“He’s talking, of course, about references to The Illuminati and so forth” Gerard’s turn to be forthright, then, imho, he (“The International” never did seem to like the idea that some think themselves more illuminated than they), is talking b**locks my friend, quote; "It’s been said that Washington truly wanted to rid the American lodges of “Illuminati”, Quote; "It was some time since that a book fell into my hands entitled “Proofs of a Conspiracy &c. by John Robison,” which gives a full account of a Society of Freemasons, that distinguishes itself by the name of "Illuminati,” whose plan is to overturn all government and all religion, even natural; and who endeavour to eradicate every Idea of a Supreme Being, and distinguish man from beast by his shape only. A thought suggested itself to me, that some of the Lodges in the United States might have caught the infection, and might cooperate with the Illuminati or the Jacobine Club in France. Fauchet is mentioned by Robison as a zealous member: and who can doubt of Genet and Adet? Have not these their confidants in this country? They use the same expressions and are generally men of no religion. Upon serious reflection I was led to think that it might be within your power to prevent the horrid plan from corrupting the brethren of the English Lodge over which you preside.
I send you the “Proof of a Conspiracy &c.” which, I doubt not, will give you satisfaction and afford you matter for a train of ideas, that may operate to our national felicity. If, however, you have already perused the book, it will not, I trust, be disagreeable to you that I have presumed to address you with this letter and the book accompanying it. It proceeded from the sincerity of my heart and my ardent wishes for the common good.
May the Supreme Ruler of all Things continue you long with us in these perilous times: may he endow you with strength and wisdom to save our country in the threatening storms and gathering clouds of factions and commotions! and after you have completed his work on this terrene spot, may He bring you to the full possession of the glorious liberty of the children of god, is the hearty and most sincere wish of your excellency’s very humble and devoted servant
G. W. Snyder" Go to: To George Washington from G. W. Snyder, 22 August 1798
Where the “Illuminati” came from, quote; "Born in 1748 in Ingolstadt, a city in the Electorate of Bavaria (now part of modern-day Germany), Weishaupt was a descendant of Jewish converts to Christianity. Orphaned at a young age, his scholarly uncle took care of his education, and enrolled him in a Jesuit school. After completing his studies, Weishaupt became a professor of natural and canon law at the University of Ingolstadt, married, and started a family. On the surface, it was a conventional enough career—until 1784 when the Bavarian state learned of his incendiary ideas.
A closer look at his upbringing, however, reveals that Weishaupt always had a restless mind. As a boy he was an avid reader, consuming books by the latest French Enlightenment philosophers in his uncle’s library. Bavaria at that time was deeply conservative and Catholic. Weishaupt was not the only one who believed that the monarchy and the church were repressing freedom of thought.
Convinced that religious ideas were no longer an adequate belief system to govern modern societies, he decided to find another form of “illumination,” a set of ideas and practices that could be applied to radically change the way European states were run.
Freemasonry was steadily expanding throughout Europe in this period, offering attractive alternatives to freethinkers. Weishaupt initially thought of joining a lodge. Disillusioned with many of the Freemasons’ ideas, however, he became absorbed in books dealing with such esoteric themes as the Mysteries of the Seven Sages of Memphis and the Kabbala, and decided to found a new secret society of his own." Go to: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/archaeology-and-history/magazine/2016/07-08/profile-adam-weishaupt-illuminati-secret-society/
for full article.
Ideas (if they do indeed contain any rationale), persist far longer than their instigators, the Illuminati cannot (and must not), simply be dismissed. There is little doubt in my mind that the conflict between The Freemasons and The Illuminati still goes on especially in America. These are powerful and influential people, people who must fill their lives with something and rely on a binding other than the mere brute struggle for capital that would otherwise have them tearing each other’s throats out on a daily basis, such is; “bad for business Luigi” there has to be a “code”." https://www.arafel.co.uk/2018/02/part-1-of-discussion-concerning.html
"Nb. The Washington Post article leads with the an argument concerning the classification of acts of terror perpetrated on children not how such numbers simply don’t compare to those of the rest of the world! Is it any kind of coincidence that The Washington Post changed its motto to; “Democracy Dies in Darkness” last year?
Quote; ""Hannah Arendt takes the proverbial expression of “the pursuit of happiness” in the United States Declaration of Independence - where pursuing “happiness” is considered an “inalienable right” - and offers a public reading of it, a reading that expands that happiness to include the freedom to participate in the public life. The revolutionary spirit must translate into the institutionalised forms of that public happiness. Public happiness is definitive to Arendt’s very conception of politics.
Extending Thomas Jefferson’s ideals, Arendt argues;
“If the ultimate end of revolution was freedom and the constitution of a public space where freedom could appear, then… no one could be called happy without his share of public happiness, that no one could be called free without his experience in public freedom, and that no one could be called happy or free without participating, and having a share, in public power.”" Go to: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/06/20126187529252770.html
for full article.
“This is why Jefferson advocated the ward system so strongly—it would have allowed every citizen to participate in the governance of the state, and thus, to be able to actually pursue public happiness. Today, not only is the “pursuit of happiness” understood exclusively as the pursuit of private happiness, but we have also forgotten the origins and the spirit of the American Revolution. That phoenix was reborn once from the ashes of the Dark Ages, and perhaps, as long as there are great minds like those of Arendt left to conceptualize and pursue it, will be reborn again.” Go to: http://fadeyev.net/public-happiness/
for full article.
…and this from, “The Atlantic”,
Quote; “Conservatives argue that the American Revolution exalted the individual. Certainly, the colonists didn’t want the British Crown telling them what to do. But the Revolution wasn’t just about getting the government out of people’s lives so the Founders could pursue their private desires.
George Washington and Thomas Jefferson had nice houses. They could have enjoyed contented private lives. But it was not just about their property. *They believed that you attained happiness, not merely through the goods you accumulated, or in your private life, but through the good that you did in public. People were happy when they controlled their destiny, when their voice was heard, when they participated in public events, when the government did not do things to them, or even for them, but with them.**” Go to: The Pursuit of Happiness: What the Founders Meant—And Didn't - The Atlantic for full article.
*Italics mine Ed.
"Public Happiness"
All three of the articles above touch on the rumoured conspiracy that, “The pursuit of happiness”, the phrase that appears in The Declaration of Independence that is held in the National Archives Museum in Washington, was not the original phraseology as it appeared in a preceding document (signed by possibly more -or the same number-, of the Founding Fathers than the other). Arendt would I think agree that as the upshot of “The American Revolution” was to see the instigation of, “perpetual war” between the republic and democracy and if, “by their works shall ye now them” it would not be surprising to discover that an earlier more egalitarian drafting of The Declaration existed. The notion that the learned elders were incapable of explicating from both the British and (at that time burgeoning), French revolutions a more egalitarian (and enlightened), conception of social well-being and social order seems most errant nonsense and is given no credence by the correspondence quoted in my previous post warning Washington of the influence of Illuminati, “free-marketeers” within the American Lodges. This “preceding document” to which I refer is supposed to have contained the phrase; “the pursuit of public happiness” rather than the shorter apparently more individualistic but nevertheless subject-less (and therefore meaningless?), one that appears on the version that is extant*, it has also been suggested that Washington and others were responsible for secreting the original document away from the centres of power and beyond-the-gaze of those who wanted its destruction. That we now see how America continually, “makes its war on its children” should also give credence to the notion that The New World never did truly sever its links with the old and simply substituted a dictatorial republican hierarchy for a monarchical one, that these same republicans should have been relying so heavily on our queen in order to maintain the status quo and further their own social- Darwinist agenda in recent years also suggests that the full story of The American Revolution (and how it is not yet over), has been deliberately kept from the American people.
One may argue that the Democrats seem to have no place in the conspiracy but surely as they see democracy as being at odds with the republic they too have a stake? This unresolved conflict has resulted in suffering and death not only for America’s own people but for the people of The World now also." https://www.arafel.co.uk/2018/02/part-2-washingtonpost.html
*So beware, all you closet totalitarians, who do these people think they are?
"This being just another pill-to-swallow having been pre-medicated with the trope that; “socialism is communism”, quote; “That we now see how America continually, “makes its war on its children” should also give credence to the notion that the New World never did truly sever its links with the old but simply substituted a dictatorial republican hierarchy for a monarchical one” (go to: “Arafel”: Part. 2 #WashingtonPost #FloridaSchoolShooting ). Since Reaganomics in the U.S and Thatcherism in the U.K the notion that one may conflate socialism with communism has been promulgated with increasing vigour and enthusiasm by the data-vampires and opinion formers giving the idea the appearance of a meme, ignorance is no defence under law, however, the populace may better understand the dangers of such conflation if the results are made clear to them.
#makingshoeswhatdoesitlooklikeImdoing?
The photo above is of E.F. Schumacher (both the college and the institute which bear his name are located in the West Country not a million miles from the venue for the G7 summit, go to: https://www.schumachercollege.org.uk/ & https://www.schumacherinstitute.org.uk/), a “mixed economy” man who expounded the theory that the individual, communal and social realms need to be in balance, each with equal “weight” and import being ascribed to them, within an economy that perforce is dynamic. Thus capital, community and society form an equilateral triangle that provides the stability necessary for the emerging economy and the “cross-pollination” that can occur within such a system ensuring the biodiversity that is the engine of sustainability. A good exemplar of the principle is the fuel supply issue for, as we are now experiencing, over-reliance on any resource creates a monoculture (brittle and hugely destructive when they fail), introducing massive instability, therefore, it is surely sensible to attempt to diversify in terms of energy production. It’s an old story, in order to make use of more sustainable (and concomitantly less environmentally destructive), resources initial investment in infrastructure is essential, cleaning up our mistakes after we have made them being, of-course, a horribly inefficient option, however, these problems only occur when we attempt to exploit resources not when we use them sensibly.
It is in order to continue to exploit resources of all kinds that the attempt has been made to convince the global electorate that a socially dominant economic model is the same as a communal one. It’s called “divide and rule”, which in this case means “freedom or slavery", and is sold to the people as a simple choice between the reassuring gewgaws of the neo-liberal state or enslavement in a drab totalitarian one (anarchy being “Bellum omnium contra omnes”, the terrible “war of all against all”, is Khaos of-course).
Quote; ““Either/or democracy is the dalliance of the totalitarian”” Go to: "Arafel": #Yugoslavia, #NATO, #Brexit, the #EuropeanUnion and the #Euromerta (a response to the dreadful neo-lib/con whitewashing of the sepulchre by #PBS: "#TheBalkansinFlames")
Socialist systems rely on the institutions of the state (many of which being pre-existing), to run the economy, communist systems rely on communes to dictate to (and often form), state institutions. The notions are very different, for a socialist there is no “communal filter” between the individual and the insitutions of the state but for a communist the state doesn’t exist without one (the capitalist, of-course, their actions being anathema to community, doesn’t believe in society at all). This exemplifies the veracity of the maxim; “the trouble with “-isms” is that they are full of “-ists”!”" https://www.arafel.co.uk/2021/06/a-dangerous-conflation-socialism.html
Typical blinkered fool; “mind-bogglingly stupid animal, it assumes that if you can’t see it, it can’t see you!” #RavenousBugblatterBeastofTraal He talks the talk of “Democracy Now” but has he any idea what that means?
“Schumacher and emergent economic theory allow for no dominant political ideology. So where is democracy? Well for one thing it ought to be clear by now that politics al.la the Industrial Revolution model is on its last legs, the G7 summit will be tackling the global problems of environmental damage, lack of biodiversity and sustainability issues that barely got a mention in the mainstream media (MSM), a hundred years ago. This macrocosm shines a light on the microcosm of our individual politics, whereby, we will become aware that democracy is process, it must always be thus for should we ever manifest “true democracy” we will have achieved totality…” (and time is relative), …
G
