the Jews fired back at Ford with: "The Truth about Henry Ford" – New-York, In 1924.
published the so called "exposé" of Ford in Yiddish which included
a hooded Ku Klux Klansman with his arm casually and familiarly
draped over Henry Ford's shoulder,
suggesting a friendly relationship between two men
sharing common anti-Semitic, nativist, and racist beliefs.
The Gentle Art of Changing Jewish Names
By Henry Ford
From The International Jew 
The Madansky brothers—Max,
Solomon, Benjamin, and Jacob—have written that their
will be May. It is a good old Anglo-Saxon name, but the Madanskys are of Asiatic origin.
Elmo Lincoln, a movie actor, comes into a Los Angeles court on the
motion of his wife, and it is discovered that he is only Otto Linknhelt.
A large department store owner was
born with the name Levy. He is now known as Lytton.
It is quite possible
he did not like Levy as a name; but why did he not change it for
Jewish name? Or perhaps it was the Jewishness of “Levy” that displeased him.
A popular tenor star recently brough suit against his wife, who married
him after allowing
him to believe that she was of Spanish origin. “I
understood from her misleading stage
name that she was Spanish when I married
her. Later I found that she was Jewish and that
her real name was Bergenstein.”
One of the biggest and best known stores
in the United States goes under an honored
Christian name, though every one
of the owners is Jewish. The public still carries a
mental picture of the
good old merchant who established the store, which picture
change if the public could get a glimpse of the real owners.
Take the name Belmont, for example, and trace its history. Prior to the nineteenth
the Jews resident in Germany did not use family names. It was “Joseph
the son of Jacob,”
“Isaac ben Abraham,” the son being designated
as the son of his father. But the Napoleonic
era, especially following upon
the assembly of the Great Sanhedrin under Napoleon’s
a distinct change in Jewish customs in Europe.
In 1808 Napoleon sent out a decree commanding all Jews to adopt family names. In
Austria a list of surnames was assigned to the Jews, and if a Jew was unable to choose,
the state chose for him. The names were devised from precious stones, as Rubenstein;
precious metals, such as Goldstein, Silberberg; plants, trees, and animals, such as
Mandelbaum, Lilienthal, Ochs, Wolf, and Loewe.
The German Jews created surnames by the simple method of affixing the
to the father’s name, thus making Jacobson,
Isaacson; while others adopted the names
of the localities in which they
lived, the Jew resident in Berlin becoming
Berliner, and the Jew resident
in Oppenheim becoming Oppenheimer.
Now, in the region of Schoenberg, in the German Rhine country, a settlement of Jews
had lived for several generations. When the order to adopt surnames went forth, Isaac
Simon, the head of the settlement, chose the name of Schoenberg. It signifies in German,
“beautiful hill.” It is very easily Frenchified into Belmont, which also means beautiful
hill or mountain. A Columbia University professor once tried to make it appear that
the Belmonts originated in the Belmontes family of Portugal, but found
it impossible to harmonize this theory with the Schoenberg facts.
It is noteworthy that a Belmont became American agent of the Rothschilds,
and that the
name of Rothschild is derived from the red shield on a house
in the Jewish quarter
of Frankfort-on-the-Main. What the original family
name is has never been divulged.
The Jewish habit of changing names is responsible for the immense camouflage that has
concealed the true character of Russian events. When Leon Bronstein becomes Leo Trotsky,
and when the Jewish Apfelbaum becomes the “Russian” Zinoviev; and when the
Jewish Cohen becomes the “Russian” Volodarsky, and so on down through the list of the
controllers of Russia—Goldman becoming Izgoev, and Feldman becoming Vladimirov—it
is a little difficult for people who think that names do not lie, to see
just what is transpiring.
there is any amount of evidence that in numberless cases this change of
adoption of “cover names,” as the Jewish description is—is for purposes of
concealment. There is an immense difference in the state of mind in which a customer
enters the store of Isadore Levy and the state of mind in which he enters the store of
Alex May. And what would be his feeling to learn that Isadore Levy painted up the name
of Alex May with that state of mind in view? When Rosenbluth and Schlesinger becomes
“The American Mercantile Company,” there is justification for the feeling that the
name “American” is being used to conceal the Jewish character of the firm.
The tendency of Jews to change their
names dates back very far. There was and is a
superstition that to give a
sick person another name is to “change his luck,” and save him
from the misfortune destined upon his old name. There was also the Biblical example
of a change of nature being followed by a change of name, as when Abram became
Abraham and Jacob became Israel.
There have been justifiable grounds, however, for Jews changing their names in Europe.
The nationalism of that continent is, of course, intense, and the Jews are an international
nation, scattered among all the nations, with an unenviable reputation of being ready to
exploit for Jewish purposes the nationalistic intensity of the Gentiles. To mollify a suspicion
held against them wherever they have lived (a suspicion so general and so persistent as
to be explainable only on the assumption that it was abundantly justified) the Jews have
been quick to adopt the names and colors of whatever country they may be living in. It is
no trouble at all to change a flag, since none of the flags is the insignia of Judah. This
was seen throughout the war zone; the Jews hoisted whatever flag was expedient
at the moment, and changed it as often as the shifting tide of battle required.
A Polish Jew named Zuckermandle, emigrating
to Hungary, would be anxious to show That
he had shuffled off the Polish
allegiance which his name proclaimed; and the only way he
could do this would
be to change his name, which would very likely become Zukor, a perfectly
good Hungarian name. Originally the Zukors were not Jews; now the usual guess would be
that they are. In the United States it would be almost a certainty. Such a change as Mr.
Zuckermandle would make, however, would not be for the purpose of concealing
the fact that he was a Jew, but only to conceal the fact that he was a foreign Jew.
In the United States it has been found that Jews change their names
for three reasons:
first, for the same reason that many other foreigners
change their names, namely, to
minimize as much as possible the “foreign
look” and the difficulty of pronunciation which
many of those names
carry with them; second, for business reasons, to prevent the
current that So-and-So is “a Jew store”; third, for social reasons.
The desire not to appear singular among one’s neighbors, when
stated in just these words,
very easily passes muster a being a natural desire,
until you apply it to yourself. If you
were going abroad to Italy, Germany,
Russia, there to live and engage in business, would
you cast about for a
changed name immediately? Of course not. Your name is part of
you, and you
have your own opinion of an alias. The Jew, however, has his own name
his own people, regardless of what “cover name” the world may know him by, and,
therefore, he changes his outside name quite coolly. The only likeness we have to that in
America is the changing of men’s pay numbers as they move their employment from place
to place. John Smith may be No. 49 in Black’s shop and No. 375 in White’s shop, but he is
always John Smith. So the Jew may be Simon son of Benjamin in the privacy
of the Jewish circle, while to the world he may be Mortimer Alexander.
In the United States it is hardly to be doubted that business and social
reasons are mostly
responsible for the changes in Jewish names. The designation
“American” is itself much
coveted, as may be gathered by its
frequent use in firm names, the members of which are
not American in any
sense that entitles them to blazon that name throughout the world.
When Moses is changed to Mortimer, and Nathan to Norton, and Isadore to Irving
(as for example Irving Berlin, whose relatives, however, still know him as “Izzy”), the
concealment of Jewishness in a country where so much is done by print, must be
regarded as a probable motive.
When “Mr. Lee Jackson” is proposed for the club there would seem to
be no reason, as
far as reading goes, why anything unusual about Mr. Jackson
should be surmised, until
you know that Mr. Jackson is really Mr. Jacobs.
Jackson happens to be the name of a
President of the United States, which
names are quite in favor with the name-changers,
but in this case it happens
also to be one of the “derivatives” of an old Jewish name.
The Jewish Encyclopedia contains interesting information on this matter
is shaded off into Archer, Ansell, Asherson.
is touched up into Benedict, Beniton, Berthold.
becomes Lopez, Seef, Wolf (this is translation).
becomes Davis, Davison, Davies, Davidson.
Sachs, Saxe, Sace, Seckel.
Jacob becomes Jackson,
Jacobi, Jacobus, Jacof, Kaplan, Kauffmann, Marchant, Merchant.
Jonah becomes by quite simple changes, Jones and Joseph, Jonas.
Judah (the true Jewish name) becomes Jewell, Leo, Leon, Lionel, Lyon, Leoni, Judith.
Levi becomes Leopold, Levine, Lewis, Loewe, Low, Lowy.
Moses becomes Moritz, Moss, Mortimer, Max, Mack, Moskin, Mosse.
Solomon becomes Salmon, Salome, Sloman, Salmuth.
And so on through the list of Jewish “changelings”—Barnett,
Barnard, Beer, Hirschel, Mann,
Mendel, Mandell, Mendelsohn, with various
which are not even adaptations but sheer appropriations.
The millinery business, which is one
of the principal Jewish grafts off American women,
shows, the liking of the
Jews for names which do not name, but which stand as impressive
“Mme. Grande,” and the like. Reuben Abraham Cohen is a perfectly
good name, and a good citizen could make it immensely respected in his neighborhood,
but Reuben thinks that the first round in the battle of minds should be his, and he does
not scruple at a little deceit to obtain it, so he painted on a window of his store, R. A. Le Cán,
which, when set off with a borrowed coat of arms, looks sufficiently Frenchified for even
observant boobs among the Gentiles. Similarly a Mr. Barondesky may blossom
Barondes or La Baron.
Commonly, Mr. Abraham becomes Miller. Why Miller should have been picked
Judaization is not clear, but the Millers of the white race may yet
be compelled to adopt
some method of indicating that their name is not Jewish.
It is conceivable that a Yiddish
and an American form of the same name may
some time be deemed necessary. Aarons
becomes Arnold—there are a number
of Jewish Arnolds. Aarons became Allingham. One
Cohen became Druce, another
Cohen became Freeman. Still another Cohen became
a Montagu; a fourth Cohen
became a Rothbury and a fifth Cohen became a Cooke.
The Cohens have an excuse, however. In one ghetto there are so many Cohens that some
distinction must be observed. There is Cohen the rag gatherer, and Cohen the schacet
(ritual meat killer), and Cohen the rising lawyer, as well as Cohen the physician. To make
the matter more difficult their first names (otherwise their “Christian”
names) are Louis.
It is not to be wondered at, therefore, that the young
lawyer should become Attorney
Cohane (which does all the better if thereby
certain Irish clients are attracted), and that
the young doctor should become
Doctor Kahn, or Kohn. These are
some of the many forms that the priestly
name of Cohen takes.
same may be said with reference to Kaplan, a very common name. Charlie Chaplin’s
name was, in all probability, Caplan, or Kaplan. At any rate, this is what the Jews
believe about their great “star.” Non-Jews have read of Charlie as a “poor English boy.”
There is the Rev. Stephen S. Wise,
for another example. He booms his way across the
country from one platform
to the other, a wonder in his way, that such pomposity of sound
such paucity of sense. He is an actor, the less effective because he essays
a part in which sincerity is requisite. This Rabbi, whose vocal exercise exhausts his other
powers, was born in Hungary, his family name being Weisz. Sometimes this name is
Germanized to Weiss. When S. S. Weisz became S. S. Wise, we do not know. If he had
merely Americanized his Hungarian name it would have given him the name of White.
Apparently “Wise” looked better. Truly it is better to be white than to be wise,
but Dr. Stephen S. is a fresh point in the query of “what’s in a name?”
The list of Jews in public life whose
names are not Jewish would be a long one. Louis Marshall,
head of the American
Jewish Committee, for example—what could his old family name
before it was changed for the name of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
of the United States?
Selwyn’s name, now so widely known in motion pictures, was originally Schlesinger.
Some of the Schlesingers become Sinclairs, but Selwyn made a really good choice for a
man in the show business. A rabbi whose real name was Posnansky became Posner.
The name Kalen is usually an abbreviation of Kalensky. A true story is told of an East Side
tinsmith whose name was very decidedly foreign-Jewish. It is withheld here, because T
HE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT prefers in this connection to mention only the names of
those who can take care of themselves. But the tinsmith moved to a non-Jewish section
and opened a new shop under the name of Perkins, and his luck really did change!
He is doing well and, being an industrious, honest workman, deserves his prosperity.
Of course, there are lower uses of the name-changing practice, as every
employer of labor
knows. A man contracts a debt under one name, and to avoid
a garnishee, quits his job,
collects his pay, and in a day or two attempts
to hire out under another name.
This was once quite a successful trick, and
is not wholly unknown now.
There is also much complaint
among the stricter observers of the Jewish ritual requirements
that the word
“Kosher” is greatly misused, that indeed it covers a multitude of sins.
“Kosher” has come to signify, in some places, little more than a commercial advertisement
designed to attract Jewish trade. For all it means of what it says, it might just as well
“The Best Place in Town to Eat”—which it isn’t,
of course; and neither is it always “strictly” Kosher.
It must be conceded, however, that the tendency to mislabel men and things is deep
in Jewish character. Jews are great coiners of catchwords that are not
true, inventors of
slogans that do not move. There is a considerable decrease
in the power they wielded by
such methods; their brilliancy in this respect
is running to seed. This may be explained
by the fact that there are so many
song titles to write for the Jewish jazz factories, and
so much “snappy”
matter for screen descriptions. Their come-back is painfully thin and
Without peers in dealing with a superficial situation like a dispute over the beauty
of two rival “stars,” or the amount and method of distributing confetti, they are the
veriest dubs in dealing with a situation like that which has arisen in this country.
upon the appearance of the Jewish Question in the United States the Jews
naturally to their habit of mislabeling. They were going to fool the people once
with a pat phrase. They are still seeking for that phrase. Slowly they are recognizing
that they are up against the Truth, and truth is neither a jazzy jade nor a movie motto,
which can be recostumed and changed at will.
This passion for misleading people by names is deep and varied in its expression. Chiefly
due to Jewish influences, we are giving the name of “liberalism” to looseness.
are dignifying with names that do not correctly name, many subversive
are living in an era of false labels, whose danger is recognized
by all who observe the various
underground currents which move through all
sections of society. Socialism itself is no
longer what its name signifies;
the name has been seized and used to label anarchy.
Judaistic influence creeping
into the Christian church has kept the apostolic labels, but
destroyed the apostolic content; the disruptive work has gone on quietly and
because often as the people looked, the same label was there—as the same
old merchant’s name stays on the store the Jews have bought and cheapened. Thus there
are “reverends” who are both unreverend and irreverent, and there are shepherds who flock
with the wolves.
Zionism is another misnomer. Modern Zionism is not what its label would indicate it to be.
The managers of the new money collection—millions of it, badly used,
for—are about as much interested in Zionism as an Ohio
Baptist is in Meccaism. For
the leading so-called “Zionists,”
Mt. Zion and all that it stands for has next to no meaning;
they see only
the political and real estate aspects of Palestine, another people’s country
just at present. The present movement is not religious, although it plays upon the religious
sentiments of the lower class of Jews; it is certainly not what Judaized orators among the
Christians want the Christians to think it is; Zionism is at present a most mischievous thing,
potentially a most dangerous thing, as several governments could confidentially tell you.
But it is all a part of the Jewish
practice of setting up a label
pretending one thing, while quite another thing
anti-Semitism. That is a label which the Jews have industriously pasted up everywhere.
If ever it was an effective label its uses are over now. It doesn’t mean anything. Anti-Semitism
does not exist, since the thing so named is found among the Semites, too. Semites cannot
be anti-Semitic. When the world holds up a warning finger against a race that is the
moving spirit of the corruptive, subversive and destructive influences abroad in the world
today, that race cannot nullify the warning by sticking up a false label of “Anti-Semitism,”
anymore than it can justify the sign of gold on a $1.50 watch or the sign
of “pure wool”
on a $11.50 suit of clothes.
So with the whole group of labels which
the Jews have trotted out like talismen to work
some magic spell upon the
aroused mind of America. They are lies. And when one lie
fails, how quickly
they hitch their hopes to another. If “Anti-Semitism” fails, then try
“Anti-Catholic”—that might do something. If that fails, try “Anti-American”—get
talent that can be hired for a night on the B’nai B’rith
platform to shout it. And whe
n that fails, as it has—?
The American Jewish Committee is itself
a misnomer. The committee is not exclusively
American, and its work is not
to Americanize the Jews nor even to encourage real
them. It is a committee composed of Jews representing that class
most by keeping the mass of the Jews segregated from Americans and
to the “higher ups” among the Jews. They are the “big Jews,” as Norman Hapgood
used to call them, who say to the “little Jews,” “You hang closely together;
we will be your
representatives to these foreign peoples, the Americans and
others.” If the American Jewish
Committee would change its name to
this: “The Jewish Commission for America,” it might
the truth. It has dealt with America in the recent past very much as the Allied
Commissions deal with Germany. There are certain things we may do, and certain things
we may not do, and the Jewish Commission for America tells us what we may and may
not do. One of the things we may not do is to declare that this is a Christian country.
There is one absolutely safe rule in dealing with anything emanating
from the American
Jewish Commitee. Don’t rely on the label, open the
matter up. You will find that the Kehillah
is not what it pretends to be;
that the Jewish labor union is not what it pretends to be; that
a camouflage for something entirely different; that the name and the nature are
nearly always different, which is the reason for a particular name being chosen. It runs all
the way through Jewish practice, and presents another little job for the Jewish reformer.
[THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT, issue of 12 November 1921]