Saturday, May 31, 2008

The Illuminati History

 From http://web.archive.org/web/20060223230321/http://www.trunkerton.fsnet.co.uk/origin_of_the_illuminati.htm

Origin of the Illuminati


Piccolo Tigre was perfectly right in his estimate of the "apathy and indifference" of the ruling classes, and in the success this attitude promised to the conspirators. No civilized modern government can be overthrown by violence if it realizes the danger that threatens it and firmly resolves to defend itself. It is not resistance but weakness that produces revolution, for weakness invites audacity and audacity is the seance of the revolutionary spirit. "Osez!" said St. Just, "ce mot est toute la politique de la Revolution!" ("Dare! this word is the whole policy of revolution.")


So while the revolutionary forces were mustering, the Government of France remained sublimely oblivious to the coming danger. On the surface few signs of popular effervescence were apparent. The incendiary doctrines of the agitators seemed to have made little headway among the great mass of the people. The peasants, indeed, with their passionate love of possession, saw little to attract them in the communal ownership of the land and continued to dig and plant with undiminished ardor. Only in the towns the fire of revolutionary Socialism was smoldering silently, unnoticed or ignored by those in power.


The government, reassured by the loyal spirit of the army and deluded by the perfect calm that reigned in the streets, made no preparations for defense. The circulation of seditious papers was known to be small, the theories of Buchez and of Louis Blanc were believed to have taken no hold on the masses; one could afford to shrug one's shoulders at the number of their following. As to Proudhon the police had declared in 1846: "His doctrines are very dangerous, they are gun-shots at the end of them; fortunately they are not read." Perhaps the most unconcerned person was the King himself. "No human power," wrote M. Cuvillier Fleury, "could have made him read a page of M. Louis Blanc, of M. Pierre Leroux, of M. Buchez, or of m. Proudhon." (Marie AmThetalie et la sociThetatTheta franTauaise en 1847, pp. 102-110; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, pp. 131-132) So with sublime insouciance the "monarchy of July" awaited the explosion.


This is not the place to relate in detail the political events which led up to the four months revolution of 1848. Ministerial corruption; always the bane of France from the first revolution onward, opposition to electoral reform, indifference to the interests of the people provided quite sufficient grounds for insurrection. In vain de Tocqueville warned the Chamber of Deputies where this state of public affairs must lead them: "My profound conviction is that we are sleeping on a volcano." And after quoting various scandalous instances of corruption he went on to say: "It is by such acts as these that great catastrophes are prepared. Let us seek in history the efficacious causes that have taken away power from the governing classes; they lost it when they became by their egoism unworthy to retain it...The evils I point out will bring about the gravest revolutions; do you not feel by a sort of intuition that the soil of Europe trembles once more? Is there not a breath of revolution in the air?...Do you know what may happen in two years: in one year, perhaps tomorrow? ...Keep your laws if you will, but for God's sake change the spirit of the Government. That spirit leads to the abyss." (+mile de Bonnechose, Histoire de France, ii, p. 647; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, pp. 132-133)


No truer words were ever spoken. Corrupt and selfish politicians will always be the most useful allies of Anarchists. We cannot doubt that Proudhon and Blanqui rejoiced over the callous attitude of the Government as heartily as de Tocqueville deplored it. The very real grounds for popular discontent would serve, as de Tocqueville clearly saw, to "magnify doctrines which tend to nothing less than the overthrow of all the foundations on which society rests."


The ministerial banquet planned by the heads of the Masonic lodges (Deschamps, ii, p. 282) for the 22nd of February and forbidden by the government provided the pretext for insurrection. When in the morning of that day the obedient army of the proletariat assembled in answer to the summons of the revolutionary papers Le National and La RThetaforme, the cry of "A bas Guizot!" that rose from their ranks was less a protest against Guizot's policy than a call to revolution for revolution's sake. deluded by the promises of the Utopian Socialists, inflamed by the teachings of the Anarchists, it was now no longer electoral reform nor even universal suffrage that could satisfy the people; it was not a mere Republic they demanded or a change of ministry, it was the complete overthrow of the existing system of government in favor of the social millennium promised them by the theorists, and which the agitators had urged them to establish by force of arms. The dismissal of Guizot by the King on February 23, did nothing, therefore, to allay popular agitation, and according to the usual revolutionary program the insurgents proceeded to barricade the streets and to pillage the gunsmiths' shops. But even then it proved difficult to bring about a conflict, for the sympathies of the bourgeoisie were still with the people, and the National Guards, seeing in the working men their brothers, showed reluctance to use force against them. (Cambridge Modern History, Vol. xi, p. 97) This feeling of camaraderie, contemptuously described by Marx as "charlatanry of general fraternity," (Karl Marx, La Lutte des classes en France, p. 40; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 134) was dispelled by the menacing attitude the working men were persuaded to assume, and inevitably the demonstrations that followed; the hoisting of the red flag, the marching of processions among which could be seen the glint of steel and brandishing of sabres, led to a collision with the troops. In the confusion a number of the insurgents fell victims to the fire of the irritated soldiery. This skirmish, described as "the massacre of the Boulevard des Capucines," gave the signal for revolution.


Throughout that night of February 23-24 the Secret Societies were at work issuing their orders; meanwhile Proudhon busied himself drawing up a plan of attack. (Cambridge Modern History, Vol. xi, p. 99; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 134) Dawn found the city in a state of chaos, the trees of the boulevards were broken to the ground, the paving stones torn up, excited bands of insurgents; working men of the faubourgs, students, schoolboys, deserters from the National Guard, collected around the Tuileries, shots were fired at the windows of the young princes.


This was the moment chosen by Louis Blanc and his friends to issue a protest against the employment of troops in civil commotions, which, handed from barricade to barricade, immensely emboldened the audacity of the revolutionaries, who now proceeded to seize munitions and attack the municipal Guard, killing a number of them. The hesitating policy of the government and the declarations of the agitators inevitably affected the morale of the troops, and by the middle of the morning they ceased to offer any further resistance and left the people in possession of the field. Already Proudhon and Flocon had posted up a placard demanding the deposition of the King, and among the leaders; Caussidi re, Arago, Sobrier, and others; the word "Republic" made itself heard. In vain Louis Philippe, profiting by the error committed by his predecessor Louis XVI in precisely the same circumstances, mounted a gorgeously caparisoned horse in order to inspect the troops assembled in the Tuileries gardens and promised reforms to the excited populace; the hour of the OrlThetaaniste dynasty had struck, and at one o'clock the royal family chose the prudent course of flight. So in the space of a few hours the monarchy was swept away and the "Social Democratic Republic" was proclaimed. (La RThetavolution de 1848, Louis Blanc, p. 23; MThetamoires de Cauusidi re, p. 62; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 135) It is unnecessary to follow the French Revolution of 1848 through its final political stages; the election of Prince Louis NapolThetaon to the Presidency of the Republic in December of the same year, the coup d'Etat carried out by him three years later (December 2, 1851), by which the Constitution of 1848 was overthrown, and, finally the proclamation of the Empire on December 10, 1852, with the prince as NapolThetaon III at its head.


Throughout this period the fire of social revolution could only smoulder feebly and with the accession of the Emperor was temporarily extinguished in France. The r gime that followed, like that which succeeded the first French Revolution, was one of absolute repression. The Socialist leaders arrested, no less than 25,000 prisoners were taken by the Government and a great number deported without trial. At the same time the Secret societies were put down with an iron hand, all the liberties granted to the French people, including the liberty of the press, were abolished by the Constitution of 1852, and this despotism was accepted by a majority of 7 million to 600 thousand votes. For as in 1800 the nation wearied of revolution, was ready to throw itself at the feet of a strong man who would restore order and give it peace once more.


The revolution of 1848 ended in the total defeat of the workers, and for this it is impossible to deny that the principal blame lay with the Socialist leaders; above all with Louis Blanc. It is only just to recognize the excellent intentions of the man, who devoted all his energies to the reorganization of labor on an ideal system, yet it must surely be admitted that social experiments of this kind can only be judged by results. The scientist who fails in a laboratory experiment may be pardoned for failure, but in the case of men who juggle with human lives failure is a crime. If a duke were to invent a novel system of drainage, and, without assuring himself if its efficacy, were to install it in all his tenants' cottages, thereby killing them off by diphtheria, he would not be regarded as a noble enthusiast whose only crime was excess of zeal, but as a criminal fool for whom no mercy should be demanded. Why then should reckless ventures, merely because they are conducted in the name of Socialism, ensure the immunity of their authors?Louis Blanc may well have been a sincere and well-meaning man, the fact remains that through his application of impracticable schemes and obstinate belief in his own infallibility he led the working classes to disaster. No one has recognized this truth more clearly than the anarchist Proudhon, who in the following words has apportioned to this dangerous dreamer the blame he so truly deserves: "A great responsibility will rest in history on Louis Blanc. It was he who at the Luxembourg with his riddle 'Equality, Fraternity, Liberty,' with his abracadabra 'Every one according to his strength, to every one according to his needs!' began that miserable opposition of ideologies to ideas, and who roused common sense against Socialism. He thought himself the bee of the revolution and he was only the grasshopper. May he at last, after having poisoned the working men with his absurd formulas, bring to the cause of the proletariat, which on a day of error fell into his feeble hands, the idol of his abstention and his silence." (La RThetavolution au XIXi me st cle, p. 108; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 154)


The outbreak of revolution in Paris had given the signal for European conflagration. On March 1st insurrection began in Baden, on the 12th in Vienna, on the 13th riots took place in Berlin, on the 18th a rising in Milan, on the 20th in Parma, on the 22nd a Republic was declared in Venice, on the 10th of April a Chartist demonstration was organized in London, on the 7th of May troubles began in Spain, on the 15th in Naples, and during the course of the year no less than sixty-four outbreaks of serfs occurred in Russia. Of course, in the pages of official history we shall find no explanation of this sudden recurrence of the revolutionary epidemic, which is once more conveniently ascribed to the time-honored theory of contagious popular enthusiasm for liberty. Thus the Cambridge Modern History, describing the revolution in Germany, observes: "The grand Duchy of Baden was the natural starting-place for the revolutionary movement, which, once set on foot, seemed to progress almost automatically from State to State and town to town." Precisely; but we are given no hint as to the mechanism which produced this automatic action all over Europe. The business of the official historian is not to inquire into causes but to present the sequence of events in a manner unintelligible to the philosopher but satisfying to the uninquiring mind of the general public.


That the European revolution of 1848 was the result of the Illuminati through the masonic organization cannot, however, be doubted by any one who takes the trouble to dig below the surface. We have already seen how Mazzini and the "Young Italy" movement had proved the blind instruments of the Haute Vente Romaine, and how the same society operating through the lodges had prepared the ground in every country. In France the part played by Freemasonry in the revolutionary movement was quite frankly recognized, and the Supreme Council of the Scottish rite presenting themselves before the members of the Provisional Government on the 10th of March received the congratulations of Lamartine in these words: "I am convinced that it is from the depths of your lodges that have emanated, first in the shade, then in the half-light, and finally in the full light of day, the sentiments which ended by producing the sublime explosion we witnessed in 1789, and of which the people of Paris have just given to the world the second and, I hope, their last representation." (Deschamps, ii, p. 282; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 156) But, of course, the people were to be allowed to think they had acted on their own initiative. Thus the Jewish Freemason CrThetamieux, whom the Revolution had raised to a place in the Provisional Government, declared in a speech to the crowd that on the ruins of the shattered monarchy "the people took for the eternal symbol o revolution 'Liberty, Equality, Fraternity'"; (MThetamoires de Caussidi re, i, p. 131; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 156)


It was only to the Freemasons themselves; this time a deputation of the Grand Orient, on March 24, that he acknowledged the true origin of this device: "In all times and under all circumstances...Masonry ceaselessly repeated these sublime words: 'Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.'" (Deschamps, ii, p. 283; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 156) What was said by Disraeli in 1876 can be applied to present world conditions: "The Governments of this country have to deal, not only with Governments, emperors, kings, and ministers, but also with secret societies, elements which must be taken into account, which at the last moment can bring all plans to naught, which have agents everywhere, agents without scruples, who incite assassinations and can, if necessary, lead a massacre." And according to Disraeli men of the Jewish race were found at the head of every such political secret society. George Sand also wrote: "There are moments when the history of Empires only nominally exists, and when there is nothing really alive but the sects hidden within them." The mother of all these secret societies is Judeo-Masonry, whose principles are identical with those realized with Revolution. As Claudio Jannet says: "It extends itself throughout the entire world, covering itself with mystery, acting in all parts of the social body...binding within it, by secret links, individual societies apparently most different. Its doctrines are everywhere the same; its unity, its universality thus explains the unity and universality of Revolution." As to the directing power, in the report of the Third Congress at Nancy, 1882, the orator, Knight Kadosch, believed that the last degrees carried on an International Masonic work of very great penetration, and that probably from there came those mysterious words which in the center of uprisings passed at times through the crowds, setting them on fire "for the good of humanity."


This secret hierarchy was also said to be Rosicrucian, a kind of Third Order, such as the "Hidden Chiefs" of the Stella Matutina. Rene Guenon, orientalist, moreover explains in the Voile d'Isis, January 1933: "Even if certain of these organizations, among the most outside, find themselves in opposition to each other, that will in no way prevent the effective existence of unity of direction. To sum up, there is something comparable to the role played by different actors in the same play in a theater, and who, although opposed to each other none the less agree in the progress of the whole; each organization also plays the role to which it is destined; and this can extend also to the esoteric domain where the elements which fight against one another none the less all obey, although quite unconsciously and involuntarily, a single direction whose existence they do not even suspect." And as Henri Misley, who took an active part in Italy's revolutions about 1830, said: "I know the world a little, and I know that in all this great future that is being prepared, there are only four or five who hold the cards. A greater number believe they old them, but the deceive themselves."


Again, in the Congress at Nancy, 1882, it was said: "What force will not Masonry have upon the outside world, when around each lodge will exist a crowd of societies whose member, ten or fifteen times more numerous than the Masons, will receive inspiration and aim from the Masons, and will unit their efforts with our for the great work which we pursue. Within this circle once founded, one must perpetuate with care a nucleus of young Masons in such a way that the young people of the schools will find themselves directly subjected to Masonic influence." In the Convent, Grand Orient of France, 1923, it was resolved: "An active propaganda is urgent, so that Freemasonry shall again become the inspirer, the mistress of the ideas through which democracy is to be brought to perfection...To influence social elements by spreading widely the teaching received within the institution."


Some of these elements were "sports societies, boy scouts, art circles, choral and instrumental groups. All organizations which attract Republican youth to works of education, physical and intellectual." But as Mazzini exclaimed: "The difficulty is not to convince people, some great words, liberty, rights of man, progress, equality, fraternity, despotism, privilege, tyranny and slavery, are sufficient for that; the difficulty is to unite them. The day when they are united will be the day of the new era." In La Temps de la Colere, M. Vallery-Radot, 1932, elucidates the methods: "What has been called the conquest of revolution is in reality only an implacable dogma affirmed by one party to the exclusion of all others ...this party has known how to extend its conquests with admirable method, sometimes subterranean, as under the First Empire; sometimes combining infiltration with violent demonstration, as under the Restoration, the July Monarchy, the Republic of 1848; then again taking up its hidden intrigue under the Third Republic...This intangible general Will revealed to the world by a half-fool as the sacred emanation of an autonomous humanity, who has to render account to no one but itself, this general Will calls itself Democracy, Progress, Revolution, Republic, Humanity, Laicity, but it is always the same Power, which shares it with none, jealously guarded by its priests and doctors." And showing what may happen in the world if the nations do not awaken and realize the secret undermining force which is seeking the destruction of Christian civilization, he says: "There are in the tropics houses which appear solid, although slowly and surely the white ants are busy gnawing the internal structure. One day the inhabitants sit on the chairs, the chain to dust; they lean against the walls, and the walls crumble away. Thus it is with our civilization, of which we are so proud."


The following is taken from an article by O. de Fremond, in the Revue Internationale des Societies Secretes, July 1, 1932: "Now, let us not forget, even in the opinion of the most optimistic, the people themselves are almost entirely de-Christianized...(Mercure de France April 1, 1932) And according to Cardinal Verdier: 'Every day we see the number of Pagans increase.'...The causes...Without going back to the Renaissance or even to the Reform, which have both prepared the ground, we find as first cause the Revolution, called French, but in reality European, world even; the Revolution everywhere spreading nationalistic ideas and applying, more apparent than real, the false principles of the 'Rights of Man': Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity ...Let us not omit the Regency, which preceded by so little the Revolution. The great crisis, says Demolins in his Histoire de France, 1880, a propos the system of law, has had deplorable consequences: it developed above all in the higher classes, cupidity, craving for material powers, love of speculation; it displaced fortunes and rendered them unstable by detaching them from real estate in order to found them on the money-changing operations of the Bourse; it produced also in the organization of property and public fortune an upset which should soon contribute to the entire collapse of society. Where are we a half-century later?


The enormous material progress realized, thanks to the great discoveries of the nineteenth century and the leap they have still more made in the twentieth by bringing these discoveries to perfection; the new facilities of existence which flow from them instead of keeping people in admiration of such marvels, by reasonable use of them, in gratitude in short towards the Creator, upon whom they depend and who dispenses them to us, the people have, on the contrary, turned their backs upon religious practices and even on belief.


Does this movement act of itself spontaneously and because of human passions of pleasure and pride, etc.? No! For the great part, a power has intervened which has pushed the wheel more and more: that which, systematically, credits all to man, his sagacity, his power to bring to perfection, and thus substitutes him, gradually and almost imperceptibly, in place of the Divine Creator, suppressing at the same time all obligation towards Him. First indifference, then unbelief. The mixture of rationalist and materialist ideas...


It places all religions on the same equality: that is to say, recognizes no religion...What is the result? A society unbalanced and demoralized, where crimes abound, all the more so that the provocation of the Press more often remains unpunished, where general materialization accentuates itself day by day... From top to bottom of the social ladder there is no longer any but one motive, pleasure, but one agent, money..."


Is it not "the greater Judaism, gradually casting non-Jewish thoughts and systems into Jewish moulds." as described in the Jewish World on February 9, 1883? Of which Karl Marx and Engles were only pawns. The image of Karl Marx as a "humanist" concerned with the plight of the underprivileged, the downtrodden and the "masses" is one which the Jews have carefully cultivated in the years since his death. The fact, however, are quite different.


Again: "It is, that the Peace, whose fruits we are tasting today, should have nothing in common with former Treaties. It would accomplish the great Masonic plan sketched in 1789, taken up again in 1830, then in 1848 and in 1870, by proclaiming the coming of Universal Democracy."


THE FRENCH REVOLUTION OF 1848: The first visible result of the work of the Secret Societies in the nineteenth century occurred in Russia, whither the doctrines of Illuminized freemasonry had been carried by Napoleon's armies and by Russian officers who had traveled in Germany. (La Russie en 1839, by Astolphe de custine, ii. 42; The Court of Russia in theNineteenth Century, by E.A. Brayley Hodgetts, i. 116; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 125)


It was owing to the intrigues of these societies that the band of true reformers calling themselves "The Association of Welfare" was dissolved and two new parties were formed, the first known as the Northern Association demanding constitutional monarchy, the second called the Southern Association under Colonel Pestel, who was in direct communication with Nubius; which aimed not only at a Republic but at the extermination of the entire royal family. (The Revolutionary Movement in Russia, by Konni Zilliacus, p. 8; Brayley Hodgetts, The Court of Russia in the Nineteenth Century, i, p. 122; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 125)


Many attempts indeed were made on the life of Alexander I., through the agency of the Secret Societies, (Deschamps, ii, p. 242; Frost's, Secret Societies, ii, p. 213; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 125) and after his death in 1825 an insurrection broke out, led by the "United Slavs" who were connected with the Southern Association and the Polish Secret Societies at Warsaw. (The Court of Russia in the Nineteenth Century, E.A. Brayley Hodgetts, i, p. 123; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 125) The pretext for this outbreak, known as "The Dekabrist rising" because it occurred in December, was the accession to the throne of Nicholas I, at the request of his elder brother Constantine, and a crowd of mutinying soldiers were persuaded to march on the Winter Palace and protest against the acceptance of the crown by Nicholas, represented to them by the agitators as an act of usurpation. The manner in which the movement was engineered has been described by the Marquis de Custine, who travelled in Russia a few year later: "Well- informed people have attributed this riot to the influence of the Secret Societies by which Russia is worked...The method that the conspirators had employed to rouse the army was a ridiculous lie: the rumor had been spread that Nicholas was usurping the throne from his brother Constantine, who, they said, was advancing on Petersburg to defend his rights by armed force. This means they took in order to decide the revolutionaries to cry under the windows of the Palace: 'Long live the Constitution!' The leaders had persuaded them that this word Constitution was the name of the wife of Constantine, their supposed Empress. You see that an idea of duty was at the bottom of the soldiers' hearts, since they could only be led into rebellion by a trick." (E.A. Brayley Hodgets, The Court of Russia in the Nineteenth Century, i, p. 192; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 126) This strange incident tends to confirm the assertion of P re Deschamps that the word "Constitution" was the signal agreed on by the Secret Societies for an outbreak of revolution. It had been employed in the same manner in France in 1791, and, as we shall see, it was employed again in Russia at intervals throughout the revolutionary movement.


The Dekabrist rising was ended by three rounds of grape-shot, and five of the ringleaders were hanged. In no sense was it a popular insurrection, in fact the people regarded it with strong disapproval as an act of sacrilege, and so little did it aid the cause of liberty that General Levashoff declared to Prince Trobetzkoy "it had thrown back Russia fifty years." (The Court of Russia in the Nineteenth Century, E.A. Brayley Hodgetts, i, pp. 201, 205; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 126) Further evidence of the connection between the French Revolution and the engineering of revolution in Russia is supplied by de Custine on his travels in the latter country fourteen years later. Now in those days before the abolition of serfdom, the peasants on an estate were bought and sold with the land, and since the Emperor's serfs were the best treated in the whole country the inhabitants of estates newly acquired by the Crown became the objects of envy to their fellow-serfs.


In this year of 1839 the peasants, hearing that the Emperor had just bought some more land, sent a deputation to Petersburg, consisting of representatives from all parts of Russia, to petition that the districts from which they came should also be added to the royal domains. Nicholas I received them kindly, for while adopting repressive measures towards insurrection his sympathies were with the people. We must not forget that it was he who visited Robert Owen at New Lanark to study his schemes of social reform. When, therefore, the peasants petitioned him to buy them he answered with great gentleness that he regretted he could not buy up all Russia, but he added: "I hope that the time will come when every peasant of this Empire will be free; if it only depended on me Russians would enjoy from today the independence that I wish for them that I am working with all my might to procure for them in the future." These words interpreted to the serfs by "savage and envious men," led to the most terrible outbreak of violence all along the Volga. "The Father wishes for our deliverance," cried the deluded deputies on their return to their homes, "he only wishes for our happiness, he told us so himself; it is therefore the seigneur and their overseers who are our enemies and oppose the good designs of the Father! Let us avenge ourselves! Let us avenge the Emperor."


The peasants, imagining they were carrying out the Emperor's intention, threw themselves upon the seigneur and their overseers, roasted them alive, boiled others in copper pots, disembowelled the delegates, burned everything with fire and sword and devastated the whole province. (La Russie en 1839, ii, pp. 219-220) Now when we compare this incident with the "Great Fear" that took place in France precisely fifty years earlier (in July 1789) how can we doubt the connection between the two? In both the pretext and the organization are identical. The benevolent intentions of Louis XVI, interpreted by the emissaries to the provinces in the word, "The King desires you to burn down the ch teaux; he only wishes to keep his own;" the placards paraded thorough the towns, headed "Edict of the King," ordering the peasants to burn and destroy, and the massacres and burnings that followed; all this was exactly repeated in Russia fifty years later quite obviously by the same organization that had engineered the earlier outbreak. How otherwise are we to explain it?


Five years after the Russian explosion of 1825 the second french Revolution took place. The revolution of 1830 was in the man not a social but a political revolution, a renewed attempt of the OrThetaaniste conspiracy to effect a change of dynasty and as such formed a mere corollary to the insurrection of July and October 1789. It is true that beneath the tumults of 1830, as beneath the Siege of the Bastille and the march on Versailles, the subversive force of Illuminism made itself felt, and that during "the glorious days of July" the hatred of Christianity expressed by the Terror broke out again in the sacking of the "ArchevOmegachTheta," in the pillage and desecration of the churches, and in the attacks on religion in the provinces. But the driving force behind the revolution that precipitated Charles X from the throne was not Socialist but OrlThetaaniste; it was a movement led by the tricouleur of July 13, 1789, not by the red flag of August 10, 1792, emblem of the social revolution; its strength lay not with the workmen but with the bourgeoisie, and it was the bourgeoisie who triumphed. The rThetagime that followed has well been named "the bourgeois monarchy." For Louis Philippe, once the ardent partisan of revolution, followed the usual program of demagogy, and as soon as the reins of power were in his hands turned a deaf ear to the demand of the people. It was then in 1848, organized by the Secret Societies, directed by the Socialists, executed by the working-men did aggravated by the intractable attitude of the King and his ministers, the second great outbreak of World Revolution took place.


There were then, just as in the first French Revolution, real grievances that rankled in the minds of the people; electoral reform, the adjustment of wages and hours of labor, and particularly the burning question of unemployment, where all matters that demanded immediate attention. The people in 1848 even more than in 1789 had good cause for complaint. But in the justice to the bourgeoisie it must be recognized that they were in the main sympathetic to the cause of the workers. "Bourgeois opinion," even the Socialist Malon admits, "was...open to renovating conceptions. Before 1848 the French bourgeoisie had as yet no fear of social insurrections; they readily allowed themselves to indulge in innocent Socialist speculations. It was thus that FouriThetarisme, for example, founded entirely on seeking the greatest sum of happiness possible, had numerous sympathizers in the provincial bourgeoisie." (Malon, Histoire du socialisme, ii, p. 295) Like the aristocrats of 1788 who had voluntarily offered to surrender their pecuniary privileges, and on the famous August 4, 1789 themselves dealt the death-blow to the feudal system by renouncing all other rights and privileges, so the bourgeoisie of 1848 showed their willingness to cooperate not merely with reforms but with the most drastic social changes directly opposed to their own interests. "In the first weeks of 1848 it was not only the proletarians who spoke of profound social reforms; the bourgeoisie that FouriThetariste propaganda (but above all the novels of Eug ne Sue and of George Sand) had almost reconciled with Socialism, thought themselves the hour had come, and all the candidates talked of ameliorating the lot of the people, of realizing social democracy, of abolishing misery. Great proprietors believed that the Provisional Government was composed of Communists, and one day twenty of them came to offer Garnier Pag s to give up their goods to the community." (Histoire du socialisme, Malon, ii, p. 520) But the art of the revolutionaries has always been to check reforms by alienating the sympathies of the class in power, and they had no intention of allowing the people to be contented by pacific measures or to look to any one but themselves for salvation. As on the eve of all great public commotions, a great masonic congress was held in 1847. (Deschamps, ii, p. 281, quoting Gyr, La Franc-MaTauonnerie, p. 368; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 130) Among the French masons present were the men who played the leading parts of the subsequent revolution; Louis Blanc, Caussidi re, CrThetamieux, Ledru Rollin, etc., and it was then decided to enlist the Swiss Cantons in the movement so that the center of Europe should form no barrier against the tide.


It was the Secret Societies, guided by the Illuminati, that the plan of campaign was drawn up and the revolutionary machine set in motion. Caussidi re, a prominent member of these associations, and at the same time Prefect of Police in Paris during the tumults of 1848, has himself provided us with the clearest evidence on this point. "The Secret Societies, had never ceased to exist even after the set-back of May 12, 1838. This freemasonry of devoted soldiers had been maintained without new affiliations until 1846. The orders of the day, printed in Brussels or sometimes in secret by compositors of Paris, had kept up its zeal. But the frequency of these proclamations, which fell sooner or later into the hands of the police, rendered the use of them very dangerous. Relations between the affiliated and the leaders had thus become rather restricted when, in 1846, the Secret Societies were reorganized and took up some initiative again. Paris was the center around which radiated the different ramifications extending into the provincial towns. In Paris and in the provinces the same sentiment inspired all these militant phalanxes, more preoccupied by revolutionary action than by social theories. Guns were more talked of than Communism, and the only formula unanimously accepted was Robespierre's 'Declaration of the Rights of Man.' The Secret Societies found their real strength in the heart of the people of the working-classes, which had its vanguard, a certain disciplined force always ready to act, their cooperation was never wanting to any political emotion and they were found in the forefront of the barricades in February." (MThetamoires de Caussidi re, i, pp. 38-39)


But the working classes were not admitted to the inner councils of the leaders; the place of the vanguard was on the barricades when the shooting began, not in the meetings where the plans of campaign were drawn up. Among these secret agencies the Haute Vente naturally played the leading part, and two years before the revolution broke out Piccolo Tigre was able to congratulate himself on the complete success of his efforts to bring about a vast upheaval. On January 5, 1846 the energetic agent of Nubius writes in the following terms to his chief: "The journey that I have just accomplished in Europe has been as fortunate and as productive as we had hoped. Henceforth nothing remains but to put our hand to the task in order to reach the dThetanouement of the comedy...The harvest I have reaped has been abundant...and if I can believe the news communicated to me here (at Livorno) we are approaching the epoch we so much desire. The fall of thrones is no longer a matter of doubt to me now that I have just studied the work of our societies in France, in Switzerland, in Germany, and as far as Russia. The assault which in a few years and perhaps even in a few months from now will be made on the princes of the earth will bury them under the wreckage of their impotent armies and their discredit thrones. Everywhere there is enthusiasm in our ranks and apathy or indifference among the enemies. This is a certain and infallible sign of success...What have we asked in return for our labors and our sacrifices? It is not a revolution in one country or another. That can always be managed if one wishes it. In order to kill the old world surely, we have held that we must stifle the Catholic and Christian germ, and you, with the audacity of genius, have offered yourself with the sling of a new David to hit the pontifical Goliath on the head." (L'+glise Romaine en face de la RThetavolution, ii, p. 387; World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 132)


Mostly, their reasoning processes have been so warped and bent out of shape by having liberal propaganda pumped into their plastic, unsuspecting minds from their earliest consciousness, that they have no real foundation on which to base decisions relating to real life. They have not been trained to face up to real life situations - life as it really is. The educational process has taught them to earn a living but it has never taught them how to live. There is a vast difference.


Admiral Hyman Rickover summed up the situation well when he said: "America is reaping the consequences of the destruction of traditional education by the Dewey-Kilpatrick experimental philosophy...Dewey's ideas have led to the elimination of many academic subjects on the ground that they would not be useful in life...The student thus receives neither intellectual training nor the factual knowledge which will help him understand the world he lives in, or to make well-rounded decisions in his private life or as a responsible citizen." (The Tablet, August 11, 1959) The awful truth of the Admiral's words should be startlingly evident when we look closely at society "like it really is." The aims expressed in Rockefeller's Occasional Letter Number One are being fulfilled! It has been said with good reason, the origin of Leninism and Bolshevism was firstly the Encyclopedists, and secondly, Marxist and other Socialist systems. The first were the atheists, philosophies, and economists of the Hotel d'Holbach, a lodge or literary academy founded about 1769, of which Voltaire was honorary and permanent president, having d'Alembert, Condorcet, Diderot, La Harpe, and others as members.


The Communist Catechism Introduction


"One cannot fully understand communism without understanding thoroughly the towering importance of this 'Catechism.' Here is the real secret that makes communism work so effectively in fomenting revolution in every land. One will never truly comprehend the psychology of the communist as a person, nor the amazing success communism as a movement has achieved without first weighing Nechayev's contribution to Marxism-Leninism through his advocacy of self-destruction as a fundamental principle of revolution! Nechayev's name is, today, almost unknown. Yet it should be added Marx's and Lenin's as those of the major geniuses of evil whose impact upon history has forever changed the world. Marxism would be only another sterile economic theory without Lenin's practicality. Lenin would himself have been only an ineffective socialist revolutionary without Marx and Nechayev. In a word, it is socialism plum 'Nechayevism' which equals communism! There is no single document in the possession of the serious student of communism that approaches Nechayev's 'Catechism' in importance for deep insight into the actual nature of communism. It surpasses in significance even the writings of Marx himself. The Revolutionary Catechism transformed Lenin into a worthless, murderous monster. It gave him the dreadful instrument that has made communism the most important and sinister movement of the 20th Century. it is the guide to power, the means of the transformation of ordinary men into the 'New Communist Men,' and much more.


When you read the 'Catechism' you will hear (horribly perverted) echoes of the blazing missionary zeal and self denial of early Christianity. More than any other document, the 'Catechism' is the illustration of the fact that 'communism is the perversion of Christianity.' Any person who reads and understands the importance of the 'Catechism' will never again refer to communism as merely another political movement. It is vastly more than politics.


Nothing could possibly be more useful than that everyone who seeks to combat communism become fully acquainted with the Revolutionary Catechism. It is still today the dreadful secret behind communism. It is the reason that there can be no compromise with the communists, no negotiations, no appeasement. Read it for yourself and fear! This is the true measure of your enemy! People who have wondered as to the source of the astounding power of communism need do so no longer. The secret is out! It begins by the transformation of the spiritually destitute individual into a destructive revolutionist, using a strange process called dehumanization. In 1873, Sergey Nechayev, an obscure Russian Jewish revolutionary, aged 24, stood trial before a court in Moscow, charged with murder. His real crime was even greater. 'He discovered the key to the box containing the forces of dissolution which destroy the state. He knew this and the court was perfectly aware that he knew it. Every day the minutes of the trial were laid before a Czar...' (The Life and Death of Lenin, Robert Payne, p. 20)


Nechayev, though very young, was already an important leader of the vast conspiratorial revolutionary movement that was secretly spinning its spiker's web across the whole of Russia. Abut 1873, he wrote a document which Lenin was to read and follow to the letter all the days of his life. It was this document called, 'The Revolutionary Catechism,' which provided Lenin with the formula with which he made Marxism into what communists call, 'Marxist-Leninism.' Nechavyev died in prison in 1882 but his associates had brought the Revolutionary Catechism to the personal attention of Lenin. Lenin later spoke of Nechayev as, 'this titanic revolutionary who gave his every such startling formulation that they were forever printed on the memory.' Lenin himself added, 'All of Nechayev should be published. It is necessary to learn and seek out everything he wrote.' Lenin used the principles of this brutal Revolutionary Catechism to come to power. More importantly, he used them to insure that communism would stay in power (a historically unique secret which no other tyranny has known), and to spread the communist revolution throughout the earth. All communists, whether they know it or not, are still following Nechayev's soul-shattering covenant with death and destruction." (M.S. McBirnie, Community Churches of America, P.O. Box 90, Glendale, CA 91309)


The Revolutionary Catechism


The Communist Catechism, by Sergey Nechayev (1847-1882)


The Duties of the Revolutionary Toward Himself


from The Life and Death of Lenin by Robert Payne


 


1). The revolutionary is a doomed man. He has no personal interests, no business affairs, no emotions, no business affairs, no emotions, no attachments, no property and no name. Everything in him is wholly absorbed in the single thought and the single passion for revolution.


2). The revolutionary knows that in the very depths of his being, not only in words but also in deeds, he has broken all the bonds which tie him to the social order and the civilized world with all its laws, moralities and customs and with all its generally accepted conventions. He is their implacable enemy and if he continues to live with them, it is only in order to destroy them more speedily.


3). The revolutionary despises all doctrines and refuses to accept the mundane sciences, leaving them for future generations.He knows only one science: the science of destruction. For this reason, but only for this reason, he will study mechanics, physics, chemistry and perhaps medicine. But all day and all night he studies the vital science of human beings, their characteristics and circumstances, and all the phenomena of the present social order. The object is perpetually the same; the surest and quickest way of destroying the whole filthy order.


4). The revolutionary despises public opinion. He despises and hates the existing social morality in all its manifestations. For him, morality is everything which contributes to the triumph of the revolution. Immoral and criminal is everything that stands in its way.


5). The revolutionary is a dedicated man, merciless toward the State and toward the educated classes; and he can expect no mercy from them. Between him and them there exists, declared or concealed, a relentless and irreconcilable war to the death.He must accustom himself to torture.


6). Tyrannical toward himself, he must be tyrannical toward others. All the gentle and enervating sentiments of kinship, love, friendship, gratitude and even honor must be suppressed in him and give place to the cold and single-minded passion for revolution. For him there exists only one pleasure, one consolation, one reward, one satisfaction, the success of the revolution.Night and day he must have but one thought, one aim, merciless destruction. Striving cold-bloodedly and indefatigably toward this end, he must be prepared to destroy himself and to destroy with his own hands everything that stands in the path of the revolution.


7). The nature of the true revolutionary excludes all sentimentally, romanticism, infatuation and exaltation. All private hatred and revenge must also be excluded. Revolutionary passion, practices at every moment of the day until it becomes a habit. It is to be employed with cold calculation. At all times and in all places the revolutionary must obey, not his personal impulses, but only those which serve the cause of the revolution.The Relations of the Revolutionary Toward his Comrades


8). The revolutionary can have no friendship or attachment except for those who have proved by their actions that they, like him, are dedicated to revolution. The degree of friendship, devotion and obligation toward such a comrade is determined solely by the degree of his usefulness to the cause of total revolutionary destruction.


9). It is superfluous to speak of solidarity among revolutionaries. The whole strength of revolutionary work lies in this.Comrades who possess the same revolutionary passion and understanding should, as much as possible, deliberate all important matters together and come to unanimous conclusions. When the plan is finally decided upon, then the revolutionary must rely solely on himself. In carrying out acts of destruction each one should act alone, never running to another for advice and assistance except when these are necessary for the furtherance of the plan.


10). All revolutionaries should have under them second - or third-degree revolutionaries, i.e., comrades who are not completely initiated. These should be regarded as part of the common revolutionary capital placed at his disposal. This capital should, of course, be spent as economically as possible in order to derive from it the greatest possible profit. The real revolutionary should regard himself as capital consecrated to the triumph of the revolution; he may not personally and alone dispose of capital without the unanimous consent of the fully initiated comrades.


11). When a comrade is in danger and the question arises whether he should be saved or not saved, the decision must not be arrived at on the basis of sentiment, but solely in the interests of the revolutionary cause. Therefore, it is necessary to weigh carefully the usefulness of the comrade against the expenditure of the revolutionary forces necessary to save him, and the decision must be made accordingly.


12). The new member, having given proof of his loyalty not by words but by deeds can be received into the society only by the unanimous agreement of all the members.


13). The revolutionary enters the world of the state, of the privileged classes, of the so- called civilization, and he lives in this world only for the purpose of bringing about its speedy and total destruction. He is not a revolutionary if he has any sympathy for this world. He should not hesitate to destroy any position, any place, or any man in this world. He must hate everyone and everything in it with an equal hatred. All the worse for him if he has any relations with parents, friends or lovers, he is no longer a revolutionary if he is swayed by these relationships.


14). Aiming at implacable revolution, the revolutionary may and frequently must live within society while pretending to be completely different from what he really is, for he must penetrate everywhere, into all the higher and middle classes, into the houses of commerce, the churches and the palaces of the aristocracy, and into the worlds of the bureaucracy and literature and the military, and also into the Third Division and the winter Palace of the Tsar.


15). This filthy social order can be split up into several categories. The first category comprises those who must be condemned to death without delay. Comrades should compile a list of those to be condemned according to the relative gravity of their crimes; and the executions should be carried out according to the prepared order.


16). When a list of those who are condemned is made and the order of execution is prepared, no private sense of outrage should be considered, nor is it necessary to pay attention to the hatred provoked by these people among the comrades or the people. Hatred and the sense of outrage may even be useful in so far as they incite the masses to revolt. It is necessary to be guided by the relative usefulness of these executions for the sake of the revolution. Above all, those who are especially inimical to the revolutionary organization must be destroyed, their violent and sudden deaths will produce panic in the government, depriving it of its will to action by removing the cleverest and most energetic supporters.


17). The second group compresses those who will be spared for the time being in order that, by a series of monstrous acts, they may drive the people into inevitable revolt.


18). The third category consists of a great many brutes in high positions distinguished neither by their cleverness nor their energy, while enjoying riches, influence, power and high positions by the virtue of their rank. These must be exploited in every possible way; they must be implicated and embroiled in our affairs, their dirty secrets must be ferreted out, and they must be transformed into slaves. Their power, influence and connections, their wealth and their energy will form an inexhaustible treasure and a precious help in all our undertakings.


19). The fourth category comprises ambitious officeholders and liberals of various shades of opinion. The revolutionary must pretend to collaborate with them, blindly following them, while at the same time prying out their secrets until they are completely in his power. They must be so compromised that there is no way out for them, and then they can be used to create disorder in the state.


20). The fifth category consists of those doctrinaries, conspirators and revolutionists who cut a great figure on paper or in their cliques. They must be constantly driven on to make compromising declarations: as a result the majority of them will be destroyed, while a minority will become genuine revolutionaries.


21). The sixth category is divided into three main group. First, those frivolous, thoughtless and vapid women, whom we shall use as we use the third and fourth category of men. Second, women who are ardent, capable and devoted, but who do not belong to us because they have not yet achieved a passionless and austere revolutionary understanding; these must be used like the men of the fifth category. Finally, there are the women who are completely on our side, those who are wholly dedicated and who have accepted our program in its entirety. We should regard these women as the most valuable of our treasures; without their help we would never succeed.


(From The Life and Death of Lenin, by Robert Payne; The Compleat Patriot, by Phillip Marsh, pp. 141-144)


 


 


 


Return to Secret Societies page.

No comments: