/pol/ - Politically Incorrect

Political discussion of ideology, history, and [current] events.

Posting mode: Reply

Check to confirm you're not a robot
Drawing x size canvas

Remember to follow the rules

Max file size: 350.00 MB

Max files: 5

Max message length: 4096

Manage Board | Moderate Thread

Return | Catalog | Bottom

Please use the stickies + catalog
Logs can be found here: https://endchan.net/logs.js
Insulting National Socialism or Hitler or promoting jews will be banned immediately.

Expand All Images

(104.35 KB 564x452 jewfortresses.png)
(239.44 KB 480x631 jewrycharters.png)
Medieval and ancient jewry Anonymous 02/15/2020 (Sat) 18:50:51 Id: d8e1dd [Preview] No. 78541
We're all well aware of the aspects of the JQ that involve over-representation in places of power in society, but I think it is also interesting to look into the JQ from a historical perspective to see the privileges that the Jews had since nearly the beginning of recorded history, so in contrast to the narratives of oppression peddled to us today.

From time immemorial this particularistic race has kept among themselves, seeing themselves as "chosen" with double-standards in morality. Through their natural drive to trade and usury, they have spread far and wide to port cities and trading post, growing rich through trade, interest and theft. With their newly found the wealth the Jews become useful to European governments, using their influence to extract privileges from the kings such as tax exemptions, the ability to lend money at interest and even military protection. In the city of Tudela in Navarre the Jews were housed by the king in a fortress to protect them from the enraged goyim (see pic 2).

Anyways, this thread will discuss truths of Judaism mostly from a historical perspective. Feel free to contribute and recommend either videos, works or infographs that go into good detail on these matters.

Anonymous 02/15/2020 (Sat) 18:53:35 Id: d8e1dd [Preview] No.78542 del

So most of this paper (link at the bottom) gives the text in Old Italian I presume, but the authors provide us a summary of each chapter. I'm well aware that the greentext is long, so if anyone wants a summary of my condensed summary below, here it is:

Jews are completely exempt from all taxes except the taille (direct land-tax), the extraction of 30-45% interest from "any person, ecclesiastic or secular, to servants, children, and women.", they are freely permitted to practice their religion, not are not forced to be identified in public, they have the right to bear arms and especial provision was made for their security on Good Friday. Oppressed or privilege….?

>1. The local authorities are to make no laws or regulations to the prejudice of the Jews herein referred to.

> 8. They are exempt from all taxes or imposts of every description except the taille to the Roman See

> 9. They are to pay no tithes to any person ecclesiastic or secular.

> 10. If pledges are not redeemed within one year, they may be sold as though they were the banker's property. If the latter chooses to keep them he may charge interest as heretofore.

>11. The Jews are not to be required or forced to loan upon security more than they choose. If the pledge is lost or stolen, they may deduct amount loaned and interest, in making compensation. They may loan to any person, ecclesiastic or secular, to servants, children, and women.

>12. After the year of redemption has passed they may add the accrued interest to the capital without prejudice to their right of selling the pledge

>13. Statutes of limitations are not to run against their written contracts

>18. The local butchers are to slaughter cattle of the Jews according to the Jewish ritual, under pain of 5 fl. fine for every offense. The Jews may, otherwise, slaughter them themselves without payment of any licence-fees, and sell what their dietary laws forbid them to use

>19. On Good Friday they are to be free from molestation of any sort. The local officials, under pain of 100 gold ducats fine, are to take special precaution to secure their safety by appropriate proclamations. The head of the household will be responsible for acts committed by minors under his care

>23. In loans without security they may charge 1 1/2 bolognini per florin a month (45 % per annum), or as per agreement. Their debtors of every sort must pay for the actual time elapsed, whatever may be the period mentioned in the agreement. The petitioners may have summary execution for principal and interest due

>27. They need not wear a badge of any sort.

>35. For their security, they may bear arms in or out of the places mentioned


Anonymous 02/15/2020 (Sat) 18:54:53 Id: d8e1dd [Preview] No.78543 del
>Although the Jews of both Palestine and the Diaspora had steadily moved into the orbit of the Roman world in the course of the second century B.C.E., Rome did not develop a substantial body of laws regarding the Jews until the second half of the first century B.C.E. Only then, in the fifty-odd years from Caesar to Augustus, did Roman magistrates pass a number of decrees aimed at protecting the free exercise of Jewish religion. They decreed that Jews might gather freely in thiasoi, observe the Sabbath and the Jewish festivals, send money to the Temple in Jerusalem, and enjoy autonomy in their communal affairs. Jews were also absolved from compulsory enrollment in the Roman military.[1]

>[1] Josephus, AJ 14.190-264, 16.162-73. For later measures taken by Claudius, see Josephus, AJ 19.278-91, 19.299-311, 20.1-14. 1 Macc. 15 claims that Rome became a guarantor of Jewish religious liberty throughout the Mediterranean as early as the second century B.C.E. But there in no convincing evidence to substantiate this claim: see J.-D. Gauger, Beitrage zur judischen Apologetik: Untersuchungen our Authentizitat von Urkunden bei Flavius Josephus und im ersten Makkabaerbuch (Cologne: Hansten, 1977) 299f. The enrollment of the Jews in the formula amicorum et sociorum of the Roman People in 140 B.C.E. did not oblige the Romans to protect the rights of individual Jews living in the Diaspora: see ibid. 188f., 205, 229f., 253f., 324.


Anonymous 02/15/2020 (Sat) 18:55:09 Id: d8e1dd [Preview] No.78544 del
The Julio-Claudians had a Rothschild-tier court jew system in Alexandria, Egypt called the "Alabarchy". I thus had came to the conclusion that the jewish financial and political control today should be called an Alabarchy.


These people were responsible for taxation and were extremely wealthy. Josephus said that Alexander the Alabarch surpassed all other citizens in "ancestry and wealth" (Antiquities 20.100) who overlaid the gates of the Jerusalem temple with gold (Judean War, 5.205), and he was in-fact the younger brother of Philo, who was a Hellenistic jewish philosopher that helped develop the eternal soul doctrine. He was even said to be a friend of Claudius.

This establishes a jewish elite going back to late Hellenistic times

>medieval jewry

The Codex Theodosianus obviously allowed jews special privileges within the Roman empire (merchants set their own price, you cannot kill the jew even in the name of Christianity, Judaism is not banned, jews are exempt from service, etc.). Charlemagne (this is a pretty obvious one) knighted for the court jews as a financial class until only a few weeks before his death.

Ebalus, the Duke of Aquitaine was called "Ebalus the Mamzer". Now mamzer was a Hebrew word meaning mongrel/bastard. It's used in the Latin Vulgate in Deuteronomy 23, and in general it was used in Latin to describe jewish mongrels in the medieval times. Perhaps Ebalus the Mamzer was a mamzer as in, his mum was jewish? Similarly, William the conqueror (who conquered England, literally went on a genocide campaign against the former Danish settlers and Northumbrians, brought jews to England who eventually became a major financial class, etc.) was also called "William the Mamzer", and his commoner mother was a daughter of a tanner, common jewish occupation in Europe at the time. In-fact in contemporary Greece and Anatolia, jews were notorious for being so filthy as they were tanners.


>Not to derail your thread, but I have a strong suspicion that the reason the alt-kike pushes medieval iconography is because, contrary to what we've been (((taught))), jews were lording it over the goyim and it was such a genetically destructive era for whites. Kind of like how the alt-kike utilizes Confederate iconography, since the CSA was fighting to keep niggers in America to eventually destroy the integrity of the white race.

It should've been obvious from the get-go all the glorification of the middle ages is suspicious. Why do you think that jewish hollywood pushes this image of knights being heroic?

Feudalism wasn't a "golden age" for whites. It's when big hat in Rome, the emperor or the noblemen that served them practically had total rule over the European populace. Jews were expelled most of the time not even by the feudal lords, but by rioting peasants, and it's in-fact the Catholic authorities that kept moving the jews around Europe until they all settled in Poland. There are FAR more than 109 expulsion of the jews yet this number keeps being pushed around as the amount of times jews were expelled around the world. Vast majority of them weren't even by the kings themselves.

Anonymous 02/15/2020 (Sat) 18:55:27 Id: d8e1dd [Preview] No.78545 del
Speaking of both Charlemagne's relations with jews and Aquitane, the old realm of Septimania, populated by Arian Visigoths but recently splitting from the rest of the Visigothic kingdom due to the Islamic conquests was conquered by Pepin's primarily Catholic army. The jews that opened the gates for Pepin's army in Narbonne fact were awarded with land in Septimania. This is in-fact a common theme in medieval history, them helping invasions and getting rewarded. They helped the Moors invade the Visigoths in Toledo, they helped the Franks invade Narbonne, later on they helped the Turks take Constantinople.


The king was a Persian jew who claimed descent from David. Read above article.

>As a part of the agreement to create Septimania, it was understand that, under the feudal system of the time, Natronai–who now took the Hebrew name of Machir-would give oaths of allegiance to the King of the Franks. King Charles requested that Machir marry his aunt Alda. A request from the King of the Franks was a command.

>All now came clear. So this was why Pepin had required that the King of Septimania be a direct descendant of King David! The problem for Pepin, and for his son, King Charles, was that Pepin had usurped the throne of the Franks from the Merovingians, and thus there was no royal blood in their veins. This they desperately needed in order to establish the legitimacy of their dynasty. By this marriage of Alda to Machir, who was a direct lineal descendant of King David, they would not only have royal blood in the veins of their descendants, but the most royal blood possible, the blood of David himself!

>But how could such a marriage take place? Alda was Catholic, and no Catholic priest would marry her to a Jew unless the Jew converted, which of course Machir absolutely could not do. On the other hand, no rabbi would marry Machir to a gentile unless she converted. An unsolvable dilemma? Apparently not, for marry they did, and had a legitimate son through whom Jewish blood now was intermingled with that of the Carolingian kings of France. How was this possible? History is silent. There was a way that perhaps it could be accomplished, based on the customs of the time. Whether in fact this way was used is purely speculative.

So not only did the dukes of Aquitane later inherit jewish blood illegitimately, but Charlemagne himself legally had a jewish uncle, who married his aunt by his own order! Meaning that the jewish kings of Septimania were in-fact related to the Carolingians. Now, going back to the Goths, this word comes into play later on during the medieval ages:


Cagots were a group in Septimania, the Basque country, and Aquitane. They were grossly persecuted by all their neighbours for some reason, despite being religious even in the churches they were treated as lepers. Why were they called Cagots? The name derives roughly from "Caas" or "Canine" and "Goth". This would mean that Cagot literally translates to Gothic dog.

I propose that they were called "Cagots" or "Gothic dogs" by the jewish rulers of Septimania as a jewish prejudice against whites, and that this is why they were persecuted.

Anonymous 02/15/2020 (Sat) 18:57:12 Id: d8e1dd [Preview] No.78547 del
(1.41 MB 1201x601 Radhanites2.png)
(44.26 KB 348x728 ForeignMerchant.jpg)
It's definitely possible that the Carolingians had some jewish blood even before they took charge, perhaps through some bastard somewhere in the Merovingian lines, blood, though it's doubtful unlike with William the bastard or especially the kings of Spain (despite him starting the inquisition, Ferdinand II was 1/8th jewish, and even the other Europeans thought of Spain as a den of jewry). He was described as swarthy, though it can be through southern Italian ancestry as well. But what we do know for sure, is that Charlemagne had jews in his extended family.
Jews hadn't been infiltrating northern Europe like they did Rome or even the Middle Eastern empires, they infiltrated it like they did for example, Poland. They probably first went to the wilder more inland parts of Germania sometime around the 2nd century AD though they already were all over Rome even before the 1st century AD (expelled from Rome by Hispanus though later came back, already had a community in Greece and ritualistically massacred Greeks in Cyprus), I would say the Roman controlled parts of Germania had jews dating back to the 1st or 2nd century (they're documented in the parts of Switzerland that were a part of Germania Superior), and Constantine allowed the jews to enter the city council of Cologne in 324 AD.
Russia would've also had an old jewish presence predating the Khazars, Crimea probably had jews dating back to antiquity, most likely the jews of Persia or Anatolia. These folks would've traded around the area of Ukraine which is why jewish presence is documented so much around that area. Later on the Radhanites (pic related was their trade routes, from France to China, and also a Radhanite merchant depicted in Chinese art) had southern Russia as a major trading hub. Russian jewry originated here, they bought Slavic slaves from nomads, and sold them to the Romans and Arabs (this is why "slave" comes from "Slav"), as far west as Spain. They tried to take over the whole of Russia several times. They were only stopped by Ivan Grozny, which is probably why they always depict him as some hollywood villain (sacking Novgorod, playing football with severed heads, impaling people, etc.) and still call him "Ivan the Terrible" in English. Also notice how much they use impaling people in propaganda around that period, it's possible that Vlad the Impaler wasn't an impaler at all.
Many cathedrals have jewish symbolism in them. Specifically in the Cordoba cathedral there was a lot of kabbalah symbolism, it even depicted the trinity like the kabbalistic tree of life. Again, Spain had the OP, Spanish royals were part-jewish since after the middle ages, and in general was known for being a stingy den of jewry by other Europeans prior to 1492. The Zohar (main text of kabbalah, mostly plagiarised from Neoplatonism and mixed with kabbalah) was written in Spain.
There's much more kabbalah symbolism in cathedrals than even just that, hexagrams too. Don't forget that the high churches and cathedrals were built by basically proto-freemasons (the original bricklaying guilds).

Anonymous 02/15/2020 (Sat) 18:59:05 Id: d8e1dd [Preview] No.78548 del
Apparently, Hungary's historical jewish population was so influential and big, that it along with Russia has the most Ashkenazi-descended population in Europe. The jewish company MyHeritageDNA admit this.

>Jews have a long history in Hungary, with Jewish officials having served the king during the early 13th-century reign of Andrew II. By the early 20th century, the Jewish community constituted 5% of Hungary’s total population (comparable to MyHeritage’s findings) and Jews comprised 23% of the population of the capital, Budapest.

However I see this as partially propaganda, considering MyHeritage is an Israeli company (immediate sign of rigging things), that this was taken from a low pool of users, and uses the low Ashkenazi-DNA in Poland to prove that the lolocaust happened. Of course this is nonsense, it's just that most jews left Poland for Israel, Russia etc. in the early 20th century. Plus, Ashkenazi DNA is said to be found among many Poles (don't take this as me saying Poles are jewish-mutts, they aren't, but a portion are):


I wouldn't be surprised if the jews running MyHeritage are just rigging it to legitimise the holohoax. In general, I wouldn't trust DNA tests that much.

Similarly, an entire town in Austria is called "Judenburg" after its historic position as a trading outpost in-between the mountains of Austria and Slovenia… …in which the jews played an important role. Suspiciously, Napoleon (freemasonic jew and one of the first Zionists who tried carving out a jewish state in Palestine, his family left for Corsica same time many jews did) ended the French war with Austria in Judenburg.

In-fact, the jews have had tremendous influence within the Habsburg realms as Hofjuden or "court jews". They often lived in massive mansions in Vienna, in far better lives than the Austrian peasant. Give these a read, they give great information on the history of the jews in Habsburg realms and their privileged status.



While the Rothschilds might have originated as court jews in Frankfurt, they only made it wealthy after going to Vienna.

Anonymous 02/16/2020 (Sun) 00:31:11 Id: 682ea4 [Preview] No.78553 del
(152.10 KB 480x798 23543.jpg)
This has been an interesting and well-researched read, OP. Blackpilling though. The truth often is. What we can gather from all of it is this ZOG empire BS has been going on for way too long.
And that most rulers cannot be trusted to expel the parasites for the betterment of nations. It falls to the people to amass a counterforce.

Anonymous 02/17/2020 (Mon) 04:15:26 Id: 875767 [Preview] No.78562 del
The middle ages were the peak of humanity. Do you wonder why its so maligned today? "The Dark Ages" is a judeo-masonic myth meant the discredit natural hierarchy and christendom. Sure there was a jewish problem back then, but it absolutely paled in comparison to the power they wielded with the coming of the renaissance and then the enlightenment.
Your information is very interesting but understand the middle ages were a "dark age" for jewish supremacy.

Anonymous 02/17/2020 (Mon) 07:33:56 Id: 682ea4 [Preview] No.78567 del
Compare your statements to OPs and realize the problem with your post. You're expecting people to take what you said at face value. More effort is required. Provide sources. Get in the habit of producing background information. The difference in the fight of information between the jew and the rest of us is going to be won by our tendency to provide clear-cut facts while they're only able to blow hot air and lie their asses off. More intelligent minds will wake up that way, and they'll only have retards on their side.

Anonymous 02/17/2020 (Mon) 13:59:13 Id: a2542b [Preview] No.78569 del
I knew a lot of Catholics were going to say that the jewish question didn't start until the enlightenment, but in-reality it was going on for far before. There's always been a sort of internal conflict between the judicialists and mysticists within Roman society and thus the church as well, the enlightenment was simply a transition from the former (what we think of as Catholic monarchies) to the latter (secular republics). However, the jewish question has been going on way before, and was especially big during the middle ages.
For starters, can you actually point out why the middle ages weren't a period where jews lorded it out over the gentiles? It's a historical fact that monarchs and the church itself hired jews to carry out degenerate acts they wouldn't want to do themselves, especially usury and trade. The expulsions of jews in the middle ages were in-fact a reaction to kings doing this, even when other kings did it like Edward I. In this thread, it's proven that jews intermarried with the royal families themselves, often on behest of kings like Charlemagne. So what you're saying isn't too convincing.

Anonymous 02/17/2020 (Mon) 19:26:06 Id: 88723b [Preview] No.78573 del
>The middle ages were the peak of humanity.
Church perverts cutting prepubescent boys' testicles off is the peak of humanity to you, Shlomo? Jews exterminating over a third of the white race during the Black Plague is peak humanity? I guess if one takes a talmmudical view of what "humanity" is (only jews, and goyim are animals in human form).

No, we were almost on our death knell during the Middle Ages. If it lasted a few more centuries, we seriously might have been finished, with Europe instead being populated by some brown/churka mongrel race with tyrannical jewish overlords. It is almost a miracle that we managed not to succumb to it.

Anonymous 02/18/2020 (Tue) 15:59:44 Id: 9c5c8f [Preview] No.78577 del
I never said there wasnt a Jewish problem in the middle ages, just that it was of significantly less of an issue. The biggest banking houses were Italian, not Jewish. The Jews were allowed to be petty pawn brokers. It wasnt until the transition to secular republics that Jewish power becomes all consuming.

Anonymous 02/18/2020 (Tue) 16:02:43 Id: 9c5c8f [Preview] No.78578 del
Anti-clerical judeo-masonic line of thinking. Blaming medieval society for jew well poisoning is pretty retarded. The Jews were pogromed as a result. The renaissance and the enlightenment led to the secular republics we have today.

Anonymous 02/18/2020 (Tue) 16:05:14 Id: 9c5c8f [Preview] No.78579 del
I'm not contesting his facts. There indeed a Jewish problem in the middle ages and posts are a great source on this. The thing is court Jews and petty money lenders were nothing compared to the banking houses that came with the enlightenment

Anonymous 02/18/2020 (Tue) 17:36:20 Id: 8d56cc [Preview] No.78581 del
Banking houses came far before the enlightenment, not even just the Medicis (or other "Italian" banking families, even if we do accept that they were Italian and not part-jewish which they were) in the Renaissance, but the Radhanites were a single jewish family responsible for the trade routes throughout the Mediterranean. Philo's family were essentially the equivalent of the Rothschilds in Alexandria. Again, unconvincing.
The "pogroms" were done by the people, not a monarch or the church, or anyone in control during the middle ages. And yes, medieval society was in-part responsible for it as contemporary western medicine failed to ward off the Black Plague.

Anonymous 02/18/2020 (Tue) 18:08:50 Id: 682ea4 [Preview] No.78582 del
Let me make one thing clear. There weren't jews "causing" the black plague. Kikes were caught poisoning the wells during the black plague. A huge difference, but what the ADL latches onto. "See these white supremacists are so dumb they think jews were responsible for the black plague." Imagine the worst plague sweeping through and killing your own people, then the fucking parasites have such degenerate minds they decide to poison your goddamn water supply.

Anonymous 02/18/2020 (Tue) 18:26:43 Id: 875767 [Preview] No.78585 del
>Banking houses came far before the enlightenment
Yes but they were European, not jewish. Additionally, aristocracy meant that the banking and mechant class couldn't wield as much political weight. Until the renaissance you couldn't buy noble titles, and there were several merchants richer than nobility, but who couldn't buy their way into power. Of course there were jews jewing all the time. Also there was always some nobility in bed with jews.

What the enlightenment did was usurp power from the monarchs in favor of the middle class entirely. The jews bankrolled Cromwell, and a parliamentary government beholden to wealth was instated. Jews were brought back into England. The French monarchy was overthrown, and masonic ideology took over and the restrictions on jews were lifted. The US revolution happened and the most materialistic and powerful golem the jews could ever hope for was spawned.
>or other "Italian" banking families, even if we do accept that they were Italian and not part-jewish which they were)
The Medici banking and political influence begins in the renaissance and they were indeed jew friendly, i'm not denying that.

Again I'm all for this thread and the jews have had their tentacles in society since antiquity even. I'm just pointing out jewish power really became all consuming in the 18th century, with the advent of nominalism and humanism before that acting as a bridge towards the degradation of traditional authority.
>The "pogroms" were done by the people, not a monarch or the church
The mass killings sure, but several expulsions were ordered by monarchs along with church and state restrictions such as forbidding jews from office, making them wear marked clothing and relegating them to ghettos ect...

Anonymous 02/18/2020 (Tue) 18:55:20 Id: 8d56cc [Preview] No.78586 del
>Yes but they were European, not jewish.
The Radhanites and Philo's family weren't jewish? Former is from the dark age, latter was from Egypt during the Roman republic, all far before the enlightenment or the renaissance, or the middle ages themselves.
>Additionally, aristocracy meant that the banking and mechant class couldn't wield as much political weight.
But the aristocracy married into the merchant class themselves. That defeats your entire thesis here.
>What the enlightenment did was usurp power from the monarchs in favor of the middle class entirely
The enlightenment was simply a transfer of power from the judicial faction within Roman civilisation to the mystical faction (something that Philo himself contributed to). It didn't make jews any more or less powerful from what they were in the middle ages. During the middle ages, the distribution of power at the time wasn't European monarchs ruling over jews with the jews trying to get one over on the whites, the jews already breached their way into power.
>The mass killings sure, but several expulsions were ordered by monarchs along with church and state restrictions such as forbidding jews from office, making them wear marked clothing and relegating them to ghettos ect...
Again, refer to what I said about Edward I. It was a reaction to previous pro-jewish policies ordered by monarchs. The fact that the jews all ended up in Poland wasn't unintentional, it was because the jews weren't really expelled from western lands at all. They were simply being moved around until they went to a country that accepted them. If the church really were to promote anti-jewish measures, it would've been likely that the jews would've not ended up in Poland (which was itself Catholic), but to North Africa etc.
Jews being forbidden in office was actually seen as favourable to them. They weren't allowed to serve in the military, meaning they didn't die in battle, they didn't own land, they instead were used as court jews by the king and thus all the problems jews have caused were brought into play.

Anonymous 02/18/2020 (Tue) 21:58:44 Id: 119da6 [Preview] No.78587 del
(148.67 KB 970x857 indian11.jpg)
Could it be said that the native populations of the Americas were victims of a jew-orchestrated genocide (particularly in Latin America and the Caribbean, but also in the USA), through race mixing and loss of culture, and in some cases outright extermination? If their decline is determined on reasonable grounds as such, how would we as counter-semites approach these peoples, from both a historical and current perspective?

This is probably going to be a tricky question to solve, especially for white racialists in the Americas. It is known though that jews were among the earliest Old World settlers in North America (especially what is now Massachusetts and Rhode Island, and later Charleston), the Caribbean (especially Hispaniola, and later Jamaica), Mexico, and South America (particularly what is now Brazil, then later what is now Argentina).

Anonymous 02/18/2020 (Tue) 22:34:24 Id: 682ea4 [Preview] No.78588 del
(297.97 KB 328x417 expulsion.png)
(337.41 KB 1180x1482 edict.jpg)
(17.15 KB 480x360 1492.jpg)

Anonymous 02/18/2020 (Tue) 23:13:45 Id: 875767 [Preview] No.78589 del
>The Radhanites and Philo's family weren't jewish?
The Radhanites weren't a conglomerate banking house like you see with the Rothschilds several centuries latter. Its a catch-all term for jewish merchant's who made seasonal loans to farmers. Still jewy. Jewsih lenders had more power in antiquity than during the middle ages you're right. It isn't a surprise that weishaupt Illuminati all took code names such as Philo ect.... Masons and kikes wanted to end Christendom.
>But the aristocracy married into the merchant class themselves. That defeats your entire thesis here.
Some of them did. There was definitely traitorous nobility. It was different country to country, and even within a single country from dynasty to dynasty. I'm not sure what your point was with Edward I? He was definitely anti-jewish. The jews were brought back in with cromwell and the parliamentary faction.
>The enlightenment was simply a transfer of power from the judicial faction within Roman civilisation to the mystical faction
I disagree. It was a transfer of power form landed aristocracy to cosmopolitan merchants and bankers.
>Jews being forbidden in office was actually seen as favourable to them.
Eh, once the restriction were lifted they infested every office in which they could inject cultural poison that they could.

The thing is, before the enlightenment, the interplay between nobility and jews was more loose, and the nobility still had more temporal power. Sure, some monarchs and clergy used jews and some jews wielded inordinate wealth and this gave them leverage to prod certain monarchs. With the enlightenment any question as to who was in charge whatsoever was shattered. The Jews ruled COMPLETELY. There was no nobility the jockey for power with as they were completely decimated. This is the period we see judeo masonic take over of the media, jews infiltrating academia. While jews could lend to monarchs in the middle ages, much of the time they were kicked out if the king didn't feel like paying, or a uprising would pogrom them. If you look at to the modern phenomenon of the central bank, in which jews print the money the entire nation uses, while "democratic" candidates are just fronts for jewish control, and try to say it was "just as bad" in the middle ages I can't agree with you.

Anonymous 02/19/2020 (Wed) 03:31:44 Id: 8d56cc [Preview] No.78591 del
>The Radhanites weren't a conglomerate banking house like you see with the Rothschilds several centuries latter. Its a catch-all term for jewish merchant's who made seasonal loans to farmers.
But the Radhanites were one family or at least a confederation of jews in Mesopotamia that were related. "Radhanite" comes from an old district in Iraq called "Radhan" meaning they came from this place.
>Jewsih lenders had more power in antiquity than during the middle ages you're right.
I really can't agree with you on this, it increased tenfold in the middle ages.
>Some of them did. There was definitely traitorous nobility.
Traitorous nobility seemed to be the mainstream then. Why do you thus hear big names like Charlemagne or William the conqueror when you look at medieval policies towards jews? The monarchs that did expel jews did it as a response to previous monarchs' policies. Edward I expelled the jews because the Norman kings kept a pro-jewish pro-usury policy.
>I disagree. It was a transfer of power form landed aristocracy to cosmopolitan merchants and bankers.
Do you have any evidence to support this? No you don't. They've been in league with each other for far longer.
>Eh, once the restriction were lifted they infested every office in which they could inject cultural poison that they could.
Restrictions on what? 99% of jewish peers don't work in the military, or work in plantations which is what the restrictions on them forbade them from doing.
>The thing is, before the enlightenment, the interplay between nobility and jews was more loose, and the nobility still had more temporal power.
The nobility was already part-jewish though (meaning that jewish families had a say in kingly affairs), and the jews still do rely on white traitors to stay in power, that's why they have to have a jewish lobby in the west. It's just that instead of relying on kings, they rely on neocon oligarchs several of which are crypto-jews (like Trump, like Putin) The Medicis started the central bank centuries before the enlightenment as well.

Anonymous 02/19/2020 (Wed) 11:32:20 Id: d8e1dd [Preview] No.78594 del
Yes, since Spain expelled its jews, they had to go somewhere else, and since they were allowed to go to America, many went there. Of course we know now that Columbus was a Majorcan jew. Many conquistadores were jewish or Moorish conversos (which is why the Spanish spoken in Mexico comes from the same places that the Alhambra decree were issued in). Cieza de Leon is admitted to be a converso for example, thus Ponce de Leon was also likely to have been a crypto-jew. Also, jews weren't just in Mexico and South America, even the Southwest (which was Spanish) had some crypto-jews living there; some families in New Mexico still practice it today.
New York when it was New Amsterdam also had a sizeable population of jews, that were nearly expelled, however their expulsion wasn't permitted by the VOC, the original English colonies also had Sephardic jews arrive around the same time.
A good thinking point that could come out of this is that this would mean that the atrocities of the Spanish Empire could be blamed not on white Spanish people, but on jews, and thus the whole idea of white guilt for destroying the Aztecs would be made invalid. The conquistadores did end up annihilating a large portion of them, and later mixed away most of the remaining natives.
Similarly, we know that the USA later on had pro-jewish policies even early on. Washington even addressed the jews of Rhode Island guaranteeing them as a minority. Meanwhile, Jefferson wanted to see whites mixing with the Indians (meaning that the USA wasn't a pro-white republic going by the vision of Jefferson himself) and in the end have them assimilated. Washington, Franklin, and Andrew Jackson later on were also freemasons, not explicitly jews like many conquistadores, but shabbos goyim.
Perhaps American whites and natives can reconcile and accept that the jews are responsible for wiping out the natives, not whites.

Anonymous 02/19/2020 (Wed) 11:57:42 Id: d8e1dd [Preview] No.78595 del
(111.06 KB 576x455 Yacatecuhtli.jpg)
Also, speaking about the Aztecs, an interesting Aztec deity is Yacatecuhtli. He's basically a chariacture of a jew; he was a merchant deity, and not only had a long nose but his name literally means "lord of the nose". He also holds a bundle of sticks (fasces?)
Now, hear me out. We know that not only were the main Aztec gods (like Quetzlcoatl) described as looking just like Spaniards, it was likely that they made their gods white because they saw earlier white explorers and thought them as gods, see Quetzlcoatl who was said to have come from the east; apparently they said the same of the Spaniards later on. Now, in the 18th and 19th century there was this hypothesis that American cultures had a near eastern origin, or at least that the Phoenicians might've visited it. There was also tobacco found in Egyptian mummies a while back, which is a New World plant. Withstanding those theses, I find this extremely unlikely, but there might've been a jew or two that ended up in Mesoamerica which could've inspired this deity's theme, just as white visitors inspired the other Aztec gods.

Anonymous 02/19/2020 (Wed) 11:58:54 Id: d8e1dd [Preview] No.78596 del

Anonymous 02/19/2020 (Wed) 17:51:00 Id: 682ea4 [Preview] No.78597 del
>Perhaps American whites and natives can reconcile and accept that the jews are responsible for wiping out the natives, not whites.
I'm already reconciled on that, since it was a simple direction to follow after realizing Marranos (Conversos of Spain) obtained the trans-atlantic slaves from Africa and held the American ports, as well as were the primary slave merchants. Thus whenever "white guilt" is brought up with doses of fake historical bullshit, I'm always aware that jews out of shame pin the blame to try to get it off themselves.

Anonymous 02/21/2020 (Fri) 15:52:53 Id: b710df [Preview] No.78629 del
>(((Russia Insider)))
>it's just another esau gambit
>pushes the christianity-is-a-bulwark-against-jews lie
>the author looks like a jew
Jews took over Russia the moment Christianity became the state religion.

Anonymous 02/21/2020 (Fri) 15:57:23 Id: b710df [Preview] No.78630 del
>There weren't jews "causing" the black plague.
Actually, that has been alleged, with a reasonable foundation. Somehow Poland, known as the jewish paradise in the Middle Ages, wasn't nearly as affected by the black plague as the rest of Europe, the Middle East, and Asia were. Now how could that ever be if disease doesn't discriminate?

One explanation for the black plague thrown out if that, aside from possibly rats, the plague was also caused or spread by jews tossing bodies down wells, except in their own vassal state of Poland.

Anonymous 02/21/2020 (Fri) 16:55:54 Id: 682ea4 [Preview] No.78631 del
Oh great. Another "anti Christian but totally not a jew guys!" again.

Anonymous 02/21/2020 (Fri) 17:23:15 Id: 682ea4 [Preview] No.78636 del
(36.47 KB 1280x720 2203699.jpg)
And here I go again. Repeating. Hitler quotes. To suggest Hitler wasn't Christian is to lie to yourself and call him a liar, which he never was. Table Talk is a kike Francis Genoud forgery. Post from that and you'll fuck off once again.

"I had excellent opportunity to intoxicate myself with the solemn splendor of the brilliant church festivals. As was only natural, the abbot seemed to me, as the village priest had once seemed to my father, the highest and most desirable ideal." - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 1

"As long as leadership from above was not lacking, the people fulfilled their duty and obligation overwhelmingly. Whether Protestant pastor or Catholic priest, both together and particularly at the first flare, there really existed in both camps but a single holy German Reich, for whose existence and future each man turned to his own heaven." - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 3

"And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary, He drove those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God; because then, as always, they used religion as a means of advancing their commercial interests. But at that time Christ was nailed to the Cross for his attitude towards the Jews; whereas our modern Christians enter into party politics and when elections are being held they debase themselves to beg for Jewish votes. They even enter into political intrigues with the atheistic Jewish parties against the interests of their own Christian nation." - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 11

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross." - - Adolf Hitler, speech on April 12, 1922

"By its decision to carry out the political and moral cleansing of our public life, the Government is creating and securing the conditions for a really deep and inner religious life. The advantages for the individual which may be derived from compromises with atheistic organizations do not compare in any way with the consequences which are visible in the destruction of our common religious and ethical values. The national Government sees in both Christian denominations the most important factor for the maintenance of our society." - Adolf Hitler, speech before the Reichstag, March 23, 1933

If Hitler bothers you, guess where you don't belong.

Anonymous 06/02/2020 (Tue) 14:50:50 Id: 4fe7dc [Preview] No.80356 del
(267.67 KB 1716x945 234543.jpg)
(185.81 KB 968x871 Tor jews.jpg)
(207.70 KB 528x1078 Tor.jpg)
Yet another Tor kike was desperately shilling hard against Christianity, as jews are known for historically, across multiple threads. And just like the gay nigger porn spammer of 2017 who did the same, the low-effort imbecile's efforts have been deleted. Once again, the Codex Sinaiticus is the oldest hard evidence of the New Testament and that is in Greek. The Septuagint is the oldest evidence of the Old Testament, also in Greek. Kikes have zero evidence they ever came up with the religion. Neither were ever "translated from Hebrew". That is the lie jews want you to believe. Christianity has been co-opted and infiltrated by kikes in many churches. It was never stated to the contrary. When you come to this board, you do not get to call a Galilean man a jew, nor an Austrian man, in order to sew division which is the obvious goal of infiltrators. Discussion of the modern infiltration of Christianity is what is permitted. No lies. Judaism is the religion of the enemy.

Anonymous 06/02/2020 (Tue) 15:12:36 Id: c40dc6 [Preview] No.80358 del
He was a Christian, but all Christians struggle. I think even the Fuhrer struggled hard with his personal faith and the Church, but he was most certainly a Christian. Anybody taking a position on religion outside the bounds the German government took is just a purity spiraling larper.

Anonymous 06/02/2020 (Tue) 18:17:27 Id: 4fe7dc [Preview] No.80360 del
(90.94 KB 587x522 scofield_dees2.jpg)
(127.12 KB 508x554 jews on jesus.jpg)
(987.24 KB 633x987 4366.png)
(98.94 KB 317x211 64565.png)
I do not deny that most Christians I've met refuse to recognize jews as the enemy, and even encourage their infiltration while singing hymns to Israel and having kike pastors whom in private slander the savior they claim to support. The brainwashing is vast.

Anonymous 06/03/2020 (Wed) 00:01:11 Id: dc3ca8 [Preview] No.80518 del
(74.23 KB 1024x768 smirk rmn.jpg)
You wonder when it'll end though

What happened lately though? We got a lot of spam recently for no reason. Which happened after I made a post highlighting it. Crazy stuff. Making it obvious that we're being stalked by a nutjob here

I know it's not said enough, but thanks to the volunteer staff here for cleaning up all of the spam. We really appreciate getting rid of the bunk around the site. Hope everyone working for the site stays safe

Anonymous 06/03/2020 (Wed) 02:08:03 Id: c40dc6 [Preview] No.80520 del
Descartes was a Catholic and father of the Enlightenment. Luther was a Protestant and the father of modern Nationalism. Medievalism is incompatible with National Socialism: its ludicrous and un-Germanic to keep faith with traditions, just because they are old. Everything that is old was new once. The religious question for a National Socialist is a private concern. Positive Christianity was tried, but unfortunately it failed. Unlike Marxists, NatSoc don't declare war on religion or the spirit (unless they are un-religions like judaism or freemasonry).

Anonymous 06/03/2020 (Wed) 04:58:19 Id: 4fe7dc [Preview] No.80524 del
(56.04 KB 500x480 1 (4).jpg)
>Positive Christianity was tried, but unfortunately it failed.
I don't call standing up to massive nations in control by jews failure.

Anonymous 06/03/2020 (Wed) 15:05:58 Id: c40dc6 [Preview] No.80530 del
Ok, but that isn't what I said, so were you replying to somebody else?

Anonymous 06/03/2020 (Wed) 15:23:00 Id: 4fe7dc [Preview] No.80531 del
No, your ID matches this post >>80520 where you said "Positive Christianity was tried, but unfortunately it failed.". I even greentexted it for you.

Anonymous 06/03/2020 (Wed) 16:07:02 Id: c40dc6 [Preview] No.80533 del
Based on the pic in that post, and "standing up to massive nations" I interpreted your post to mean I was saying National Socialism was failure because the Germans lost the war. That wasn't what I said though. I was talking about Positive Christianity, which iirc was a failed experiment. Whatever, as long as we both agree zionism is judaism, and therefor evil.

Anonymous 06/03/2020 (Wed) 17:16:36 Id: 4fe7dc [Preview] No.80536 del
You failed to explain why Positive Christianity was a failure in your opinion, then. I had to extrapolate what you might've meant. Try detail instead of off-handed bullshit. It might help.

Anonymous 06/03/2020 (Wed) 17:30:37 Id: c40dc6 [Preview] No.80537 del
Why would you extrapolate from Positive Christianity to the entire Third Reich, unless you set out with the intention of finding an error. I was specific. I said Positive Christianity was a failed experiment, I didn't say National Socialism failed. Next time, ask instead of rushing to a phony conclusion. Maybe I'm wrong, I'll go look and post later.

Anonymous 06/03/2020 (Wed) 20:44:58 Id: 289d38 [Preview] No.80541 del
Because the Third Reich was the only time Positive Christianity existed, wide-spread and nationwide. You still have yet to explain why it "failed".

Anonymous 06/04/2020 (Thu) 04:44:30 Id: c40dc6 [Preview] No.80543 del
I don't want to hear it. Are you speaking for the other anon? Do I need to carve out a block of my day just for you? I said I'd post later. I said it was a failed experiment, based on a speech the Fuhrer gave to the Reichstag. There were priests and preachers accusing the National Socialist government of injustice or something. Basically the point of Positive Christianity was to harmonize two discontented Churches: evangelical and roman. If you don't know what speech I'm talking about, I can't find it, so go ahead and whip me or whatever.

Anonymous 06/04/2020 (Thu) 12:04:21 Id: 4fe7dc [Preview] No.80548 del
>I don't want to hear it.
I don't give a fuck what you want to hear.
>Are you speaking for the other anon?
I am the same anon. Sometimes the .net goes down and I have to use the .org. There are different IDs there and ID sharing. endchan.org is kind of fucked up.
>I said it was a failed experiment, based on a speech the Fuhrer gave to the Reichstag
No you didn't. This is the first time you've brought up the lie that Hitler ever gave a speech declaring failure of Positive Christianity.
>I can't find it, so go ahead and whip me or whatever.
Because it doesn't exist. I've read through all speeches of Hitler. I'm also aware that the kike Francois Genoud forged the Table Talks both to bash Christianity and lie about Hitler. You're at a dead end.

Anonymous 05/22/2021 (Sat) 19:32:38 Id: d76f18 [Preview] No.84740 del
Jews are proud of Chrisopher Columbus's jewish heritage.


Top | Return | Catalog | Post a reply