Artful Revealer
Star
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2017
- Messages
- 4,423
It's been over 7 years since I posted this one on a Vigilant forum. After my blog having expired, VC forums having been deleted entirely unannounced and a computer crash which wiped clean everything I had backed up, by some miracle I was able to find this hidden away deep within an external hard drive. So here it is, more pertinent than ever in this day and age of socio-economic and cultural warfare, an impending New World Order and the infamous Illuminati boogeymen whose absence in conspiracy theories have become unthinkable, divided into chapters since it's quite a lot of literature. It'll revolve mainly around the French Revoution and the machinations of the Bavarian Illuminati or the "Enlightened" behind the subversion. I've tried to hyperlink and source as much as I can, but let it be known that most of the information here stems from French sources and is often personally translated into English. I apologize for any shortcomings in this regard.
Introduction
“… the French Revolution gave rise to ideas which led beyond the ideas of the entire old world order. The revolutionary movement which began in 1789 in the Cercle Social, which in the middle of its course had as its chief representatives Leclerc and Roux, and which finally with Babeuf’s conspiracy was temporarily defeated, gave rise to the communist idea which Babeuf’s friend Buonarroti re-introduced in France after the Revolution of 1830. This idea, consistently developed, is the idea of the new world order.” – The Holy Family by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, 1844.
Here we read a summary of the “illuminist” origins of revolutionary communism and the New World Order.
The purpose here is not to exculpate the monarchy and the excesses of past nobility, but to denounce a cast of cosmopolitan bankers and revolutionaries, their responsibility and instrumentalization of the misery of the pre-revolutionary people of France, and their totalitarian project with which they not only sought to replace kings, but the very place of God.
Conspiracy theories: a derogatory trash concept used to avoid the debate by categorically disqualifying any disturbing alternative theories and their adherents.
To avoid being accused as conspiracy theoreticians, those who expose unspoken parts of official history often specify that they don’t see conspiracies everywhere, and they especially distance themselves from a certain infamous conspiracy theory connecting the dots between the Illuminati, the French Revolution, Marxism and the New World Order. That’s … unfortunate.
It’s strangely for this specific theory concerning the Bavarian Illuminati that terms like “conspiracy theories” were forged. In reality, in face of the evidence we possess, we wonder if it wouldn’t be more sensible to prescribe tranquillizers to the hysterical critics of this conspiracy theory, and to have official history be put in question entirely. The proofs, too many to be ignored, are pushing towards change of the dominant discourse which gradually shifts from “the Bavarian Illuminati are a pure phantasm of paranoiacs” to “yes, they existed, but what difference does it make?” and eventually arrive at “yes, the Bavarian Illuminati are at the origins of Communism and the New World Order and have therefore contributed to the happiness of the human race!”
Various websites speak of the Bavarian Illuminati but often base their stories on conspiracy literature, which doesn’t really allow the reader to form his own opinion. The real pieces of evidence are kept in the archives of the Grand Orient de France, the biggest Masonic lodge on the European continent, to which we lack direct access. However, elements provided to us by encyclopedias, notably the Encyclopédie de la Franc-Maçonnerie and Encyclopédie Universalis, enables an unquestionable judgment that will be largely supplemented by what Marxists themselves have retained from their own history.
The causes of the French Revolution are multiple, contradictory and intertwined. The Bavarian Illuminati are but the device of a totalitarian project among other equally present revolutionary tendencies. To become blind, as some have, to the simplicity of this totalitarian project clearly visible in the roots of the revolution and pretend that the French Revolution sprung from the misery of “this people lying in the dust, like poor Job” as contended by French historian Jules Michelet in History of the French Revolution, is a downright misleading reduction long denied by Albert Mathiez and Albert Soboul, two acclaimed historians, in spite of their communist persuasions.
The weight of the rising bourgeoisie - “A new distribution of wealth opens the way to a new distribution of power”, after the proclamation of Antoine Barnave, bourgeois Protestant and one of the drafters of the Rules of the Jacobin Club – and the contrast between the Nobles of the Robe and the Nobles of the Sword are generally known, but a better understanding of the causes should include for example the role of England with its network of bankers who dreamed of creating a “Bank of France” in the image of the Bank of England they already had, networks of bankers and speculators who had approached the court; the role of the Jansenists; the relevance of Masonic cabals and their so-called “clubs de réflexion”, similar to modern think tanks: … all vital components that lead to a better understanding of this period.
Let's dive into them!
1. The Hunger Riots
That there were popular revolts against the inflated prices of bread, called the Flour War, is not being disputed. But unlike the official historical narrative, these revolts were not in opposition to the King or the monarchy, but against the establishment of a free market system, the triumph of speculators who had grown close to the court and to Turgot’s Edict of September 13, 1774 which established the liberalization of grain trade. This liberalization broke with the royal principle which required of the king to ensure the safety of his subjects and their food supply and quickly led to grain markets being drained by greedy hoarders in order to produce bread, then taken elsewhere under the disbelieving eyes of worried mothers, to be sold at higher prices. The prospect these empty markets gave, promising mothers that their sons and daughters wouldn’t survive the coming winter, will be the cause of what will become more or less the only genuine and spontaneous revolts of this period, revolts that will lead to the Flour War which was a lucidly led uprising against liberalism, against “hoarders” and “monopolists”, not against the King or the Church. It would thus be a misinterpretation to solely look for the roots of the French Revolution in these revolts against the liberalization of the price of bread, since the revolution will demand and impose, from the moment of its inception, this liberalization of the price of bread and prices in general.
Speculation on grain was forbidden in the kingdom of France before the abolition of the grain police by the Edict of Turgot, whose duty consisted of ensuring that grain products were passed at the right price from the producer to the people in priority without interference of speculators or hoarders. To justify speculation on grain which would starve the people and get rid of all annoying moral obstructions, the first liberal theories came to life with the Physiocrats, in the wake of the Enlightenment and the fathers of liberalism. (Physiocrats whom we would’ve loved to see explain their theories in front of empty markets facing a bereft crowd of hungry parents with hungry children …)
Following the economic liberalization put in place by the “Enlightened” from the beginning of the French Revolution, almost all people started suffering from the high cost of living: pensioners, artisans, small businessmen, urban workers, rural labourers, … all demanding or hoping for the return of the regulation of subsistence, the return of a maximum price on grain imposed by the regime.
The Jacobins, even The Mountain (Montagnards), more “left-wing” than the Jacobins, took their time to question this new economic freedom and accept this “maximum” price cap as demanded first by Jacques Roux the “Mad” (after his group of left-wing radicals called Enragés (“madmen”)) under popular pressure. Jacques Roux, champion of the cause of the sans-culottes, the proto-communists according to most Marxists, was accused of being a foreign agent and ended up committing suicide in prison with no more than the guillotine to look forward to. This accusation directed at Jacques Roux, a charge we might have expected coming from bourgeoisie fearing for their wealth, may seem unfounded if it wasn’t for the man who vigorously accused him and eventually sent him to prison, no other than Robespierre himself, whose reputation as “the Incorruptible” has remained virtually untainted.
The image of Robespierre sending proto-communist Jacques Roux to the gallows raises the question of ownership of the character of Robespierre by communists as well as the oblivion of these communists of some of their authentic roots. We’ll see which.
It’s now clearly established that the followers of the program of Jacques Roux, the Hébertists, against whom Robespierre adamantly opposed himself, had connections with international finance which sought to radicalize the revolution bolstered by the people. The Hébertists, called ‘les exagerés’ during the revolution, fanatical atheists, would institute their hatred of Christianity as part of the revolutionary movement with the de-Christianization of France, the massacres of the Vendée. They are also behind the Law of Suspects and consequently the Reign of Terror. The Hébertists (Exaggerators), among others, would obtain the return to the regulation of bread prices following the food riot at Etampes where Jacobin mayor Simonneau was killed (1792). This regulation of subsistence called ‘la loi du maximum général’ (law of general maximum), pride of the leftists nostalgic of the revolution, had nothing revolutionary at all, since, as we have seen, it already existed during the Ancien Régime prior to the revolution.
Somewhat later, in September 1793, the law of general maximum would be put to a vote: price limits on all first necessity goods are established. These limits correspond to the price in 1790 increased by one third. But the cap is coupled to a maximum wage: equal to those of 1790 increased by half, which accounted for a decline of 30 to 50 percent of wages during the implementation of the general maximum! In reality, the revolutionary government did not apply strict price caps on food, despite Robespierre, but on the contrary rigorously applied maximum limits on wages which earned this same Robespierre to be welcomed upon his march towards the scaffold with cries sounding “Foutre le maximum!” (F*** the maximum!)
2. The Royal Palace
To further examine and better comprehend the revolution it would be interesting to get acquainted with some aspects of the Royal Palace called Le Palais-Royal, rarely highlighted or sometimes completely ignored by historians of the revolution.
They aren’t scarce, history’s mentions of pre-revolutionary France concerning infernal orgies, overflowing banquets, binge drinking, the outrageous signs of affluence while people lived in misery, starved in the streets. The most scandalous displays of wealth actually took place every day in the Palais-Royal, a city on its own within Paris. At nightfall, banquets gave way to sexual orgies involving the most “sophisticated” members of the Palais-Royal. These endless carousing orgies were well known by the people and received with disgust, all very true. But often overlooked by many a reader is that the Palais-Royal no longer belonged to the King of France (who resided at Versailles during that time) but to one of his worst enemies, the Grand Master of the Grand Orient de France and central figure of the revolution: the Duke of Orléans.
We could look at the history of the Palais-Royal from a never discussed perspective: the Palais-Royal and the descent of Madame de Montespan. This angle of approach could be historically insignificant, but it’s not forbidden to take it into account.
In 1692, King Louis XIV gave the Palais-Royal to the Duke of Chartres, his nephew Philippe II, son of Philippe of Orléans, to offset the humiliation of being forced to marry Mademoiselle de Blois, a.k.a. Françoise Marie de Bourbon, the youngest legitimized daughter of the king and his chief mistress Madame de Montespan. Montespan was the king’s favourite with whom he had seven children. She appeared to be getting her way with the King up until 1680 and the Affair of the Poisons revealing the existence of a huge Satanic network that had infiltrated the court and church, a network involving poisoning, witchcraft, black masses and child sacrifice. To try the accused of this scandal, the king had re-established the Chambre Ardente (burning chamber), a special court traditionally used for the trials of heretics, held in a dark room draped in black, lit only by candles and torches. The Lieutenant General of Police of Paris, Nicolas de la Reynie, informed the king that the most relevant testimonies accused Madame de Montespan of having participated in black masses to receive the blessings of the king upon her and their illegitimate children. During these black masses Montespan uttered Christian prayers in reverse while lying naked on a table, with satanic priest Étienne Guibourg standing over her, slitting the throat of an infant whilst invoking the demons Ashmedai and Astaroth.
To prevent this affair from going public, the king dissolved the burning chamber again before the accusers of Montespan could be tried. Louis XIV decided this case to remain in an “eternal oblivion” and in 1709 ordered to burn before his eyes the 'twenty-nine big packages of various records', records and police reports that he had been holding onto in a chest since 1682. Louis XIV had the remaining embarrassing accused locked up by 'lettre de cachet' (royal warrants), but Montespan wasn’t worried. The king simply distanced himself from her while continuing to visit to see his children, whom were thus left to Montespan’s care and therefore subject to her education and passing of her values.
Later at the Palais-Royal, which had actually become the Palace of the Orléans, Françoise Marie de Bourbon (Mademoiselle de Blois), daughter of Montespan, proudly wore the nickname “Mrs. Lucifer”. One may wonder if this nickname was in fact given to her by her husband, Philippe II, Duke of Orléans, simply to tease her, as written by historians. The fact remains that the descent of Louis XIV was at the origin of a very serious crisis for French royalty: almost all legitimate descendants of King Louis XIV had died to which he decided to strengthen the royal family by an edict of July 29, 1714, which gave the right of succession to two of his legitimate sons he had with Montespan. The king was no doubt only concerned with ensuring the kingdom to his descendants, but this incredible decision which created the possibility for two sons of Montespan to become King of France, wishes pronounced by Montespan to the demon Ashmedai would have gone fulfilled … if parliament hadn’t reversed this edict after the death of the king.
That is how a few decades later, during the French Revolution, we naturally find the direct descent of Montespan in the Palais-Royal together with its owner, the new Duke of Orléans who would eventually name himself Philippe Égalité. This “bastard” descendant of Louis XIV and Montespan, deprived of royalty by parliament, finds himself “very concentrated” in the Palais-Royal, since his mother and father, as well as the mother and father of his wife (who is the richest heiress in France), are all four grandchildren of Montespan! Philippe “Equality” is very concentrated Montespan-juice indeed.
Despite having become one of the richest men of France after the death of his father and due to his marriage, the Duke of Orléans became heavily indebted to a point where he restored order in his finances by surrounding the gardens of the Palais-Royal with shops for rent, luxury stores, especially jewelry and clockwork. It is said that this is the true birthplace of the typical restaurant with à la carte menus. Stock markets were installed attracting international financiers and speculators. Gambling houses were so numerous that the Palais-Royal resembled one large casino. Orgies and drinking bouts were infinite. The top floors of the Palais-Royal housed an army of prostitutes who descended in the evening, easily making a living from the enormous amounts of money flowing through it.
Philippe “Equality”, officially named Louis Philippe II of Orléans, equally became the first Grand Master of the Grand Orient de France, which brings us to the following anecdote provided for our own pleasure and those interested: the Freemasons claim descent from Tubal-cain, related to Ashmedai, the demon summoned by Montespan, demon of fortune, gambling and prostitution.
With Philippe of Orléans, the Palais-Royal quickly became a hotbed of agitation by hosting the most radical revolutionary clubs, the most leftist of the revolution as we will see. It is precisely at this Palais-Royal where Camille Desmoulins, journalist and politician, harangued the crowds (in reality no more than renters and clients of the Palais-Royal) on July 12, 1789, and prompted the march towards the infamous Bastille on July 14, 1789, with people carrying the busts of the Duke of Orléans and banker Jacques Necker at the head of the procession. The Duke himself heavily speculated on grain, contributing, causing even, famine in Paris and we find him next in the middle of the crowd of the October March complaining about the high prices and scarcity of bread, an event described as the great march of the starving women of Paris, but was in reality surrounded by prostitutes and transvestites from the Palais-Royal paid for by the Duke himself. What a travesty!
In the news edition of Journal de Paris of February 22, 1793, the Duke had declared to part with Freemasonry, disappointed by its lies and secrets: “I was attached to Freemasonry which offered an image of equality, as I was attached to parliament which offered an image of liberty. I have since traded this phantom for reality … Since I do not know how the Grand Orient is made up and since I also believe mysteries or secret assemblies have no place in a Republic, especially at the beginning of its establishment, I no longer wish to involve myself with anything of the Grand Orient, nor any assemblies of Freemasons.”
This statement was met with bitter cold and followed by the 'Masonic degradation of citizen Equality by having him resign and stripped of his title of Grand Master.' The Duke of Orléans was guillotined that same year.
3. The Financiers of the Revolution
The most tragicomic denial of reality by the left in face of mounting evidence is the one that denies the facts linking the birth of the Revolution, and subsequently its most radical elements, with high finance. Discussions about the French Revolution prior to the existence of the internet with history enthusiasts, all armed with the sole knowledge available at the time, ie. commercial literature, rarely, if not ever, included some of the most dim characters and shady actors of this revolution, and their names were often completely unknown.
International bankers perpetually operating from the shadows have no need to codify a pyramid scheme like the Illuminati had to. A pyramid scheme comes natural to them: the more the banker becomes important or the closer we get to a financial source, the less we hear about the banker/financier in question. The same is true for the French Revolution, which had its share of international networks of bankers hidden in the shadows of one particular man: Isaac Panchaud.
A reoccurring pattern and implacable logic is systematically verified in the history of revolutions for over two centuries: when the most powerful financial player, ie. the international bank, ends up achieving the creation and obtaining the control of the biggest wealth creation device imaginable in the country in revolution, namely the central bank and the creation of money, the revolution ends. The French Revolution was no different.
Isaac Panchaud, a Swiss banker, close with the Physiocrats, big grain speculator and admirer of the financial reformations in England following the Glorious Revolution (Panchaud also had the English nationality), would become the counselor of and bridge between, on one hand, all of France’s ministers of Finance under Louis XVI, from Turgot to Perregaux through Necker, Calonne et al … and on the other hand a network of international bankers of which he himself was an important pawn. In 1776, Isaac Panchaud relied on Turgot’s connections to create a discount bank, Caisse d’Escompte, the predecessor of the Bank of France, except that this bank did not yet have the lever to limitless wealth: the right to coin money.
It’s due to this bank, where he introduced his network of international bankers, that Isaac Panchaud would push the finance minister Calonne to borrow more and more expensive than any of his predecessors, which would plummet France into unsustainable debt while making the fortunes of his fellow cosmopolitan bankers swell. This excessive borrowing of minister Calonne had cost the state of France so dearly that, according to historian Louis Blanc (1811-1882), the purpose of it all was to bankrupt the monarchy in order to coerce parliament and privileged members of society to accept radical reforms made to the country’s economic and financial structures.
Finance Minister Jacques Necker (who also made his fortune speculating on grain), consistently supported by the network of bankers introduced in the Caisse d’Escompte by Isaac Panchaud, continues to ruin the country by convincing the king to finance the American War of Independence through loans at high interest rates because state credit was still at a low level. It is estimated that American Revolutionary War was the most expensive in the history of France with a total cost of nearly one billion French livre, but Necker assured the king its finance was possible without increasing taxes. On the eve of the French Revolution, half of the state’s budget would be devoted to reimbursing the debts accumulated during the American Revolution. On July 11, 1789, Louis XVI, perhaps as a last effort, dismissed Jacques Necker.
It wouldn’t be long before Isaac Panchaud’s network of bankers reacted: On July 12, 1789, Camille Desmoulins, close to the Duke of Orléans, and via Mirabeau close to Panchaud, mobilizes the masses and initiates the Revolution in a famous speech at the Palais-Royal against Necker’s dismissal.
The storming of the Bastille came in close succession. It is from here on that we must pay closely attention to the following creature of Isaac Panchaud: another banker who went by the name of Jean-Fréderic Perregaux.
Perregaux received financial assistance from Isaac Panchaud to found his own bank in association with, to a lesser extent, fellow banker Jean-Albert Gumpelzheimer. Immediately following Necker’s dismissal, Perregaux would assume an important role in the Revolution: he will be seen handing out guns to passersby to take the Bastille.
Perregaux, who never displayed his actual opinions, never published articles in the press, would nonetheless become the banker of the most extreme left-wing revolutionaries, the Hébertists, the so-called representatives of the sans-culottes, champions of the de-Christianization of France. He became the banker of the Committee of Public Safety and could also be found in the finance committee of the National Constituent Assembly together with his cosmopolitan banker friends (Boyd and Ker, Cottin, Le Couteulx, Delessert, Boscary, Jauge, Girardot, Greffuhle and Montz, etc.).
It’s this same Perregaux who financed the coup of 18 Brumaire, bringing Napoleon to power to which he received in return the right to establish the Bank of France in 1800, built entirely on private funds. This bank where Perregaux would become governor, obtained on April 14, 1803, the hallucinating privilege of issuing currency with the penalty of death for all counterfeiters. The international bankers had finally achieved their goal and this period is generally regarded as the end of the revolution.
This truly makes one wonder: by what kind of sorcery does a nation agree to hand over the creation of money to private banks until its own total demise, the ruin of its children’s futures, to the point of being ashamed, not for having been scammed into the most grotesque of all deceptions, but for not being able to pay off the interests of the debt created by this abhorrent scam?! It doesn’t take a genius in economics or math to understand that such a system where the nation must borrow money from private banks in order to carry out public works and services, creates a mass of monetary assets that always ends up in the pockets of the private money lenders to whom this money belongs, with as absurd result that the people of a nation, after having built, by the sweat of their brows, the strength of their arms, hospitals, schools, bridges, roads, et al … must pay back more than what they have built themselves! And not just once, but the whole nation is forced to repay up to three, four, five times its own achievements!
But as long as we react like cattle, we are but livestock. The international bankers are aware and have since long aspired to manage the world as if it were a farm, by a much more radical and totalitarian project. The Bavarian Illuminati were charged with laying the foundations for this project.
Introduction
“Liberty and Equality are the essential rights that man in his original and primitive perfection received from nature. Property struck the first blow at Equality; political Society, or Governments, were the first oppressors of Liberty; the supporters of Governments and property are the religious and civil laws; therefore, to reinstate man in his primitive rights of Equality and Liberty, we must begin by destroying all Religion, all civil society, and finish by the destruction of all property.” – Adam Weishaupt according to Augustin Barruel in Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism, 1798.
“A specter is haunting Europe - the specter of communism.” - Karl Marx, Communist Manifesto, Chapter 1.
Karl Marx with the hand of Jahbulon
“… the French Revolution gave rise to ideas which led beyond the ideas of the entire old world order. The revolutionary movement which began in 1789 in the Cercle Social, which in the middle of its course had as its chief representatives Leclerc and Roux, and which finally with Babeuf’s conspiracy was temporarily defeated, gave rise to the communist idea which Babeuf’s friend Buonarroti re-introduced in France after the Revolution of 1830. This idea, consistently developed, is the idea of the new world order.” – The Holy Family by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, 1844.
Notice
The purpose here is not to exculpate the monarchy and the excesses of past nobility, but to denounce a cast of cosmopolitan bankers and revolutionaries, their responsibility and instrumentalization of the misery of the pre-revolutionary people of France, and their totalitarian project with which they not only sought to replace kings, but the very place of God.
Conspiracy theories: a derogatory trash concept used to avoid the debate by categorically disqualifying any disturbing alternative theories and their adherents.
To avoid being accused as conspiracy theoreticians, those who expose unspoken parts of official history often specify that they don’t see conspiracies everywhere, and they especially distance themselves from a certain infamous conspiracy theory connecting the dots between the Illuminati, the French Revolution, Marxism and the New World Order. That’s … unfortunate.
It’s strangely for this specific theory concerning the Bavarian Illuminati that terms like “conspiracy theories” were forged. In reality, in face of the evidence we possess, we wonder if it wouldn’t be more sensible to prescribe tranquillizers to the hysterical critics of this conspiracy theory, and to have official history be put in question entirely. The proofs, too many to be ignored, are pushing towards change of the dominant discourse which gradually shifts from “the Bavarian Illuminati are a pure phantasm of paranoiacs” to “yes, they existed, but what difference does it make?” and eventually arrive at “yes, the Bavarian Illuminati are at the origins of Communism and the New World Order and have therefore contributed to the happiness of the human race!”
Various websites speak of the Bavarian Illuminati but often base their stories on conspiracy literature, which doesn’t really allow the reader to form his own opinion. The real pieces of evidence are kept in the archives of the Grand Orient de France, the biggest Masonic lodge on the European continent, to which we lack direct access. However, elements provided to us by encyclopedias, notably the Encyclopédie de la Franc-Maçonnerie and Encyclopédie Universalis, enables an unquestionable judgment that will be largely supplemented by what Marxists themselves have retained from their own history.
The causes of the French Revolution are multiple, contradictory and intertwined. The Bavarian Illuminati are but the device of a totalitarian project among other equally present revolutionary tendencies. To become blind, as some have, to the simplicity of this totalitarian project clearly visible in the roots of the revolution and pretend that the French Revolution sprung from the misery of “this people lying in the dust, like poor Job” as contended by French historian Jules Michelet in History of the French Revolution, is a downright misleading reduction long denied by Albert Mathiez and Albert Soboul, two acclaimed historians, in spite of their communist persuasions.
The weight of the rising bourgeoisie - “A new distribution of wealth opens the way to a new distribution of power”, after the proclamation of Antoine Barnave, bourgeois Protestant and one of the drafters of the Rules of the Jacobin Club – and the contrast between the Nobles of the Robe and the Nobles of the Sword are generally known, but a better understanding of the causes should include for example the role of England with its network of bankers who dreamed of creating a “Bank of France” in the image of the Bank of England they already had, networks of bankers and speculators who had approached the court; the role of the Jansenists; the relevance of Masonic cabals and their so-called “clubs de réflexion”, similar to modern think tanks: … all vital components that lead to a better understanding of this period.
Let's dive into them!
1. The Hunger Riots
That there were popular revolts against the inflated prices of bread, called the Flour War, is not being disputed. But unlike the official historical narrative, these revolts were not in opposition to the King or the monarchy, but against the establishment of a free market system, the triumph of speculators who had grown close to the court and to Turgot’s Edict of September 13, 1774 which established the liberalization of grain trade. This liberalization broke with the royal principle which required of the king to ensure the safety of his subjects and their food supply and quickly led to grain markets being drained by greedy hoarders in order to produce bread, then taken elsewhere under the disbelieving eyes of worried mothers, to be sold at higher prices. The prospect these empty markets gave, promising mothers that their sons and daughters wouldn’t survive the coming winter, will be the cause of what will become more or less the only genuine and spontaneous revolts of this period, revolts that will lead to the Flour War which was a lucidly led uprising against liberalism, against “hoarders” and “monopolists”, not against the King or the Church. It would thus be a misinterpretation to solely look for the roots of the French Revolution in these revolts against the liberalization of the price of bread, since the revolution will demand and impose, from the moment of its inception, this liberalization of the price of bread and prices in general.
Speculation on grain was forbidden in the kingdom of France before the abolition of the grain police by the Edict of Turgot, whose duty consisted of ensuring that grain products were passed at the right price from the producer to the people in priority without interference of speculators or hoarders. To justify speculation on grain which would starve the people and get rid of all annoying moral obstructions, the first liberal theories came to life with the Physiocrats, in the wake of the Enlightenment and the fathers of liberalism. (Physiocrats whom we would’ve loved to see explain their theories in front of empty markets facing a bereft crowd of hungry parents with hungry children …)
Following the economic liberalization put in place by the “Enlightened” from the beginning of the French Revolution, almost all people started suffering from the high cost of living: pensioners, artisans, small businessmen, urban workers, rural labourers, … all demanding or hoping for the return of the regulation of subsistence, the return of a maximum price on grain imposed by the regime.
The Jacobins, even The Mountain (Montagnards), more “left-wing” than the Jacobins, took their time to question this new economic freedom and accept this “maximum” price cap as demanded first by Jacques Roux the “Mad” (after his group of left-wing radicals called Enragés (“madmen”)) under popular pressure. Jacques Roux, champion of the cause of the sans-culottes, the proto-communists according to most Marxists, was accused of being a foreign agent and ended up committing suicide in prison with no more than the guillotine to look forward to. This accusation directed at Jacques Roux, a charge we might have expected coming from bourgeoisie fearing for their wealth, may seem unfounded if it wasn’t for the man who vigorously accused him and eventually sent him to prison, no other than Robespierre himself, whose reputation as “the Incorruptible” has remained virtually untainted.
The image of Robespierre sending proto-communist Jacques Roux to the gallows raises the question of ownership of the character of Robespierre by communists as well as the oblivion of these communists of some of their authentic roots. We’ll see which.
It’s now clearly established that the followers of the program of Jacques Roux, the Hébertists, against whom Robespierre adamantly opposed himself, had connections with international finance which sought to radicalize the revolution bolstered by the people. The Hébertists, called ‘les exagerés’ during the revolution, fanatical atheists, would institute their hatred of Christianity as part of the revolutionary movement with the de-Christianization of France, the massacres of the Vendée. They are also behind the Law of Suspects and consequently the Reign of Terror. The Hébertists (Exaggerators), among others, would obtain the return to the regulation of bread prices following the food riot at Etampes where Jacobin mayor Simonneau was killed (1792). This regulation of subsistence called ‘la loi du maximum général’ (law of general maximum), pride of the leftists nostalgic of the revolution, had nothing revolutionary at all, since, as we have seen, it already existed during the Ancien Régime prior to the revolution.
Somewhat later, in September 1793, the law of general maximum would be put to a vote: price limits on all first necessity goods are established. These limits correspond to the price in 1790 increased by one third. But the cap is coupled to a maximum wage: equal to those of 1790 increased by half, which accounted for a decline of 30 to 50 percent of wages during the implementation of the general maximum! In reality, the revolutionary government did not apply strict price caps on food, despite Robespierre, but on the contrary rigorously applied maximum limits on wages which earned this same Robespierre to be welcomed upon his march towards the scaffold with cries sounding “Foutre le maximum!” (F*** the maximum!)
2. The Royal Palace
The Royal Palace
To further examine and better comprehend the revolution it would be interesting to get acquainted with some aspects of the Royal Palace called Le Palais-Royal, rarely highlighted or sometimes completely ignored by historians of the revolution.
They aren’t scarce, history’s mentions of pre-revolutionary France concerning infernal orgies, overflowing banquets, binge drinking, the outrageous signs of affluence while people lived in misery, starved in the streets. The most scandalous displays of wealth actually took place every day in the Palais-Royal, a city on its own within Paris. At nightfall, banquets gave way to sexual orgies involving the most “sophisticated” members of the Palais-Royal. These endless carousing orgies were well known by the people and received with disgust, all very true. But often overlooked by many a reader is that the Palais-Royal no longer belonged to the King of France (who resided at Versailles during that time) but to one of his worst enemies, the Grand Master of the Grand Orient de France and central figure of the revolution: the Duke of Orléans.
We could look at the history of the Palais-Royal from a never discussed perspective: the Palais-Royal and the descent of Madame de Montespan. This angle of approach could be historically insignificant, but it’s not forbidden to take it into account.
In 1692, King Louis XIV gave the Palais-Royal to the Duke of Chartres, his nephew Philippe II, son of Philippe of Orléans, to offset the humiliation of being forced to marry Mademoiselle de Blois, a.k.a. Françoise Marie de Bourbon, the youngest legitimized daughter of the king and his chief mistress Madame de Montespan. Montespan was the king’s favourite with whom he had seven children. She appeared to be getting her way with the King up until 1680 and the Affair of the Poisons revealing the existence of a huge Satanic network that had infiltrated the court and church, a network involving poisoning, witchcraft, black masses and child sacrifice. To try the accused of this scandal, the king had re-established the Chambre Ardente (burning chamber), a special court traditionally used for the trials of heretics, held in a dark room draped in black, lit only by candles and torches. The Lieutenant General of Police of Paris, Nicolas de la Reynie, informed the king that the most relevant testimonies accused Madame de Montespan of having participated in black masses to receive the blessings of the king upon her and their illegitimate children. During these black masses Montespan uttered Christian prayers in reverse while lying naked on a table, with satanic priest Étienne Guibourg standing over her, slitting the throat of an infant whilst invoking the demons Ashmedai and Astaroth.
To prevent this affair from going public, the king dissolved the burning chamber again before the accusers of Montespan could be tried. Louis XIV decided this case to remain in an “eternal oblivion” and in 1709 ordered to burn before his eyes the 'twenty-nine big packages of various records', records and police reports that he had been holding onto in a chest since 1682. Louis XIV had the remaining embarrassing accused locked up by 'lettre de cachet' (royal warrants), but Montespan wasn’t worried. The king simply distanced himself from her while continuing to visit to see his children, whom were thus left to Montespan’s care and therefore subject to her education and passing of her values.
Later at the Palais-Royal, which had actually become the Palace of the Orléans, Françoise Marie de Bourbon (Mademoiselle de Blois), daughter of Montespan, proudly wore the nickname “Mrs. Lucifer”. One may wonder if this nickname was in fact given to her by her husband, Philippe II, Duke of Orléans, simply to tease her, as written by historians. The fact remains that the descent of Louis XIV was at the origin of a very serious crisis for French royalty: almost all legitimate descendants of King Louis XIV had died to which he decided to strengthen the royal family by an edict of July 29, 1714, which gave the right of succession to two of his legitimate sons he had with Montespan. The king was no doubt only concerned with ensuring the kingdom to his descendants, but this incredible decision which created the possibility for two sons of Montespan to become King of France, wishes pronounced by Montespan to the demon Ashmedai would have gone fulfilled … if parliament hadn’t reversed this edict after the death of the king.
That is how a few decades later, during the French Revolution, we naturally find the direct descent of Montespan in the Palais-Royal together with its owner, the new Duke of Orléans who would eventually name himself Philippe Égalité. This “bastard” descendant of Louis XIV and Montespan, deprived of royalty by parliament, finds himself “very concentrated” in the Palais-Royal, since his mother and father, as well as the mother and father of his wife (who is the richest heiress in France), are all four grandchildren of Montespan! Philippe “Equality” is very concentrated Montespan-juice indeed.
Despite having become one of the richest men of France after the death of his father and due to his marriage, the Duke of Orléans became heavily indebted to a point where he restored order in his finances by surrounding the gardens of the Palais-Royal with shops for rent, luxury stores, especially jewelry and clockwork. It is said that this is the true birthplace of the typical restaurant with à la carte menus. Stock markets were installed attracting international financiers and speculators. Gambling houses were so numerous that the Palais-Royal resembled one large casino. Orgies and drinking bouts were infinite. The top floors of the Palais-Royal housed an army of prostitutes who descended in the evening, easily making a living from the enormous amounts of money flowing through it.
Philippe “Equality”, officially named Louis Philippe II of Orléans, equally became the first Grand Master of the Grand Orient de France, which brings us to the following anecdote provided for our own pleasure and those interested: the Freemasons claim descent from Tubal-cain, related to Ashmedai, the demon summoned by Montespan, demon of fortune, gambling and prostitution.
With Philippe of Orléans, the Palais-Royal quickly became a hotbed of agitation by hosting the most radical revolutionary clubs, the most leftist of the revolution as we will see. It is precisely at this Palais-Royal where Camille Desmoulins, journalist and politician, harangued the crowds (in reality no more than renters and clients of the Palais-Royal) on July 12, 1789, and prompted the march towards the infamous Bastille on July 14, 1789, with people carrying the busts of the Duke of Orléans and banker Jacques Necker at the head of the procession. The Duke himself heavily speculated on grain, contributing, causing even, famine in Paris and we find him next in the middle of the crowd of the October March complaining about the high prices and scarcity of bread, an event described as the great march of the starving women of Paris, but was in reality surrounded by prostitutes and transvestites from the Palais-Royal paid for by the Duke himself. What a travesty!
In the news edition of Journal de Paris of February 22, 1793, the Duke had declared to part with Freemasonry, disappointed by its lies and secrets: “I was attached to Freemasonry which offered an image of equality, as I was attached to parliament which offered an image of liberty. I have since traded this phantom for reality … Since I do not know how the Grand Orient is made up and since I also believe mysteries or secret assemblies have no place in a Republic, especially at the beginning of its establishment, I no longer wish to involve myself with anything of the Grand Orient, nor any assemblies of Freemasons.”
This statement was met with bitter cold and followed by the 'Masonic degradation of citizen Equality by having him resign and stripped of his title of Grand Master.' The Duke of Orléans was guillotined that same year.
3. The Financiers of the Revolution
Financiers of the Revolution
The most tragicomic denial of reality by the left in face of mounting evidence is the one that denies the facts linking the birth of the Revolution, and subsequently its most radical elements, with high finance. Discussions about the French Revolution prior to the existence of the internet with history enthusiasts, all armed with the sole knowledge available at the time, ie. commercial literature, rarely, if not ever, included some of the most dim characters and shady actors of this revolution, and their names were often completely unknown.
International bankers perpetually operating from the shadows have no need to codify a pyramid scheme like the Illuminati had to. A pyramid scheme comes natural to them: the more the banker becomes important or the closer we get to a financial source, the less we hear about the banker/financier in question. The same is true for the French Revolution, which had its share of international networks of bankers hidden in the shadows of one particular man: Isaac Panchaud.
Isaac Panchaud the Banker
A reoccurring pattern and implacable logic is systematically verified in the history of revolutions for over two centuries: when the most powerful financial player, ie. the international bank, ends up achieving the creation and obtaining the control of the biggest wealth creation device imaginable in the country in revolution, namely the central bank and the creation of money, the revolution ends. The French Revolution was no different.
Isaac Panchaud, a Swiss banker, close with the Physiocrats, big grain speculator and admirer of the financial reformations in England following the Glorious Revolution (Panchaud also had the English nationality), would become the counselor of and bridge between, on one hand, all of France’s ministers of Finance under Louis XVI, from Turgot to Perregaux through Necker, Calonne et al … and on the other hand a network of international bankers of which he himself was an important pawn. In 1776, Isaac Panchaud relied on Turgot’s connections to create a discount bank, Caisse d’Escompte, the predecessor of the Bank of France, except that this bank did not yet have the lever to limitless wealth: the right to coin money.
It’s due to this bank, where he introduced his network of international bankers, that Isaac Panchaud would push the finance minister Calonne to borrow more and more expensive than any of his predecessors, which would plummet France into unsustainable debt while making the fortunes of his fellow cosmopolitan bankers swell. This excessive borrowing of minister Calonne had cost the state of France so dearly that, according to historian Louis Blanc (1811-1882), the purpose of it all was to bankrupt the monarchy in order to coerce parliament and privileged members of society to accept radical reforms made to the country’s economic and financial structures.
Finance Minister Jacques Necker (who also made his fortune speculating on grain), consistently supported by the network of bankers introduced in the Caisse d’Escompte by Isaac Panchaud, continues to ruin the country by convincing the king to finance the American War of Independence through loans at high interest rates because state credit was still at a low level. It is estimated that American Revolutionary War was the most expensive in the history of France with a total cost of nearly one billion French livre, but Necker assured the king its finance was possible without increasing taxes. On the eve of the French Revolution, half of the state’s budget would be devoted to reimbursing the debts accumulated during the American Revolution. On July 11, 1789, Louis XVI, perhaps as a last effort, dismissed Jacques Necker.
It wouldn’t be long before Isaac Panchaud’s network of bankers reacted: On July 12, 1789, Camille Desmoulins, close to the Duke of Orléans, and via Mirabeau close to Panchaud, mobilizes the masses and initiates the Revolution in a famous speech at the Palais-Royal against Necker’s dismissal.
The storming of the Bastille came in close succession. It is from here on that we must pay closely attention to the following creature of Isaac Panchaud: another banker who went by the name of Jean-Fréderic Perregaux.
Perregaux received financial assistance from Isaac Panchaud to found his own bank in association with, to a lesser extent, fellow banker Jean-Albert Gumpelzheimer. Immediately following Necker’s dismissal, Perregaux would assume an important role in the Revolution: he will be seen handing out guns to passersby to take the Bastille.
Perregaux, who never displayed his actual opinions, never published articles in the press, would nonetheless become the banker of the most extreme left-wing revolutionaries, the Hébertists, the so-called representatives of the sans-culottes, champions of the de-Christianization of France. He became the banker of the Committee of Public Safety and could also be found in the finance committee of the National Constituent Assembly together with his cosmopolitan banker friends (Boyd and Ker, Cottin, Le Couteulx, Delessert, Boscary, Jauge, Girardot, Greffuhle and Montz, etc.).
It’s this same Perregaux who financed the coup of 18 Brumaire, bringing Napoleon to power to which he received in return the right to establish the Bank of France in 1800, built entirely on private funds. This bank where Perregaux would become governor, obtained on April 14, 1803, the hallucinating privilege of issuing currency with the penalty of death for all counterfeiters. The international bankers had finally achieved their goal and this period is generally regarded as the end of the revolution.
This truly makes one wonder: by what kind of sorcery does a nation agree to hand over the creation of money to private banks until its own total demise, the ruin of its children’s futures, to the point of being ashamed, not for having been scammed into the most grotesque of all deceptions, but for not being able to pay off the interests of the debt created by this abhorrent scam?! It doesn’t take a genius in economics or math to understand that such a system where the nation must borrow money from private banks in order to carry out public works and services, creates a mass of monetary assets that always ends up in the pockets of the private money lenders to whom this money belongs, with as absurd result that the people of a nation, after having built, by the sweat of their brows, the strength of their arms, hospitals, schools, bridges, roads, et al … must pay back more than what they have built themselves! And not just once, but the whole nation is forced to repay up to three, four, five times its own achievements!
But as long as we react like cattle, we are but livestock. The international bankers are aware and have since long aspired to manage the world as if it were a farm, by a much more radical and totalitarian project. The Bavarian Illuminati were charged with laying the foundations for this project.
Last edited: