"The International Jew" Study Hour - Episode 61
August 22, 2013
Carolyn Yeager and Hadding Scott read and comment on Chapter 56, “Dr. Levy, a Jew, Admits His People's Error.”
Dr. Oscar Levy (pictured right) was a Jew born in Pomerania to a banker, who emigrated at the age of 27 to the United Kingdom and Ireland where he became well-known in literary circles.
This chapter gives his reply to a brochure written by Oxford professor George Pitt-Rivers titled “The World Significance of the Russian Revolution.” In a letter to Pitt-Rivers, Levy agreed with the criticism of the Jewish role, but at the same time gave an overblown estimation of Jewish greatness and their importance to Europe. Some examples:
- No race in the world is more interesting than the Jews;
- Scarcely an event in modern Europe that cannot be traced back to the Jews;
- Jews invented nationalism, plead for honesty and cleanliness in politics, and have a duty to guide Europe;
- Jews are unconscious of the harm they cause – they know not what they do (all in all pretty funny stuff).
Note: We are using the Noontide Press publication of The International Jew — The World’s Foremost Problem which can be found online here as a pdf file.
Category
International Jew Study podcast, JewsBookmark/Search this post with
- 574 reads
Comments
Original comments on this program
8 Responses
Hadding
August 23, 2013 at 4:39 pm
It was Barnard Mandeville who said, “Private vice makes public virtue.”
David Ricardo’s claim to fame was arguing that unregulated international trade benefits all.
First came Bernard Mandeville, then Adam Smith, then David Ricardo.
Fred Wilson
August 26, 2013 at 12:19 am
@Hadding
You overlooked the progenitor of the above crackpots, Thomas Malthus.
The man that argued , people should be kept at subsistence levels to keep the population in check. Another of his brilliant ideas , outlaw contraception to limit population growth.
Bunch of academic idiots who caused millions to suffer over more than a century by promulgating nitwitted ideas to justify starvation wages.
Fred Wilson
August 26, 2013 at 12:22 am
This rebuttal by Oscar Levy is a good illustration of jewish baffle gab.
A deluge of words and not a drop of sense.
Etienne
August 26, 2013 at 1:27 pm
No Fred, Malthus argued that the laws of nature would keep people at subsistence level unless they were constrained by restrictions on fertility, such as marriage and property.
Hadding
August 26, 2013 at 4:42 pm
Malthus was contemporary with David Ricardo. Here are the dates:
Mandeville 1670-1733
Smith …. 1723-1790
Malthus .. 1766-1834
Ricardo .. 1772-1823
Ricardo is the only one of them — so far as I know — that was a Jew. As usual, the Jew stretches the limits of some line of thinking invented by non-Jews.
Maltus’ observation about population outstripping the possibility of supporting it seems commonsensical on its face, but at the time when Malthus made the observation poverty in Britain was due not to overpopulation but to lopsided distribution of wealth, which the free market promoted by Mandeville, Smith, Ricardo, and Malthus himself, tends to exacerbate.
Fred Wilson
August 27, 2013 at 1:22 am
Etienne, you’re technically correct.
He stood by, in nodding agreement, while Parliament used his concept to block pro-worker legislation, like removing the Anti-combination laws (preventing unions and co-ops) and the Corn Laws (preventing the importation of cheap American grain).
His concept was used in a circular fashion. “The workers will just overpopulate to starvation levels, so we should just keep them at that level and not do anything to mitigate their poverty. If they have more money they will just populate more “(Which is the opposite of reality. Ppl with more money tend to populate less). He didn’t raise his voice to oppose this.
How marriage or property will prevent overpopulation is beyond me.
Billions seem to do just fine without either one.
Fred Wilson
August 27, 2013 at 1:28 am
“poverty in Britain was due not to overpopulation but to lopsided distribution of wealth, which the free market promoted by Mandeville, Smith, Ricardo, and Malthus himself, tends to exacerbate.”
Exactly! Nothing like a doctrine that keeps wages low and profits high.
Fred Wilson
August 27, 2013 at 1:47 am
“the free market promoted by Mandeville, Smith, Ricardo, and Malthus himself, tends to exacerbate.”
There wasn’t a ‘free market’, as there was a plethora of laws and constraints. Like the death penalty for forming unions or workers associations. Corn Laws to protect domestic grain producers, keeping food prices high (another concept supported by Malthus’ doctrine).
A totally ‘free market’ can’t exist. We’d have code clerks selling out a nations secrets to the highest bidder, total anarchy. Restrictions have to exist at some level.