Abolishing the Family — Primary Obstacle to Tyranny

“Not only are the communists and other socialists concerned with abolishing the traditional family; but also the process of bringing women fully into production, ‘liberated’ from the bonds of home and children, is now a major agenda of global Big Business.”

In 386 BC Plato founded his Academy in Athens. This Academy was a prototype of the schools of political science that were founded in the early 20th century by Fabian Socialists with funding from Big Business. Just like the London School of Economics & Political Science and the New School for Social Research, Plato’s Academy was founded ‘as a school for statesmen.’ Plato’s translator, Sir Desmond Lee, explains:

Plato had decided that nothing could be done with contemporary politics and with contemporary politicians. He therefore decided to set up a school where a new type of politician could be trained . . .1

In about 375 BC Plato wrote The Republic, ‘a statement of the aims which the Academy set itself to achieve.’ Plato’s collectivist state involved three classes: philosopher-rulers; ‘Guardians,’ who uphold the laws of the Republic; and those below who engage in labour and commerce. Private property and family were to be abolished in the first two classes because they divide one’s loyalties from duty towards the state, whilst they were to be strictly overseen among the lower class. Sir Desmond states of Plato’s Republic:

He starts from the principle of the equality of the sexes. By this he means that though men and women have different functions in the process of reproduction, they should apart from that difference, follow the same careers, share the same education, and have the same opportunities. Women may not always be able to do quite the same heavy or energetic work as men, as for example in war; but within the limitations imposed by their physique equality is to be absolute.

It follows logically that they must be exempted so far as possible from family responsibilities. For under the family system what stands in the way of the kind of sex equality which Plato wants is the domestic responsibility for running a household and bringing up a family. With complete logic therefore he removes that responsibility by abolishing the family and substituting for it a system of state nurseries… And it may be said that this scheme … perhaps anticipates the objectives of the Women’s Liberation movement.

In his dialogue on women and family in The Republic, Plato has it that, ‘things in common between friends should apply to women and children.’2

‘… So if we are going to use men and women for the same purposes, we must teach them the same things …’

‘… There is therefore no administrative occupation which is peculiar to woman as woman or man as man; natural capacities are similarly distributed in each sex, and it is natural for woman to take part in all occupations as well as men …’

Of the class of Guardians Plato writes that women and children should be ‘held in common, and no parent should know its child, or child its parent.’ State nurseries would look after the children. Unwanted children would be disposed of by abortion, infanticide, or by secreting the children out to the general community.

Doesn’t this, written over two thousand years ago, sound very familiar today? Didn’t the Communist states push women into the labour market by equalising the sexes occupationally, and rearing children through State creches? And doesn’t it sound similar to the measures that have been demanded by feminism and are now being discussed at international conferences chaired by feminists and funded by Big Business? Like Plato and Marx, global plutocracy considers family, motherhood and traditional gender roles to be as much hindrances to a globalised economy as they consider nation-states barriers to world trade.

Illuminati & the French Revolution

This collectivist idea of the City State of Plato’s time was carried over to the ideal of a World Collectivist State and resurfaced during the 18th century.

The Order of the Illuminati was founded by Professor Adam Weishaupt in Bavaria in 1775 and was outlawed3 by the Elector of Bavaria in 1786. The Illuminati was comprised mostly of the literati and debased aristocrats in France and the German states. Its aim was the creation of a world state by the destruction of monarchy, Church, nation-states, and the traditional concept of family. Although suppressed, the Illuminati had infiltrated Continental (Grand Orient) Masonry, which played a prominent part in the French Revolution.4 The Masonic and crypto-Masonic secret societies that fomented the French Revolution and the revolutions of mid 19th century Europe5 formed the basis of the communist and socialist movements that were to culminate in communism and the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917.6

Like the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia over a century later, and the various movements of the New Left and liberalism today, there was no lack of funding. As in the Bolshevik Revolution certain influential coteries overthrew aristocracy in the name of ‘the people.’ Professor John Robison, an eminent 18th century Scottish academic, studied the documents relating to the Illuminati, Masonry, and the French Revolution, including those produced by the investigation into the Illuminati by the Elector of Bavaria. He states that the Regiment de Flandre, arriving at Versailles to protect the royal family was bribed with 45,000 livres to disband but refused. The Duke of Orleans, Grand Master of French Grand Orient Masonry acknowledged that he paid out over 50,000 livres in bribing the Gardes Françoises. The Duke was seen with a sack of money to pay the armed mob that had descended on Versailles from Paris.7

It was a group of some 6,000 women who were the first to take to the streets and marched on the Paris Town Hall. These proto-feminists of this era of upheaval formed into the armed and uniformed Revolutionary Republican Women Citizens to support the Jacobins.8

Engels & Marx: The Birth of Communism

In 1848 the collectivist doctrine applied to the family received its most systematic treatment when Friedrich Engels, a wealthy merchant and Marx’s principal colleague and financial backer, wrote The Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State. He argued that in man’s pre-civilised state there had been no differences in gender roles. In this supposed natural utopian existence the household was a ‘public, socially necessary industry’ like any economic activity of the primitive era. The individual family of the civilised eras made the family no longer a ‘public’ matter, states Engels, and the wife became a ‘private, domestic servant,’ pushed out of participation in social production.’9

Not only are the communists and other socialists concerned with abolishing the traditional family; but also the process of bringing women fully into production, ‘liberated’ from the bonds of home and children, is now a major agenda of global Big Business. Hence, the nexus between socialism, feminism and plutocracy pushing us towards a World Collectivist State.

This is an excerpt from Revolution from Above by Kerry Bolton.

  1. Plato, The Republic, translated by Sir Desmond Lee (England: Penguin, 1974).
  2. Plato, The Republic, p. 226.
  3. That is, driven underground, and reorganised as seemingly innocuous literary societies. Professor John Robison, Proofs of a Conspiracy (Boston: Western Islands, 1967 [1798]), p. 169. Professor Antony Sutton considered the Yale secret society Lodge 322 to be the American branch or heir of the Illuminati.
  4. K. R. Bolton, From Knights Templar to New World Order (Paraparaumu, New Zealand: Renaissance Press, 2006).
  5. See also: ‘Masonry,’ The Catholic Encyclopaedia (New York: Robert Appleton Co., 1910), vol. IX.
  6. Bolton, From Knights Templar to New World Order, pp. 53-63.
  7. Robison, Proofs of a Conspiracy, p. 218.
  8. Susan Alice Watkins, Marisa Rueda, and Marta Rodriguez, Introducing Feminism (Australia: Allen & Unwin, 1999), pp. 22-23.
  9. Frederick Engels, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State (New York: International Publishers, 1972 [1884]), p. 240.

Leave a Reply