Sunday, August 6, 2017

The Charter of the Protofascist "Regency of Carnaro" of Gabriele D'Annunzio in the Seized City of Fiume

Gabriele D'Annunzio and other Italian nationalists were enraged at the treatment of Italy after the Great War. The Versailles Treaty compounded their humiliation. Fiume, which is today a city in Croatia, was at the time a city peopled with Italians clamoring to return to Italy. In defiance of Britain, France, and America, D'Annunzio, a poet, gathered an army, invaded Fiume, declared himself "Duce," and imposed a protofascist state. The Regency of Carnaro would endure only for a short time, but its brief life would resonate throughout the interwar years and beyond, the first state of its sort to erupt onto the world.

"Who can be against us?"

Outline of a New Constitution for the Free State of Fiume
Quis Contra Nos?
FlUME OF ITALY 27 August, 1920 
The Enduring Will of the People 
Fiume, for centuries a free Commune of ancient Italy, declared her full and complete surrender to the mother-country on October I0, 1918. Her claim is threefold, like the impenetrable armour of Roman legend. 
Fiume is warden of the Italian marches, the furthest stronghold of Italian culture, the most distant land that bears the imprint of Dante. From century to century through all vicissitudes, through strife and anguish, Dante’s Carnaro has done faithful service to Italy. From her as from a centre the spiritual life of Italy has shone forth and still shines forth over shores and islands, from Volosca to Laurana, from Moschiena to Albona, from Veglio to Lussino, from Cherso to Arbe. This is her claim from history.
Fiume, as of old Tarsatica, placed at the southern end of the Liburnian rampart stretches thence along the Julian Alps and is contained entirely within that boundary which science, tradition and history alike confirm as the sacred confines of Italy. This is her claim from position. 
Fiume, with will unwavering and heroic courage, overcoming every attack whether of force or fraud, vindicated her right, two years ago, to choose her own destiny, her own allegiance on the strength of that just principle declared to the world by some of her unjust adversaries themselves. This is her claim founded on Roman right.
In contrast to this threefold claim stands the threefold wrong, iniquity, cupidity, and force to which Italy submits in sorrow, leaving unrecognized and unclaimed the victory that she, herself, has won. Thus it comes to pass that the inhabitants of the free city of Fiume, faithful to their Latin origin and determined to carry out their lawful decision are framing a new model for their constitution to suit the spirit of their new life not intending to limit that constitution to the territory which, under the title ‘corpus separatum’ —was assigned to the crown of Hungary, but offering it as a free alternative to any of those communities of the Adriatic which desire to break through all hindrances and rise to freedom in the name of a new Italy. Thus, in the name of a new Italy, the people of Fiume, taking their stand on justice and on Iiberty, swear that they will fight to the utmost with their whole strength against any attempt to separate their land from the mother-country and that they will defend for ever the mountain boundary of their country assigned to it by God and by Rome.
The Basis 1. The sovereign people of Fiume, in the strength of their unassailable sovereignty, take as the centre of their free State the “corpus separatum”, with all its railways and its harbour. But, as on the west they are determined to maintain contact with the mother-country, so, on the east, they are not prepared to renounce their claim to a frontier more just and more secure than might be assigned to them by the next happening in the give-and-take of politics or by any future treaties which they might be able to conclude with the rural and maritime communes after the proclamation of an open port and of generous statutes.
2. The Italian province of Carnaro is made up of the district of Fiume, of the islands, traditionally Venetian, which have declared by vote that they will share her fortunes; and of any neighbouring communities, which, after making a genuine application for admission, have becn welcomed fraternally and in due legal form.
3, The Italian province of Carnaro is a State chosen by the people which has for basis the power of productive labour and for constitution the widest and most varied forms of autonomy such as were in use during the four centuries of our glorious communal period.
4. The province recognizes and confirms the sovereignty of all citizens without distinction of sex, race, language, class, or religion. But above and beyond every other right she maintains the right of the producer; abolishes or reduces excessive centralization and coinstitutional powers, and subdivides offices and powers: so that by their harmonic, interplay communal life may grow more vigorous and abundant.
5. The province protects, defends, preserves, all popular rights and liberties; insuring international order by justice and discipline, seeks to bring back a time of well—ordered happiness which should bring new life to a people delivered at last from Government of lies and oppression; her constant aim is to raise the status of her citizens and to increase their prosperity; so that the citizenship shall be recognized by foreigners as a title of high honour as as it was in former days under the law of Rome. 
6. All citizens of the State, of both sexes are equal, and feel themselves equal in the eve of the law. The exercise of their constitutional rights can be neither diminished nor suppressed except by public trial and solemn condemnation.
7. Fundamental liberties, freedom of thought and of the Press, the right to hold meetings and to form associations are guaranteed to all citizens by the Constitution. Every form of religion is permitted and respected, and allowed to erect its own places of worship; but no citizen may allege his creed or the rites of his religion as a reason for withdrawing from the fulfilment of duties prescribed by the law. Misuse of statutory liberty, when its purpose is illegal and when it disturbs the public peace may be punished, as provided by the law; but the law must in no way transgress the principle of liberty.
8. The Constitution guarantees to all citizens of both sexes: primary instruction in well-lighted and healthy schools; physical training in open-air gymnasiums, well-equipped; paid work with a fair minimum living wage; assistance in sickness, infirmity, and involuntary unemployment; old age pensions; the enjoyment of property legitimately obtained; inviolability of the home; ‘habeas corpus’; compensation for injuries in case of judicial errors or abuse of power. 
9. The State does not recognize the ownership of property as an absolute and personal right, but regards it as one of the most useful and responsible of social functions. No property can be reserved to anyone in unrestricted ownership; nor can it be permitted that an indolent owner should leave his property unused or should dispose of it badly, to the exclusion of anyone else. The only legitimate title to the possession of the means of production and exchange is labour. Labour alone is the custodian of that which is by far the most fruitful and profitable to the general well-being. 
10. The harbour, station, railway lines comprised in the territory of Fiume are the inalienable and incontestable property of the State in perpetuity. By a statute of the Free Port, the full and free use of the harbour for commerce, industry, and navigation is guaranteed to foreigners as to natives, in perfect equality of good treatment and immunity from exorbitant harbour dues and from any injury to person or goods. 
11. A National Bank of Carnaro under State supervision, is entrusted with the issue of paper money and with all operations concerning credit. A law for this purpose will decide methods and regulations to be followed and will point out the rights, functions, and responsibilities of the banks already in operation in the territory and of those that may be hereafter founded there. 
12. All the citizens of both sexes have the full right to choose and carry on any industry, profession, art, or craft. Industries started or supported by foreign capital and all concessions to foreigners will be regulated by liberal legislation. 
13. Three elements unite to inspire and control the regulation, progress, and growth of the Community: the Citizens; the Corporations; the Communes. 
14. There are three articles of belief which take precedence of all others in the Province and the federated communes: Life is a good thing, it is fit and right that man, reborn to freedom, should lead a life that is noble and serious; a true man is he who, day by day, renews the dedication of his manhood to his fellowmen; labour, however humble and obscure, if well done adds to the beauty of the world. 
The Citizens 15. The following persons have the rank of citizens of Carnaro: all citizens now on the register of the free city of Fiume; all citizens of the federated communes; all persons who have made application for citizenship and who have obtained it by legal decree. 
16. Citizens are invested with all civil and political rights as soon as they reach the age of twenty. Without distinction of sex they become electors and eligible for all careers. 
17. Those citizens shall he deprived of political rights by formal sentence, who are: condemned by the law; defaulters with regard to military service for the defence of the territory; defaulters in the payment of taxes; incorrigible parasites on the community if they are not incapacitated from labour by age or sickness. 
The Corporations 18. The State represents the aspiration and effort of the people, as a community, towards material and spiritual advancement. Those only are full citizens who give their best endeavour to add to the wealth and strength of the State; these truly are one with her in her growth and development. Whatever be the kind of work a man does, whether of hand or brain, art or industry, design or execution, he must he a member of one of the ten Corporations who receive from the commune a general direction as to the scope of their activities, hut are free to develop them in their own way and to decide among themselves as to their mutual duties and responsibilities. 
9. The first Corporation comprises the wage-earners of industry, agriculture and commerce, small artisans, and small landholders who work their own farms, employing little other labour and that only occasionally. The second Corporation includes all members of the technical or managerial staff in any private business, industrial or rural, with the exception of the proprietors or partners in the business. In the third, are united all persons employed in commercial undertakings who are not actually operatives. Here again proprietors are excluded. In the fourth, are associated together all employers engaged in industrial, agricultural, or commercial undertakings, so long as they are not merely owners of the business but — according to the spirit of the new constitution —prudent and sagacious masters of industry. The fifth comprises all public servants, State and Communal employees of every rank. In the sixth are to be found the intellectual section of the people; studious youth and its leaders; teachers in the public schools and students in colleges and polytechnics; sculptors, painters, decorators, architects, musicians, all those who practise the Arts, scenic or ornamental. The seventh includes all persons belonging to the liberal professions who are not included in the former categories. The eighth is made up of the Co-operative Societies of production and consumption, industrial and agricultural, and can only he represented by the self-chosen administrators of the Societies. The ninth comprises all workers on the sea. The tenth has no special trade or register or title. It is reserved for the mysterious forces of progress and adventure. It is a sort of votive offering to the genius of the unknown, to the man of the future, to the hoped-for idealization of daily work, to the liberation of the spirit of man beyond the panting effort and bloody sweat of to-day. It is represented in the civic sanctuary by a kindled lamp bearing an ancient Tuscan inscription of the epoch of the communes, that calls up an ideal vision of human labour: 'Fatica senza fatica.' 
20. Each Corporation is a legal entity and is so recognized by the State. Chooses its own consuls; makes known its decisions in an assembly of its own; dictates its own terms, its own decrees and rules; exercises autonomy under the guidance of its own wisdom and experience; provides for its own needs and for the management of its own funds, collecting from its members a contribution in proportion o their wages, salary business profits, or professional income; defends in every way its own special interest and strives to improve its status; aims at bringing to perfection the technique of its own art or calling; seeks to improve the quality of the work carried out and to raise the standard of excellence and beauty; enrols the humblest workers, endeavoring to encourage them to do the best work; recognizes the duty of mutual help; decides as to pensions for sick and infirm members; chooses for itself symbols, emblems music, songs, and prayers; founds its own rules and ceremonies; assists, as handsomely as it can, in providing enjoyment for the commune for us anniversary fetes, and sports by land and sea; venerates its dead, honours its elders, and celebrates its heroes. 
21. The relations between the Government of the province and the corporations and between the different Corporations are regulated by the methods defined in the statutes which regulate the relations between the central province and the affiliated communes and between the several communes. The members of each Corporation form a free electoral body for choosing representatives on the Council of Governors (Provvisori). The first place in public ceremonies is assigned to the consuls of the Corporations and their banners. 
The Communes 22. The ancient ‘potere normativo’ will be re-established for all communes —the right of making laws subject to the Common Law. They exercise all powers not specially assigned by the Constitution to the judicial, legislative and executive departments of the province. 
23. Each commune has full sanction to draw up its own code of municipal laws, derived from its own special customs, character, and inherited energy and from its new national life. But each commune must apply to the province for ratification of its statutes which the commune will give. When these statutes have been approved, accepted, and voted on by the people they can be amended only by the will of a real majority of the citizens. 
24. The communes have the acknowledged right to make settlements, agreements, and treaties between themselves, administrative and legislative. But they are required to submit them to be examined by the Central Executive Power. If the Central Power considers that such settlements, agreements, or treaties controvert the spirit of the Constitution, it sends them up for final decision to the Court of Administration. If the Court declares them to be illegal and invalid, the Central Executive of the province makes provision for their cancellation. 
25. If order, within a commune, should be disturbed by faction, rebellion, or plot, or by any other form of craft or violence, if the dignity or integrity of a commune should be injured or menaced by the transgression of another, the Executive of the province would intervene as mediator or peace maker, if the communal authorities agreed in requesting it to do so, if a third of the citizens exercising political rights in the commune itself should make the request. 
26. The following functions belong especially to the communes: to provide for primary instruction, according to the regulations laid down by the Central Education Authority; to nominate the communal judges; to appoint and maintain the communal police; to levy taxes; to contract loans within the territory of the province, or even outside it, provided that the sanction of the Central Government shall have been obtained, but this will not be granted except in case of absolute necessity. 
Legislation 27. Two elected bodies will exercise legislative power: the Council of Senators; the Council of 'Provvisori'. 
28. The Senate is elected by means of direct and secret universal suffrage, by all citizens throughout the province, who have attained the age of twenty-one years and have been invested with political rights. Any citizen who has a vote is eligible as a member of the Senate. 
29. Senators remain in office ten years. They are elected in the proportion of one to every thousand electors, but in no case can their number be under thirty. All electors form a single constituency. The election is to be by universal suffrage and proportional representation, 
30. The Senate has authority to make ordinances and laws with reference to the penal and civil code the police, national defence, public secondary instruction, art, relations between the communes and the State. The Senate meets, as a rule, only once a year, in the month of October, for a short definite sitting. 
31 The Council of the Provvisori is composed of sixty delegates, elected by universal secret suffrage and proportional representation. Ten provvisori are elected by industrial workers and agricultural labourers; ten by seamen of all kinds; ten by employers; five by rural and industrial technicians; five by the managerial staffs in private firms; five by the teachers in the public schools, by the students in the higher schools, and by other members of the sixth Corporation; five by the liberal professions; five by public servants; five by Co-operative Societies of production, of labor and of consumption. 
32. The provvisori remain in office two years. They are not eligible unless they belong to the Corporation represented. 
33. The Council of the Provvisori meets usually twice in the year, in the months of May and November, and uses the laconic method of debate. It has authority to make ordinances and laws with reference to the commercial and Maritime code; to the control of labour; to transport; to public works; to treaties of commerce, customs, tariffs, and similar matters; to technical and professional instruction; to industry and banking; to arts and crafts. 
34. The Senate and the Council of Provvisori unite together once a year as a single body on the first of December, as a Grand National Council under the title of Arengo del Carnaro. The Arengo discusses and deliberates on relations with other States; on finance and the Treasury; on the higher studies; on reforms of the constitution; on extensions of liberty. 
The Executive 35, Executive power in the province is exercised by seven ministers elected jointly by the National Assembly, the Senate, and the Council of Provvisori, The Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Minister for Finance and the Treasury, and the Minister of Public Instruction are elected by the National Assembly. The Minister of the Interior and of Justice, the Minister of National Defence are elected by the Senate. The Council of Provvisori elects the Minister of Public Economy and the Minister of Labour. The Minister for Foreign Affairs takes the title Prime Minister and represents the Province in intercourse with other States ‘primus inter pares’. 
36. The seven ministers, once elected, remain in office for their allotted time. They decide everything that does not interfere with current administration. The Prime Minister presides over the discussions and has the deciding vote when the votes are equally balanced. The ministers are elected for a year, and are not re-eligible except once. But, after the interval of one year, they may be nominated again. 
Judiciary Power The Judiciary Power will be held by magistrates. Labour judges, judges of the High Court, judges of the Criminal Court, the Court of Administration. 
38. The magistrates, elected to inspire public confidence, by all the electors of the various communes in proportion to their number, decide all civil and commercial casts under the value of five thousand lire and questions of crime where the penalty of imprisonment does not last more than one year. 
39. The Labour judges decide eases of controversy between employers and workers, whether wage-earners or salaried staff. The Labour judges are grouped in ‘colleges’, the members of each ‘college’ being nominated by one of those Corporations’ which elect the Council of the Provvisori. According to the following scale: two by industrial workers and agricultural labourers; two by all workers connected with the sea; two by employers; one by technical workers, industrial or agricultural; one by the liberal professions; one by members of the administrative staff in private firms; one by public employees; one by teachers, by students of the higher institutes, and by other members of the sixth Corporation; one by the Co-operative Societies of production, of labour and of consumption. The Labour judges have power to divide their colleges into branches in order to render their proceedings more rapid, they are to dispense justice with promptitude, clearness, and expedition. A joint assembly of the branches constitutes a Court of Appeal. 
40. The judges of the High Court adjudicate on all questions civil, commercial, and penal which are not dealt with by the magistrates and the Labour judges except those which are dealt with by the judges of the Criminal Court. The judges of the High Court constitute the Court of Appeal for sentences of magistrates. The judges of the High Court are chosen by the Court of Administration from citizens holding the title of Doctor of Law (LL. D.). 
41. Seven sworn citizens, assisted by two deputies and presided over by a judge of the High Court compose the Criminal Court which tries all crimes of a political nature and all those misdemeanours which would he punished by imprisonment for more than three years. 
42. Elected by the National Council, the Court of Administration is composed of five acting members and two supplementary. Of the acting members, at least three, and of the supplementary members, at least one shall be chosen from Doctors of Law. The Court of Administration deals with: acts and decrees issued by the legislative and executive authorities to ascertain that they are in conformity with the Constitution; any statutory conflict between the legislative and executive authorities, between the province and the communes, between one commune and another, between the province and the Corporations, between the province and private persons, between the communes and the Corporations, between the communes and private individuals; cases of high treason against the province on the part of citizens who hold legislative or executive power; attacks on the rights of the people; civil contests between the province and the communes or between commune and commune; questions regarding the rights of citizenship and naturalization; questions referring to the competence (function) of the various magistrates and judges. The Court of Administration has the ultimate revision of sentences and nominates by vote the judges of the High Court. Citizens who are members of the Court of Administration are forbidden to hold any other office either in that commune or any other. Nor may they carry on any trade or profession during the whole period that they are in office. 
The Commandant 43. When the province is in extreme peril and sees that her safety depends on the will and devotion of one man who is capable of rousing and of leading all the forces of the people in a united and victorious effort, the National Council in solemn conclave in the Arengo may, voting by word of mouth, nominate a Commandant and transmit to him supreme authority without appeal. The Council decides the period, long or short, during which he is to rule not forgetting that in the Roman Republic the dictatorship lasted six months. 
44, During the period of his rule, the Commandant holds all powers —political and military, legislative and executive. The holders of executive power assume the office of commissaries and secretaries under him. 
45. On the expiration of the period of rule, the National Council again assembles and decides: to confirm the Commandant in his office, or else to substitute another citizen in his place, or else to depose him, or even to banish him. 
46. Any citizen holding political rights, whether he have any office in the province or not, may be elected to the supreme office. 
National Defence 47. In the province of Carnaro, all the citizens of both sexes, from seventeen to fifty-five years of age, are liable for military service for the defence of the country. After selection has been made, men in sound health will serve in the forces of land and sea, men who are not so strong and women will serve in ambulances, hospitals, in administration, in ammunition factories, and in any other auxiliary work according to the capacity and skill of each. 
48. State assistance on an ample scale is granted to all citizens who, during military service, have contracted any incurable infirmity, and to their families, if in need. The State adopts the children of all citizens who are killed in defence of their country, assists their families in distress, and commends to the memory of future generations the names of the fallen. 
49. In time of peace and security, the State will not maintain a standing army; but all the nation will remain armed, as prescribed by law, and its forces by land and sea well and duly trained. Strict military service is confined to the period of instruction or to periods when war is either actually being waged or when there is immediate danger of war. During periods of instruction or of war, the citizen will lose none of his civil and political rights; and will be able to exercise them whenever the necessities of active service permit. 
Public Instruction 50. For any race of noble origin, culture is the best of all weapons. For the Adriatic race, harassed for centuries by a ceaseless struggle with an unlettered usurper, culture is more than a weapon; like faith and justice, it is an unconquerable force. For the people of Fiume at the moment of her rebirth to liberty, it becomes the instrument more helpful than any other against the insidious plots that have encircled her for centuries. Culture is the preservative against corruption; the buttress against ruin. In Dante’s Carnaro the culture of the language of Dante is the custodian of that which has ever been reckoned as the most precious treasure of the people, the highest testimony to the nobility of their origin, the chief sign of their moral right of rule. That moral right is what the new State must fight for. On its will to victory is founded the exaltation of the human ideal. The new State, with unity completed, liberty achieved, justice enthroned, must make it her first duty to defend, preserve, and fight for unity, liberty, justice in the spirit of man. The culture of Rome must be here in our midst and the culture of Italy. For this cause the Italian province of Carnaro makes education — the culture of her people — the crown and summit of her Constitution, esteems the treasure of Latin culture as the foundation of her welfare. 
51. The city of Fiume will have a free University, housed in a spacious building, capable of accommodating a great number of students and ruled by its own special ordinances. There will be in the city of Fiume, a School of Painting, a School of Decorative Art, a School of Music free from any legal interference, conducted in a candid and open spirit under the guidance of a judgment acute enough to get rid of the incumbrance of the inefficient, to choose the best students from among the good and to assist the best in the discovery of new possibilities in the rendering of human sentiment. 
52. The secondary schools will be under the supervision of the Senate; the technical and professional schools under that of the Council of the Provvisori; higher education, under that of the National Council. In every school and in every commune the Italian language will have the first place. In secondary schools the teaching of the various dialects spoken in the Italian province of Carnaro will be obligatory. Primary instruction will be given in the language spoken by the majority of the inhabitants of each commune and also in parallel classes in that spoken by the minority. If any commune tries to evade the obligation of providing those double courses of instruction the Central Government of the province reserves its right to provide them at the cost of the commune. 
53. An Educational Council decides upon the nature and method of primary instruction which is compulsory in the schools of all communes. The teaching of choral singing based on the genuine poetry of the people (folk songs) and the teaching of decorative art based on examples of indigenous popular art will hold a first place. The Council will consist of: a representative of each commune two representatives of secondary schools; two, of technical and professional schools; two, of institutions of higher education (to he elected by professors and students); two, by the Schools of Music two, by the School of Decorative Art. 
54. Schools, well lighted and ventilated, must not have on their walls any emblems of religion or of political parties. The public schools welcome the followers of every religious profession, the believers in every creed and those, too, who are able to live without an altar and without a God. Liberty of conscience receives entire respect. Each one may offer up his silent prayers. But there will be inscribed on the walls inspiring words that, like an heroic symphony, will never lose their power to raise and animate the soul. And there will be representations of those masterpieces of the painter’s art which interpret most nobly the endless longings and aspirations of mankind. 
Reforms of the Constitutions 55. Every seven years the Great National Council will meet in a special conference to consider constitutional reforms. But the Constitution can be altered at anytime, when a third of the citizens electors make a request for the alteration. The following bodies have the right to propose amendments of the Constitution: the members of the National Council; the representatives of the communes; the Court of Administration; the Corporations. 
The Right of Initiative 56. All citizens belonging to electoral bodies have the right of initiating legislative proposals with regard to questions which fall within the sphere of action of one or other Council; but the initiative will not take effect unless at least one-fourth of the electors of the Council in question are unanimous moving and supporting it. 
'The Power of Appeal 57. All laws that have received the sanction of the two legislative bodies may be subjected to public reconsideration with the possibility of repeal provided that such reconsideration be asked for by a number of electors equal to at least a fourth of the enfranchised citizens, 
The Right of Petition 58. All citizens have the right of petition towards those bodies which they have helped to elect. 
Reduplication of Offices 59. No citizen may fill more than one official post nor take part in two legislative bodies at the same time. 
Recall 60. Any official appointment may be revoked: when the official in question loses his political rights through a sentence confirmed by the Court of Law; when the decree of revocation is voted for by more than half of the members of the electoral body. 
Responsibility 61. All holders of power and all public officials of the province are legally responsible for any injury caused to State, commune, Corporation, or single citizen by any transgression of theirs, whether through misdoing, carelessness, cowardice, or inaccuracy. 
Remuneration 62. All public officials, enumerated in the Statutes and appointed in the new Constitution, will receive suitable remuneration, in accordance with the decision of the National Council annually revised. 
The Aediles 63. There will be in the province a College of Aediles, wisely selected from men of taste, skill, and a liberal education. This ‘College’ will be a revival not so much of the Roman Aediles, as of the Office for the adornment of the City’ which, in our fourteenth century, arranged a new road or a new piazza with the same sense of rhythm and proportion which guided them in the conduct of a Republican triumph or a carnival display. It will provide for the decorum of life; secure the safety, decency, sanitation of public edifices, and private dwellings; prevent the disfigurement of roads by awkward or ill-placed buildings; enliven civic festivals by sea and land with graceful ornament, recalling our forefathers for whom the glory of the sunshine and a few fair garlands of flowers with human beauty of pageant and motion sufficed to frame a miracle of joy; convince the workers that to add beauty, some sign of joy in the building, to the humblest habitation is an act of piety, that a sense of religion, of human mystery, of the profundity of Nature may be passed on from generation to generation in the simplest symbol carved or painted on the kneading trough or the cradle, on the loom or the distaff, on the linen chest or the cottage beam; it will try to reawaken in our people the love of beautiful line and colour in the things that are used in their daily life, showing them how much, in the old days, could be achieved be achieved by a slight geometrical design, by a star, a flower, a heart, a serpent or a dove on a pitcher or oil jar or jug, on a bench or chest or platter; it will serve to show our people how the ancient spirit of communal liberty manifested itself even in the utensils that received the imprint of man’s life; finally, convinced that a people cannot attain to strength and nobility without noble architecture it will endeavour to make modern architects realize that the new materials — iron and glass and concrete — must be raised to the level of harmonious life by the invention of a new architecture. 
Music 64. In the Italian province of Carnaro, music is a social and religious institution. Once in a thousand or two thousand years music springs from the soul of a people and flows on for ever. A noble race is not one that creates a God in its own image but one that creates also the song wherewith to do Him homage. Every rebirth of a noble race is a lyric force, every sentiment that is common to the whole race, a potential lyric; music, the language of ritual, has power, above all else, to exalt the achievement and the life of man. Does it not seem that great music has power to bring spiritual peace to the strained and anxious multitude? The reign of the human spirit is not yet. ‘When matter acting on matter shall be able to replace man’s physical strength, then will the spirit of man begin to see the dawn of libertv’: so said a man of Dalmatia of our own Adriatic, the blind seer of Sebenico. As cock-crow heralds the dawn, so music is the herald of the soul’s awakening. Meanwhile, in the instruments of labour, of profit, and of sport, in the noisy machines which, even they, fall into a poetical rhythm, music can find her motives and her harmonies. In the pauses of music is heard the silence of the tenth corporation. 
65. In every commune of the province there will be a choral society and an orchestra subsidized by the State. In the city of Fiume, the College of Aediles will be commissioned to erect a great concert hall, accommodating an audience of at least ten thousand with tiers of seats and ample space for choir and orchestra. The great orchestral and choral~ celebrations will be entirely free — in the language of the Church — a gift of God. 

Friday, August 4, 2017

The Right Wing '6 February 1934 crisis' in Paris

On 6 February, 1934, right wing groups organized a riot on the Place de la Concorde. Over a dozen rioters were killed by police in what leftists claimed was an attempt at a fascist coup d'état. The rioters attempted to dislodge the radical leftist and socialist Cartel des Gauches coalition then in power. I reproduce a piece on online historical writing below; it offers insights on the event and calls into question a few orthodox historical views.

Right wing rioters clashing with police in the streets of Paris, France,
on 6 February 1934; the left wing government resigned the next day,
but unfortunately a conservative, not fascist, government followed.

The significance of speculation about the extent to which the riot was genuinely fascist and prospects for success has implications for World War II revisionism. Had it succeeded and had the regime it would have spawned endured, it is unlikely that a quasifascist France would have entered into an alliance with the USSR or backed a British war guarantee to Poland, meaning that an Anglo-German war would have been unlikely. In this sense, this episode of French history was more pivotal than Marine Le Pen's recent loss.

From 'French History Online':

'6 February 1934, French fascists topple government'

As today is the 80th anniversary of the riots of 6 February 1934, I thought I’d post something on this event that redefined French interwar politics. On that night, extreme right-wing activists and war veterans descended on central Paris to protest about the alleged corruption of the ruling centre-left government. The demonstration soon turned violent. Thirteen rioters were killed and hundreds were injured as police fought off repeated attempts to storm the French parliament. The following day, the government resigned. Street violence had successfully removed the elected administration.

In 1941, French author Robert Brasillach looked back on the night of 6 February 1934 with fondness:
‘For us, we did not have to repudiate the 6 février. Every year we went to place violets on the Place de la Concorde, in front of this fountain that had become a cenotaph, in memory of the twenty-three dead. Each year the crowd diminished, because French patriots are forgetful by nature. Only the revolutionaries understood the meaning of the myths and the ceremonies. But if the 6 February was a malicious intrigue, it was a night of sacrifices, which remains in our memory with its odour, its cold wind, its pale common faces, its groups of humans on the pavement, its invincible hope for a National Revolution, the very birth of social nationalism in our country. What does it matter if, later, everything was exploited, by the right and the left, of this burning fire, of these dead who were pure. One cannot prevent from being what has been. (from Notre avant-guerre [1941])
Historians have spilled much ink over the intentions of the rioters on the night of 6 February 1934. The debate is split along the lines of what is called the ‘immunity thesis’ debate (a term coined by French political scientist Michel Dobry). The immunity thesis pertains to France’s alleged ‘allergy’ to fascism. Developed in the 1950s and 1960s, under the influence of the resistance-centric history of the Vichy years and the totalitarian model that sought to compare fascist and communist regimes in order to discredit the latter, the immunity thesis has proved robust. Defence of the immunity thesis most often entails reference to a political culture founded upon the long implantation of democracy in France. Immunity thesis historians argue that certain groups spread their values and ideas to a diverse set of social formations, especially the middle classes, and so oriented them towards democracy. One such group, the mouvement ancien combattant, was essential to the edification and maintenance of this democratic culture. Veteran anti-parliamentarianism therefore expressed a legitimate dissatisfaction with a regime that no longer functioned, rather than a desire for fascist government. The associations’ true convictions lay in their ideas on a democratic reform of the state.

In recent years, a largely Anglophone group of historians (Dobry being a notable exception) has challenged the French orthodoxy on fascism. The anti-immunity thesis school stresses that fascism was a significant force in France on the level of ideas and political movements. Moreover, the argument for the existence of a common political culture is problematic. However widely a group may publicise its doctrine or ideology, the internalisation of such a culture on an individual level, that is to say for ‘ordinary’ citizens, is subjective. Each person has prejudices and preconceptions that would make them more or less receptive to one idea or another. One cannot credit a whole nation with the same fundamental political values.

As for the riot of 6 February 1934, some French historians argue that the failure of the rioters to install a fascist regime attested to the democratically minded French people’s rejection of fascism and their ‘immunity’ to the doctrine. For René Rémond the events of 6 February were little more than a protest that went wrong. Had the night not turned to tragedy, it would have been quickly forgotten. Serge Berstein claims that the lack of co-ordination between the nationalist leagues and the absence of a plan to invade the Chamber prove that the riot was not an attempted coup. The heterogeneity of the six février groups underlines the disjointed nature of the protest. Pierre Pellissier suggests that the rioters in no way threatened the Republic as the failed insurrection did not follow the ‘strict rules’ of past revolts, such as Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte’s coup of 2 December 1851. A successful coup requires the utmost secrecy in preparation, the selection of one supreme leader and the use of arms or the threat of armed action. The action failed in February 1934 as agitation throughout January alerted the authorities to trouble, no group would submit to the leader of another, and arms were not employed.

Brian Jenkins has specifically questioned the immunity thesis as applied to 6 February. Firstly, immunity thesis historians mistakenly equate a fascist takeover with a violent coup. This was neither true in the case of the Nazis in Germany nor the Italian fascists. Secondly, despite Berstein’s judgement on the alleged heterogeneous nature of the groups, Jenkins writes that the organisations that took part on the night shared common ideas and an anti-democratic attitude. Their memberships often overlapped and were largely drawn from the same social groups. Thirdly, there is evidence that despite the apparently disparate nature of rioting groups, a collective mood took hold as the evening progressed. Witness statements do give some indication of a common feeling among protesters. Finally, an argument that uses the outcome of events to presume the intentions of actors is dubious. In short, the failure of rioters to enter the Chamber does not prove that no such intentions existed. Moreover, the disappointment of the extreme right on one night should not neutralise the threat that it posed during the decade. In France, extra-parliamentary movements like the Croix de Feu grew while parliament gradually gave way to a government reliant on decree powers.

Admittedly, there is a lack of documentation to prove that an alliance between the various rioting groups existed. No blueprint for the overthrow the Republic has been found. Immunity thesis historians cite this shortage of evidence in their argument. However, in reference to the French penal code Marcel Le Clère argues that a plot did exist. Though it is largely futile to re-classify the riot as a plot largely based on a legal technicality, as Le Clère does, he makes several valid points. The leagues had co-operated throughout January. Activists of the Action Française (AF) and the Fédération nationale des contribuables worked together on 9 January, as did members of the Je4nesses Patriotes (JP) and the Solidarité Française on 11 January. On 23 January, the call to demonstrate saw the names of the AF, the JP and the Contribuables on the same poster. On 6 February, the arranged meeting time for each group would see them converge on the Place de la Concorde, over the river Seine from the French parliament building, between 8 and 9pm. Le Clère concludes that this synchronisation shows a devised plan and an evident entente among the groups.

Whatever the case, the riot witnessed collaboration between individuals of different groups. Town councillors Charles des Isnards and Puymaigre joined the marches of the JP and the Croix de Feu respectively. Prominent members of several groups were in regular contact and had met before the riot. The Parisian municipal council included veterans’ leaders Georges Lebecq and Jean Ferrandi. JP leader Pierre Taittinger was also a member of the council and a deputy in the Seine. His name appeared alongside veteran leader Jean Goy’s and twenty-eight other deputies at the bottom of an open letter of protest to interior minister Eugène Frot. This was turned into a poster and stuck up around Paris on the night of 5 February.

Collusion on the night should not be discounted simply because it was not ‘total’. Thus whether or not a plan existed does not mean that the riot did not undermine the Republic, which six years later gave way to an authoritarian regime. Even if their action was apparently uncoordinated the organisations nevertheless secured the eviction from power of an elected left-wing government. The riot of February 1934 is therefore best viewed as part of a longer process of political radicalisation that destabilised the democratic regime in the years preceding the defeat of 1940.


Numerous works were consulted for this post. There are several works in French on the 6 February 1934. The most influential, particularly for the immunity thesis, is Serge Berstein, 6 février (Paris 1975). See also Maurice Chavardès, Une campagneand Le 6 février: La République en danger (Paris: Calmann-Lévy, 1966). Pierre Pellissier’s 6 février (Paris: Perrin, 2000) offers a detailed if rather dramatic account of the events. For a ‘dissenting’ interpretation in French see Marcel Le Clère, 6 février and Michel Dobry, ‘Février 1934’ (or ‘February 1934’). Books in English are lacking. The fullest treatment is that of Brian Jenkins, ‘The Paris riots of February 1934: The crisis of the Third French Republic’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of London, LSE, 1979). See Jenkins’ historiographical article, ‘The six février 1934 and the ‘survival’ of the French Republic’, French History, 20 (2006), pp. 333-351 and Chris Millington ‘February 6, 1934: The veterans’ riot’, French Historical Studies (2010). Works written at the time include Laurent Bonnevay, Les journées sanglantes de février 1934: pages d’histoire (Paris: Flammarion, 1935) and Philippe Henriot, Le 6 février (Paris: Flammarion, 1934). See also the collection of essays in Le mythe de l’allergie française au fascisme especially Dobry, ‘La thèse immunitaire’; William D. Irvine, ‘Fascism in France: The strange case of the Croix de Feu’, Journal of Modern History, 63 (1991), 271-295; Kevin Passmore, From liberalism to fascism: The right in a French province, 1928-1939 (Cambridge: CUP, 1997); Robert Soucy, ‘French fascism and the Croix de Feu: A dissenting interpretation’, Journal of Contemporary History 26 (1991), pp. 159-188; and French Fascism: The Second Wave (1995).

Wednesday, August 2, 2017

A Remark on Hitler in the Fullness of the German Folk

"I have never met a happier people than the Germans and Hitler is one of the greatest men. The old trust him; the young idolise him. It is the worship of a national hero who has saved his country."

- David Lloyd George, from the Daily Express, on 17 September 1936

Tuesday, August 1, 2017

A Quote from D'Annunzio on the Creation of One's Life

"You must create your life, as you’d create a work of art." 
- Gabrielle D'Annunzio, founder of the protofascist Italian Regency of Carnaro in the seized city of Fiume, in 'Il Piacere'

Sunday, July 30, 2017

A Prescient Quote from Goethe and Sir Mosley in a Speech

"Remember to live."
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe 
Image: Sir Oswald Mosley, "The greatest comet of British politics in the twentieth century" in the words of A.J.P. Taylor, in a speech

Wednesday, July 26, 2017

A Quote from Hitler on Boundaries in Nature

"Thus men without exception wander about in the garden of nature; they imagine that they know practically everything and yet with few exceptions pass blindly by one of the most patent principle's of nature's rule: the inner segregation of the species of all living beings on this Earth." 
- Adolf Hitler, 'Mein Kampf' 

Monday, July 24, 2017

A Quote from Szálasi on the Agony of the Truth

"The reason why people believe lies so easily, is because they don't want to fight for another ideology and they don't want to suffer to find the truth." 
- Ferenc Szálasi, leader of the Arrow Cross party of Hungary 
Image: Szálasi, after the war, observing the ruin around him

Saturday, July 22, 2017

A Quote from Szálasi on the Hypocrisy of Peacemakers

"Those who start a war to make peace, are just like the apostle who kills off his followers, so they can join the beauty of afterlife." 
- Ferenc Szálasi 
Image: Szálasi in meeting with fellow members of the National-Socialist party, the Arrow Cross; the Arrow Cross gained and held power from Oct. 1944 to May 1945, in Hungary, under the title, the Government of National Unity.

Sunday, July 16, 2017

Victors Write History: Joachim Peiper on the Past

"History is always written by the victor, and the histories of the losing parties belong to the shrinking circles of those who were there." 
- Joachim Peiper, field officer in the Waffen SS 
Image: Members 'Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler' at Königsplatz in Munich

Friday, July 14, 2017

Codreanu on the Virtue of Silence and the Oratory of Deeds

"The law of silence: Speak little. Say only what you must. Speak only when necessary. Your oratory should be deeds, not words. You accomplish: let others talk." 
- Corneliu Codreanu, 'The Nest Leader's Manual'

Thursday, July 13, 2017

A Quote of Sir Mosley on Fascist Resistance to Communism

"Governments and Parties which have relied on the normal instruments of government... have fallen easy and ignoble victims to the forces of anarchy. If, therefore, such a situation arises in Britain, we shall prepare to meet the anarchy of Communism with the organised force of Fascism."  
- Sir Oswald Mosley, 'The Greater Britain'  
Image: Blackshirts at their Chelsea headquarters

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

A Quote of Sir Mosley on Lost Prospects for Fascist Unity

"We were sometimes suspected of being organised in a fascist International. On the contrary, we were much too national; the view of history may well be that we were not nearly international enough. There were sporadic meetings between leaders, and occasional holiday parties touring each other's countries, but no form of systematical organisation... More, not less, should in my view have been done to surmount these differences for the purpose of preserving peace." 
- Oswald Mosley, 'My Life' 
Image: A symbol of past efforts toward fascist unity; Unity Mitford, wearing her Blackshirt uniform, meeting Fritz Stadelmann, a Hitler adjutant.

Monday, July 10, 2017

A Quote from Céline on Experience

"Experience is a dim lamp, which only lights the one who bears it." 
- Louis-Ferdinand Céline, from a 1960 interview

Sunday, June 18, 2017

A Quote from Mussolini on Time and Blood

"Blood alone moves the wheels of history." 
- Benito Mussolini, speech at Parma, in 1914

Wednesday, April 12, 2017

"The Empire of the Shopkeepers," by Julius Evola: Remarks on it and a Defense of the British Empire's Native Origins

Evola's piece is reprinted beneath my remarks; I disagree with him that the British Empire was a creature of Jewish influence and manipulation. Like the US, which was European in its origins, the British Empire succumbed to Jewish influence and was transformed.

Julius Evola (1898-1974), traditionalist visionary.

Before providing Evola's piece, I want to offer my own perspective on the British Empire. It is an historical viewpoint that distinguishes me as much from some of my political fellows as it does from Evola. In 1066, William the Conquerer brought with him the first Jewish settlers to the British Isles. For two centuries, the inevitable tensions that result from Jewish insertion of self into a host accumulated, resulting in King Edward I issuing his famous edict that Jews were expelled from Britain in 1290. In 1657, almost four hundred years on, Oliver Cromwell allowed the Jews to return. Two historical contingencies were decisive for Britain.

Evola argues that the decision to permit the Jews to return to Britain led to the creation of an Empire that was a "travesty and a contradiction of a real Empire." In Evola's view, an Empire is built on "heroic, aristocratic and spiritual values." British martial and other qualities, Evola claims, were corrupted by Jewish elements that had been permitted to return. He observes that Jews had been expelled in 1290 and were allowed to return in 1649, and that after they returned, they began to undermine traditional life. He argues that this led to the primacy of commercial interests as the British Empire expanded and as it grew economically.[1]

Evola's belief that the British Empire became an instrument of Jewish interests is accurate, but his claim that the British Empire as a whole was a Jewish construct is not. It was in the period of the late 15th and early 16th centuries that the British Empire had its origins. From this period of exploration and expansion through 1657, when Cromwell permitted the Jews to return, there was no direct Jewish influence on the early growth of the British Empire. By the time Jews were again a force in British politics, an Empire was forged through the effort and struggle of native Britons. Native Britons, not Jews, founded the British Empire.

Evola is correct in claiming that Benjamin Disraeli, a Jewish Prime Minister, had solidified the Jewification of the British Empire. But by the early twentieth century, it was the process of Jewification that had made possible Disraeli's tenure. Native British nationalists, such as Sir Oswald Mosley, understood that the British Empire was primordially ethnic British in its origins. The British Union of Fascists aimed, among other things, at returning the Empire to its role as the handiwork of native Britons. Sir Mosley's movement aspired to use the Empire to enrich the native peoples of Britain, and end it as an instrument of Jewish policy.[2]

Disraeli the Jew and the Empire of the Shopkeepers
Julius Evola [3]

In a short article published in this journal during the period of the sanctions (November 1935), we tried to explain the nature of the ‘British Empire’ from the point of view of the typology of forms of civilisation.

On that occasion, we showed that it is nothing but a travesty and a contradiction of a real Empire. An Empire worthy of the name is a supra-national organisation based upon heroic, aristocratic, and spiritual values. There is nothing of this sort in the ‘British Empire’. All normal hierarchical relations are on the contrary subjected to a veritable inversion. England possesses a monarchy, an almost feudal nobility, and a military caste which, at least up until very recent years, showed remarkable qualities of character and of sang-froid. But all this is mere appearance. The real centre of the ‘Empire’ is elsewhere; it is, if we may put it this way, within the caste of merchants in the most general sense, of which the modern forms are plutocratic oligarchy, finance, and industrial and commercial monopoly. The ‘Shopkeeper’ is the veritable master of Britain; the unscrupulous and cynical spirit of the merchant, his economic interests, his desire to gain possession to the greatest possible extent of all the world’s riches, these are the bases of English ‘Imperial’ politics, and the real driving forces of English life, beneath the monarchical, conservative appearances.

We know that, wherever economic interests predominate, the Jew rapidly rises and accedes to the commanding positions. The penetration of Judaism into England is not a thing of recent days alone. It was the English Revolution and Protestantism which threw open England’s doors. The Jews, who had been expelled by Edward I in 1290, were readmitted to England as a result of a Petition accepted by Cromwell and finally approved by Charles II in 1649. From this time forward, the Jews, and above all the Spanish Jews (the Sephardim) began to immigrate en masse to England, bringing with them the riches which they had acquired by more or less dubious means, and it was these riches, as we have just explained, which allowed them to accede to the centres of command within English life, to the aristocracy and to positions very close to the Crown. Less than a century after their re-admission, the Jews were so sure of themselves that they demanded to be naturalised, that is to say, to be granted British citizenship. This had a very interesting result: the Law, or Bill, naturalising the Jews was approved in 1740. Most of its supporters were members of the upper classes or high dignitaries within the Protestant Church, which shows us the extent to which these elements had already become Judaised or corrupted by Jewish gold. The reaction came not from the English upper classes, but from the people. The Law of 1740 provoked such outrage and disorder among the populace that it was abrogated in 1753.

The Jews now resorted to another tactic: they abandoned their synagogues and converted, nominally, to Christianity. Thus the obstacle was circumvented and their work of penetration proceeded at an accelerated pace. What mattered to the Jews was to keep their positions of command and to eliminate the religious arguments on which the opposition of that period principally rested; everything else was secondary, since the converted Jew remains, in his instincts, his mentality, and his manner of action, entirely Jewish, as is shown by one striking example among many others: the extremely influential Jewish banker Sampson Gideon, despite having converted, continued to support the Jewish community and was buried in a Jewish cemetery. His money bought for his son an enormous property and the title of Baronet.

This was the preferred tactic of the rich Jews of England from the eighteenth century on: they supplanted the English feudal nobility by acquiring their properties and titles, and thus mixing themselves with the aristocracy, by the nature of the British representative system, they came closer and closer to the government, with the natural consequence of a progressive Judaification of the English political mentality.

In addition, from 1745 to 1749, Sampson Gideon financed the British government from capital which he had multiplied in a dubious manner: by speculating on the Seven Years’ War, more or less as Rothschild did when he made a killing on stocks while only he knew from his own agents the outcome of the battle of Waterloo.

At the same time, in order to increase their influence, the Jews systematically allied themselves to the nobility; the fact that in 1772 it was felt to be necessary to prevent the marriage of members of the British royal family to Jews by means of the Royal Marriages Act, should give us some idea of extent of the Jewish penetration.

By these two means there was brought about a convergence of interests which became more and more apparent between British imperialism and British capitalism, which was itself tied by more and more indissoluble and complex knots to Jewish capitalism.

Yet, from the inception of imperialism on the large scale, what was less apparent was that the ‘British Empire’ was a creature of Judaism, which a Jew had given as a present to the British Royal Crown.

This Jew was Benjamin Disraeli, Queen Victoria’s Prime Minister, ennobled under the title Lord Beaconsfield. This development was remarkably interesting. Until that time, it had occurred to no-one to associate with the dignity of Empire an idea of riches like that which attaches to colonial possessions. Even after the Ghibelline Middle Ages, all traditional spirits would have seen this as a real extravagance and a caricature, since the Imperial idea had always had a sacred aura connected to a higher function of domination and civilisation and to a right which was in a certain sense transcendent. Only one Jew could have conceived the idea of ‘reforming’ the conception of Empire and making of it something plutocratic and transforming it into imperialistic materialism. This Jew was Disraeli – ‘Dizzy’ as he was known. It was he who made of Queen Victoria an ‘Empress’, a colonial Empress, the Empress of India. This indefatigable proponent of the English ‘Imperial’ idea modelled his conception upon the Jewish Messianic-imperial idea, the idea of a people whose power consists in the riches of others, over which they take power, and which they cynically exploit and control. Disraeli always attacked very violently those who wished to separate England from her overseas territories, within which, as a Jewish historian has pointed out, Jews were the pioneers. Disraeli knew who it was that sustained this England which in turn was to dominate the riches of the world; it is possible that he was among those initiates who knew that it was more than a simple British-Jewish plutocracy which was pulling the strings. One recalls those often-quoted words of Disraeli: ‘The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.’

‘What an actor the man is! And yet, the first impression that he gives us is of absolute sincerity. Some think of him as a foreigner. Does England belong to him, or does he belong to England? Is he conservative or liberal? All this doubtless matters not at all to him. The power of Venice, the imperial republic on which the sun never set, this is the vision that fascinates him. England is the Israel of his imagination and if fortune is with him he will be the Prime Minister of the Empire.’

The critic who wrote these words of Disraeli, when he was merely the leader of the Conservative Party, showed himself thereby to have been possessed of a genuine prophetic spirit. His words capture the true spirit of ‘Dizzy’ in action. The reference to Venice, in material terms, derives from the fact that Disraeli’s family, originally from Cento, near Ferrara, had sought its fortunes in Venice before setting off for England; it was also because of his family that Dizzy would have recalled the ‘imperial’ Venetian idea, to the level of which, in strict connection with the Jewish idea, he wished to raise England. There also was found the ‘imperial’ idea of the merchant, of the power of a bourgeois oligarchy built upon gold, commerce, overseas possessions, and trade. All others would serve as means and instruments to this end. But to realise this ‘Venetian’ ideal, given that Venice itself was at least nominally a free republic, it was necessary to rob England of whatever in her organisation had retained the ancient traditional spirit. Here we have another characteristic feature of Disraeli’s activity.

We cannot provide here a profound exposé of the party-political conflicts of England in Disraeli’s time. However, most of our readers will know of the battles between the Tories, the partisans of the monarch, conservative and mostly Catholic, and the Whigs, a Lutheran aristocracy jealous of its independence and favourable to new liberal ideas. Disraeli’s master-stroke was to by-pass to some extent this opposition by becoming the leader of a new party, to be called, in a restricted sense, ‘Conservative’, which would become a powerful enough instrument for the application of his ideas to neutralise whatever was still good in each of these parties by means of the assistance offered by the other. To put this differently, in Disraeli’s ‘Conservative Party’, the true conservatives became liberals and the liberals, conversely, became at least to some extent conservatives, since it was easy to show them by means of the utilitarian ideas which they already possessed that their interests and those of their adversaries coincided. Having thus realised, with his new party, the ‘quid medium’, Disraeli turned England into a simple oligarchical republic. His ‘Conservative Party’ was in reality a sort of clique, held together by common class interests but divided internally, seized with liberalism, and utterly lacking in ideals. Naturally, Jewish and Masonic influences predominated in it.

It seems nevertheless that Disraeli saw even further than this. This becomes apparent from his novel cycle, The New England. Sybil, or The Two Nations reflects exactly the ideological tactic which Freemasonry had already employed to prepare the French Revolution. Disraeli does not conceal his enthusiasm for the lower classes of society, stating that it is they who will create the future when they are guided by their natural leaders, a new enlightened elite which will have surmounted the prejudices of the past. Such ideas enthused the younger generation of the English nobility, which dreamed of playing this leading rôle of new ‘enlightened’ aristocrats, thereby digging their own grave. In the other novel of the same cycle, Coningsby, the central character is a mysterious Jew of Spanish origin, Sidonia – ‘a mixture of Disraeli and Rothschild, or rather, of what Disraeli would have liked to be and what he would have liked Rothschild to be’ (Maurois). This Sidonia transmits to Coningsby, the symbol of the new England, the doctrine of ‘heroic ambition’; here, again, we find the pseudo-conservative ideal of Disraeli. Sidonia’s solution is a government with conservative ideas but liberal practices. In the final analysis, once the English Tory aristocracy had become liberal, and its ideas had become no more than simple ‘principles’ without practical consequences, all that remained was to flatter their ambitions, in order that they should play the rôle of ‘leaders of the people’ – destined, naturally, to be made victims of in the subsequent phase of the subversion, just as had happened to the French aristocrats who had cherished such new ideas. On this subject, in addition to what we find exposed in these books, we should note that it was Disraeli who introduced universal suffrage into Britain, at least in the rudimentary form of the suffrage of all property-owning heads of households, which he skilfully presented as a compromise acceptable to Tories as well as Whigs. But the destructive labours of Disraeli did not confine themselves to politics; they extended also to the domain of religion. It is here that the Jew simply throws away his mask. It was necessary for him to undermine the elements of English society in their most interior foundation, which was the Christian religion, and, above all, the Catholic religion. To this end, Disraeli propounded his famous theory of the convergence and reciprocal integration of Judaism and Catholicism. Here is what he wrote in Sybil: ‘Christianity without Judaism is incomprehensible, in the same way that Judaism without Catholicism is incomplete.’ In Tancred he adds to this, claiming that the task of the Church is to defend, in a materialistic society, the fundamental principles, of Jewish origin, which are found in the two Testaments. This thesis was so extreme that Carlyle declared the ‘Jewish insolence’ of ‘Dizzy’ insupportable, and asked, ‘For how much longer shall John Bull allow this absurd monkey to dance upon his stomach?’

But in the matter of Judaism, Disraeli, who, because he had been baptised, declared himself to be a Christian, was both intransigent and ready for anything. By any and every means, without caring about possible scandal, he maintained the thesis of the alliance between the ‘conservatives’, now weakened in the manner we have discussed, and the Jews. To persecute the Jews would be the gravest error possible for the conservative party to commit, because it would turn them into chiefs of the revolutionary movements. There was also the moral question. ‘You teach your children the history of the Jews’, said Disraeli in his famous speech to the House of Commons, ‘and on your holy days you read at the tops of your voices the exploits of the Jews; on Sundays, if you wish to sing the praises of the Most High or to console yourselves in your misfortunes, you search among the songs of the Jewish poets for an expression of your feelings. In exact proportion to the sincerity of your faith you must accomplish this great act of natural justice . . . as a Christian (?) I will not take the terrible responsibility of excluding those who follow the religion in which my Lord and Saviour was born.’

He could have gone no further in impudence. In fact, this declaration caused a scandal among the ‘conservatives’, but one without consequences. The prudent and noiseless penetration of Jewry into the English upper classes and into the government itself continued. It was Disraeli who performed the coup upon Egypt in 1875 – with whose help? Rothschild. In 1875, the Khedive had financial worries and Disraeli managed to learn that he was willing to sell 177,000 shares of Suez Canal stock. This was a magnificent opportunity to gain certain control of the route to the Indies. The government hesitated. Rothschild did not. Here is the record of the historic conversation between Disraeli and Rothschild (Disraeli had asked him for four million pounds sterling): ‘What guarantee can you offer me?’ ‘The British government.’ ‘You shall have five million tomorrow.’ The interest on the loan was ‘extremely low’; naturally, the real and important interest of the Jewish clique lay on another and less visible plane . . .

Disraeli did not fail to make more convenient to the Jews of England their ritual observance. A little-known fact is that the ‘English Saturday’ is nothing other than the Jewish Sabbath, the ritual day of rest of the Jews. It was suitably Disraeli who introduced it to England, under an adequate social pretext.

Thus, as the Judaification of old feudal England was accomplished by diverse means, and as the old aristocracy gradually decomposed and underwent inoculation with ideas which would make it an easy prey for the material and spiritual influences of Judaism and Freemasonry, Disraeli did not forget his other task, that of augmenting and reinforcing the power of the new ‘Empire of Shopkeepers’, the new ‘Imperial Venice’, the reborn Israel of the Promise. This he did in a manner which was just as characteristically Jewish. Disraeli was one of the principal instigators of that sad and cynical English foreign policy by means of ‘protected’ third parties and the use of blackmail, which it pushes to the most extreme consequences. The most striking case is that of the Russo-Turkish War. Disraeli did not hesitate to betray the ancient cause of European solidarity, by placing Turkey under British protection. Turkey, defeated, was saved by Britain; by use of the well-known ‘English’ method of threats and sanctions, Disraeli was able to paralyse the Slavic advance to the South without a single shot being fired, and a grateful Turkey made him a present of Cyprus. At the Congress of Berlin, the Russian ambassador, Gortshakov, was unable to restrain himself from crying dolorously: ‘To have sacrificed a hundred thousand soldiers and a hundred million of money, and for nothing!’ * There is a factor even more serious, from a higher point of view. By virtue of this situation, brought about by Disraeli, Turkey was admitted into the community of the European nations protected by so-called ‘International Justice’. We say ‘so-called’ because, until that time, far from being held to be valid for all the peoples of the world, this justice was held to be valid uniquely among the group of the European nations; it was a form of recourse and of internal law for Europeans. With the admission of Turkey, a new phase of international law began, and this was truly the phase in which ‘justice’ became a mask and its ‘international’ character became a ruse of ‘democracy’, for it was simply an instrument in the service of Anglo-Jewry, and subsequently of the French also. This development led to the League of Nations, to crisis, and to actual war.

The last years of Disraeli’s life were nevertheless agitated ones. The misdeeds of the plutocracy and the pseudo-conservative cliques began to be felt when they brought about a general financial crisis, agricultural and even colonial, in the Empire of which Disraeli had dreamed and which had become a reality: there followed the Afghan Revolt, the Zulu War, and the prelude to the Boer War. The aged Disraeli, now Lord Beaconsfield and favourite of Queen Victoria, ended up losing his position. He was replaced by Gladstone. In spite of everything, this was a mere changing of the guard. The cabals, the ‘systems’, the directives of international imperialist politics, the false conservatism, the Jewish mentality which more and more destroyed the remains of the old ethic of the gentleman and of fair play in favour of a bottomless hypocrisy and materialism, all this survived and developed, in the form of the ‘British Empire’, from the time of Disraeli onwards, and always retained the mark of its author. Until today.

Tradition requires that each year the merchants of the City of London, home of the Anglo-Jewish plutocracy, invite the Lord Mayor to a banquet and receive the confidences and expressions of trust of the Prime Minister in a speech which he makes at this event. The last speech of this sort that Disraeli gave was another expression of the ‘imperialist’ faith. ‘For the English, to be patriots means to maintain the Empire, and in maintaining the Empire lies their liberty.’ However, one should say that, in the obstinate and hopeless war which England actually conducts, it is the spirit of the Jew Disraeli which lives on. If the English, by following this spirit, bring about the ruin of their ‘Empire’, and of their nation, it is to this champion of the Chosen People that they must be grateful.

[1] An analogous argument was made regarding 'Americanism' within his book, The Jews and Modern Capitalism by Werner Sombart. Sombart argues that early European settlers in America were always close to Jewish commercial activity and other "elements," and that this led to sensitivity to, and ultimately identification with, Jewish interests and goals.
[2] In this interview, Sir Mosley offers some perspectives on British history, at one point also remarking that in his view, the British Empire was ultimately rooted in heroism.
[3] I found the article I have reprinted here. Also, this blog post presents a view distinct from mine but congruent or complimentary to Evola's perspective of the British Empire.