"It's difficult to admit the obvious"
political world

Jews as the Chosen People

jan peczkis|Wednesday, April 15, 2015

JEWISH CIVILIZATION is the title of this Polish-language work (review based on original 1943 edition). There is such a wealth of information in this book, by a noted Endek author, that I can only touch on a few topics.

Jewish civilization is of the sacral type, as is Brahmin civilization. (e. g, p. 99, 101, 140, 266). Judaism places sacral law over ethics. (p. 23, pp. 152-154). The main difference between the Brahmin and the Jew is Jewish messianism and the concept of the Chosen People. (p. 140). [To see Koneczny's taxonomy of civilizations, please click on, and read the detailed Peczkis review, of On the Plurality of Civilisations]. The reader should note that Koneczny uses his taxonomy in a typological as well as literal sense. As an example of the former, Bismarck was an example of Byzantine civilization, which had largely replaced Latin civilization in pre-Hitler Germany. (p. 362).

It is hardly surprising that this Endek author is the bete noire of leftists. Koneczny's ideas do not conform to the current leftist dogma of multiculturalism, and his statements can be taken as criticisms of groups that the politically correct crowd wants to be exempt from criticism. [However, I do not agree with much of what Koneczny says.]

Koneczny's scholarship is extensive. This work is a very comprehensive history of the Jews, is 415 pages in length, and is supported by 1,721 references. Agree with Koneczny or not, one must realize that he is no intellectual lightweight. As for the "hateful" tone of what Koneczny sometimes says about Jews, it is, at worst, no more so than the volumes of venomous materials that Jews have written about Christianity and about Poles, even (or especially) in our own "enlightened" and "ecumenical" age.


Unlike his critics, the Endek Koneczny does not engage in black-and-white thinking. The reader will soon notice that Feliks Koneczny is not unilaterally negative towards Jews. He rejects the blood libel and accusations of Jews conducting ritual murder. He attributes such beliefs to folklore. He appreciates the fact that consumption of blood and of human flesh is abhorrent to Judaism. However, he suggests that a few allegations of ritual murder may be factual, but were conducted not by mainstream Jews but by magic-oriented cults that are offshoots of Judaism. (pp. 312-314).

What about Jewish particularism? Koneczny rejects the argument that Jews are a race (p. 110), and expresses appreciation for the Jews who had become sincere Poles. (pp. 318-319). However, he stresses the fact that this does not often happen, because, to him, it is very difficult for the Jewish psyche to be transformed into the Polish psyche. (p. 321).

Koneczny rejects the PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF ZION as even possibly authentic. (p. 180). Nor can they serve as any kind of gauge of the degree of actual Jewish international influence. (p. 181). However, Koneczny believes that the PROTOCOLS express the age-old Jewish desire to see the GOYIM transformed into the servants of Israel. He suggests that the PROTOCOLS were written by a Jewish author, probably Asher Ginsberg, in the context of Ginsberg's disagreement with Theodor Herzl. The pioneering Zionist Herzl had wanted a Palestinian-based Zion, while Ginsberg had envisioned an alternative Zionism that functioned right in the galut. (p. 180).


Feliks Koneczny recognizes both monotheism and monolatry in classical Jewish thinking. Monotheism is belief in one God who is universal. Monolatry is belief in a God who is above all other gods, and who effectively serves as a tribal god for the Jews. (p. 8). In monolatry, God loves only Israel, supports Jews when they are wronged, gives Jews privileges without regard for justice to other peoples, etc. (p. 17). Monolatric sacralism leads to the notion of Jews as the Chosen people, to Jewish exclusivism and separatism, and even to contempt for non-Jews. (p. 24).

[The reader should realize that Koneczny's concept, of monolatry and monotheism in Judaism, is quite similar to that of Claude G. Montefiore, a leading British Jewish thinker. Please click on, and read my review, of Liberal Judaism: An Essay.]


The author suggests that the Talmud has obscured the Torah, if not eclipsed it. (p. 60). Koneczny believes that the Talmud is an example of sacralism run amok, in that the Pentateuch had been bloated into 613 laws. What's more, commentaries have been built on commentaries, and Talmudic reasoning has degenerated into casuistry. (p. 60).

The author cites Moses Maimonides, who, upon his visit with Saladin in Cairo in the late 12th century, had been told that Jews living under the Tatars and Turks followed only the Torah. This is in addition to the Karaites, who had explicitly rejecting the authority of the Talmud. (p. 62).

Koneczny does not uncritically endorse the view that the Talmud teaches hatred for Christians. He notes that some modern Jewish interpretations of the verses referring to idolaters (e. g, AKUM, MINIM, ADOM, etc., p. 179) state that these terms do not apply to Christians, at least to modern Christians. Koneczny leaves it an open question as to whether this new position is genuine, or if it is a public-relations move. (p. 142).


Some forms of early Jewish assimilation in Europe envisioned the creation of a "new man". This "new man" would consist of those Jews and Christians that had rejected their religions in favor of a vague deism. This process was propounded by Freemasonry. (p. 318, 325).

In common with many authors, Koneczny sees Jews as major players in the promotion of sexual permissiveness (p. 365), breakdown of other forms of morality, etc., in Poland. However, Koneczny does not scapegoat Jews in this regard. He realizes that gentiles, including Poles, were also involved in this process. In Poland, one vision of the "new Jew" and "new Pole" was propounded by Andrzej Niemojewski, a notorious anti-Catholic, who stated (before he turned in an anti-Jewish direction) the following: The Jew and Pole have nothing in common. They do not have the same aspirations. They cannot work for the same goals. They do not value the same things. They do not share the same sufferings. So what can unite the "new Jew" and the "new Pole"? It can only be one thing--the mockery of God, of religion, of traditional values, of the Nation, of various ideals, etc. (p. 326).

The foregoing, written now over 70 years ago, is uncannily similar to the situation in today's Poland. We see the "Europeanization" of Poles by the LEWAKS (Polish leftists) and local Jews, as exemplified by the content of the left-wing and Judeocentric GAZETA WYBORCZA. This "modernization" of Poland involves the creation of a new elite of Poles and Jews that falsify history, and mock Polish patriotism, Catholicism, and traditional morality.


Koneczny stresses the role of the Litvaks (Litwaks) in turning the assimilated Polish Jews of Congress Poland in a non-Polish or anti-Polish direction. This is exemplified by the statements of the eminent Yiddishist writer Szolem Asz (Sholem Asch). (pp. 319-320).

Jewish messianism is now secular. (p. 180). Moreover, according to Koneczny, the Jewish support for socialism and Communism are manifestations of messianism, as well as the grabbing of any tool that can destroy Christianity. (p. 350). The halutzim of Eretz Israel are an experimental form of Communism that is designed to demonstrate the feasibility of Communism in an agricultural setting. (p. 162, 258, 342).

Finally, the author provides much information about the following: The concept of Judeopolonia, the strongly pro-German orientation of Poland's Jews around WWI, and what he saw as the subsequent zazydzenie (Judaization) of Poland.


The reader who finds this juxtaposition shocking should remember the following: Countless Jewish authors have no regard for either the facts, or for the feelings of Christians, and they freely juxtapose Christianity and Nazism. Some find a direct connection, while others insinuate that Christian condemnations of Jews, as for deicide, went on to serve as a precedent, and example, for the Nazis and the Holocaust. On this basis, it is only fair that we ask if Jewish concepts of supremacy had served as a precedent, and example, for Nazi German concepts of supremacy.

Feliks Koneczny realizes that Nazism is the strongest form of anti-Semitism, yet he suggests that it is, in a sense, a copy of Jewish civilization. [The scientifically-minded reader may think of matter and antimatter. They are similar, yet opposites.] This is in the sense that Nazism copies the Chosen People and Chosen Race concept. (p. 362, 365). In addition, both systems rely on monolatry. The monolatry in Judaism has already been discussed. As for Nazism, the Germans have a revived tribal war god in Wotan, or in a form of Germanized Christianity (e. g, DEUTSCHE GOTT). (pp. 363-364).

Finally, the reader must realize that a leading American rabbi, Mordecai M. Kaplan, the co-founder of Reconstructionist Judaism, himself juxtaposed Nazi supremacism with the racial-style supremacism of the Jews, against both of which he strongly objected.
Copyright © 2009 www.internationalresearchcenter.org
Strony Internetowe webweave.pl