[This is the 6th video in the T&T series from The Occidental Observer contributor and scholar Andrew Joyce on the “jewish problem/question“, available at his newly created BitChute channel.
Here Joyce discusses Theodor Emil Fritsch (October 28, 1852 near Leipzig – September 8, 1933), his life and his writings. He goes through each of Fritsch’s “ten commandments” contained in “The Antisemite’s Handbook” evaluating their reasoning and their relevance in today’s world.
Joyce concludes by recommending people to read Fritsch’s, “The Riddle of the Jew’s Success“, which I have serialized here (see link at end) and is also available to download at archive,org.
Fritsch was a German anti-semite whose views did much to influence popular opposition to Jewish supremacism in Germany during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, right up to his death in 1933, soon after the rise of National Socialism to power.
T & T No 6:
The Antisemite’s Handbook
Aug 11, 2020
Click here for the video:
Published on Aug 11, 2020
First published at 06:40 UTC on August 11th, 2020.
Support via Bitcoin:
Free copy of Fritsch’s “The Riddle of the Jews’ Success” (1927 English translation) :
Donate to theoccidentalobserver.net
Jew: Welcome to this call. We have rabbis all across the country committed to passing comprehensive immigration reform, …
Jew: Hi! I’m Josh Goldstein. I’m an immigration lawyer in Los Angeles. And I help people and families across the country and around the world get work visas, Green Cards and citizenship.
Jews: I’m just, … I’m just, … I’m just, … I’m just jewish! I’m just jewish! And these lies about me are nothing but classic hateful, anti-semitism!
[Intro music and imagery]
Andrew Joyce: Hello and welcome to another episode of Talmud and Taboo!
As usual I’d like to begun by saying a very special thank you to those of you that donated via BitCoin after I posted the last episode. It’s much much appreciated. Now I’ve noticed that there are at least, one or two donors who have been consistently donating. And they have really been quite generous indeed. And I want to say a very special thanks to them, because their generosity is the reason why I have been able to a little bit more time and effort to this weeks podcast. It going to be a little bit more in depth. It’s certainly going to be longer than usual. And the reason for that is them. So I hope all of you are grateful for those who are donating.
I don’t want everyone to donate. I’m not selling a product. I don’t want to get into a position, and I never will get into a position, where this thing gets behind a pay wall, or I ask for subscriptions, or subscribers. It’s not a vision I have for myself. It’s not a vision I have for this podcast. It’s simply never going to happen. But for those of you who do donate I want to say a very special thank you and express my gratitude. And I will always open this podcast that way.
I was recently contacted by a number of people who are alert to the fact that BitChute looks like it is making baby steps towards maybe falling into line with the “masters of the media”, shall we say. And I also I’m aware that Twitter has already banned the sharing of links from BitChute. It’s kind of weird that all this happened a couple of weeks after I started my podcasts. I’m not getting paranoid about it. But I know that BitChute was in the sights of these influential figures for quite sometime even before I came on the scene. But it is kind of disheartening and depressing, I suppose, because I normally tend to be among are first who are removed from a platform once it goes into this phase.
I was one of the first who was banned and then repeatedly banned by Twitter to the point where the platform was just unsustainable for me to just keep trying to get on.
YouTube as early as 2016 was removing my Red Ice video that had accumulated 60,000 views. And en with really kind of niche very same scale podcasts that attempted to do interviews for, after that it wasn’t long before they were getting banned in Germany and half of Europe and banned completely to the point where it’s very difficult to actual find any of my material on YouTube anymore.
So I have my feeling of apprehension about what’s going to happen. I’m trying to not let that distract me right now. If I get removed from BitChute, I will simply find somewhere else and will keep going from there.
Another little piece of contact I had recently concerned a North Carolinia jew called Michael Brown. Now Brown is a kind of phone-in Christian pastor. I mean, he presents as a Christian, although he admits that he was born jewish. Brown is a fascinating character in that he just kind of a “blast from the past”. He’s a full-blown crypto jew, of the converso type. He literally like, is the type of person that brought about the Inquisition! In that you get this jew who comes into Christian and he makes it his whole life’s work to inculcate White guilt.
I mean look at some of the titles of some of Brown’s books; “Our Hands are Stained with Blood”! And he has written three, or four, books on Christian anti-semitism. He never shuts up about it. He does a lot of podcasts on it. And he can’t let go of his jewish interests!
And he apparently said that he is willing to debate any anti-semite. I actually emailed him, I messaged him via his website a few days ago now, and I haven’t received a response.
So, Michael if you are listening to this I am willing to debate you absolutely! I feel like I have credentials that are at least equal to yours and actually probably superior, I would vouch. I would bet that I have read many more texts on jewish history than you have, and certainly have a better and more honest grasp on them. So, I’m just throwing down the gauntlet. If you want to do this thing, if you are serious about debating with an anti-semite, let’s go! Let’s do it!
Anyway that is it for introductions.
Right! Let’s begin!
It really quite appropriate at this early stage in the podcast series that we turn to the life and work of Theodore Fritsch, who was born in 1852, he dies in September 1933, just months after he witnessed many of his political and cultural theories come to fruition in the ascent to power of the National Socialists.
It’s appropriate that we are doing Fritsch, because he essentially picks up where Louis-Mathieu Molé, who we discussed in Episode 4, leaves off. Molé’s failure to conclusively end jewish citizenship during the Grande Sanhedrin, entrenches so-called “jewish emancipation” in European society. The French example, partly, because of political influence, partly cultural, really out across the continent. And we see successive, gradual, mirror image, jewish emancipation across Europe.
This is important and, in fact, world changing, because it represents a fundamental transformation of the nature of jewish European relations. Prior to the era of emancipation jews are a powerful financial middleman minority that boasts intensive elite connections but which also have limited cultural control, or influence. There are exceptions to this when we look at the activity of crypto jews, or con-versos who created their own spheres of influence after insincere conversions to Christianity.
But really these are exceptions to a rule. After emancipation, to quote Yeats:
“Things are changed, changed utterly!”
Emancipation opened up European society to jews. Jews are for the first time free to enter into journalism, to become academics, to move through every level of the political system. Their economic activities cease to be seen as those perpetrated by an alien group, and are instead cloaked by citizenship.
What is culture? You could offer any number of answers. But one of the most straightforward is that it is a way a people speaks to itself, about itself, about its history, about its dreams, its goals.
What happens when you take a foreign people and insert them uncritically into a given culture, is that that culture becomes distorted, it becomes confused. Because essentially you have to conversations going on at the same time. The society becomes schizophrenic.
We today are quite used to living in a schizophrenic society, because we live under multiculturalism, where there aren’t just to in conversations going on but multiple. There is a constant clash of interests, there is no common agreement on history, no common dreams. We have no shared goals anymore!
The entry of the jews into European culture is novel for two reasons. The first is the simple fact that it interrupts European cultures significantly for the first time. The second is that the entry is total! Europeans whether they are French, or they are German, accept that a jews can become a Frenchman, or a German. And what they have to say, or do, counts for the speech and activity of one of their own.
Today we have the meme:
But really it begins right here, here in the early 19th century.
A kind of myth emerged in the aftermath of the Second World War that jews had been fully integrated into European society between 1840 and the rise of Hitler. But this isn’t really backed by any significant research.
In fact when you look at books like Alfred Low’s, “Jews in the Eyes of the Germans” the central thesis is that jews and Europeans, despite superficialities of emancipation, remain a people apart.
It wasn’t long after emancipation that problems began to emerge. Some of the more astute members of European society started to notice that when jews enter the national conversation it’s with a radically different orientation and direction.
Jewish historians and journalists, like Henrich Grets, looked at the European past, or contemporary politics and denigrated things like tradition and patriotism. Not as jews, of course, but as “Fellow Europeans”! It’s the start of a disharmony in the national conversation. Jews appear to follow a separate trajectory altogether. One that weakens the concept of nationhood in the host population, and helps advance the position of the jews.
By way of response, Europeans started organizing themselves into anti-semitic political parties and movements with the sole aim of attempting to finish what Molé and started.
Édouard Drumont in France, Wilhelm Marr in Germany, who of course coined the term “anti-semitism”, were at the forefront of the European reaction, with very strong representation also in Hungary.
But the electoral performance of these movements was universally mediocre. Even if its propaganda and ethos was quite widespread.
At this point at the stage where it looks like anti-semitic politics is total we see the fateful entry of Theodore Fritsch into German political life. Fritsch is born into a farming family in 1852. He’s the sixth of seven children and he progresses through the educational system eventually becoming a minor technician, or petty engineer.
Fritsch’s origins were relatively humble, but even early on were a source of pride for him. For Fritsch the class of small farmers and craftsmen, and artisans, were the real backbone of Germany, whereas the aristocracy was tainted by corruption and intermarriage with jews, whereas the working class had been tainted by Marxism, whereas the middle class were succumbing to jewish consumerism, Fritsch’s class were, more or less, pure in their spiritual and national orientation. If the folk had a heart, Fritsch was sure it lay in the people that he emerged from.
Fritsch progressed rapidly in his career. He moved from someone who worked on printing machines, to someone who ran a company employing such people, to someone who owned many printing machines himself. He eventually moved to Berlin, starts a publishing company, and he becomes a figure of some importance in Berlin’s small business network.
This guy wasn’t a nobody! By 1880s he had published both Richard Wagner and Friedrich Nietzsche. At the age of 29 he wrote his first anti-semitic pamphlet. And by 1885 he was the publisher of anti-semitic correspondence, something like the Occidental Observer, or the Occidental Quarterly, which would go on to become one of the longest running anti-semitic journals in history.
Fritsch disagreed somewhat with of his contemporaries in the anti-semitic political movement, in that he viewed electoral politics as more or less useless if the cultural groundwork hadn’t been laid first. Today, we are all very familiar with Antonio Gramsci and his novel method of cutting Marxism from the roots and setting it free to pervade culture. This is where we get Cultural Marxism from.
But I view Fritsch as arguably, as his tactical predecessor as Fritsch believed that the most important political activity was to undermine the jews. And for him that meant creating a kind of “cultural anti-semitism”. Fritsch divorced anti-semitism from traditional religion and the political spectrum, and he designed propaganda that could saturate society. Saturation was key for Fritsch.
He had numerous [word unclear] and he wrote propaganda that would appeal to professors and plumbers, farmers and pharmacists. The jewish historian Jacob Katz wrote that:
“Fritsch possessed an outstanding talent for propaganda.”
He could be articulate on different intellectual levels, adapting his fluent and always striking style to his audience. More clear-sighted than his colleagues, he did not believe that an anti-semitic party would amass significant political power to realize its objectives. He relied rather on the slow but methodical indoctrination of anti-semitic ideas, which he believe and could be absorbed by the adherents of any political party.
Basically, if Fritsch was alive today there’s a strong likelihood that he would be “shit-posting” on Twitter, writing for the Occidental Quarterly, sending letters to high society, and even possibly even writing things clandestinely for leftists, anti-zionists and black nationalist groups. He was really that prolific!
Unlike many other leaders of the anti-semitic movement, Fritsch claimed that he had no ideology or worldview what-so-ever, other than anti-semitism. It was his sole intellectual concern. And he was prepared to work with anyone, if it advanced his cause of undermining the social, political and economic status of the jews.
Fritsch’s basic argument was that the jews were a destructive element within European culture and that reducing this negative influence was a moral imperative. In his first pamphlet, basically a rhyming poem, he depicted jews as deceitful parasitical creatures that were incapable of reform. In later publications, those aimed at a better educated reading public, he underpinned his thesis with the theory of races.
One of his books “Handbook on the Jewish Question” which also had the title “Handbook of Anti-semitism” was essentially a compilation of anti-jewish observations from great thinkers, right down through the ages. Published in 1896, by 1914 it has already run to 36 editions. Thirty six! How many editions do you think it would manage today?
In his publications Fritsch expounded on the finer points of his political theories. In particular he felt because jews dominated capital and essentially controlled the media it was more or less futile to fight these forces directly. His primary approach therefore to attack what he called the “Talmudic moral”. Jewish double standards and hypocrisy rooted in the Talmud are what Fritsch perceived to be the Achilles heel of the jews. And he assaulted them repeatedly with his considerable rhetorical skills.
Fritsch once wrote:
“Yet, Judaism has an enormous weakness, the Talmudic moral. Rabbinism is the Achilles heel of the jewish world dominion, and is only here that the foe can be mortally wounded. Only here can he be ceased at his core and his essence, at the roots of his demonic power.”
Despite his appeal to the imagery of demons, Fritsch himself wasn’t especially religious. He was happy for Christianity to continue to play a role in the life of Germans, but a minimal role. And he was very critical of organized religion and the church. Fritsch’s anti-semitism was also expressed in terms of the Old Testament which brought him into conflict with others in the movement who believed that disrespect towards any part of the Bible would weaken their propaganda in the eyes of less sophisticated believers, and especially the rural clergy.
But Fritsch also showed some reverence for Christianity, declared it to be non-semitic Ayran character. He once wrote:
“Surely Christian teaching arose as a protest of the Ayran spirit against the inhumane jew spirit.”
This relatively simple statement paved the way for a broader shift to racial thinking among traditional Christians in Germany. And it was particularly influential on Huston Stewart Chamberlain, whose “Foundations of the 19th Century” was one of the most important anti-semitic texts of the early 20th century.
An especially interesting relationship to observe at this time was that between Fritsch and Nietzsche. Today Nietzsche remains for reasons that are never entirely clear to me, in vogue on the far Right, especially with Richard Spencer and his circle. I have quite different views on Nietzsche, especially in him personally as a man. And I differ from this group quite strongly. Spencer and I have had brief conversations about this.
Nietzsche’s sister Elizabeth, was of course, married to Bernhard Forster, who was one of the key players in the anti-semitic political movement, and a close friend and associate of Theodore Fritsch. Forster was also a semi-regular contributor to anti-semitic correspondence. Fritsch’s journal. At some point a connection is made and it is hinted that Fritsch should send Nietzsche some copies of anti-semitic correspondence and invite him to join the movement.
So Fritsch sends a letter — which is since lost to history — and a few copies of the journal. What Fritsch doesn’t expect is that even though Nietzsche creates this big philosophy of the transcendent superman Nietzsche himself is extraordinarily motivated by the need for fame and fortune!
Quite early in his career Nietzsche was alarmed by the way allegations of anti-semitism could taint or damage someone’s career. And he saw this firsthand in his friendship with Richard Wagner, which would later turn sour predominately on the issue of jews. Nietzsche had jewish fan clubs, he had jewish patrons and in a lot of respects I believe jewish sympathies. So when Fritsch approaches him with his journal Nietzsche responds quite bitterly and sarcastically. Essentially saying, and I’m not even paraphrasing much here:
“Thanks for sending this stuff because now I know just how much of a muddled mass of thinking it all is. I think your list of so-called great anti-semitic figures are just a bunch of cranks! And don’t send it to me again or I’ll be forced to get even angrier than I’m currently am!”
My sympathies in this exchange have always been with Fritsch. Who responds to Nietzsche’s insolence by writing a lengthy review, a negative one, of “Beyond good and Evil” in his journal of anti-semitic correspondence, where he mercilessly ridicules Nietzsche’s philosophy and attacks his intellect.
Fritsch argued that Nietzsche had no clue about the nature of the real world and has repudiated moral values which were in fact essential to highlighting jewish hypocrisy and overthrowing jewish influence. After reading the review Nietzsche wrote to a friend that the anti-semitic movement had declared war on him.
But rather than go on the attack again, Nietzsche the superman, simple resorts to bullying his sister for marrying one of its members. Fritsch is really disturbed by this episode. In fact his influence is much greater than Nietzsche’s at this stage anyway. While the latter’s philosophy is still struggling for mainstream traction, Fritsch is in the middle of selling his 36th edition of the Handbook of Antisemitism, and he has developed a very popular propaganda technique, something he calls the “Anti-semitic Ten Commandments”.
These ten commandments were essentially the basic rules for living in a world in which jewish influence was strong and a way in which jewish influence could itself be weakened. I think it’s worth going through these ten commandments and try to see if they have any relevance today.
So I’ll read them first and then we can discuss.
Okay first commandment:
“Be proud of being a German and strive earnestly and steadily to practice the inherited virtues of our people. Courage, faithfulness and veracity. And to inspire and develop these in thy children.”
“They shall know that tho with all thy fellow Germans, regardless of faith or creed, have a common and implacable foe. His name is the jew.”
“Tho shall keep though blood pure. Consider it a crime to soil the noble Aryan breed of thy people by mingling with the jewish breed. For thy must know that the jewish blood is everlasting, putting jewish stamp on body and soul lasting until the furthest generations.”
“Tho shall be helpful to thy fellow German and further him in all matters, not counter to the German conscience. The more so if he be pressed by the Jew. Though shall at once take into court any offence or crime committed by the jew in deed, word or letter that come to thine knowledge less the jew abuse the laws of our country with impunity.”
“Tho shall have no social intercourse with the jew. Avoid all contact and community with the jew. And keep him away from thyself and thy family, especially thy daughters, less they suffer injury of body and soul.”
“Tho shall have no business relations with the jews. Never choose a jew as a business partner, nor borrow, nor buy from him. And keep your wife to, from doing. So though shall sell nothing to him or use him as an agent in transaction, that they may remain free, and not become a slave onto the jew, nor help to increase his money which is the power in which he enslaves our people.”
Next [7th] commandment:
“Tho shall drive the jew from though own breath and take no example from jewish tricks and jewish wiles, for though shall never match the jew in trickery, but forfeit thine honour and earn the contempt of thy fellow German and the punishment of the courts.”
Next [8th] commandment:
“Tho shall not entrust thy rights to a jewish lawyer, nor thy body to a jewish physician, nor thine children to a jewish teacher, less thine honour, body and soul suffer harm.”
“Tho shall not listen nor give credence to the jew. Keep all jewish writings away from thine Germany home and hearth, less their lingering poison may unnerve and corrupt thy self and thy family.”
And the 10th commandment:
“Tho shall not use violence against the jews because it is unworthy of thy and against the law. But if a jew attacks thy ward off his semitic insolence with German wrath.”
Basically of course all these commandments are about creating distance or breathing space between German life and jewish life. It is interesting that Fritsch begins with a call for pride, almost as if the White guilt that we associate with a very modern, especially post-war phenomenon, was in existence in some form even then. And of course it was, in the writings of jews like Heinna [sp] and Grets [sp] who denigrated, satirized the national traditions, or even if it was something queasy into national pride in general.
The point that I think is worth making here is that when it comes to anti-semitism there really is nothing new under the sun. Most of what we feel to be ultra modern, post modern, cutting edge, in terms of how jews influence, and how jewish influence is expressed, and challenged, it isn’t new at all, but has actually been rehashed over and over again for every generation. Of all Fritsch’s commandments this is probably my favorite. It asks for a pride rooted in the past and projected into the future. It’s an acknowledgment that we are no isolated beings who happen to be alive solely for ourselves for a set period of time, before we die, but instead a link in a chain, or part of a thread that should lead onwards to some kind of greater destiny. This is beyond a petty pride. This is a transcendent form of knowing on a deep, deep, level who you truly are.
The second commandment is essentially a call for racial unity. I don’t know if Fritsch truly felt that the only problem in German life was the jews, although something tells me that he genuinely did believe this. I think it is here that we might start to differ somewhat from Fritsch.
There’s little doubt that jewish influence is highly problematic, sometimes devastatingly so. But a century on Fritsch’s writings, we are perhaps a little more cynical and ironic in how we perceive our nationalism, even on the far-Right. I think that many, even in our own circles, would scoff at the idea that if we could just come up with some kind of useful resolutions to the issue of jewish influence then all our problems would magically disappear.
Of course, Fritsch didn’t have to contend with the rampant spread of ideologies in his society that we see today. His society was for the most part, apart from jewish cynicism and some elements of degradation, traditional, patriotic, and in possession of some sort of vision of national destiny.
Today semitism isn’t invested solely in the jewish population — this is my opinion — but it is probably mainstream, both in commercialism and consumerism, in fashions of all descriptions in political ideologies, from the radical Left, right the way through to what we see today that calls itself “conservatism“.
Exactly how to approach a cultural rot as widespread as with see today is something that Fritsch didn’t have to consider. And I think it’s doubtful if his approach and solutions would work today, in as a clear cut a manner as he envisaged for his own time.
The 3rd commandment relating to purity of blood is also dated in a nuanced way. Here Fritsch refers to miscegenation only from the perspective of Jews. I actually sympathize with his point here, because of my own personal experience with some of the most virulent semitism that I have seen that has come from half Jews, or those with partial Jewish ancestry.
About four years ago I interviewed two Jews for a Radix piece titled “The Jewish Question and some Answers” one of people I interviewed called himself “Reactionary jew” on Twitter and was a full Jew from a very orthodox background. The other guy who called himself “The Rebbe” was a half Jew. And of the two it was actually the Rebbe who was the most aggressive both in asserting his jewish identity, and in terms of any personal interaction that he had with me, he was unblinkingly hostile, or at least I got that impression.
Reactionary jew was more relaxed in his identity and considerably more honest about the nature of Jewish influence, Jewish history. He had previously had been in communication with Kevin MacDonald. And I could see that there was potential for a civil discussion of nothing else.
Reactionary jew later got spooked by a third party who discovered his identity and scared of being doxxed to his community would destroy him completely and ruin a marriage that was in the pipeline. He disappeared less than a year later. He didn’t know it at the time but he actually left his micro data including his name, his real name, in the answers he submitted to me for the Radix piece. So I could have doxxed him myself. But that is not how I want to play the game. So I deleted the doc and waited for time to basically to wipe his real name from my memory, and now I really can’t remember it!
But the point of me telling uts is that sometimes the nature of the Jewish blood will suprise you. And sometimes it is in fact in the mixing of peoples that produces the most troublesome results.
Ashkenazi Jews of course have a not insignificant percent of European matrilineal DNA, meaning most of them are some sort of ethnic mix to begin with. How this exactly effects this affects the mentality of jews is something which would require study in itself. But I think that the basic premise of Fritsch that these races should remain apart I’d healthy and rational. Where it becomes somewhat dated is of course in the fact that we now live in multicultural societies where miscegenation is not only the norm, but is actively preached as part of globalist dogma.
Who though could argue with the material and spiritual benifits and “keep thy blood pure”?
The 4th commandment about helping ones kinsmen in pursuing Jewish wrongs through the courts is also very interesting. Really the crafty Fritsch is trying to squeeze two commandments into one here.
Who could argue with helping ones kinsmen? I often wonder of we help each other enough in this movement. In some ways of course we are prevented from doing so with real world activity limited, it’s not so easy to offer material or emotional support to our comrades. We are limited in a lot of ways to the rhetorical. And in the broader racial picture I think there’s little question that in-group philanthropy in non-Whites [Whites?] has declined. Wasn’t it Ed Dutton who argued that as multiculturalism takes hold in a society suspicion of potential traitors increases. Why help someone who could be helping an outsider?
So Fritsch’s call for universal aid to one another is much more complicated today. We are an infinitely more fractured people and so many have thrown themselves on to the multicultural band wagon, the separating the wheat from the chaff seems almost impossible.
Taking the Jews through the courts is an interesting proposal. Fritsch himself was jailed twice for a contemporary version of “hate speech”. And I suspect courts held a special, and not particularly pleasant, place in his psyche. Even in Fritsch’s day though this aspect of the commandment didn’t really mean much. Yes, Jewish criminals were prosecuted, but isn’t it in the nature of jewish influence that so much of what has been harmful has occurred in the blurred lines between the legal and illegal?
Has George Soros, or Sheldon Adelson, or Mosche Kantor committed any crimes? No! We can argue until we are blue in the face that they have committed crimes against our people, but the truth is that they have engaged in a harm without breaking existing laws!
Now there may have been financial conduct by this or by that elite jew or jewish group, but the misconduct itself not what gives jewish influence culturally significant harmful aspect we often describe. And you are probably thinking:
“What are you trying to say here Joyce?”
Well I’m saying that without reversion of the law taking individual jews through the courts won’t accomplish anything. Much more significant would be laws that break up bodies like the ADL and then disrupt the culturally harmful activities that we are all familiar with. Only then will the courts be able to provide anything like a helpful function.
The next commandment:
“Have no social intercourse with jews and keep your family away from them, especially your daughters.”
Should really also undergo a slight revision today. How many Europeans interact with jews on a daily basis? Relatively few. Certainly far fewer than in Fritschs day. This could probably today be considered an American issue, since the United States is where most jews maintain their largest social presence outside Israel. Do I think that most people are likely to be harmed by their personal interactions with jews? When you see what happened to those that came into the circle of Jeffery Epstein and Ghilaine Maxwell, it’s hard to disagree.
But I don’t think that personal interactions contain as much as life or death quality that Fritsch implied. Perhaps he’s right and I’m wrong. All I can say is that in my own personal interactions with jews which have been relatively brief but quite large in number I haven’t felt personally harmed.
The harm I’ve always felt occurs predominately on the cultural, political and economic, rather than the social. You can have a perfectly civilized conversation with a used car salesman who won’t harm you personally, but might economically pick your pocket. Does this mean I should all go out and befriend a jew or two? No! Of course not! But it does mean that I think the personal fear implied in Fritsch’s commandment is for the most part a hindrance, rather than a help to clear thinking.
We should move on then to the commandment about having no business dealings with jews. Here again we have to confront the inarguable core of the commandment while providing with some contemporary nuance. Fritsch was writing before the days of Amazon like corporations. Jewish finance and banking was quite extensive and jewish consumerism in the form of department stores was beginning to take off. But it was possible to live economically separate from jews if you set your mind to it. It was possible as we know from the National Socialist period to boycott jewish businesses.
Look! Such interactions had the potential to be harmful and still do. A friend of mine established a business several years ago in fishing supplies, which included the manufacture of flys. In order to make one particular set of flys he required a particular fur. And one of his contacts was a jewish fur merchant in England. My friend who is aware of my position on the jews, but does not himself share all my conclusions nevertheless would regularly inform me about how his trading was going with this particular English jew. I was always entertained but these stories because it was the stereotypical story of over charging, interest, poor quality goods in general, bad faith. Apparently a sucker for punishment my friend continues to trade with his favorite son of Moses.
But how practical or profitable to avoid jewish business in the age of global capital today? How many of you haven’t heard of Calvin Klein , Levi Strauss, Ralph Lauren, Michael Cores, Kenneth Corrs, Max Factor, Estée Lauder, Marc Jacobs, Starbucks, [word unclear], The Gap, American Apparel, Costco, Staples, Home Depo, Ben & Jerry’s, Snapple, Häagen-Dazs, Dunkin Donnuts, Monster Beverages, Mattel, Toys R Us, … Or how about Facebook, Craig’s List, I could go on and on and on!
Waste collection in many Irish towns and cities is now carried out by jewish hedge fund. Paul Singer’s hedge fund is trying to acquire Twitter. Britain’s biggest book stores are owned by a jewish hedge fund. It’s in the nature of modern international global capital that jewish businesses are everywhere here, and is unavoidable without reducing yourself to a homeless peasant, where you will be free but totally unable to change anything about the society you have left behind.
All of this goes to show that when it comes to the jews, nothing is new under the sun. But these things can become worse, and they have worsened, and will therefore acquire more sophisticated solutions.
Equally interesting is Fritsch’s admonition not to imitate Jewish tactics. He argues that Whites can never imitate Jews in what he calls “trickery”. I think it’s sensible advice in one sense because methodologies that aren’t instinctive to us probably become liabilities fairly quick.
On the other hand if you read Kevin MacDonald’s “Separation and Its Discontents” mirror image strategies tend to work very well against jewish ethnocentrism. MacDonald devotes a lot of the book to placing National Socialism in this light. And if you haven’t read it, I urge you to do. So the simple fact that high levels of ethnocentrism and certain methodologies for obtaining influences are part of that, tend to be very effective.
This is something reinforced in Ed Dutton’s “Race Differences and Ethnocentrism” where Dutton makes the argument that ethnocentric groups will always win in the end against groups in which ethnocentrism is low. There isn’t really any way to improve our situation that involves Whites continuing along with individualism and social atomization.
So while I understand and sympathize with Fritsch’s demand that we don’t compromise our moral identity and ethical standards, I think that circumstance will force us to adapt new ways that we don’t want to, and to undertake efforts that we would rather not. The question is simple. How much do you want to win?
Fritsch’s commandment on not using jewish lawyers, doctors, or teachers arise from his general hostility to the entry of jews into the professions in the wake of emancipation. Fritsch believed that Jewish entry into the professions marked the beginning jewish cultural interference. And he felt that a boycott of jewish professionals would starve them of their influence inherent in these positions. I think that there are different levels and textures of influence.
I think that there are different levels and textures of influence in each of the positions. Fritsch describes jewish entry into the law in one of his books as bringing about a fundamental change in the way the law works and the purpose for which it worked.
Certainly there were many jewish and folkish thinkers who argued that the law must always embody the spirit of the people you need it and it should serve the community. They argued that jewish lawyers and judges on the other hand were perceived the whole legal structure as simply involving contests where the only objective was to win. For jews there was simple no importance to the wider nation.
And on top of this jewish influence in criminal law had resulted in the introduction of jewish psychological theories, from Freud and Adler into the legal discourse. Something that was felt again to represent a perversion of the once natural state of German law.
Fritsch’s ideas on teachers and physicians followed more or less the same logic. That these positions were vital to the national conversation and the national spirit and quite apart from the specific texture of the jews themselves it was unwise to have any outsider participation. It’s this basic and essential ethos that I find quite resonant.
Today our professional life is essentially multicultural. Our laws are increasingly losing perspective and logic and are used against us instead of in order to help us. Our teachers are filling our children’s heads with harmful ideologies, our doctors are indulging the fantasy of transgenderism and the terrible stain of mass abortion. Our professional class has departed from the natural order.
And Fritsch’s commandment here is essentially a call for the natural order. That a people should direct its own conversation and perform its own essential functions. Sharing these functions with outsiders is always going to be a recipe for disaster and confusion.
The same theme is repeated I suppose in the 9th commandment, “Keep from jewish writings”. We again come back to this issue of jewish participation in what should be a racial, national conversation. It’s about reclaiming direction and destiny without outsiders pretending to be insiders.
One of the greater challenges we face compared with the situation presented to Fritsch is that jewish writings aren’t so nearly so neatly packaged and contained anymore. Fritsch might have had to deal with a few jewish newspapers and some hostile journalists. He might have had beef with Heinna or Grets, with their caustic writings on German patriotism. But he didn’t really have to contend with a society in which these writings had gone absolutely mainstream! Getting replicated over and over again by Whites, by blacks, by Pakistanis, or Hispanics.
In a Googleist world saturated by propaganda from all angles shot through with mass migrations from all over the world, and where the dissolution of the national community is simply everywhere! Where do jewish writings begun and end? Is banning or boycotting books going to save us in the age of big Tech and Globohomo? I really don’t know, although I have my doubts.
Much like Fritsch’s warning about personal contact with individual jews I think he invests too much fear in the smaller picture and not enough awareness of the need for action on a grander scale. The age of global politics and economics will surely require global solutions.
Fritsch’s final commandment is measured in [word unclear]. Fritsch was all to aware that jews ultimately benefit from a historical narrative in which they are victims. Even before World War Two jews derived a lot of political sympathy and capital for the Russian pogroms! Which were themselves in large part according to the work of the Oxford scholar, John Klier, utterly fictional!
So violence throughout time, whether it’s been real or imagined, has served to reinforce jewish ethnocentrism and it provides it with a rationale, and it enables in many respects many of judaisms most pathological behaviors.
And Fritsch is right to discourage the violence. And he is equally right to defend the right to self defense. If you are politically harmed you have the right to retaliate politically, and so on with economics. And then the other sphere in which your rights and personal integrity are being infringed upon.
So where does that leave us in terms of Theodore Fritsch, in terms of his legacy today? I personally have an affinity for Fritsch. I see him as a tough guy. I see him as a guy that faced overwhelming odds and backed down from a fight. I see him, his exchange with Nietzsche and as I say, I have his back on that. I think that he wasn’t fazed by the pretentiousness of intellectuals. I think he was single minded. I think that even faced with overwhelming odds he was always willing to rise to a challenge and really give it everything that he has got!
I think that Fritsch was also an incredibly talented man who was responsible for energizing people around him, who was constantly innovating techniques. Who was completely tireless in terms of how he pursued his goal. I mean I think even his enemies at the time, and certainly his enemies in modern times, now, in our own day and age. I quoted from the historian Katz there. You can’t help but look at what he’s doing and say:
“He was almost a force of nature!”
And in his prolific writings, and his networking I just think there is a lot there that we should to emulate, even if we don’t try to emulate exactly his work, just that drive I think is something that we should all look at and learn from. I think that someone like Fritsch deserves a place in our popular memory.
I think it’s a shame that most of you who are probably listening to this podcast right now will not have heard of from before in your life! And yet he is absolutely crucial! I mean I remember coming through high school and college and being told in lectures and in textbooks that the National Socialists derived a lot of their ideologies and so forth from Nietzsche. And that Nietzsche’s vision of the uberman and everything was the template upon which they built their self image. I have a very different view on that. I mean as I say I think that you can subtract Nietzsche from the equation and you still get the National Socialists, but if you subtracted Fritsch from history I’m not so sure that you would get the National Socialists, or indeed any of the kind of resurgent anti-semitism that comes from the late 19th century or the 20th century. I just don’t see that happening.
I think that he was that much of a force of nature. He was that innovative in his propaganda. He was that good at networking and creating a kind of drive even among those that he worked with. It’s interesting that in his first kind of revival not to long after he died actually, the National Socialists came up with the idea that they would put up statues commemorating really famous anti-semites from the past.
And of all the people within Germany history the first person they choose to build a statue for was Theodore Fritsch! One of the kind of quirks of history is that in 1943, I think it was, the armament shortage in Germany was so ferocious that they had to melt down really any metals that they can get their hands on. So poor old Fritsch was taken off his plinth. He was taken off to be smelted down and reworked into firearms, … They probably got a few rifles out of old Fritsch, which were then sent off to the Eastern Front! I don’t think Fritsch would have minded. I think that if someone told him:
“We’re going to melt down your statue to make rifles to go and shoot down judeo-bolsheviks!”
He probably would have been quite cheerful about that! That was the nature of the man.
But that was his first real ha-rah, and really since the end of the Second World War Fritsch has more or less dropped down the memory hole, much like our friend Louis-Mathieu Molé that we discussed in episode four.
So one of the things with this podcast series was to start to bring back some of the history, some of the ideological or intellectual fore bearers of some of the things that we are doing today.
I mean a lot of people I meet would think that anti-semitism was invented by Kevin MacDonald! The reading just doesn’t go back that far into history. But I think it’s worth digging into the history. I think it’s worth revisiting these things and taking out what is useful. Well you might say:
“What is useful then, Joyce, about Fritsch’s work?”
Well I think it is the basic drive, it’s the basic philosophy, it’s the basic gut instinct, the basic feeling that underpins all of Fritsch’s writings. I’ve included a link below to a free copy, it’s available in archive dot org, to “The Riddle of the jews Success” which is a 1927 English translation of one of Fritsch’s full length books, and I think it’s worth reading.
In some respects as you have probably guessed from this podcast, there will be elements of it which are dated and which don’t marry up completely with our contemporary experience. But I think there will be so much that you can learn from it. So much that you can, that will flesh out your broader understanding of this thing over a broader historical time.
And I think it’s always worth just revisiting the past, and you can take comfort from that as well, knowing that others, at other times, have faced overwhelming odds and in their own way have achieved small or large victories.
So I will leave you with Theodore Fritsch, and down load his book. Go and sit on the subway, bring it up on your tablet, make sure someone besides you see what you are reading, and be controversial!
And I will catch you next time! Thanks for listening.
Pierre_de_Craon • 3 days ago
The comment threads from all earlier episodes have disappeared within the past two hours. If this was deliberate, I hope that it was Andrew Joyce, not the Masters of the Narrative, who deleted them.
JannikT • 4 days ago
This was a brilliant and thought provoking episode.
katana17 • 5 days ago
Andrew Joyce – T&T 6 – The Antisemite’s Handbook – Aug 11, 2020 — Transcript
Here Joyce discusses Theodor Emil Fritsch (October 28, 1852 near Leipzig – September 8, 1933), his life and his books including, “The Riddle of the Jew’s Success”.
[NOTE: This transcript is in progress. Please help out by volunteering to do a few minutes. Thanks]
soulog • 6 days ago
Haha the Dr Brown Inquisition shout👌
Raziel • 6 days ago
So i seen in Easons bookstore recently a book called .. Frenzy and Betrayal : The Anatomy of a Political Assassination. By Alan Shatter. Im curious to know if you have read it Dr.Joyce ?
Raziel • 6 days ago
Hail to you Dr. Joyce for speaking truth. I hope you have discussions with others, maybe Adam Green from Know more news ? He talks alot about the J’ish problem in the USA. Would like to see you on Mark Colletts show aswell (He has moved away from Youtube and onto DLive now), Perhaps you would speak with Jason Khöne/No white guilt on his and Jared George’s show called Tap. I feel more and more people Need to hear, read, see your work Dr.Joyce. May your good work continue and be spread out and hopefully educate European people to what is really going on, to what has been happening to and continues to happen to European people by this certain.. tribe
Holocost Survivor • 6 days ago
The esteemed Dr. Andrew Joyce has taken Brown up on this call for debate in his podcast, yet he has have failed to respond.
It is truly cringe that this man would dodge this worthy representative of what he would call an “anti-semitic” ideology
KeepTheChange • 6 days ago
Great video … I really appreciate your thoughtful and learned approach to these matters. I’m currently reading “The Riddle of Jew Success” and I have to wonder that since that book was written about 100 years ago, how much further along have we traveled on this timeline toward a total Jewish control of our society? I had this same thought when I was browsing a book written by Henry Ford, who was critical of the Jews. My fear is that we’ve long since crossed the Rubicon and we have no idea how complete the societal control is, i.e., we’re like a frog being boiled and we don’t realize that we’re at 98 degrees celsius. Thanks again for your hard work.
Prussian Blue • 6 days ago
11:30 “If the folk had a heart, Fritz was sure it lay in the people he emerged from.”
Thats very eerily similar to Orwell/Winston’s line that the hope lies in the proles.
Prussian Blue • 6 days ago
I’ve seen Brown before I was keen to the JQ. Definite crypto jew.
Prussian Blue • 6 days ago
Fuckin love the intro.
Dr.Shekelstein • 7 days ago • edited
Is that a ballymena accent Dr Joyce hey!
elstein • 7 days ago
“And then one day for absolutely no reason, an Austrian painter began to hate them”.
theboiler • 7 days ago
Don’t worry we don’t think you are a Paul Joseph Watson…
Otternal theboiler • 6 days ago • edited
Beaver: ‘I must build dams’.
New born turtle: ‘I must find an ocean’.
Migratory bird: ‘I must fly south for winter’.
Small hat wearer: ‘I must subvert my host people’.
Earthenware • 7 days ago
I disagree with your point here. You’re the expert of course, but it sounds to me as though Fritsch was trying to create a set of general guidelines which should inform daily decisions. A sort of ethnic US Constitution, if you will.
Fritsch would have been aware of the need for global solutions (which was just as great then as now – Jews were internationally pervasive), so I don’t think it’s accurate to suggest that his emphasis on the individual rather than the global is inappropriate for the modern world.
It’s a bit like saying “your individual actions will always have a minor impact, so concentrate only on the global”. It confuses the micro with the macro, when each is actually equally valid.
Sorry to be picky, I’m a bit autistic 🙂
nopinkcreations • 7 days ago
There is but one solution…
Not_A_Piano_Key • 7 days ago • edited
As a person who loves studying history and has only fairly recently become “woke” to the JQ (“Counter-Kosher,” as I have amusingly heard it called), I really enjoy these historical and biographical streams you do. This is totally (and unsurprisingly) new stuff for me to learn about.
In speaking of history, what are your thoughts on Martin Luther and his book “On the Jews and their Lies?” As a Catholic, I’m sure most of what I have heard and read on Luther is extremely skewed and biased. Many people say he only became anti-Semitic when German Jews refused to become Protestant. I have also heard that, as he was translating the Bible to German, he researched the Talmud and was horrified by what he read. Are they both somewhat true?
Anyway, thanks again for the great content, Dr. Joyce. I sincerely hope Dr. Brown takes you up on that debate. It would be quite entertaining!
Pierre_de_Craon Not_A_Piano_Key • 3 days ago
“As a Catholic, I’m sure most of what I have heard and read on Luther is extremely skewed and biased.”
How Catholic are you, really? I ask because if you had read any formal theology written in the past fifty years or even read any of the hundreds of pseudo- or quasi-academic articles in the soi-disant mainstream Catholic journals over the same period, you would be aware that post-Vatican II, the conciliar establishment’s attitude toward Luther has gone so far from being censorious that at the ceremony marking the 500th anniversary of the posting of the 95 theses on the church door in Wittenberg, Pope Francis declared Luther a great reformer. He described him as an intelligent man who was protesting corruption, worldliness, greed, and lust for power in the church.
The problem within the governing hierarchy of the Catholic Church is not biased hostility to a great reformer but scandalous apostasy from the Faith that they are charged by God with proclaiming and defending.
OccidentalJoyce Not_A_Piano_Key • 6 days ago
I’m very ambivalent about Luther who often turned personal issues into theological or political ones. What you’ve said about him here is accurate. There’s a phenomenon of something I call “insincere antisemitism.” I think it emerges in Luther. I’m going to podcast on the subject at some stage so stay tuned!
Brundlepodfly • 7 days ago • edited
Jews own 50% of Premier League Clubs.
Neal_Kiggers • 7 days ago
6ft of semitic distancing.
Prussian Blue Neal_Kiggers • 6 days ago
Neal_Kiggers • 7 days ago
michael brown is a lying, disgusting scumbag. even some christians call him the Apostle of Obfuscation. i would love to hear that debate if you can make it happen. he thinks being nice to his opponents covers over a multitude of sins and he’ll do his best to avoid addressing the points of contention straight on.
Obtinuit • 7 days ago
Big respect to folk who donated to this highly intelligent man willing to speak truth to power.
hearts-horses • 7 days ago
I found this article about Nietzsche and after listening to this I think that it holds a lot of truth. https://highexistence.com/a… This is the first time I have listened to you and I must say I am very interested in listening to the rest of your work.I have heard of Fritsch but that is because I have been studying the history of the National Socialists and Hitler and this has added to my knowledge base.Thanx
JMasefield • 7 days ago
You are quite right about multicultural society being schizophrenic. Decades ago the feeling was one of ease and rightness and even desiring and then gradually appreciating that feeling of ease was denigrated. It is that feeling of ease when you are amongst your family members compared to with strangers. We are told it is wrong of us not to feel ease amongst strangers, that no one is a stranger and so on. We are definitely psychologically unhealthy.
2020deusvult • 7 days ago
thanks as always for another great episode of talmud and taboo.
I was just wondering if you had seen the bitchute video , “the history of blood libel” and if so what were your thoughts on it..
the work you are doing is incredibly important , I hope that when we are finally free of the curse that lives among us you will be rightfully honoured for your efforts.
OccidentalJoyce 2020deusvult • 7 days ago
I haven’t watched it, but will try to do so later. I’ll let you know what I think.
2020deusvult OccidentalJoyce • 7 days ago
great , thanks for the reply.
katana17 • 7 days ago
I’ve serialized the book in 17 parts beginning here:
THE RIDDLE OF THE JEW’S SUCCESS
OccidentalJoyce katana17 • 7 days ago
Well done. It’s fairly rare online. I don’t think it’s as good as Belloc’s 1922 book but it’s up there.
katana OccidentalJoyce • 6 days ago
Thanks. I liked Fritsch’s Riddle book for how he systematically goes through all the areas of life that jews have a baneful effect on for the typical German. I also have Belloc’s book, so I’ll give that a try.
Off the top of your head, what would be the best books that you would recommend to get a good grasp of the “problem”. It could also make a good topic for a podcast.
OccidentalJoyce katana • 6 days ago
I actually wrote a three part essay for the Occidental Observer a few years ago on this. I think it’s titled “The Jewish Question: Suggested Readings with Commentary.” Hope that helps! For me, Belloc is a personal favorite. I wrote a three part review for Too so maybe read that first as a primer?
DieSchwarzeSonne • 7 days ago
One of the people I was following on Bitchute had his comments Shoahed (Disqus, I assume) and so he moved to LBRY.TV You’re one of those people who I’ll follow wherever they go. Do you have a GAB.AI account?
OccidentalJoyce DieSchwarzeSonne • 7 days ago
I did try Gab when I was first banned from Twitter, but found its interface to be very poor quality. Maybe they’ve improved since then. Unfortunately, one of the problems with Alt Tech is an issue of quality and usability. Everything tends to be slower, clunkier, and less attractive overall. I still think we are waiting for that big alternative to Twitter/Facebook that won’t put us in an echo chamber.
* Total words = 8,046
* Total images = xx
* Total A4 pages = xxx
Click to download a PDF of this post (x.x MB):
Version 7: Nov 15, 2020 — Updated See Also links.
Version 6: Sep 20, 2020 — Updated See Also links and image.
Version 5: Aug 18, 2020 — Added 12 more minutes of transcript. Now 47 mins and text transcript now complete. Added 3 images. Added DISQUS comments.
Version 4: Aug 17, 2020 — Added 10 more minutes of transcript. Now 35 mins complete.
Version 3: Aug 16, 2020 — Added 5 more minutes of transcript. Now 26 mins complete.
Version 2: Aug 16, 2020 — Added 5 more minutes of transcript. Now 21 mins complete.
Version 1: Aug 13, 2020 — Published post. Have done the first 15 minutes of the transcript.