Apocalypse of Marx

THE FIRST FRENCH Revolution of 1789 marked the beginning of a long series of uprisings in France. A new Duke of Orleans, Louis-Philippe, became the figurehead of a July 1830 revolt which placed him on the throne of France as the ruler of a constitutional monarchy. Assisting him was the Marquis de La Fayette. Another of Louis-Philippe's important backers was a man named Louis-Auguste Blanqui, who was decorated by the new government for helping to make the 1830 revolution a success. Blanqui remained an active revolutionary after 1830 and provided significant leadership for a long string of uprisings. According to Julius Braunthal, writing in his book, History of the International, "Blanqui was the inspiration of all uprisings in Paris from 1839 to the Commune* in 1871."1 

*The Commune was a revolutionary group which governed Paris from March 18 to May 28, 1871 Blanqui belonged to a network of French secret societies which organized and planned the revolutions. Nearly all of those secret societies were outgrowths of Brotherhood activity and were patterned after Brotherhood organizations. Each  society had a different function and ideological foundation for drawing people into the revolutionary cause. Although the revolutionary societies sometimes differed in matters of ideology and tactics, they had one objective in common: to bring on the revolution. Many revolutionary leaders participated in several of these organizations simultaneously. One of the most effective of the secret French revolutionary groups was the Society of the Seasons, over which Blanqui shared leadership. This society was designed explicitly for the purpose of hatching and carrying out political conspiracies. One of the Society's allied organizations was the "League of the Just." The League of the Just was founded in 1836 as a secret society and it aided Blanqui and the Society of the Seasons in at least one revolt: the uprising of May 1839. A few years after that uprising, the League was joined by a man who would later become the revolutionaries' most famous spokesperson: Karl Marx. Karl Marx was a German who lived from 1813 until 1883. He is considered by many to be the founder of modern communism. His writings, especially the Communist Manifesto, are an important cornerstone of communist ideology. As some historians have pointed out, however, Karl Marx did not originate all of his ideas. He was acting largely as a spokesperson for the radical political organization to which he belonged. It was during his membership in the League of the Just that Marx penned the Communist Manifesto with his friend, Friedrich Engels. Although the Manifesto contained many of Marx's own ideas, its true accomplishment was to put into coherent form the communist ideology which was already inspiring the secret societies of France into revolt. Because of his intellect, Marx gained considerable power within the League of the Just, and his influence caused a few changes within that organization. Marx did not like the romantic conspiratorial character of the secret society network to which he belonged and he was able to do away with some of those traits within the League. In 1847, the name of the League was changed to "Communist League." Associated with the Communist League were various "workers" organizations, such as the German Worker's Educational Society (GWES). Marx founded a branch of the GWES in Brussels, Belgium. At this point, we can see the extraordinary irony in these events. The same network of Brotherhood organizations which had given us the United States and other "capitalist" countries through revolution, was now actively creating the ideology (communism) which would oppose those countries! It is crucial that this point be understood: both sides of the modern "communist vs. capitalist" struggle were created by the same people in the same network of secret Brotherhood organizations. This vital fact is almost always overlooked in history books. Within a short one hundred year period, the Brotherhood network had given the world two opposing philosophies which provided the entire foundation for the so-called "Cold War": a conflict that lasted nearly half a century. Considering the affiliation of Karl Marx to the Brotherhood network, it should come as no surprise that Marx's philosophy follows the basic pattern of Custodial religion. Marxism is strongly apocalyptic. It teaches a "Final Battle" creed involving forces of "good" and "evil" followed by a Utopia on Earth. The primary difference is that Marx molded those beliefs into a nonreligious framework and tried to make them sound like a social "science" rather than a religion. In Marx's scheme, the forces of "good" are represented by the oppressed "working classes," and "evil" is represented by the ownership classes. Violent conflict between the two classes is portrayed as natural, inevitable, and ultimately healthy because such conflict will eventually result in the emergence of a Utopia on Earth. Marx's idea of inevitable class tension reflects the Calvinist belief that conflict on Earth is healthy because it means that the forces of "good" are actively battling the minions of "bad." Marx tried to make his "inevitable conflict" idea sound scientific by fitting it into a concept known as the "dialectic." The "dialectic" was a notion espoused by another German philosopher, Hegel (1770-1831). Hegel's idea of the "dialectic" can be explained this way: from a thesis (an idea or concept) and an antithesis (a contradictory opposite) one can derive a synthesis (a new idea or concept which is different than the first two, but is a product of them). Marx took this seemingly scientific idea and incorporated it into his theory of social history. In the communist model of "dialectical materialism," social, economic, and political change arises out of the clash of contradictory, and often violent, opposites. In this way, the endless wars of history and the unceasing array of opposing factions on Earth are said to be a natural part of existence out of which all social change must occur. This makes endless social conflict seem desirable, and that is precisely the illusion Marx tried to convey in his "class struggle" theory. The communist vision of Utopia is a curious, but significant one. In it, everyone is a worker equal to every other worker. No one owns anything but everyone together owns everything; everybody gets everything they need but not necessarily everything they want; but before this Utopia occurs, everyone must first live in a dictatorship. Whew! This bizarre vision of Utopia seems clearly designed to maintain mankind as a work race and to encourage humans to accept conditions of social repression (i.e., dictatorship). By Marx's lifetime, spiritual knowledge had reached a severe state of decay. The "quickie salvation" of the Protestants and the embarrassing rituals practiced by nearly all religions were understandably driving many rationally-minded people out of religion altogether. It is not surprising that the validity of all spiritual reality began to be questioned. This questioning led many people to lean towards a strictly materialist outlook on life, and Marx provided a philosophy for many of those people to step into. Although Marx acknowledged the reality of spiritual existence, he erroneously stated that spiritual existence was entirely the product of physical and material phenomena. In this way, Marx's teachings helped promote the Custodial aims expressed in the Book of Mormon and in ancient Sumerian tablets of bringing about a permanent union between spiritual beings and human bodies. Marx's writings gave this union "scientific" acceptability by suggesting that spirit and matter could not be separated at all. Marxist philosophy added that "supernatural" reality (i.e., reality existing outside the bounds of the material universe) is not possible. Marx's Utopia therefore amounts to a Biblical Eden: a materialistic paradise in which everyone is a worker with no route to spiritual knowledge and freedom; in other words, a pampered spiritual prison. During the same era in which communism was being shaped into an organized movement, the practice of banking was undergoing important developments. By the late 19th century, the new system of inflatable paper money was the established norm throughout the world. This money system was not adequately organized on an international scale, however, and that was the next step: to create a permanent worldwide central banking network which could be coordinated from a single fixed location. One scholar to write about this development was the late Dr. Carroll Quigley, professor at Harvard, Princeton, and the Foreign Service School of Georgetown University, Dr. Quigley's book, Tragedy and Hope, A History of the World in Our Time, achieved a degree of fame because it was used by some members of the John Birch Society to prove their "Communist Conspiracy" ideas. Putting this notoriety aside, we find that Dr. Quigley's book is exhaustively researched and well worth reading. Dr. Quigley was not a "conspiracy buff," but was a highly-respected professor with outstanding academic credentials. Dr. Quigley's book describes in great detail the development and workings of the international banking community as it established the inflatable paper money system throughout the world. Let us take a brief look at what Dr. Quigley had to say.