Following the Second World War and the defeat of Nazi Germany, Jewish intellectuals in the West began formulating a cohesive plan designed to weaken and subdue Western cultures. From their view, the scheme amounted to a preventative measure against any possible future backlash on par with what happened in Germany under Hitler.
In places like the Middle East and Latin America, multiculturalism and multiethnicism were a somewhat organic outgrowth of historical circumstances. The Middle East functioned as a crossroads of sorts between the global East, West, North and South, and the large population movements across the region resulted in the heavily mixed (ethnically speaking) societies that exist there now. Likewise, the modern nation-states of Latin America were formed through Spanish and Portuguese colonialism. The introduction of African slaves to the area as well as intermixing between natives and the occupying Spanish and Portuguese colonials has produced a medley of multiethnic countries, with the exception of Argentina and Uruguay (which are majority European).
But Europe itself, while multicultural and multiethnic on a continental level in the sense that many sub-ethnicities and sub-cultures of Europeans exist more or less in their own spaces, did not open itself up to the rest of the world in the way we are seeing today with mass immigration from the Third World. It is one thing to have different types of Europeans, who have similar cultures, languages and genetic stock, living with or near each other; it is another thing altogether to have masses of non-Europeans with starkly different cultures, customs and genetics to be artificially inserted into the bosom of Europe without the consent of its people.
This synthetic introduction of millions of non-Europeans into Europe, peoples very different from those native to the continent, did not happen by chance, but by deliberate calculation on the part of Western power elites. These predominantly Jewish-Zionist elites adhere to a globalist creed that sees ethnicity, race and culture as impediments to their aim of a one world government and one world economy. In conjunction with the ideas promoted by the Cultural Marxist New Left – notions that encourage dysgenic social norms (feminism, homosexuality, transgenderism, etc.) designed to deracinate European peoples and cultures globally – the open-borders policies of the West’s present political establishment could eventually result in the genocidal ethnic and cultural dissolution of all White European-derived ethnic groups. And, as we will see, that is the end game.
In his study of Cultural Marxism entitled The Culture of Critique, evolutionary psychologist Kevin MacDonald notes that the “first generation of the Frankfurt School were all Jews by ethnic background and the Institute of Social Research itself was funded by a Jewish millionaire, Felix Weil.” The Institute of Social Research was founded in Frankfurt, Germany, in 1923 by Carl Grünberg, a Jewish-Marxist professor who taught law and politics at the University of Vienna and Goethe University Frankfurt. The Institute later became informally known as the Frankfurt School and boasted a nearly-exclusive Jewish cast of thinkers, researchers and ideologues, which included: Theodore Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse, Friedrich Pollock, Erich Fromm, Otto Kirchheimer, Leo Löwenthal, Franz Leopold Neumann and Henryk Grossman.
The primary purpose and aim of the Jewish-Marxist ideologists of the Frankfurt School was to stigmatize “anti-Semitism” through convoluted social and cultural delegitimation theories. They were, in essence, a coterie of Jewish supremacists bent on the psychological subordination of Gentiles, thereby producing a social, cultural and political environment in which Jews could thrive without much resistance. The Frankfurt School brain trust acted freely during the Weimar period in Germany, but was promptly dismantled and chased out of the country when Hitler and the National Socialists seized power in 1933. The Institute quickly moved its base to the United States, principally Columbia University in New York City after Max Horkheimer had convinced Columbia’s president to host the Institute in 1934. At Columbia, the epicenter of Cultural Marxist activity in the U.S., the Frankfurt School’s ‘Institute of Social Research’ was re-branded into ‘Studies in Philosophy and Social Science’ which set out on a quest to discredit White European males with “fascistic” tendencies.
The two most prominent Jewish-Marxists of the Frankfurt School, often credited as the “fathers of the Institution,” were Theodore Adorno and Max Horkheimer. The duo produced classic aphorisms which form the basis of Cultural Marxism today. Adorno’s Freudian tome The Authoritarian Personality embodies the deconstructionist philosophy of Cultural Marxism, intended to demolish the “authoritarian” or “fascistic” tendencies in Western man in order to prevent “new Hitlers” from arising. Wikipedia, a more or less philosemitic source, identifies the disputed events of “the Holocaust” as the impetus behind Adorno’s work, disclosing that Adorno and other Frankfurt School ideologists were a “predominantly Jewish group of philosophers and Marxist theorists who fled Germany when Hitler shut down their Institute for Social Research.” It adds that:
Adorno et al. were thus motivated by a desire to identify and measure factors that were believed to contribute to antisemitic and fascist traits. The book [The Authoritarian Personality] was part of a ‘Studies in Prejudice’ series sponsored by the American Jewish Committee’s Department of Scientific Research.
Adorno continued with this anti-fascist deconstructionist theme in his 1947 essay Wagner, Nietzsche and Hitler and a 1950’s commentary entitled Freudian Theory and the Pattern of Fascist Propaganda. Max Horkheimer is best known for his book Eclipse of Reason and has been credited to a large degree with the conception of Critical Theory, a radical form of social and cultural critique, hence the term “Cultural Marxism.” Another Horkheimer classic was Dialectic of Enlightenment, which was co-authored by Adorno. Horkheimer headed the ‘Studies in Prejudice’ initiative sponsored by the American Jewish Committee, which was for all intents and purposes an exercise in prejudice against White European males.
In The Culture of Critique, Kevin MacDonald characterizes Horkheimer as a man with “a strong Jewish identity that became increasingly apparent in his later writings.” MacDonald asserts that Horkheimer’s commitment to Judaism was “evidenced by the presence of specifically Jewish religious themes” in his writings. By his life’s end, MacDonald explains, “Horkheimer completely accepted his Jewish identification and achieved a grand synthesis between Judaism and Critical Theory.” MacDonald further observes that Horkheimer’s philosophizing and activism within the framework of the Frankfurt School and its offshoots was aimed at “vindicating Jewish history.”
The Kalergi Plan and White Genocide
In early 2014, British National Party (BNP) leader Nick Griffin made a bold statement in the meeting hall of the European Parliament. Griffin forthrightly identified the machinations of a “human genetic-modification industry” whose policies will result in the “ethnocide of the peoples of Europe.” The encouragement of “mass non-White immigration” was “central to the plot,” Griffin declared in front of his European Union colleagues. He specifically named an elite cabal of “leftists, capitalists and Zionist supremacists” as the architects of White genocide in Europe, who constantly invent new pretexts to actualize their globalist blueprint. Griffin elaborated that these globalist schemers endeavored to,
promote immigration and miscegenation with the deliberate aim of breeding us out of existence in our homelands. As indigenous resistance to this human genetic-modification industry grows, the criminal elite seeks new ways to camouflage their project. First, their immigrant pawns were temporary guest workers; then it was a multiracial experiment; then they were refugees, and then the answer to a shrinking population. Different excuses, different lies – and asylum is just another one. But the real aim stays the same: the biggest genocide in human history, the final solution to the Christian European problem. This crime demands a new set of Nuremberg trials, and you people will be in the dock.
Griffin then traced the origins of the conspiracy of White genocide to Count Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, the founding ideologue behind European integration and thus the European Union itself. Kalergi, the product of an Austrian diplomat father and Japanese mother, was born in Austro-Hungary in 1894 and is credited as the founding father of the Pan-Europa movement which “strove to replace the nationalist German ideal of racial community with the goal of an ethnically heterogeneous and inclusive European nation based on a commonality of culture.” Kalergi headed the Pan-Europa movement for 49 years and authored its seminal founding text, Pan-Europa, in 1923. An Italian article on Kalergi noted:
[T]hanks to his close contacts with all European aristocrats and politicians, due to the relationships of his nobleman-diplomat father, and by moving behind the scenes, away from the glare of publicity, [Kalergi] managed to attract the most important heads of state to his plan, making them supporters and collaborators for the ‘project of European integration’.
Kalergi’s beliefs were steeped in notions of Jewish supremacy, which he picked up from his father, Heinrich Coudenhove-Kalergi, who had succumbed to radical philosemitism. His father aggressively propagandized against anti-Jewish critiques and “sought to defend the Jews against … charges of parasitic greed and cowardice.” Richard Kalergi was himself married to a Jewess, Ida Roland. At the Pan-Europa conference in Vienna in 1926, Kalergi candidly outlined the movement’s philosemitic program. He specifically stated that the creation of a “United States of Europe” would “be beneficial to the Jews as it would eliminate racial hatred and economic rivalry.” An Oct. 5, 1926, Jewish Telegraphic Agency report entitled “Jews Participate in Pan-europe Congress Sessions in Vienna” highlighted the prominent Jewish presence at Kalergi’s conference, noting that:
Several Jewish European leaders took a prominent part in the first Pan-European Congress which opened here Sunday, when the movement to establish a United States of Europe, modelled after the United States of America, took definite shape.
The keynote of the Congress was sounded by Paul Loebe, president of the German Reichstag, and Francis de Laisi, a Frenchman, Count Richard Coudenhove Kalergi, an Austro-Japanese, who launched the movement in 1923, Rudolph Goldscheid and Bronislaw Huberman, who delivered the principal addresses.
Many individual European Jews are furthering the Pan-European movement by giving it financial support. Among the messages received from various countries were those from Luigi Luzzatti, Leon Blum, Georg Brandes, Georg Bernhard, Harry Warburg and Max Rheinhardt.
Count Coudenhove Kalergi, who is married to Ida Roland, a Jewess, when interviewed by the representative of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency here expressed his opinion that the Pan-European movement ought to find particular support on the part of the Jews who are scattered throughout the various countries in Europe. The creation of the United States of Europe would be beneficial to the Jews as it would eliminate racial hatred and economic rivalry, he said.
In his 1925 book Practical Idealism, Kalergi elucidated the Jewish supremacist ideals at the crux of his thinking. In its alleged attempts at “destroying European Jewry,” Kalergi theorized, Europe unintentionally “refined and educated this people” into a “future leader-nation through this artificial selection process.” He further pontificated:
The main representatives of the corrupt as well as the upright brain aristocracy: of capitalism, journalism and the literate are Jews. The superiority of their spirit predestines them to become a main factor of the future nobility. One look at the history of the Jewish people explains its lead in the struggle over the governance of humanity. For two thousand years Jewry was a religious community, made up of ethical and religious predisposed individuals from all nations of the classical cultural area, with a national Hebrew centre in Palestine. … No wonder that this people, that escaped Ghetto-Prison, developed into a spiritual nobility of Europe.
… Therefore a gracious Providence provided Europe with a new race of nobility by the Grace of Spirit. This happened at the moment when Europe’s feudal aristocracy became dilapidated, and thanks to Jewish emancipation. … The prominent position held by Jewry these days is owed to its spiritual supremacy which enables it to win the spiritual battle over enormous superior numbers of favored, hateful, jealous rivals.
While the Jews would form a “spiritual nobility” in Europe, Gentile Europeans were destined to be bred out of existence, according to Kalergi’s master plan. He wrote that,
The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals.
Kalergi’s grand strategy, evidently, was to deracinate Gentile Europeans through racial interbreeding, whereas Jews – who adhere to an exclusivist, tribal culture – would remain relatively pure and cohesive. This scenario, wholly artificial in its organism, would thus precipitate the ascent of Jews to a position of an ethnic oligarchy and ruling super-class over an atomized mass of rootless cosmopolitan “Eurasian-Negroid” plebs.
The Jewish Telegraphic Agency report cited earlier disclosed how “[m]any individual European Jews [furthered] the Pan-European movement by giving it financial support.” Among them were a number of Jewish kings of high finance. Kalergi relayed in his autobiography that he maintained a personal friendship with Baron Louis von Rothschild, the head of the Austrian branch of the infamous Jewish banking dynasty, who introduced him to Max Warburg, a powerful German-Jewish banker. Warburg purportedly financed Kalergi to the tune of 60,000 gold marks and continued to support the Pan-Europa movement the rest of his life. In addition to providing crucial funding, Warburg introduced Kalergi to wealthy Jewish financiers in the U.S. such as Bernard Baruch and Paul Warburg; the latter being Max Warburg’s brother who has been described as the “chief architect” of the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank. In addition to the backing of many prominent Jews, Kalergi succeeded in winning the support of conspicuous philosemitic politicians like former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and former U.S. President Harry Truman, among many other 20th century tools of Zionism.
Like those of the Frankfurt School, Kalergi’s ideas were suppressed by Hitler’s National Socialist regime, and the Count was driven into exile, eventually settling in the United States where he continued to advocate for a unified Europe “along the Paris-London axis” during and after World War II. Hitler and the Nazis denounced Kalergi’s movement and ideas as anathema to German nationalism and pegged it as a Judeo-Masonic conspiracy with the goal of destroying genuine nationalism in Europe.
Kalergi’s movement was indeed supported by Europe’s Masonic lodges, particularly Austrian Freemasonry. Kalergi himself was a member of the “Humanitas” lodge in Vienna. An official 1938 publication of the Nazis titled Die Freimaurerei: Weltanschauung, Organisation und Politik (Freemasonry: Ideology, Organization and Policy) expounded on themes of Jewish-Masonic collaboration and even mentioned Kalergi by name as an agent of said forces. The book opens with this overview of Freemasonic goals and agendas:
Freemasonry is an ideological form of hostility to National Socialism, the significance of which, in the historical development of the past two centuries, must be deemed comparable to the effects of other supranational organisations, the political churches, world Jewry, and Marxism. In its present form, it must be viewed as the bourgeois liberal advance troops of World Jewry.
It corrupts the principles of all forms of government based on racial and Folkish considerations, enables the Jews to achieve social and political equality, and paves the way for Jewish radicalism through its support for the principles of freedom, equality, and brotherhood, the solidarity of Folks, the League Of Nations and pacifism, and the rejection of all racial differences.
With the help of its international connections and entanglements, Freemasonry interferes in the foreign policy relationships of all Folks, and pursues, through governmental leaders, secret foreign and world policies which escape the control of those in government. Through its personal influences and economic favouritism, Freemasonry ensures that all dominant positions of the public, economic, and cultural life of a Folk are filled with lodge brethren, who in fact translate the concepts of Freemasonry into action.
The National Socialist State has destroyed the organisations of Freemasonry in Germany, and has likewise given rise to similar measures in a number of European States during the present war. But the liberal, Masonic body of thought lives on in the former lodge brethren. In addition, there is still a danger of a renewed penetration of Masonic ideas through the lodge organisations of States in which Freemasons remain free to pursue their objectives without hindrance.
Thus, researching this enemy, and providing a basic education for all racial comrades on the topic of Freemasonry, is not just a matter of expounding upon interesting historical problems; rather, it is an urgent duty of alertness in the struggle against our enemy.
Freemasonry is tightly allied with Jewry, and not just through its organisation. Even the symbolism of Freemasonry points to Jewry through its customs, and to Hebrew through its words and signs, as its real origin. The Masonic conceptual universe is a reflection of Jewish near eastern images and concepts. The central point of Old Testament thought is represented by the concept of Yahweh as the Jewish God. Initially, the belief in many national deities prevailed among the Jews, for whom Yahweh was still an entirely insignificant desert god, until he sought out a Folk (the nomadic tribe of Israel) with whose help he could set about to dethrone all other gods and achieve world domination. In later Jewry, Yahweh was conceived of first as a High God, then as the One God; but his original nature was strictly retained. To Jewry, the name Yahweh implies a program of world enslavement (see Isaiah LX.).
Specifically on Kalergi, the pamphlet quotes the Masonic publication The Beacon, which purportedly issued this statement in support of Kalergi and his movement:
Freemasonry, especially Austrian Freemasonry, may be eminently satisfied to have Coudenhove-Kalergi among its members. Austrian Freemasonry can rightly report that Brother Coudenhove-Kalergi fights for his Pan European beliefs: political honesty, social insight, the struggle against lies, striving for the recognition and cooperation of all those of good will. In this higher sense, Brother Coudenhove-Kalergi’s program is a Masonic work of the highest order, and to be able to work on it together is a lofty task for all brother Masons.
Kalergi’s prescriptions of racial interbreeding and cultural assimilation were consonant with the long-term goals of Judaism and Freemasonry, the forbearers of modern-day globalism and international finance. Smashing nationalism and ethnic allegiances has been a key objective of the globalists, embodied by the roundtable brain-trusts of the Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission, Chatham House, the Council on Foreign Relations et al., who seek to remove all the boundaries and roadblocks inherent in the nation-state model which inhibits the mass movement of populations and capital. In his book Babel Inc., author Kerry Bolton scrutinized the nefarious role of Kalergi in engendering the ideas of integration and multiethnicism in Europe, writing:
This precisely explains the globalist alchemy of multiculturalism: to break down all differences – in the name of promoting ‘differences’ – to recreate a formless mass of individuals without bonds to ‘space,’ ‘time’ or ‘prejudice,’ or what we can call one’s rootedness to land, heritage and destiny, and consciousness of identity. The goal is the elimination of the idea of a collective identity and consciousness, or indeed of community or society. This is what had been unfolding in the United States for decades: a collection of individuals tenuously held together in the name of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and the pursuit of the ‘American Dream’ of endless consumption.
Kalergi continued his subversive activities into the 1940s and 1950s, founding the European Parliamentary Union (EPU) in 1947, a precursor organization to the modern-day European Union (EU) which was formally declared in 1993; although past agreements virtually brought it into existence long before that. Kalergi’s dream has essentially been realized as today’s EU works towards the full erosion of national sovereignty in Europe through a panoply of “supranational institutions” that dictate policy to member states. In 1950, Kalergi was awarded the Charlemagne Prize for his ceaseless efforts to erase Europe’s borders and race-mix its peoples. Since April 2008 the European Parliament – the EU’s legislative council based in Brussels – took over stewardship of the Charlemagne Prize and credits it to “people [who contribute] towards the process of European integration.” Since 1950 the award has been given to such Zionist-Globalist luminaries as Winston Churchill, Henry Kissinger, Bill Clinton, Tony Blair and Angela Merkel.
Other Jews have been instrumental in foisting the ideas of multiculturalism and multiracialism on Western populations. One major ideologist in this respect was Israel Zangwill, a British-Jewish author and playwright who was “at the forefront of cultural Zionism during the 19th century.” Zangwill, while an active proponent of Zionism during his day and associate of Theodore Herzl, earned his fame by authoring a popular play titled “The Melting Pot,” within which he promoted ideas of multiculturalism, tolerance and inter-mixing among the Gentile races as a prelude to world peace and harmony. Throughout the play the protagonist, David, expressed “his hope for a world in which all ethnicity has melted away.” The UK’s chief rabbi Jonathan Sacks opined that Zangwill wrote his works “as a Jew” whose “real hope was for a world in which the entire lexicon of racial and religious difference is thrown away”; except, of course, for the Jews who retain their strong religious, cultural and ethnic identity (even getting their own ethno-state, Israel) in Zangwill’s Jewish supremacist vision of the future. Kerry Bolton, writing in Babel Inc., characterizes Zangwill’s vision for mankind as a “universal brotherhood under the auspices of the League of Nations, predecessor of the United Nations Organization, with the world capital in Jerusalem, under tutelage of Jewish holy law.”
Zangwill’s dual-advocacy of multiculturalism for Gentiles and ethnocentrism and group-loyalty for Jews was rank doublespeak typified by activists of his ilk. Zangwill championed “Jewish emancipation, Jewish assimilation, territorialism [and] Zionism” and is credited with constructing the fraudulent mythos used by Zionists to justify the Jewish colonization and takeover of Palestine: that it was a “land without a people for a people without a land.” Jewish settlers in Palestine would “make the wilderness blossom as the rose,” Zangwill said; another line used frequently by Zionist ideologues. In 1916 Zangwill contradicted his own ostensible pro-multicultural worldview, telling Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the extremist Zionist ideologist who founded the Irgun terror group, that,
If you wish to give a country to a people without a country, it is utter foolishness to allow it to be the country of two peoples. This can only cause trouble. The Jews will suffer and so will their neighbours. One of the two: a different place must be found either for the Jews or for their neighbours.
These ideologists of multiculturalism and multiethnicism – the Frankfurt School, Kalergi, Zangwill et al. – kick started the project of European genocide nearly a century ago, and their work is carried on by their disciples and fellow travelers today. Two modern-day devotees to the Kalergi plan for Europe are George Soros, Jewish billionaire “philanthropist” extraordinaire whose ‘Open Society Institute’ stands behind a slew of pro-mass immigration NGOs; and Peter Sutherland, an ostensibly Irish international businessman and former Attorney General of Ireland who has worked for Rothschild-Zionist companies Goldman Sachs and British Petroleum (BP).
In response to the present-day migrant crisis in which endless streams of Middle Eastern and African refugees and asylum seekers are trekking deep into Europe by the millions, Soros outlined his demands for the continent on his website. He brazenly called for the EU to accept “at least a million asylum-seekers annually for the foreseeable future.” He further encouraged the establishment of “safe channels” so that migrants can move into Europe as they please. “Finally,” Soros arrogantly demanded, “the EU needs to mobilize the private sector – NGOs, church groups, and businesses – to act as sponsors” in order to “absorb and integrate more than a million asylum seekers and migrants a year.” Responding to accusations from Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban that he is funding the migrant crisis to destabilize Europe, Soros doubled-down on his pro-open borders mass refugee resettlement program, stating that, “Our plan treats the protection of refugees as the objective and national borders as the obstacle.”
Soros’ schemes are perfectly consonant with Kalergi’s vision of a mongrelized Europe detached from its roots, and it’s hard to argue against his purposeful devotion to the plan. The aforementioned Peter Sutherland – who now functions as the United Nations Special Representative for Migration – publicly acknowledged, albeit in couched terms, the end-goal of White genocide. As the head of the Global Forum on Migration and Development, an influential neoliberal think tank “which brings together representatives of 160 nations to share policy ideas,” Sutherland has been lobbying European leaders and policy makers to embrace massive, unrestricted non-White immigration into Europe for some time. BBC News reported that in 2012 Sutherland told a UK commission on migration that the EU should “do its best to undermine national homogeneity in Europe.” Elaborating on that point, Sutherland affirmed that “an ageing or declining native population in countries like Germany or southern EU states” was his “key argument … for the development of multicultural states.” He further remarked:
It’s impossible to consider that the degree of homogeneity which is implied by the other argument can survive because states have to become more open states, in terms of the people who inhabit them. Just as the United Kingdom has demonstrated. The United States, or Australia and New Zealand, are migrant societies and therefore they accommodate more readily those from other backgrounds than we do ourselves, who still nurse a sense of our homogeneity and difference from others. And that’s precisely what the European Union, in my view, should be doing its best to undermine.
Sutherland advised that the EU should lift restrictions on “low skilled migrants,” advocating unlimited, open borders for basically anyone wishing to set foot in Europe. Such a nonsensical and insane policy can only be the desire of a madman following the Kalergi plan, hoping to push as many non-Whites as possible into Europe in the furtherance of the planned Eurasian-Negroid plebeian mass of acculturated zombies. The BBC report noted Sutherland’s attendance at Bilderberg Group meetings where the global power elite iron out the details of their long-march towards global governance. He also serves as an Honorary Chairman of the Trilateral Commission.
In 2011, British PM David Cameron, French PM Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel all simultaneously declared that multiculturalism in Europe has been a monumental failure. A February 2011 Telegraph article reported:
“We have been too concerned about the identity of the person who was arriving and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him,” he [Nicolas Sarkozy] said in a television interview in which he declared the concept a “failure”. Prime Minister David Cameron last month pronounced his country’s long-standing policy of multiculturalism a failure, calling for better integration of young Muslims to combat home-grown extremism. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Australia’s former prime minister John Howard and former Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar have also in recent months said multicultural policies have not successfully integrated immigrants.
The bold statements by Merkel, Cameron and Sarkozy were disingenuous at best, designed as bait to pacify the European masses and confuse them about where these politicians actually stand on the issue. All three leaders have been instrumental in promoting the mass immigration agenda. Cameron himself admitted that his attempts to stem the flow of immigration into Britain “hasn’t worked so far,” or in other words, has not been a top priority for the fake conservative. Under his leadership Britain has been taking in 330,000 immigrants annually. Merkel, a recipient of the Kalergi-inspired Charlemagne Prize, has been leading the effort to destroy Germany’s ethnic and cultural fabric. In 2014 Merkel’s government opened the floodgates to Middle Eastern and African refugees, having registered 964,574 new asylum seekers in the first 11 months of 2015. The Guardian reported that Germany is now “the top European destination for people fleeing conflict, repression and misery in the Middle East, Asia and Africa.” The Merkel regime planned to take in 1.5 million asylum seekers in 2015 alone, and there is no end in sight. And that doesn’t include legal immigration into Germany, which has been ongoing for years.
Sarkozy feigned opposition to mass immigration during his stay in office, but France under his guardianship has not slowed the process, which has been ongoing for decades and has already severally defaced French identity. A 2008 study by INSEE, France’s national institute of statistics, concluded that 19 percent of the French population are foreigners, either first generation immigrants or their direct descendants. The same institute found that since 2004 200,000 immigrants are accepted into France annually, many from the Arab Maghreb region and other parts of Africa. Sarkozy unveiled his Kalergiite affinities when he announced in a 2008 speech that he aimed to coercively enforce “racial interbreeding” on the French population. In the bizarre speech, which was delivered under the banner of “Equal Opportunities and Diversity,” Sarkozy spoke of the “obligation” of the French, and all Europeans, to engage in “racial interbreeding.” He stated:
What is the objective? It’s going to be controversial. The goal is to meet the challenge of racial interbreeding. The challenge of racial interbreeding that faces us in the 21st century. It’s not a choice, it’s an obligation. It’s imperative. We cannot do otherwise. We risk finding ourselves confronted with major problems. We must change; therefore we will change. We are going to change all at the same time; in business, in administration, in education, in the political parties. And we will obligate ourselves as to results. If this volunteerism does not work for the Republic, then the State will move to still more coercive measures.
Sarkozy’s attempts to artificially engineer race-mixing in France stands in stark contrast to his positions towards other peoples. During a speech in Saudi Arabia, Sarkozy stated that it is wrong to forcefully impose a “single model of civilization,” which he called a “tragic error which in the past provoked so much misery.” To deny peoples’ identities, Sarkozy added, “would not arouse peace and brotherhood, but violence.” He went on to say that, “There is nothing more dangerous than an injured identity, a humiliated identity.” The rank hypocrisy doesn’t end there. Sarkozy has also jealously sought to safeguard Jewish identity and culture, not only in France, but in Israel too. A rabid supporter of Israel, Sarkozy told a Jewish journalist that the cause of Israel is “the fight of my life.” Sarkozy’s love affair with Jews and Zionism can be partially explained by his own Jewish roots. But more interestingly, according to a 2007 report in the French newspaper Le Figaro, Sarkozy was at one time in the employ of the Israeli Mossad intelligence agency as a “Sayanim” or “Jewish helper” who volunteers to aid the Zionist regime.
Ex-insiders in Britain have admitted that the New Labour administrations of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown deliberately organized the immigration flood into their nation in order to advance the globalist values of “multiculturalism” and “inclusiveness.” Lord Mandelson is quoted by the Telegraph stating that the New Labour government under Tony Blair for which he worked “not only [welcomed] people to come into this country to work, we were sending out search parties for people and encouraging them … to take up work in this country.” Andrew Neather, a former Blair speechwriter and advisor, broke the story in a 2009 Evening Standard article. In it he alleged that during his work for Home Office he saw an earlier draft of a Labour Party-backed think-tank policy paper on immigration which outlined a strategy to deliberately make Britain multicultural, and by extension undermine the Labour Party’s political rivals on the Right. Neather attested that,
Earlier drafts I saw also included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural. I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn’t its main purpose – to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date. 
The paper was called “Migration: An Economic And Social Analysis” and was produced by the Performance and Innovation Unit, a Labour-affiliated think tank.
The Jewish-Zionist elite’s pro-multiculturalism stance vis-à-vis the West is the ultimate form of chutzpah, considering they hold opposite views when it comes to Israel. Strongly-identifying Jews, especially the rabbinical elite, are staunchly opposed to intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews. In Israel, the religious authorities do not recognize mixed marriages. Israel is violently nationalistic, indeed imperialistic in its constant land-grabs and settler expansion in the West Bank. The Israeli regime bitterly guards the Jewish ethnic character of the state, and has the strictest immigration laws on earth, effectively only allowing people of Jewish parentage to immigrate to the ‘Holy Land.’ A Russia Today (RT) report on an Arab man who was charged with ‘rape’ for having consensual sex with a Jewish woman in Israel, related:
An Arab man is to appeal his conviction of ‘rape by deception’ in Israel after having consensual sex with a woman who thought he was a fellow Jew. Sabbar Kashur, who denies pretending to be Jewish, was sentenced to 18 months in jail. … But even couples who knowingly choose to enter into an inter-faith relationship are ostracized [in Israel].
RT’s Jerusalem correspondent observed:
This Jewish Jerusalem suburb is surrounded by Arab neighbourhoods. And far from cultivating a culture of tolerance, vigilante-style Jewish patrol groups calling themselves ‘Fire for Judaism’ stand watch outside the local shopping mall. Their mission: to prevent Arab men mixing with local Jewish girls. The municipality has created a 24 hour hotline where parents and friends can phone to rat on Jewish girls breaking this taboo. A specially trained team of councilors and psychologists is on standby to rescue them. 
Alina, an Israeli anti-mixing campaigner, told RT: “It’s important to safeguard our traditions, culture, history and identity because without this, who are we?” All major Jewish and Zionist organizations in the world share Alina’s position on the need to preserve Jewish identity yet simultaneously lobby and propagandize for open-borders, multiculturalism and race-mixing in the West. The migrant crisis currently afflicting Europe, which began in earnest in 2015, has illuminated these hypocrisies like never before. The World Jewish Congress, the Central Council of Jews in Germany, the CRIF (Representative Council of Jews in France), the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith and other establishment Jewish groups have all lent their voices in favour of the migrant influx, preaching that allowing an unrestricted flow of migrants into Europe is the “right thing to do” and not doing so would be “immoral.”
Israelis have even lent a helping hand to migrants seeking sanctuary in Europe. In September 2015 it was reported that IsraAID, an Israeli ‘disaster relief’ NGO, sent a “team to help refugees in Europe.” A report on the Israel21c website disclosed:
Streams of desperate refugees flooding Europe from the Middle East, Asia and Africa are getting a helping hand from IsraAID, a non-profit, non-governmental organization founded in Israel in 2001 to bring lifesaving disaster relief and long-term support wherever needed.
“We are running a campaign with the goal of inspiring the Jewish people and Israel to help the hundreds of thousands of refugees washed up on the shores of Europe,” says IsraAID Director Shachar Zahavi.
As of Tuesday evening, the NGO had raised enough money to send three professionals, who will land early Wednesday in Athens and then later proceed to Lesbos. Zahavi tells ISRAEL21c that he hopes to send additional volunteers to help manage the European migrant crisis currently overwhelming several countries.
The director of IsraAID, Shachar Zahavi, invoked the Holocaust to guilt-trip Europeans into accepting the migrants and called for Jews to take a leading role in facilitating the migratory wave. “I think Jews have a responsibility, after the Holocaust in Europe only 70 years ago, to get involved and actually become leaders in this. We know, more than others, what happened when countries wouldn’t accept Jewish refugees of atrocities,” Zahavi said.
These pro-migrant sentiments contrast sharply with those of Israel itself. Since the Syrian civil war began in 2011, Israel has taken in virtually no refugees, and has indeed pledged to keep them out. In September of 2015 Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu announced the construction of a “security fence” on Israel’s Eastern border with Jordan to block Syrian refugees from entering the country. Netanyahu stressed that it is “imperative for Israel to have control over all of its borders.” He issued a statement that same month declaring that Israel “is a very small country with neither geographic nor demographic depth” to take in non-Jewish migrants and refugees. Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders have repeatedly referred to Arab and African migrants and refugees seeking asylum in Israel as “predators,” “infiltrators” and even as “cancer.” As soon as migrants cross into Israel they are placed in holding pens and eventually deported.
Invoking the “Holocaust” and the alleged historical persecution of Jews in Europe is standard psychological warfare on the part of the Zionists intent on transforming Western peoples into a multicultural/multi-racial flock of serfs. Barbara Spectre, an American Jewess and Israeli citizen, let slip the end game in a 2010 interview with Israeli television. She told the interviewer:
Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural. And I think we are going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies that they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the center of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multicultural mode, and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role, and without that transformation, Europe will not survive.
Spectre, shamelessly forwarding the customary chutzpah of the Jewish elite, is a Zionist for Israel but a multiculturalist for Europe. She moved from Israel to Sweden in 1999 and founded Paideia, the European Institute for Jewish Studies, whose mission is to promote multiculturalism and mass immigration in the Scandinavian country and Europe generally. Her group is funded by the Swedish government and the Wallenberg Foundation. The latter outfit was established in honour of Raoul Wallenberg, a Swedish architect, businessman and former diplomat heralded by the Jewish elite as a “Righteous Gentile” for his pro-Jewish activities during the Second World War. So there we have another “Holocaust” connection to the architects of European displacement and genocide.
Some Jews have been more forthright in their desire to erase Europe from the map as part of a revenge fantasy. Baruch Efrati, an Israeli Yeshiva head and community rabbi, openly hailed the Islamization of Europe “as a punishment against Christians for persecuting the Jews.” He implored Jews to “rejoice at the fact that Christian Europe is losing its identity as a punishment for what it did to us for the hundreds of years [we] were in exile there.” The rabbi took the vengeful argument even further, stating:
We will never forgive Europe’s Christians for slaughtering millions of our children, women and elderly… Not just in the recent Holocaust, but throughout the generations, in a consistent manner which characterizes all factions of hypocritical Christianity… And now, Europe is losing its identity in favor of another people and another religion, and there will be no remnants and survivors from the impurity of Christianity, which shed a lot of blood it won’t be able to atone for.
In a sermon posted on YouTube, another rabbi declared the Islamization of Europe good for the Jews. As opposed to revenge, this rabbi made a theological argument, stating that Europe and Christianity – who, according to the rabbi, represent “Edom” (biblical enemies of the Israelites) – must be destroyed in order for the Jewish Messiah to return to earth. “Is it good news that Islam invades Europe?” the rabbi asked his pupils. “It’s excellent news! It means the coming of the messiah.”
Jack Engelhard, writing in the Israeli Arutz Sheva publication, gloated about the prospect of Germany losing its identity to an incoming mass of Middle Eastern refugees let in by Merkel. Appealing to the Holocaust revenge fantasy, Engelhard writes that Germany’s acceptance of 800,000 predominately Muslim refugees from the Middle East,
will raise the total number of Muslims living within Germany to six million, the same number of Jews that the Germans sent to the gas chambers merely a generation ago. We called it karma and a trade, Muslims for Jews, that Germany will rue.
This hateful sentiment crops up time and again. Gregor Gysi, an influential left-wing Jewish politician in Germany, similarly attempted to play on peoples emotions in an Orwellian plea for more Syrian refugees. In a video address to supporters titled “Live Better Without Nazis – Diversity is Our Future,” he implored Germans to be more welcoming of refugees and asylum seekers, invoking the 1933-1945 Nazi era in German history to trigger guilt-feelings among the populace. “Because of this history,” Gysi said, it is incumbent upon all Germans to welcome their demographic displacement. “By the way, every year more native Germans die than are born,” Gysi remarked, welcoming the phenomenon as “very fortunate… Nazis are not very good at having offspring.” Gysi’s deplorable comments are reminiscent of the manic screed Germany Must Perish!, published in 1941 by American Jew Theodore Kaufman, which advocated the genocidal sterilization of all Germans as punishment for electing Adolf Hitler. Gysi’s stance on refugees and immigration in Germany diametrically contradicts his views on Israel, a country which he more or less supports as a ‘Jewish state.’
In line with Cultural Marxist tradition, the dedicated Jewish-Marxist Noel Ignatiev – a former lecturer at Harvard University and Massachusetts College of Art – spearheaded a campaign to explicitly attack White males. In 1994 Ignatiev launched Race Traitor magazine, which carried the tagline: “Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.” The aim of the magazine, explained Ignatiev, “was to chronicle and analyze the making, remaking, and unmaking of whiteness.” An early issue ran an article titled “Abolish the White Race – By Any Means Necessary” which stated the magazine’s mission to “serve as an intellectual center for those seeking to abolish the white race.” The article added:
[Race Traitor Magazine] will encourage dissent from the conformity that maintains [the white race] and popularize examples of defection from its ranks, analyze the forces that hold it together and those which promise to tear it apart. Part of its task will be to promote debate among abolitionists. When possible, it will support practical measures, guided by the principle, Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.
Responding to a reader who objected to the overt anti-White message of the magazine, the editors wrote:
Make no mistake about it: we intend to keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as ‘the white race’ is destroyed—not ‘deconstructed’ but destroyed.
Ignatiev denied he wished any physical harm to Whites, and that he only sought to dispose of “White privilege” by doing away with the “White race” as a social category. But his aggressive and incendiary rhetoric was obviously designed to produce a climate of loathing towards all White people in his stated objective to depose Whites from any seat of power in countries where they are the majority. Ignatiev once said “the goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable” that the only people who would oppose it are “committed white supremacists.” In another interview he said “whiteness is a form of racial oppression” and that it is “not possible to separate whiteness from oppression.” “There can be no white race without the phenomenon of white supremacy,” he added, shamelessly decreeing, “Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.” He further identified his mission to “make it impossible for the legacy of whiteness to continue to reproduce itself.” In the 1950s Ignatiev was a member of the Communist Party USA, and later dabbled in various Marxist-Leninist, Third Worldist and Maoist political groups, before embarking on a career as a professional anti-White agitator.
Another display of chutzpah appeared in the January 2016 edition of Foreign Policy magazine, authored by its CEO and editor-in-chief David Rothkopf, an affluent Zionist Jew who once served in the Clinton Administration. Rothkopf published a commentary headlined “The End of an Era … for White Males” wherein he hailed the prospect of American Whites becoming a minority by the year 2050. “White men have had a great run,” Rothkopf writes in the article. “From the rise of the Greeks to the birth of Western-based global empires, they have controlled much of the world or sought to: So much of history is a consequence of decisions made by—and at the behest of—the white guys in charge.” Rothkopf saluted the destructive impact of feminism in contributing to the decline in White birthrates, stating that “once male-dominated domains are now populated by more women than ever before, and this trend shows no signs of reversing—thankfully.” He noted that in Europe “the influx of migrants and refugees is already producing irreversible demographic shifts—a great blending of cultures” and that in America “the former majority [White] population will be a minority” by mid-century. He added,
By that time, Europe will include massive populations from Africa and the Middle East, as well as Asia. This is to say that by 2050 white men will be the ones checking the “other” box on census forms.
According to Rothkopf, anyone who opposes this dramatic shift in the ethnic balance in the West is exuding irrational “intolerance” and appealing to “fear mongering.” He writes that “the politicians in America and Europe who spew nationalist bile and fan the flames of anti-immigrant furor are tapping into a growing if unconscious cultural recognition that time is running out on what has been the world’s most privileged ethnic class.” The “most privileged ethnic class” is not White Gentiles, as Rothkopf would have us believe, but the Jews – specifically the Ashkenazi variety of which he is a prominent member. He goes on to praise the allegedly “wondrous benefits” of diversity, a position that it is unlikely he also applies to Israel, a racist, Jewish supremacist ethno-state built through conquest and ethnic cleansing of the native Arabs. Rothkopf ends his screed with this:
What we need instead are those who will stand up and say, “No. You have it wrong. Diversity is not the threat. It is the answer.” That is, in fact, what has made America and every diverse society great. To be sure, we should not—not for one minute—lament the passing of the white-male era, for there is at least a glimmer of hope that soon to come is the era of “all.”
The Columbia University-educated media mogul and business magnate appears to have received a good schooling in Cultural Marxism at the former U.S.-based hub of the Frankfurt School.
Another Jewish writer, Financial Times’ chief foreign affairs correspondent Gideon Rachman, penned a similarly gloating article entitled “Mass migration into Europe is unstoppable,” observing the demise of the West vis-à-vis massive Third World immigration and the migratory wave. Documenting the significant decline of White populations globally, he writes:
In the 18th and 19th centuries, Europeans populated the world. Now the world is populating Europe. Beyond the furore about the impact of the 1m-plus refugees who arrived in Germany in 2015 lie big demographic trends. The current migration crisis is driven by wars in the Middle East. But there are also larger forces at play that will ensure immigration into Europe remains a vexed issue long after the war in Syria is over.
Europe is a wealthy, ageing continent whose population is stagnant. By contrast the populations of Africa, the Middle East and South Asia are younger, poorer and rising fast. At the height of the imperial age, in 1900, European countries represented about 25 per cent of the world’s population.
Today, the EU’s roughly 500m people account for about 7 per cent of the world’s population. By contrast, there are now more than 1bn people in Africa and, according to the UN, there will be almost 2.5bn by 2050. The population of Egypt has doubled since 1975 to more than 80m today. Nigeria’s population in 1960 was 50m. It is now more than 180m and likely to be more than 400m by 2050. The migration of Africans, Arabs and Asians to Europe represents the reversal of a historic trend.
Rachman then indirectly identified the cause of Europe’s woes: guilt and shame about the so-called Holocaust and other perceived historical wrongs, spawned in large part by Jewish media and academic initiatives designed to stigmatize White European ethnic consciousness, identity and culture, thereby securing Jewish ethnic advantages over guilt-ridden, self-hating White Gentiles. Rachman explained: “But post-imperial, post-Holocaust Europe is much more wary of asserting the superiority of its culture. It has replaced a belief in its civilising mission and the Bible with an emphasis on universal values, individual rights and international treaties.” Rachman, an “avowed secular Jew,” grew up in “a passionately liberal South African-Jewish family.” Rachman told the Jewish Telegraph that he’s “always been conscious of being Jewish. It’s part of my identity.” He acknowledged that his parents were activists against apartheid in South Africa, a movement that, Rachman affirmed, Jews were “disproportionately involved” in. It is unlikely, however, that Rachman or his parents will ever take up the “struggle” against apartheid and Jewish supremacy in Israel.
In the aftermath of the November 13, 2015, Paris attacks, Dov Lior, a chief Israeli rabbi, expressed approval of the deaths of 130 Parisians as revenge for the Holocaust. “The wicked ones in blood-soaked Europe deserve it for what they did to our people 70 years ago,” Lior declared. The rabbi previously wrote a glowing appraisal of the 2009 book, The King’s Torah, which offered religious justification for the murder of civilian non-Jews, including children, during wartime. The Jerusalem Post revealed that Lior also “published a letter saying that Jewish law permits destroying the entire Gaza Strip to bring peace to the south of the country.” A fanatical Gentile-hater with a long history of incitement to genocide of Palestinians, Lior once praised the mass murderer Baruch Goldstein – an extremist Jew who gunned down 29 unarmed Palestinians in a West Bank mosque in 1994 – as a ‘hero’ and ‘messenger of God.’ Avigdor Lieberman, the former Israeli foreign affairs minister and head of the ultra-Zionist Yisrael Beiteinu Party, likewise hinted approval of the November 13 Paris massacre due to Europeans’ growing support of the pro-Palestinian BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanction) campaign against Israel. Commenting on the attack, Lieberman opined:
When we look at Europe of today, which is busy labeling settlement products when the Middle East is on fire in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Yemen and other places, we understand the problem. The problem is that there is no political willpower or determination by the Europeans to deal with reality.
A January 2015 article in the Irish Times entitled “Israel scathing of alleged pro-Palestinian stance by Europe” noted Lieberman’s hostility towards the continent, particularly the governments of Ireland and Sweden for siding with the Palestinians. Lieberman said that “the attitude of European parliaments was like another chapter in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” and accused them of acting like “Nazi appeasers” who failed to act against Hitler during the 1930s.
It is beyond the scope of this chapter to cover in detail the inner workings of every Western country’s descent into the multicultural/multi-ethnic fold. But the pattern described here uniformly repeats itself across virtually the entire Western world: from Scandinavia to Germany, Switzerland, France, Spain, Australia, Canada and the United States, it has been predominately Jewish ethnic lobbying, activism and media campaigns that has led those countries to adopt liberal immigration policies and to embrace the ideals of multiculturalism, diversity and an “open, tolerant” society.
The Jewish elite consensus on the issue is abundantly clear: multiculturalism and multiethnicism are “good for the Jews” when they are a minority living among Gentiles, but such concepts are “bad for the Jews” when they are the majority endeavouring to suppress and stifle the self-determination of another people, the Palestinians, whose land they have usurped through deceit, terrorism and mass murder.