Struggle for the Soul
Lesson 5: Churchill & Comparison
Introduction: World Knew. It is often claimed that linking Bolshevism and Zionism is a modern “conspiracy theory.” This lesson proves that in 1920, it was amainstream political debate. We will look at two primary sources: Winston Churchill (future Prime Minister of the UK) and A. Homer (political analyst). Both identified the same “Twin Pillars” but drew radically different conclusions.
1920 Publication
Churchill’s Three Groups (1920)
In his famous article Zionism versus Bolshevism, Churchill did not treat Jewish people as a monolith. He explicitly divided them into three distinct groups.
Churchill’s Three Spheres
These are citizens loyal to the country they live in (like British Jews). Churchill calls them helpful and patriotic.
The “sinister confederacy.” These are the revolutionaries who want to overthrow civilization. He links them directly to the “underworld” of Europe.
The “third sphere.” He sees this as a national idea that offers a positive alternative to Communism.
The Lineage
Admitting Conspiracy
Churchill explicitly confirms the lineage of the revolution, validating that this was a long-term plan, not a random event.
Lineage: He traces a direct line of “world-wide conspiracy” from Spartacus-Weishaupt (the Illuminati) to Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), and Emma Goldman (USA).
Spartacus-Weishaupt (The Illuminati)
Karl Marx (Ideology)
Trotsky, Kun, Goldman (The Executioners)
- Goal: He states their goal is the “overthrow of civilization” and the “reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality.”
- Grip: He admits that this band of “extraordinary personalities” has “gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads.”
The Evidence
Confirming Leadership
Churchill validates the statistical data we saw in Lesson 4 regarding the ethnic dominance in the Soviet Union.
- Terrorists: He states that with the exception of Lenin, the majority of leading figures are Jews. (While at the time Churchill did not know Lenin came from Jewish lineage, since Lenin’s sister wrote the letter to Stalin after his death)
- Driving Power: He says the “principal inspiration and driving power” comes from Jewish leaders like Trotsky, Zinoviev, Radek, and Krassin.
- Brutality: He confirms that Jews (and Jewesses) took the principal part in the “system of terrorism” executed by the Cheka (Secret Police).
The Debate
Two Pillars (Comparison)
This is where the nuance lies. We have two competing theories from the time on why this was happening.
| Theory | Winston Churchill (1920) | A. Homer (1933) |
|---|---|---|
| Bolshevism | Led by “International Jews.” A threat to civilization. | Led by “International Money Power.” A weapon to destroy nations. |
| Zionism | The Enemy of Bolshevism. A “National” movement that will save Jews from Communism. | The Partner of Bolshevism. The second arm of the “Twin Pincers” used to control the world. |
| British Role | Britain should support Zionism to create a loyal ally in the Middle East. | Britain was tricked or coerced into supporting Zionism by financial pressure (Balfour Rewrite). |
| Conclusion | Zionism is the cure for the “Red Plague.” | Zionism and Bolshevism are two sides of the same coin. |
The AON Theory
Grand Deception?
The AON theory posits that Churchill was either wrong or part of the game.
- Trap: Churchill believed supporting Zionism would stop Communism.
- Reality: The AON theory suggests that the “International Money Power” (Schiff, Warburg, etc.) wanted both. They used the fear of Bolshevism to get the West to agree to Zionism (the Balfour Declaration), thereby giving them exactly what they wanted all along: a base of power in both the East (Russia) and the Middle East (Palestine).
The Conclusion
Summary
This lesson proves that the ethnic and ideological nature of the Bolshevik revolution was an open secret in the highest halls of power. The only debate was whether Zionism was the antidote to the Red Terror (Churchill’s view) or its partner (Homer’s view). History would soon reveal the answer.
Sources for Lesson 5:
Comparative Source: A. Homer, Judaism and Bolshevism: A Challenge and a Reply (1933).
Context: Henry Ford, The International Jew, Chapter 9 (The “Twin Pincers” concept).
US Army Intelligence: Captain Montgomery Schuyler, Report to the Chief of Staff (March 1, 1919). (Schuyler explicitly reports on the ethnic makeup of the Bolshevik leadership from his post in Russia).
Diplomatic Cable: David R. Francis (US Ambassador to Russia), Russia from the American Embassy (1921). (Detailed his observations of the Bolshevik leadership structure).
British Intelligence: Russia No. 1 (1919), A Collection of Reports on Bolshevism in Russia. (The original “White Paper” containing the Oudendyk report).
Senate Testimony: Bolshevik Propaganda: Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary (US Senate, 1919). (Contains testimony from witnesses like Dr. George Simons regarding the NYC-Russia connection).
