“Dracula” was really a Social Critique of Jews

After the recent release of director Luc Besson’s new version of the movie Dracula, Count Dracula, that old horror legend, is back in people’s awareness. But what if I told you that Dracula was not horror fiction? Actually, it was a satire that was very politically and socially relevant at the time. Because it was confronting a social problem plaguing England in the late 1890s. And that was the problem of an influx of Ashkenazi refugees pouring into London and changing the landscape of that iconic English city. That might sound really crazy to a lot of people and I know that people will say; “Okay Cato you say a lot of crazy stuff about and you’re very well researched but with this one I think you’re really reaching.” And I get that however by the end of this video I will have you convinced that Bram Stoker’s dracula was unquestionably a social critique that was coded as a historical fiction in order to get a point across to people who at the time would have definitely understood exactly what he was saying. But it was presented in a way that was more palatable than angry op-eds or something like that in the local papers.

This is a really interesting story because we all know who Dracula is. But very few people have any idea that this was actually a social critique at the time. And that’s because all of the context that we have about in Western society has been radically changed. The fact is, for most of the history of Western civilization, Jews and Christians were either openly in conflict, and sometimes that conflict was violent, but mostly it was a religious and social conflict. Or they just existed in this kind of uneasy balance where Jews were normally on the fringes of Christian society, not really welcomed in. Although the Jews themselves also didn’t want to be a part of Christian society.  They themselves elected to live on the fringes of Christian society for basically the entire Middle Ages.

There was historically a lot of intercourse between these two communities that mainly revolved around trade and finance. So for the entire history of Europe, Jews are around Christians. Everybody knows that they exist, but they typically are on the fringes. And that’s not only because Christians wanted them there, it’s because Jews wanted to be there. So there’s always been this uneasy relationship between the two communities for literally 2,000 years. There were also many laws restricting what Jews could do and the various kinds of businesses they could get involved in in Christian societies. They were typically very restricted legally, culturally, socially, and also in business. And that’s part of the reason they engaged in finance so much for most of history is because that was one of the only things they could actually do.

But all that changed in the early 1800s, basically with the age of revolutions. Starting with the French Revolution and the Napoleonic era, those were emancipated in Europe, basically meaning that all of the legal restrictions were taken off of them. And from that point on, they could engage in any industry that Gentiles could. So they poured into key industries, mainly in media, in finance and government administration. What happened in the 1800s was that Jews, who had for centuries lived on the fringes of European civilization, now poured into its concentrations of power. And by the end of the 1800s, there was tremendous amounts of unease all across Europe about this new situation. Because across Europe, you had communities that had a very small percentage of Jews, maybe 2% or 3%, but when you looked in finance or the media or in government, they might be 30, 40, 50, 60% of the people in those positions. And that was causing a great deal of unease all across Europe. This was happening in Germany, in Hungary, in Austria, in France, in England, all over Europe. This was a very big issue. And that became known as the Jewish Question.

This unease was not only felt by Europeans, it was also felt by Jews. So the phrase,

the Jewish Question actually came from Jewish writers who were writing about the tension that those two communities felt at that time. So now we’ll hone in on London because London is where the Dracula legend begins with an author named Bram Stoker. He was an Irish author who was living in London and he published this book in 1897. And it’s no coincidence that the Jewish Question was a very big deal across Europe in the 1880s and 1890s. So right when this book came out, the idea of the Jewish Question was peaking in importance. So before we dive into this, let’s talk about why there was an influx of Jews into London to begin with. And that influx was very large, especially at the time. About 150,000 Jews went to London as refugees in only the 1880s and 1890s. And virtually all of them were Ashkenazi Jews. And Ashkenazi Jews are the ones that originally came from deep in Eastern Europe.

In fact, they were considered to be so far from the East that in the 1800s, a lot of Europeans, when they commented on this, would call them Asian. A lot of times these Jews were considered to be from the Orient. They looked and acted very different from the Sephardic Jews, which mainly came from the Western European region, primarily from Spain, where they had resided for centuries. And for most Europeans and even Jews that were very assimilated into Europe, the Ashkenazi were felt to be a very alien people. They were very much outsiders.

Now, for the most part, for a long time, these Ashkenazi were very comfortable living in their own region away from everybody else, which was a part of Eastern Europe bordering Russia, which was called the Pale of Settlement. The Pale of Settlement is a big strip of land that goes all the way from Ukraine in the Black Sea all the way up north to like Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, that whole region. Everything encompassing that huge strip of land was considered the Pale of Settlement, and that’s where Jews had settled after centuries of being kicked out for various reasons from all kinds of European Christian civilizations, everything from big empires to tiny little principalities and everything in between.

So in Europe, you had a whole bunch of European civilization, and then you had Russia all the way in the east, and in between was this sort of empty area. And that’s where the Jews concentrated over the course of a couple hundred years. And the more Jews concentrated there in the 1500s, 1600s, and 1700s, the more Europeans kind of knew not to go there. So the question is, why did these Jews who were so comfortable living in that region and no one else really wanted them around because they were so alien and such outsiders, why did they ever leave? Well, it’s because during a series of wars in the 1700s, Russia ended up winning that entire territory and it took that pale of settlement and added it to its land holdings.

At that time, Russia was basically the strongest, most Christian, most orthodox monarchy in all of Europe. And they just swallowed up this region that had the people in it who hated Christianity the most for the longest time, because as I said earlier, Jews and Christians have been locked in conflict since basically the beginning of Christianity. Now, Russia thought it could get these people under control by imposing laws and being very strict with them and forcing them to obey various kinds of Christian laws, but Jews do not historically like that at all.

Ever since the Roman invasion of Judea in the first century BC, Jews have been very, very stubborn about not obeying anybody else’s laws throughout history, and they damn sure aren’t about to follow Christian laws just because Russia happened to win a war. So this created a tremendous amount of tension between the two, and there was a very tense and very uneasy relationship between the Jews, who were now part of the Russian Empire, and all of the Christians who already lived there.

It was a very problematic time that lasted over two centuries, and that’s why Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who is a very famous and celebrated author, wrote the book 200 Years Together, documenting the relationship between Christian Russians and Jews. Because it was a very problematic relationship. And much later, it was Jewish Bolshevik communist revolutionaries that would end up overthrowing Russia, and a lot of the reason they did that was because they had so much animosity toward Russia for so long. Because they were being suppressed and persecuted for quite a long time before that. One of the key events in that conflict was the assassination of Tsar Alexander II, which took place in 1881. The Tsar was actually very loved by the people and the Russian Christians understood that it was the Jewish communist revolutionaries who had committed that act.

So there was a huge retaliation. And remember, this took place after there was already generations of tension between the two communities and lots of outbreaks of violence and all kinds of intermittent chaos that had gone on. But when the Tsar’s assassination happened, the Russian Christian community was in an uproar and they started all kinds of violence against the Jewish residents of the Pale of Settlement region, which are called pogroms. It would not really be inaccurate to call this a kind of civil war in that region. And what civil wars do is they always displace the native population. There’s some people who join the fight, and there’s a lot more people who say, screw this, I’m out of here.

And the Jews that poured out of the Pale of Settlement region and resettled into other parts of Europe became a very big issue for those parts of Europe who suddenly had not just a big increase in Jews, which like we said earlier, were already a problematic community. But they were Ashkenazi Jews, which were the most alien, most outsider type of Jews that even Sephardic Jews generally did not like or get along with, or even speak the same language as. And out of that whole exodus of Jews from this region that was turning into war, 150,000 of them ended up in London. The same way London is today being really transformed by a huge wave of African or Muslim immigrants and before it was Indians, at that time it was Jews that were rapidly transforming England and people had a big problem with it. And the highest concentration of this was in London, and London is where the author of Dracula lived, Bram Stoker.

So he writes this book, and it’s very entertaining horror fiction. There’s no doubt about that. It’s a great book and a great story, and that’s why it’s been adapted into so many movies and different forms of storytelling for the last over a century. But if you were an Englander at the time, and especially if you were living in London, you would have understood this reference without a doubt. So let’s start going through all those references because this is going to be very interesting to you. To the modern mind, you will not see these references because you didn’t have the context that Londoners were experiencing at the time. But after I go through all these, you’re going to realize it’s unmistakable that Bram Stoker’s Dracula was actually a critique about this major social issue.

So first we have his physical description and basically Bram Stoker is describing an Ashkenazi. He describes the pale skin, the black hair, the bushy eyebrows, but the unmistakable feature, which has been basically featured in every anti-Semitic caricature of especially Ashkenazi is the aquiline nose. Aquiline means hooked. The long hooked nose that comes slightly over the mouth. If you look at any old anti-Jewish caricatures, you’re gonna see that over and over. It is the most signature feature specifically of Ashkenazi genes. And that is the feature most identified in the description of Bram Stoker’s Dracula. And if that wasn’t obvious enough, where does he come from? From Eastern Europe. Now, the way Dracula operates is he’s a parasite. That’s what vampires are. They’re parasites. They feed on the life force of other human beings, just like any parasite in the animal kingdom does.

People can also be parasites from economies and that’s what Jews had been characterized as for many centuries. And the chief reason for that was usury. Jews were in a unique position because of their religion and because of the laws of other religions, mainly Christianity, where Jews could operate as moneylenders. That’s why they concentrated in finance so much from the earliest days. It was considered a sin to loan money and collect interest on it. So basically Christians borrowed money from Jews because they were letting Jews commit the sin because they didn’t care if they went to heaven or not. Whereas Jews were very happy to loan money to Gentiles because it wasn’t a sin in their religion and they could just make money very easily by doing nothing more than loaning it out and collecting more than that back. And ultimately that relationship made Jews very, very wealthy. Because over the course of centuries, Jews were always the moneylenders and they always got paid interest and their hoard just got bigger and bigger. So they were very, very wealthy Jews. Especially by the end of the 1800s, which some historians call the age of the Rothschilds, the Jews in banking were very, very wealthy.

The Rothschilds were the absolute peak level bankers, but there were many, many Jews operating in a money lending capacity all the way down. But because they were always getting wealthy off of interest-based loans from the community. They always had that reputation as being parasites. And that, of course, is a reference of Dracula. He’s an actual parasite sucking people’s blood, but the reference at that time that he is a greedy, usurious parasite just sucking off the wealth of the community would have been very well understood.

Then the way that Dracula operates in the story, there’s this idea of infiltration and corruption and seduction. He’s penetrating English high society because he wants to corrupt it. That was based on the characteristic of something that another author calls Jews; the seducer. That author was named George Ratzinger. He published a book only a few years prior to Bram Stoker’s Dracula in German explained Jewish business practices. It was basically a commentary talking about how Jewish do business and warning Christian Gentiles about that because they basically had a lot of like dirty tricks in the way they do business. Generally Christian Gentiles wouldn’t have really ever thought of these things. So they wouldn’t have had much preparation against them and that was the purpose of Ratzinger writing this book to warn them about the way that Jews do business. And one of the ways they do business was by folding in the idea of seduction and corruption and blackmail into their business operations.

This was actually an archetype in Europe at the time. And fast forward to today, the optimal version of the Jewish seducer that was quite a common fixture in cities in 1800s Europe would be Epstein today and everybody else like Epstein. Because just like back then, there were entire rings doing this, pulling people into kind of a web of seduction and corruption in order to either bring them under control or harvest their wealth. This is actually documented extensively because there were many court cases about this in the 1800s. And in Ratzinger’s book, he’s kind of providing a summary of that. So Dracula, by the way he’s operating in English high society, he is basically reflecting that archetype of the Jewish seducer in the way that he operates.

As for Jonathan Harker, he’s a lawyer. And remember, the reason he’s originally hired by Dracula in the first place was to operate as an intermediary. He is being hired to take Dracula’s money from deep in Transylvania and move it all the way to London and purchase properties there on the Count’s behalf. But he’s not just buying any old properties, he’s choosing them very strategically. Specifically because he wants to manipulate real estate prices. And Jonathan Harker picks up on that right away in the very beginning, and he actually thinks it’s quite crafty. That was very obvious Jewish coding, and it was a reference to bankers like the Rothschilds and many other Jewish banking families at the time too. Because the Rothschilds get mentioned a lot, but they were far from the only powerful Jewish banking family. There were many and the way that they were known to do business was by manipulating prices and manipulating markets. So that was a reference that really couldn’t be more obvious but only if you know the history of Jews especially in the 1800s. They also did typically act through intermediaries rather than acting on their own especially because in a lot of places Jews couldn’t buy property. It was illegal for them to do so. So they would give their money to intermediaries typically lawyers and do business. That way and that’s exactly why Jonathan Harker is a lawyer working with Count Dracula to make these real estate transactions happen. Also, the fact that he is a count, that is no mistake either.

In the 1800s, very powerful and wealthy Jewish banking families, despite being Jewish, had managed to penetrate European royal bloodlines. In some cases, they actually bought the breeding rights of these monarchies. So even though for many centuries, Jews weren’t even allowed to get anywhere near government or anywhere near royals, by the 1800s,

they are actually having royal titles and owning royal estates and employing a bunch of Christian Gentiles or even controlling their lives because now they are landowners and royals themselves. That’s exactly why Dracula isn’t just some super rich investor. He’s a count. He’s royalty.

Another reference is the fact that Dracula was basically doomed to wander across

the centuries because he is immortal, and that is a reference to the idea of the wandering Jews. In Europe, Jews gained the reputation for being wanderers, and that was a self-imposed reputation. Because Jews perceived themselves to be an exile. For almost 2,000 years, they have still perceived themselves to have been ejected from the Holy Land by God,

but they do believe that they will be called back. And as a result of that, they never fully assimilate with anywhere they live because it’s not really valid to them. They don’t really think that they’re going to end up there. For Jews, as a whole, residents in any other country or civilization of any kind is just temporary because their real home is back in the so-called Holy Land. And they believe that they’re going to be called back there one day. And today that of course manifests itself as political Zionism. Because historically they never plant roots anywhere because everything is temporary anyway. That’s why they wander around basically hunting for the best business opportunities.

So that idea of being a wanderer as a Jew is related to the idea of wandering throughout time without any kind of home or any sense of belonging that Dracula also experiences. There are many more references. Dracula has an obvious, very powerful aversion to Jesus and the cross.

That one couldn’t be more obvious because Jews have also always had an aversion to Jesus and the cross, and they pretty much still do to this day. The scene where the dock workers are moving these large crates filled with dirt that Dracula is going to sleep in when he takes up residence in London. And as the dock workers are moving the crates, they smell them and it’s a horrible smell and they mention that it smells like old Jerusalem. There’s another character named Hildesheim who is basically operating as a living human assistant to Dracula. And aside from having an obvious Jewish name, he is described as being an old Hebrew.

And this was a reference to the way Jews kind of always have each other’s back and work together, even when they’re up to no good. But what Dracula is above all else is a vampire, and a vampire is a bloodsucker. And you wouldn’t know it today, but in the 1800s,

that would have been the most obvious and most terrifying Jewish reference of all. And the reason for that is because there’s an ancient Jewish stereotype that is known as blood libel. Blood libel is a concept that is very contested and very controversial. So I’m gonna have to tread carefully on this topic. But I will just simply share with you the fact that for many centuries. It was thought that human blood was used in their rituals, specifically around two holidays, Purim and Passover. There were many, many anecdotal accounts of this throughout history, but there are two very notable incidents that stand out because of their very extensive documentation, because they were legal court cases. One of them is a case of a boy named Simon who was killed in a part of Italy called Trent in 1475, and that case became known as the Simon of Trent case. And another took place in 1840 and it was the murder of a man named father Thomas who was a christian priest and that took place in the city of Damascus in Syria. Now at the time both of these were really famous cases that had the local community in an uproar and news of these cases spread far and wide because they were so diabolical. Because they were such landmark cases, there were many witnesses and experts that were forced to testify, including rabbis. And some of the statements of these rabbis proved that to at least some extent, this blood libel was not just a myth. It actually did happen. And the statements in particular of the rabbis actually proved that human blood was

in fact used in certain rituals in certain times, although the extent to which is unclear.

Now, most hate the suggestion that they have anything to do with that, and the vast majority of them probably don’t. However, there was a Jewish author named Ariel Toff, and he wrote a book in 2007 in Italian called Pasqua di Sangue, which means Passovers of Blood. And he was an academic and a professional researcher who looked deep into this issue and found out that, yes, in fact, it was historically documented that specifically Ashkenazi Jews, did use human blood in some of their rituals, in particular during Passover. Now, he did specify that they only used dried human blood in their rituals, and he also said this practice was limited to only a few radical extremists. It was not a common ritual by any means. But nevertheless, despite him being Jew himself, and actually he was the son of the former chief rabbi of the city of Rome, he still got in a tremendous amount of trouble from the Jewish community all over the world for this. And the pressure was so great that he actually pulled his own book from circulation, much to his regret.

Later on, he expressed that this was very unfortunate because he felt that pulling the book

out of circulation did more damage than publishing the book because it caused so much speculation about what was in the book among people who were already biased against Jews. And he may have been right about that. But whatever the case, the fear that people had of Jews and specifically the Ashkenazi from the Pale of Settlement region was at least to some extent a valid fear. And again, it was exactly those Jews who ended up all the way out in London and with their very alien habits and alien language and their tendency to be outsiders and all of this bad reputation that followed them. It’s no surprise that the blood libel reputation also followed them. And in that environment, it’s no surprise that Bram Stoker, if he wanted to make a really popular bestselling book, and of course he did, would take all that information and turn it into a fictional horror character that was so Jewish coded. It would be a very obvious social critique that would be very relevant to the people at the time, but it wouldn’t be considered openly antisemitic. And in a way, he was being kind of a mastermind because he was speaking out about this issue and complaining about the issue. But in a way where not a lot of fingers could be pointed back to him. But at the same time, most people would definitely understand the reference.

But despite all that, he wasn’t the first to do this. There was actually another book, very similar, that came out only three years prior to Bram Stoker’s Dracula. And that was a story named Trilby by the French-British author, Georges du Maurier. And that came out in 1894. That book was also a sensation, but it wasn’t Jewish coded. It was openly, blatantly anti-Semitic, and the author did catch a lot of flack for that. The book tells the story of a woman who’s not a very good singer, but there’s a master manipulator, actually a professional hypnotist, who’s very sinister and very malevolent. And he’s able to not only hypnotize this woman, whose last name was Trilby. But also use various psychological and emotional manipulation tricks and basically turn her into a puppet doing whatever he wanted to do. Using hypnosis, he opens her up to the possibility of singing because she actually is a very talented singer, but she lacks confidence. So we have a bit of the mind control thing going on here. Once she becomes a good singer, however, he is basically puppet mastering her from the shadows. Because she is operating under his complete control, but no one can really see it except the few people who understand the nature of psychological and emotional manipulation, trauma programming, and mind control in the form of hypnosis.

So the story was really captivating to the imagination at the time because the man who was this master manipulator, this sinister, malevolent mind controller in the shadows, was Jewish. He wasn’t obviously a villain. He wasn’t harmful or violent or threatening, and he wasn’t a shapeshifter. He was just a mind control master, and he was able to get his way through manipulation. And that is something that people found very threatening about Jews, but he wasn’t supernatural, he was a regular person, just very, very sinister in the ways that Jews are often considered to be. That character’s name was Svengali, and Svengali ended up becoming a cultural reference for decades, even generations. In fact, to this day, if you look up the definition of Svengali, it’s not going to reference the story Trilby. It’s going to say someone who dominates or manipulates another person using either the threat of force or psychological or emotional manipulation. Basically turning another person into their puppet and controlling them from the shadows.

You can see that at play with many politicians and public figures today, many celebrities, many people in a position of public trust, even billionaires. They are clearly being controlled from behind the scenes by these sinister forces. For example, Trump is one of the most obviously controlled political figures in modern history, and he’s clearly being controlled by essentially what I call a Jewish mafia. So despite the fact that the word Svengali has a very anti-Semitic reference, and it has largely been worked out of the language to this day. The idea of a Svengali and people who work in that way still very much exist. In fact, I would argue that today they exist more than ever before. We can see them all over Hollywood, all over the music industry, all over politics. And if you look behind the scenes of all of those roles, you’re going to see many very powerful Jews. It is definitely something that is very common within that group of people.

But in the 1890s, that was still a thing back then, just like it is a thing now. But this was turned into a novel that captivated the imagination with this malevolent, sinister, terrifying figure named Svengali. And Svengali entered the English lexicon and put a label on the idea of the Jewish manipulator. Now, George du Maurier, despite sounding French, actually lived in London, and he released his book in London in 1894. So there is no question whatsoever that Bram Stoker would have been aware of the book Trilby, and he probably would have read it and seen its success. And it’s virtually impossible that he wasn’t inspired to do something similar when he set out to write the story of Dracula. However, he also saw the trouble that Trilby got George du Maurier in. So when Bram Stoker wrote Dracula, he very likely wanted to do something that was expressing the social sentiment towards this influx of Ashkenazi Jews in London, but he wanted to do it in a less obvious way. Rather than have overt language talking about how Svengali was an Oriental Jew or an Ashkenazi Jew and describing him physically and adding all of the typical antisemitic description into his book. Bram Stoker coded it into his book in a way that could be deniable. Yes, he looks like an Ashkenazi Jew and he acts like an Ashkenazi Jew. He comes from where Ashkenazi come from and he does a lot of the things that Jews do, but there’s not really overt references that he’s a Jew.

At any point of the book, it’s all coded in. And the way to understand that would only be through the context of people living in England at the time, especially people in London. So taking all of this together, there’s no question. If you lived in the time of Bram Stoker, especially if you lived in London, when you read Dracula, you would have seen the references to Jews penetrating London and transforming the landscape of that city, immediately there would have been no question about it because people were very afraid. They did feel like that was a very sinister presence. They did feel like it was very alien and that it was coming in and causing a lot of problems. And this was expressed in a way that they could feel and talk about and relate to, but not openly have to feel guilty about because the shaming of antisemitism was even a pretty big thing even back then.

Now, if after all that evidence, you still think I’m reaching here, and I know some of you will,

let’s refer to Jewish writers themselves who very plainly see that Dracula represents Jewish stereotypes and aren’t very happy about it. I’ll reference a very well-written article by a man named Rob Silverman Asher, who’s a Jewish arts writer based in Chicago. He has a whole breakdown of all the ways that Dracula is obviously playing on Jewish stereotypes. But I’m gonna read you some quotes from his article. Because it’s very obvious to him and it’s very obvious to me, but it may not be very obvious to you. In one section of his article, he says this, “Bram Stoker’s original bloodthirsty wealth hoarding degenerate, Dracula, of course, was no doubt based on anti-Semitic stereotypes, but a lot has changed since then.” He goes on to describe some of the things that I described earlier, but he adds some elements of Hebrew folklore, which I think you’ll find pretty interesting. Check this out. The Count must be invited into homes that he visits, a direct cribbing from the Jewish folk legend of the Dibuk, a malicious spirit and soul removed from a dead person. Notably, debuchim are said to be male spirits that possess virginal women on the eve of their wedding. And that is of course a reference to the way that Dracula was pursuing the fiance of Jonathan Harker. But the idea of the debuch gets way more interesting.

Basically a debuch is a type of demon, but specifically it’s a demon that clings to people. It attaches and it doesn’t let go. And you guys will think this is really crazy. But someone who’s very wealthy and very famous and at the center of the Epstein scandal, is the billionaire. Les Wexner, who became a billionaire with a number of different brands selling clothes to young women, most notably Victoria’s Secret. But believe it or not, he complained throughout his life that he was harassed by a Dubuque. And that sounds crazy, but it was actually pretty widely known. And in an interview that he gave to New Yorker magazine in 1985, after he became a billionaire, he talks about how he has been harassed by this demonic energy throughout his life ever since he was four years old. He said that’s part of why he worked so relentlessly morning, noon, and night, and why he always played music everywhere he went, including in all of his stores, because he was one of the first people to put music in stores. It was to shut the demon in his mind up, and he actually said that in this article.

So yes, as crazy as it sounds, the individual who put Epstein into the highest position of power which allowed him to basically act like a billionaire and go around American high society and start infiltrating everybody was someone who literally claimed to have a demon living inside his head who would never stop bothering him. And that is very weird, and yes, you can research that on your own. But that’s a crazy connection between the idea of a Hebrew legend, the Debuchim, and Count Dracula, and the Epstein scandal, which is going on right now. To close out his article, Silverman Asher says this, Stoker seemed to know what he was talking about in regards to not just antisemitism, but Jewish customs as well. So whether you check out the latest iteration of Dracula, which is in theaters now, or you watch my favorite, which is the one that came out in the 90s, which stars Keanu Reeves, I find that one very entertaining, or read the original book, that’s really your best bet. Because then you’re going to see that these references are actually very strong, especially after you’ve been exposed to my content.

But whatever the case, there’s no doubt you’ll find it very interesting that there were such obvious references to Jews, in particular how they were penetrating European civilization and transforming it radically, especially by flooding into concentrations of power. And living in America or anywhere in the West today, you can see that we are struggling with the exact same thing. Especially because all of these different nations who have been penetrated in that way are now all transferring vast amounts of money and weapons and other types of assistance to Israel.

So it’s more obvious than ever. Well, now you can take yourself back to the time of Bram Stoker in the 1890s and they were dealing with the exact same thing. And they didn’t always feel comfortable expressing that overtly because they could get trouble for that back then just like you can now. And that is exactly why Dracula was written. It was a coded complaint. A way for people to vent this frustration with the social problem but not feel bad about it because it was in the form of fiction and a very entertaining story at that.

But going on through the 20th century, especially after World War II, all the Jews in that reference gets completely taken out and now we’re left with a horror figure that is represented in everything from scary movies to boxes of kids cereal. But this whole story is so much more interesting when you know where it actually came from and especially when you realize that what the English were dealing with way back in the 1890s as now what all of us in Western civilization are dealing with today.

 

*Cato Dezorra is a former military/security professional turned independent commentator.

 

Source: https://catodezorra.substack.com/p/dracula-was-really-a-social-critique