Martin Luther, a famous religious fanatic, remains of great ideological importance to the white Anglo-Saxon established order. A good reason to sink him. Luther is central to the ideology that praises “market” moral superiority, and “Reformation”. These are actually code words: their true meaning, plutocracy and exploitative reformation into barbarity, and inhumanity, no holds barred, is hidden in plain sight, and demonstrated by gory history.

A closer look at what Luther was really preaching flows from his 65,000 words treaty, “On the Jews and Their Lies”. As a few quotes below demonstrate, it is full of genocidal threats against Jews (and thus, as Luther’s reasoning makes clear, it is also genocidal against all and any minority, and those who do not believe that he, Luther, is not a friend of “Jesus”, whatever “Jesus” is the name of… apparently another homicidal maniac, see below!).

Thus, contrarily to the legend that Hitler was an accident, out of nowhere, a foreign body, its origin with Luther (or earlier) shows that Nazism’s ill-fated, genocidal mood was long in the making… And had been revered in Germany for centuries.

On The Jews And Their Lies. D.M.Luth.

On The Jews And Their Lies. D.M.Luth.

A question comes to the fore: if Luther behaved in such a vicious manner, why is it that no one is pointing this out? It is very simple: the very viciousness of Protestantism a la Luther or Calvin is still viewed, to this day, as a precious gift by those whose avocation is domestication, extermination, proliferation and relentless hyper exploitation, of whatever they can exploit, from people to planet.

Here a few extracts of Luther’s monstrous mood. I start with a few lengthy quotes, to show Luther’s mood in context:

“I shall give you my sincere advice:

First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming… if we, now that we are informed, were to protect and shield such a house for the Jews, existing right before our very nose, in which they lie about, blaspheme, curse, vilify, and defame Christ and us (as was heard above), it would be the same as if we were doing all this and even worse ourselves, as we very well know.

In Deuteronomy 13:12 Moses writes that any city that is given to idolatry shall be totally destroyed by fire, and nothing of it shall be preserved. If he were alive today, he would be the first to set fire to the synagogues and houses of the Jews

Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. For they pursue in them the same aims as in their synagogues. Instead they might be lodged under a roof or in a barn, like the gypsies. This will bring home to them the fact that they are not masters in our country, as they boast… what will happen even if we do burn down the Jews’ synagogues and forbid them publicly to praise God, to pray, to teach, to utter God’s name? They will still keep doing it in secret. . . They must be driven from our country.

Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb. ..

What are we poor preachers to do meanwhile? In the first place, we will believe that our Lord Jesus Christ is truthful when he declares of the Jews who did not accept but crucified him, “You are a brood of vipers and children of the devil [cf. Matt. 12:34]. This is a judgment in which his forerunner John the Baptist concurred

I have read and heard many stories about the Jews which agree with this judgment of Christ, namely, how they have poisoned wells, made assassinations, kidnaped children, as related before. I have heard that one Jew sent another Jew, and this by means of a Christian, a pot of blood, together with a barrel of wine, in which when drunk empty, a dead Jew was found. There are many other similar stories. For their kidnaping of children they have often been burned at the stake or banished (as we already heard). I am well aware that they deny all of this. However, it all coincides with the judgment of Christ which declares that they are venomous, bitter, vindictive, tricky serpents, assassins, and children of the devil who sting and work harm

Now let me commend these Jews sincerely to whoever feels the desire to shelter and feed them, to honor them, to be fleeced, robbed, plundered, defamed, vilified, and cursed by them, and to suffer every evil at their hands — these venomous serpents and devil’s children, who are the most vehement enemies of Christ our Lord and of us all. And if that is not enough, let him stuff them into his mouth, or crawl into their behind and worship this holy object. Then let him boast of his mercy, then let him boast that he has strengthened the devil and his brood for further blaspheming our dear Lord and the precious blood with which we Christians are redeemed. Then he will be a perfect Christian, filled with works of mercy for which Christ will reward him on the day of judgment, together with the Jews in the eternal fire of hell!

These, just above, were extracts from Part 11 of “On The Jews…” Here is an extract from Part 12:

“if I had power over them, I would assemble their scholars and their leaders and order them, on pain of losing their tongues down to the root, to convince us Christians within eight days of the truth of their assertions.”

Luther had many bloodthirsty and cruel statements about the Jews. In ones of the longest and most striking, Luther says that Jews should be forever tortured rather than just killed, so that their “laments” could be music to the ears of the righteous.  Here is some more:

“If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone around his neck and push him over, with the words, ‘I baptize thee in the name of Abraham.’”

“They are real liars and bloodhounds who. . . continually perverted and falsified all of Scripture. . .”

“Oh how fond they are of the book of Esther, which is so beautifully attuned to their bloodthirsty, vengeful, murderous yearning and hope.”

“The sun has never shone on a more bloodthirsty and vengeful people. . .”

“The worse a Jew is, the more arrogant he is, solely because he is a Jew.”

“Be on your guard against the Jews, knowing that wherever they have their synagogues, nothing is found but a den of devils. . . Where you see or hear a Jew teaching, remember that you are hearing nothing but a venomous basilisk who poisons and kills people merrily by fasten. . .”

“Whenever you see a genuine Jew, you may with a good conscience cross yourself and bluntly say, ‘There goes a devil incarnate.’”

“In their synagogues and in their prayers they wish us every misfortune. They rob us of our money and goods through their usury, and they play on us every wicked trick they can. . . no one acts thus, except the devil himself, or whomever he possesses, as he has possessed the Jews.”

“They are a heavy burden, a plague, a pestilence, a sheer misfortune for our country.”

“. . . that they be forbidden on pain of death to praise God, to give thanks, to pray, and to teach publicly among us and in our country.”

” . . . that they be forbidden to utter the name of God within our hearing. . .”

“I advise that. . . all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken away from them. . .”

“. . . Eject them forever from the country. . . gentle mercy will only tend to make them worse and worse, while sharp mercy will reform them but a little. Therefore, in any case, away with them!”

“I wish and I ask that our rulers who have Jewish subjects. . . act like a good physician who, when gangrene has set proceeds without mercy to cut, saw, and burn flesh, veins, bone and marrow. Such a procedure must also be followed in this instance. Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work, and deal harshly with them, as Moses did in the wilderness, slaying three thousand lest the whole people perish.”

Clearly Hitler, although a Catholic, was an honorable Lutheran in mentality. Luther calls for genocide. Such a maniac would now be put in jail, and rightly so.

However, not only was Luther-Hitler not put in jail, but he came to be considered a paragon of virtue. This had long-term consequences. They are still with us today.

Where did Luther criminal madness come from? Why was it thought honorable? Of course many of the potentates who supported Luther wanted to feel it was moral to rob the Jews. But how did morality break down that much? After all, when the Roman empire was officially renovated under Charlemagne, Jews were citizens equal in all ways. How did this regression into the Dark Side occur?

Insensibly. It’s a long story. Plutocracy rose to a fevered pitch, starting with the First Crusade in 1100 CE. It promoted the Dark Side ever more, thanks to fanatics like Saint Bernard and his followers (opposed strenuously by the philosopher Abelard, and his own followers). Plutocrats promote mayhem and wealth, it was natural that kings such as those of France and England took to stealing Jews.

Saint Louis hated the Jews and the unbelievers, he wrote that nothing would please him more than plunging a knife in their bellies and move it around to look at their suffering face. However, he deplored that the law (the Lex Salica of the Franks) did not allow him to do so. This Crusader died from the plague in Tunis, and was made into a Saint in 1297 CE.

That propaganda imparted on feeble minds such as Luther’s, the great aura of sainthood to rabid anti-Semitism (Saint Louis being a great killer of both Jews and Muslims).

After 250 years of reverence for Luther’s murderous racial mania, the autocrats of Prussia acted on it. In the Eighteenth Century, the rulers of Prussia implemented massive abuse against, and hyper exploitation of, the Jews. It was helpful that there was a vast Jewish population in Eastern Europe. By spoiling the Jews, the thieves who governed Prussia could pay for an ever bigger, more ferocious Prussian army. Hitler would duplicate that exact same method, two centuries later, just as he would implement all the “sincere advice” of Luther about the Jews.

(Want to know why Prussia disappeared? Ethical failure can only go so far before being irretrievable.)

When the greedy opportunist Napoleon rolled around in the name of the Human Rights Revolution, he was forced to pay more than lip service to it (lest the French part of the army would not follow him anymore; although I abhor Napoleon, I must recognize this).

Thus, the Jews were made into equal citizens in the huge united Germany that the revolutionary dictator created. Jews were also freed in Poland. The Poles were also freed. (So Napoleon had no problem finding hundred of thousands of young Germans and Poles eager to fight in Russia; however, the Grande Armee got decimated by typhus before even fighting the Czar’s forces.)

After Napoleon’s defeat at its hand, a re-born Prussia dominated the German-speaking world. Luther triumphed. Racial abuse was re-installed, over an even larger area.

Abuse of Jews was made into law. This is when Marx’s father lost his job as a physician. Marx’s dad was a Jew. Important professions (such as law and medicine) were forbidden to Jews. Poles were re-enslaved (until they were freed by the Versailles Treaty, 104 years later, to Keynes’ rage!).

Adolf Hitler in all this? Just a continuation, more of the same, carried secretly, thanks to modern technology, to its logical conclusion.

Would there have been Hitler’s murderous holocaust of the Jews, and several other holocausts to accompany that one, for a grand total of maybe 20 million assassinated in “camps” by the Nazis, if not for Luther’s influence? It’s unlikely.

The problem indeed was not just that Luther was a demented psychopathic murderous maniac. The problem is that he has had, and still has, a huge following. The maniac is actually respected.

And the Luther derangement syndrome, as I said, is deeper than just hating the Jews. Or just wanting to exterminate non-Christians (and those who helped them: analyze carefully what Luther wrote above!).

Luther followed the Old Testament, well, religiously. The original Protestants, the Cathars (Catharos, the Pure) were just the opposite. The Cathars considered that the Old Testament, was the work of the Devil.  On the face of it, just reading it with a straight mind, that’s pretty obvious. Three centuries before Luther, seven hundred years before Hitler.

The Old Testament was the Bible, literally, of the Barbarous Years that seized the future USA after 1610, when holocausts became the best business plan ever. That was accompanied by Luther sized racism, applied on a continental scale. Against the Natives, Africans, etc. It blossomed into the most ferocious racial slavery ever instituted.

Don’t ask where holocausts and slavery came from, they came, proximally, from reading the Bible, and nothing but the Bible.

Don’t ask what Luther is for. Just look around, and celebrate the USA. But maybe, just maybe, it’s time to talk about it, and extirpate those toxic roots.

Patrice Aymé

Notes: Luther stayed ever more virulently anti-Jewish until the end of his life.

On Kristallnacht, the Nazi thugs, on order attacked Jews all over Germany (to the disgust of most of not just the German population, but of the Nazi Part members… a poll showed that 65% of Nazis were against racial persecution!).

Moreover, the connection that the Nazi leadership made with Luther was explicit. Martin Sasse, Nazi and bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Thuringia, published a compendium of Martin Luther‘s writings shortly after Kristallnacht. Sasse “applauded the burning of the synagogues” and gloated that: “On 10 November 1938, on Luther’s birthday, the synagogues are burning in Germany.”

In The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, William L. Shirer wrote:

It is difficult to understand the behavior of most German Protestants in the first Nazi years unless one is aware of two things: their history and the influence of Martin Luther. The great founder of Protestantism was both a passionate anti-Semite and a ferocious believer in absolute obedience to political authority. He wanted Germany rid of the Jews. Luther’s advice was literally followed four centuries later by Hitler, Goering and Himmler.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

42 Responses to “LUTHER: HITLER, UNELECTED.”

  1. Ken Says:

    The Bible AND money lending.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Ken: you are alluding to the fact that Luther allowed money lending? It existed before, though, from Jews. Also the Republic of Florence had instituted bonds (to pay for the Republic, or army, just like now), centuries before.
      Francois Premier was massively bankrolled by the Medicis before Luther got to publish his stuff.
      Charles Quint followed, fifteen years later, using German bankers.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      It’s true that, the more Florence borrowed, the more of a plutocracy Florence became. Until independence was lost.


  2. Sallie Reynolds Says:

    Genocide is in most major religions, and probably the minor ones as well. Great essay, Patrice. Do you think we humans can ever end it?

    If you haven’t read Pat Barkers trilogy, Regeneration, I think you might find it fascinating.



    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Dear Sallie: You threw the gauntlet to me! My challenge is now to find a perfectly innocuous religion. Maybe some forms of Buddhism, or Jainism qualify… Most forms of Buddhism are not that pacific…

      However, even inside Christianity, there is a whole spectrum. For example, whereas Saint Bernard (350 years before Luther) was fundamentally a demented SS, Saint Francis of Assisi (at least the way I remember him from childhood reading) was innocuous. There is no doubt that some Christians, some Muslims, and some Buddhists live their religion in a fully anti-genocidal way.

      Never heard of Pat Barkers.

      Humanity, considering the weapons, is forced to be at its most pacific ever. Luther, by today’s standards, even the worst Muslim Fundamentalist standards, would be viewed as off the deep end. So there has been huge moral progress: we have no choice.


  3. EugenR Says:

    Dear Patrice, let me please suggest an excellent book on the subject by Amos Elon,
    The Pity of It All: A Portrait of the German-Jewish Epoch, 1743-1933


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Governmental exactions against Jews instigated by Luther, started in several German states, during Luther’s lifetime. So why 1743?


      • EugenR Says:

        Luther was an extreme example of Christian theologists, who had problem to cope with the very existence of Jews, stubbornly refusing to except Jesus as Messiah. Christianity as any other belief system that is based on dogmas, that have to be excepted as final truth, become violent against phenomena that doesn’t fit to these dogmas. And the very existence of Jews was exactly about this.

        Saint Augustine solved the Jewish problem more humanly than Luther. He pointed on them as wretched people, whose suffering is a proper punishments for their refusal to recognize the truth about the Savior. But as compared to Luther he was for continuous Jews existence, just not to allow them to thrive. But he lived in the fourth century, at times when the Vandals and Visigoths threatened the very existence of his community.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Dear Eugen: I second what GMax said. Genocide is genocide, and that’s it. Second guessing Hitler or Luther is interesting, but it’s not the fundamental thing. Hitler did not stay popular very long. Luther is still the leader of dozens of millions, if not more.

          Saint Augustine also definitively was genocidal about the Jews. I have quoted the relevant passages several times on this site. Just like an encephalitis bearing mosquito, he should be crushed, not engaged in respectful exchange.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Another thing about Augustine being more human than Luther: as I explained with Saint Louis, there was a progressive degeneracy into murderous racism. The Roman republic did not discriminate against Jews, nor did the Imperium Francorum, or the Renovation Imperium Romanorum.

          Augustine led to Saint Louis, who led to Luther, and then Hitler.


  4. Paul Handover Says:

    So here’s a question (or three) from this new American.

    Would an atheist ever be voted President of the USA? Or make it as a Senator? Or be elected to Congress?


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Dear Paul: If you mean an official atheist, it may be difficult. But so it is from San Francisco to Vladivostok. It seems clear to me that JFK, Nixon, or Obama never believed in a deity. The first two because they flouted the basic commandments, and the later because I know for a fact he does not believe in gogod whatsoever.

      Why Obama mentions a deity continually? That’s part of the let’s-not-get-shot-by-a right-wing-fanatic-I-am-one-of-yours program.


  5. gmax Says:

    @ eugen: I remember reading, both directly and indirectly genocidal stuff from Saint Augustine about Jews. Genocide ain’t just about killing people. Aussies down under set up a genocide against Bushmen in the 1960s, by stealing their kids.

    Saint Augustine wanted Jews out of Israel, their home. That’s genocide.

    Please stop making excuses for infamy


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      GMAx: When Hitler took measures against Jews, he was supported by… (some important) Jews. Hannah Arendt made lots of enemies pointing that out in detail.

      There are no excuse to be made for Christo-fascism. Not anymore than for Islamo-fascism. Actually less, because the former was cause to the latter.


    • EugenR Says:

      Dear gmax, agree, i intended to be ironic about Saint Augustine. He is the prove that the antisemitism didn’t start with the crusaders as contrary to some apologetic claims of the church, but is derived from the Christian faith itself. Lets not forget, that he lived in times, when it seemed that nothing will stop the destruction of Christian Roman empire, (he died when the Vandals besieged his city). Naturally his approach had to be more mild than that of Luther, who lived when Christianity looked as the superior faith. Not due to spiritual but rather material achievements, mainly colonialism and Renaissance in arts and sciences partly supported by the Catholic church, that due to Reformation made a U-turn in its pro education position.
      Truth the Catholic church was a very corrupt organization at the time, but as to my view, corruption of any autocratic entity is the good news, because they give hope the autocracy will collapse soon. The bad news are when the autocracy succeeds to keep its zealousness popular and murders all its real or imaginary opponents.
      An other urban mythology is the intellectual openness of the Lutheran movement that brought to enlightenment and scientific revolution of 17-18 century. France was Catholic and its achievements were comparable to that of protestant English. The English were more lucky because of gradual and not revolutionary political change to non autocratic political system, invention of steam engine and above all, North America becoming a protestant English country rather than French. And it could easily be otherwise if not the stupidity of its kings and dictators. Yes the English King Gorge III was disastrous too, but he had the parliament that eventually forced him to come to reason (or rather to lose his reason).


      • gmax Says:

        Dear Eugen: Ah you’re joking about Augustine? I feel better already. I feel Christianism has had a terrible effect: the dark ages, as Patrice always say.


  6. Patrice Ayme Says:

    Dear Eugen:

    The difference space between England and France has several ignored dimensions:
    1) The French peasants owned their land. That made them less prolific.

    2) The “West Country Men” a set of very nasty plutocrats, dominated English politics, and made it viciously expansionist. They used liberal amounts of human fodder, especially from vagrants in cities… that had to be rid of. So they were offered the rope or the boast. They took the boat.

    By contrast, the French felt that going to America was a great honor.

    (The French were also exterminated by Philippe II: they were the first to settle the present USA.)

    3) Since Roman times, England has had readily exploitable coal.

    Interestingly, it’s a French professor in Germany who invented the first serious steam engines we know of, and the first steam boat (destroyed by monks). All this in… Germany.


    • EugenR Says:

      The steam engine was invented by Heron the Greek almost 2000 years before the industrial revolution, but for what usage? The important thing was not its reinvention but the usage. The English needed coal, and it forced them to make the steam engine a practical tool and the rest came because of some smart people around. One of them was Brunel, a French living in England.


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        Dear Eugen: The Egyptians, early on, used the steam engine to open temple doors magically. That’s where the Greeks got it from, and it was used similarly.

        (Whenever looking at the Greeks, look all the way to Egypt, and don’t forget Crete!)

        As far as the Romans were concerned, they had absolutely all the engineering, potentially, to make steam boats (paddle powered: they invented, and used massively the paddle mechanism, to measure ships’ speeds). But, of course, under the Principate, new ideas, even in tech, were officially the enemy.

        Denis Papin crossed the Rubicon, as he travelled more than a 100 miles with his steam boat. Everybody knew this, and could see how useful it was. As everybody knew deforestration was an acute problem (it became catastrophic in 1300 CE). As I said precedingly, Edward III took anti-pollution edicts in London around 1325 CE, because of the heavy coal burning.

        Coal developed more in England, because there was more of it, and fewer forests. Another French engineering team made the first (steam powered) cars… Or, rather, tanks. The program was paid by the Ancient Regime military, and the idea was the idea of the tank: go cross country. The first car accident, duly notified quickly resulted in Paris.


    • EugenR Says:

      Dear Patrice and gmax. After I read what I wrote…………”the antisemitism didn’t start with the crusaders as contrary to some apologetic claims of the church, but is derived from the Christian faith itself”, I got a strong urge to correct myself.
      After all Christianity is a derivate of Judaism and I will try to explain what I mean.
      The theological foundation of Judaism is the intensive God-human-God relation loaded with tension and activity based on recipe exactly prescribed in the Five Books of Moses the Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy or the Pentateuch. This books of stories and law prescribe to Jews many complicated rules God ordered to follow. Most of the laws have no human to human consequences, and it is almost impossible strictly to follow them without to fail. This creates a constant relation of sin and guilt, to which the all mighty God reacts with continuous punishment, threats for the future, but also consolation and promises.
      One of these promises is to help the Jews to create an independent statehood under a king directly appointed by the God, the Messiah. (Messiah in Hebrew means one who was anointed, or greased, which is the part of act of ceremony of apotheosis of a king.) The best known Messiah was of course King David (Who according to last archeological findings was rather a local chieftain between the mountains of Jerusalem and Hebron than a great King). But since David times, for thousand years of Jews living in the Levant the “Holly Land”, the Jewish statehood had only very few years of real independence. In the nine century b.c. came already the Assyrians, followed by Babylonians, Persians, Greeks and finally the Romans. All these empires of the region left very little gap for Jewish independence.
      And after 1000 years of not fulfilled God’s promises for independent Jewish Kingdom ruled by king Chosen by God how could the Jews cope with the frustrating situation, after again the Jewish statehood was ruled by a Roman dictator, who claimed that he and his horse are God. To a Jewish believer like Jesus, his followers and many other Jews it had to be a shocking experience to see, that God allowed these people to rule the Holy Land, and it seems it is not going to change very soon. But you can’t go to complain to your all mighty God and claim your promised kingdom, viz. what happened to Job in the Book of Job.
      So what could the Jews do in their frustration? Leaving the belief in Torah was not an option, so some of them tried to find new definition for Messiah. Not anymore a earthly creation, but a divine creature, who’s promised kingdom is not on earth but in the heaven.
      All I wanted to say is that Christianity is a understandable development of Jews theological concept, of Jews living in the first century under Roman governance. So why did it become the major source of anti-Judaism? First, because in the Canonical gospels the general public watching the Jesus crucifixion ceremony was called Jews and not the audience. The second and even more important issue is, when Christianity has become the dominant political religion, they tryied to destroy every hint, that can shake the foundations of their obscure belief, and every thought that is not compatible to their expansionist intentions. So they destroyed all the gospels except of the four canonical gospels, they persecuted the Arians and many others like them, and of course the Jews, who happened to have the copyright for gospels, yet they themselves or at least some of them refused to except the ultimate truth, the truth of the official Christian church.


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        Thanks Eugen for the long description of Judaism. To avoid the nestling effect, I put my observations about Judaism in a separate comment. Judaism and Israel are impossible to dis-entangle form history, so it’s important to have its main properties clear.

        …Hey, we still extract a good war or two from it all…


      • gmax Says:

        One has to distinguish antisemitism, antijudaism, and antizionism. Lots of the naughtiness of Christianity comes from Bible, as Patrice said.


        • EugenR Says:

          I disagree. All forms are different names for hate towards something that is not mine yet is part of me. Did you ever heard about anti Albanism? probably not. What do you know about Albanians? I believe not much. Al I know about them, that they are unique small European nation, without to having any impact on my consciousness. I also know that they are the poorest nation in Europe. Whenever they emigrate, Italy, Serbia etc. some out of them create the most vicious criminal gangs. When emigrating massively to somewhere, like to Serbia, they forced to create a new political entity, Kosovo. Yet, I ask you again did you met ever anyone who wants to kill Albanians just because he is Albanian? I haven’t. Why? Because they have no impact on us with creating new ideas, we can like or hate but never neglect.


          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            Dear Eugen: Hmmmm… GMax seems to be a Cathar reborn s/he does not like the Bible, or rather say that “lots of naughtiness comes from it”. Meanwhile I just used (I believe the example of the Son of David). I would like you to explain to me how much abominable that is not… In a separate comment (because nestling makes them unreadable).

            One of my main themes is that the Bible was the Mein Kampf of whoever brandished is (Charlemagne by 780 CE). I may be the first one to brandish that idea that provocatively, but not the first to brandish it.

            Now for Albania: Kosovar are on the lowest rung of popularity in Europe, arguably below “Roma” (Gypsies). Albanese are not much on the radar, because, in theory, they are out of the EU entirely (that will change).

            Your theses seems to be the popular one of the “Genius Of Christianism” (Chateaubriand). Well, I don’t believe in it, in the sense that love was not invented by Jesus. It’s natural to man.


          • gmax Says:

            Dear Eugen: zion is a hill in Jerusalem, and Zionism something some Jews pushe for. WAS Sharon a Zionist?


          • EugenR Says:

            Zion is a hill but also a symbol. Symbol of jews who believe that the Jews have the right for homeland at least as much as the Albanians. This need for homeland at beginning seemed to be a rather spiritual need than material so not many were interested. Then around the turn off 20 century, with rise of neoatisemitism the need became material and more Jews became interested. The Holocaust unfortunately proved how right they were. The remaining left overs of European Jews believed that they can secure their physical and cultural survival only by establishing a independent Jewish state. And then the world community feeling ashamed of its own deeds agreed to it. But since the seventies and eighties started again the old new voices continuing the tradition of St. August, Luther, the Russian Czar, you name the rest to delegitimate the right of Jews to exist as a separate culture, with all its anomalities for good or bad. This voices started under the cover of internationalism orchestrated by the imperialistic intention of the post WWII bastion of evil, the USSR. After the collapse of USSR, it’s agents who lost thear directive, out of confusion continue until today the crusade against the Jewish culture, under the pretext of anti zionism. I wonder for how long they canto nurish this internationalism pretext until they realise that the enemies of Israel the MuslimoNazis are not partners for this kind of thing, unless it will be an internationally imposed fundamental Islam on the rest of the world.

            Sharon was a military man and a lousy politician. As such he is man of action and not man of thought. I am interested in thought and not in acts. You may criticise acts and claim they are wrong, and still the idea behind can be right and opposite. While acts are temporary as the people behind them the ideas are not.


          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            I am myself a sort of Zionist light. Very very light, but still I believe the Jews have a right of return… Of course a problem is that some, even many, are not really returning.
            I generally avoid the problem of Israel because it is secondary to much more blatant problems, like Abrahamo-fascism… The way to fix the problem with not make the obsolete ones happy: one state.


          • EugenR Says:

            As to the question is Judaism a religion or nation, we have to ask what it means nation. Once I read somewhere that Stalin wrote “nation is group of people with common language and common land they occupy”. From this perspective the Jews in diaspora are not a nation while the Jews in Israel are. But who really cares what this primitive butcher has to say about the subject.
            My opinion is very different from his. To my opinion nation is a group of people with joint cultural heritage and a joint epical story or history they identify with. From this point of view of course Jews are a nation even if without a common land. The oddity about the Jews is that their epic story is more than a tribal-national story, it is a theological epic story or in other words a religion.

            What’s more their theological story became the basis for theological epics of the Christians and Muslims as well, and this annoys them a lot. ” How come such a wretched nation claims the priority upon our epic story?”

            It may be interesting to compare the Jewish identity with that of the Greek national identity. The Greeks have a very long history with a influence on western civilization that is comparable with the influence of the Judaism. But the modern Greeks are hardly connected to their ancient culture. They are orthodox Christians and don’t believe in their ancient myths. Their language is very different from the classical Greek etc. Yet they claim they are the rightful decents of classical Greece. Viz how they opposed the usage of name Macedonia. So what are the Greeks? nation? culture? an epic story? it just shows to you that the definition of what is nation is more complicated than what Stalin thought.


          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            Agreed. Yet, the notion of nation is engaged in very practical vital debate: Israel is confronted to apartheid (!), Greece confronted to its imperial, pluto (!) in disguise, church. Stalin’s notion is what tends to rule the giants: Australia (!), Canada (!), USA, Brazil, Russia…


          • EugenR Says:



  7. Is Christianity antisemitic? | EugenR Lowy עוגן רודן Says:

    […] Aim in her essay says, „Martin Luther, a famous religious fanatic, remains of great ideological importance to […]


  8. Patrice Ayme Says:

    On Judaism:
    Here are my bottom lines:
    1) Judaism was a typical tribal religion.
    2) As civilization grew, it transcended tribes. That’s especially true of the giant Roman republican civilization (Rome grew to 75 million, about a quarter of humanity).
    3) Judaism, interpreted as a generator of nation of Israel, was therefore of no future.
    4) The Judaica war, when finally general Josephus was adopted by the Roman emperor Vespasian, was a demonstration of this.
    5) Smart Jews disconnected Judaism from Israel, and call that Christianity, with the help of gory details designed to make standard Judaism repellent.
    6) Two ill fated wars of rebellion calmed the Jews.
    7) Emperors of the Dominate decided to adopt Christianity as state religion, and, more exactly, Catholicism. Everything else was eradicated… Except the Jews, the mythical Jesus being one of them. Extermination of the Jews was contemplated in the Fifth Century, but rejected. However, when the Samaritans rebelled, they were exterminated: after all, Jesus was a Jew, not a Samaritan.
    8) When the Franks were given military control of the North West empire, starting in 400 CE, as they were Pagans, and their Lex Salica was blind to religion, they re-established Jews as full citizens.
    9) Starting with the madness of the First Crusade, anyone not hysterical about Catholicism was viewed with hatred. The Jews were first to pay. A reaction was Protestantism, with the Cathars, millions of them by 1200 CE. Catholics exterminated the Cathars, down to the last, and anyone who tolerated them around.
    10) As Jews had been all over the Roman republic, and equal citizens, for like 12 centuries, they proved difficult to extirpate.
    11) Then came Luther…


  9. Plutocracy, Slavery, Martin Luther | Some of Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] where did this racial inequality come from? Partly, as I have explained, it arose from the original Martin Luther, and his reference bible, the Bible. Let’s not forget […]


  10. gmax Says:

    Eugen: Is Judaism a religion or a nationalism?


  11. Il mondo dell’archeologia Says:

    That is really attention-grabbing, You are an overly professional blogger.
    I’ve joined your feed and look ahead to seeking more of your wonderful post.
    Additionally, I have shared your site in my social networks


  12. Christ Preached Lethal Violence To Non-Christians | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] that I should reign over them, slay them before me!”. The message was embraced by Saint Louis, Martin Luther, Calvin. Saint Louis wanted to torture his enemies to death, and wrote nothing would give him more […]


  13. Patrice Ayme Says:

    [Sent to The Conversation.

    In his book “On Jews and Their Lies”, Luther wrote:

    “My advice, as I said earlier, is: First, that their synagogues be burned down, and that all who are able toss sulphur and pitch; it would be good if someone could also throw in some hellfire…Second, that all their books– their prayer books, their Talmudic writings, also the entire Bible– be taken from them, not leaving them one leaf, and that these be preserved for those who may be converted…Third, that they be forbidden on pain of death to praise God, to give thanks, to pray, and to teach publicly among us and in our country…Fourth, that they be forbidden to utter the name of God within our hearing. For we cannot with a good conscience listen to this or tolerate it…The rulers must act like a good physician who, when gangrene has set in proceeds without mercy to cut, saw, and burn flesh, veins, bone, and marrow. Such a procedure must also be followed in this instance. Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work, and deal harshly with them. If this does not help we must drive them out like mad dogs.”

    Hitler and Luther: ce sont des mots qui vont tres bien ensemble, as the French, or the Beatles, said.

    For much more details:


  14. Nazism: A Paradigm | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] Luther made countless declarations calling to burn Jews, destroy them, torture them, and rejoice in …: “I wish and I ask that our rulers who have Jewish subjects. . . act like a good physician who, when gangrene has set proceeds without mercy to cut, saw, and burn flesh, veins, bone and marrow. Such a procedure must also be followed in this instance. Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work, and deal harshly with them, as Moses did in the wilderness, slaying three thousand lest the whole people perish.” […]


  15. Patrice Ayme Says:

    [Sent to Scientia Salon, July 30, 2015.]

    Labnut says somebody said that only 10% of conflicts were religiously based. That analysis is probably hindered by too narrow a meaning of the concept of “religion”.

    Probably, if asked that somebody would assert that Nazism was not a religion, nor Nazism religiously based. However, considering Luther’s extremely violent and explicit threats against the Jews, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that, relatively to the Jews, Hitler was just applying Luther’s extremely detailed proposals on how to deal with the Jews. For a few details:


  16. Frankfurt School of Philosophy As Nazism Unexamined | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] […]


  17. Self-Described “Jew” Hides Who & What  Caused Holocaust | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] still respected, not to say adulated Christian figures, such as Saint Louis IX and Luther actually made detailed, abominable declarations about what they wanted to do to the Jews that were way worse than the worst Hitler ever said we […]


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: