-Caveat Lector-

from:
http://www.tarpley.net/venesys.htm
<A HREF="http://www.tarpley.net/venesys.htm">From Venice to England</A>
-----

------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART -1-


HOW THE VENETIAN SYSTEM WAS TRANSPLANTED INTO ENGLAND


New Federalist June 3, 1996.

by Webster Tarpley



------------------------------------------------------------------------


NOBLE VENETIAN: ...pray tell us what other prerogatives the King [of
England] enjoys in the government; for otherwise, I who am a Venetian,
may be apt to think that our Doge, who is called our prince, may have as
much power as yours.

Henry Neville, Plato Redivivus, 1681


The oligarchical system of Great Britain is not an autochthonous product
of English or British history. It represents rather the tradition of the
Babylonians, Romans, Byzantines, and Venetians which has been
transplanted into the British isles through a series of upheavals. The
status of Britain as the nation foutue of modern history is due in
particular to the sixteenth and seventeenth century metastasis into
England and Scotland of the Venetian oligarchy along with its
philosophy, political forms, family fortunes, and imperial geopolitics.
The victory of the Venetian party in England between 1509 and 1715 built
in turn upon a pre- existing foundation of Byzantine and Venetian
influence.

One of the best governments in English history was that of King Alfred
the Great, who ruled from 871 to 899. Alfred pursued a policy of
literacy, education, and nation-building, and stands as a founder of Old
English literature. The Byzantine Empire saw in Alfred a flare-up of the
Platonic Christian humanism of the Irish monks and Alcuin of York, the
principal adviser to Charlemagne a century earlier. Byzantium
accordingly incited Vikings and Varangians, who had been defeated by
Alfred the Great, to renew their attacks on England. Then in 1066 two
armies converged on England. The first was the Norwegian army of King
Harold Hardrada ("the pitiless"), a Byzantine general who had served as
the commander of the Imperial Guard in Constantinople. Harold Hardrada
was killed by the English at Stamford Bridge in 1066. But in that same
year the weakened English forces were defeated at Hastings by William of
Normandy ("the Conqueror"). Thus began the Norman Yoke, imposed by
Norman oligarchs and a century of Norman kings. The next dynasty, the
Plantagenets, featured such figures as Richard I Lionheart, a flamboyant
homosexual who avidly participated in the Venetian- sponsored Crusades
in the eastern Mediterranean. The Magna Carta extorted from Richard's
successor King John in 1215 had nothing to do with political liberties
in the modern sense, but protected the license of marauding feudal
barons against the central monarchy. The enforcement machinery of the
Magna Charta permitted the barons lawfully to wage war upon the King in
case their grievances were not settled. Since civil war and private
warfare were by far the greatest curses of society at that time, England
was held hostage to parasitical feudal overlords that a more centralized
(or "absolute") monarchy might have mitigated. The barons whose
sociopathic prerogatives were anchored in the Magna Charta by a license
for civil war were easily the most reactionary element in English
society, and were susceptible to easy manipulation by Venice, which had
now conquered Byzantium and was approaching the apogee of its power.

Venetian influence in England was mediated by banking. Venetian
oligarchs were a guiding force among the Lombard bankers who carried out
the "great shearing" of England which led to the bankruptcy of the
English King Henry III, who during the 1250's repudiated his debts and
went bankrupt. The bankruptcy was followed by a large- scale civil war.

It was under Venetian auspices that England started the catastrophic
conflict against France known today as the Hundred Years' War. In 1340
King Edward III of England sent an embassy to Doge Gradenigo announcing
his intention to wage war on France, and proposing an Anglo-Venetian
alliance. Gradenigo accepted Edward III's offer that all Venetians on
English soil would receive all the same privileges and immunities
enjoyed by Englishmen. The Venetians accepted the privileges and
declined to join in the fighting. Henceforth English armies laying waste
to the French towns and countryside would do so as Venetian surrogates.
France was in no position to interfere in the final phase of the rivalry
between Venice and Genoa, which was decided in favor of Venice. The deg
eneracy of English society during these years of Venetian ascendancy is
chronicled in the writings of Chaucer - the greatest English writer of
the age - who was an ally of the anti-Venetian Dante-Petrarca-Boccaccio
grouping.

The Venetians concocted myths to enhance their influence on English
society. For the nobility and the court there was the anti- Christian
myth of King Arthur and his Round Table of oligarchs seeking the Holy
Grail. For the mute and downtrodden masses there was the myth of Robin
Hood, who by robbing from the rich to give to the poor combined plunder
with class struggle.

During the wartime 1370's, the population of England collapsed by 1.5
million souls, from a total of 4 to 2.5 million, because of the Black
Death, which itself resulted from Venetian debt service policies. The
year 1381 saw an uprising in London and southeast England on a program
of abolishing feudal dues, free use of forests, and an end to the tithes
or taxes collected by the church. This was called Wat Tyler's rebellion,
which ended when Wat was killed by the Mayor of London. Contemporary
with this was the rise of Lollardry, the prototype of English
Protestantism promoted by John Wycliffe, the Oxford scholastic.
Wycliffe's anti-clerical campaign had many easy targets, but his
theology was inferior and his stress on every person's right to read and
interpret the Bible was designed to spawn a myriad of fundamentalist
fanatics.

Lollardry as a social phenomenon had a specific Venetian pedigree, best
seen through the prevalence among Lollard rank and file of the belief
that the soul is not immortal and dies with the body. This is the
mortalist heresy, and can more accurately be called the Venetian heresy
because of its deep roots within the Venetian oligarchy. Later the
University of Padua and Pietro Pomponazzi were notorious for their
advocacy of mortalism.

In 1377 Wycliffe was saved from prosecution by an uprising of the London
mob. Lollardry kept going for centuries as an underground religion for
the disinherited kept going by itinerant preachers. During Queen
Elizabeth's time Lollardry lived in the form of a sects called the
Familists and the Grindletonians. These finally flowed into the Puritan
Revolution of the 1640's. Lollardy contained a strong dose of primitive
socialism; Lollard leaders like John Ball and "Jack Straw" preached
social revolution with slogans like "When Adam delved and Eve span, Who
was then the gentleman?" This is the ultimate source of that communism
which David Urquhardt taught Karl Marx five centuries later. Finally,
Lollardry spread into central Europe through the medium of the Husites
 of Bohemia and caused a series of wars of religion there. In
seventeenth-century England there was a slogan to the effect that
Wycliffe begat Hus, Hus begat Luther, and Luther begat truth. There is
every reason to view the Lollards as a Venetian pilot project for
Luther's 1517 launching of the Reformation during the war of the League
of Cambrai.

The English defeat in the Hundred years' War (1453) left English society
in a shambles. This was the setting for the oligarchical chaos and civil
war known as the Wars of the Roses, which pitted the House of York with
its symbol the white rose against the House of Lancaster with its red
rose. Both groupings derived from quarrels among the seven sons of the
pro-Venetian Edward III, who had started the wars with France. The Wars
of the Roses, fought between 1455 and 1485, brought English society to
the point of breakdown.

>From this crisis England was saved by the coming of Henry Tudor, the
Earl of Richmond, who became king as Henry VII. It was under Henry VII
that England began to become a modern state and to participate in the
Renaissance progress associated with Medici Florence and the France of
Louis XI. The precondition for the revival of England was the
suppression of the pro-Venetian oligarchy, the barons. Conveniently,
these had been decimated by their own handiwork of civil war. Henry VII
set himself up as the Big Policeman against the oligarchs. Henry VII
established for the central government an effective monopoly of police
and military powers. One of the reasons for the great ineptitude
demonstrated by both sides in the English Civil War of the 1640's is
that under the Tudors the nobility and gentry had largely forgotten how
to wage civil war.

Like that of Louis XI, Henry VII's policy was based on an alliance of
the crown with the urban trading and productive classes against the
latifundist barons. Barons were excluded from the state administration,
which relied rather on city merchants who were much more likely to be
loyal to the king. Since the oligarchs routinely intimidated local
courts, Henry VII gave new prominence to the court of the Star Chamber,
a special royal court designed to impose central authority on the
barons. The private armies of oligarchs along with other bandits and
pirates were liquidated.

Henry VII was an active dirigist, promoting trading companies to expand
overseas commerce. Under the Tudor state, England existed as a nation,
with relative internal stability and a clear dynastic succession.

Henry VII's suppression of the oligarchs displeased Venice. Venice also
did not like Henry's policy of alliance with Spain, secured by the
marriage of his heir to Catherine of Aragon. Henry VII in fact sought
good relations with both France and Spain. The Venetians wanted England
to become embroiled with both France and Spain. Venice was also
fundamentally hostile to the modern nation- state, which Henry was
promoting in England. When Henry VII's son Henry VIII turned out to be a
murderous pro-Venetian psychotic and satyr, the Venetians were able to
re-assert their oligarchical system.

Henry VIII was King of England between 1509 and 1547. His accession to
the throne coincided with the outbreak of the War of the League of
Cambrai, in which most European states, including France, the Holy Roman
Empire (Germany), Spain, and the Papacy of Pope Julius II della Rovere
joined together in a combination that bid fair to annihilate Venice and
its oligarchy. The League of Cambrai was the world war that ushered in
the modern era. Henry VIII attracted the attention of the Venetian
oligarchy when he -alone among the major rulers of Europe - maintained a
pro-Venetian position during the crisis years of 1509-1510, just as
Venice was on the brink of destruction. Henry VIII was for a time the
formal ally of Venice and Pope Julius. The Venetian oligarchy became
 intrigued with England.

In 1527, when Henry VIII sought to divorce Catherine of Aragon, the
Venetian-controlled University of Padua endorsed Henry's legal
arguments. Gasparo Contarini, the dominant political figure of the
Venetian oligarchy, sent to the English court a delegation which
included his own uncle, Francesco Zorzi. The oligarch and intelligence
operative Zorzi, consummately skilled in playing on Henry's lust and
paranoia, became the founder of the powerful Rosicrucian, Hermetic,
cabbalistic, and freemasonic tradition in the Tudor court. Later, Henry
VIII took the momentous step of breaking with the Roman Papacy to become
the new Constantine and founder of the Anglican Church. He did this
under the explicit advice of Thomas Cromwell, a Venetian agent who had
become his chief adviser. Thomas Cromwell was Henry VIII's business
agent in the confiscation of the former Catholic monasteries and other
church property, which were sold off to rising families. Thomas Cromwell
thus served as the midwife to many a line of oligarchs.

Under the impact of the War of the League of Cambrai, the Venetian
oligarchy realized the futility of attempting a policy of world
domination from the tiny base of a city-state among the lagoons of the
northern Adriatic. As was first suggested by the present writer in 1981,
the Venetian oligarchy (especially its "giovani" faction around Paolo
Sarpi) responded by transferring its family fortunes (fondi),
philosophical outlook, and political methods into such states as
England, France, and the Netherlands. Soon the Venetians decided that
England (and Scotland) was the most suitable site for the New Venice,
the future center of a new, world- wide Roman Empire based on maritime
supremacy. Success of this policy required oligarchical domination and
the degradation of the political system by wiping out any Platonic
humanist opposition.

The overall Venetian policy was to foment wars of religion between the
Lutherans, Calvinists and Anglicans on the one hand, and the
Jesuit-dominated Catholic Counterreformation of the Council of Trent on
the other. The Venetians had spawned both sides of this conflict, and
exercised profound influence over them. The Venetians insisted on the
maintenance of a Protestant dynasty and a Protestant state church in
England, since this made conflict with the Catholic powers more likely.
The Venetians demanded an anti-Spanish policy on the part of London,
generally to energize the imperial rivalry with Madrid and most
immediately to prevent the Spanish army stationed in Milan from getting
an opportunity to conquer Venice.

The destruction of the English mind was fostered by the Venetians under
the banner of murderous religious fanaticism. Under Henry VIII, the
English population continued in their traditional Roman Catholicism,
which had been established in 644 at the synod of Whitby. Then, in 1534,
Henry's and Thomas Cromwell's Act of Supremacy made the Roman Pope
anathema. Those who refused to follow Henry VIII down this path, like
St. Thomas More and many others, were executed. This first phase of
Anglicanism lasted until 1553, when the Catholic Queen Mary I ("Bloody
Mary", the daughter of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon) took power.
Mary re-established Papal authority and married King Philip of Spain.
Bloody Mary's main adviser in her proscriptions was Cardinal Reginald Po
le, who had lived in Venice for some years and was part of the immediate
circle around Gasparo Contarini. Henry VIII had feared Pole, an heir to
the Plantagenets, as a possible pretender, and Pole had done everything
to excite Henry's paranoia. Pole incited Bloody Mary to carry out a
bloodbath with 300 to 500 prominent victims. These executions of the
"Marian martyrs" were immortalized in John Foxe's celebrated Book of
Martyrs (1554 ff.), a copy of which was later kept in every church in
England and which attained the status of a second Bible among
Protestants of all types. The events orchestrated by Pole seemed to many
Englishmen to prove the thesis that a Catholic restoration would
threaten their lives and property.

Bloody Mary died in 1558, and was succeeded by Elizabeth I, the daughter
of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn. From the Catholic point of view Elizabeth
was a bastard, so it was sure that she would rule as a Protestant.
Elizabeth forcibly restored her father's Anglican or Episcopal Church.

Three times within the span of 25 years the English population was thus
coerced into changing their religion under the threat of capital
punishment. Three times the supposedly eternal verities taught by the
village parson were turned upside down, clearly because of dynastic
ambition and raison d'etat. The moral, psychological, and intellectual
destruction involved in this process was permanent and immense.

Elizabeth's anti-Catholic and anti-Spanish policies fulfilled the basic
Venetian imperatives. The struggle against the Spanish armada in 1588
gave also these policies an undeniable popularity. Elizabeth was for 40
years under the influence of William Cecil, whom she created First Baron
of Burliegh and Lord Treasurer. The Cecils were notorious assets of
Venice; their ancestral home at Hatfield house was festooned with Lions
of St. Mark. When William Cecil was too old to act as Elizabeth's
controller, he was succeeded by his son Robert Cecil, the 1st Earl of
Salisbury. The Venetian-Genoese Sir Horatio Pallavicini was an important
controller of English state finance.

Elizabeth's economic policies had strong elements of dirigism and
mercantilism. The numerous industrial monopolies she promoted had the
result of establishing new areas of production in the country. Cecil
developed the merchant marine and the navy. There were taxes to support
those unable to work, and a detailed regulation of jobs and working
conditions. Many of these successful measures were coherent with the
Venetian desire to build up England as the new world empire and as a
counterweight to the immense power of Spain.

At the death of Elizabeth, Robert Cecil masterminded the installation of
the Stuart King of Scotland as King James I of England. Cecil was for a
time James's key advisor. James I was a pederast and pedant, an
individual of flamboyant depravity, an open homosexual who made his male
lovers into the court favorites. In addition to pederasty, James aspired
to tyranny.

James I was a leading theoretician of the divine right of kings. He
delivered long speeches to the parliament, telling the wealthy
latifundists and the Puritan merchant oligarchs of London that they
could as little tell him what to do as they could tell God what to do.
Policy, said James, was "king's craft" and thus "far above their reach
and capacity." James I was an enthusiastic supporter of Paolo Sarpi in
Sarpi's 1606 struggle against the Papal Interdict. James I did this in
part because he thought he had received his crown directly from God,
without any mediation by the Pope. Venetian influence at the Stuart
court was accordingly very great. Sarpi even talked of retiring to
England.

James was also an occultist. Shakespeare left London not long after the
coming of James, and died after unwisely sitting down to drinks with the
Aristotelian hack Ben Jonson.

James's feeble pro-Spanish appeasement policy bitterly disappointed
Paolo Sarpi, Cecil's boss and the leading Venetian intelligence chief of
the era. James made peace with Spain in 1604, ending 19 years of war.
Cecil then tried to induce James into an anti-Spanish policy with a
planned provocation - Guy Fawkes and the Gunpowder plot of 1605. Sarpi
schemed to unleash the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648) as an apocalyptic
confrontation between Protestant and Catholic Europe, and he wanted
England in the fray. James's advisor Sir Francis Bacon of the Cecil
family urged James to enter the war against Spain and Austria, but James
first attempted to mediate the conflict and then did nothing. Charles I
was equally disappointing: he married the Catholic princess Henrietta
 Maria of France, and helped France to defeat the French Calvinists or
Huguenots - a Venetian asset - in their stronghold of LaRochelle.

The early Stuarts were unable to assert England as a great power because
war required taxes and taxes required the vote of Parliament, which they
did not wish to convoke, since it would undercut their claims of divine
right. Between 1628 and 1639 Charles I attempted to rule as an autocrat,
without calling a Parliament. English naval power grew so weak that even
ships bringing coal coastwise from Newcastle upon Tyne to London were
not protected from pirates. This outraged the City of London and its
Puritan merchants, followers of doctrines derived from Calvin of Geneva.


With their tirades about their own divine right, the early Stuarts were
violating a cardinal point of the Venetian political code. Venice was an
oligarchy ruled by at most a few thousand male nobles. In practice power
belonged to several dozen patrician leaders. But no single patrician was
strong enough to dominate all the rest as dictator. The Grand Council
(Maggior Consilgio) was the general assembly of the nobility, and
elected the Senate or Pregadi. The Grand Council, using a complicated
procedure, also elected the Doge or Duke, who occupied the highest post
in the state. The Doge was accordingly an elected and limited executive
who served for life. This office was never hereditary; when one Doge
died, a new one was elected by the Maggior Consiglio. The Doge was
surrounded by his cabinet or Collegio, including the savi or ministers
of various departments. Under this system the Doge was not the leader of
a nation and the protector of all the people, as an absolute monarch
might be; he was the chief functionary of a consortium of noble families
who owned and ran the state for the private profit of their own fondi.
For the Venetians, an oligarchy required the weak executive power of a
Doge, and this was the system they wanted transplanted into their clone,
England.

These issues were prominent in seventeenth-century Europe. Louis XIV of
France in his better moments exemplified the benefits of centralistic
absolutism as directed against the pro-Venetian French nobles
responsible for the civil wars of the Fronde and the wars of religion.
Colbert pursued economic unification by wiping out local interests
intent on collecting parasitical taxes. Louis compelled the great
nobility to be towel-boys and fixtures at Versailles, while the French
departments were ruled by Intendants sent by the king. A little later in
Russia some of the same issues were fought out between the centralizing
absolutist Peter the Great and the great latifundist nobles, known in
Russia as the boyars. Real economic and social development was best
served by breaking the power of the aristocracy. England, by contrast,
was the country where the triumph of the oligarchs was eventually most
complete. (This is even clearer if we bear in mind that the English
gentry and squires correspond to the level of count in the continental
titled aristocracy.) The English gentry were determined that they, and
not intendants from the government in Whitehall, would rule in the
shires.

When Charles I was forced to call a Parliament in 1640 because he needed
money, a conflict between oligarchy and monarchy developed. The House of
Commons theoretically represented men with property capable of bringing
in 40 shillings per year; this was the threshhold of free subjects who
had a stake in the state. The Commons were elected by about one tenth of
the people of England. The House of Lords was full of latifundists, but
it was estimated that the landowners and merchants of the House of
Commons were rich enough to buy the House of Lords three times over.
Parliamentary leaders like Pym and Hampden wanted to establish an
oligarchy by the surrender of the King to Parliament so they could build
up a navy and hasten the looting of the Spanish Empire in the Caribbean.
They wanted a more vigorous pursuit of the slave trade. Pym and Hampden
asserted Parliamentary authority by passing bills of impeachment and
attainder against royal favorites like Strafford and Archbishop Laud,
the head of the Church of England, who were both executed. In 1641
Charles I tried to arrest Pym and Hampden. The pro-Venetian City of
London, the ports, and the south and east of England rebelled against
this botched coup by the stupid King, who fled north. The English Civil
War or Puritan Revolution was on. Many English were appalled by the
miserable level of leadership and wretched programs of both the sides. A
contemporary wrote that many people tried to remain neutral because they
thought that "both sides raised an unlawful war, or ...could not tell
which (if either) was in the right...." The civil war was artifically
imposed by two rival London cliques, both under Venetian influence.

England would be the only major European country in which a war of
religion would be fought between two pro-Venetian Protestant factions --
the Anglican royalist cavaliers and the Parliamentary Puritan
roundheads. One result would be the liquidation of the remaining
positive and dirigist features of the Tudor state.

During the first phase of the civil war (1642-1646) there emerged two
factions among the Parliamentarian Roundheads. A more conservative group
favored a limited, defensive war against Charles I, followed by a
negotiated peace. They hoped to defeat Charles by using a foreign army,
preferably the Scottish one, in order to avoid arming the English lower
orders. The Scots demanded for England a Presbyterian state church on
the model of their own kirk - run by synods of Calvinist elders - but
that was what the majority of the Long Parliament wanted anyway. So this
faction came to be called the Presbyterians. Among them were the
Calvinist town oligarchy of London.

The other group wanted total war and eventually the execution of the
King, the end of the monarchy and the House of Lords. This group was
willing to accept a standing army of sectarian religious fanatics in
order to prevail. This group was called the Independents or
Congregationalists. They were favored by Venice. Oliver Cromwell emerged
as the leader of this second group.

Oliver Cromwell was a Venetian agent. Prominent in Oliver Cromwell's
family tree was the widely hated Venetian agent Thomas Cromwell
(1485-1540), Earl of Essex and the author of Henry VIII's decision to
break with Rome and found the Church of England. Oliver Cromwell
(1599-1658) was descended from Thomas Cromwell's sister. Oliver
Cromwell's uncle had married the widow of the Genoese- Venetian
financier Sir Horatio Pallavicini. This widow brought two children by
her marriage to Pallavicini and married them to her own later Cromwell
children. So the Cromwell family was intimately connected to the world
of Venetian finance. One of the leading figures of Parliament, John
Hampden, was Oliver Cromwell's cousin. Cromwell's home was in the Fens,
the large swamp in eastern England. The swamp-dwelling Venetians, true
to form, came to choose another swamp-dweller as their prime asset of
the moment.

Cromwell ridiculed the weakness of the Parliamentary army, which he said
was made up of "decayed tapsters" (elderly waiters). Cromwell's own
Ironsides regiment was made up of relatively well-off cavalrymen of
heterodox religious views. This regiment was highly effective against
the Royalist or Cavalier forces. The Ironsides contained numerous
Independents. It also contained many of the more extreme sects. Some of
the most important roots of modern communism can be found in the sects
represented in Cromwell's Ironsides.

After 1640, the censorship of printed books practically collapsed. The
church courts which prosecuted crimes like heresy and blasphemy broke
down. Especially in the City of London, but also in the countryside, a
lunatic fringe of radical religious sects began to gather followers.
What boiled up reflected the pervasive influence of Venetian kookery in
England going back to Wycliffe. Ideas came to the surface which went
back to Francesco Zorzi and Edmund Spenser, to Francis Bacon, Robert
Fludd and to Bernardino Ochino, one of Contarini's Italian Protestants
or spirituali who had been active in London around 1550 under Edward VI.


There were the Levellers, radical democrats of the Jeffersonian or sans
culotte type who wanted to expand the franchise for Parliamentary
elections - although they would have left half or more without the vote.
Apprentices, laborers, and servants would remain disenfranchised.
Levellers wanted no monarchy, no House of Lords, no monopolies, no
tithes, and no state church. Their petitions sound well today, but so do
parts of the Jacobin Club's Declaration of the Rights of Man. Among the
Leveller leaders were John Lilburne, Richard Overton, and Sir John
Wildman. The latter two were double agents, taking money from Royalists
as well as from Thurloe, the director of Cromwell's secret police.

Sir John Wildman was a land speculator and an agent of the Duke of
Buckingham (as Pepys's diary tells us). He plotted against every regime
from Cromwell to William III. He was a member of Harrington's Rota Club,
a nest of Venetian agents in 1659-1660. He appears as a classic type of
Venetian provocateur. Richard Overton was the author of the tract Mans
Mortalitie, which argues that the soul dies with the body -- the
Venetian heresy once again. As for Lilburne, he died in jail after
becoming a Quaker.

In 1647, with the Royalist forces wiped out, the Presbyterian faction
tried to disband the army, and the Levellers responded by electing
Agitators - in effect, political commissars - for each regiment. But the
Leveller movement was soon crushed by Cromwell.

Other groups owed their continued existence to the pro-toleration
policies of the Ironsides, which Cromwell often respected. There were
the True Levellers or Diggers, with Gerard Winstanley as main spokesman.
Winstanley supported mortalism, the Venetian heresy. The Diggers in 1649
began to form communes to squat on land and cultivate it - three
centuries before Chairman Mao. Their idea was primitive communism and
the abolition of wage labor. Private property they condemned as one of
the results of Adam's Fall. Their program was "Glory Here !", the
creation of heaven on earth. With the communist, materialist (and some
would say, atheist) Gerard Winstanley we see the Anglo-Venetian roots of
the later Marxism financed and directed by Lord Palmerston's stooge
David Urquhardt.

Then came the Ranters, devotees of the antinomian heresy, the free love
party. The Ranters, many of whom were ex-Levellers, held that sin and
the law had been abolished - at least for the elect - leaving mankind
with "perfect freedom and true Libertinism." Some of them thought that
fornication and adultery were positive religious duties, necessary to
enjoy a maximum of grace. Ranter leaders included Laurence Clarkson and
Abiezer Coppe. Clarkson supported mortalism, the Venetian heresy. The
Ranter John Robins proclaimed that he was God and agitated to lead
140,000 men to conquer the Holy Land - thus foreshadowing later British
policy in the Middle East. Ranters were heavily repressed.

The Quakers, a new sect in those days, had not yet made their pacifist
turn. Often Ranters became Quakers. Many of them were highly
militaristic troopers in Cromwell's New Model Army. Quakers were heavily
represented in the English army that carried out Cromwell's genocide
against Ireland. But Quaker James Naylor was cruelly punished for
blasphemy after he re-enacted at Bristol Christ's Palm Sunday entry into
Jerusalem. In 1657 the Quaker leader George Fox criticized the English
army because it had not yet seized Rome. Pacifism was adopted only after
the Stuart Restoration, in 1661.

The other group that came out of the Ranter milieu was the
Muggletonians, led by John Reeve and Lodowick Muggleton, who claimed
that they had been commissioned by God in 1652 to serve as the Two Last
Witnesses foretold in Revelation 11. Muggletonians supported mortalism,
the Venetian heresy; they were also anti-Trinitarians and materialists.
If formal positions on theological issues are counted up, John Milton
turns out to have been very close to the Muggletonians. The
Muggletonians kept going in Britain until about 1970.

The Fifth Monarchists were radical millenarians, believing that the
Second Coming and the Rule of the Saints were close at hand - some
thought as close as the Barebones Parliament convened under the
Commonwealth in 1653. Some Fifth Monarchists in the Barebones Parliament
wanted to re-impose the Mosaic law in place of the English common law,
and wanted a Sanhedrin of the Saints to assume state power. Diminishing
interest in the New Testament was also documented by the official
banning around this time of Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost
(Whitsunday), which were all condemned as popish idolatry. The roots of
the British Israelite movement are clearly revealed.

There were also the Seekers, who thought all existing religions were
inadequate; they cliamed they were still looking for the right one. One
Seeker was Milton's friend and language teacher Roger Williams, later of
Rhode Island. Finally, there were the extreme sectaries, parties of one,
unable to get along with any of the above. John Milton was an example of
these.

These were the Hydra-like components of the army which was Cromwell's
power base. Cromwell attacked all the sects at certain times, but leaned
heavily on them at other times. But he always relied for his power upon
the army of which the sectarians were the backbone. In 1648 Colonel
Pride, acting for Cromwell, expelled from the Long Parliament some 100
of the most Presbyterian members, some of whom had been negotiating
under the table with Charles I, by now a captive of the Army. What was
left was called the Rump Parliament. Cromwell then tried Charles I for
treason and executed him on 30 January 1649. The Commonwealth was
declared and the monarchy abolished.

Cromwell's problem was now to govern a country in which no elected
Parliment could countenance the army and its gun-toting sectarian
iconoclasts. The Rump, which harbored its own desires of becoming a
ruling oligarchy, was dispersed by Cromwell's troops in 1653. The next
Parliament, the Barebones, was a hand-picked selection of the godly,
many nominated by Independent congregations. The Barebones was modeled
as an oligarchy: it chose a Council of State as its own executive, and
was supposed to choose its own successors before it disbanded. Instead
Major General Thomas Harrison of the New Model Army, convinced he was
the Son of God, dominated the proceedings. A moderate faction around
Major Gen. Lambert caused the dissolution of the Barebones with a coup
de main. For many sectaries, Cromwell suddenly went from being the New
Moses to being the small horn of the Antichrist.

Cromwell accepted the Instrument of Government, the first written
constitution of England. The franchise was restricted, going up from the
old 40-shilling freehold to a personal net worth of 200 pounds, which
meant much greater wealth. The Parliament was made more oligarchical.
Cromwell was named Lord Protector. The Protector was backed up by a
Council of State of generals serving for life. The first Protectorate
Parliament refused to fund the standing army (now 57,000 troops) and
rebelled against toleration (toleration of the sects), so Cromwell
dissolved it in January 1655. This was already Cromwell's third
dissolution; he would ultimately make it four.

In March 1655 Cromwell decided in favor of a "thorough" Bonapartist
military dictatorship. The country was divided into 11 ad hoc districts,
and a Major-General of the army was put in charge of each district. The
Major-Generals controlled the local militia, ran the courts, appointed
all officials, and suppressed public immorality. All of this was done
arbitrarily, with little reference to law. At the same time secretary
Thurloe, the Lavrenti Beria of the regime, extended his secret tentacles
into every pore of society and into every country of Europe. The rule of
the Major-Generals prefigured European fascism. But they alienated many
oligarchs who found this interference far worse than that of Charles I.

The second Protectorate parliament was impelled by desperation to pass
the Humble Petition and Advice, which urged Cromwell to take up the
crown. But it was a doge's crown, a limited monarchy of the House of
Cromwell subject to Parliament. Under pressure from the army generals,
Cromwell declined the title of king but accepted all the rest. In
February 1658, Cromwell dissolved his last Parliament, and died the same
year. His son Richard attempted to rule, but left after a few months.
1659-1660 was a time of great chaos, with the restored Rump alternating
with direct army rule. Finally the army split into pieces; the commander
of the winning piece, Gen. Monck, joined the new Parliament in recalling
Charles II, the son of the executed Charles I.

Observing these events, the pro-Venetian writer John Milton -who had
been Latin secretary to Cromwell's council of state -lamented that the
City of London had concluded that "nothing but kingship can restore
trade." Milton's "Ready and Easy Way to Establish a Free Commonwealth",
issued in March, 1660, proposed a regime based on a Grand Council along
explicitly Venetian lines, with life tenure and co-optation of new
members. This could be obtained, Milton thought, by declaring the Rump
perpetual and capable of co-opting new members when the old ones died
off. Milton had wanted religious tolerance, but he was willing to
sacrifice this to obtain an oligarchy without a single-person executive.
Milton effusively praised Venice, which had made its "whole aristocracy
immovable" with similar methods.

During this time Milton was close to the Rota Club, a pro- Venetian
salon dominated by James Harrington, author of the book Oceana and one
of the most important Venetian ideologues in England. Harrington was the
direct precursor of the great Whig aristocrats of the Venetian Party who
were frequently in power after 1688. Other Rota members included
Milton's close friend Cyriack Skinner, the economist Sir William Petty,
the intelligence operative Sir John Wildman, the Fifth Monarchist Thomas
Venner (who had led and would lead abortive uprisings in London) the
diarist Samuel Pepys, and Andrew Marvell, poet and member of Parliament.
There was also the Rumper Henry Neville, who propagandized Harrington's
views in his political dialogue Plato Redivivus of 1681. There were Sir
John Hoskins, later president of the Royal Society, and Richard
Sackville, the Fifth Earl of Dorset. Charles II assumed power later in
1660.

Today some members of the British oligarchy are calling for the end of
the monarchy and the creation of a republic. We must recall that the
last time this was tried, the result was the fascist dictatorship of
Oliver Cromwell and his major-generals. A "republic" in Britain in the
early 21st century might turn out to be a military dictatorship rather
similar to Cromwell's, with animal rights freaks acting the part of the
Ranters and Diggers.

So what had the Puritan Revolution accomplished, beyond killing 500,000
persons? First, Cromwell had founded the British Empire. Between 1651
and 1660 he had added 200 warships to the British navy, more than the
early Stuarts had managed to build during their 40- year tenure.
Cromwell's war with the Dutch (1652-1654), which hardly made sense for a
Puritan, made plenty of sense in the light of the 1,700 Dutch ships
captured. Cromwell set up a convoy system for English merchant vessels,
including those bringing coal from Newcastle. The basis of British naval
domination was thus laid. After making peace with Holland, Cromwell made
war on Spain, in exact conformity with Venetian requirements. Cromwell
conquered: Jamaica, St. Helena, Surinam, Dunkirk, Nova Scotia and New
Brunswick (in Canada). In addition, he established the status of the
Portuguese Empire as a satellite and auxiliary of London. It was under
Cromwell that English ships established a permanent presence in the
Mediterranean; in his last years he was considering the conquest of
Gibraltar to facilitate this stationing. Jamaica, a center of the slave
trade, stood out in what was called the Western Design - making war on
Spain in the New World.

Cromwell was also personally responsible for the campaign of genocide
and starvation in Ireland that began with the 1649 massacre of the
garrison of Drogheda. Cromwell told the Parliament that if he waged war
according to international law and the rules of war, the campaign would
be too expensive. So Cromwell relied on massacres and famine. Cromwell's
genocide eventually killed about one third of the Irish population.
Cromwell also invaded and reduced Scotland, which had switched to the
Stuart cause in 1649. This laid the basis for the myth of a "British"
people as a label imposed on Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and English victims
of an oligarchy not of Englishmen, but of Venetians and their tools.
Until 1991 there was talk of a "Soviet" people, but this is now nowhere
to be found. Perhaps the fraud of a "British" people will also not
survive too long.

Cromwell's rule marked the triumph of free trade as it was understood at
that time. All attempts by government to supervise the quality of
production, to fix prices, to maintain jobs and employment, to influence
labor-management relations, or to influence wage rates were wholly
abandoned. The City of London demanded free trade. It got the abolition
of all industrial monopolies, which had previously covered some 700
staple products. Laissez-faire was established in every sphere. Whatever
the Restoration Stuarts tried to change in this regard was immediately
rolled back after 1688.

In the years after Cromwell it was estimated that cottagers and paupers,
laborers and servants, who had no property and no vote, made up half of
the population of England. One third of all English households were
exempted from the Hearth Tax because of their poverty. After 1660 wheat
prices were kept artifically high because, it was argued, only fear of
starvation could coerce the poor into working.

Under the Restoration the gentry and latifundists had been released from
their feudal dues to the King, but there was no protection for small
farmers and tenants. By 1700 the family farm was well on its way to
being wiped out in England, giving rise to a landless mass of
agricultural day laborers. The English countryside was full of de facto
serfs without land. Craftsmen and artisans in the towns were
increasingly wiped out by merchant oligarchs and bankers. Through this
brutal primitive accumulation, England acquired its propertyless
proletariat, forced to live by selling its labor. Usury became
thoroughly respectable. This is the world described by Karl Marx, but it
was created by Anglo-Venetian finance, and not by modern capitalism.
What might be called the middle class of small farmers and independent
producers was crushed, while Puritan initiatives in popular education
were suppressed. English society assumed the bipolar elite-mass
structure which is a hallmark of empires. As for oligarchism, it was
estimated in the 1690's that Parliamentary elections were under the
effective control of about 2,000 men.

Charles II, who had been deeply impressed by his father's death and the
civil war, was tolerated by the oligarchy because he had learned the
virtue of caution. But Charles II had not given up on his royal
prerogatives. During the 1670's Charles II became the satellite and
toady of Louis XIV of France, who paid him a subsidy which he used to
circumvent Parliament. This enraged the Venetian Party. By now, the
Venetians wanted to use England against the growing power of France,
which had supplanted Spain at the top of their hit list. In 1678 Titus
Oates alleged a new "popish plot" in which France, and no longer Spain,
was the bogey-man. Charles II announced on his death-bed that he was a
Roman Catholic, violating another key point of Venetian doctrine. That
his brother and successor James II had also become a Catholic had been
known and the center of political battle for some time. The Whig party,
the main vehicle of Venetian rule, made its mark at this time as the
group most devoted to a Protestant succession to the English throne.
James II was also in the pay of the Sun King.

When the Duke of Monmouth, the illegitimate but Protestant son of the
Charles II, attempted to land and stage an uprising, he was quickly
defeated. In response, James II's lackey Judge Jeffries brought his
Bloody Assizes court to the southwest of England, and began an orgy of
thousands of death sentences. James II was trying to set up a standing
army with Catholic officers, and put a Catholic admiral in charge of the
Royal navy. Louis XIV's revocation around this time of the Edict of
Nantes, which had provided toleration for Protestants, made it appear
plausible to some that James II would now attempt to play the role of
Bloody Mary. The Anglo-Venetians decided that they were fed up with the
the now-Catholic, pro-French and wholly useless Stuart dynasty. Repres
entatives of some of the leading oligarchical families signed an
invitation to the Dutch King, William of Orange, and his Queen Mary, a
daughter of James II. John Churchill, the future Duke of Marlborough,
was typical of James' former supporters who now went over to support
William and Mary. William landed and marched on London. This is called
by the British the "Glorious Revolution" of 1688; in reality it
consolidated the powers and prerogatives of the oligarchy, which were
expressed in the Bill of Rights of 1689. No taxes could be levied, no
army raised, and no laws suspended without the consent of the oligarchy
in Parliament. Members of Parliament were guaranteed immunity for their
political actions and free speech. Soon ministers could not stay in
office for long without the support of a majority of Parliament.
Parliament was supreme over the monarch and the state church. At the
same time, seats in Parliament were now bought and sold in a de facto
market. The greater the graft to be derived from a seat, the more a seat
was worth. Within a few years after the Glorious Revolution there was a
Bank of England and a national debt. When George I ascended the throne
in 1714, he knew he was a Doge, the primus inter pares of an oligarchy.

The regime that took shape in England after 1688 was the most perfect
copy of the Venetian oligarchy that was ever produced. There was a
flare-up of resistance during the reign of Queen Anne because of the
activity of the Tory Robert Harley and his ally Jonathan Swift; there
was also the threat that the Hannoverian succession might bring Leibniz
into England. Otherwise the Venetian Party was broadly hegemonic, and
Britain was soon the dominant world power. The English masses had been
so thoroughly crushed that little was heard from them for one and one
half centuries, until the Chartist agitation of the 1840's. The
franchise was not substantially expanded until after the American Civil
War, with industrial workers getting the vote in 1867 and farm laborers
allowed to cast ballots in 1884.

The struggles of the seventeenth-century England were thus decisive in
parlaying the strong Venetian influence which had existed before 1603
into the long-term domination by the British Venetian Party observable
after 1714. These developments are not phenomena of English history per
se. They can only be understood as aspects of the infiltration into
England of the metastatic Venetian oligarchy, which in its British
Imperial guise has remained the menace of mankind.

End



------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to Home Page
------------------------------------------------------------------------


-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
Omnia Bona Bonis,
All My Relations.
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
Kris

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to