Talk:Jewish Bolshevism/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


someone needs to look at this article write now its heavily antisemtic and is filled with quotes suggesting that there is merit to the ideal that the Soviets were controlled by Jews. --Mao1949 18:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Some parts are totally ridiculous, e.g. "Nobel Prize winner Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn has recently (2002) reviewed in great depth, and in a truly unbiased and heartfelt way..." - it would be difficult to find more POV appeal to authority, especially in light of heavy criticism of Solzhenitsyn's writings regarding Jews. ←Humus sapiens ну? 10:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Removal of image

How is the cover image of the Protocols alleging that the Bolshevik govt is "Jewish" is irrelevant here: [1]. ←Humus sapiens ну? 04:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I have strong reservations as to the authenticity of the book cover. To me it looks like a photo placed atop the book, especially under magnification. On the second thought it may well be an artifact of cheap publisher. I am withdrawing the objection. `'mikka 06:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Alfred Rosenberg: Die Protokolle der Weisen von Zion und die judische Weltpolitik (Munich: Deutsche Volksverlag, 1923).

The Protocols as a reference? Why not add Mein Kampf as a reference as well? But seriously this source should be deleted as it's not needed to demonstrate a valid point and one can assume is only included for anti-semitic purposes. Actually I will delete it right away, let this be the note of explanation.--Caranorn 00:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

This has been addressed at Talk:The Protocols of the Elders of Zion#Protocols were used as a supposed reference in the article. No need to crosspost. ←Humus sapiens ну? 05:27, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Actually this was the first post, not a cross post. The argument why a reference, not referring to any part of the sentence is supposed to be included has not been explained yet. While inclusion in the article on the Protocols itself might be reasonable it is not here, therefore I will delete it once more until a good motivation has been provided to keep it. The only necessary reference for that sentence is from the quoted book (Pipes'), not the book talked about.--Caranorn 12:47, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Humus sapiens please read the section Why sources should be cited of Wikipedia:Citing sources. Point 5 ("To improve the overall credibility and authoritative character of Wikipedia.") of that section is particularly interesting in this context. There clearly is no need to include a reference to the Protocols in the context of your sentence.--Caranorn 13:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Sorry I thought you'd reinserted the reference here as well. The way the article is now I see no need for additional debate, thanks.--Caranorn 13:11, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Partitions of Poland, White movement

1) Jews were not allowed in the Russian Empire before the Partitions of Poland and were "acquired" with the territory. 2) There is no direct relation between Belorussia (white Russia) and the White movement. ←Humus sapiens ну? 05:27, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Major Expansion Needed

Given the very well verified and very prominent role of Jews in the rise of the Soviet Union and its satellite states in Eastern Europe, this article needs to be expanded massively. There are only a few paragraphs on this page when there have bee many volumes written on this subject. Maybe we can move some information here from the History of the Jews in Russia and the Soviet Union and other articles dealing with Jewish involvement in Communism in other countries around the world (particularly European ones) to help fill this article out? -- 20:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

No expansion needed. This article is about a particular slander. The rest belongs where it is, in historical articles. `'mikka 20:55, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Expansion as an Antisemitic impulse

I agree that no expansion is needed. Sounds like just another antisemitic urge to blame the Jews for Communism. By the many volumes this person probably has at the top, Hitler's Mein Kompf closely followed by, not doubt, The International Jew.
Does this un-registered Wiki User also think that we need a special article about all the Great Things that Jews have contributed to the world, including the Alphabet (with their Arab cousines) followed by the Bible and Monotheism. And how about an article titled Jewish science with Einstein at the climax? Would this person need it because, after all, so "many" Jews have been active the the development of the Moder world, or should I say, the Jewish modern world?
And how about the Jewish contemporary world? Do we need it too? Take as an example, Genocide, maybe we should call it, according to this user, Jewish genocide, because the concept had a word coined for it by a Jew. So anything done by Jews must be Jewish, right?
We already have Leninism and Trotskyism, and since Lenin was Russian orthodox, I suggest an article titled Ruski Bolshevism. After all, were there not much more Ruskis involved in it then Jews?
I recommend search for an image depicting Lenin in a derrogetory way - looking like a malevolent RUSKIE and leading IGNORANT, UNEDUCATED, ILLITERATE, recently emancipated serfs of extremely backward "Holy Mother (of God) Russia"!!!
And let's call a spade a spade - it's the White Russians who were responsible for the Russian revolutions, (1905) & (1917), for RESISTING CHANGE, and mostly supporting Tsarism.
Yours truly, --Ludvikus 23:10, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
You both misunderstand my proposition. I merely proposed to fill this article with more factual information (rather than the simplistic and prototypical philo-Semitic apologia we mostly find here now) regarding the fact that Jews (remember: the vast majority of them secular ethnic Jews that had totally abandoned their ancestral religion and probably even despised it) definitely DID play a HUGE part in the grand Soviet experiment, for better or worse. For instance, Yuri Slezkine's book The Jewish Century (2004) has many statistics and states many facts regarding the amazingly disproportionate influence of Jews in the Soviet Union and the Eastern bloc (among a ton of other books). Obviously much of this lies buried in still unreachable Russian or Eastern European archives, but it is slowly trickling out as these places open up more and more to foreign scholars/researchers.
If there was no disproportionate Jewish involvement in the Soviet Union, then why Stalinism and antisemitism, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the Doctor's Plot, the dissolution of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee in 1948, the "rootless cosmopolitan" campaign, the MAJOR post-WWII anti-Semitic purges of major Soviet organs, the Slánský trials, the execution of the Rosenbergs (Jews) in the USA for spying for the Soviet Union, and countless other events related to Jews in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe? There are a hundreds if not thousands of examples of actual, factual Jewish involvement at ALL levels of the Soviet Union, yet this page merely focuses on the anti-Semitism and various anti-Semitic stereotypes (whether real or imagined) that arose because of this. While some info regarding anti-Semitism certainly belongs here, this is not what the ENTIRE article should be composed of (as it presently is). This seems to be yet another attempt at using the anti-Semitism card to blatantly obscure the issues and cloud the historical record; or maybe I'm just missing the entire point of this page. What about the very real and clearly definable role that Jews played in the Soviet Union & Eastern Europe? Doesn't at least some of that information belong here in this article? Or is this to stay only in the History of the Jews in Russia and the Soviet Union article? -- 04:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to see the aerticle expanded. I wanted to read if Jews were overly represented in the early communist leadership or not, and if so by how much, and if so what reasons were the cause of this socially. Instead the article is incomplete and insists the idea is a myth merely because it may offend some Jews. The logic: A is offensive to Jews ergo A must be false is not very firm. Can we someone please expand the article to be informative rather than an exercise in Jewish perenoia. 21:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Jews Who Stayed Behind - Racist Expression

Palestinians, the likes of Hamas, call the Israelis (who came after 1881, or the first Alya), European colonialists, while the Ruskis call them "those who stayed behind" (meaning after the Pogroms). Interesting. The implicit RACIST point is that the Jews of Russian were and are foreigners, aliens, and that they should, and must, "behave themselves" as guests!!! These same people also forget that there were NO JEWS in the RUSSIAN EMPIRE - until the Partition of Poland. Accordingly, the foreign and alien element was the Russian Empire in the former much more tolerante "Polish Republic," and Polish Empire. --Ludvikus 03:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Uh, which Partition of Poland?! There have been more than a few of those over the centuries.
 <<..."NO JEWS in the RUSSIAN EMPIRE"...>>
 ...haven't you ever heard of the Pale of Settlement (?!),
 which had always spilled over in to huge portions of Western Russia (if not officially,
 then unofficially).  -- 04:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

--- You definitely sound ignorant at best, or like a antisemite Ruski at worst.

The Pale of Settlement was created by Mother Russia to keep the Jews out of Mother Russia proper - in the land that belonged to imperialist Russia before she devoured Poland TOGETHER WITH ALMOST ALL OF HER JEWS. You say, of Jews: which had always spilled over in to huge portions of Western Russia (if not officially, then unofficially). Tell me, did your parents spill you over into the United State, or did you spill over here, together with your mother and father? Is there a way we can spill you over some place other than were you happen to be right now? --Ludvikus 05:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth

The majority of Europe's Jews lived in the above entity - for a very long time. Accordingly, it was the Russians, in the 19th century, after Poland's Partition/dismemberment, which acquired these Jews by their conquest - in war. So the foreigner, aliens, there, were not Jews but Russians!!!

Sorry, Signature: Ludvikus 05:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Are you implying that Middle Eastern immigrants are not considered foreigners and aliens in a Central-Eastern European state? Most unusual. Humanophage 11:08, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Jews are often considered "foreigners" and "settlers" everywhere. Let's keep in mind that most nations migrated long ways (Huns, Madyars, Saxons, etc.) and that those "Middle Eastern immigrants" lived in many areas of Europe for centuries. It is a common stereotype. ←Humus sapiens ну? 03:08, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Souns to me like a lot of the contributors are working very hard to dispell the "myth" that jews were largely behind the bolshevik revolution, due to sensitivities about being anti-semitic. Largely smacks of bias and does a disservice to people who come to read about the truth on wikipedia. Just tell it like it is. Don't spend most of the article trying to discredit that even though 90% of the bolshevik leadership was jewish during the communist revolution doesn't mean it was a jewish revolution. That's a load of crap and you know it. What percentage of jews made up russia and what percent made up the communist leadership in the early days? If you want to minimized anti-semitism quit trying to hide historical fact and tell it like it is. When stuff like this is hidden it only increased people's suspicions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:07, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with; we have to be NPOV on Wikipedia and not hide facts. It's a very well known fact that Jews played a big role in the Bolshevik party. It's not antisemitism to point this out in the article. — EliasAlucard|Talk 04:59 17 Sept, 2007 (UTC)

Appears to be a neologism and lacks any sources so is unverifiable

There is no reference to the actual use of Jewish Bolshevism

Accordingly, it should be deleted, in spite of the references in the matter below the introction of the title and explanation of its meaning or use. --Ludvikus 09:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
--Ludvikus 09:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the term is not a neologism. It became popular since 1917 and after a short wave of popularity in the West regularly appeared in the Nazi propaganda. Sidenote: the best way to fight hate is to expose it. Less we forget. ←Humus sapiens ну? 10:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

List of political epithets

In the alternative to deletion, it should be merged with the above, where it's to receive a brief paragraph, or so, of descrption. --Ludvikus 10:08, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Here is why (it falls under the heading as follows):

  The following is a list of pejorative political epithets; meaning,
  words or phrases used to mock or insult certain political views and their supporters.
  An explanation is also given for each term's intended meaning and original source (where known).
  The list is not comprehensive, and perhaps never will be,
  due to the multitude of political epithets that have been and continue to be created.
  Please note that the majority of these epithets are inherently biased terms
  and some are considered highly inflammatory.

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 10:10, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

This is not a political epithet, but an important theme in the antisemitism of the 20th century. Beit Or 10:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The same can be said about anti-communism (though obviously communists like me don't give a hoot about the ethnic origin of our colleagues). One could say that the term Jewish-Bolshevism and variants thereof was for some a means to promote anti-semitism, for others to promote anti-communism.--Caranorn 12:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Good for you, Mr. communist. And I understand your position. What the above user does not seem to be aware of is that by singling out THIS ONE POLITICAL EPITHET for a separate article, (s)he is promoting anti-semitism. What this user really want's to say is that you cannot possibly be a genuine commie, not because you're not a Ruski, but because with a name like Caranorn you cannot possibly be Jewish! So how can you be a commie?
I think that all these terms of derision belong together in the said list. But then these antisemites won't have a platform in which to explain why at least one Jew, say Trotsky became commies - as if there is a need to explain it. Again, its merely a manifestation of the view that Jews had to "behave" in mother Russia. Hey, how about an article entitled Ruskie Bolsheviks? If that won't do, how about Ruskie commie? Hey it exists! Why? Because I've greated it. For purely dialectical reasons. Ludvikus 20:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Ludvikus please read the following guideline Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. I'd also recommend you revert your recent edits in which you seem to have intentionally included nonsense links (and of course a link to your bogus article in violation of above guideline), unneeded fact tags, moved the article etc.--Caranorn 21:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
In the spirit of pure NPOV and calm/rational discussion, he has also spent his time here blatantly insulting and degrading the native Russian population (the people most negatively affected by the 1917 Revolution), calling them <<..."malevolent RUSKIE[s]...IGNORANT, UNEDUCATED, ILLITERATE, recently emancipated serfs of extremely backward "Holy Mother (of God) Russia"!!!>> for not wanting to hand over control of their native land, government, and economy to highly elitist, arrogant, city-dwelling, money-obsessed, and largely disdainful minority group(s) that had no substantial links to them and would soon plunge many of them in to famine(s), war(s), and unwanted mass-industrialization, along with performing land seizures of familial lands, attempting to indoctrinate them with deceptive and misleading propaganda, decimating their native cultures and trying to strip them of their local customs/language, nearly outlawing religious practice, and so forth. He/she also pitifully plays the 'anti-Semitic card' every chance that he gets, calling anyone that disagrees with him an anti-Semite. What a sad state of affairs. -- 22:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I've now reverted Ludvikus most recent changes as well as the move, I had hoped he would do it himself but he seems to have opted not to do so.--Caranorn 22:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

original research

  • Where did "Lenine" come from? In what language it sounds Jewish?
  • Concurrently, indentured peasants who had been virtual slaves to the large landlords - note the year: Emancipation reform of 1861 in Russia.
  • the most revolutionary in nature : the Bolsheviks - according to whom?
  • it was customary in White Russian circles to ignore the fact that the vast majority of Russia's Jews lived in, and were confined to, the Pale of Settlement, a region which had previously been part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and that the real foreign element there was Russia itself. - where is this coming from? Note the years: the last of Partitions of Poland took place in 1795. There is more OR/POV, but I am writing this only to ask: please, stop adding original research. It won't stick, don't waste your own and other's time.
  • Also, I thought there was an agreement to leave history for other articles. ←Humus sapiens ну? 11:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Never heard of that Lenine bit either. In any case Lenin is a nom de guerre (related to the river Lena, his real name is Vladimir Illyitsch Ullianovsk (spelling)) in other words a pseudonymn. This was quite common practice at the time (funnily Ludvikus thought my nom de plume (can't say nom de guerre as I ain't fighting all that much) Caranorn was a real name, how one could derive any ethnicity from it (other then possibly Sindarin or Quenya) is beyond me;-).
Bolshevics were also not the most revolutionary, at least the anarchists would be considered more revolutionary, and there were a few other movements active at the time that could be seen as more radical. What the Bolshevics became after the bourgeois revolution and certainly with the red revolution was the most dominant group, even then they were pulled behind the actual revolution which was not of their making, or at least only in small parts of their making.--Caranorn 13:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Common Knowledge

Please do not take personal offense - User:Caranorn, you sound sincere, but unaware of the antisemitic nature and sources of the allegation that Jews, rather than Russians, were/are responsible for Communist Russia.

  • 1 Lenine was a misspeling of Lenin's NAME to make it sound Jewish - I'll get you the source. Do you disaggree that it was alleged by these "theme" writers that Lenin was a Jew?
  • 2 Are you suggesting that miraculously the ignorant/uneducated/illiterate Russian pheasants (unlike the literate Jews), suddenly became enlightened Russian citizens because the wonderful Tzar saw the light and made them all instantly free? I know what happened to American slaves in 1863 - Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation. But they remained "Negroes" until the 1960's - and only then did they start to be recognized as African Americans. Do you have a problem locating sources which will inform vast number of Russia's effective SLAVES, remained so until well into the Russian Revolution - excuse me - the Jewish Russian Revolution?
  • 3 I think you are unaware of where the Pale of Settlement is. It is NOT in Russia ANYMORE because, in part, nationalism determined that peopless, like Ukrainians, Poles, Lithuanians should have their own countries - and not be subject to Russian imperialism.

Again, the Pale of Settlement was not historic Russia - do I really need to give you an exact citation to prove this to you? And if so, it was the Russian who was the foreigner? The Pale of Settlement was created to keep "Holy Mother Russia" clean, pure, and "unpoluted" by Jews!!! That's where Hitler learned his stuff - with the effective invention of the Pogrom in 1881 - right after the assassination of the Tsar who "liberated" the wonderful Russian peasants 20 years before. Now these free Russian realized what they had to do - get rid of the Christ killers by Pogroms. Am I getting the "complex theme" right? Is this the explanation of the bad behavior, un-Russian behavior, of the Jews?

  • 4 & *%, etc. I do not wish to offend you, I'm just pointing out what antisemites,and other kind of racist included, do - they focus on names to find one's ethnicity. Regarding yours, all I TRIED TO DO IS SHOW THAT IT CANNOT INFERRED THAT YOU ARE A JEW FROM YOUR NAME. It doesn't matter to me what you are originally, or whatever. All I care about is your views, and POV.
  • 6 Finally, the subject you raise is HISTORICAL - you cannot get arround that!
  • 7 The phrase does NOT deserve a title, any more that Ruski commie. Otherwise, I have to write that the rise of Ruski commies is a complex them in Russian history. "Ruski's are as much to blame as Yids for Bolshevism." 'Ruski were not really freed in 1861." "And many jobs were not available to them in mother Russia because of the clever, Anti-Christ Jews in their midst."

Yours truly, Ludvikus 15:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

You are replying to Humus Sapiens in most of the above examples. Maybe you missed that the section original research had two contributors.
Anyhow, I will reply to the part I believe are actually adressed to me.
Concerning Lenin, do indeed get the source (note the wikilink to Lenine points to an article about an entirely different person). And yes, I've heard lenin described as a Jew or the like before, to be honest I never cared (as an internationalist like Lenin himself) and therefore did not investigate whether he was indeed of partial jewish origin or not. Though I'm not sure how Lenine would sound more or less Jewish then Lenin, but that could be an issue of the russian language, which I don't speak.
Concerning my pseudonym I was originally rather astonished about your comments, with your explanation I think I now understand what you meant. But then again, as I already explained Lenin is also a pseudonym, accordingly it's not really logical to try and attribute an ethnic origin by the name alone. Of course we would agree that anti-semitism is not logical, same for any other form of racism.
Lastly please stop yelling (writting in all caps), it's not really the way to conduct a discussion.--Caranorn 16:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Jew Watch

Jew Watch is an antisemitic sight on the WEB which currently uses and subscribes to the theme that Bolshevism IS Jewish: [2]

Yours truly, Ludvikus 15:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

--Ludvikus 16:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC) says that here's the source of Jews and Bolshevism - Jew Watch:

Jews and Bolshevism

--Ludvikus 16:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC) SAYS: Here's a reference for you all - if you really want to be accurate, READ IT!!!

    Call #         *ZP-*PBM n.c. 128 no. 1
    Author      Valentin, Hugo, 1888-1963.
    Title       The Jews and Bolshevism [microform] /
               by Hugo Valentin.
    Imprint     [New York : American Jewish Committee, 1936?]
    URL for this record
         Humanities- Jewish Division     *ZP-*PBM n.c. 128 no. 1        
    Division    Humanities- Jewish Division
    Descript    11 p. ; 22 cm.
    Note        Cover title.
        "A chapter from Antisemitism by Hugo Valentin,
       published by the Viking Press".
        Microfilm. New York, N.Y. : New York Public Library, [197-].
       1 microfilm reel ; 35 mm. (MN: *ZZ-16578)
    Subject     Communism -- Soviet Union.
        Jews -- Soviet Union.
    Alt title   Antisemitism: historically and critically examined.

William Striker

--Ludvikus 17:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC) says here's a quote of a source on the "theme" coonecting Jews and Bolshevism:

    as the night to day, is the thrice hotter Jewish fire of 'Communism.'" William Striker

Protocol of 1919

The source of this Jewish connection theory is Russian and Nazi propaganda. It is contained in the above so-called "Protocol" published in 1934 in the 300-page tome of the Protocols of Zion issued by the SO-CALLED PATRIOTIC PUBLISHING CO.. It occurs on pages 297-298 of that antisemitic plagiarism. And the reference there is to an alleged Russian newspaper, Prizyu, issue of 5 February 1920. There it has a reference to an alleged "interesting document," in Hebrew, dated December 19919, and "found in the pocket of the dead Jew Zunder, the Bolshevic Commander of the 11th Sharp-shooter Battalion, throwing light on the secret organizations of Jewry in Russia." Apparently the "dead Jew" missed his mark. The quote that's most relevant (besides being "interesting") is the following antisemitic diatribe:

  Bronstein (Trotsky), Apfelbaum (Zinovieff), Rosenfeld (Kameneff), Steinberg
  —— all of them are like unto thousands of other true sons of Israel.

That's the scholarship behind the "theme" of Jewish Bolshevism Ludvikus 18:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Ruski Bolsheviks

Jewish Bolsheviks, like Negro this, or Negro that, and the above, are all equally offensive, racist expressions. Why must there be a justification for a "Jew" being a Boshevik as opposed to a "Ruski"? Yours truly, --Ludvikus 18:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

You ask: << "Why must there be a justification for a "Jew" being a Boshevik as opposed to a "Ruski"?>> Because Russian and Eastern Europe were (and in some cases still is) a very ethnic-conscious place, mostly because the populations had remained ENTIRELY separate/segregated from each other throughout their history (even though they living in the same country/territory). These differing groups remained separate not only ethnically but also religiously, socially, and economically. You have said yourself here many times that the Russian people (the "peasants" you so disdain) were a distinct group as opposed to Jews, and this was how the Soviets viewed it too. If you had done your research you would know that a section stating a person's ethnicity (or "nationality") and "family status" (along with known paternity, "patronymic") was ALWAYS noted on Soviet passports and other important documents and, according to the Soviet system, Jews as minority group were considered a distinct ethnic group in the USSR. Other groups (White Russians, Crimeans, Baltic Russians, etc.) had this noted on their documents, just as the Jews did. They also tracked people by region/territory of original origin (Propiska), so if people had originally been from the Russian areas of the Pale of Settlement this would have been noted in these documents. In fact, this lasted until recent times and in many cases is still happening in Russia and other places touched by Bolshevism. Look in to this and you shall find -- here's some info: Passport system in the Soviet Union. -- 00:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't particularly disdain Russian peasants - however, neither do I romanticise the "noble savage," or think illiteracy, ignorance (or as most "slovs" put it - being and "unalphabeta"), is particularly virtuous; neither is puity - not being poluted - like city people, or Jews. Otherwise, I didn't get the point.
Ulimately, we are all brothers and sisters, one species, human-beings.
The fact is, before Hitler's holocaust, there were Russian Pogroms.
The Germans, at least to sme extent, have learned to feel ashamed of their Nazi history. But the Russians, I do not know this for sure - generally, in their cultural and political didcourse, just pass over the Pogroms that began in 1881; they just innocently ask, and want to know why were there Jewish Bolsheviks?
Why not? --Ludvikus 02:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Rhetorical questions (I'm not actually asking them - no offense intended to my Russian brothers and sisters - even if I am renounced for being related to Jesus Christ, and they are not):

"Were the Ruskis to stuped, ignorant, or illiterate to become Bolsheviks?"
"Or is it simply that the Russian was pure, uncorrupted, good - unlike the evil, wicked Jew?"
What COMPLEX THEME is there to explore - except the simple theme of Antisemitism. In my opinion, it is not complex at all - anymore so than hatred, malicious, jelousy, envie - that's what it is.
And perhaps another element, I might add - scapegoat. The need for a scapegoat. The Jew is the convenient scapegoat to explain the rise of Communism in Russia. The Russian people are innocent in it - it was the Jews who did - made Russia take up Bolshevism.
So we must prove it by counting: How many Jews were Bossheviks? Many, Not so many? Some? Few? At least one? Even one would be too many!
Why not ask the question another way - why were there not enough Ruskis to defeat it? Why not explain the inadequacy of Russians to oppose Bolshevism? It is convenient to make the Jew "clever." But what does this racist remark make the Russian into but INFERIOR!
I am amazed that so few realize that this NEED to explain how many Jews were Bolsheviks is in its very nature racist, and antisenitic. --Ludvikus 18:39, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

PLEASE Ludvikus, read Yuri Slezkine's notable book The Jewish Century (that I have mentioned over and over) and then try and claim that Jews were not VERY HEAVILY involved with Bolshevism. Also realize that this is only one source of many (but one of the most recent and thorough). I might also add that Slezkine himself is partially Jewish and hails from the former USSR and has no "antisemitic agenda" to push; he is currently a professor at UC-Berkeley and this book was published by Princeton U.P. Thus the book is not "racist" or "antisemitic" propaganda, but is scholarly and has been the recipient of many awards. It cites hundreds of statistics regarding the incredibly high Jewish presence in European Bolshevism (mostly in Chapter 3, though the other chapters contain a wealth of material as well). Also, independently check some of the hundreds of sources listed in The Jewish Century that Slezkine uses to back up his facts. If I have some time over the coming days I'll try and post a few of the most startling statistics from the book here; maybe this will help to quell your irrational belief that Jews were not disproportionately involved in Bolshevism. -- 00:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

You sound like a young Russian recently freed form the yoke of Soviet Communism - or should I say Jewish Soviet Communism. Accordingly, you are unaware (Marx was right about irrationality)

of your gentle racism. You say many Jews. But what's your criteria? At what point do you get too many Jews? Don't you realized that the Palestinians claim that the Jews do not belong in Palestine? Don't you realize they say they belong in Europe, especially Russia, since most of the came from Russia? Or do you think ALL THE JEWS BELONG IN ISRAEL?

Again I ask you - how many Jews is too many Jews?
Also, why were there so few ethnic Russians among the Bolsheviks - where they too stupid? Or were they not clever? How do you measure these things? WHY DO YOU EVEN NEED TO ASK THE QUESTION?
Let me tell you again - the Russians invented the Pogroms. Therefore, my question is the following: HOW COME SO FEW JEWS PARTICIPATED IN THE BOLSHEVIK REVOLUTION (whatever number it was - IT WAS TOO FEW). Do you get my point? Probably not.
Tell me. You know how many Billions of dollars the Germans had to pay for victim's compensation? Well, how much compensation did the Russians pay for the major Pogroms which started in 1881, and made so many Russians - excuse me, Jews, since they are not Russians, right?
Yours truly, --Ludvikus 17:02, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Not Enought Jews Among the Bolsheviks

To expose the Racist nature of this notion consider this: Chinese, under their Communist system, are prospering, far surpassing Russia in the material progress, or standard of living. Could that be because there were not enough Jews among the Bolsheviks, and far too many Ruskis?

Quations: How many Jews are too many, and how many are too much?
Answer: The Jews were not sufficiently violent to resist their Stalinist Ruski oppressors in the Dictatorship of the Proletariate.
Anticipated Objections: Stalin was not Russian but a Georgian, and Krushchev was a Ukrainian. And Lenin was Lenine, a Jew (SO YOU WISH), not a Russian.
So Ruskis are not to "blame" for their Soviet system - it was somebody else who did it - the Jew (alway a convenient scapegoat for the "good Christian") did it, not the Ruskis.
Yours truly, Ludvikus 17:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

What does one of the top scholars of Jewish-Russian history in modern times (Yuri Slezkine) have to say about all of this?

"[Slezkine] says it would be impossible to ignore the contributions of Jews to the early Soviet government. They [Jews] had "the highest degree of over-representation among elites in the Soviet Union, and were very prominent in government," he said.
"A substantial proportion of the Soviet elite, including the government elite, were people of Jewish origin," continued Slezkine, a professor at U.C. Berkeley for the last nine years. "Many were actually native speakers of Yiddish." SOURCE: [3]

G'day. -- 07:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you trying to make a point? Please read the article, it should answer your concerns. ←Humus sapiens ну? 07:21, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Not enough Russians were Bolsheviks - Many Jews took their place - like "most negroes are less intelligent"

I am surprised that the editors are unaware of the fundamental Antisemitic and Racist nature of the term, "many Jews were Bolsheviks"! How many is many? Is "2 Jews too many"?

The subtext reads "too many Jews were Bolsheviks. African Americans have established these kind of racist remarks. It is just like saying "Most Negroes are inferior". Or most Negros are less intelligent.
There is no place for Antisemitism, or Racism, on Wikipedia under the guise of reporting the facts.
I ask that all editors be on guard against this kind of hateful rubbish. --Ludvikus 02:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Creapy, & Creaping Antisemitism

I suspect this kind of racism comes to the English Wikipedia from Russia where the Jews are to be blamed for Bolshevism.

  • One can say, "there were Jews who were Bolsheviks" - if there were.
  • The were 3,520,386 - if that were the case.
  • But how can one judge "many"?
  • Why not: "under the circumstance, few Jews were Bolsheviks?

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 03:08, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, see subtext, narratology, hermeneutics, semiotics, etc. --Ludvikus 03:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

  • May the phrase be used in a non-Antisemitic way? Requires citation!
  • How about "Russian gangsters" in New York? Is that neutral?
  • How about this question: What made "Russian communists"? Is that neutral?
  • Or this one: "Of all the Europeans, only Russians became communist - why? Is that neutral?
    • Citation required to assert neutrality.

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 06:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

These modern Antisemites wish to explain so-called "Negro crime in America." Will they also explain the "Russian mafia"? Here's something these contemporay Antisemites will not explain: "Why are there so many Ruskies in today's Russian Mafia?" There are no more "Jews" they can blame? Or is the there such a thing as the Judeo-Russian Mafia today as well? Please come forward and explain yourselves - I would like to learn about this so-called "neutral usage". --Ludvikus 14:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

used according to English grammar as an adjective + a noun

Consider other general syntagms: "dirty Jew", "bloodthirsty Jew", "perfidious Jew". ←Humus sapiens ну? 04:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

"dirty", "bloodthirsty", "perifidious" are insulting by themselves. "dirty French", "bloodthirsty French", "perfidious French" are insulting, too, right? But "French Bolshevism" would be insulting? No. So what is insulting in "Jewish Bolshevism" if one wants to address specifically the phenomenon? It is like "French Surrealism" or "Balkanic Nationalism" - A phenomenon observed/discussed within some ethnic/cultural/geographical boundaries. Daizus 08:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Since you seem to insist on the strictly literal interpretation, let me play a devil's advocate and say that I don't see anything offensive in the word "dirty." ←Humus sapiens ну? 11:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC) Daizus 11:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
LOL. Shall we make a special clause for "dirty Jew" in the article Kibbutz? Surely their work involves getting dirty once in a while. ←Humus sapiens ну? 23:51, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
The expression "Jewish Bolshevism" is known to be used in a very specific way, and our article reflects it. Even there were plenty of Russians, Ukrainians and Lativans in the movement, we don't have articles Russian Bolshevism, Ukrainian Bolshevism or Latvian Bolshevism for a reason. ←Humus sapiens ну? 11:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't suggest we should write an article on Jewish Bolshevism as a neutral term (because simply it is not coined as such), simply to acknowledge in this article that actually a large number of Jews participated in Bolshevic movements (and that removed paragraph had a link to History of the Jews in Russia and the Soviet Union#Jews and Bolshevism, an article with a rich scholarly bibliography - check Yuri Slezkine's book for instance). It is a POV to suggest Jewish Bolshevism is just a conspiracy theory and has absolutely no factual basis. There was a significant part in the Bolshevic movement with Jewish origin and I see this fact intentionally obscured by the current form of the article. Daizus 11:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Agree with User Humus above. And to answer your specific question on "French Bolshevism": the number of Frenchmen in the Russian empire was practically zero. But if there were a significant number it too would be racist. Any such usage, suggests a defect in a people, race, nationality - can only be such in the context you give. What you are saying by it is, again, that there was something in the nature of the Jew which mad him a Communist; but Russians, are nicer people, so they are not inclined to be Communists. That's what the phrase means, and nothing more. The purpose of this article is to document Antisemitism, and not to be Antisemitic like the Protocols of Zion. You are only trying to do what these Protocls are all about - to say that Jews, or primarily Jews, are responsible for the Communist fate of Russia. That's why you do not have a Reference to support your usage. Do you understand me? --Ludvikus 11:56, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Ludvikus, Bolshevism wasn't and isn't limited to Russia (or rather the former Soviet Union). There were and are Bolsheviks in France. I myself could be considered a Luxembourgish (or European as I don't identify all that much with the country/state) Bolshevik (and several of my friends and colleagues consider themselves such rather then simply communists). I'd also like to see a source for the specific, scholarly use of the term "Jewish Bolshevism", but that does not mean that the term is always inappropriate (though I'm not sure an internationalist like Trotsky for instance would have self identified as a Jew, Russian or any other ethnicity for that matter (in a way, "Jewish Bolshevik" is an insult to those people (not because of the identification as Jewish, but because of any ethnic/national identification when they tried to overcome all such barriers))). Also attacking other wikipedians as you once again did with your You are only trying to do what these Protocols are all about... comment is not acceptable. Please read Wikipedia:Assume Good faith, I see no reason to assume Daizus is pursuing an anti-semitic agenda in his edits and comments here.--Caranorn 13:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, Caranorn.
I also provided my examples: "French Surrealism", "Balkan nationalism" are coined syntagms and they do not suggest anything about full commitment of the members in one category to the other category. I am not trying to say all the things you suggest I'd believe or want to say! I understand however a point you're making - that some people may understand that. We can work on phrasing, no problem for me!
The purpose of the article is not antisemitism (which has its own article), but Jewish Bolshevism as a theory (conspiracy theory as it is presented). People may read this article and say: ok, ok - these guys were crazy and thought the Jews conspired to create a new world order, a worldwide system led by them, but what was the reality, what eventually drove them to believe that? It's absurd to claim the term just popped up from nothingness. Perhaps it is not within this article's purpose to clarify that, but as long as there's in Wikipedia a material (not very detailed, I admit) concerning this issue (which was in the text you removed), it would be nice to have a mention and a reference. Daizus 13:17, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
First, my colleagues: we are dealing with emotional issues, let's try to assume good faith.
On the subject: let me put it this way. There were more Jewish Mensheviks than Jewish Bolsheviks. There are tons of "an adjective + a noun" expressions that do not have their own articles. This particular expression deserves its own article only because it was/is abused by antisemites and was a Nazi rallying cry. There is no specifically Jewish concept of Bolshevism (an internationalist and fiercely anti-religious movement, at least in the USSR), unlike "French Surrealism", "Balkan nationalism". The inclusion of the proposed WP:POINT is really unnecessary, IMHO.
BTW, thank you for pointing me to History of the Jews in Russia and the Soviet Union, I wrote some of its content. ←Humus sapiens ну? 06:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't think I have requested a new article for Jewish Bolshevism so I am not quite sure I'm following the point you're making, Humus sapiens. I have just asked to acknowledge directly (by stating it) and/or indirectly (by linking to Jews and Bolshevism section from the article you have just mentioned), there were indeed a large number of Bolshevic Jews. And I don't think this point disrupts in anyway the article, on the contrary, it draws a clear distinction between the conspiracy theory and the real fact. Daizus 07:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I think you are confused what's being discussed in this section, please check out its title. Who says "new article"? And History of the Jews in Russia and the Soviet Union is already linked twice. ←Humus sapiens ну? 07:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
OK, I provided link #3. Hope all are happy now. ←Humus sapiens ну? 07:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
You have said "There are tons of "an adjective + a noun" expressions that do not have their own articles.". I haven't requested a new article for "Jewish Bolshevism" as an adjective + a noun.
Your new link makes it much better, yes, but I still believe it should have been made in a clear statement somewhere in the lead. Anyway, this is a progress. Daizus 07:57, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Article geographical scope is too narrow.

"Jewish Bolshevism" topic is important elsewhere beyond Russia or the USSR. For example Stalin himself described Mátyás Rákosi, the local communist dictator between 1949-1955 as the "first jewish king of Hungary". In fact the large amount of top position jews in the opressive hungarian communist party regime contributed to pogromic events during the 1956 hungarian revolution. In fact even today right-wing anti-semitism in Hungary is largely motivated by anti-communist anti-jewry, rather than genetical based anti-jewry (i.e. nazi ideology). The memory of communist opression is still alive, pre-WWII era has faded. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 14:17, 17 February 2007 (UTC).

I've forgotten where I've read it (in a reliable source), but it's known that Mátyás Rákosi himself often expressed anti-Semitic attitudes (often in regards to money/business/economics), even though he was himself ethnically Jewish! Before WWII Hungary had a Jewish population of around 5% (one of the highest in Europe), and many estimate that this 5% controlled about 70-90% of all the business and industry in Hungary (similar situation in Romania, Belarus, Poland, Ukraine, and so forth). A few hundred thousand Jews were apparently killed by the Nazis and Nazi collaborators in Hungary (sent to Auschwitz), but even then because so many Jews still remained In Hungary after WWII they soon rose to occupy the highest positions in the newly installed Communist govt. -- 21:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Jewish communism

Is there an article on that subject - equivalent to Polish communism, Communism in Colombia, or Category:Communism in the United Kingdom? I.e. not dealing with conspiracy theories, but with nonpartisan analysis of views on communism among Jewish communities?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree. This page should be reserved for the conspiracy theory stuff, and Jewish Communism should be the article for actual history. (With capital C, as we are talking (presumably?) about Communist parties and states, rather than the much, much broader small-c communism that includes anarchist communism, primitive communism, council communism, etc. BobFromBrockley 11:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

factually wrong article

Where is the source for the following statement:

"In the mid-1930's, under the leadership of Genrikh Yagoda (who was Jewish), the Jewish presence in the secret police briefly became dominant: of the people surrounding Yagoda, 39% were Jewish and only 30% Russian. The immediate predecessors to Yagoda in that same position were also Jewish : Iosif Unschlicht and Meier Trilisser."

Yagoda's predecessor was Vyacheslav Menzhinsky (he wasn't Jewish). The "39%" claim is highly suspect

In response to this anon editor, I have added fact and dubious tags by this info. BobFromBrockley 12:44, 18 July 2007 (UTC)