Origin of Ideology of lluminati of Bavaria
The Illuminati of Bavaria: Origins of Its Ideology
Rousseau Was Primary Origin of Its Ideology
The Illuminati were a group aiming to inaugurate a libertarian communist world structured on a cosmopolitan model where conflict among nations would be mediated so that the original family of man would be restored. The Illuminati of Bavaria were an important catalyst of social movements in Europe (in particular France) from 1780-1794. Their ideology predominantly came from Rousseau.
Contents
Rousseau's Influence
The French Masonic dictionary article “Illuminés de Bavière” says that the “philosophical and religious principles of the [Illuminati] Order were based on... the influence of Rousseau....” [1]
a. Cosmopolitanism
In 1761, Jean-Jacques Rousseau re-published a book by Abbé St. Pierre (1658-1743) which advocated a cosmopolitan world federation. Rousseau's work was entitled Extrait Du Projet de Paix Perpetuelle De M. L’Abbé de Saint-Pierre (1761). Rousseau incorporated St. Pierre’s work verbatim. Rousseau also added some important new points and ideas. Rousseau proposed that a federation of at least “all important powers” was needed. It must have a legislative body with powers to pass laws binding upon all member states. “It must have coercive force capable of compelling every state to obey its common resolves...,” Rousseau said. It also must be strong enough to prevent withdrawal of any state. He proposed the nineteen major powers of the world should form one government (only excluding China and Africa). Rousseau lamented, however, that “No [such] federation could ever be established except by a revolution.” To pass the censor, he then says: “That being so, which of us would dare to say whether the League of Europe is a thing to be desired or feared? It would perhaps do more harm in a moment than it would guard against for ages.”[2]
Abbé St. Pierre's original book was entitled Projet de Paix Perpetuelle (Utrecht: Schouten, 1717).St. Pierre wrote: “it is necessary at the beginning to impose silence on all the world... and behold (voilá) the authority and prudence of the Union will have been made infallible within all the states of Europe.” To impose such silence against any one who objected to the union, St. Pierre called for a centralized army to “put down rebellion within states” where “these terrible revolts, that sort of disease of the state, can be stopped only by an absolutely inevitable and very great punishment against the conspirators.” Of course, armies would also “punish nations which violate the peace,” and that included nations who refuse to join the union.[3]
This new union's existence justified citizens of other states subverting their nation in service of this greater union. When a resisting government was subject to external attack, this justified subversion from within. St. Pierre said that international law now should recognize that the citizens of such a ruler “are no longer bound to him, but to the new collective republic,” as Perkins explains the Projet.[4]
No wonder Rousseau said such a union can only come about by a revolution.
This cosmopolitan idea, among many taught by Rousseau, became a cardinal principle of the Illuminati of Bavaria.
Incidentally, Voltaire revolted at this idea. Voltaire commented that St. Pierre “is continually harping upon perpetual peace, and a sort of universal parliament, which he called the Diet of Europe” and Voltaire called it a “chimerical project.”[5]
b. Marriage Was Unnatural; Libertarian World Was Natural
Rousseau in his Discourse on Inequality (1754) observed the negative impact that marriage had on society. Rousseau contended it was the root cause of violence between men, and the unfortunate rise of civilization.[6]Rousseau idealized, rather, the Nomadic existence of man prior to domestication in marriage partnerships where man was free of constraint either by unequal property rights, or by the need to obey any political authority or by obligations to a spouse. In the “original state of nature,” Rousseau said individuals “lived isolated nomadic lives, totally devoid of contact or cooperation except for momentary and chance encounters that satisfied their sexual impulses.”[7] This world prior to civilization was best: “We could have avoided nearly all of them [e.g., problems caused by civilization] by keeping the simple, regular, and solitary way of life prescribed by nature.”[8]. Restoring man to the state of nature should be our goal, Rousseau insisted. It “is the one that best assures peace, and the most advantageous to mankind.”[9]
c. No Property; The Original Nomadic Life Was Preferable
In that preferred state of nature, no one owns anything. Rousseau proclaims: “You are lost if you forget that the fruit of the earth belongs to everyone, and the earth to no single person.”[10] Rousseau claimed that the state of nature was “mankind’s happiest and most stable epoch.” He continued: “The more we reflect on it, the more clearly we see that this state was the least subject to upheavals and the best for man, and that he must have left it as the result of some unfortunate accident which, for the common good, should never have happened.” Rousseau concluded that our discovery of island savages “seem to confirm the view that the human race was meant to remain in it forever....”[11]
d. Nomadic Life without Child-Rearing Responsibilities
Rousseau taught in the idealized state of nature, as soon as the suckling period was over for the child, and “it could fend for itself, the child would go off, and the two [i.e., mother and child] would no longer recognize each other.”[12] With this theory in mind, Rousseau taught that in order to restore the state of nature today means that modern education must cease imparting the current ideas and mores of society to the young child. The child should learn only from experience, just as in the state of nature, and not from its parents who in the state of nature would have anyway quickly abandoned them. Rousseau thus taught, as Zeldin says, that children “should not be abandoned to their parents’ educational whims and fancies.”[13]
e. Praise for Machiavelli and Perhaps His Maxim: the 'End Justifies the Means'
Finally, Rousseau in his Essay on Inequality said true “republicans” had to admire the teachings of Nicolas Machiavelli in the Prince which could help true republicans to success. These maxims included the ‘end justifies the means.’ Rousseau then comments: “The people’s maxims are inscribed at length in the archives of history and in Machiavelli’s satires.”[14] The claim by Rousseau that Machiavelli was being satirical in telling a prince how to control his subjects was meant to read The Prince on a different level. Rousseau claimed that Machiavelli intended his works to tell the people what they needed to do to thwart princes and monarchs. Machiavelli, Rousseau contended, only wanted to appear to tell a prince how to thwart the will of the people. For example, Rousseau said Machiavelli was being satirical when he wrote, addressing an imaginary king, that the prime interest of the king is that the people should be weak, wretched, and unable to resist his will. To this proposition, Rousseau comments that “while appearing to instruct Kings he has done much to educate the people. Machiavelli’s book The Prince is for republicans.”[15] Thus, Keith Ansell-Pearson explains: “Rousseau was also a great admirer of Machiavelli, and regarded his masterpiece The Prince as a satirical work in which Machiavelli, for certain practical reasons (namely, seeking a job from the Medicis), concealed his real political morality, which for Rousseau was one of patriotism and republicanism.”
Hence, the Republican aiming at freedom and revolution could use Machiavelli as a blueprint for a republican revolution.
Conclusion
In sum, the Illuminati of Bavaria adopted social messages from Rousseau, and thus more explicitly taught:
a. taking education of children away from their parents and giving them ideals compatible with republicanism;
b. republicanism would be founded by Machiavellian principles of the end justifies the means;
c. the end product would be a society without property and wholly libertarian, like a nomad would enjoy;
d. the world would form a world union of various states coordinating efforts to subjugate the rest to fulfill a plan of reuniting the original family of man.
Hence, the Illuminati's dream of a cosmopolitan communistic and libertarian world originated with Rousseau.
For more information, you can purchase my book Illuminati Manifesto of World Revolution (1792) by Nicolas Bonneville published in 2011, with extensive material on the Illuminati at this Amazon link.
References
Dictionnaire de la Franc-Maçonnerie (Daniel Ligou, Ed.) (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1987) at 603.
See Art & Jervis, International Politics, Anarchy, Force, Imperialism (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1973) at 79, quoting J.J. Rousseau, A Lasting Peace through the Federation of Europe and the State of War (trans. C.E. Vaughan) (London: Constable, 1917). See also C.E. Vaughan, The Political Writings of Jean Jacques Rousseau (Cambridge, Great Britain: University Press, 1915) at 364-74.
Abbé St. Pierre, Projet de Paix Perpetuelle (Utrecht: Schouten, 1717) I, 250 (terrible revolts), 292 (impose silence); III, 51-52 (vengeance by police).
Merle L. Perkins, The Moral and Political Philosophy of Abbé St. Pierre (Geneva & Paris: 1959) at 62 (internal army), 96, 136, 137-38 (not bound to ruler, but to international union).
(Voltaire,The Works of M. de Voltaire (ed. Tobias George Smollett, Thomas Francklin) (London: Newberry, 1761) Vol. IX at 288. See link: http://books.google.com/books?id=EzcLAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA288
J.J. Rousseau, “Discourse on Inequality Among Men,” in The Essential Rousseau (Trans. Lowell Bair) (New York: Mentor Book 1974) at 167 (because marriage did not exist in the state of nature and there was no natural bond to anyone else like a family, there was little violence in the state of nature, and hence no oppression.)
John T Scott, Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Routledge, 2006) at 133 (summarizing the Second Discourse on Inequality).
J.J. Rousseau, “Discourse on Inequality Among Men,” in The Essential Rousseau (Trans. Lowell Bair) (New York: Mentor Book 1974) at 150.
J.J. Rousseau, “Discourse on Inequality Among Men,” in The Essential Rousseau (Trans. Lowell Bair) (New York: Mentor Book 1974) at 163.
J.T. Scott, supra, at 133-34.
J.J. Rousseau, “Discourse on Inequality Among Men,” in The Essential Rousseau (Trans. Lowell Bair) (New York: Mentor Book 1974) at 179.
J.T. Scott, supra, at 133-34.
David Zeldin, The Educational Ideas of Charles Fourier (1772-1837) (Frank Cass, 1969) at 35.
Economie Politique, OC Vol. 3 at 247 (trans. Cole 1952) at 370, quoted in Maurizio Viroli, Derek Hanson, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the 'Well-Ordered Society' (Cambridge University Press, 2003) at 168.
Maurizio Viroli, Derek Hanson, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the 'Well-Ordered Society' (Cambridge University Press, 2003) at 169 (quoting Rousseau).