Hit mus’ be now de kingdom comin’,
an’ de year ob Jubilo! … (1)
“Liberty, Equality, Fraternity!” has come down to us as the lofty rallying-cry of the French Revolution, but in Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities it is rendered as “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity or Death!” (2) and we all know of the guillotine and its work. But Liberty and Equality are mutually exclusive and inversely proportional to one another in any government, and true Fraternity – an impulse welling up from within the individual towards his fellow man – cannot be imposed from without; therefore the French Revolution’s march towards Liberty, Equality, Fraternity or Death proved to be a march towards the perfect Equality of slavery to a totalitarian government devoid of all Liberty, and a coerced, affected Fraternity cowering in the shadow of the guillotine.
The French Revolution destroyed the aristocracy, but the basic dichotomy remained, with the aristocracy merely replaced by the bourgeoisie. The same happened here after Lincoln’s War, with the agrarian patricians of the old Republic merely replaced by a capitalist oligarchy; while agrarian slaves were replaced by industrial wage workers, and slave insurrections were replaced by labor strife and urban riots. The Russian Revolution played it out again, when the Tsarist autocracy was replaced by the Bolshevik Party, and the peasants were herded into an industrial “workers’ paradise” through government orchestrated famines and re-education camps. “Life has become better, comrades. Life has become more joyous,” declared Stalin (3) just before the bloody purges and deportations to Siberia during “The Great Terror” in the 1930s.
Is this where the “woke” Progressives are taking us, with their Fascist “Antifa” rent-a-thugs, their Marxist Black Lives Matter mobs, their Anti-White and Anti-West Critical Race Theories, and their hubristic claims of being on “the right side of history”? History is cyclic, not linear, so there is no such thing as “the right side of history.” Perhaps, then, we may learn something from the Cyclic March of History by looking at the French Revolution, Lincoln’s Revolution, and the Russian Revolution – and then look at the “Woke Revolution” of today to see if there is any connection. Follow the dollar and know the truth
As Napoleon said, “Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency: their sole object is gain” (4). The world’s first international financial network was founded by the House of Rothschild, attaining great success by the end of the eighteenth century by lending money to governments and kings, and parlaying wealth into political power. Wars are profitable to bankers because they expand the debts of the antagonists. If an antagonist doesn’t exist, then one must be created by financing the rise of a hostile regime. While the virtues of peace must always be proclaimed, perpetual conflict is where the money is. Both sides of the conflict may be financed, giving them each a 50/50 chance to win, but giving a one hundred percent chance for the bankers to win. If a government does not wish to borrow money to finance the conflict, then it would be necessary to encourage a revolution to replace it with one that does. G. Edward Griffin calls this “The Rothschild Formula” (5), and its footprints may be found on the three revolutions looked at here – and on the “Woke Revolution” today.
King Louis XVI of France inherited large French debts. His policy of taking out international loans rather than increasing taxes further increased the debt, while his helping to finance the American Revolution brought France near to bankruptcy (6). That, combined with poor harvests and bread shortages, sparked the French Revolution. In 1789, the king was deposed and the revolutionary government took over. European bankers would not risk any large loans to it as long as there was the possibility that the king could return and repudiate the debts, so Louis XVI was offered a cumbersome coach in which to “escape” to Austria. He was captured at the border, returned under guard, condemned to die for treason, and beheaded in 1793. His queen, Marie Antoinette, was beheaded thereafter. The international bankers foreclosed on Louis XVI’s France, and made safe new loans to the revolution (7).
In the middle of the nineteenth century, the Wall Street Money Trust ginned up sectional hatred in America by helping to finance the publication of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, the case of Dred Scott, “Bleeding Kansas,” and John Brown’s Raid, which drove the “Cotton Kingdom” out of the Union and lit the fuse to Lincoln’s War (8). After the conquest of the Southern States, Confederate President Jefferson Davis was supposed to die in prison, but he did not, so he was to be hanged by military tribunal for treason to prevent him from coming back into power and repudiating the debts of the “carpetbagger” governments and their Black puppets who now ruled the Southern States. However, with the return of the civil courts, Jefferson Davis was never tried for treason for fear of his being declared not guilty and thereby exposing Lincoln’s War as unconstitutional (9). But the South was still prostrate under the iron heel of Reconstruction, and while the Southern Whites were kept at bayonet-point, the carpetbag governments ratified the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which – among other things – forced the conquered South to pay for the Union war debts and repudiate her own (10). This, along with her total devastation from the war, kept the South in poverty until the Second World War, while Wall Street and the Money Trust gamboled in the Gilded Age (11).
Russia freed her serfs in 1861. The Tsar gave them land to purchase and forty-nine years to pay for it. But depression hit, followed by Russia’s unsuccessful Russo-Japanese War in 1904-5. The peasants couldn’t pay their mortgages, pay their taxes, pay for the war, and feed their families all at the same time, so they revolted in 1905. The Tsar was both the Government and the Church, and therefore owned the lands of both. He was heavily in debt to the international bankers, with much land as collateral, but there was no way for the bankers to foreclose as long as the Tsar had an army. A revolution was the ticket. The seeds had already been sown with the revolt of 1905, and fertilized with Marxist propaganda. Tsar Nicolas II mobilized his army to both avoid revolution and to give him the excuse to borrow more money to relieve the suffering population. But Germany saw the mobilization as an act of war, and declared war on Russia in 1914. Russia’s peasant army was no match for the most powerful army on earth, and when Russia suffered a reverse, the troops mutinied, killed their officers, and headed for home. The Russian front collapsed, Tsar Nicolas II was told his government was ended, and the Communists took over with the October Revolution of 1917. To ensure the Tsar could not return to power and repudiate the loans made to the Communists, he and his family were executed. The bankers foreclosed on Tsarist Russia, and made safe new loans to the Communists (12).
To ask what these revolutions and “The Rothschild Formula” have to do with the “Woke Revolution” today, a look at our national debt approaching thirty trillion dollars should first give one pause. Bankers are creditors who make big money off of loans, so it is good business for bankers – who are among the most fiscally conservative people on earth – to promote profligacy, irresponsibility, and dependency among potential debtors. If war is where the money is in the international arena, at home the ticket is the Welfare State – or Socialism, or Communism, or whatever other iterations of collective dependency on government handouts you may choose – for it increases government borrowing to pay for it. Therefore, politicians who promise government handouts (both to citizens and to corporations) have been promoted by the Money Trust and Wall Street ever since the Lincoln Administration sold out the financial independence of the United States Government with the Second National Bank Act of 1864. America is now a debtor in the grip of Morgan, Rothschild, and their affiliates on Wall Street – a grip which tightened with the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 (13) – and to challenge them is futile. As John Randolph of Roanoke said of National Banks long ago, “You might as well attack Gibraltar with a pocket pistol as to attempt to punish them.” (14)
The Welfare State not only increases the national debt, it also creates political opposition, and as stated in “The Rothschild Formula,” Wall Street bankers have no qualms about financing both sides of any conflict. However, the side that promises the most expansion of the Welfare State is the side that bankers will find more profitable, so that is the side to bet on. In addition to the Welfare State there are other ways for Wall Street to profit. Radical “human rights” policies, “civil rights” policies, and “affirmative action” policies of government that presume to correct the deficiencies in God’s Creation require an ever-expanding bureaucracy to administer them. This increases the size of government, which also increases borrowing – if the political inexpediency of raising taxes is to be avoided. Therefore Wall Street will always promote the radical politicians and the radical media who promote these government-expanding policies.
What, then, are the policies of the “Woke Revolution” today? Progressives are indoctrinating malleable minds with Critical Race Theory through the “woke” media, through the endless virtue-postings of radical politicians and race hustlers, through judicial pettifoggery and tortuous twistings of the Constitution, and through the government-controlled public schools that have taken over child-rearing responsibilities in these profligate and irresponsible times. To gain power through universal suffrage, Progressives are seeking to level society to its lowest common denominator by promoting and sanctifying society’s basest animal appetites. The anti-West and anti-White Critical Race Theory has replaced the traditional Marxist class conflict with a race conflict, so it appears now that the Money Trust – financing these Progressives in yet another iteration of “The Rothschild Formula” – is preparing to foreclose on Western Civilization with a race war. The demand now is that Western Civilization repudiate its heritage – from Virgil to Jefferson – for the sake of Equity with those who have none, and “take a knee” to the eternal African present. As ever, the basic dichotomy will remain; only the nightmare will have changed: enslavement to a totalitarian “affirmative action” bureaucracy surrounded by a wall of skulls, with Wall Street and the Money Trust beaming benignantly down upon it all…
- “Kingdom Coming.” Library of Congress, Rare Books and Special Collections Division, America Singing: Nineteenth-Century Song Sheets. https://www.loc.gov/resource/amss.hc00045b.0/?st=text
- Charles Dickens. A Tale of Two Cities (1859; New York: Barnes & Noble, 2020) pg. 271.
- David L. Hoffmann. Stalinist Values: The Cultural Norms of Soviet Modernity [1917-1941] (Ithaca and London: Cornell UP, 2003) pg. 126.
- R. McNair Wilson, Monarchy or Money Power (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, Ltd., 1933) pg. 72. Quoted in G. Edward Griffin. The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve, 4th ed. (1994; Westlake Village, CA: American Media, 2002) pg. 221.
- Griffin, pgs. 230-3.
- Richard Kelly Hoskins. War Cycles – Peace Cycles, 7th printing (Lynchburg: Virginia Publishing Co., 2005) pg. 76.
- John Remington Graham. Blood Money: The Civil War and the Federal Reserve, 2nd printing (2006; Gretna, LA: Pelican Publishing Co., 2012) pgs. 44-5.
- Hoskins, pg. 77.
- Charles Adams. Arguing the Case for Southern Secession (London. Boulder. New York. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2000) pgs. 177-87.
- Philip Leigh. Southern Reconstruction (Yardley, PA: Westholme Publishing, LLC, 2017) pgs. ix – xviii.
- Hoskins, pgs. 131-9.
- Graham, pgs. 48-64.
- William Cabell Bruce. John Randolph of Roanoke 1773- 1833, 2 vols. (New York & London: G. P. Putnam’s Sons – The Knickerbocker P, 1922) I: 431-2.
I must note that some of the things said about Russia in Mr. Traywick’s column strike me as some what questionable. Was it really the peasants who revolted in 1905? And was Russia’s mobilization in 1914 really in order to borrow money and avoid revolution? That seems to leave the dispute in the Balkans and the shelling of Belgrade by Austria-Hungary out of the equation.