The strange charge of Judeo-Bolshevism

One of the most peculiar things about anti-Semitism is how Jews can be charged with apparently contradictory things. Perhaps the weirdest is the representation of Jews as both arch capitalists and devout communists at the same time. The two would seem to be at odds but in the hands of anti-Semites they are often not.

One of several strengths of A Specter Haunting Europe (Harvard 2018) is to show there is a perverted logic to this anti-Semitic world view. Paul Hanebrink, a history professor at Rutgers University-New Brunswick, argues that for those who propagate the idea of Judeo-Bolshevism: “Communism and global capitalism always functioned in their minds as two sides of the same international (and antinational) Jewish evil. In their paranoid fantasies, Jewish Communists and Jewish financiers invariably worked together to pursue world domination, each feeding off the power of the other” (p6). Such ideas in turn fed off earlier notions of Jewish fanaticism and an international Jewish conspiracy.

The concept, sometimes also called Jewish Bolshevism, emerged towards the end of the First World War. It was part of a conservative reaction against the revolutionary upsurge from 1917-23. Hanebrink defines it as: “the idea that Jews had created and supported Bolshevism and were therefore responsible for its crimes” (p14). 

It drew credence from the fact that a disproportionate number of communist leaders, most notably Trotsky, were Jewish. That was despite the fact that most communists were not Jews and only a small proportion of Jews were communists.

Hanebrink considers but then rejects the view that Judeo-Bolshevism should be seen as just one variation of transhistorical Jew hatred. In his view it has to be examined in relation to specific times and places. He follows the general approach used by Shulamit Volkov, an Israeli historian, who sees anti-Semitism as a cultural code. She argues that stereotypes about Jews generate associations and linkages among a variety of complex and disparate social phenomena (p6).

In the aftermath of the revolutionary upsurge the idea of Judeo-Bolshevism took hold across transnational anti-communist networks. It had the backing of prominent anti-Semites across Europe including Charles Maurras in France and Corneliu Codreanu in Romania. There were also best-selling books on the subject in Britain and Italy.

In eastern Europe it played a key role in the turmoil which created the nation states in the region. As the old alignments broke down, including the Austro-Hungarian and Russian empires, anti-Semitism was central to many new national movements. The most bloody was in the civil war between the Red Army, defending the new Soviet Union, and the western-backed Whites. Hanebrink quotes estimates of 50,000 to 200,000 Jews slaughtered in the Ukraine. Most of the culprits were the counter-revolutionary Whites but occasionally Red Army units were responsible (Red Cavalry, classic short stories by Isaac Babel from the 1920s, depicts these events). 

But the best known proponent of the idea was Adolf Hitler. Hanebrink argues he consistently invoked it from 1920 onwards when the nascent Nazi movement was (literally) fighting communists in Munich. 

Even for the Nazis the meaning of Judeo-Bolshevism changed over time. In its early days it was focused more on Jews as a supposed enemy within Germany. Later on the emphasis was on the Soviet Union as, in Hitler’s view, a Jewish-ruled Asian realm. Hanebrink argues this ideology drove the murderous Nazi onslaught into the Soviet Union.

After the Second World War the idea of Judeo-Bolshevism remained an influential force in eastern Europe. Opponents of the Stalinist regimes often accused them of being Jewish instruments of Soviet power. The regimes themselves also sometimes took to anti-Semitism – often rebranded as anti-Zionism – in campaigns against their opponents.

One aside in the book is of broader importance to the way anti-Semitism should be understood. It shows how the Stalinist movement presented the Second World War as a straightforward battle against fascism. From this perspective anti-Semitism is merely a tactic to distract workers from their revolutionary goals. Although this sounds at first like a progressive outlook in reality it diminishes the importance of anti-Semitism as a racial ideology. This flaw is consistent with the way the left more generally has played down the historical significance of anti-Semitism in the name of universalism.

The epilogue is the least satisfying part of A Specter Haunting Europe. Hanebrink argues that there are echoes of the idea of Judeo-Bolshevism in the current European debate on Islam and Islamism. As evidence he points to concerns about national sovereignty and migration expressed by right wing European politicians. These include Viktor Orbán in Hungary, Marine Le Pen in France and Geert Wilders in the Netherlands. But hostility to Muslims, although regrettably apparent at times, is not comparable to anti-Semitism with its core notion of Jews as the personification of evil. Nor is criticism of Islamism – a reactionary political movement – a form of bigotry.

Overall though Hanebrink has written an important book. It is a detailed study of a key dimension of anti-Semitism which is all too often overlooked.