← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Oliver Cromwell
Thread ID: 12423 | Posts: 47 | Started: 2004-02-20
2004-02-20 13:30 | User Profile
Yummybear asks an intellegent question. Is there anything other than an allegation floating around the internet that Stalin was a Jew?
[QUOTE]-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There were lots of rumours about Stalin. For example, that he was a Jew. If Jews, as they say, rule in the Soviet Union, who's at the head? Surname "Dzhugashvili" was translated as "son of a Jew".
Not that Mr. Romanov is presenting this as the truth, but I always feel the need to comment on this. The benefits of having had a Georgian girlfriend came in handy in shooting down this particular piece of bullshit.
First of all, his name is transliterated properly (Georgian has its own unique alphabet) as Jughashvili (the /gh/ is a guttural vowel not found in English). While -shvili in Georgian does mean "son of" or "child or," "Jugha" does not mean "Jew." The words for "Jew" are either Ebraeli or Iudeli. Cursory searches on "Jugha" as well as "Dzhuga" typically brought up town names in Russia, Dagestan, Chechnya, etc. Apparently, probably centuries ago, Stalin's paternal ancestors came to Georgia from elsewhere. My own great-grandfather's last name was Calabrese, even though he was Pugliese in origin (born and raised in Bari).
This is all despite the fact that Stalin was sent to an Eastern Orthodox seminary for his education (where he was expelled for reading Marx).
It's amazing the lengths some knuckle-draggers will go to just to make a Jew of every evil person in human history.[/QUOTE]
This thread has lots of information about Stalin and wives, lovers, etc..
[url]http://pub86.ezboard.com/frodohforumfrm2.showMessage?topicID=73.topic[/url]
2004-02-20 14:46 | User Profile
Not that Mr. Romanov is presenting this as the truth, but I always feel the need to comment on this. The benefits of having had a Georgian girlfriend....
The man looked Jewish and acted Jewish. He married Jewish women, gave his son a Jewish name, changed his own name, was a communist revolutionary and criminal, hailed from a heavily Jewish area. Why is it outrageous to think he was probably Jewish? Because he attended a Christian seminary, if in fact he did? What does that prove? What he wasn't was a four year stooge occupant of some presidency or other, but rather the inheritor and thirty year top man of a Jewish revolution.
If any real proof existed either way, it most likely would've been brought out a long time ago. Since it hasn't, what's the point of the typically Jewish smears against knuckledraggers who think he was likely Jewish? Surely a misinterpretation of his name isn't the sole or even prominent grounds for this belief. Will we ever know for sure? No, probably not. Does it seem likely? Yes, it does.
2004-02-20 15:16 | User Profile
He looked Georgian, and acted Georgian, and to this day Georgians admire him. Ruffin, you should travel a bit or something. And learn basic logic. YOU CAN'T PROVE A NEGATIVE. That means, you have to have some evidence for asserting that Stalin was Jewish. Having sex with a Jew doesn't cut it.
2004-02-20 16:04 | User Profile
Sorry, but proving that he was a Gentile rather than a Jew isn't proving a negative. Until that is accomplished however, I'll feel free to see more indications of Jewishness than of Gentileness in Stalin. I hope that doesn't bother you.
Incidentally, you aren't the only person who gets around.
2004-02-20 16:23 | User Profile
I can believe you have more in common with the Blacks who used to work for me in South Africa than the Jewish pilot who we just completed a construction job for here in California, but for myself, I have more in common with the Jew.
2004-02-20 17:01 | User Profile
Does this mean you won't go steady with me?
2004-02-20 18:33 | User Profile
I don't know anything about Georgian names or their meanings, so I've never considered that as a factor.
Stalin's third wife was a sister of L. Kaganovich. A son from a previous marriage was named Yakov (Jacob). So, in addition to the other seemingly Jewish traits of his that I've mentioned, the idea that he was an anti-semite or would've been insulted by such association with Jews is a little extreme.
As for his purges, I've seen nothing to indicate that he purged Jews because they were Jews. If that was the case, this by then unquestioned and brutal ruler of the Soviet Union wasn't a very efficient purger. If he whacked some Jews it's only further testament, to me, that Jews occupied the important positions that Stalin perceived to be threatening to his authority. Jews, at least as much as other people, have been known to step on other Jews in pursuit of their goals.
Why is it so important that Stalin not be a Jew?
2004-02-20 20:28 | User Profile
Because I've seen no convincing evidence that he was. In a previous post I mentioned some of the posts at Stormfront along the lines of "Mao Tse Tung was a Joo" and "Ho Chi Minh Was a Joo" which only make our side look like idiots. Asserting that Stalin was a Jew (just because it suits a propaganda purpose) isn't much better.
For someone so dedicated to distancing himself from Stormfronters because he's afraid of looking like an idiot, you quote them a lot. But it's a terrible way to decide something. Since, as far as I know, there is no definitive proof either way, why rely on the assumption that rumors are necessarily false, when much about the man's life indicates the plausibility of the rumors?
Also, the rumors about Stalin's "third wife" were just that...rumors.
Are you sure of this, or do you assume it because it puts distance between you and Stormfronters? I believe that his third marriage is alleged to have occurred in the late 1930s, so of the many indicators this one should be easier to document. Before I look into it, what will satisfy you? Statements from Kruschev?
His second wife liked to mingle in Jewish "intellectual" circles, much to Stalin's disapproval, and he was livid with rage when his son married a Jewess and his daughter a Jew.
We're talking about Stalin, the bolshevik, right?
According to Kruschev, Stalin hated Jews but feared them, and thus any efforts he took against them were subtle and behind the scenes (such as replacing a Jewish foreign minister with a gentile as means of securing the pact with Hitler). No Jew would ever replace a fellow tribesman in a position of power with a gentile (on the other hand, Stalin DID favor Georgian henchmen such as Beria, and had policies which favored Georgians over Muslim Osetians, which suggests that he identified as a Georgian).
Everything I've seen suggests to me that Stalin was originally put into power by Jews like Kaganovich with the hope that a "dumb Georgian peasant" would be easy to manipulate (i.e. the role Bush plays for the neocons). What is more, the Jews hoped that Stalin would take the blame for the famines that they themselves engineered. He proved to be more difficult to handle than they had hoped...hence the purges of Jews, the attempted pact with Hitler, courting of Russian nationalism and the Orthodox Church, etc. As far as I can tell, "Stalin" and "Stalinism" were simply the scapegoats for the machinations of Kaganovich, Yagoda, and Frenkel. What can be directly attributed to Stalin usually went against Jewish interests rather than working in their favor, thus "Stalinism" has become a smear word in Judaeo-Bolshevik circles. Remember that the neocons became "anti-Communist" because Stalin was pereceived as "anti-Semitic" during the later years of his rule, and because unlike the Soviet Jews, he was anti-Israel (the Jews in his inner circle had pushed him to endorse Israel at the UN in 1948, until some years later he began to act independently and oppose Soviet Zionists).
Compare all of this conspiratorial theory with the man's actual deeds. First though, rid yourself of the lunacy that Stalin, or any other leader, operated on "hate" rather than on cold calculation combined with genetic predisposition.
Don't you find it at least as convincing that Stalin was ruthless in acquiring power for himself and wasn't too picky about who he had to eliminate in order to achieve it? Naturally some Jews were bound to be bitter, eventually, at this man who concreted his own power when he was supposed to be more concerned with spreading the revolution.
I don't know if I'll find anything or not, but I'll try to avoid any Stormfronters who insist that a Republican from Texas can be as bad as a Democrat from Massachusetts, or that the sky is blue.
2004-02-20 20:36 | User Profile
Well, there's one person who didn't seem to consider Stalin a Jew- Hitler.
If there was anything to this we would have comments from him about it.
2004-02-20 21:11 | User Profile
I don't recall Hitler mentioning the Jewishness of any individual by name. Perhaps he assumed that all of the leading bolsheviks were Jews?
[QUOTE=Sertorius]Well, there's one person who didn't seem to consider Stalin a Jew- Hitler.
If there was anything to this we would have comments from him about it.[/QUOTE]
2004-02-20 21:37 | User Profile
Doing some very preliminary digging. Nothing conclusive yet, just possible hints. Here, an article propagating the Jewish canard of Jewish poisecution by the Soviet, lets a few clues about his greasy and un-peasant-like personality slip by:
[url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,2763,907761,00.html[/url]
Stalin's reputation as a ruthless master of deception remains intact
Fifty years after Stalin's death, one of the first western historians to document the violence perpetrated by the brutal leader describes how his demise saved citizens of the Soviet Union from greater suffering
Robert Conquest Wednesday March 5, 2003 The Guardian
It is lucky for many - for the world - that Stalin did not live as long as Mao. His death in Moscow 50 years ago, in circumstances that are still dubious, proved a direct and immediate benefit to large numbers of people. In the prisons, for example, the large group of physicians arrested in the "doctors' plot" and charged with conspiring to assassinate the Soviet leadership had confessed and faced execution. Their "trial" was due in a couple of weeks. The men were freed almost immediately after Stalin's death.
Other prospective victims who were saved by his death came from the political leadership, his old colleagues and comrades: Vyacheslav Molotov, whose wife, formerly Stalin's wife's best friend, was in jail, Anastas Mikoyan and others, all suspected of espionage for the US or Britain (or in Mrs Molotov's case, the Jews).
Stalin's last year, 1952, had been particularly brutal and even now the appearance of new material is shedding further light on the extremes of his regime. Stalin's officials oversaw the secret trial of the Jewish Antifascist Committee, the full text of which again only emerged in the 1990s. Execution of suspects followed months of torture, with one key suspect testifying that he had been severely beaten 80 odd times in the "interrogation".
It is only by chance that evidence of many of these violent acts survives. One of the most "Stalinist" acts of the period had been the murder of the leading Jewish actor and producer Solomon Mikhoels. Here again, the full story only came out in the mid-90s. The killing was done by a secret police team from Moscow, headed by the deputy minister, Sergei Ogoltsov.
The actor was crushed under a Studebaker, then his body was left in a side street and his death attributed to a car accident. Mikhoels was buried with honours. We have the details because, on Stalin's death, police chief Lavrenti Beria arrested the perpetrators, though they were later released and the case was hushed up.
But we now at last have their confessions, which include the detail that they were instructed to "put nothing on paper", one of them adding that this was always the rule in such cases. Which means, of course, that there must be much information about the regime's actions that will never be "documented". We have learned much in recent years, but much will remain beyond our grasp forever.
What of the mind behind all this? In his private life, if you can call it that, Stalin wanted adulation, was extremely touchy, but at the same time wished to appear the hearty comrade. All this informed the long, dreary soirees described by his daughter, with colleagues in constant fear. But in contrast, he is often described by foreigners as having charm - a word used by the Nazi negotiators in 1939, though HG Wells said much the same, and even Churchill felt it occasionally.
From the start, Stalin was noted for an extraordinary capacity to enforce his will, as is also said of Hitler. This is a characteristic little studied, and doubtless hard to analyse. The Old Bolshevik Fyodor Raskolnikov, rehabilitated under Khrushchev, and de-rehabilitated by his successors, saw Stalin as lacking "farsightedness".
The purge of the great majority of experienced red army officers was a huge negative, as was, in another sphere, the execution of many of the engineers newly trained to run the state-driven economy, the former for treason, the latter for sabotage. As a consequence, both army and industry had been gravely weakened by the second world war and this nearly produced disaster when Hitler invaded.
Historians have written that Stalin was a "consummate actor". When post-Soviet Russian historians saw that Stalin had deceived Roosevelt in crucial world war two negotiations, academics pointed out that this was perhaps not very surprising, since he had even managed to deceive Alexei Rykov, Lenin's successor as head of the Soviet government, who had served with him on the politburo in daily, close contact for over a decade - only to be shot later.
In fact, if we look back at Stalin, we see not only terror and ruthlessness, but - even more - deception. Not only in such things as the faked public trials, the disappearance of leading figures, of writers, of physicists, even of astronomers, but in the invention of a factually non-existent society. The British socialists Sydney and Beatrice Webb were taken in by the not very sophisticated trick of having meaningless elections, trade unions, economic claims and so on.
One major attribute of Stalinism was stupefaction or stultification. His subjects, or dupes, had to act as if they believed what the Kremlin was telling them in the press, on the radio. Anna Akhmatova, the poet, said that no one could understand the Soviet system who had not been subjected to the continuous roar of the Soviet radios at street corners and elsewhere. And, with all that, the effective banning of non-Stalinist thought, or its expression.
Hypnosis
Even the wise physicist Andrei Sakharov, one of the finest minds of the generation, said later that he was deeply affected by Stalin's death; it took him years to break out of what he described as a "type of hypnosis" that had blinded him and so much of the population to the reality of Stalin's regime.
As one Russian scholar later remarked, "we wiped out the best and brightest in our country and, as a result, sapped ourselves of intelligence and energy".
Any comparison of post-Nazi Germany with post-Stalinist Russia throws up the obvious difference that one regime was totally destroyed and its ideas totally discredited. There was no formal process of de-Stalinisation in Russia; the disorganised breakdown of the Soviets left a detritus of both ideas and interests, which took decades to disintegrate.
Stalin's heritage today? He remains respected by a swath of what may legitimately be called reactionaries in Russia: nationalists - chauvinists. This might have surprised him, because Stalin was not Russian and did not even begin to learn the language until he was eight or nine. Those who remain devoted to Stalin often combine Stalinism with religion. How Stalin, the rebellious young theology student who went on to blow up the Cathedral of the Christ the Saviour, would have jeered.
÷ From Soso to Koba to Stalin
Born December 21 1879 to cobbler Vissarion Djugashvili and wife Catherine. Grew up in Gori in Georgia. Father died when he was 11. His hard childhood was not helped by two of his toes growing together and smallpox scars on his face
Names His mother called him "Soso". In his early years he got the name "Koba" after a literary outlaw. When he was 34, he changed his name from Djugashvili to Stalin, meaning "man of steel".
First job After studying theology, he fell in and out of work. He was exiled twice to Siberia in 1902 and 1913, and even robbed trains as he supported the revolutionary cause. Got his first real job on the newspaper Pravda in St Petersburg before the 1917 revolution
First rose to fame In 1917 helped Lenin direct a meeting of Bolsheviks who approved armed uprising. Became Communist general secretary in 1922
Worst legacy Killed millions across Russia. Hundreds of thousands of scientists, artists, priests and intellectuals perished in the Gulag
Better legacy Transformed Russian industry, enabling Russia to resist the Nazi advance
2004-02-20 22:00 | User Profile
Stalin at age 14:
[IMG]http://www.stel.ru/stalin/images/1893.jpg[/IMG]
From [url]http://www.stel.ru/stalin/index.htm[/url]
2004-02-20 22:15 | User Profile
Albert Speer wrote in Inside the Third Reich that Hitler seriously considered allowing Stalin to act as a regional leader in a conquered Russia because "he was so good at keeping the rabble in line." I doubt he would have said that if Stalin were a Jew or if he suspected him of being one.
Speer wrote many things in his postwar book that, um, eased his position, but you don't believe Hitler really would've done that, do you?
Since Nikita Kruschev was a member of Stalin's inner circle from the 1930's on, I consider him to be the most informed source about what went on there. I "trust" him in the same way that I "trust" Speer's account of Nazi Germany, certainly more so than hearsay on the internet. Kruschev is obviously unreliable as far as his own role in Stalin's government is concerned (NK would have portrayed himself in the most favorable light, obviously), but what Kruschev stood to gain by saying that Stalin privately disliked and feared the Jews and made subtle moves to push them out of power is beyond me. If one accept's Kruschev's account (which makes no mention of Rosa Kaganovich being a "third wife," only mentioning a Georgian or Armenian mistress that Stalin shacked up with after Svetlana Alleliueva killed herself), then I interpet any actions of Stalin that favored Jewry (e.g. initial endorsement of Israel) as being motivated by fear of his Jewish handlers while contrary moves (i.e. a desire to resettle all Jews in a Siberian province, support for Arabs, etc) as Stalin's self-assertion against his would-be masters.
Don't you know that it would have been in Kruschev's political interest to portray Stalin as anti-semitic, just as it was in Speer's interest to feign shock and horror at his former boss's "holocaust"? That Kruschev would bother with this kind of thing also dilutes the notion that Jews were on their way out in his time even.
Just a reminder, that we're talking about likelihood here, since there doesn't seem to be proof. So I fully admit that you may be right. But, as with "the holocaust", "witnesses" should be examined for their interest in the thing.
I haven't looked at anything on R. Kaganovich yet. Will do so ASAP, tonight or tomorrow.
2004-02-20 22:16 | User Profile
I can't remember for sure how long ago it was (maybe five or six years ago?) that someone showed us a Time/Life hardcover book about facts; it was printed in the eighties and it gave a paragraph or two about him, wherein it stated that Stalin was a Jew. I have regretted over and over again that I never made a copy of thatââ¬Â¦
2004-02-20 22:27 | User Profile
Ruffin, how old are you? Your basic argument is "Stalin was bad, Jews are bad, therefore Stalin was a Jew".
2004-02-20 22:38 | User Profile
I actually like Don Black and Stormfront, but for some reason that forum attracts a disproportionate share of morons. The reason I give no credit to the "Stalin was a Joo" posts is because they come from the same people who post, "The Joos are Fluoridiating our water" and "Ho Chi Minh was a Joo." If to you the credibility of a source means nothing then that's your prerogative. To repeat, I have seen nothing but internet rumors about Stalin having a Jewess for his 3d wife or anything else to suggest Jewishness. Incidentally, Kevin MacDonald's CofC account of Stalinism and the Jewish reaction to Stalin is more or less consistent with my interpretation (i.e. a man who did the Jews bidding to come to power only to turn on them later in his career). I suspect that if there were any foundation to Stalin being Jewish MacDonald would have mentioned it in the same way that the Jewishness of virtually every major player in the 1917 Bolshevik revolution came to light.
Sorry, I missed this paragraph the first time around.
Yes, I know that many nuts post at Stormfront. A lot of nuts post elsewhere too. Some nuts write history books. Some nuts become politicians. I understand your concern, but looking at American society in general, are there really a disproportionate number of nuts at Stormfront? Stormfronters also tend to be younger people, with much to learn. They're right about many things that the average American father and homeowner wouldn't even suspect though, don't you agree?
MacDonald may have not mentioned Stalin being or not being a Jew because the question is unclear. Like yours, my impressions are consistant with a greedy and power-obsessed Stalin. Considering his personal history, I think that attributing much of his behaviour to his being a Jew is not unreasonable, even if it cannot be proven. He certainly would have been an unusual Georgian peasant who attended seminary.
2004-02-20 22:43 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Oliver Cromwell]Ruffin, how old are you? Your basic argument is "Stalin was bad, Jews are bad, therefore Stalin was a Jew".[/QUOTE]
No, that's not my argument at all. It's all of my argument that you're capable of understanding, as evidenced by your resort to ad hominem.
2004-02-20 23:45 | User Profile
AY, it's hard to determine the reliability of sources on this, considering that it's still a political topic. Here's one that apparently agrees with you on R. Kaganovich but that does mention Stalin's children, including Yakov.
According to Svetlana, Stalin's oldest son, Yakov, was unassuming and unambitious, had a quiet charm, and seemed to have inherited his gentle character from his mother, Stalin's first wife. Stalin had no use for him and bullied him unmercifully.
Yakov once tried to commit suicide, and Stalin despised him as a weakling more than ever after that. When Yakov was captured by the German army, Stalin refused to make the prisoner exchange that was offered him, and Yakov was executed by the Germans.
The rest, on Stalin and Trotsky, at [url]http://www.socialistaction.org/news/200103/last.html[/url]
2004-02-21 00:47 | User Profile
The nephew of Lazar Kaganovich wrote the book the Wolf in the Kremlin. He had this to say, (pg 14)
"How many poeple have an uncle who was the right-hand man of the most hated dictator the country ever had? How many people have an aunt who was this [B]dictator's wife [/B] and another uncle who was this dictator's commissar of aviation.
So yes, Stalin's wife ( number three?) was Jewish. And she was Kaganovich's sister.
2004-02-21 04:53 | User Profile
Well, I've done a search of "Rosa Kaganovich" and I've found many confirmations that she was Stalin's mistress and third wife, but all of the sources are on anti-Jewish sites or boards. I checked out Stuart Kahan and found that he is the biggest source of the claims, and that other relatives of Lazar K. dispute the relationship as well as the existence of R.K. and also the family's relation to Kahan.
It seems that anti-Jews believe it and Jews and pro-Jews don't. While I might suspect the former of putting their faith in a falsehood because it suits their politics, I definitely don't trust the latter, so I'm back to relying on other aspects of Stalin. In my own opinion, Kruschev is as trustworthy on this as would be Simon Weisenthal. The idea that Stalin hated or was in any way hostile to Jews because they were Jews flies in the face of his actions from an early age. Perhaps someone familiar with Russia and Georgia can advise as to the likelihood of a non-Jew of the time naming his son Yakov? Stalin was definitely not kept on a leash by his political brethren the way I believe a Gentile would've been, thus his ability to seize power over the notoriously power-jealous Jews he was surrounded by.
I have no idea where to look for documentation that I would be confident hadn't been adjusted for political or monetary gain, so I'm back to thinking that there are more indicators that he was a Jew than that he wasn't, and I don't think that saying so hurts one's credibility any more than does claiming he was a stooge empowered by Jews. There is precedent for both, but they seemed to favor direct control in the east and in the early days of their Red revolution, whereas in the west since WWII they prefer puppets.
One last thing. I understand that his family was from Portugal, although I don't know how far back. This might also weigh slightly further against his sometime Jewish appearance being blamed on non-Jewish Asiatic lineage.
If anyone has any solid(?) info on the subject, either way, please deliver. Anything so uncertain should be open to amiable debate.
2004-02-21 05:00 | User Profile
I don't think the nephew of Kaganovich can be considered a biased source when he states that his aunt was married to Stalin.
2004-02-21 10:57 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]I don't recall Hitler mentioning the Jewishness of any individual by name. Perhaps he assumed that all of the leading bolsheviks were Jews?[/QUOTE]
I don't think so and his actions in dealing with Stalin support that. I would note as well that other than Kaganovitch, the Politburo was overwhelmingly Gentile. I think the thing that gets overlooked here about Stalin is it isn't so much that he was an antisemite. It is more of Stalin going after certain Jews like the Zionists and the Trotskyites that posed a threat to his power. Even after the purges of the late '30s where were still a sizable number of Jews in the Soviet government. The main thing was that Stalin had all the reins of power in his hands. I think that AntiYuppie is correct. While it is possible that maybe Stalin did have some Jewish blood, (I highly doubt it) it would be a mistake to attribute everything thing that is wrong in the world to the Jews. There are plenty of Gentiles working hand in glove with them who are every bit as rotten and venal as they are.
2004-02-21 14:15 | User Profile
I've asked this question many times of serious Russian historians who see the Jewish Bolsheviks for what they were, and the consensus among them is that Stalin was born of a Georgian mother but was of uncertain paternity. His mother's husband and putative father was a local alcoholic shoemaker who beat both little Yosef and his mother without mercy. One version poplar among Armenians is that Stalin's real father was a local Armenian merchant and that it was an open secret that he was Stalin's father, and this was the man who financed Stalin (Dzhugashvili's) education at an Orthodox seminary school. Of course, that smells a bit too self-serving to be kosher, so to speak.
Anyway, I think that there is no question that Stalin's mother was Georgian, and that her husband was also Georgian. It's interesting that to this day the question seems unresolved, and despite the foregoing nothing would surprise me about Stalin's origins.
Stalin understood tribal politics, that's for sure. But the Georgians, like the Armenians and other peoples of the Caucus, always do.
Walter
2004-02-22 02:17 | User Profile
[QUOTE]One version poplar among Armenians is that Stalin's real father was a local Armenian merchant and that it was an open secret that he was Stalin's father, and this was the man who financed Stalin (Dzhugashvili's) education at an Orthodox seminary school. Of course, that smells a bit too self-serving to be kosher, so to speak.[/QUOTE]
I agree, especially as the Armenians aren't Orthodox, even in the general sense. They don't get invited to ecumenical councils because they deny Christ's fully human nature. They guy was a brutal Caucasian tribesman.
2004-02-22 04:58 | User Profile
Stalin was Georgian. He was married to a Jew.
Lenin aka Ulianov (sp?) was a Jewish orphan raised by Jewish foster parents.
The Communits claimed he was ethnic Russian and raised by Jews. However, documents from the Moscow archives show that his birth parents were Jewish and he refers to himself as a Jew in a personel letter.
2004-02-22 08:04 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Oliver Cromwell]I agree, especially as the Armenians aren't Orthodox, even in the general sense. They don't get invited to ecumenical councils because they deny Christ's fully human nature. They guy was a brutal Caucasian tribesman.[/QUOTE]
The Armenians seem to have worked out an arrangement with Rome. I don't know all the details, but it looks like the 1700 year split may have been caused by an error in the translation of the documents of the Council of Chalcedon.
The Armenians I know tell me that in fact they are not monophysitists (sp?), believing only in the Devine Nature of Christ, but rather that the wording of the description of His Dual Nature is different. If memory serves (and I'm getting this from individual Armenian laymen I've known, so take it with a grain of salt) Armenians hold that at the Transfiguration His Human Nature was completely subsumed into his Devine Nature (like a drop of wine in the sea").
Here's a link:
[url]http://www11.dht.dk/~2westh/uk/official_visit_to_pope-e.html[/url]
Walter
2004-02-22 12:36 | User Profile
Walter, there is some truth in what you say, in the sense that it is partially a case of Armenian bull-headedness, but there will always be a problem with their believe in the subsumtion of His human nature. As Chalcedon states, and even much earlier by Athanasius, He is Very God of Very God, and Very Man of Very Man. And it continues to this day. Until the Armenian Church drops their subsummation doctrine, they'll always be on the inside looking out.
Regards for you good posting
[QUOTE]The Communits claimed he was ethnic Russian and raised by Jews. However, documents from the Moscow archives show that his birth parents were Jewish and he refers to himself as a Jew in a personel letter.[/QUOTE]
Your heritage isn't all you've lost, you've also lost your Christian legacy of scholarship. You're as bad as those that think FOX is fair and ballanced.
2004-02-22 13:50 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Oliver Cromwell]Walter, there is some truth in what you say, in the sense that it is partially a case of Armenian bull-headedness, but there will always be a problem with their believe in the subsumtion of His human nature. As Chalcedon states, and even much earlier by Athanasius, He is Very God of Very God, and Very Man of Very Man. And it continues to this day. Until the Armenian Church drops their subsummation doctrine, they'll always be on the inside looking out.
Regards for you good posting.[/QUOTE]
The understanding reached with Rome appears to be complete, inasmuch as, at least if I understand the linked joint communique correctly, the Pope and the Catholicos of all the Armenians celebrated mass together.
The Catholicos when asked what now separated Echmiadzin (his see) from Rome famously replied "about three hours on an airplane."
My understanding also is that the Patriarch of Constantinople recognizes the Armenian Catholicos, and has for centuries. I would appreciate any information on this.
Cheers.
Walter
2004-02-22 13:52 | User Profile
[QUOTE=heritagelost]Stalin was Georgian. He was married to a Jew.
Lenin aka Ulianov (sp?) was a Jewish orphan raised by Jewish foster parents.
The Communits claimed he was ethnic Russian and raised by Jews. However, documents from the Moscow archives show that his birth parents were Jewish and he refers to himself as a Jew in a personel letter.[/QUOTE]
Could you please provide a cite on that?
I need this for a personal project I'm working on.
Thanks,
Walter
2004-02-23 03:55 | User Profile
AY -
First of all, the idea that Stalin was in any way an "antisemite" is ridiculous (yeah, I know it's the popular neo-con line now, now that their agenda calls for the support of American "conservatives", and since their holocaust fairytale is crumbling and the absence of equal time given to Stalin's gulags is questioned more, so they've reflexively pushed the idea that, well, Hitler and Stalin were kinda the same, ya know, totalitarian dictators, who as we all know are always bad old anti-semites). Whether he was or wasn't a Jew, he immersed himself in Jewry and its ideology. If you think he did this with the intention of subverting their plans, well, he devoted his entire life to something he was unsuccessful at, since there were no "anti-Soviet" Jews, at least none of signifigance, until AFTER Stalin died! Look at the McCarthy Hearings. Sure, a few of them may have, when put on the spot, condemned communism, but 99% of their effort went to discrediting anti-communism and changing the subject to "witchhunts". The fact is, Jewry didn't give up on communism or on Stalin until Kruschev's time when it became obvious that the United States was a far superior home base. Likewise Russian Jews didn't start whining about poisecution and "antisemitism" there until Kruschev's time - and peaking in the 70s & 80s!
2004-02-23 04:20 | User Profile
I can't state this with certainty, but I think the zhids turned "anti-Soviet" only AFTER Stalin's death. The often-mentioned "Doctor's Plot" and other zhid "persecutions" only serve to portray zhids as victims, but the fact is, those events were happening only at the very end of Stalin's rule and are of little consequence when the history of Stalin's regime is taken as a whole.
2004-02-23 04:31 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]I don't think so and his actions in dealing with Stalin support that. I would note as well that other than Kaganovitch, the Politburo was overwhelmingly Gentile. I think the thing that gets overlooked here about Stalin is it isn't so much that he was an antisemite. It is more of Stalin going after certain Jews like the Zionists and the Trotskyites that posed a threat to his power. Even after the purges of the late '30s where were still a sizable number of Jews in the Soviet government. The main thing was that Stalin had all the reins of power in his hands. I think that AntiYuppie is correct. While it is possible that maybe Stalin did have some Jewish blood, (I highly doubt it) it would be a mistake to attribute everything thing that is wrong in the world to the Jews. There are plenty of Gentiles working hand in glove with them who are every bit as rotten and venal as they are.[/QUOTE]
I don't understand how your first sentence reflects on Hitler's opinion of whether Stalin was a Jew. Whether the politburo was mostly Gentile or not by the time Hitler and Stalin were facing off seems beside the point of Stalin's ethnicity, since the gang Stalin rode in with had been largely replaced by then (some think this happened due to Stalin's "anti-semitism", I think it's more likely that it was due to Stalin's ruthless quest for power and the elimination of those who might have checked that - surprise, surprise - Jews).
I haven't attributed everything that's wrong in the world to Jews, but that doesn't have any bearing whatsoever on whether Stalin was Jewish or not. Make a list of the things that argue for it and a list of the things that argue against it and then tell me why you highly doubt it. I think that basing a decision on whether Stalin was a Jew or not on the premise that it'd be one too many communist Jews to sell to the public, instead of on the likelihood itself, is another example of how history is distorted for political purposes.
I'm aware of the many Gentile lapdogs that serve international Jewry. IMO they are far more despicable people than are Jews who work for their own ethnic interests. When I drive beneath the big oak trees on my street, more Gentiles than Jews come to mind.
2004-02-23 07:49 | User Profile
I'm alluding to the Nazi-Soviet nonaggression pact in regard to Hitler's relationship with Stalin. As for Stalin's dealings with his enemies I am in agreement with that. Like you, I think that Stalin's antisemtism had little to do with the purges. Instead, I view it more as two rival gangs having a war with one another. My comment about folks that blame the Jews for everything wasn't specifically directed at you. It was more of an observation on my part with some of the things I've read. I really don't see the need for a list simply because at this time I believe that he wasn't a Jew. He would have made a fine one though. If you were to find something that at the very least shows that Stalin was Jewish I'd like to see it. If it is just one of many cases of history being falsified, then it should be brought to the surface. In any event, going on my belief that he wasn't Jewish doesn't offset the record the tribe holds for culture destroying. They could do nothing but good deeds for the next thousand years and it still wouldn't offset the damage they have done in the last 100.
I have the same sentiments that you do concering oak trees. Better yet, hang the vermin on the steps of the Capitol.
2004-02-23 13:14 | User Profile
Walter, you could be right. My info comes mostly from R.J. Rushdoony, but he's been dead for a couple years now, and in any event I hadn't spoken to him about this subject in about 15 years. So do the Eastern Churches now consider them Ecumenical?
2004-02-23 15:15 | User Profile
Re the Hitler-Stalin Pact: Stalin's lineage would not have affected this, I don't think. Hitler clearly perceived the Russia of the time as a Judeo-bolshevik project, with which he had no choice but to reach at least a temporary truce.
On the big question itself, suppose we ask what evidence exists (and what are its sources) that Stalin was a Gentile. Would a Roosevelt or a Bush, or a Georgian peasant, have possessed the chutzpah to purge their sponsors and upend their thousand year dream? The odds? Other examples?
2004-02-23 19:08 | User Profile
From my book:
[QUOTE]In the spring of 1941 Matsuoka told Joseph Grew, the American ambassador to Japan, that if the United States became involved in a shooting war with Germany, even in defense against German submarines, Japan was obligated to enter the war on the side of the Germans.[1] "Democracy is bankrupt" Grew was bluntly told by Matsuoka. This same Matsuoka stood with Stalin when the dictator of Russia proclaimed that the Soviets were all Asians. In April 1941 before Germany attacked the Soviet Union, Stalin told Matsuoka that since Japan and the Soviet Union had settled their dispute Japan should straighten out the Far East while Germany and his country took care of Europe. Later all three could confront the United States.[2] [COLOR=Red]Even after the war had ended Stalin had told his daughter that together with the Germans the Soviet Union would have been invincible.[/COLOR][3]
[1] [I]NYT[/I], July 14, 1943, p7 [2] James M. Burns, [I]Roosevelt: The Soldier of Freedom[/I], p95 (Harcourt, Brace 1970) [3] S. Alliluyeva, [I]Only One Year[/I], p392[/QUOTE]Prominent German historian Meinecke noted what he thought was the desire of Hitler for the Red Army to take Berlin, rather than the allies.
2004-02-23 20:02 | User Profile
EG, Americans who take your tripe seriously deserve the sinking boat they've found themselves in. God hopes that the last of their seed will be spent "defending freedom" from the Islamofascist superpowers.
2004-02-24 00:10 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin][COLOR=Red]EG, Americans who take your tripe seriously deserve the sinking boat they've found themselves in.[/COLOR] God hopes that the last of their seed will be spent "defending freedom" from the Islamofascist superpowers.[/QUOTE]Ruffin as a tough talking punk, you should be keeping your typewriter silent along with your mouth. Within this forum you are not too far out of place. When the time comes to saunter forth and take the field, you will lie, whimper and urge others to do what you lack the balls to do.
You must know who I am. Please use a P.M. or some other form of communication to let me know who you are. Then we will see who has any credibility. Many take advantage of the anonymity of internet to sound off, but they give a misleading impression. Gutless wonders abound. Do yourself a big favor, start taking lessons on how to fight or die.
2004-02-24 02:01 | User Profile
Ruffin,
You either believe or strongly suspect that Stalin was a Jew. I think the opposite. Until new information comes out to prove otherwise, I will continue to hold this opinion.
As to your question I don't think FDR or Bush would, but Stalin did to those who posed a threat to him. If you find something, I'll look at it.
2004-02-24 03:53 | User Profile
Was Stalin a Jew?
Whether or not Stalin was Jewish is probably a moot point. Stalin carried out the homicidal pogroms of the Jewish Bolsheviks, aided the tribe in carrying out the revolution, surrounded himself with homicidal Jewish maniacs.
When one watches the old film footage of Stalin & Co., it is most interesting to note that the Jew who called himself "Molotov" is never seen showing any deference to Uncle Joe.
2004-02-24 07:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE=edward gibbon]Ruffin as a tough talking punk, you should be keeping your typewriter silent along with your mouth. Within this forum you are not too far out of place. When the time comes to saunter forth and take the field, you will lie, whimper and urge others to do what you lack the balls to do.
You must know who I am. Please use a P.M. or some other form of communication to let me know who you are. Then we will see who has any credibility. Many take advantage of the anonymity of internet to sound off, but they give a misleading impression. Gutless wonders abound. Do yourself a big favor, start taking lessons on how to fight or die.[/QUOTE]
Go see a psychiatrist, you overblown windbag. I take your huffing and puffing as seriously as I take your comedic history.
"The danger of free speech does not lie in the menace of ideas, but in the menace of emotions. If words were merely logical devices, no one would fear them. But when they impinge upon a moron they set off his hormones, and so they are justifiably feared." ~ H.L. Mencken
2004-02-24 07:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]Ruffin,
You either believe or strongly suspect that Stalin was a Jew. I think the opposite. Until new information comes out to prove otherwise, I will continue to hold this opinion.
As to your question I don't think FDR or Bush would, but Stalin did to those who posed a threat to him. If you find something, I'll look at it.[/QUOTE]
Actually, I hadn't thought about it much until I saw it was up for debate. As I made up two lists of uncertified evidence I found myself more impressed by the one. Of course which he was is unlikely to alter our world signifigantly.
2004-02-24 11:09 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Blond Knight]Was Stalin a Jew?
Whether or not Stalin was Jewish is probably a moot point. Stalin carried out the homicidal pogroms of the Jewish Bolsheviks, aided the tribe in carrying out the revolution, surrounded himself with homicidal Jewish maniacs.
When one watches the old film footage of Stalin & Co., it is most interesting to note that the Jew who called himself "Molotov" is never seen showing any deference to Uncle Joe.[/QUOTE]
Right, but then he killed all the Old Bolsheviks 1937-1939, and was intent on shipping them all to Birobidzhan on the eve of his death.
It's an important point, because it may be the cause of much hope for us.
For if Stalin and Beria could do it, maybe we can, too.
Hope springs eternal, as they say.
Walter
2004-02-24 21:59 | User Profile
If only this were true, many things would be explained. Both Hitler and Stalin were in pre-World War I Vienna at the same time. They met and spent a night together and bonded.
Real conspiracy enthusiasts advance this as a plausible cause for the trust and mutual respect that both held for the other. Of course, I know nothing about this rabid affair.
I ask that Ruffin be deputized and look into this. This is right up his alley - much warm goo and hot, damp places.
2004-02-26 07:46 | User Profile
[QUOTE]They met and spent a night together and bonded.[/QUOTE]
Umm, you're not implying . . .
Are you? :shocking:
A protocol signed by Beria and his German counterpart (can't remember his name) in the Nazi sercret service signed a protocol of cooperation between the GESTAPO and the NKVD to fight international Zionism.
This was published in a reputable journal, although I take everything with a grain of salt. In this old world one can never be too rich, too thin, or too cynical, IMHO.
But, if it's true, this is an earth-shattering document, since it shows that Stalin's government undertood the threat and were taking measures to stop it. If this is true (and again I don't vouch for it) then much of the justification for the Nazi attack on the USSR would seem to evaporate, at least it would tend so to prove.
I've always meant to translate and post.
I'll see if I can dig it up and get back to you on it.
As I mentioned on another post, I got a copy of your book in the mail yesterday, and I'll let you know when I've had a chance to read it.
Walter
2004-02-26 14:17 | User Profile
Walter, you're kidding, right?
2004-02-26 14:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]Walter, you're kidding, right?[/QUOTE]
No, I'm completely serious.
I read it in Russian a couple of years ago. It was not given much press. It was published, if memory serves, in a scholarly journal, but don't quote me on that.
I'll dig it up and translate key parts at least. I also need to confirm that this isn't just some hoax.
I'll get back to you on it.
Walter