Among the revolutionary leaders, a few aristocrats realised what they
had done and the demonic nature of any revolution in the modern
sense, when it was already too late to go astern. So did Napoleon I,
with whom it seems to us that Napoleon III and his esoteric mumbo-
jumbo cannot be compared in any way both in terms of statesmanship
and in human terms. In 'Men among the Ruins', Evola tempers the
severity of the judgement of Burhnam and Michels on Bonapartism but
doesn't say a word about the ambiguous historical character whom
Napoleon I was.
Some of the positive aspects of Napoleon I's political line have been
brought to light, indirectly, by E. Mullins, still in 'The New
History of the Jews' : "The battle of waterloo signified the end of
gentile independence from the Jews in Europe Napoleon was unshakeable
in his determination that the Jews should obey the laws of the
Empire. The other European nations were governed by aristocrats who
were indebted to the Jews. When Napoleon made his triumphant return
from Elba, the Rothschilds immediately guaranteed huge loans to every
European country which would send an army against him. As a result,
Napoleon faced a vast coalition at Waterloo. It was the first
instance of the Jewish technique of enlisting "Allied" nations to
fight their enemies for them."
"During the Battle of Waterloo, the London stockbrokers were fearful
of the outcome. Despite the tremendous force arrayed against him,
Napoleon was still known as the most brilliant general in Europe.
Because the Jews specialized in exchanging information, Nathan Mayer
Rothschild, head of the House of Rothschild, had made arrangements to
learn the outcome of the battle from London. No sooner had Napoleon's
troops been defeated than a lieutenant of Rothschild hurried to the
hill overlooking the Channel, and late that night, he sent the
message by winking lights, "Napoleon has lost". Then he released a
carrier pigeon bound for the London Stock Exchange with the
message, "Napoleon has won"."
"When Nathan Mayer Rothschild came swaggering into the Stock Exchange
the next morning, all was pandemonium. At the news that Napoleon had
won, everyone tried to unload their stocks at any price. Only
Tothschild knew the truth, and he bought everything that was offered
(...) When the Exchange closed that afternoon, he owned sixty-two per
cent of all shares listed on the Exchange. Many of the great names of
England were ruined that day. The next morning, London awoke to learn
the truth - Napoleon had been crushed. The London aristocrats who had
been ruined on the Exchange now hurried to do Rothschild's bidding.
The Duke of Marlborough, who had led the British Army to victory at
Waterloo, became Rothschild's ally, after Rothschild had raised a
large purse, from the public, of course, and presented it to him.
Marlborough became a loyal henchman of the Jews, just as, one hundred
years later, his descendant, Winston Churchill, or W. C., as he was
known to his subjects (meaning water-closet), became the faceless
tool of Baruch and the Rothschilds."
As the master of Europe and the victor over his gentile enemy,
Napoleon, the merciless Rothschild had the fallen Emperor shipped to
a remote Atlantic island and slowly poisoned with arsenic until he
died. Now Rothschild forced all the European nations to take large
loans from him. As soon as the nations borrowed the money, the Jews
moved into official positions. The real celebration of the Jewish
victory was the Congress of Vienna in 1815. Rothschild ordered the
European rulers to meet in Vienna and draft a plan which would make
it impossible for another Napoleon to rise to power. They developed
the "balance of power" plan, whereby, if any European nation began to
get too powerful, the other nations would rally and attack it. In
effect, it meant that any future enemy of the Jews would have to face
the armies of the other nations, as later occurred against Hitler",
who, as is known, ordered on the 15th of December 1940 that the
remains of Napoleon's son, Napoleon II (1811-1832), Duke of
Reichstadt, be moved from the Kaisergruft in Vienna to lie beside
Napoleon's tomb in the Invalides.
Incidentally, it is not by chance that the bicentennial of the battle
of Austerlitz has given rise to unprecedented attacks against the
figure of Napoleon I from the representatives of
coloured 'minorities' in occupied France.
--- In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "vandermok" <vandermok@l...>
wrote:
>
> Napoleon I pursued the legendary Iron Crown (now in Monza), symbol
of the authority of the mythical chain of the Kings of Rome, made,
according to the legend, of the nails of the crucifixion.
> He was crowned King of Italy in Milano the 26th May 1805, after
being crowned Emperor by the pope Pio VII in Nôtre Dame the 2nd of
December 1804, and after having crowned Josephine Empress of the
French, as the ritual prescribed.
>
> Without doubt, Napoleon had the support of the Masonry and other
secret societies, which let him out from the nowhere, like happened
to other historical personages, probably Hitler enclosed. He
introduced in the Loges four 'uncles' and five 'nieces', but when he
tried to replace the Phrygian Cap - of Cybele and of the revolution -
with the imperial idea, the support of the sects failed.
>
> So, we can guess Napoleon I (like Napoleon III) tried to 'use' the
revolution, even if his Bonapartism aimed at an ambiguous 'new
society'. It is true that Napoleon I stated: "I'm the Revolution",
and also "The Empire is the Revolution", but in his 'Memorial', he
said too: "A revolution is the worst evil that heaven can send for
tormenting the earth".
>
>
>
> In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com
> evola_as_he_is <evola_as_he_is@y...>
> wrote:
>
> Napoleon I who, as stressed a few days ago, was, with the man who
led
> Germany from 1933 to 1945, one of the very few modern European
> statesmen who had a truly manly attitude towards women, both in
> private life and in public life, founded on the 5th of June 1805,
on
> the occasion of his being crowned King of Italy in Milan,
the 'Ordine
> della Corona di ferro' ('The Order of the Iron Crown'), for service
> rendered to the Crown both in the career of arms and in that of
> administration, of magistracy, of letters and of arts. It was an
> order of merit, clearly not dynastic. Unfortunately, Napoleon
> Bonaparte was overcome by Bonapartism, as showed by Evola in 'Men
> among the Ruins'
>
> You ask whether the nine points of 'The Order of the Iron Wreath'
> were ever put into practice or they exist purely in the theoretical
> stages. What do you think?
>