Revolution for World’s End
Sietze Bosman sheds light on the continuity of dark, occult forces driving revolutions from the past into the present, revealing a sinister strategy of manipulation by those in power.
The French Revolution of 1789 showed us a blueprint of the machinations of revolution, which would become the signature of an occult force driving revolutions around the world. The French Revolution was geared entirely towards the destruction of the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie. This is a hallmark of the revolutionary serpent and can be found as fingerprints on many of the revolutions that followed. The aristocracy was largely based on hereditary status, but as they were also the highest educated, they certainly could be considered intelligentsia. The very demographic the revolutionary monster likes best as petit fours. The leviathan of upheaval has, throughout history, gluttonously devoured all the best and brightest of the people.
Although these revolutionary manoeuvres have been clad in terms of “equality,” there has been a very dark esotericism beneath these maniacal mass murders of the best and brightest.
The result of the destruction of the aristocracy and much of the bourgeoisie was that there was no longer any employment for the artisans in the country. The aristocracy was a very large employer of scores of people who manufactured all the fancy needs of the wealthy. These were now out of work. And thus, the revolutionaries were faced with a dilemma. What to do about the now useless workers?
...but towards the end of 1793, it became evident that there was no possibility of absorbing the residuum created, for the attacks on the manufacturing towns of France had dealt the final blow to trade and the Republic found itself faced by hundreds of thousands of working-men for whom it could not find employment. It was then that the Comité de Salut Public, anticipating the Malthusian theory, embarked on its fearful project — the system of depopulation.
N. H. Webster, World Revolution, p. 46.
After the main revolutionary thrust, the country plummeted into utter chaos and the people found themselves not just wanting work, but food, money, and property were all in extremely short supply. And so the revolutionaries set out, over some crêpes I should think, to conjure up a policy that would serve as the legal foundation of the extermination of the “useless eaters.”
“In the eyes of Maximilien Robespierre and his council,” says Babeuf, “depopulation was indispensable because the calculation had been made that the French population was in excess of the resources of the soil and of the requirements of useful industry, that is to say, that with us men jostled each other too much for each to be able to live at ease; that hands were too numerous for the execution of all works of essential utility — and this is the horrible conclusion, that since the superabundant population could only amount to so much ... a portion of sans-culottes must be sacrificed; that this rubbish could be cleared up to a certain quantity, and that means must be found for doing it.
N. H. Webster, World Revolution, p. 47
The system of the terror that sprouted from the genocidal phantasies of the revolutionaries was thus not, as most of us learned in school, a terror upon the oppressing aristocracy; it was, in fact, a system of extermination of the superfluous masses left bereft of usefulness by the revolution. The published revolutionary tribunal records reflect exactly this; of the three hundred thousand people executed, in whatever form, only three thousand were aristocrats. The sans-culottes were the useful masses used as foot soldiers by the dark revolutionary forces. The revolution owed its successful execution of the revolution to these masses, yet the inner core of revolutionaries was callously planning to eliminate millions of them, as they wanted to reduce the population from twenty-five million to fourteen million, or even to eight million, depending on the source.
Mainstream history would have us believe that the French Revolution was a resounding success, even if the means were dreadful. The horrible, debauched aristocracy was finally dethroned and now the liberated people could finally live out their peaceful dreams in a fair and equal republic. Nothing could be further from the truth. France was utterly broken by the revolution. M. Madelin puts it thus:
France is demoralized. She is exhausted — this is the last trait of this country in ruins. There is no longer any public opinion, or rather this opinion is made up only of hatred. They hate the Directors (members of the Directory) and they hate the deputies; they hate the Terrorists and they hate the Chouans (the Royalists of La Vendée); they hate the rich and they hate the anarchists; they hate the Revolution and the counterrevolution. … But where hatred reaches paroxysm is in the case of the newly rich. What is the good of having destroyed kings, nobles, and aristocrats, when deputies, farmers, and tradesmen take their place? What cries of hatred! ... Of all the ruins found and increased by the Directory — ruins of parties, ruins of power, ruins of national representation, ruins of churches, ruins of finances, ruins of homes, ruins of consciences, ruins of intellects — there is nothing more pitiable than this: the ruin of the national character.
M. Madelin, La Revolution, p. 443.
As far as can be known, no example has occurred in history before the French Revolution where there was actual intent by those in power to eliminate millions of their own people. What could have caused such a hatred towards the people? Was it mere dispassionate mathematics? A cold and calculated conclusion based on ratios? No, there were very dark influences involved in bringing this catastrophe about. Here we see, for the first time in history, a well-documented revolution that was fully initiated by dark occult and secret elements within France. It was illuminated freemasonry that acted as an incendiary force through clandestine influence and power play.
Aloys Hoffman, the editor of the Journal de Vienne, wrote: “I shall never cease to repeat that the Revolution has come from Masonry and that it was made by writers and the Illuminati.”
Adam Weishaupt created a system of how to construct a secret society. This system is fundamentally based on a hierarchy of thirteen degrees. To the observant, the number thirteen shall be quite familiar as the seal of the one-dollar bill reflects this order. A pyramid with thirteen layers of bricks and the all-seeing eye on top. An image wreathed with the words Novus ordo seclorum, “new world order.” When we observe the great seal of the United States, we see thirteen red and white banners in the U.S. flag, thirteen stars, and thirteen arrows. The phrase E pluribus unum contains thirteen letters. Now, all of this is explained as symbolic of the first and original thirteen states of the union that came into being in 1776. However, the Constitution was written based on the constitution of the Jacobin French Revolution. Both have the Declaration of the Rights of Man as their basis. This declaration was based on enlightened (read illumined) philosophy. And Thomas Jefferson was actually among those who framed this document. The very foundations of the United States are replete with Masons and Masonic and illumined symbolism.
This is important to mention as there is good evidence that many nations that adopted a constitution did so because the hidden forces of illuminism were driving the creation and implementation of these constitutions. When researching this topic, one finds a strange common substance in these constitutions, even though the countries and their nations are vastly different from each other.
The Russian Revolution seems, at first hand, an event that has nothing to do with events in the West. But, here again, we can trace the revolutionary poison of the Jacobins all the way to the Russian Revolution of 1917. Gracchus Babeuf himself uttered the prophetic words:
The French Revolution is only the forerunner of another revolution, very much greater, very much more solemn, and which will be the last!
To the observant reader studying these seemingly divergent revolutionary epochs, the French and the Russian revolutions seem like twins born from one dark and twisted mind. The revolutions were both directed by the socialist (illumined) bourgeois, using the sans-culottes and the proletariat as stormtroopers against the landed aristocracy. Both revolutions were started by covert forces stirring unrest among the working class, fomenting strikes through unions, spreading deflagratory propaganda through clandestine publications, and using violence and murder to further their aims. Ultimately, it stoked the fires of discontent to such a degree that open revolution was inevitable.
As soon as the revolution was out in the open, the aristocracy was rounded up and killed off. But where mainstream history books tell us that was the single and sole aim of the revolutions is bitterly misinformed as both the French and Russian revolutionary machines quickly turned on their own people. The Robespierrian plan to exterminate millions of French seems eerily similar to the massive factory-style killings executed under the orders of Lenin. In fact, these revolutions are so similar, Webster puts it thus:
Not only is there an exact analogy between the revolutions of France and Russia, but as everyone who has studied the latter movement knows, the Russian Revolution from November 1917 onwards was a direct continuation of the French. This was admitted by the Bolsheviks themselves, who repeatedly declared that the first French Revolution must be copied in every detail, and who from the outset took Marat and Robespierre as their models.
N. H. Webster, World Revolution, p. 281
The battle plan of the French Revolution was adopted as the very blueprint for the Russian Revolution. Lenin himself elucidates the matter with a statement made in The Soviets At Work, p. 8:
What is the first stage? It is the transfer of power to the capitalist class (bourgeoisie). Up to the March Revolution of 1917, power in Russia was in the hands of one ancient class, namely the feudalist-aristocratic-landowning class headed by Nicholas Romanov. After that revolution, power has been in the hands of a different, a new class, namely the capitalist class (the bourgeoisie). The shifting of power from one class to another is the first, the main, fundamental symptom of a revolution, both in the strictly scientific and the practical political sense of the word.
This battle plan lays out all the steps of wrestling the power from the ancien regime to the bourgeois, to the proletariat, and eventually to a despotic clique of violent extremists. The end result of the people’s revolutions was the utter enslavement of those very people.
Did, then, the Russian revolutionaries simply read up on the French Revolution? No, both revolutions were underpinned by the ideas made public by Babeuf but originated with Adam Weishaupt. The Bolshevik Revolution, in fact, followed the code of Weishaupt in every point — the abolition of monarchy, abolition of patriotism, abolition of private property and inheritance, abolition of marriage and morality, and abolition of all religion.
N. H. Webster lays out some compelling facts about the similarity between the revolutions, not only of 1789 and 1917 but also of 1776:
1. That although the grievances of the people throughout this period have varied according to the changing conditions of our civilization, the program of the social revolution has never varied. For if the succeeding outbreaks had been made by the people each would have been distinguished by different war cries, different aims arising from the exigencies of the moment; instead of this each outbreak has been carried on to the same slogans, has repeated the same catch-words, and each has been directly copied from the earliest — and until 1917 the most successful — attempt, the first French Revolution.
2. That the leaders of the movement have never, in a single instance, been men of the people, but always members of the upper or middle classes who could not by any possibility be regarded as victims of oppression.
3. That, with rare exceptions such as Louis Blanc, they invariably displayed complete unconcern for the sufferings of the people and a total disregard for human life. No instance has ever been recorded of pity or sympathy displayed by the Terrorists of France towards any individual members of the working classes; on the contrary, they turned a deaf ear to all complaints. The Marxists and Bakuninists mutually accused each other of regarding the people as ‘cannon fodder.’
4. That each outbreak has occurred not when the cause of the people was hopeless but on the eve of great reforms.
5. That each has been followed not by reform but by a period of reaction. For twenty years after the first French Revolution the very word ‘reform’ could hardly be breathed even in England.
6. That, in spite of the fact that each outbreak has thus thrown back the cause of the people, each has been represented to the people as a step forward and further revolutions have been advocated. The revolutionary movement of 1776 to the present day is therefore the work of a continuous conspiracy working for its own ends and against the interests of the people.
Not only can the program devised by Weishaupt be traced through the French, American, and Russian revolutions, but we can see the exact same ideology driving the modern revolution against the great mass of people. UN, WHO, and WEF all display the very exact tendencies that have been brought to bear against the sovereignty of the people. The dictates that are openly admitted to in the Agenda 21 and 2030 programmes are textbook rehashes of a centuries-old plan for the subjugation of all men of the world.
As long as the great masses consider this matter conspiratorial and not actual fact, the World Revolution shall continue until it is finally successful. If, however, we can shine the light of open knowledge on the darkness of the conspiracy, it shall wither away, for it can only exist in shadow.