Feb. 2009, Volume 6, No.1 (Serial No.

44) Journal of US-China Public Administration, ISSN1548-6591, USA

Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

Chiara Volpato, Federica Durante

(University of Milan–Bicocca, Milano 20126, Italy)

Abstract: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is the most influential fake in contemporary history. The
persuasive power of the protocols comes from the combination of a particular series of stereotypes from secular
anti-Semitism, enhanced with contents outlining the “conspiracy”. To understand the success of the protocols, it is
necessary to examine the content of the group images and stereotypes conveyed by the text. The text has been
content analyzed using psychological theories and methods. Specifically, the protocols is investigated within the
framework of the stereotype content model (SCM; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick & XU, 2002) and the theory of group
images (Alexander, Brewer & Herrmann, 1999). We expected to find an envious stereotype content of the Jewish
group, which results from their being perceived as low in warmth but high in competence. Moreover, we expected
that such a representation fit the image of the “enemy”. Results are in line with our predictions.
Key words: anti-Semitism; stereotype; prejudice; persuasion; conspiracy

1. The historical point of view

In history there are cases in which fake, invented ideas seep into reality creating new dimensions of
comparison and conflict. The fake idea makes up history, stirs up both thoughts and armies, and influences the
course of politics and culture. Examples are abound. The Donation of Constantine, the imperial edict issued by
Constantine in the fourth century AD which granted some territories to the Pope and laid the foundations of the
Church’s temporal power, is in fact a historical fake. It allowed for the legitimization of the temporal power of
Popes, it influenced the entire medieval culture and was one of the causes of Martin Luther’s reform.
The most influential fake in contemporary history is The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an anti-Semitic libel
that appeared in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century. Unexpectedly, it became very successful in the
immediate aftermath of World War I and it was one of the most important texts of the twentieth century and still
topical nowadays: It allowed the Christian-school secular anti-Semitism to become one with the theories of the
Zionist Complot. These theories, as well as anti-Semitism, emerged in the German culture in the second half of
the nineteenth century, but it was not until the circulation of the protocols that they had worldwide resonance.
The volume, defined as a “secret, hidden text”, is presented as the conclusive evidence of the conspiracy that
had been plotted since Salomon’s times to lead the Jews to world power. The text describes the interventions of a
secret gathering during which the Jewish chiefs outline their plans to penetrate pivotal parts of Western society.
The protocols consists of twenty-four programmatic declarations that explained the steps to obtain world power;
the main steps are the infiltration into the top economic ranks, the corruption of the Christian minds by the

Chiara Volpato, professor of social psychology, at the University of Milan; research fields: social psychology of stereotype and
prejudice, intergroup relationships, the socio-psychological analysis of historical and religious texts, cultural diversity and
immigration.
Federica Durante, assistant professor of social psychology, at the University of Milan; research fields: stereotype content,
prejudice, social identity and intergroup relationships, cross-cultural psychology.

23
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

inoculation of Darwinism and Marxism and the establishment of a tough political dictatorship.
The protocols was written in France at the beginning of the twentieth century by Mathieu Golovinskij, and
was assigned by Pëtr Raèkovskij, head of the foreign section of Ochrana, the tsarist secret police. The primary
intent was to hinder the process of Russian modernization that had been started by the Minister of Finance, Sergej
Vitte. The latter attempted to introduce the gold standard system and give an impulse to industry by opening up
the Russian market to international capital; this policy was strongly opposed by aristocratic circles and land
owners who were afraid to lose their power. As a guiding text, the author used a text published in Brussels in 1864,
Dialogue aux enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu (Dialogue in hell between Machiavelli and Montesquieu),
written by Maurice Joly, an opponent of Napoleon III. Many of the passages of the dialogue (more than 160
according to Rollin, 1939) were plagiarized and put together in order to fit the conspiracy paradigm.1
Apart from this main source, the protocols was inspired by narrative texts. Foremost, there was Biarritz
(1868), the novel by Hermann Gödsche, that told how the twelve Tribes of Israel met at a cemetery in Prague to
prepare the conquest of the world. According to Eco (1994), Gödsche had himself copied a novel by Dumas
(1848), Joseph Balsamo, which described the encounter between Cagliostro and other Masonic conspirators to
prepare the French Revolution. Eco (1994) indicated other literary sources of the protocols, one of which was
Eugène Sue’s Le juif errant. Eco claims that the protocols reveals their origin as a novel: Only in feuilletons or in
lyrical operas do the “bad ones” speak so openly about their mischievous intentions. 2
At first, the protocols circulated through marginal channels in Russia. The final version that would be
translated and disseminated all over the world was published in 1905. The success of the protocols in the
following years was rather limited. Their popularity was not ensured until the difficult period after World War I:
In a short period of time, it was translated into the main European languages giving rise to countless discussions
(Cohn, 1967). An article published by the Times on May 8, 1920, had remarkable resonance among these
discussions because, by claiming that their falsity had yet to be proven, which implicitly corroborated the
protocols’ hypotheses. One year later and on three consecutive days (16, 17 and 18 August, 1921), however,
Times made up for the mistake by publishing the evidence that the protocols was fake. This evidence was
discovered in Istanbul by the journalist Philip Graves, who had found the dialogue by Joly and compared it with
the pages of the protocols, discovering that the former had served as the source for the latter.
Despite the discovery of their falsity, the protocols has known an unstoppable worldwide proliferation. In
1967, Cohn pointed out thousands of books, pamphlets, and articles that defended their authenticity listing 59
editions in Russian, German, English, French, Polish, Romanian, Hungarian, Czech, Serbian, Croatian, Greek,
Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Flemish, Swedish, Norwegian and Latvian in the period from 1920 to 1945.
In 1992, Taguieff updated this list and documented the circulation of the protocols in the Arab world in the period
after World War II. Today, the libel continues to play an essential role in the ideological construction of neo-Nazi
movements in Western society (for example, the analysis by Dyer, 1998, on the rural US); at the same time, it has
circulated all over the world thanks to the Arab, Persian, Chinese and Japanese translations. Cohn (1967)
emphasizes that of all three pivotal texts of Nazism–Mein Kampf by Hitler, The myth of the 20th century by

1
The text by Maurice Joly, Dialogue aux enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu, ou la politique de Machiavel au XIX siècle par un
contemporain, was published anonymously in Brussels in 1964. It was published again in German the following year (Leipzing, 1865)
with the name of the author and later rediscovered and reprinted (Paris, 1948, 1968). For Joly, see Rollin (1939).
2
Umberto Eco seems to be intrigued by the protocols that feature in much of his work. Apart from the quoted work, the writer has
also woven the protocols into the plot line of his second novel, Foucault’s pendulum (1988). Moreover, he has recently presented the
graphic novel by Will Eisner (2005), the plot, that reports the disturbing success of the protocols.

24
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

Rosenberg and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion - only the latter has been extensively used abroad as
propaganda. It should be added that only the influence of the latter has not declined after the second World War.
In fact, the protocols continues to receive disquieting attention in today’s world.
The protocols contains the strategies that the Jewish elite planned to use power from the Gojim, the
Christians. The ideology of the work clearly emerges in the definition of such plans; the ideology is
antidemocratic and based on the concept of authority and force. The development of the arguments outlines the
steps to gain power; they range from penetrating the higher circles of the state (through infiltration in the press,
bureaucracy, and university) to controlling the economy, as well as exercising brute force. The ideas expressed in
the protocols are in line with the classical concepts of political despotism: Freedom is a utopian idea; politics have
to be detached from any moral consideration, the ends justify the means. The ideological framework is inspired by
Machiavellianism: People are predators defined by “bad instincts”; power is their only aspiration; right resides in
force; the people need to blindly obey the authorities; the power of gold is sovereign; force and hypocrisy are the
keys to successful governing. The principles of the French revolution are ridiculed; the republican political
organization is considered a picklock to conquer power (“The republics will give us the throne of the world”). The
“complete destruction” of Christian faith – the most dangerous enemy – should be pursued. Another remarkable
fact is the stance on quotes regarding anti-Semitism: It is an instrument invented by the Jewish elite with the aim
of diverting the hatred of Jews towards Christians, maintaining the cohesion of the ingroup, disseminating the
Jews all over the world, and breaching the enemy lines by arousing pity among Christians towards Jews.
The ideological frame of the protocols is reminiscent of the political thought of the twentieth century
dictatorships; numerous concepts are similar to the ones encountered in Mein Kampf (Capozza & Volpato, 2007):
The emphasis of the crucial role of the internal divisions within a society, the description of problems caused by
the proliferation of alcoholism and libertine sexual behavior, and the persistence of the importance of
manipulating public opinion through control of the press. The Jewish group is defined by characteristics and
stereotypes that would later be retrieved by Hitler: Unfit for agriculture, economically powerful, devoted to
conspiracy, “internationalist”. Similarly featuring in Mein Kampf is the vilification of the democratic political
universe with its representation in parliament made up of “chatterboxes”. Hitler will also adopt the language of the
protocols, a language that “biologizes” social aspects through the obsessive use of medical metaphors (“infect
with Liberalism”, “deadly poison” and “septicemia”).
An interesting fact is the cross-referencing to social sciences and their use to control and manipulate society.
For example, as soon as power has been seized, the “science of the structure of human reality and social life” will
be introduced from the primary schools onwards in order to predispose the youth to obedience to authority, as
well as the acceptance of the state organization. In other places, the role of the political economy is discussed:
“The economical sciences constitute the main subject that should be taught to Jews”. The authors of the protocols
introduce a precise connection between social sciences and Jewish conspiracy in that the progress of social
sciences would serve the plans of the Jewish elite.

2. The social psychological point of view

The protocols has repeatedly been interpreted in the light of psychodynamic theories (Cohn, 1966, 1967;
Grunberger, 1962; Loeblowitz-Lennard, 1947; Loewenstein, 1952). According to Cohn, for instance, the fact that
the myth of the Jewish conspiracy has survived over centuries in the most diverse cultures makes us think that it

25
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

meets tenacious, unconscious needs. The author maintains that negative projections can be recognized in
anti-Semitism: Jews are perceived as “bad sons” (i.e. rebellious sons with homicidal tendencies towards the
father), but at the same time as “bad fathers” (i.e. possible castrators of their sons).
However, to our knowledge, there are no social psychological interpretations of the protocols, i.e. analyses
that investigate the text in the light of social psychology theories. Nevertheless, the protocols presents us with
multiple reasons for interest of social psychological research: It offers a case study of influence that appears to
contradict the ideas of common sense as well as some rules of persuasive communication. First and foremost, it is
lengthy and tedious, written in a bureaucratic language and edited in a unilateral way. Its circulation can by no
means be attributed to the pleasure derived from reading them nor to the vividness of the message. Rather, It
seems to indirectly confirm the fact that the vividness is not always necessary for a message to be persuasive
(Taylor & Thompson, 1982; Frey & Eagly, 1993).
The research on persuasion has demonstrated that the similarity with the source of influence strengthens the
persuasive effect of a message. Yet again, the protocols is an exception to that rule: In this case the distance and
the dissimilarity from the source increase the impact. The key factor in the circulation of the protocols lies in their
presentation as a product made by the detested outgroup: The protocols verbalizes the outgroup’s hidden “truth” -
the conspiracy to seize world power. In general, a source from the outgroup is regarded as less persuasive than a
source from the ingroup (Haslam, McGarty & Turner, 1996; Turner, 1991). In the protocols’ case, however, the
fact that the source belongs to the outgroup does not undermine, but, rather, reinforces the persuasiveness of the
message for two reasons. Firstly, the message is not perceived as a text with persuasive aims, but is “discovered”
and revealed “despite” the source’s will to hide it. These elements guarantee the trustworthiness of the message
and turn it into a powerful tool of influence. Secondly, the protocols discloses the plans of the Jewish elite, i.e. a
representative outgroup minority. Studies on minority influence indicate that the representative outgroup
minorities provoke a particularly strong derogation (Volpato, Maass, Mucchi Faina & Vitti, 1990). However, such
kinds of minorities are highly visible and considered to have a great level of expertise of their own ingroups. This
renders their discourse on the ingroup extremely credible to the audience.
The protocols conveys the idea that the modern form of Western society and the collective forces within that
society are the results of Jewish manipulation. Parliamentary democracy, but also liberalism, socialism and
anarchism have all been created by the Jews in support of their plans attributing the more important ideologies as
well as social institutions to the Jews means that a negative meaning is conferred to such things. The products of
modern thinking are associated with the Jewish in order to undermine their influence.
In the first years after it had been written, the protocols was taken into consideration since it was presented as
a reliable discovery. In a paradoxical way, however, its diffusion started when their falsity had been documented,
immediately after World War I. From this moment onwards, the defenders of the protocols use one single
rhetorical argument: “It is of no importance whether the protocols are true or false, what matters is that they tell us
the truth about the Jewish conspiracy”. This argument is fallacious at a rational level, but of extraordinarily
persuasive efficacy since it confirms and amplifies stereotypes, prejudice and beliefs that already exist. In the
Thirties, this argument recurs obsessively in the Nazi and Fascist propaganda and it is, even today, still used by
adherents of contemporary anti-Semitism.3

3
See the work by Nesta Webster (1924), an anti-Semitic author who dedicated her entire life to sustain the truth of the Jewish Plot.
Her reasoning resembles Hitler’s Mein Kampf: The protocols could be a fake, but they report exactly what Jews think and do, and are,
therefore, considered authentic.

26
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

As mentioned above, the spread of the protocols is due to the fact that it appears to be discovered and
published against the will of the Jewish group, who had written it for internal use only. However, this is not
enough to explain its impact. In our opinion, the persuasive power of the protocols comes from the combination of
two factors. First, the protocols has selected a particular series of stereotypes from secular anti-Semitism. Second,
it inserts them into a new framework – the conspiracy theory – in order to increase the threat of the Jewish group
and to facilitate discriminatory and hostile behavior against this group. Thus, in other words, to understand the
success of the protocols, it is necessary to examine the content of the group images and stereotypes conveyed by
the text. This is, indeed, the purpose of the present study.
In order to reach this aim, we used social psychological methods to analyze the content of the protocols and
interpret it in light of the theoretical models of the discipline. Specifically, the protocols is investigated within the
framework of the stereotype content model (SCM; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick & XU, 2002) and the theory of group
images (Alexander, Brewer & Herrmann, 1999).
The SCM (Fiske, et al., 2002) conceptualizes different forms of prejudice as a consequence of the social
structural relationships between groups with reference to two critical factors: The socio-economic status of
ingroup and outgroup and the type of interdependence between groups (cooperative vs. competitive). Such
dimensions generate the content of the stereotypes around two fundamental dimensions: Perceived competence
and warmth, negatively correlated in the ambivalent forms of prejudice.
The SCM describes four different kinds of prejudice. The admiration prejudice is directed toward high status
groups perceived in a cooperative relationship. The contemptuous prejudice, instead, is directed toward low status
groups perceived in a competitive relationship. The last two forms of prejudice are characterized by ambivalence:
The envious one targets high status groups perceived in a competitive relationship, while the paternalistic
prejudice targets low status groups perceived in a cooperative relationship.
The second theoretical framework, the theory of group images, is a general interpretation of intergroup
perceptions (Alexander, et al., 1999; Alexander, Brewer & Livingston, 2005). According to Alexander, et al.,
stereotypes are the consequence of three structural attributes that characterize intergroup relationships: The
compatibility of goals, the ingroup’s relative status and the ingroup’s relative power. The status perception
depends on the way the ingroup and the outgroup are evaluated within the intergroup context. The power
perception, instead, comes from perceived inequalities in terms of political, economic, and military resources.
These structural attributes give rise to emotions and behaviors not always acceptable. The stereotype serves to
justify attitudes and behavioral decisions concerning theoutgroup members.
Herrmann and Fischerkeller (1995) identified five outgroup images, which are the consequences of the
structural attribute combinations (Alexander, et al., 2005; Alexander, Levin & Henry, 2005; Herrmann, Voss,
Schooler & Ciarrochi, 1997): Enemy, ally, degenerate, imperialist and colony. In the more recent works
(Alexander, et al., 1999, 2005a, 2005b), the label “colony” has been substituted by the label “dependent”.
In our opinion, the text conveys an image of the Jews based on traits coming from traditional anti-Semitism
but enhanced with contents outlining the “conspiracy”. It should result in a threatening and powerful
representation of a dangerous minority. Hence, we expect to find an envious stereotype content of the Jewish
group, which results from their being perceived as low in warmth but high in competence. Moreover, we expect
that such a representation fits the image of the “enemy”.

3. The research

27
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

3.1 Method
The Italian translation of the protocols by De Michelis (1998) was used for the analysis. We coded all social
groups described in the text. Only groups with more than ten references to them throughout the text were included
in the analysis (the group of liberals, for example, was excluded since it was mentioned only 6 times). These
groups are: We Jews (note that the text is written in the first plural person: The Jews describe their plans to the
world’s conquest), our government (the future Jewish government that will take global power), our agents
(charged to follow the orders of the Jewish elite in order to create by all means the conditions allowing to seize
power), the Goijm (the Christians) and the people. Each group was codified by adjectives (e.g. “invincible”,
“barbaric”), nouns (e.g. “dictatorship”, “anarchy”), verbs (e.g. “they corrupt”, “they plot”) and sentences (e.g.
“they prepare the future government”) associated with them. Words and sentences with the same or a similar
meaning were grouped into the same category. This selection yielded 52 categories of analysis.
The codification was carried out by one of the present authors. Coding reliability was measured as over-time
stability, according to Krippendorff’s guidelines (1980). To this end, the percentage agreement index was used,
equaling 98.6. Because of the limitations of this index (lack of correction for agreements due to chance, and
absence of confidence intervals) Cohen’s (1960) Kappa was applied. Kappa came out as .90 which is considered a
satisfactory value (Fleiss, 1981; Smith, 2000).
The frequency with which groups were associated with categories is reproduced in a contingency matrix (52
x 5), which was subjected to correspondence factor analysis (Benzécri, 1980; Clausen, 1998; Deschamps, 2003).
This analysis aims to look at the representation of each group and its position in relation to others.
3.2 Results
The correspondence factor analysis revealed four interpretable factors, each of them contributing to explain
the meaning of the groups. The plane defined by axes 1 and 3 (see Table 1 and Figure 1) shows the meaning of We
Jews, Goijm and People. The concept of We Jews is entirely explained by the first factor; its squared cosine (cos2)
in relation to the first axis is equal to .91, whereas the cosine in relation to each of the other axes is inferior to .15.
The Goijm concept is explained by the first (cos2=.72) and by the third factor (cos2=.28), as is the concept of
People (cos2=.61 for first factor and cos2=.39 for the third). The categories whose meaning is accounted only by
the first and/or third dimension (cos2<.15 for the three other dimensions) are also shown on the plane of Figure 1.

Table 1 Correspondence factor analysis

F1 F2 F3 F4
Categories 2 2 2
Coord Contr. Co Coord. Contr. Co Coord. Contr. Co Coord Contr. Co2
WE Jews .57 .22 .91
Our government .57 .01 .02 4.43 .95 .98
People -1.77 .33 .61 -1.79 .56 .39
Goijm -1.77 .42 .72 1.41 .44 .28
Our agents -3.89 .97 .91
The power of gold .57 .01 .77
Force, powerfulness .57 .01 .77
They seize power .57 .01 .77
Invisible power .57 .01 .77
Dictatorship,
.57 .01 .77
despotism

(to be continued)

28
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

Used by the Jews -1.77 .09 .99

The mould the minds .57 .01 .77
They use the press .57 .01 .77
Influential, they use
.57 .01 .77
suggestion
Follower of liberalism -1.77 .01 .94
Coward -1.77 .02 .99
Violent .57 .02 .77
International .57 .01 .77
They use others .57 .02 .77
They uproot
.57 .01 .77
radicalism
Destructive .57 .01 .77
They manipulate
.57 .01 .77
memory
Enemies of
.57 .01 .77
Christianity
Strategy .57 .01 .77
Irrational -1.77 .02 .99
Astute, hypocrite .57 .01 .77
They cheat, they
.57 .01 .77
betray
They prepare the
.57 .05 .82
future government
Creators of contention
.57 .01 .77
and chaos
Naive, immature -1.77 .03 1.00
They safeguard the
.57 .01 .77
ingroup
Similar to animals -1.77 .03 .89
Wise, sage 3.68 .16 .97
Genius 2.36 .06 .92
Predestined by God 4.68 .20 .98
Patriarchal 6.34 .28 .99
Authoritarian 3.49 .20 .96
Invincible .57 .01 .70 -.29 .01 .25
They conspire, they
.57 .01 .20 1.36 .01 .80
use terrorism
Capable of governing .57 .01 .50 .65 .01 .47
They submit to force,
they love -1.77 .03 .37 -2.93 .11 .63
dictatorships
Barbarians -1.77 .03 .37 -2.93 .11 .63
Herd -1.77 .04 .50 -2.27 .11 .50
Stupid -1.77 .23 .83 1.02 .12 .17
Divided -1.77 .04 .98
(to be continued)

29
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

Anarchical -1.77 .01 .37 -2.93 .04 .63

Frank, righteous,
-1.77 .02 .84 .99 .01 .16
pitiful
Inconstant -1.77 .01 .37 -2.93 .04 .63
Self-destructive -1.77 .02 .78 -1.18 .01 .22
Depraved, drugged -1.77 .02 .49 .21 .07 .51
They suffer, they are
-1.77 .04 .37 -2.93 .18 .63
poor
Misled, cheated upon -1.77 .01 .37 -2.93 .04 .63
Inept, weak -1.77 .01 .49 2.30 .04 .51
Venal -1.77 .01 .49 2.30 .03 .51
Negligent -1.77 .01 .49 2.30 .04 .51
They plot .57 .05 .46 -1.09 .70 .49
They corrupt, they
.57 .01 .50 -.94 .06 .39
infect

The first axis (which accounts for 51.5% of the total inertia) demonstrates the opposition between Jews, on
one side, and Goijm and people on the other. The categories associated with Jews convey an image of negative
strength which serves to obtain power in an insidious and hidden way (“invisible power”) through illegal means
and a skilled use of strategies of manipulation. Whilst preparing the future government, the Jews spread dissent
and chaos, behave violently, cheat, betray and destroy the other groups, but always safeguard their own group. In
this image, it is possible to trace many traits drawn from European secular anti-Semitism (the Jews are “astute,
cunning and hypocritical”, enemies of Christianity, they rest their strength upon “the power of gold”, they are
“international” in that they establish relationships that go beyond the national boundaries and that are in conflict
with the interests of the country that hosts them). These traits are flanked by numerous categories that emphasize
the Jewish competence to use the influence techniques (“they mould the minds of others”, they use “the others”,
“suggestion”, “the press”, “they manipulate memory”).
At the opposite extreme of the first axis, people and Goijm are the targets of the Jewish influence strategies.
If Jews cheat, the people are cheated upon; if Jews are controlling and dictatorial, people love dictatorships and
willingly submit to brute force; if Jews are destructive, people are self-destructive; if Jews wisely employ all
instruments to manipulate consensus, the naive and stupid Goijm are willing to succumb and become those
instruments; if Jews intend to uproot Liberalism, the Goijm appreciate it.
The third axis (19.3% of the total inertia) distinguishes between Goijm and people. The Goijm are attributed
with negative characteristics that conjure up an image of weakness (“inept”, “negligent”, “cowards” and
“depraved”), venality, incompetence (“naive”, “stupid” and “irrational”). Also frankness, the only positive trait,
contributes to the picture of the Gojim as individuals with limited cognitive skills since it is typical of people who
are unaware of the danger they find themselves in. Another significant category completes the picture: “Similar to
animals”, often used to delegitimize the outgroup (in the text one finds expressions such as: “They look like tigers,
but have the souls of sheep”, “their intelligence is of animal nature”, “animals devoid of reason”). A similar
category, “herd”, defines the people, which are also portrayed in a negative manner: The people include members
that suffer, but incapable of redeeming themselves since they are easily misled; they are divided, self-destructive,
inconstant, barbaric and anarchical despite being ready to submit to whoever exercises bruteforce.

30
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

axis 3
depraved; inept;
negligent; venal;

GOJIM
stupid
frank
similar to animals
followers of Liberalism
used by the Jews coward;
irrational
naive axis 1
*
JEWS
divided

they prepare the future government;

self-destructive they use others;
violent;
they mould the minds;
they use the press;
PEOPLE creators of contention;
they cheat;
dictatorship;
herd the power of gold;
force;
astute;
they suffer; they they uproot liberalism;
submit to force; influential;
international;
barbarians; anarchical; strategy;
inconstant; misled they plot;
they manipulate memory;
they safeguard the ingroup;
enemies of Christianity;
invisible power;
destructive

Figure 1 Correspondence factor analysis (axes 1 and 3)

The plane defined by axes 1 and 2 (25.2 % of the total inertia) (Figure 2) shows We Jews and our
government; the latter is entirely explained by the second factor (cos2=.98). The characteristics associated with
Jews correspond with the ones illustrated in Figure 1 and are enriched by a number of traits that Jews have in
common with our government: The invincibility, geniality and the ability to govern. The skill that stands out, in
particular, is the ability to orchestrate plots by using terrorism. Typical characteristics of the government, on the
other hand, are authoritarianism, wisdom, the divine predestination and the patriarchal character.
The final concept, our agents, is entirely explained by the fourth factor (cos2=.91). The two categories that
define our agents and, at the same time, complete the image of the Jews are “they corrupt” and “they plot”.
3.3 Discussion
Examining a historically relevant case, the present study analyzes the construction of an exemplary
conspiracy paradigm and interprets its key points with the help of contemporary social psychological models. The
attention is focused on the construction of group images as well as the content of the stereotypes that these images
sustain.

31
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

axis 2
patriarchal

predestined by God

OUR GOVERNMENT

wise

authoritarian

genius

they plot

capable of governing

invincible
axis 1

they use others; violent; they mould the JEWS

minds; they use the press; creators of they prepare the future government
contention; they cheat; dictatorship; the
power of gold; force; they seize power;
astute; they uproot Liberalism; influential;
international; strategy; they manipulate
memory; they safeguard the ingroup;
invisible power; destructive

Figure 2 Correspondence factor analysis (axes 1 and 2)

In the protocols, Jews are presented as a group that is powerful, skilled, dangerous and determined to pursue
global power with all possible means. The Jews are everywhere, hide themselves inside the institutions, and plot
against the societies that host them; they are organized in a rigid hierarchy; they safeguard their own people whilst
damaging all other societal entities. They are close to success. This representation is congruent with the image of
the enemy proposed by Alexander, Brewer, & Herrmann (1999; Alexander, et al., 2005a, 2005b; Herrmann &
Fischerkeller, 1995; Herrmann, et al., 1997). According to the authors, the image of the enemy is formed when the
ingroup and outgroup are groups that are in competition and similar in social status, power and strength. This
situation produces perceptions of threat and a behavioral inclination to eliminate the threat through attack. Such
inclinations, however, are in stark contrast with the norms of equal and non-aggressive behavior towards the
others. The function of the stereotype of the enemy – based on the attribution of categories such as “hostile”,
“untrustworthy”, “monolithic” and “opportunistic” – is to restore the balance between behavioral inclinations and
moral norms and justify the use of force.
The image of the Jews conveyed by the protocols presents all the necessary elements of the enemy: The Jews
are skilled and powerful; they compete over world power with the Christians; their status poses a threat to the
status of the Gojim on a cultural, economic and political level.
The traits linked to the image of the Jews were selected to arouse an envious prejudice, a kind of prejudice
that targets high-status groups with whom there is perceived a competitive relationship (Fiske, Cuddy & Glick,

32
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

2002; Fiske, et al., 2002; Fiske, XU, Cuddy & Glick, 1999; Glick, 2002; Glick & Fiske, 2001). In the envious
prejudice, members of the outgroup are regarded as competent, but lacking in warmth: The traits associated with
the Jews in the analysis of the protocols fully fit the envious prejudice described in the SCM. In fact, the Jews are
dexterous, powerful, hostile and have skills that make them extremely dangerous; moreover, they are not defined
by any warm characteristic; the trait “they safeguard the ingroup” further emphasizes the danger they constitute
since it highlights the cohesion (e.g. Abelson, Dasgupta, Park & Banaji, 1998; Dépret & Fiske, 1999; Likel,
Hamilton, Wieczorkowska, Lewis, Sherman & Uhles, 2000) within the group. By linking the Jews to the
characteristics that would arouse envious prejudice, the protocols exposes them to the kinds of behavior associated
with this form of prejudice: Avoidance and ostracism, but also segregation and extermination in situations of
conflict like the ones that took place in the aftermath of World War I in Europe.
In the face of the Jewish force, the Goijm are blemished with a prejudice of contempt: They are incompetent,
stupid, similar to animals, vile, irrational, and prone to instrumentalization; not a single trait of warmth softens the
negativity of this representation. The image of the People demonstrates many analogies: The only non-conforming
trait is provided by the category “they suffer”. The consideration for this suffering, however, is still linked with
the intention of the Jews to use this information to their advantage.
The representations of the people and the Gojim conveyed by the Protocols recall the image of the
dependent as defined by Alexander and colleagues (1999, 2005). It concerns an image typical of situations where
there is negative interdependence, in which the outgroup is perceived as weaker than the ingroup in terms of force,
power and culture. In these cases, the ingroup attempts to remove the incompatibility of goals by taking advantage
of the asymmetry. The stereotype of dependence, defined by traits such as “infantile”, “incompetent” and
“divided”, serves to interpret the exploitation of the outgroup as help; exploitation that would otherwise be
regarded to go against all widely accepted ethical norms.
It may be interesting to point out that the Protocols was developed in the same years and atmosphere –
France and the Dreyfus affair – in which the crowd psychology was developing (Le Bon, 1895; Reicher, 1996):
the depiction of the People and the Gojim, in fact, recall the negative image of the crowd found in the first social
psychological theories.
As mentioned before, there are insistently dehumanizing labels in the representations of the Gojim and
people. The people are portrayed as a flock of sheep that need guidance. The Gojim are dehumanized in a worse
manner, like in the part in which the Elders declare: “We will take care of them for their work, like we take care
of working animals and cattle”. The dehumanization is a radical strategy to delegitimize the outgroup, which
prepares and goes hand in hand with genocides and exterminations (Bandura, 1999; Bar-Tal, 1989; Staub, 1989,
1999; Volpato & Contarello, 1999). Depicting the Goijm as animals implies a reversal of the usual pattern:
Normally an outgroup is delegitimized to strike with more efficiency without any feeling of collective guilt. The
aim, in this case, is to demonstrate to the readers that the ingroup runs the risk of being completely delegitimized,
which is intended to increase the feeling of perceived threat. Expressions that emphasize the asymmetry between
ingroup and outgroup have the same objective, e.g. “we have redeemed ourselves by sacrificing many of our
people, each victim of which is worth a thousand Goijm in the eyes of our God”.

4. Conclusions

The present analysis can help us to provide some answers to the question: why did the protocols turn out to

33
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

be so persuasive and continue to be? By using a well-rooted stereotype in a moment of crisis, the protocols have
selected the traits associated with the dimensions of competence and power, and have introduced them in a new
framework: The global Jewish conspiracy. In this way, the traditional image of the Jewish group was empowered
and transformed into the image of a dangerous enemy, which is close to success – an ideal target for envious
prejudice.
The main objective of the operation was to increase the perception of threat on various levels (Branscombe,
Ellemers, Spears, & Doosje, 1999; Devos, Silver, Mackie, & Smith, 2002; Neuberg & Cottrell, 2002; Stephan &
Renfro, 2002). In particular, the operation of the Protocols aimed at increasing the perception of group-level
resource threat as well as groupintegrity threat (Neuberg & Cottrell, 2002). The group-level resource threats
pertain to group safety, group possessions and opportunities, as well as group economic security. In the protocols,
the threats to group safety were made salient by attributing traits of invincibility and competence to the Jews, as
well as an ability to plot, conspire and manipulate minds. The threats to group possessions and opportunities are
increased by the fact that Jews are depicted as people with the will and ability to take possession of political and
economic power. It should be noted that the group-level resource threats become more salient in situations of
crisis, like the one that typified the international scenario in the period between the two world wars. The threats to
the group integrity, on the other hand, are stressed by a number of traits attributed to Goijm and the people; these
negative traits emphasize the internal divisions, the incompetence, and the apathy in the face of the Jewish
manipulations. Making the perception of threat from the Jewish group more salient also meant evoking emotions
like anxiety, fear, anger, and disgust that would have led to destructive behavior.
As illustrated above, the protocols introduces the reader to the conspiracy paradigm, a universe which has not
yet been sufficiently explored by social psychological research. The majority of conspiracy research in social
psychology describes conspiracy theories found in different social groups (for example: Abalakina-Paap, Stephan,
Craig, & Gregory, 1999; Billig, 1978, 1988; Butler, Koopman & Zimbardo, 1995; Crocker, Luhtanen, Broadnax,
& Blaine, 1999; Goertzel, 1994; Licata & Klein, 2000; McCauley & Jacques, 1979; McHoskey, 1995; Simmons
& Parsone, 2005; Wagner-Egger & Bangerter, 2006; Zonis & Joseph, 1994). A significant theoretical contribution
was made in the volume edited by Graumann and Moscovici (1987) that puts together essays by historians,
political scientists and social psychologists. Valid indications can be found in the more recent work by Kramer
(1998; Kramer & Messick, 1996; Kramer & Jost, 2002) on outgroup paranoia. However, a satisfactory theoretical
paradigm, which is able to interpret the phenomenon as a whole, is still lacking. Our work is intended to be a cue
for further research in this direction.

References:
Abalakina-Paap, M., Stephan, W. G., Craig, T. & Gregory, W. L. (1999). Beliefs in conspiracies. Political Psychology, 20, 637-647.
Abelson, R. P., Dasgupta, N., Park, J. & Banaji, M. R. (1998). Perception of the collective other. Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 2, 243-250.
Alexander, M. G., Brewer, M. B. & Herrmann, R. K. (1999). Images and affect: A functional analysis of out-group stereotypes.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 78-93.
Alexander, M. G., Brewer, M. B. & Livingston, R. W. (2005a). Putting stereotype content in context: Image theory and interethnic
stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 781-794.
Alexander, M. G., Levin, S. & Henry, P. J. (2005b). Image theory, social identity, and social dominance: Structural characteristics and
individual motives underlying international images. Political Psychology, 26, 27-45.
Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3,
193-209.
Bar-Tal, D. (1989). Delegitimization: The extreme case of stereotyping and prejudice.

34
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

Bar-Tal, C. F. Graumann, A. W. Kruglanski & W. Stroebe. (Eds.). Stereotyping and prejudice. Changing conceptions. New York:
Springer-Verlag, 169-182.
Benzécri, J. P. (1980). L'analyse des données. L'analyse des correspondences ( Vol. 2). Paris: Dunod.
Billig, M. (1978). Fascists: A social psychological view of the national front. New York: Academic Press.
Billig, M. (1988). Methodology and scholarship in understanding ideological explanation. In: C. Antaki. (Ed.). Analysing everyday
explanation. London: Sage, 199-215.
Branscombe, N. R., Ellemers, N., Spears, R. & Doosje, B. (1999). The context and content of social identity threat. In: N. Ellemers,
R. Spears & B. Doosje. (Eds.). Social identity. Oxford: Blackwell, 35-58.
Butler, L. D., Koopman, C. & Zimbardo, P. G. (1995). The psychological impact of viewing the film JFK: Emotions, beliefs, and
political behavioral intentions. Political Psychology, 16, 237-257.
Capozza, D. & Volpato, C. (2007). Mein Kampf. (Testing the stereotype content model through a case analysis). Under review.
Clausen, S. E. (1998). Applied correspondence analysis. An introduction. London: Sage.
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37-46.
Cohn, N. (1966). The myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy: A case study in collective psychopathology. Commentary, 41(6), 35-42.
Cohn, N. (1967). Warrant for genocide. The myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. London:
Eyre & Spottiswoode.
Crocker, J., Luhtanen, R., Broadnax, S. & Blaine, B. E. (1999). Belief in U.S. government conspiracies against Blacks among Black
and White college students: Powerlessness or system blame? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 941-953.
De Michelis, C. G. (1998). Il manoscritto inesistente. I “Protocolli dei savi di Sion”: Un apocrifo del XX secolo. Venezia: Marsilio.
En. Trans. The non-existent manuscript. A study of the Protocols of the Sages of Zion. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
2004.
Dépret, E. & Fiske, S. T. (1999). Perceiving the powerful: Intriguing individuals versus threatening groups. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 35, 461-480.
Deschamps, J. C. (2003). Analyse des correspondances et variations des contenus de représentations sociales. In: J. C. Abric. (Ed.).
Méthodes d’études des représentations sociales. Saint-Agne: Erès, 179-199.
Devos, T., Silver, L. A., Mackie, D. M. & Smith, E. R. (2002). Experiencing intergroup emotions. In: D. M. Mackie & E. R. Smith.
(Eds.). From prejudice to intergroup emotions. New York: Psychology Press, 111-134.
Dyer, J. (1998). Harvest of rage. Westview Press.
Eco, U. (1988). Il pendolo di Foucault. Milano: Bompiani. En. Trans. Foucault’s pendulum. Ballantine Books, 1990.
Eco, U. (1994). Six walks in the fictional woods. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Eisner, W. (2005). The plot. New York: Norton.
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. C. & Glick, P. (2002). Emotions up and down: Intergroup emotions result from perceived status and
competition. In: D. M. Mackie & E. R. Smith. (Eds.). From prejudice to intergroup emotions. New York: Psychology Press,
247-264.
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. C., Glick, P. & XU J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth
respectively follow perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878-902.
Fiske, S. T., XU J., Cuddy, A. C. & Glick, P. (1999). (Dis)respecting versus (dis)liking: Status and interdependence predict
ambivalent stereotypes of competence and warmth. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 473-489.
Fleiss, J. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportion. New York: Wiley.
Frey, K. P. & Eagly, A. H. (1993). Vividness can undermine the persuasiveness of message. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 65, 32-44.
Glick, P. (2002). Sacrificial lambs dressed in wolves’ clothing: Envious prejudice, ideology, and the scapegoating of Jews. In: L. S.
Newman & R. Erber. (Eds.). Understanding genocide. The social psychology of the holocaust. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
113-142.
Glick, P. & Fiske, S. T. (2001). Ambivalent stereotypes as legitimizing ideologies: Differentiating paternalistic and envious prejudice.
In: J. T. Jost & B. Major. (Eds.). The psychology of legitimacy. Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup
relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 278-306.
Goertzel, T. (1994). Belief in conspiracy theories. Political Psychology, 15, 731-742.
Graumann, C. F. & Moscovici, S. (Eds.). (1987). Changing conceptions of conspiracy. New York: Sprinter-Verlag.
Grunberger, B. (1962). Der Antisemit und der Oedipuscomplex. Psyche, 14, 255-272.
Haslam, S. A., McGarty, C. & Turner, J. C. (1996). Salient group membership and persuasion: The role of social identity in the
validation of beliefs. In: J. L. Nye & A. M. Brower. (Eds.). What’s social about social cognition? London: Sage, 29-56.
Herrmann, R. K. & Fischerkeller, M. P. (1995). Beyond the enemy image and spiral model: Cognitive-strategic research after the

35
 Empowering the “Jewish threat”: The protocols of the elders of Zion

cold war. International Organization, 49, 415-450.

Herrmann, R. K., Voss, J. F., Schooler, T. Y. E. & Ciarrochi, J. (1997). Images in international relations: An experimental test of
cognitive schemata. International Studies Quarterly, 41, 403-433.
Joly, M. (1864). Dialogue aux enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu, ou la politique de Machiavel au XIX siècle par un
contemporain. Bruxelles. En. Trans. The dialogue in hell between Machiavelli and Montesquieu. Lanham (Md.): Lexington
Books, 2002.
Kramer, R. M. (1998). Paranoid cognition in social systems: Thinking and acting in the shadow of doubt. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 2, 251-275.
Kramer, R. M., & Jost, J. T. (2002). Close encounters of the suspicious kind. Outgroup paranoia in hierarchical trust dilemmas. In: D.
M. Mackie & E. R. Smith. (Eds.). From prejudice to intergroup emotions. New York: Psychology Press, 173-189.
Kramer, R. M. & Messick, D. M. (1998). Getting by with a little help from our enemies: Collective paranoia and its role in intergroup
relations. In: C. Sedikides, J. Schopler & C. A. Insko. (Eds.). Intergroup cognition and intergroup behavior. Mahwah, N.J.:
Lawrence Erlbaum, 233-255.
Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis. An introduction to its methodology. London: Sage.
Le Bon, G. (1895). Psychologie des foules. Paris: Alcan.
Licata, L. & Klein, O. (2000). Situation de crise, explications profanes et citoyenneté: L’affair Dutroux. Cahiers Internationaux de
Psychologie Sociale, 47-48, 155-174.
Lickel, B., Hamilton, D. L., Wieczorkowska, G., Lewis, A., Sherman, S. & Uhles, A. N. (2000). Varieties of groups and the
perception of group entitativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 223-246.
Loeblowitz-Lennard, H. (1947). The Jew as symbol. The Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 16, 33-38.
Loewenstein, R. M. (1952). Psychoanalyse de l’antisémitisme. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
McCauley, C. & Jacques, S. (1979). The popularity of conspiracy theories of presidential assassination: A Baynesian analysis.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 637-644.
McHoskey, J. W. (1995). Case closed? On the John F. Kennedy assassination: Biased assimilation of evidence and attitude
polarization. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 395-409.
Neuberg, S. L. & Cottrell, C. A. (2002). Intergroup emotions. A biocultural approach. In: D. M. Mackie & E. R. Smith. (Eds.). From
prejudice to intergroup emotions. New York: Psychology Press, 265-283.
Rauschning, H. (1939). Hitler speaks. London: Thornton Butterworth.
Reicher, S. (1996). “The Crowd” century: Reconciling practical success with theoretical failure. British Journal of Social Psychology,
35, 535-553.
Rollin, H. (1939). Apocalypse de notre temps. Paris: Gallimard.
Simmons, W. P. & Parsons, S. (2005). Beliefs in conspiracy theories among African Americans: A comparison of elites and masses.
Social Science Quarterly, 86, 582-598.
Smith, C. P. (2000). Content analysis and narrative analysis. In: H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd. (Eds.). Handbook of research methods in
social and personality psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 313-335.
Staub, E. (1989). The roots of evil. The origins of genocide and other group violence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Staub, E. (1999). The roots of evil: Social conditions, culture, personality, and basic human needs. Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 3, 179-192.
Stephan, W. G. & Renfro, C. L. (2002). The role of threat in intergroup relations. In: D. M. Mackie & E. R. Smith. (Eds.). From
prejudice to intergroup emotions. New York: Psychology Press, 191-207.
Taguieff, P.A. (1992). Les Protocoles des Sages de Sion (Vol. 2). Paris: Berg International.
Taylor, S. E. & Thompson, S. C. (1982). Stalking the elusive “vividness” effect. Psychological Review, 89, 155-181.
Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Volpato, C. & Contarello, A. (1999). Towards a social psychology of extreme situations: Primo Levi’s If This is a Man and social
identity theory. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29(2-3), 239-258.
Volpato, C., Maass, A., Mucchi Faina, A. & Vitti, E. (1990). Minority influence and social categorization. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 20(2), 119-132.
Wagner-Egger, P. & Bangerter, A. La vérité est ailleurs: Déterminants de l’adhésion aux théories du complot. Unpublished
manuscript.
Webster, N. (1924). Secret societies and subversive movements. London: Boswell.
Zonis, M. & Joseph, C. M. (1994). Conspiracy thinking in the Middle East. Political Psychology, 15, 443-459.

(Edited by Amanda and Jennifer)

36