Christian Rakovsky (August 13 [O.S. August 1] 1873 – September 11, 1941) was a Bulgarian socialist revolutionary, a Bolshevik politician and Soviet diplomat; he was also noted as a journalist, physician, and essayist. Rakovsky’s political career took him throughout the Balkans and into France and Imperial Russia; for part of his life, he was also a Romanian citizen.
A lifelong collaborator of Leon Trotsky, he was a prominent activist of the Second International, involved in politics with the Bulgarian Social Democratic Union, Romanian Social Democratic Party, and the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party. Rakovsky was expelled at different times from various countries as a result of his activities, and, during World War I, became a founding member of the Revolutionary Balkan Social Democratic Labor Federation while helping to organize the Zimmerwald Conference. Imprisoned by Romanian authorities, he made his way to Russia, where he joined the Bolshevik Party after the October Revolution, and, as head of the Rumcherod, unsuccessfully attempted to generate a communist revolution in the Kingdom of Romania. Subsequently, he was a founding member of the Comintern, served as head of government in the Ukrainian SSR, and took part in negotiations at the Genoa Conference.
He came to oppose Joseph Stalin and rallied with the Left Opposition, being marginalized inside the government and sent as Soviet ambassador to London and Paris, where he was involved in renegotiating financial settlements. He was ultimately recalled from France in autumn 1927, after signing his name to a controversial Trotskyist platform which endorsed world revolution. Credited with having developed the Trotskyist critique of Stalinism as “bureaucratic centrism”, Rakovsky was subject to internal exile. Submitting to Stalin’s leadership in 1934 and being briefly reinstated, he was nonetheless implicated in the Trial of the Twenty One (part of the Moscow Trials) and imprisoned, with his initial death sentence being commuted by Stalin, before allegedly being executed by the NKVD during World War II.
According to testimony allegedly given by Christian Rakovsky, known as ‘The Red Symphony’, during an interrogation by the Stalinist police on 26 January 1938, Rakovsky stated that he and Leon Trotsky were representatives of an invincible power known as the Capitalist-Communist Financial International. This power, Rakovsky insisted, was being exercised by the House of Rothschild, which facilitated, financed and controlled the work of Karl Marx and the revolutionary communist movement from the outset, proof of which can be determined by examining how the bankers, who control the flow of capital via the monopolisation of the money supply, were never identified by Marx as being part of the ruling establishment, let alone the unaccountable power behind the moneyed aristocracy:
“Notice with what penetration Marx comes to conclusions given the then existence of early British industry, concerning its consequences, i.e. the contemporary colossal industry: how he analyses it and criticizes; what a repulsive picture he gives of the manufacturer. In your imagination and that of the masses there arises the terrible picture of Capitalism in its human concretization: a fat-bellied manufacturer with a cigar in his mouth, as described by Marx, with self-satisfaction and anger throwing the wife and daughter of the worker onto the street. Is that not so? At the same time remember the moderation of Marx and his bourgeois orthodoxy when studying the question of money. In the problem of money there do not appear with him his famous contradictions. Finances do not exist for him as a thing of importance in itself; trade and the circulation of moneys are the results of the cursed system of Capitalistic production, which subjects them to itself and fully determines them. In the question of money Marx is a reactionary; to one’s immense surprise he was one; bear in mind the “five-pointed star” like the Soviet one, which shines all over Europe, the star composed of the five Rothschild brothers with their banks, who possess colossal accumulations of wealth, the greatest ever known… And so this fact, so colossal that it misled the imagination of the people of that epoch, passes unnoticed with Marx. Something strange… Is that not so? It is possible that from this strange blindness of Marx there arises a phenomenon which is common to all future social revolutions. It is this: we can all confirm that when the masses take possession of a city or a country, then they always seem struck by a sort of superstitious fear of the banks and bankers. One had killed Kings, generals, bishops, policemen, priests and other representatives of the hated privileged classes; one robbed and burnt palaces, churches and even centres of science, but though the revolutions were economic-social, the lives of the bankers were respected, and as a result the magnificent buildings of the banks remained untouched… According to my information, before I had been arrested, this continues even now…”
Rakovsky claimed that the organisation sought to use Communism to establish a global dictatorship of the super-rich. Since money is the current consensual basis of power and influence, which the internationalists create for themselves through the monopoly of the supply of credit and currency, the revolutionary Marxist movement was seen as an opportunity by the Rothschilds and their dependents to protect and extend this monopoly by establishing a totalitarian New World Order:
“The Rothschilds were not the treasurers, but the chiefs of that first secret Communism… Marx and the highest chiefs of the First International… were controlled by Baron Lionel Rothschild [1808-1878]… You know that according to the unwritten history known only to us, the founder of the First Communist International is indicated, of course secretly, as being Weishaupt. You remember his name? He was the head of the masonry which is known by the name of the Illuminati; this name he borrowed from the second anti-Christian conspiracy of that era— Gnosticism. This important revolutionary, Semite and former Jesuit, foreseeing the triumph of the French revolution decided, or perhaps he was ordered (some mention as his chief the important philosopher Mendelssohn) to found a secret organization which was to provoke and push the French revolution to go further than its political objectives, with the aim of transforming it into a social revolution for the establishment of Communism. In those heroic times it was colossally dangerous to mention Communism as an aim; from this derive the various precautions and secrets, which had to surround the Illuminati. More than a hundred years were required before a man could confess to being a Communist without danger of going to prison or being executed. This is more or less known. What is not known are the relations between Weishaupt and his followers with the first of the Rothschilds. The secret of the acquisition of wealth of the best known bankers could have been explained by the fact that they were the treasurers of this first Comintern. There is evidence that when the five brothers spread out to the five provinces of the financial empire of Europe, they had some secret help for the accumulation of these enormous sums: it is possible that they were those first Communists from the Bavarian catacombs who were already spread all over Europe. But others say, and I think with better reason, that the Rothschilds were not the treasurers, but the chiefs of that first secret Communism. This opinion is based on that well-known fact that Marx and the highest chiefs of the First International – already the open one – and among them Herzen and Heine, were controlled by Baron Lionel Rothschild, whose revolutionary portrait was done by Disraeli [in Coningsby—Transl.] the English Premier, who was his creature, and has been left to us. He described him in the character of Sidonia, a man, who, according to the story, was a multi-millionaire, knew and controlled spies, carbonari, freemasons, secret Jews, gypsies, revolutionaries etc., etc. All this seems fantastic. But it has been proved that Sidonia is an idealized portrait of the son of Nathan Rothschild, which can also be deduced from that campaign which he raised against Tsar Nicholas in favour of Herzen. He won this campaign. If all that which we can guess in the light of these facts is true, then, I think, we could even determine who invented this terrible machine of accumulation and anarchy, which is the financial International. At the same time, I think, he would be the same person who also created the revolutionary International. It is an act of genius: to create with the help of Capitalism accumulation of the highest degree, to push the proletariat towards strikes, to sow hopelessness, and at the same time to create an organization which must unite the proletarians with the purpose of driving them into revolution. This is to write the most majestic chapter of history.”
Rakovsky also asserted that Lionel Rothschild’s son, Nathaniel, needed to overthrow Russia’s Christian Romanoff dynasty in order to consolidate the domination of the Rothschilds in Europe. With this purpose in mind he used Jacob Schiff and the Warburg brothers to finance a Japanese war against the Russian empire. Rakovsky testified that Rothschild hired Trotsky to assassinate Archduke Ferdinand in order to initiate the First World War, before arranging Wall Street finance to catalyse the Bolshevik Revolution. In reward for such malevolence, it was Rothschild’s intention to install Trotsky as leader of a new International Communist regime. However, his position was usurped by National Communist, Vladamir Lenin in 1918. Later that year, Lenin survived Trotsky’s first attempt to assassinate him, almost certainly at the behest of the international bankers who financed the revolution.
““They” isolated the Tsar diplomatically for the Russo-Japanese War, and the United States financed Japan; speaking precisely, this was done by Jacob Schiff, the head of the bank of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., which is the successor of the House of Rothschild, whence Schiff originated. He had such power that he achieved that States which had colonial possessions in Asia supported the creation of the Japanese Empire which was inclined towards xenophobia; and Europe already feels the effects of this xenophobia. From the prisoner-of-war camps there came to Petrograd the best fighters, trained as revolutionary agents; they were sent there from America with the permission of Japan, obtained through the persons who had financed it. The Russo-Japanese War, thanks to the organized defeat of the Tsar’s army, called forth the revolution of 1905, which, though it was premature, but was very nearly successful; even if it did not win, it still created the required political conditions for the victory of 1917. I shall say even more. Have you read the biography of Trotsky? Recall its first revolutionary period. He is still quite a young man; after his flight from Siberia he lived some time among the émigrés in London, Paris, and Switzerland; Lenin, Plekhanov, Martov and other chiefs look on him only as a promising newcomer. But he already dares during the first split to behave independently, trying to become the arbiter of the reunion. In 1905 he is 25 years old and he returns to Russia alone, without a party and without his own organization. Read the reports of the revolution of 1905 which have not been “pruned” by Stalin; for example that of Lunatcharsky, who was not a Trotskyite. Trotsky is the chief figure during the revolution in Petrograd. This is how it really was. Only he emerges from it with increased popularity and influence. Neither Lenin, nor Martov, nor Plekhanov acquire popularity. They only keep it and even lose a little. How and why there rises the unknown Trotsky, gaining power by one move greater than that which the oldest and most influential revolutionaries had? Very simple: he marries. Together with him there arrives in Russia his wife— Sedova. Do you know who she is? She is associated with Zhivotovsky, linked with the bankers Warburg, partners and relatives of Jacob Schiff, i.e. of that financial group which, as I had said, had also financed the revolution of 1905. Here is the reason why Trotsky, in one move, moves to the top of the revolutionary list. And here, too, you have the key to his real personality. Let us jump to 1914. Behind the back of the people who made the attempt on the Archduke there stands Trotsky, and that attempt provoked the European War. Do you really believe that the murder and the war— are simple coincidences?…, as had been said at one of the Zionist congresses by Lord Melchett. Analyze in the light of “non-coincidence” the development of the military actions in Russia. “Defeatism” is an exemplary word. The help of the Allies for the Tsar was regulated and controlled with such skill that it gave the Allied ambassadors the right to make an argument of this and to get from Nicholas, thanks to his stupidity, suicidal advances, one after another. The mass of the Russian cannon fodder was immense, but not inexhaustible. A series of organized defeats led to the revolution. When the threat came from all sides, then a cure was found in the form of the establishment of a democratic republic— an “ambassadorial republic” as Lenin called it i.e. this meant the elimination of any threat to the revolutionaries. But that is not yet all. Kerensky was to provoke the future advance at the cost of a very great deal of blood. He brings it about so that the democratic revolution should spread beyond its bounds. And even still more: Kerensky was to surrender the State fully to Communism, and he does it. Trotsky has the chance in an “unnoticed manner” to occupy the whole State apparatus. What a strange blindness! Well that is the reality of the much praised October revolution. The Bolsheviks took that which “They” gave them.”
Three years after seizing power from Trotsky’s grasp, Lenin had a stroke, shortly after which he was allegedly killed by his doctor, Levin, on the orders of his political rival. Ironically, on the very brink of finally assuming power, Trotsky became sick himself, an opportunity which was seized by the ‘Bonapartist’, Josef Stalin, much to the chagrin of Rothschild, who had once again failed to install their man as Soviet dictator. In order to contain Stalin’s unexpected and uncontrolled rise to power upon the death of Lenin, the international bankers mobilised Wall Street finance to facilitate Hitler’s rise to power in Germany. As Rakovsky put it in the Red Symphony:
“The ambassador Warburg presented himself under a false name and Hitler did not even guess his race… he also lied regarding whose representative he was… Our aim was to provoke a war and Hitler was war… [The Nazis] received… millions of dollars sent to it from Wall Street, and millions of marks from German financiers.”
It might well be the case that the nations controlled by the House of Rothschild, the modern architects of what we know as Zionism and the founders of the illegal occupation of Palestine, as well as the overlords of a conspiracy to impose International Communism upon the people of the world by stealth, deception and genocide, would have more naturally allied their forces with Hitler against Stalin, who was responsible for the murder of an estimated 60 million people during his reign of terror, had Hitler been committed to International Socialism instead of National Socialism, especially since his regime supported the international repatriation of Jewish people to Palestine, two decades before the formation of the terrorist state of Israel. Nevertheless, “International Jewry” formally declared war on all things German shortly after Hitler took power in 1933, which was almost certainly because Hitler was committed to freeing Germany from the shackles of usury by issuing its currency without charging interest, the real reason for the declaration of war against Germany.
Rakovsky’s testimony gives an undeniably plausible account of the manner in which the second great slaughter of the 20th century was orchestrated by the agents of Rothschild, just as the first had been, with the joint aims of seizing direct power over both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., by instigating financial revolution in the former and un-winnable wars involving the latter:
“Remember the morning of the 24th October 1929. The time will come when this day will be for the history of the revolution more important than October, 1917. On the day of the 24th October there took place the crash of the New York Stock Exchange, the beginning of the so-called “depression,” a real revolution. The four years of the Government of Hoover— are years of revolutionary progress: 12 and 15 millions on strike. In February, 1933 there takes place the last stroke of the crisis with the closing of the banks. It is difficult to do more than capital did in order to break the “classical American,” who was still on his industrial bases and in the economic respect enslaved by Wall Street. It is well known that any impoverishment in economics, be it in relation to societies or animals, gives a flourishing of parasitism, and capital is a large parasite. But this American revolution pursued not only the one aim of increasing the power of money for those who had the right to use it, it pretended to even more. Although the power of money is political power, but before that it had only been used indirectly, but now the power of money was to be transformed into direct power. The man through whom they made use of such power was Franklin Roosevelt. Have you understood? Take note of the following: In that year 1929, the first year of the American revolution. in February Trotsky leaves Russia; the crash takes place in October… The financing of Hitler is agreed in July, 1929. You think that all this was by chance? The four years of the rule of Hoover were used for the preparation of the seizure of power in the United States and the USSR; there by means of a financial revolution. and here with the help of war and the defeat which was to follow. Could some good novel with great imagination be more obvious to you? You can understand that the execution of the plan on such a scale requires a special man, who can direct the executive power in the United States, who has been predetermined to be the organizing and deciding force. That man was Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt. And permit me to say that this two-sexed being is not simply irony. He had to avoid any possible Delilah… I do not know if he is one of “Them,” or is only subject to “Them.” What more do you want? I think that he was conscious of his mission, but cannot assert whether he obeyed under duress of blackmail or he was one of those who rule; it is true that he carried out his mission, realized all the actions which had been assigned to him accurately. Do not ask me more, as I do not know any more.”
The Red Symphony