1. The 19th century, "the stupid 19th century", was the century of liberal capitalism, invading the civilisation of our ancient Christian monarchies and extending to the colonised world. Today, historians emphasise the price that had to be paid for this domination of the "great bourgeois dynasties" and, in the world, of the great industrial and mercantile nations: inhuman oppression and exploitation, plunder and exhaustion of natural resources. The picture is painted as black as can be. There are very few historians, however, who note the deterioration of social relationships, the corruption of political life, the suicidal malthusian propaganda, and the degradation of religion, become "the opium of the people" (Marx), through Money.
At that time most economists, satisfied with their own comfort, envisaged the future with optimism. Everything was going for the best. There was a general increase in wealth, an accelerating rhythm of inventions, a growth in industrial output, the conquest of the world, and everywhere the progress of democratic freedom and human rights. It was the definitive triumph of the Protestant spirit and of Anglo-Saxon pragmatism.
2. The 20th century is the century of communism, bringing the capitalist era to a brutal close. Most politicians and economists, surprised by its implacable expansion, regard it as the antidote to the human inadequacies and injustices of liberalism. In their view it is liberalism’s opposite, and is legitimately victorious. After the capitalist exploitation there would naturally follow the people’s emancipation; after the polluting and corrupting anarchy of western liberalism would naturally follow the austere rigour of a powerful collective order. Bloody revolutions, wars of conquest, genocide and the re-establishment of slavery by whole nations would be no more than stages towards a new humanism hitherto unknown.
Thus the passage from capitalism to communism appears as normal as the revolutionary substitution of Protestantism for Catholicism and of liberalism for the monarchical order! All those who have learned to reject the age-old social institutions would easily pass from liberalism to communism, just as in the last century the intellectuals embraced the capitalo-industrial ideology and its naively philanthropic design for European imperialism.
Such is the feeble reasoning which leads the human masses, surprised by the propaganda assault and by the invasion of the communist armies, to follow the movement and to accept the world's fall into the red barbarity.
The phalangist protests. Capitalism and Communism are one and the same revolution – the revolution of man against God, against the King and ultimately against man himself. The death of God and the death of the King herald and prefigure the death of man.
1. It is not true that capitalism is barred from making further progress by some natural or human obstacle. The world’s resources and mankind’s needs present capitalism with immense and limitless fields for exploitation and commerce. The human mind’s capacity for invention does not follow but rather precedes the technological demands of industry. Capitalo-industrial organisation is capable of being extended to the ends of the world; computer systems exceed our ability to utilise them. This "technetronic" industrialised society has the necessary means of self-protection against any enemy within or without.
It should be added that because of its extraordinary development, today’s capitalist society can accommodate all the costs required by the modern sentiment – be it ever so developed or even exaggerated – of moral justice and of human rights, without nevertheless ceasing to be amply profitable for its big financiers, its bureaucratic and technocratic personnel.
Economically speaking, the future of capitalism is infinite. Compared with it, communism does not exist.
2. Spiritually, it is another story altogether. Capitalism pursues its war as ever against God, against kings and against man. In communism it finds a sure ally, a field for manoeuvre that is not found elsewhere. Such is the profoundest enigma of our times and one which explains the whole movement down to the last detail. Whereas communism fights against the entire capitalist world considered as a bloc, the leaders of the capitalist world shore up the communist aggressor in order to prolong their own domination over peoples for whom they are not, and have never been, the true masters. Thus it is that capitalism hands over to communism, piece by piece, every part of the world as to a necessary ally, not as to an enemy.
Everywhere in the world one finds this intellectual party for whom the passage from capitalism to communism is an inevitable though dramatic fact. This progressivist party does no disservice to capitalism by announcing communism's victory. On the contrary, it helps capitalism to survive. By means of such a dialectic, the progressivist justifies both capitalism and communism in their common revolution against God, against kings and against man.
If this agreement between international finance and soviet imperialism were courageously denounced, such a denunciation would provoke the only salutary awakening before the apocalyptic catastrophe. It would provoke the religious and political reaction of peoples and of historical nations against their tyrants of yesterday and of tomorrow, against their common atheism, their materialism, and their inhumanity.
Nothing would be easier for the Western world today than to beat the Communist world. The West would simply have to consent to restoring its religion, its legitimate authorities and its traditional ecological order. But the adherents of the capitalist system have never yielded on this. They prefer to see the world sacrificed to barbarians, rather than restore power to God, to kings, to the fathers of families, whom they have dethroned, despoiled and vanquished. To restore such rightful authority is something the capitalists will never do!
1. "The capitalist evolution has annihilated, or pushed close to destruction, the institutional developments of the feudal world – the manor, the village, the artisans’ guild. The world of the artisans has been crushed... The world of lords and of villagers has been destroyed, by political measures in the first instance and, in some cases, by revolutionary measures... Along with the disappearance of the old economic organisation there have also disappeared the economic and political privileges of those classes and groups who had been used to holding the dominant role, in particular the landed gentry and the clergy.
"Economically, this evolution has been interpreted by the bourgeoisie as the breaking of so many shackles and the removal of so many barriers. Politically, this evolution has been interpreted as the replacing of one regime, where the bourgeoisie held a humble position, by another regime much more sympathetic to their rationalist mentality and much more favourable to their immediate interests. Nevertheless… the observer is entitled to wonder whether, in the final analysis, such a wholesale emancipation has been of benefit to the middle class and to bourgeois society. The fact is that the shackles which have disappeared were not only a constraint but also a protection…
"The king, the centre piece of the system, was king by the grace of God, and, considerable though the economic advantages inherent in the capitalist system may have been for him, the roots of his power remained feudal, not only in the historical sense, but even more in the sociological meaning of the term. We are dealing therefore with more than just a case of dynastic survival. We are dealing with the symbiosis of two social layers, one of which clearly supported the other economically and was in its turn supported politically by the second… This symbiosis was the very essence of monarchical society…"
2. "I have described the bourgeois class as rationalist and anti-heroic. In order to defend its position or bend a nation to its will, it can only use rationalist and anti-heroic means… An economic command cannot so easily be transformed into a political command, as could the military command of the mediaeval lord. On the contrary, the ledger book and the calculation of cost prices absorb and isolate those who serve such interests.
"The conclusion is self-evident:… The bourgeois class is ill equipped to confront either internal or international problems, such as any country of importance must normally expect. The bourgeoisie themselves are well aware of this inadequacy, despite all the phraseology used to disguise the fact, and the same goes for the masses. Within a protective framework, not composed of bourgeois materials, the bourgeoisie can gain political success… especially in opposition… But for want of being protected by some non-bourgeois group, the bourgeoisie is politically disarmed and incapable, not only of directing the nation, but even of defending its own class interests: which amounts to saying that it needs a master."
3. "Now, the capitalist process, as much by its economic mechanism as by its psycho-socio-biological consequences, has eliminated this protective master or, as in the United States, has never given it, or any institution filling the same role, the chance of affirming itself."
"The capitalist evolution causes not only the disappearance of the King by the Grace of God but also of the political ramparts which, had they been able to have been maintained, would have been constituted by the village and the artisan’s guild. Of course, neither of these institutions could have been maintained in the exact form in which they were found by capitalism. All the same, capitalist politics pushed their destruction much further than was necessary… The peasant had no choice but to accept the benefits of primitive liberalism… and all the individualist rope necessary for him to hang himself.
"By breaking the pre-capitalist social framework, capitalism therefore broke not only the barriers that hindered its progress, but also the buttresses which prevented it from collapsing. This process of destruction, deeply disturbing in its character of inexorable fatality, consisted not only in pruning the institutional dead wood, but also in eliminating those partners of the capitalist class whose symbiosis with it was an essential element in stabilising capitalism…
"I am inclined to consider this symbiosis of the classes as the rule rather than the exception… At the very least this rule operated for six thousand years, that is, from the day when the first labourers became the subjects of the nomadic horsemen…"
(Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 12. The walls are crumbling, 2. The destruction of the protective layers)
So having arrived at the day of reckoning, after basing its power on the 1789 Revolution and the destruction of religion – as well as of the monarchy, the elites, the military class, trade and village communities – will capitalism revise its position and draw back? Never!
It prefers to push back the day of reckoning by feeding the monster who will devour it, each year throwing it a new people to tear to pieces.
It is not the bourgeoisie as a social class, nor even as a socio-professional group of industrialists and businessmen, who prove to be incapable of political authority and stability. It is the bourgeoisie as revolutionary – as a moral union of assassins of God and the King, of the noble and the artisan, of the knight and the villein – that is incapable. It is capitalism as liberal – that is to say, as principal agent behind the storming of the Bastille, the abolition of privileges, regicide, the civil constitution of the clergy and the Vendéen genocide – that is incapable. For the French Revolution provides a valuable example. Money, become the religion and the politics of a certain organised social power, wished everywhere to be master and no longer servant. Thereafter, it waged a life and death struggle, a permanent revolution against all natural and all traditional authority, against every sacred custom and order. For that purpose it needs lackeys and torturers; it goes from one to the other, attaching them to itself by ever higher salaries and by exorbitant concessions, before collapsing beneath their blows.
Such is the true history of contemporary France. It is an indefinite manoeuvring of capitalo-industrial power simply to hold on to its financial privileges. France – and the world, for that matter – has been and still is governed by permanent deicides and regicides, who call themselves liberals and who claim to be conservatives, but whose only concern is to carry out business and to prevent the people from rebelling.
2. When the social insurrection is unchained, capitalism allies itself with the socialist party, whose role was and still is – at the price of financial support and enormous advantages – to channel the popular revolution in such a way that it does not harm the new lords, the financiers and industrialists, and to turn it against the ancient bodies that remain the bête noir of the liberal bourgeoisie: the king, the clergy and the nobility. Organised socialism, in the pay of established power, and a hidden branch of bourgeois freemasonry, is first and foremost anticlerical, antimilitarist and republican. That is its threefold function. It regularly diverts the people’s anger and national insurrections away from their true object, the wall of money, the two hundred families, Judaic plutocracy and masonic democracy, to pitch them into helping the very people who are exploiting them and attacking the social forces which are their natural, legitimate and sacred defenders: the Church, the Army, and the Monarchy.
Such is "the shady entente" between the powers who run the world and the ideologues and managers of the socialist parties. The result of which is this chaotic series of oppressions and sterile revolutions, which make for the world’s decadence.
The intellectual party, eager to flatter the conquerors, hails communism as the dispenser of justice, the executor of noble designs, charged with the beheading of capitalism for its many crimes and acts of injustice. The phalangist thinks quite the opposite. He thinks that world communism is the executioner of capitalism in this precise sense, that it is charged by capitalism to put to death everything opposed to its power, everything that risks escaping from it decisively and thus setting up in a revolutionary way a State, a system or a society, outside of its domination, that is to say, one that is Christian, nationalist and social, if not socialist.
1. It is not a paradox. When the French Revolution lost its way in its crimes, and when the royalist counter-revolution was about to triumph, the buyers of the nation’s wealth preferred to hire a Corsican adventurer, a revolutionary general, a potential despot, rather than witness the return of the most Christian King and the power of the Church through the people’s acclamation.
Today, when capitalism has exploited a third world country, leaving its people on the verge of revolt, capitalo-socialism whistles to its accomplice, and communism buries for ever this inconvenient people. For wherever communism rules, it relies for the maintenance of its power more on the aid and money of capitalist states than it does on its own secret police and death camps.
2. What will happen when the Soviet power, having conquered the rest of the world, comes up against capitalist power itself, in its own American sanctuary? It will be the end of a world, the world of liberal capitalist cheating and of its socialist complicity. But it will not necessarily be the end of the world. In such an apocalyptic catastrophe, capitalism would once more have to invent some new and apparently revolutionary power, which in reality would be exclusively and solely at its service.
There exists an extremely simple principle for judging and discerning with extraordinary clarity the truth in the apparent confusion of events. Any power, whether it be a monarchy, an empire, a dictatorship, a republic, socialism or communism, that declares itself faithful to the great Principles of 1789, is or will be the tool of judaeo-masonry and shares in its threefold fight against God, against kings and against man himself, restoring the sole dictatorship of Money.
If, on the other hand, there is a future for the world far removed from the triple alliance of capitalism, socialism and communism – which originally are three forms of biblicism, Judaeo-Protestant, Calvinist, Methodist and Lutheran, and which end in three forms of barbarity, Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, and Slav – this future will be Catholic, royalist, and communitarian, in the manner of those happy times before 1789.