THE GLOBALIST UTOPIA
From its very inception, Masonic ideology contained all the heresies of the modern age. These contribute to the destruction of European nations, empires, societies and their foundation: the Catholic faith.
Adam Weishaupt, the founder of the secret society the Illuminati of Bavaria, declared to its members:
“We must establish an authoritarian, universal regime, a form of government which covers the entire world”
“It is in the privacy of secret societies that we must shape public opinion” (1)
This is what nationalists fight against. Weishaupt condemned these “partisans of National Pride” in his letters, seized by the Elector of Bavaria’s police.
Another revealing text is the La Marseillaise des Franc-Maçons written by Jouy (2) :
“The Universal Repbulic is merely the temple of the Masons; they drew the blueprint of this from their symbolic lessons”
The utopian dream of the Universal Republic has not changed.
In 1968, Roger Leray, the Grand Master of the Grand-Orient lodge, reminded the General Assembly of Freemasons (3) that:
“Two hundred years ago, Chevalier Ramsay declared the Universal Republic”.
“Ever since, Freemasons the world over have indefatigably contributed to its construction.”
Likewise, Patrick Kessel (4) in his inaugural speech declared that :
“The Freemasons of the Grand-Orient de France have a project, a task, a hope: the Universal Republic.”
We shouldn’t believe that this utopia is unique to the atheist Grand-Orient whereas other Masonic orders are, supposedly, different and “trustworthy”, as some would try to have us believe. Guy Piau (5), Grand Master of the Grande Loge de France, takes care to open the eyes of the gullible by pointing out that:
“The quest for both a European and world community falls within the ambit of our thoughts and our actions.”
And it is confirmed that :
“Freemasons from the Grand-Orient are not the only ones to advocate the destruction of nations; those from the Grand Loge adopt the same language”
“For the Freemasons, the construction of a European zone is merely the precursor to the creation of a universal territory, the entire planet as a homeland”
In Europe-Parlement, a private publication reserved for politicians, Richard Dupuy (6), (7), also Grand Master of the Grande Loge de France, confirmed what the common goal was:
“We work for the creation of a Universal Republic and this Republic depends on Europe”
So we should have no illusions. All Masonic orders and their “fellows” work to achieve the same goal, as confirmed by J Baylot (8), another Grand Master of the Grand Loge Nationale:
“Each order has its own specific characters and language but, in truth, members all receive the same Masonic instruction, leading to the same goal”
“The lodges will give way to Masonism, which will be a universal religion”
It couldn’t be any clearer and we can see that, after two centuries, the goal remains the same:
Universal Republic, universal religion, Masonism
Another revealing text can be found in Travaux (T.XI, p.3.), published by the Grande Loge de France:
“The Grande Loge de France has the great advantage of welcoming among its midst members from different orders who have their own particular rituals”
This is in no way a problem for them because
“All fellows agree on the fundamental principles, otherwise they could not be Freemasons”
Could there be any better proof of the fact that all Masonic orders work to achieve the same goal?
These documents show that the Grande Loge Nationale de France is no more “trustworthy” than the other lodges, contrary to what some of its agents, who claim to no longer be Masons, would try to have us believe (9).
To ensure that this “universal, Masonic religion” or “Masonism” was viable, it was necessary not only to destroy Catholicism but also its political foundation: the nations which drew their inspiration from Catholicism, monarchies based on the divine right of kings.
The new nation of the revolutionaries has no connection with the natural homeland, the product of previous generations.
In 1993, the Grand Master of the Grand-Orient, Gilbert Abergel, recalled that:
“As early as 1987, during the draft stages of this reform (of the law governing the entitlement to French nationality, replacing the principle of jus sanguinis with that of jus soli) our order – via the Grand Master at the time, Jean-Robert Ragache (10) – had reiterated in Le Monde its commitment to the republican idea of nationality which ruled out all use of the jus sanguinis principle as the foundation of French nationality”
So the Freemasons, in the execution of their globalist plot, rely on the principle of jus soli in order to drown nations in a vast inflow of foreigners, thereby preventing any nationalist backlash.
Bush’s condemnation of Austria’s immigration policy in 2000, reported by Roger Cohen in the New York Times, demonstrates how the globalists rely on immigration to “break down the barrier of the nation”.
This passage from the Contrat maçonnique européen (11) provides further evidence of the development of this policy:
“The European ideal, a vital element of universalism, is inherent in the Masonic tradition, which declares that the construction of a Masonic Europe is necessary”.
Following the triumph of internationalist ideas of the French Revolution, the new nation of the Freemasons was defined in ideological terms. All those who adhere to these “new ideals” belong to this “nation”, regardless of their religious beliefs or national origins. In order to properly understand this total transformation of the concept of a nation, we have to go back to Weishaupt.
In the letters he wrote to his followers, he divided his contemporaries into two categories:
Those who, like him, adhered to what he called love of the world, the ancestor of globalist cosmopolitanism.
Those whose acts are motivated by love of the nation (12). His followers were urged to fight these nationalists.
It is clear that, right from the very inception of the Masonic utopia, the two camps were already diametrically opposed to each other
On the one hand, we have the citizens of the world, the globalists for whom the new nation is planetary in nature, the Universal Republic.
On the other hand, we have those who understand the grave consequences of these revolutionary, internationalist ideas and who fight against this utopia. Henceforth we will call them nationalists.
We must emphasise the importance of these definitions and the historical origins of the nationalist ideal. Some people wrongly believe that the Jacobins were nationalists, because they declared that the “homeland was in danger”. To believe this is to fail to understand that words did not have the same meaning and purpose. The revolutionaries defended the “new” nation, which was “ideological”, “internationalist”, and was opposed to the inherited, traditional nation.
The following statement from Point de Vue Initiatique (13) is very clear:
“Citizenship is open to all those who identify with the values of the Republic, whether they be foreigners or natives”
Nicolas Sarkozy’s declaration clearly expressed the same principle:
“I don’t want any more talk about native-born French”
We understand why, because he doesn’t belong to this category!
So for the revolutionaries of 1789 and their heirs, the nation and the homeland are mere ideological constructions which reject the idea of the nation as a heritage, a nation inherited with all its defining cultural characteristics.
This is why Anacharsis Cloots, a Prussian Jew and one of the key foreign agents of the so-called “French” Revolution, was granted French nationality by the Convention upon publication of his book, entitled The Universal Republic…
As far as the members of the Convention were concerned, the key criterion to be French was the identification with the internationalist “values of the republic”.
A fact rarely highlighted is the large number of foreigners involved in the French Revolution: Cloots, Marat, Necker, Franklin, Weishaupt, Cagolistro, Mesmer, to take just the most famous names, not to mention Israelites from France and elsewhere, who actively participated in the revolutionary turmoil and financed it.
Likewise, the ranks of the republican army were full of foreign officers committed to “new ideas”. Many of them went on to play a role in the revolutions in their own countries, in particular in Spain and Latin America during decolonisation.
Another type of nation, which aimed to destroy the traditional nation, emerged from this revolutionary process.
On the one hand, we have the nation of heritage which represents the intellectual, moral, spiritual capital, gradually built up by previous generations, that is to say everything which has come to form the unique character of each nation.
On the other hand, we have the new and artificial homeland, the ideological nation, which rejects and hates national heritage. This is a new nation made of men who are supposedly equal and undifferentiated. The only thing these men have in common is their commitment to the revolutionary utopia, irrespective of their nationality. (12)
From this perspective, nationality no longer defines the individual; it is ideology which defines the individual and, according to this logic, the nation of heritage will gradually disappear to the point where it is no longer the defining framework or reference point for the citizen who is now a “citizen of the world”. Consequently, the nation is regarded as superfluous.
Such is the inherent and destructive logic of globalism, the product of the Masonic utopia, the disastrous consequences of which we can see today.
Jacques Ploncard d’Assac (14) made a cogent analysis of this programmed destruction:
“Nations no longer form a coherent whole.”
“Things have somehow lasted through force of habit, but, as the principles which form the idea of nation disappear, the masses become once again open to the artificial regroupings of stateless technocrats.”
“Societies are to be portrayed as being sorts of refugee camps where men from all over the world will work for an unnamed and gigantic company in exchange for a salary and a home, their work having no precise meaning in an extinct historical community”
This is precisely what certain groups, at the time of the Revolution, were fighting against. This is why the Freemason Weishaupt warned his followers of those he called “nationalists”. They were liable to endanger these Masonic and globalist ideas.
Once the monarchy gave way to revolutionary ideas and certain “initiated” members of the aristocracy, such as Philippe Egalité, started to collude with financial speculators (most of whom were either Jewish or Protestants from England) to corner the market for consumer goods in order to drive up their price (sparking widespread anger), the nationalist backlash, which worried Weishaupt, emerged by default from a monarchy which had surrendered its role. (12)
Understanding the darker purpose of the Masonic internationalist conspiracy, Joseph de Maistre (who had decided to leave both the Freemasons and the Martinist Order) had identified exactly what was really underlying the Revolution and where it would lead society and the nation (15). In a letter to viscount de Bonald, he wrote:
“Nations are destroyed by conquest, that is to say by invasion. But in this case we have an important question. Without being invaded or transplanted, can a nation die on its own soil just through decay, simply by letting corruption reach its heart and the founding principles which define its character? This is a serious and daunting problem. At this point, France and the French no longer exist. Rome is no longer in Rome and everything is lost.” (16)
This question precisely defines the process which began with the Revolution and which, if nations fail to take action, will conclude with the programmed destruction of nations. It is at the root of every nationalist analysis.
(1) Augustin Barruel. Mémoires pour servir à l‘Histoire du Jacobinisme.
(2) Humanisme. février 1998, p.1 78-1 79.
(3) ibid, juillet l969.
(4) ibid, N°219, décembre 1994, p. 51.
(5) Points de Vue Initiatiques, 1989, N°71.
(6) Jacques Ploncard d’ Assac. Le secret des Francs-maçons.
(7) Serge de Beketch wrote of him that he was his “dear friend”
(8) J. Baylet. Oswald Wirth, 1860-1943.
(9) Philippe Ploncard d’ Assac. Enquête sur la Nouvelle-Droite et ses Compagnons de route.
(10) His friendship and his literary dealings with the aetheist and now deceased Jean Mabire, editor of National Hebdo, are well known.
(11) Humanisme, N° 213, décembre, 1993, p. 93
(12) Philippe Ploncard d’Assac. Le Nationalisme français.
(13) Point de Vite Initiatique N° 97, mars 1995, p. 132,
(14) Jacques Ploncard d’ Assac. Les idées qui tuent, p. 34,
(15) The Freemasons and their supporters conceal his criticism of Masonic ideoglogy and the Revolution.
(16) Letter to viscount de Bonald, 1.12.1814, in Lettres et Opuscules, T. I. P· 243 ·
INTERNATIONAL FINANCE, REVOLUTIONS AND WARS
“Without being invaded or transplanted, can a nation die on its own soil just through decay, simply by letting corruption reach its heart and the founding principles which define its character?”
Joseph de Maistre’s question leads us to examine the means by which the “founding principles” of a nation are endangered.
We have already discussed the political and financial role of numerous Jews in the French Revolution, in particular Marat, Necker, Cloots and Weishaupt.
The means by which this plan is put into action are always the same, as demonstrated by declaration made by Paul Walberg, a Jewish financier, before the American Senate:
“We shall have world government, whether or not we like it. The question is only whether world government will be achieved by consent or by conquest.”
Twenty years later, Baron Edmond de Rothschild (1), comes back to the same obsession:
“The barrier which must be breached is the nation!”
Prior to this, certain members of the Jewish community, in particular Sigmund Warburg, Arman Hammer and Jakob Schiff, had supported the Bolshevik Revolution from its very beginning. This gives credence to what the American historian Ivor Benson (2) observed. He considered international Communism to be:
“The explosive needed to destroy Christian nations”
This explains the ease with which the Soviet Union collapsed. Once Communism had completed its designated task of destruction, it became more profitable for its backers, the cosmopolitan plutocracy, to open new markets in the ex-USSR by destroying it from the inside! There was no need for intervention by Pope Jean-Paul II, who had refused to sanctify Russia at the Sacré-Coeur. The globalist elite which had backed Communism decided to change its strategy, and this alone was enough for it to disappear. This is the truth of what appeared to be the opposition between cosmopolitan capitalism and Marxism, both of which are merely two sides of the same coin, namely atheist materialism, which is opposed to Christian society.
The continuation of this globalist desire to destroy nations can be seen in the statements made by French official representatives of Judaism, who express their hatred of France:
Bernard-Henry Lévy, (3)
“Hurray for everything which can contribute to the destruction of reactionary mythologies of the nation-state, chauvinistic nationalism, region, bagpipes and folklore”
The same hatred of the nation is also expressed by Georges-Marc Benamou (4) :
“Everything to do with region, berets, drunkenness, bagpipes, in short anything typically French and jingoistic is alien to us, not to say abhorrent”
As for Pierre Bergé, patron of the Globe and various gay magazines, he claimed that:
“Homeland is the most hateful word for us”
Us ? What does he mean by “us” ?! A statement made by Jean Khan, president of the Jewish European Congress, leaves no room for doubt:
“My political party is the Jewish people”
In addition, he considered that:
“Any form of reference to the baptism of Clovis constitutes a very strong incitement to racial hatred” and he called for a “crack down on any reference of this kind”
In the light of certain statements, we can see what lies behind this hatred of nations.
In his memoirs, the globalist Jean Monnet (7), one of the “fathers of Europe” and an American agent revealed the objective:
“The European community itself is merely a step towards the organizational structures of tomorrow”
This is what all Masonic orders declare, while obsessively striving for the creation of the Universal Republic, as we have seen above.
Jean Gandois, who was president of the CNPF (National Council of French Directors), made a revealing remark:
“Labour and national capital no longer serve the nation and its people” (8)
Who does benefit from them, then ? Felix Rohatyn was the American ambassador to France and the director of Lazare bank. He was also the head of the highly influential and highly secretive French-American Business Council (FABC). He gives us the answer:
“It is time to think about Europe in a new way, no longer as a group of nation-states but as constellation of dynamic cities and regions which will be our clients” (9)
Note that he doesn’t say “partners” but “clients”, meaning people fit only to buy their products…!
Likewise, during the American military operation against Serbia (a country which sought to protect the birthplace of its religious and national identity, Kosovo) the US chief of operations, General Michael Wesley Clark (10), declared in July 1999 on CNN that:
“There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states”
“That’s a 19th century idea, and we are preparing the transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multiethnic states.”
Again, notice this very revealing “we”.
These declarations concur with those made by the cosmopolitan financers Paul Walberg and Edmond de Rothschild for whom:
“The barrier which must be breached is the nation” (1) !
Aside from revolutions, we must also examine the way in which wars are used by the Freemasons as means of securing world domination.
There were two “sparks” in twentieth century history which triggered the globalist chain reaction. These events correspond to specific stages in the Masonic blueprint for the world. These events were engineered using the well-known technique of provocation:
The First World War: The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria by the terrorist Prinzip, a Jewish Freemason.
Léon de Poncins (11) notes that :
“Some authors have claimed that the war of 1914 was in fact a Jewish and Masonic war, perhaps triggered by them, or at least used by them, in order to achieve their objective. Indeed, they did benefit greatly from the Versailles Peace Treaty with the collapse of European monarchies, the democratisation of Europe, the break-up of Catholic Austria, the fact that financial power fell into Jewish hands, and the creation of the League of Nations, which had long been called for and heralded by the Jews and the Masonic lodges.”
We ought to touch upon the Sarajevo assassination, as it played a major role in the outbreak of the First World War. A high-ranking Swiss Freemason wrote a letter regarding the heir to the Austrian throne, the Archduke Franz Ferdinand. This letter was published on the 15 September 1912 by the Revue Internationale des Sociétés Secrètes, edited by Bishop Ernest Jouin:
“He is good, it’s a shame he is condemned”
“He will die on the steps to the throne”
On the 28 June, 1914, the heir to the Austrian throne and his wife were killed in Sarajevo.
The eight assassins were all members of the Serbian Masonic group Narodna Odbrana, similar to the Italian Carbonari.
The minutes of the trial leave us in no doubt that they were Freemasons, as were the instigators. (3).
Regarding the First World War, the F.A. Lebey (12), one of the official bodies of French Freemasonry, claimed at the time that:
“The current campaign is the continuation of that started in 1789”
And at the Masonic conference, held in Lisbon on 13 May 1917, the Portuguese Grand Master, Magalhaes de Lima, proclaimed:
“The allied victory will be the triumph of Masonic principles”
Thus the massacre of 1914-18 merely served to continue the destruction of political structures which obstructed the path to the Universal Republic.
The Second World War: The assassination of the German diplomat, Ernst von Rath, carried out by a Jew, Herschell Grynzspan, on November 1938 in Paris, led to an intensification of the crackdown on Jews by the Germans, who were already infuriated by the declaration of war by the Jewish world, published on the front page of The Daily Express on 24 March 1933: “Judea declares war on Germany”
Swept along by the rage of cosmopolitan pro-war propaganda, England and France were led to declare war against Germany. All European countries were weakened by this war, both victors and vanquished alike. This war opened the path leading to the destruction of colonial empires in Africa and Asia, much in the same way as this had been done for the Spanish and Portuguese Catholic empires in America. This marked a new phase in the globalist conspiracy to weaken European nations.
It is in this way that the globalists use revolutions and world wars in their quest for the Universal Republic.
(l) Entreprise, 18.7.1 970
(2) Ivor Benson, The Zionist Factor. The Noontide Press.
(3) France-Soir, 24.4.79
(4) Globe, N° I, 1988
(5) Quoted in Rivarol, 8.5.91.
(6) Tribune Juive, April, 1996.
(7) Jean Monnet revived the Crémieux decree, following the liberation of Paris. The decree, named after the president of the Alliance israélite universelle, granted French nationality to all Jewish Algerians, and excluded Muslims, sparking the revolt led by Mokrani, who had just fought for France in the war against Prussia in 1870 c.f. Le Nationalisme français, chap. VIII.
(8) Report for 11th Plan, p.274-275,
(9) Wall Street Journal, 7.5.99
(10) Whose surname at birth was in fact “Kanne” : his mother’s second husband gave him the name Clark.
(11) Léon de Poncins, La F.M.’. d’après ses documents secrets. p. 185-86
12) Albert Mousset. L’Attentat de Sarajevo. Court minutes of the trial.
(13) The regionalism of the pro-European new right is objectively the ally of globalism. cf. P. P. d’Assac. Enquête sur la Nouvelle-Droite et ses Compagnons
Translated from French
The original author was Philippe Ploncard d’Assac
Source: La Maçonnerie, pp 181 – 194