2: Souls for SatanWhen the Soviets in their early years adopted the slogan, ‘Let us drive out the capitalists from earth and God from heaven’, they were merely fulfilling the legacy of Karl Marx. One of the peculiarities of black magic, as mentioned earlier, is the inversion of names. Inversions so permeated Marx’s whole manner of thinking that he used them everywhere. He answered Proudhon’s book The Philosophy of Misery with another book entitled The Misery of Philosophy. He also wrote, ‘We have to use instead of the weapon of criticism, the criticism of weapons.’31 Here are some more examples of Marx’s use of inversion in his writing: ‘Let us seek the enigma of the Jew not in his religion, but rather let us seek the enigma of his religion in the real Jew.’31a ‘Luther broke the faith in authority, because he restored the authority of faith. He changed the priests into laymen, because he changed the laymen into priests.’31b Marx uses this technique in many places. He has what could be called the typical Satanist style. Have you ever wondered about Marx’s hair? Men usually wore beards in his time, but not beards like his, and they did not have long hair. Marx’s manner of bearing himself was characteristic of the disciples of Joanna Southcott, a Satanic priestess who considered herself in contact with the demon Shiloh.32 It is strange that some sixty years after her death in 1814. ‘the Chatham group of Southcottians was joined by a soldier, James White, who, after his period of service in India, returned and took the lead locally, developing further the doctrines of Joanna ... with a communistic tinge.’33 Marx did not often speak publicly about metaphysics, but we can gather his views from the men with whom he associated. One of his partners in the First International was Mikhail Bakunin, a Russian anarchist, who wrote: ‘The Evil One is the satanic revolt against divine authority, revolt in which we see the fecund germ of all human emancipations, the revolution. Socialists recognise each other by the words “In the name of the one to whom a great wrong has been done!” Satan [is] the eternal rebel, the first freethinker and the emancipator of worlds. He makes man ashamed of his bestial ignorance and obedience; he emancipates him, stamps upon his brow the seal of liberty and humanity, in urging him to disobey and eat of the fruit of knowledge.’34 Bakunin does more than praise Lucifer. He has a concrete programme of revolution, but not one that would free the poor from exploitation. He writes: ‘In this revolution we will have to awaken the devil in the people, to stir up the basest passions. Our mission is to destroy, not to edify. The passion of destruction is a creative passion.’35 Karl Marx formed the First International together with Bakunin and endorsed this strange programme. Marx and Engels said in The Communist Manifesto that the proletarian sees law, morality and religion as ‘so many bourgeois prejudices, behind which lurk in ambush just as many bourgeois interests.’ Bakunin reveals that Proudhon, another major Socialist thinker and at that time a friend of Karl Marx, also ‘worshipped Satan.’36 Hess had introduced Marx to Proudhon, who wore the same hair style typical of the nineteenth century Satanist sect of Joanna Southcott. Proudhon, in The Philosophy of Misery, declared that God was the prototype for injustice. ‘We reach knowledge in spite of him, we reach society in spite of him. Every step forward is a victory in which we overcome the Divine.’37 He exclaims, ‘Come, Satan, slandered by the small and by kings. God is stupidity and cowardice; God is hypocrisy and falsehood; God is tyranny and poverty; God is evil. Where humanity bows before an altar, humanity, the slave of kings and priests, will be condemned ... I swear, God, with my hand stretched out towards the heavens, that you are nothing more than the executioner of my reason, the sceptre of my conscience ... God is essentially anti-civilised, anti-liberal, anti-human.’38 Proudhon declares God to be evil because man, his creation, is evil. Such thoughts are not original; they are the usual content of sermons in Satanist worship. Marx later quarrelled with Proudhon and wrote a book to contradict his Philosophy of Misery. But Marx contradicted only minor economic doctrines. He had no objection to Proudhon’s demonic anti-God rebellion. Heinrich Heine, the renowned German poet, was a third intimate friend of Marx. He too was a Satan fancier. He wrote: I called the devil and he came, ‘Marx was a great admirer of Heinrich Heine ... Their relationship was warm, hearty.’39a Why should he have admired Heine? Perhaps for Satanist thoughts like the following: ‘I have a desire ... for a few beautiful trees before my door, and if dear God wishes to make me totally happy, he will give me the joy of seeing six or seven of my enemies hanged on these trees. With a compassionate heart I will forgive them after death all the wrong they have done to me during their life. Yes, we must forgive our enemies, but not before they are hanged. ‘I am not revengeful. I would like to love my enemies. But I cannot love them before taking revenge upon them. Only then my heart opens for them. As long as one has not avenged himself, bitterness remains in the heart.’ Would any decent man be an intimate friend of one who thinks like this? Marx and his entourage thought alike. Lunatcharski, a leading philosopher who was once Minister of Education of the USSR, wrote in Socialism and Religion that Marx set aside all contact with God and instead put Satan in front of marching proletarian columns. It is essential at this point to state emphatically that Marx and his comrades, while anti-God, were not atheists, as present-day Marxists claim to be. That is, while they openly denounced and reviled God, they hated a God in whom they believed. His existence is not challenged; His supremacy is. When the revolution broke out in Paris in 1871, the Communard Flourens declared, ‘Our enemy is God. Hatred of God is the beginning of wisdom.’40 Marx greatly praised the Communards who openly proclaimed this aim. But what has this to do with a more equitable distribution of goods or with better social institutions? Such are only the outward trappings for concealing the real aim—the total eradication of God and his worship. Today we see the evidence of this in such countries as Albania and North Korea, where all churches, mosques, and pagodas have been closed. Marx’s Devilish PoetryIn Marx’s poems Invocation of One in Despair and Human Pride, man’s supreme supplication is for his own greatness. If man is doomed to perish through his own greatness, this will be a cosmic catastrophe, but he will die as a godlike being, mourned by demons. Marx’s ballad The Player, records the singer’s complaints against a God who neither knows nor respects his art. It emerges from the dark abyss of hell, ‘bedevilling the mind and bewitching the heart, and his dance is the dance of death.’41 The minstrel draws his sword and throws it into the poet’s soul. ‘Art emerging from the dark abyss of hell, bedevilling the mind.’ This reminds us of the words of the American revolutionist Jerry Rubin in Do It: ‘We’ve combined youth, music, sex, drugs, and rebellion with treason—and that’s a combination hard to beat.’42 In his poem Human Pride, Marx admits that his aim is not to improve the world, reform or revolutionise it, but simply to ruin it and to enjoy its being ruined: With disdain I will throw my gauntlet Marx adopted Satanism after an inner fight. The poems were ended in a period of severe illness, the result of this tempest within his heart. He writes at that time about his vexation at having to make an idol of a view he detests. He feels sick.44 The overriding reason for Marx’s conversion to Communism appears clearly in a letter of his friend Georg Jung to Ruge: It is not the emancipation of the proletariat, nor the establishing of a better social order. Jung writes: ‘If Marx, Bruno Bauer and Feuerbach associate to found a theological-political review, God would do well to surround himself with all his angels and indulge in self-pity, for these three will certainly drive him out of heaven ...’45 Were these poems the only expressly Satanist writings of Karl Marx? We do not know, because the bulk of his works is kept secret by those who guard his manuscripts. In The Revolted Man, Albert Camus wrote that thirty volumes of Marx and Engels have never been published and expressed the presumption that they are not much like what is generally known as Marxism. On reading this, I had one of my secretaries write to the Marx-Lenin Institute in Moscow, asking if this assertion of the French writer is true. I received a reply from the vice director, Professor M. Mtchedlov, who after saying Camus lied, confirmed his allegations. He further writes that there is no plan to complete the first edition of Marx and Engels. He says that of a total of 100 volumes, only thirteen have appeared. He offers a ridiculous excuse: World War II forestalled the printing of the other volumes. The letter was written in 1980, 35 years after the end of the war. And the State Publishing House of the Soviet Union surely has sufficient funds! From this letter it is clear that though the Soviet Communists have all the manuscripts for 100 volumes, they have chosen to publish only thirteen. There is no other explanation than that most of Marx’s ideas are intended to be kept secret. Marx’s Ravaged LifeAll active Satanists have ravaged personal lives. This was the case with Marx as well. Arnold Künzli, in his book Karl Marx—A Psychogram,46 writes of Marx’s life, which included the suicide of two daughters and a son-in-law. Three children died of malnutrition. His daughter Laura, married to the socialist Lafargue, also buried three of her children. Then she and her husband committed suicide together. Another daughter, Eleanor, decided with her husband to do likewise. She died; he backed out at the last minute. Marx felt no obligation to earn a living for his family, though he could easily have done so, at least through his tremendous knowledge of languages. He lived by begging from Engels. He had an illegitimate child by his maidservant, Helen Demuth. Later he attributed the child to Engels, who accepted this comedy. He drank heavily. Riazanov, director of the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow, admits this fact in his book Karl Marx: Man, Thinker and Revolutionist.47 Eleanor was Marx’s favourite daughter. He called her Tussy and frequently said, ‘Tussy is me.’ She was shattered when she heard about the scandalous matter from Engels on his deathbed. It was this that led to her suicide. It should be noted that Marx, in the Communist Manifesto, had railed against capitalists ‘having the wives and daughters of their proletarians at their disposal.’ There was an even darker spot in the life of Marx, the great revolutionary. The German newspaper Reichsruf of 9 January 1960, published the fact that the Austrian Chancellor Raabe donated to Nikita Khrushchev, then dictator of Soviet Russia, an original letter of Karl Marx. Khrushchev did not enjoy it, because it was proof that Marx had been a paid informer of the Austrian police, spying on revolutionaries. The letter had been found accidentally in a secret archive. It indicated that Marx the informer reported on his comrades during his exile in London. He received $25 for each bit of information he turned up. His notes were about the revolutionary exiles in London, Paris, and Switzerland. One of those against whom he informed was Ruge, who considered himself an intimate friend of Marx. Letters in the language of a cordial relationship between the two still exist. Rolv Heuer describes Marx’s ravaged financial life in Genius and Riches: ‘While he was a student in Berlin, the son of papa Marx received 700 thalers a year pocket-money.’48 This was an enormous sum because at that time only five percent of the population had an annual income greater than 300 thalers. During his lifetime, Marx received from Engels some six million French francs (Figures from the Marx-Lenin Institute). He always lusted after inheritances. While an uncle of his was in agony, Marx wrote, ‘If the dog dies, I would be out of mischief.’49 to which Engels answered, ‘I congratulate you for the sickness of the hinderer of an inheritance, and I hope that the catastrophe will happen now.’50 Then ‘the dog’ died. Marx wrote, on 8 March 1855, ‘A very happy event. Yesterday we were told about the death of the 90-year-old uncle of my wife. My wife will receive some 100 Lsd [pounds]; even more if the old dog has not left a part of his money to the lady who administered his house.’51 He did not have any kinder feelings to those who were much nearer to him than his uncle. He was not on speaking terms with his mother. In December 1863 he wrote to Engels, ‘Two hours ago a telegram arrived to say that my mother is dead. Fate needed to take one member of the family. I already had one foot in the grave. Under the circumstances I am needed more than the old woman. ‘I have to go to Trier about their inheritance.’52 This was all he had to say at his mother’s passing. In addition, the relationship between Marx and his wife was demonstrably poor. She abandoned him twice but returned each time. As for him, he did not even go to her funeral. Always in need of funds, he lost much money at the stock exchange where he, the economist, knew only how to lose. Marx was an intellectual of high calibre. So was Engels. But their correspondence is full of obscenities, unusual in this class of society. Foul language abounds, and there is not one letter in which one hears an idealist speaking about his humanist or Socialist dream. Since the Satanist sect is highly secret, we have only leads about the possibilities of Marx’s connections with it. His disorderly life might be another link in the chain of evidence already considered. Engels’ Counter-ConversionSince Engels figures prominently in Marx’s life, just a word about him. Engels had been brought up in a pietistic family. In his youth he had composed beautiful Christian poems. After meeting Marx, he wrote about him: ‘Who is chasing with wild endeavour? A black man from Trier [Marx’s birthplace], a remarkable monster. He does not walk or run, he jumps on his heels and rages full of anger as if he would like to catch the wide tent of the sky and throw it to the earth. He stretches his arms far away in the air; the wicked fist is clenched, he rages without ceasing, as if ten thousand devils had caught him by the hair.’53 Engels had begun to doubt the Christian faith after reading the book of a liberal theologian, Bruno Bauer. He had had a great struggle in his heart. He wrote at that time, ‘I pray every day, indeed almost all day, for truth, and I have done so ever since I began to doubt, but still I cannot go back. My tears are welling as I write.’54 Engels did not find his way back to the Word of God, joining instead the one whom he himself had called ‘the monster possessed by ten thousand devils.’55 He had experienced a counterconversion. What kind of person was Bruno Bauer, the liberal theologian who played a decisive role in the destruction of Engels’ Christian faith and who endorsed Marx in his new anti-Christian ways? Did he have anything to do with demons? Like Engels himself, he started life as a believer and later as a conservative theologian, who even wrote against critics of the Bible. Afterward, he himself became a radical critic of the Holy Scriptures and creator of a materialistic Christianity, which insisted that Jesus was only human, not the Son of God. Bauer wrote to his friend Arnold Ruge, also a friend of Marx and Engels, on 6 December, 1841: ‘I deliver lectures here at the university before a large audience. I don’t recognise myself when I pronounce my blasphemies from the pulpit. They are so great that these children, whom nobody should offend, have their hair standing on end. While delivering the blasphemies, I remember how I work piously at home writing an apology of the holy Scriptures and of the Revelation. In any case, it is a very bad demon that possesses me as often as I ascend the pulpit, and I am so weak that I am compelled to yield to him ... My spirit of blasphemy will be satisfied only if I am authorised to preach openly as professor of the atheistic system.’56 The man who convinced Engels to become a Communist was the same Moses Hess who had previously convinced Marx. Hess writes, after meeting Engels in Cologne, ‘He parted from me as an over-zealous Communist. This is how I produce ravages . . .’57 To produce ravages—was this Hess’s supreme purpose in life? It is Lucifer’s, too. The traces of having been a Christian never disappeared from Engels’ mind. In 1865, he expresses his admiration for the song of the Reformation A Mighty Fortress Is Our God, calling it ‘a triumphal hymn which became the Marseillaise of the 16th century.’58 There are also other such pro-Christian sayings from his pen. The tragedy of Engels is moving, even more gripping than that of Marx. Here is a wonderful Christian poem written in his youth by the man who would later become Marx’s greatest accomplice in the destruction of religion; Lord Jesus Christ, God’s only son, After Bruno Bauer had sown doubts in his soul, Engels wrote to some friends, ‘It is written, “Ask and it shall be given unto you.” I seek truth wherever I have the hope of finding at least a shadow of it. Still I cannot recognise your truth as the eternal truth. Yet it is written, “Seek and ye shall find. Who is the man among you who would give to his child a stone, when it asks for bread? Even less will your Father who is in heaven.” ‘Tears come into my eyes while I write this. I am moved through and through, but I feel I will not be lost. I will come to God, after whom my whole soul longs. This, too, is a witness of the Holy Spirit. With this I live and with this I die ... The Spirit of God witnesses to me, that I am a child of God.’60 Engels was very well aware of the Satanist danger. In his book Schelling, Philosopher in Christ, Engels wrote: ‘Since the terrible French Revolution, an entirely new, devilish spirit has entered into a great part of mankind, and godlessness lifts its daring head in such an unashamed and subtle manner that you would think the prophecies of Scripture are fulfilled now. Let us see first what the Scriptures say about the godlessness of the last times. The Lord Jesus says in Matthew 24:11-13 “Many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” And then in v. 24 ‘There shall arise Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” And St. Paul says, in 2 Thessalonians 2:3ff “That man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is God, or that is worshipped ... [The coming of the Wicked] is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” ’ Engels quotes Scripture after Scripture just as the most Bible believing theologian would do. He continues: We have nothing to do any more with indifference or coldness toward the Lord. No, it is an open, declared enmity, and in the place of all sects and parties we have now only two: Christians and anti-Christians ... We see the false prophets among us ... They travel throughout Germany and wish to intrude everywhere; they teach their Satanic teachings in the market-places and bear the flag of the devil from one town to another, seducing the poor youth, in order to throw them in the deepest abyss of hell and death.’ He finishes this book with the words of Revelation: ‘Behold, I come soon. Keep what you have, that nobody take away from you your crown. Amen.’61 The man who wrote such poems and such warnings against Satanism, the man who prayed with tears to beware of this danger, the man who recognised Marx as being possessed with a thousand devils, becomes Marx’s closest collaborator in the devilish fight, ‘for Communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality ...’62 Liberal theology had accomplished this monstrous change. It shares with Marx and Engels the guilt for the tens of millions of innocents killed by Communism. Marx Hates Whole NationsMarx’s whole attitude and conversation were satanic in nature. Though a Jew, he wrote a pernicious anti-Jewish book called The Jewish Question. In 1856, he wrote in The New York Tribune an article entitled ‘The Russian Loan,’ in which we read: ‘We know that behind every tyrant stands a Jew, as a Jesuit stands behind every Pope. As the army of the Jesuits kills every free thought, so the desire of the oppressed would have chances of success, the usefulness of wars incited by capitalists would cease, if it were not for the Jews who steal the treasures of mankind. It is no wonder that 1856 years ago Jesus chased the usurers from the Jerusalem temple. They were like the contemporary usurers who stand behind tyrants and tyrannies. The majority of them are Jewish. The fact that the Jews have become so strong as to endanger the life of the world causes us to disclose their organisation, their purpose, that its stench might awaken the workers of the world to fight and eliminate such a canker.’ Did Hitler say anything worse than this? Strangely, Marx also wrote to the contrary, in The Capital, Vol. I, under the heading ‘The Capitalist Character of Manufacture’: ‘In the front of the chosen people it was written that they are the property of Jehovah.’ Many other Jewish Communists imitated Marx in their hatred of Jews. Ruth Fisher, renowned German Jewish Communist leader and a member of Parliament, said: ‘Squash the Jewish capitalists, hang them from the lamp posts; tread them under your feet.’63 Why just the Jewish capitalists and not the other remains an unanswered question. Marx hated not only the Jews but also the Germans: ‘Beating is the only means of resurrecting the Germans.’ He spoke about ‘the stupid German people.... the disgusting national narrowness of the Germans’ and said that ‘Germans, Chinese, and Jews have to be compared with peddlers and small merchants.’64 He called the Russians ‘cabbage eaters.’65 The Slavic peoples are ‘ethnic trash.’66 He expressed his hatred of many nations, but never his love. Marx wrote in his new year’s round-up of 1848 about ‘the Slavic riff-raff,’ which included Russians, Czechs and Croats. These ‘retrograde’ races had nothing left for them by fate except ‘the immediate task of perishing in the revolutionary world storm.’ ‘The coming world war will cause not only reactionary classes and dynasties, but entire reactionary peoples, to disappear from the face of the earth. And that will be progress.’ ‘Their very name will vanish.’67 Neither Marx nor Engels were concerned about the destruction of millions of people. The former wrote, ‘A silent, unavoidable revolution is taking place in society, a revolution that cares as little about the human lives it destroys as an earthquake cares about the houses it ravages. Classes and races that are too weak to dominate the new conditions of existence will be defeated.’ By way of contrast, Hitler, who desired only the enslavement, not the destruction, of these nations, was much more humane than Marx. Engels wrote in the same vein: ‘The next world war will make whole reactionary peoples disappear from the face of the earth. This, too, is progress.’68 ‘Obviously this cannot be fulfilled without crushing some delicate national flower. But without violence and without pitilessness nothing can be obtained in history.’68a Marx, the man who posed as a forefighter for the proletariat, called this class of people ‘stupid boys, rogues, asses.’ Engels well knew what to expect from them. He wrote, ‘The democtratic, red, yes, even the Communist mob, will never love us.’ Marx identified black people with ‘idiots’ and constantly used the offensive term ‘nigger’ in private correspondence. He called his rival Lassalle ‘the Jewish nigger’ and made it very clear that this was not intended as an epithet of disdain for just one person. ‘It is now absolutely clear to me that, as both the shape of his head and his hair texture shows, he is descended from the Negroes who joined Moses’ flight from Egypt (unless his mother or grandmother on the paternal side hybridised with a nigger) ... The pushiness of the fellow is also nigger-like.’ Marx even championed slavery in North America. For this, he quarrelled with his friend Proudhon, who had advocated the emancipation of slaves in the U.S. He wrote in response, ‘Without slavery, North America, the most progressive of countries, would be transformed into a patriarchal country. Wipe North America from the map of the world and you will have anarchy—the complete decay of modern commerce and civilisation. Abolish slavery and you will have wiped America off the map of nations.’69 Marx also wrote, ‘The devil take the British’.70 In spite of such propositions, there are plenty of British, as well as American Marxists. Satan Is in the FamilyMarx’s favourite daughter Eleanor, with her father’s approval, married Edward Aveling. He lectured on subjects such as ‘The Wickedness of God’ (exactly as Satanists do; unlike atheists, they do not deny the existence of God, except to deceive others; they know of His existence but describe Him as wicked). In his lectures he tried to prove that God is ‘an encourager of polygamy and an instigator to theft.’ He advocated the right to blaspheme.71 Marx’s chosen son-in-law was a lecturer in this movement. The following poem describes the attitudes of his circle toward Satanism: To thee my verses, unbridled and daring, A Housemaid’s RevelationAn American, Commander Sergius Riis, had been disciple of Marx. Grieved by the news of his death he went to London to visit the house in which the admired teacher had lived. The family had moved. The only one whom he could interview was Marx’s former housemaid Helen Demuth. She said these amazing words about him: ‘He was a God-fearing man. When very sick, he prayed alone in his room before a row of lighted candles, tying a sort of tape measure around his forehead.’73 This suggests philacteries, implements worn by Orthodox Jews during their morning prayers. But Marx had been baptised in the Christian religion. He had never practised Judaism. He later became a fighter against God. He wrote books against religion and he brought up all his children as atheists. What was this ceremony that an ignorant maid considered a prayer? Jews when saying their prayers with philacteries on their forehead usually don’t have a row of candles before them. Could this have been some magic practice? We also know that Marx, the presumed atheist, had in his study a bust of Zeus. In Greek mythology, Zeus, a cruel heathen deity, transformed himself into a beast and took Europe captive—exactly what Marxism did later. The naked figure of Zeus, known for his ferocity, is also the only religious emblem in the main lobby of the Organisation of United Nations in New York. Family LettersAnother possible hint is contained in a letter written to Marx by his son Edgar on 31 March 1854. It begins with the startling words, ‘My dear devil.’74 Who has ever known of a son addressing his father like this? Yet that is how a Satanist writes to his beloved one. Could the son have been initiated too? It is no less significant that Marx’s wife addresses him as follows, in a letter of August 1844: ‘Your last pastoral letter, high priest and bishop of souls, has again given quiet rest and peace to your poor sheep.’75 Marx had expressed his desire in The Communist Manifesto to abolish all religion, which one might assume would include abolishing the Satanist cult too. Yet his wife refers to him as high priest and bishop. Of what religion? The only European religion with high priests is the Satanist one. What pastoral letters did he, the man believed to have been an atheist, write? Where are they? There is a part of Marx’s life which has remained unresearched. Biographers’ TestimoniesSome biographers of Marx might have had an intuition about the connection between devil worship and the subject of their book, but not having the necessary spiritual preparation they could not understand the facts they had before their eyes. Still their testimony is interesting. The Marxist Franz Mehring wrote in his book Karl Marx: ‘Although Karl Marx’s father died a few days after his son’s twentieth birthday, he seems to have observed with secret apprehension the demon in his favourite son ... 76 Henry Marx did not think and could not have thought that the rich store of bourgeois culture which he handed on to his son Karl as a valuable heritage for life would only help to deliver the demon he feared.’77 Marx died in despair, as all Satanists do. On 25 May 1883, he wrote to Engels, ‘How pointless and empty is life, but how desirable!’78 Marx was a contemporary of great Christians: the composer Mendelssohn, the philanthropist Dr Barnardo, the preachers Charles Spurgeon and General William Booth. All lived near him in London. He never mentions them. They went unobserved. There is a secret behind Marx which only a very few Marxists know. Lenin wrote, ‘After half a century, not one of the Marxists has comprehended Marx.’79 The Secret Behind Lenin’s LifeThere is a secret behind Lenin’s life too. When I wrote the first edition of the present book, I knew of no personal involvement of Lenin with any rituals of the Satanist sect. Since then, I have read The Young Lenin by Trotsky, who was Lenin’s intimate friend and co-worker. He writes that Lenin, at the age of 16, tore the cross from his neck, spat on it, and trod it underfoot, a very common Satanist ceremony. There is not the slightest doubt that he was dominated by Satanist ideology. How else could one explain the following quotation from his letter to the Russian writer Maxim Gorki, dated 13-14 November 1913: ‘Millions of sins, mischiefs, oppressions, and physical epidemics are more easily discovered by the people, and therefore less dangerous, than the thinnest idea of a spiritual little god, even if disguised in the most decorous garb.’80 In the end, Satan deceived him, as he does all his followers. Lenin was moved to write as follows about the Soviet state: ‘The State does not function as we desired. How does it function? The car does not obey. A man is at the wheel and seems to lead it, but the car does not drive in the desired direction. It moves as another force wishes.’81 What is this other mysterious force which supersedes even the plans of the Bolshevik leaders? Did they sell out to a force which they hoped to master but which proved more powerful than even they anticipated and drove them to despair? In a letter of 1921 Lenin wrote: ‘I hope we will be hanged on a stinking rope. And I did not lose the hope that this would happen, because we cannot condemn this dirty bureaucracy. If this happens, it will be well done.’82 This was Lenin’s last hope after a whole life of struggle for the Communist cause: to be justly hanged on a stinking rope. This hope was not fulfilled in his life, but almost all of his co-workers were eventually executed by Stalin after having confessed publicly that they had served other powers than the proletariat they pretended to help. What a confession from Lenin: ‘I hope we will be hanged on a stinking rope!’ It is interesting to note that at the age of 13 Lenin wrote what could be called prophetic poetry foretelling the bankruptcy with which his life would end. He had decided to serve mankind, but without God. These were his words: Sacrificing your life freely for others, What a contrast to the words of another fighter, St Paul the apostle, who wrote towards the end of his life: ‘I have fought the good fight, I have finished my course ... Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day’ (II Timothy 4:7,8). There exists a ‘too late.’ Esau repented with many tears for having sold his birthright, but the deal could not be undone. Lenin, founder of the Soviet state, said on his deathbed, ‘I committed a great error. My nightmare is to have the feeling that I’m lost in an ocean of blood from the innumerable victims. It is too late to return. To save our country, Russia, we would have needed men like Francis of Assisi. With ten men like him we would have saved Russia.’ Bukharin, Stalin, Mao, Ceaushescu, AndropovIt might be instructive at this point to take a look at some modern Marxists. Bukharin, secretary general of the Communist International and one of the chief Marxist doctrinaires in this century, knew as early as the age of twelve, after reading the book of Revelation in the Bible, that he longed to become the Antichrist. Realising from Scripture that the Antichrist had to be the son of the apocalyptic great whore, he insisted that his mother confess to having been a harlot. About Stalin he wrote, ‘He is not a man, but a devil,’84 Too late Bukharin realised into whose hands he had fallen. In a letter which he made his wife memorise just before his arrest and execution, he said: ‘I am leaving life. I am lowering my head ... I feel my helplessness before a hellish machine. . .’85 He had helped erect a guillotine—the Soviet State—that had killed millions, only to learn in the end that its design had been made in hell. He had desired to be the Antichrist. He became instead its victim. Kaganovitch, Stalin’s brother-in-law and closest collaborator, writes about him in his Diary: ‘I started to understand how Stalin managed to make himself a god. He did not have a single human characteristic ... Even when he exhibited some emotions, they all did not seem to belong to him. They were as false as the scale on top of armour. And behind this scale was Stalin himself—a piece of steel. For some reason I was convinced that he would live forever ... He was not human at all.’ ‘Rosa [his wife] says he makes her climb a tree wearing nothing but stockings. I have a feeling he is not human at all. He is too unusual to be a regular human being. Although he looks like an ordinary man. Such a puzzle. What is it I’m writing? Am I raving mad, too?’ Stalin described to Kaganovitch his spiritual exercises. Believers of various religions engage in the practice of meditation on what is beautiful, wise and good, to help them become more loving. Stalin indulged in just the opposite practice. He told Kaganovitch: ‘When I have to say goodbye to someone, I picture this person on all fours and he becomes disgusting. Sometimes I feel attached to a person who should be removed for the good of the cause. What do you think I do? I imagine this person shitting, exhaling stench, farting, vomiting and I don’t feel sorry for this person. The sooner he stops stinking on this earth, the better. And I cross this person out of my heart.’ One of Stalin’s amusements was to put green glasses on the eyes of horses to make them see hay as grass. He also put dark glasses of atheism on the eyes of men to keep them from seeing God’s green pastures, reserved for believing souls. The Diary contains many revealing insights. ‘Many times Stalin spoke of religion as our most vicious enemy. He hates religion for many reasons, and I share his feelings. Religion is a cunning and dangerous enemy ... Stalin also thinks that separation from children should be the main punishment for all parents belonging to sects, irrespective of whether they were convicted or not. ‘I think he secretly engaged in astrology. One peculiar feature of his always astonished me. He always talked with some veiled respect about God and religion. At first, I thought I was imagining it, but gradually I realised it was true. But he was always careful when the subject came up. And I was never able to find out exactly what his point of view was. One thing became very clear to me—his treatment of God and religion was very special. For example, he never said directly there was no God ... ‘People ceased somehow to be their own selves in his presence. They all admired him and worshipped him. I don’t think he enjoyed any great love of the nation: he was above it. It may sound strange but he occupied a position previously reserved only for God.’ It belongs to the tragedy of human existence that one has enemies and is sometimes obliged to fight them. Marx took delight in this sad necessity. His favourite verse, which he often repeated, was, ‘There is nothing more beautiful in the world than to bite one’s enemies.’85a No wonder his follower Stalin said that the greatest joy is to cultivate a person’s friendship until he lays his head confidently on your bosom, then to implant a dagger in his back; it is a pleasure not to be surpassed.85b Marx had expressed the same idea long before. He wrote to Engels about comrades with whom he disagreed: ‘We must make these rogues believe that we continue our relationship with them, until we have the power to sweep them away from our road, in one manner or another.’85c It is significant that many of Stalin’s comrades-in-arms speak about him as demonic. Milovan Djilas, prominent Communist leader of Yugoslavia who was personally well acquainted with Stalin, wrote: ‘Was it not so that the demonic power and energy of Stalin consisted in this, that he made the [Communist] movement and every person in it pass to a state of confusion and stupefaction, thus creating and ensuring his reign of fear ... ?’86 He also says about the whole ruling class of the U.S.S.R. ‘They make a semblance of believing in the ideal of Socialism, in a future society without classes. In reality, they believe in nothing except organised power.’87 Even Stalin’s daughter, Svetlana Alliluyeva, who never learned about the depths of Satanism, wrote, ‘Beria (the Soviet minister of Interior Affairs) seems to have had a diabolic link with all our family . . . Beria was a frightening, wicked demon ... A terrible demon had taken possession of my father’s soul.’ Svetlana further mentions that Stalin considered goodness and all-forgiving love to be worse than the greatest crime.88 Such is the Satanic priesthood that rules almost half of mankind, and which orders terrorist acts all over the world. It is only fair to add a few words that might serve to explain the essence of the man Stalin. He was the illegitimate child of a landlord by a servant-maid. His father, fearing notoriety, bribed a cobbler to marry the pregnant girl, but the affair became known. During his childhood, Stalin was mocked as a bastard. When he was a teenager, his real father was found murdered. Stalin was suspected, but no proof could be found against him. Later, as a seminary student, he joined Communist circles. There he fell in love with a girl named Galina. Since the Communists were poor, Galina was given the assignment to become the mistress of a rich man and so provide the Party with money. When Stalin voted for this proposal, she cut her veins. She had loved Stalin. He himself received from the Party the assignment to commit robberies, and in this he was very successful. He appropriated none of the stolen money for himself. He was also assigned the duty of infiltrating the Czarist police. He had to play the dual role of their informer, denouncing some unimportant Party members, in order to find out secrets of the police and protect the important Communists. As a young man, therefore, Stalin had the worst possible heredity, education, and development. Thus he was easily susceptible to Satanist influence. He became what his pseudonym ‘Stalin’ means: a man of steel, without the slightest human emotion or pity. (Andropov, late premier of the Soviets, produced the same impression as Stalin. The French Minister of External Affairs Claude Cheysson, who met him, described Andropov in Le Monde, Paris, as ‘a man without warmth of soul, who works like a computer . . . He shows no emotions ... He is extremely dispassionate ... He is accurate in words and gestures like a computer’). Stalin, like Marx, Engels and Bauer before him, started out as a believer. At 15, he wrote his first poem, which begins with the words, ‘Great is the Almighty’s providence.’ He became a seminarian because he felt it his calling.89 There he became first a Darwinist, then a Marxist. When he began to write as a revolutionary, the first pseudonyms he used were ‘Demonoshvily,’90 meaning something like ‘the demoniac’ in the Georgian language, and ‘Besoshvili’,91 ‘the devilish.’ Troitskaia, daughter of the Soviet marshal Tuhatchevsky, one of the top men of the Red Army, later shot by Stalin, wrote about her father that he had a picture of Satan in the east corner of his bedroom, where the Orthodox usually put their ikons. In Czechoslovakia, when a Communist was named head of the State Council for Religious Affairs, an institution whose purpose is to spy on believers and persecute them, he took the name ‘Hruza,’ which means in Slovak ‘horror,’ an appellation used for ‘devil.’ One of the leaders of a terrorist organisation in Argentina took the nickname ‘Satanovsky.’ Anatole France was a renowned French Communist writer who introduced some of the greatest intellectuals of France to Communism. At a recent exhibition of demoniac art in Paris, one of the pieces shown was the specific chair used by the Communist writer for presiding over Satanist rituals. It’s horned arm rests and legs were covered with goats’ fur.92 Britain’s centre of Satanism is Highgate Cemetery in London, where Karl Marx is buried. Mysterious rites of black magic are celebrated at this tomb.93 It was the place of inspiration for the Highgate Vampire who attacked girls in 1970.94 Hua-Kuo-Feng, dictator of Red China, also paid it his respects. Ulrike Meinhof, Eselin, and other German Red terrorists have been involved in the occult.95 One of the oldest devil-worshipping sects, the Syrian Yezidi, is described in a Soviet atheistic magazine, Nauka I Religia July 1979). It is the only religious sect about which the magazine wrote not the slightest word of criticism. As for Mao-Tse-Tung, he wrote: ‘From the age of eight I hated Confucius. In our village there was a Confucianist temple. With all my heart, I wished only one thing: to destroy it to its very foundations.’96 Is it normal for a child at the age of eight to wish only the destruction of his own religion? Such thoughts belong to demonic characters. Again at the other extreme, there is St. Paul of the Cross, who from the age of eight spent three hours in prayer every night. Cult of ViolenceEngels wrote in Anti-Duhring, ‘Universal love for men is an absurdity.’ And in a letter to a friend he said, ‘We need hate rather than love—at least for now.’ Che Guevara learned his lessons well; in his writings he echoes Engels’ sentiments: ‘Hate is an element of fight—pitiless hate against the foe, hate that lifts the revolutionist above the natural limitation of man and makes him become an efficient, destructive, cool, calculating, and cold killing machine.’ This is what the devil wishes to make of men. He has succeeded all too well with many notorious leaders of the human race. In our lifetime we have witnessed more than our share: Hitler, Eichmann, Mengell, Stalin, Mao, Andropov, Pol Pot. Marx writes in The Communist Manifesto: ‘The Communists despise making a secret of their opinions and intentions. They openly declare that their aims can be reached only through the violent overthrow of the whole existing social structure.’ Further: ‘There is only one method to shorten the murderous pains of death of the old society, the bloody birth pangs of the new society; only one method to simplify and concentrate them, that is revolutionary terrorism.’96a There have been many revolutions in history. Each had an objective: the American revolution was fought for national independence, the French revolution for democracy. Marx is the only one who formulates as his aim a ‘permanent revolution,’ terrorism and bloodshed for revolution’s sake. There is no purpose to be attained. Violence to the point of paroxysm is its only objective. This is what distinguishes Satanism from ordinary human sinfulness. Terrorists executed in Czarist Russia for murder he called ‘immortal martyrs’ or ‘amazingly capable fellows.’96b Engels wrote, too, of the ‘bloody revenge we take.’ This expression occurs often. ‘In the interior, [of Russia], what a splendid development. The attempts at murder become frequent.’ ‘Leaving aside the problem of morality ... for a revolutionist any means are right which lead to the purpose, the violent, as the seemingly tame.’96c The Marxist Lenin, while living under the democratic rule of Kerensky in Russia said, ‘What is needed is wild energy and again energy. I wonder, yea more, I am horrified that more than half a year has passed in speaking about bombs and not one single bomb has been fabricated.’96d A further insight into the fundamental attitudes of Communists can be gained from a few brief quotes: Marx: ‘We make war against all prevailing ideas of religion, of the state, of country, of patriotism. The idea of God is the keynote of a perverted civilisation. It must be destroyed.’ Lenin: ‘We have to use any ruse, dodge, trick, cunning, unlawful method, concealment, and veiling of the truth. The basic rule is to exploit the conflicting interests of the capitalist states.’ Communist Manifesto: ‘The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their aims can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all the existing social conditions. Let the ruling class tremble at a Communist revolution.’ Lenin: ‘Atheism is an integral part of Marxism. Marxism is materialism. We must combat religion. This is the ABC of all materialism and consequently of Marxism.’ Lenin in an address in 1922: ‘First we shall take Eastern Europe, then the masses of Asia. After that, we shall surround and undermine the U.S.A., which will fall into our hands without a struggle—like an overripe fruit.’ Khruschev: ‘If anyone believes our smiles involve abandonment of the teachings of Marx, Engels and Lenin, he deceives himself. Those who wait for that must wait until a shrimp learns to whistle.’ Satanist CrueltySolzhenitsyn reveals in his monumental Gulag Archipelago97 that the hobby of Yagoda, the Soviet Union’s minister of Interior Affairs was to undress and, naked, to shoot at images of Jesus and the saints. A couple of comrades joined him at this. Another Satanist ritual practised in Communist high places! Why should men allegedly representing the proletariat shoot at the image of Jesus, a proletarian, or of the virgin Mary, a poor woman? The Pentecostals recall an incident that took place in Russia during World War II. One of their preachers had exorcised a devil who threatened, upon leaving the possessed, ‘I will take revenge.’ Several years later the Pentecostal preacher who had performed the exorcism was shot for his faith. The officer who executed him said just before pulling the trigger, ‘Now we are even.’ Are Communist officers sometimes possessed by devils? Do they perhaps serve as Satan’s instruments of revenge against Christians who seek to overthrow his throne? In Russia in Stalin’s day, some Communists killed a number of innocents in the cellars of the police. After their bloody deed, one of the henchmen had second thoughts and went from corpse to corpse, apologising: ‘I did not intend to do this. I don’t know you. Speak to me, move, forgive me.’ One of his comrades killed him. A third was converted and related the incident. Russkaia Misl, a Russian-language magazine appearing in France, reported on 13 March 1975, the following from the Soviet Union: D. Profirevitch, in Russia, had a daughter and a son whom he brought up in the faith. Naturally, they had to attend Communist schools. At the age of twelve the daughter came home and told her parents, ‘Religion is a capitalist superstition. We are living in new times.’ She dropped Christianity altogether. Afterwards, she joined the Communist Party and became a member of the Secret Police. This was a terrible blow to her parents. Later on the mother was arrested. Under Communist rule no one possesses anything, whether it be children, a wife, or personal liberty. The State can take them away at any time. After the mother’s arrest the son exhibited great sorrow. A year later, he hanged himself. D. Profirevitch found this suicide letter: ‘Father, will you judge me? I am a member of the Communist youth organisation. I had to sign that I would report everything to the Soviet authorities. One day the police called me, and Varia, my sister, asked me to sign a denunciation against mother because as a Christian she is considered a counter revolutionist. I signed. I am guilty of her imprisonment. Now they have ordered me to spy on you. The consequence will be the same. Forgive me, father; I have decided to die.’ The suicide of the son was followed by the jailing of the father.98 Father Kovalyk was arrested by the Bolsheviks in the year 1941 and was confined in the Brygidka jail in Lviv, Ukraine. When the Germans put the Bolsheviks to flight that same year, the people of the city found the priests blood-stained body nailed to the wall by the arms and legs, as if it were the crucified Lord. They also found about six thousand massacred prisoners, shot in the nape of the neck, whom the Bolsheviks had piled on top of each other in the cellars and covered over with plaster. Dr 0. Sas-Yavorsky (U.S.A.), after the capture of Lviv by the Germans near the end of June 1941, went searching for his imprisoned father and saw in the jail a priest nailed to the cross. Into his slashed stomach the NKVD had placed the body of an as yet unborn baby, taken from the womb of its mother, whose mutilated dead body lay on the blood-soaked floor. Other eyewitnesses recognised that this was the body of the renowned missionary Father Zynoviy Kovalyk, C.S.S.R.99 Generally, to the Communists human life is cheap. Lenin wrote during the civil war. ‘It would be a shame not to shoot men for not obeying the draft and avoiding mobilisation. Report more often about the results.’100 During the Spanish civil war, the Communists killed 4,000 Catholic priests. The renowned Russian Orthodox priest Dudko reported that six Communists entered the house of Father Nicholas Tchardjov, pulled out his hair, gouged out his eyes, made many cuts on his body, passed a pressing iron over it, then shot him with two bullets. This happened on the Eve of St. Nicholas. It was not only a crime against the priest but also a mockery of the saint. The Western press reported on 10 March 1983, that in Zimbabwe 3,000 of the Ndebele tribe were killed by the soldiers of the Communist dictator Mugabe. The army had been trained by North Korean instructors. Tribe members were asked to shoot their grownup sons themselves; if they refused, they were shot together with their sons. Marxism promises a paradise on earth. Well, the devil is God’s monkey. He apes God by promising still waters and green pastures, which are not his to give. Therefore he must pretend. And the less he can offer, the more he must pretend. To gain a foothold, he puts on a false front (did you ever wonder about Communist front organisations?) and makes benevolent gestures. But he delivers only misery, death, and destruction ‘awful, complete, universal, and pitiless.’ The devil is jealous and becomes enraged at spiritual beauty. It offends him. If he cannot be beautiful—and he lost his primal beauty because of his pride—he does not want anyone else to be. If it were not for the saints’ spiritual beauty, the devil would not seem so ugly. Therefore he wishes to deface all beauty. For this reason, Christians in the Romanian Communist prison of Piteshti, as well as other Communist jails, were tortured not only to betray the secrets of the Underground church, but also to blaspheme. Regimes under which such horrors occur again and again, regimes that turn even Christians into murderers and denouncers of innocent victims, can only be abhorred by the children of God. Whoever bids them Godspeed is a partaker of their evil deeds (2 John 11). Notes31. Karl Marx, Zur Kritik der Hegelschen Rechtsphilosophie. Einleitung. (Critique of the Hegelian Philosophie of Law Introduction), MEGA, I, i, (1), 614.(back) 32. Hans Enzensberger, Gespräche mit Marx und Engels (Conversations with Marx and Engels) Frankfurt-am-Main: Insel Verlag, 1973), p. 17. (back) 33. James Hastings, Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1921), XI, 756. (back) 34. Mikhail Bakunin, God and the State (New York: Dover Publications, 1970), p. 122. (back) 35. Roman Gul, Dzerjinskii (Paris: published by the author, 1936. In Russian), p. 81. (back) 36. Enzensberger, op.cit., P. 407. (back) 37. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Philosophie de la Misère (The Philosophy of Misery) (Paris: Union Générale d'Editions, 1964), pp. 199-200. (back) 38. ibid., pp. 199-200. (back) 39. Paul Garus, History of the Devil (Bell Publishing Co.,) p. 435. (back) 39a. Heinrich Heine, Works, vol. I, p. LXIV. (back) 40. Charles Boyer, The Philosophy of Communism. 10. The Political Atheism of Communism, by Igino Giordani (New York: Fordham University Press, 1952), p. 134. (back) 41. Karl Marx, ‘Spielmann,’ loc. cit. (back) 42. Jerry Rubin, Do It, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1970), p. 249. (back) 43. Karl Marx, ‘Menschenstolz,’ (‘Human Pride’), MEGA, I, i, (2), 50. (back) 44. Karl Marx, Letter of 10 November 1837 to his father, ibid., p. 219. (back) 45. Georg Jung, Letters 0f 18 October 1841, to Arnold Ruge, ibid., pp. 261-262. (back) 46. Arnold Künzli, Karl Marx, Eine Physiographie (Karl Marx, A Physiogram), (Zürich: Europa Verlag, 1966). (back) 47. David Rjazanov, Karl Marx: Man, Thinker and Revolutionist (Karl Marx als Denker, Mensch und Revolutionär) (New York: International Publishers, 1927). (back) 48. Rolv Heuer, Genie und Reichtum (Genius and Riches), (Vienna: Bertelsmann Sachsbuchverlag, 1971), pp. 167-168. (back) 49. Karl Marx, Letter of 27 February 1852 to Friedrich Engels, MEW, XXVIII, 10. (back) 50. Friedrich Engels, Letter of 2 March 1855 to Karl Marx, ibid., p. 33. (back) 51. Karl Marx, Letter of 8 March 1855 to Friedrich Engels, ibid., p. 438. (back) 52. Karl Marx, Letter of 2 December 1863 to Friedrich Engels, MEW, XXX, 376. (back) 53. Franz Mehring, Karl Marx—Geschichte seines Lebens (Karl Marx—Story of His Life) Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1964), pp. 99-100. (back) 56. Bruno Bauer, Letter of 6 December 1841 to Arnold Ruge, MEGA, I. 1 (2), 263. (back) 57. A. Melskii, Evangelist Nenavisit. (The Evangelist of Hate—Life of Karl Marx) (Berlin: Za Pravdu Publishing House, 1933. In Russian), p. 48. (back) 58. Friedrich Engels, Dialektik der Natur. Finleitung (Dialectics of Nature Introduction), MEW XX, 312. (back) 59. Friedrich Engels, Poem probably written beginning 1837. MEGA, I, ii, 465. (back) 60. Friedrich Engels, Letter of July 1839 to the Graber brothers, ibid., p. 531. (back) 61. Friedrich Engels, Schelling und die Offenbarung (Schelling and Revelation), MEGA, pp. 247-249. (back) 62. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Selected Wroks (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1958), p. 52. (back) 63. Ossip Flechtheim, The Communist Party of Germany in the Weimar Republic (Offenbach, 1948). (back) 64. Künzli, op. cit., p. 187. (back) 65. Bertram Wolfe, Maarxism—One Hundred Yeads in the Life of a Doctrine (New York: The Dial Press, 1965), p. 32. (back) 66. Karl Marx und Friedrich Engels, The Russian Menace to Europe (Glencoe: The Free Press, 1952), p. 63. (back) 67. Quoted by Bertrand Wolfe, Marxism (New York: The Dial Press. 1965). (back) 68. Engels, MEW, VI, 176. (back) 68a. Deutschland Magazine, February 1985. (back) 69. Quoted by Nathaniel Weyl, Karl Marx: Racist (New Rochelle, N.Y.: Arlington House). (back) 70. Karl Marx, MEW, XXXV, 122. (back) 71. Chushichi Tsuzuki, The Life of Eleanor Marx (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967), p. 85. (back) 72. Frederick Tatford, The Prince of Darknmess (Eastbourne: Bible and Advent Testimony Movement, 1967). (back) 73. Sergius Martin Riis, Karl Marx, Master of Fraud (New York: Robert Speller, 1962), p. 11. (back) 74. Edgar Marx, Letter of 31 March 1854 to Karl Marx, MEW, II, 18. (back) 75. Jenny Marx, Letter (dated after 11 August 1844) to Karl Marx, MEW, Suppl. Vol. I, 652. (back) 76. Franz Mehring, op. cit., p. 18. (back) 77. Franz Mehring, Karl Marx—Story of His Life (New York: Covici, Friede, 1935), p. 32 (back) 78. Karl Marx, Letter of 20 May 1882 to Friedrich Engels, MEW. XXXV, 65. (back) 79. Walter Kaufmann, Hegel (Garden City: Doubleday, 1965), p, 288. (back) 80. V. Illich Lenin, Complete Works (Moscow: Political Literature Publishing House, 1964. In Russian), Vol. 48, pp. 226-227. (back) 81. Ibid., Vol. 45, p. 86. (back) 82. Ibid., Vol. 54, pp. 86-87. (back) 83. ‘Budilnik,’ Russia, No. 48, of 1883. Quoted in The New Review, New York, 140/1980, p. 276. (back) 84. George Katkov, The Trial of Bukharin (London: B.T. Batsford Ltd., 1969), 1. p. 29. (back) 85. Roy Medvedev, Let History Judge (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1971, p. 183. (back) 85a. F.J. Raddatz, Karl Marx (Berlin, 1925), p. 32. (back) 85b. Boris Souvarine, Stalin. (back) 86. Milovan Djilass, Strange Times, ‘Kontinent’ 33, p. 25. (back) 88. Svetlana Alliluyeva, Twenty Letters to a Friend (London: Hutcjinson 1967), pp. 64ff. (back) 89. Paloczy Horvath, Stalin (Germany: Bertelmanns-Verlag) (back) 90. Abdurakhman Avtorkhanov, Criminals in Bolshevism (Frankfurt-am-Main: Possev Verlag. In Russian), Grani No. 89-90, pp. 324-325. (back) 91. Abdurakhman Avtorkhanov, The Provenience of Partocracy (Frankfurt-am-Main: Possev Verlag, 1973. In Russian), pp.198-201. (back) 92. Express, Paris, 6 October 1979. (back) 93. Tempo, Italy, 1 November 1979 (back) 94. P. Underwood, The Vampire’s Bedside Companion (Frewin). (back) 95. H. Knaust, The Testament of Evil. (back) 96. Manfred Zach, Mao Tse-tung (Esslingen: Bechtle Verlag, 1969), p. 13. (back) 96b. MEW, XXXI, 191, XXV, 179. (back) 96c. MEW, VI, 283; VI, 286; VI, 279. (back) 96d. Lenin, Collected Works, vol. 32, p.281. (back) 97. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago (New York: Harper & Row, 1973). Vol. I-II, 173. (back) 98. Russkaia Misl (Russian Thought), Paris, 13 March 1975. In Russian. (back) 99. Rev. Rd. I. Nahyewsky, ‘Spomyny Polovoho Dykhovnyka,’ America, 7 October 1982, Vol. IXXI, No. 176, pp. 4, 18. (back) 100. V. Illich Lenin, Military Correspondence (Moscow, 1954), p. 148. (back) Return to The Beginning : |