Secret Societies
Illuminati
Origin of the Illuminati - part 1 of
3 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
RThetavolution!" ("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.
(end of part 1)
-Caveat Lector-
