to anarchy, which in itself is the highest degree of savagery.
Behold the alcoholised animals, bemused with drink, the right
to an immoderate use of which comes along with freedom. It is
not for us and ours to walk that road. The peoples of the goyim
are bemused with alcoholic liquors; their youth has grown stupid
on classicism and from early immorality, into which it has been
inducted by our special agents - by tutors, lackeys, governesses
in the houses of the wealthy, by clerks and others, by our women
in the places of dissipation frequented by the goyim. In the
number of these last I count also the so-called "society
ladies," voluntary followers of the others in corruption
and luxury.
Our countersign is -Force and Make-believe. Only force conquers
in political affairs, especially if it be concealed in the talents
essential to statesmen. Violence must be the principle, and cunning
and make-believe the rule for governments which do not want to
lay down their crowns at the feet of agents of some new power.
This evil is the one and only means to attain the end, the good.
Therefore we must not stop at bribery, deceit and treachery when
they should serve towards the attainment of our end. In politics
one must know how to seize the property of others without hesitation
if by it we secure submission and sovereignty.
Our State, marching along the path of peaceful conquest, has
the right to replace the horrors of war by less noticeable and
more satisfactory sentences of death, necessary to maintain the
terror which tends to produce blind submission. Just but merciless
severity is the greatest factor of strength in the State: not
only for the sake of gain but also in the name of duty, for the
sake of victory, we must keep to the programme of violence and
make-believe. The doctrine of squaring accounts is precisely
as strong as the means of which it makes use. Therefore it is
not so much by the means themselves as by the doctrine of severity
that we shall triumph and bring all governments into subjection
to our super-government. It is enough for them to know that we
are merciless for all disobedience to cease.
Far back in ancient times we were the first to cry among the
masses of the people the words "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,"
words many times repeated since those days by stupid poll-parrots
who from all sides round flew down upon these baits and with them
carried away the well-being of the world, true freedom of the
individual, formerly so well guarded against the pressure of the
mob. The would-be wise men of the goyim, the intellectuals, could
not make anything out of the uttered words in their abstractness;
did not note the contradiction of their meaning and inter-relation:
did not see that in nature there is no equality, cannot be freedom:
that Nature herself has established inequality of minds, of characters,
and capacities, just as immutable as she has established subordination
to her laws: never stopped to think that the mob is a blind thing,
that upstarts elected from among it to bear rule are, in regard
to the political, the same blind men as the mob itself, that the
adept, though he be a fool, can yet rule, whereas the non-adept,
even if he were a genius, understands nothing in the political
- to all these things the goyim paid no regard; yet all the time
it was based upon these things that dynastic rule rested: the
father passed on to the son a knowledge of the course of political
affairs in such wise that none should know it but members of the
dynasty and none could betray it to the governed. As time went
on the meaning of the dynastic transference of the true position
of affairs in the political was lost, and this aided the success
of our cause.
In all corners of the earth the words "Liberty, Equality,
Fraternity" brought to our ranks, thanks to our blind agents,
whole legions who bore our banners with enthusiasm. And all the
time these words were canker-worms at work boring into the well-being
of the goyim, putting an end everywhere to peace, quiet, solidarity
and destroying all the foundations of the goy States. As you
will see later this helped us to our triumph; it gave us the possibility,
among other things, of getting into our hands the master card
- the destruction of the privileges, or in other words of the
very existence of the aristocracy of the goyim, that c ass which
was the only defence peoples and countries had against us. On
the ruins of the natural and genealogical aristocracy of the goyim
we have set up the aristocracy of our educated class headed by
the aristocracy of money. The qualifications for this aristocracy
we have established in wealth, which is dependent upon us and
in knowledge, for which our learned elders provide the motive
force.
Our triumph has been rendered easier by the fact that in our
relations with the men whom we wanted we have always worked upon
the most sensitive chords of the human mind, upon the cash account,
upon the cupidity, upon the insatiability for material needs of
man; and each one of these human weaknesses, taken alone, is sufficient
to paralyse initiative for it hands over the will of men to the
disposition of him who has bought their activities
The abstraction of freedom has enabled us to persuade the mob
in all countries that their government is nothing but the steward
of the people who are the owners of the country, and that the
steward may be replaced like a worn-out glove.
It is this possibility of replacing the representatives of the
people which has placed them at our disposal, and, as it were,
given us the power of appointment.