“The Tea Party, I always say, is more like the American Revolution, and Occupy Wall Street is more the French Revolution.” -Rand Paul
There are two major strands of the revolutionary tradition (or what we might call revlutionism) when viewed from the perspective of association with secret societies. Both are inheritors of the Enlightenment and both were connected with the French and American Revolutions. There is the laissez-faire capitalist tradition we see exemplified in characters like Adam Smith and David Ricardo, and on the other end is the Jacobin tradition of ‘Illuminism’ from characters like Robespierre, Marat, Danton and the other radicals of France. This account is fairly well-known: in the lecture from Zbigniew Brzezinski I posted, he referenced this same dual trend in revolutionary thought. I don’t mean to oversimplify: I recognize there are a whole host of varying shades of so-called “rebels” of all flavors – women’s rights activists (feminists), anarcho-Marxists, anarcho-capitalists, etc. What I am proposing that many are not aware of is that there are deeper currents of occult and secret society-linked systems of thought that undergird the revolutionary faith.
Both of these revolutionary traditions draw energy from Freemasonry, which is commonly divided into British and Continental. The British strand that influenced much of the American tradition retained a notion of theism and some connection with monarchy and aristocracy. This explains why the Queen of England is the royal patron of Masonry, with the Duke of Kent and others having well-known masonic positions of power. Similarly in America, the masonic tradition has tended to be connected to the upper class of white males, generally excluding women (except for women’s associations) and having racialist views. One may inquire as to whether many of these people are actual practitioners of the craft, but regardless, the institution is thus very useful from a geo-political perspective.
That said, the British masonic tradition views the Continental, or Grand Orient tradition of masonry as “irregular,” like a black lodge. The confusion would therefore arise from the desire of the Crown to have spies and infiltrators in all different branches of masonry, as well as attempting to run many of the cultic societies. Keep in mind that from the geo-political view, the name of the great game is full spectrum dominance more than it is adherence to a particular ideology. Ideologies are something trafficked in by those at the top, than something devoutly believed. This idea can be seen extending all the way back to ancient Greece, for example, where Plato spoke of leaders in the Republic viewing religion as a kind of noble lie necessary for civil maintenance. This trend in British espionage goes all the way back to Elizabeth, who was pictured in paintings with eyes covering her garment – symbolizing her spies sent all throughout Europe.
What is of particular relevance from the Grand Orient tradition is that this is the modern origin of socialism, communism and egalitarianism. The Grand Orient tradition of France in particular is a direct line back to the French Revolution, which has direct descent to the Bavarian tradition of Illuminism from the famed Adam Weishaupt. The French Revolutionaries sought through a direct and immediate reign of “red terror” to depose the monarchy and all religion with the establishment of an atheistic, secular republic based on the supposed dignity of bare humanism. It is from the French Revolutionaries that the famous “Declaration of the Rights of Man” arises. A modern example would be the United Nations’ supported Secular Humanist Manifesto I and II. The French Revolutionaries were far more radical in their Jacobinism than many American fathers desired, but Jefferson, the American minister to France, was apparently a fan of the French experiment:
“The experiment failed completely, and would have brought on the reestablishment of despotism had it been pursued. The Jacobins saw this, and that the expunging that officer was of absolute necessity, and the Nation was with them in opinion, for however they might have been formerly for the constitution framed by the first assembly, they were come over from their hope in it, and were now generally Jacobins. In the struggle which was necessary, many guilty persons fell without the forms of trial, and with them some innocent. These I deplore as much as any body, and shall deplore some of them to the day of my death. But I deplore them as I should have done had they fallen in battle. It was necessary to use the arm of the people, a machine not quite so blind as balls and bombs, but blind to a certain degree. A few of their cordial friends met at their hands, the fate of enemies. But time and truth will rescue and embalm their memories, while their posterity will be enjoying that very liberty for which they would never have hesitated to offer up their lives. The liberty of the whole earth was depending on the issue of the contest, and was ever such a prize won with so little innocent blood? My own affections have been deeply wounded by some of the martyrs to this cause, but rather than it should have failed, I would have seen half the earth desolated. Were there but an Adam and an Eve left in every country, and left free, it would be better than as it now is. I have expressed to you my sentiments, because they are really those of 99 in an hundred of our citizens. The universal feasts, and rejoicings which have lately been had on account of the successes of the French shewed the genuine effusions of their hearts. You have been wounded by the sufferings of your friends, and have by this circumstance been hurried into a temper of mind which would be extremely disrelished if known to your countrymen. The reserve of the Pres. of the U.S. had never permitted me to discover the light in which he viewed it, and as I was more anxious that you should satisfy him than me, I had still avoided explanations with you on the subject. But your [letter] 113 induced him to break silence and to notice the extreme acrimony of your expressions. He added that he had been informed the sentiments you expressed in your conversations were equally offensive to our allies, and that you should consider yourself as the representative of your country and that what you say, might be imputed to your constituents. He desired me therefore to write to you on this subject. He added that he considered France as the sheet anchor of this country and its friendship as a first object. There are in the U.S. some characters of opposite principles; some of them are high in office, others possessing great wealth, and all of them hostile to France and fondly looking to England as the staff of their hope. These I named to you on a former occasion. Their prospects have certainly not brightened. Excepting them, this country is entirely republican, friends to the constitution, anxious to preserve it and to have it administered according to it’s [sic] own republican principles. The little party above mentioned have espoused it only as a stepping stone to monarchy, and have endeavored to approximate it to that in it’s [sic] administration, in order to render it’s [sic] final transition more easy. The successes of republicanism in France have given the coup de grace to their prospects, and I hope to their projects.—I have developed to you faithfully the sentiments of your country, that you may govern yourself accordingly. I know your republicanism to be pure, and that it is no decay of that which has embittered you against it’s[sic] votaries in France, but too great a sensibility at the partial evil by which it’s object has been accomplished there.”
I wonder how many “good American patriots” are aware of the extent to which Jefferson was a radical. The so-called Tea Party crowd often cite Jefferson in quote-mining exercises looking for proofs of capitalism, slavery, and whatever else they want to use, but Jefferson, as all traditionalists and conservatives know, was a radical at heart. His “god” was “liberty,” just as the god of the revolutionaries was liberty. His theology was purely deistic: how any religionist would think he works as an example of good ole American hometown religion is beyond me. But then again, good ole hometown American religion basically is civic deism. The American experiment is therefore closely linked to the French, but with a more sober, capitalist and racial tradition. This explains why Washington was a Mason, yet hesitant about the activities of the Jacobin Illuminists spreading to America. He wrote:
“It was not my intention to doubt that, the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am.
The idea that I meant to convey, was, that I did not believe that the Lodges of Free Masons in this Country had, as Societies, endeavoured to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or pernicious principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of separation). That Individuals of them may have done it, or that the founder, or instrument employed to found, the Democratic Societies in the United States, may have had these objects; and actually had a separation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned.”
By contrast, the tradition of Continental or Grand Orient Masonry that spread from France to Italy, Germany, Prussia, and eventually Moscow, is one of the secret forces behind world communism. Monsignor George Dillon, James Billington and John Daniel have written works analyzing these divisions and trends that I recommend. One clear sample of evidence for this claim is the cached site of the Grand Orient of France, which reads as follows (notice the claims of “liberty, equality, fraternity” – the rallying cry of the French Revolutionaries:
“Lafayette received a sword from George Washington in honor of the part played by French Freemasons in the American War of Independence.
In this way, the preparation of the ideas of Liberty and Equality in the Masonic Lodges contributed to the great reforms of the French Revolution.
And this is how answers to a question which was studied in the Lodges of the Grand Orient de France before the war would be highly instrumental in setting up the French welfare system. But these are just a few examples, for in the past three centuries the history of French Freemasonry has been that of France and of its great social victories in the humanist context in which it has placed itself.
Whether it be the abolition of slavery with Victor Schoelcher, the setting up compulsory, nondenominational state school with Jules Ferry, more recently the work of Arthur Groussier with industrial tribunals, the protection of women and children in work, then the shortening of the working week, paid leave etc… these are some of the problems studied in the Masonic Lodges of the Grand Orient de France and made the law of the Republic by the enlightened men who for their time were at the cutting edge of progress.
The Grand Orient de France lives in its century and takes the lead in the emancipatory battles of its time.
Whereas in other forms of Masonry – particularly those which are the direct descendants of English Masonry and have retained their dogmas – a member must be a practising believer, the Grand Orient de France as an institution, is a society which practises Absolute Freedom of Conscience that is to say it leaves its members free to believe in a revealed truth whatever it may be or to be totally agnostic. Thus in the Masonic Lodges we find believers of all faiths together with atheists, agnostics and freethinkers. This is the meaning of the freedom of conscience which the Grand Orient de France defends when it defends secularism in all the activities of the state and not only in education which it wants to see remain free, nondenominational and compulsory for all. This new concept of Freemasonry – of Absolute Freedom of Conscience which was born on the ” Convent ” (Annual General Meeting) of 1877 and whose gave birth to a new form of practise in Freemasonry which is called Liberal Freemasonry. This form is fast developing in all the countries of the world where men aspire no longer to be the slaves of dogmas and enforced beliefs and want to change the societies in which they live, preparing a better and more enlightened future for tomorrow.”
Mandatory secular state schooling, state welfare, egalitarianism, abolition, women’s rights, the secular Republic, atheism, so-called ‘free-thinking,’ relativism, socialism and communism, etc., all founding principles of the modernist hell we experience today can be traced here. There’s only one problem here: what if men aren’t all radically equal? Clearly the end result of this philosophy is pure Marxism. In cultural and social Marxism, all differentiation, hierarchy and difference are somehow metaphysically “bad,” and must be stamped out. But man cannot live in rebellion against nature, and since Marx was so often taken with the idea of man being alienated from nature, how ironic it is that this Grand Orient tradition, which Karl Marx and Antonio Gramsci draw directly from, is so anti-natural. In fact, it is a war on nature, God and all things healthy. That is what bleary-eyed revolutionary idealists never understand. I’m reminded of the great quote from Spengler: “There is no proletarian, not even a Communist movement, that has not operated in the interests of money, and for the time being permitted by money – and that without the idealists among its leaders having the slightest suspicion of the fact.”
What can we conclude from this? Continental or Grand Orient masonry is still very much a powerful force in the world, and is still associated with communist and socialist trends, as well as with feminism and Marxism. It has been at work in the South American and Mexicans revolutions, as well as in Europe and Africa. The Jacobin socialist Illuminists are still at work in America, too. They are the force behind radical egalitarianism that is destroying everything, including its fellow tradition, capitalist revolutionism. The foolish and moronic masses have no idea how bad it is going to get when the communist-socialists have their way and dismantle the western traditions of cohesion. God is the author of distinction and differentiation. Some things are holy, some are not. Some men are evil, some are good. Radical egalitarianism as a philosophy ends up destroying everything for the sake of the false trinity, “liberty, equality, fraternity.” From the geo-political perspective, this is partly at work in the modern machinations we see attempting to blackmail both the Vatican and the British Crown. The question we must ask is, do we really want to see complete victory and exaltation of the worst? Andrew Wilkow put it well when he said we don’t raise the smaller trees in the forest by cutting down the taller.