Zionism is Communism

There is no difference between Zionism today and Communism in Russia, as a matter of fact Russia was more or less Zionist. You get the same thing with the two ideology; the invasion and destruction of sovereign states, the subsequent murder and persecution of the population and then making the common people poor while the rich Jews live on top.

Joseph Stalin, a Jew treated his rat colony quite well too. In 1928, Jewseph established the first official Jewish homeland/rat colony approximately 5,000 miles east of Moscow close to the Chinese/Russian border in a town called Birobidzahn. Birobidzahn is the capital of the Jewish Autonomous Region (JAR). Kate Goldberg, writing for the BBC Online, in an article titled, Russia’s Forgotten Jewish Land, said, “ The first settlers arrived in the region in 1928, 20 years before Israel was created.” She explains the motive for Jewish resettlement as “to build a new city and set up a national homeland for Soviet Jewry with Yiddish as the official language.”

Karl Marx, the Jewish “father” of Communism, was lectured by the “father” of Zionism, Moses Hess.

Dan Pines, a (Russian) Zionist activist wrote in his memoirs that he had visited Stalin when the latter was Commissar for Nationalities in the mid-1920s and got his support for his Zionist activities in Russia. Another supporter of Zionism was Felix Dzerzinsky, the head of the GPU, who was also a “right Bolshevik”.

By the late 1920s many left wing Zionists had been disappointed by their experiences in Palestine and they returned to the USSR. The majority of these people were later executed in 1937.

Others understood that there was no way back from the “Zionist paradise”. In the late 1930s the official position on Zionism in the USSR also began to change to a more favourable one. In the huge official Soviet Encyclopedia published in those times we find a positive attitude towards Zionism. It said that Jewish migration to Palestine had become a “progressive factor” because many of the immigrants stood on the left and were also workers and these could be used against the pro-British Arab sheikhs!

Then again, in late 1947, soon to be enemies, USA and USSR, were both in support of the Zionist movement. Stalin’s interest here was to follow the order he received from the Torah to create a Soviet Jewish bureaucracy in the ME, and Zionist/Jewish rules America was to extract the oil so the Jews can gain all the money from it.

Moreover, the main founder/first prime mister of Israel wanted to form a “Great Israel” on both sides of the Jordan or at least encompassing the Sinai Peninsula.

Jewish soviet authorities allowed the supplying of Israel with weapons and from puppet regime in Czechoslovakia arms were sent to Israel, and at the same time “communists” were encouraged to serve in the Israeli armed forces, those same forces that committed terrible crimes against the Arabs workers and peasants. The “Great Leader” of course had hoped to became a patron of the future Jewish state, and to achieve a so-called “Finlandisation” and thus to make Israel a capitalist ally of the Soviet Union.

Vacheslav Molotov, foreign affairs minister who signed the Nazi-Soviet pact in ’39 was also in support of helping the Jews against the Arabs. Molotov is quoted as saying “They are a very nice people, they have all completed their education in Russian colleges or gymnasiums. We spoke about classical literature and the Russian language, but they think in English with an American accent”.

Also, the Israeli bourgeoisie and the government of the emerging Israeli state were part taking in economic and political links with the West, namely the USA. Golda Meir said at that time: “We cannot buy Soviet weapons with money that we have received from American Jews”. The rats then turned to where they can get cheese, USSR, but after the so-called “War of Independence” was over they began to develop closer relations with the West.

Trotsky said: “Socialism will open the possibility of great migrations on the basis of the most developed technique and culture. It goes without saying that what is here involved is not compulsory displacements, that is, the creation of new ghettos for certain nationalities, but displacements freely consented to, or rather demanded, by certain nationalities or parts of nationalities. The dispersed Jews who would want to be reassembled in the same community will find a sufficiently extensive and rich spot under the sun. The same possibility will be opened for the Arabs, as for all other scattered nations. National topography will become a part of the planned economy. This is the great historic perspective as I see it. To work for international Socialism means to work also for the solution of the Jewish question.* {Why does Trotsky mention the Arabs, if not implying that Palestine would be given to the Jews? H. G. Wells also envisaged mass migration in his world state.}”
—————————————————————————————————————-
{p. 206} In June 1937 Mrs. Beba Idelson, a Russian-born Jewish socialist Zionist leader in Palestine, visited Trotsky in Mexico. First she participated in a press conference at Diego Rivera’s residence and then had a long conversation with Trotsky in his study. The following are some of her recollections of that conversation:

I told him who I was, and that at the time I had been expelled from Russia as a Zionist-Socialist. If he was interested, I would tell him about our life in Palestine. Trotsky got up from his chair, asked me to wait awhile, and soon returned with his wife. He introduced me to her and asked me to tell him everything. He wanted to know about Palestine and was happy to hear a report from a person living there.

I talked to him not as one talks to a stranger. A feeling accompanied me all the time that he was a Jew, a wandering Jew, without a fatherland. This brought me closer to him, aroused in me confidence that my story was addressed to a man who was able to understand. I interrupted my story several times, asking him whether he was sure he had the time to listen to me, and he urged me to continue, jotted down some points, and then began to question me: How many Jews are there in Palestine? Where do they reside; is it only in towns? He asked numerous questions about the kibbutzim and the Histadrut. Are we able to work in harmony with the employers within the framework of the Zionist Organization; how do we bring Jews to Palestine and how do they join our party; how is our young generation being brought up and what is its language? He asked me to say a few sentences in Hebrew and smiled at the sound of the language. He wrote several words and noted down mainly the names of the Zionist leaders, the parties, the Histadrut, and various places in Palestine. He showed interest as if he were a man hearing about an unknown land, but I was under the impression that the subject absorbed his thought and heart.

The conversation lasted nearly three hours. After telling how we were fighting for Jewish immigration into our country, and he was deeply immersed in thought, I asked him: “Here is a country that is ready to admit you; perhaps you, too, will go to Palestine?” I felt that a shiver ran through his spine. He replied with a calm question: “Wouldn’t you be afraid to accept me?” I answered: “No, we won’t be afraid, for our idea is stronger than any fear of any man, even of a man like you.” Trotsky came over to me, pressed my hand, and said: “Thank you. It is a long time since I have felt so good. But you should know that I have friends throughout the world. We have not renounced our views,

{p. 207} even though I am rejected by Stalin and his Oprichniks [this is Trotsky’s expression, referring to the special corps created by Ivan the Terrible to fight treason which instituted the reign of terror]. I have friends, and they are also persecuted.” I told him that his persecuted friends lived in their own countries, whereas he had no country of refuge, for he was a Jew. Trotsky nodded agreement.

We had lunch together. His wife showed no interest in our conversation. From time to time she would address questions to him, but he would put off his reply and then turn to me with further questions about matters relating to Palestine. He was particularly interested in our relations with our Arab neighbors. He asked me whether there were Communists in Palestine, and why they did not go to Russia instead of staying in a Zionist country. He also wanted to know whether the Communist party was legal, big or small. When I told him that the Communists were not among the builders of the kibbutzim (“communes,” as Trotsky called them), he laughed, commenting: “They do not have this in Russia, either.” He was very interested in the status of women in Palestine, and also asked a personal question – how I had arrived in Mexico and what the nature of my mission was. He showed me his library, which filled a large hall, consisting of books in various languages; I realized how spiritually attached he was to this single possession of his in exile. I asked him: “Should you be obliged to leave Mexico – what will you do with this library: perhaps you would transfer it to Palestine?’

When we renewed our conversation after the meal, he listened attentively to what I told him about the cultural work being carried on in our country, about the libraries in each and every settlernent, about the National Library in Jerusalem, about the Hebrew press. I can no longer recall all his questions, but I cannot forget how attentively he listened to what I told him about our children, the sabras, and their love of their fatherland. I noticed that my words penetrated deep into his heart, that he was glad to hear about a world from which he had dissociated himself. I sensed that he was listening not like a man who placed himself above all nationality, and that our great idea found an echo in his heart.

At the end of our conversation Trotsky asked me not to publish the fact of our meeting and its contents: “Let the matter remain between us. The world will not understand. People will seek in this, too, grounds for accusing me of harboring alien views, and perhaps even sympathy for Zionism.” I promised him this and kept my promise for nineteen years.
—————————————————————————————————————-
Here is an exerpt that is more to do with the communist-jewish link, but is still very relevant:
{p. 42} … messianic activism, called by its opponents a “wrong messianism” or “mad messianism,” was never entirely wiped out. As a nearly permanent latent factor, it has repeatedly manifested itself in Jewish history in the form of different messianic movements. …

The Zionists, the Bundists, and the Jewish Communists shared the same messianic activism and emancipatory ideal, the token of all modern Jewish secular politics. … To point out the central significance of messianic traditions in modern Jewish ideology, identity, and politics does not mean that this tradition is an exclusively Jewish possession. In secularized form, elements of the messianic idea permeated the European Enlightenment and the French and Industrial revolutions. Under the influence of religious and political liberalism, urbanization, and industrialization, and united with elements of utopian thought, messianic millennialism was transformed into the modern idea of progress. However, if the messianic idea was of such great significance within the general society, it was immensely more so in the community that created and carried it throughout the ages. The messianic tradition permeated Jewish civilization to such a degree that it became one of its very central, even when latent, features and a backbone of its popular culture. It resisted the impact of secularization and acculturation, the challenge of modernity, by transforming itself into radical political options, in which activist forces were immensely strengthened.

{p. 51} … some of the radical peers were to become Bundists, some others Zionists, and still others Communists.

{p. 52} The Bundist vision lost its social substance with the physical disappearance of the large Yiddish-speaking radical Jewish working class. As the Communists took over Poland, the Bundists had to capitulate: they either became resigned fellow travelers or emigrated.

{p. 114} … For these young Communists, there existed an increasing gap of totally different values, attitudes, and images separating
them from their parents and their “world of yesterday.” As the gap between the generations grew, the Communist movement increasingly became a substitute for their original families. This phenomenon was not exclusively Communist. The Zionist and Bundist movements, with their large profile of activities- schools, summer camps, social clubs, and so on – and the fact of their legality, were able to function as social substitutes for the family. They “helped give party members the feeling that they resided in a ‘new world,’ as opposed to the ‘old world’ of the home and the synagogue.”

{p. 232} … In 1948 they (and the Bund) had to join the Zionists in fund-raising, the recruitment of volunteers for Haganah (which soon became the official Israeli army), and in military training, all carried out with the quiet blessing of the authorities. On Israel’s victory in the war for independence, several Jewish Communists were provided with party contacts and sent to Israel with officially proclaimed wishes for good luck in the task of building socialism there.

{p. 252} an important ideological signal that precluded the final Communist offensive in the Jewish sector was Ilya Ehrenburg’s Pravda article of September 21, 1948. This obviously offficially sanctioned article condemned Zionism as “mysticism,”denied that there was any afffinity between Jews of different countries, condemned Jewish nationalism, stressed the necessity of class struggle in the newly created Jewish state, and declared that Communism and not the bourgeois-governed State of Israel was the solution to the Jewish problems.

{p. 254} … This was soon followed by deep and lasting political and organizatlonal changes in the Jewish sector. Separate Jewish schools, which previously had been subordinated to the CKZP, were at the beginning of the 1949-50 school year taken into the state budget and soon wholly incorporated into the national school system. The vocational ORT schools were taken over by the state in 1950. Toward the end of 1949, against the wishes of the CKZP and the Communist activists, the American Joint Distribution Committee (AJDC) was ousted from Poland as part of the severing of contacts with the West. The Jewish welfare institutions and the Jewish theater, which had been operating with AJDC aid, were nationalized. Jewish libraries were merged with non-Jewish ones, the Jewish Writers Association, Jewish youth organizations, and the lands-