Primitivism by Adam Weishaput
This is a lecture, by Adam Weishaupt, that was given to those who were initiated into the Epopt, or Priest, degree of the Illuminati. This lecture is from the book called Perfectibilits, by Terry Melanson, which has a lot of reliable information on the Illuminati that is based on historical evidence. This lecture by Adam Weishaupt seems to be promoting the exact opposite of the giant global government that conspiracy theorists accuse Adam Weishaupt of promoting. In this lecture he is clearly promoting a much more primitive form of society that used to exist. It makes sense because Man has been around for around 200 000 years and what is the system that has existed for most of that time? It was small society. This is the system that Mankind has developed with for much longer than anything else and it is hard wired into people. This type of ideology isn't promoted by any educational institutions, because they can only think in a big society paradigm and there is no other type of society possible. The big society paradigm has only existed for around 5000 years and it has been nothing but dysfunctional as evidence by the 5000 years of near continuous warfare, brutality, greed etc. Conservatives are against big government, Liberals are against big corporations, but primitivism is against big society itself. A big society will always be dysfunctional, no matter what ideology people come up with. If big, hierarchical, corrupt societies, with all their laws, armies, economies, rulers etc, hasn't worked out for the past 5000 years, what makes people think it will ever work? The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Obviously it's not practical to expect Mankind will go back to its primitive origins and that would be a bad idea to give up all the progress made, but the structure and standards should be pursued, there should be some kind of reconciliation between the modern technological society and the old ways that Mankind developed with. "Nature makes us begin at infancy, from infancy she raises us to manhood. She at first left us in the savage state, but soon brought us to civilization.... The first age of mankind is that of savage and uncouth nature. A family is the whole society; hunger and thirst easily quenched, a shelter from the inclemency of the seasons, a woman, and, after fatigue, rest, are then the only wants. At that period men enjoyed the two most inestimable blessings of Equality and Liberty; they enjoyed them to their utmost extent; they would have forever enjoyed them, had they chosen to follow the track which Nature had traced for them-or had it not entered the plans of God and Nature first to show man for what happiness lie was destined; happiness the more precious, as he had begun by tasting it; happiness so early lost, but instantaneously regretted and fruitlessly sought after, until he should have learned how to make proper use of his strength, and how to conduct himself in his intercourse with the rest of mankind. In his primitive state he was destitute of the conveniences of life, but he was not on that account unhappy; not knowing them, he did not feel the want of them. Health was his ordinary state, and physical pain was his only source of uneasiness-Oh happy mortals! who were not sufficiently enlightened to disturb the repose of your mind, or to feel those great agents of our miseries the lover of power and of distinctions, the propensity to sensuality, the thirst after the representative signs of all wealth, those truly original sins with all their progeny, envy, avarice, intemperance, sickness, and all the tortures of imagination!
An infortunate germ soon vivifies in the breast of man, and his primitive peace and felicity disappear: As families multiplied, the means of subsistence began to fail; the nomade (or roaming) life ceased, and property started into existence; men chose habitations; agriculture made them intermix. Language became universal; living together, one man began to measure his strength with another, and the weaker were distinguished from the stronger. This undoubtedly created the idea of mutual defence, of one individual governing divers families reunited, and of thus defending their persons and their fields against the invasion of an enemy; but hence liberty was ruined in its foundation, and equality disappeared.
Oppressed with wants unknown until that period, man perceived that his own powers were no longer sufficient. To supply this defect, the weakest imprudently submitted to the strongest or to the wisest; not however to be ill-treated, but that he might be protected, conducted, and enlightened.-All submission, therefore, even of the most unpolished mortal, has an existence only in as much as he wants the person to whom he subjects himself, and on the express condition that that person can succour him. His power ceases when my weakness no longer exists, or when another acquires superiority. Kings are fathers; the paternal power is at an end when the child has acquired his strength. The father would offend his children if he pretended to prolong his rights beyond that term. Every man having attained to years of discretion may govern himself; when a whole nation therefore is arrived at that period, there can exist no further plea for keeping it in wardship.
Never did strength submit to weakness.-Nature has destined the weak to serve, because they have wants; the strong man to govern, because he can be useful. Let the one lose his force, and the other acquire it, they will then change situations, and he that obeyed will command. He that stands in need of another, also depends upon him, and he has renounced to him his rights. Hence few wants is the first step towards liberty. It is for this reason that the savages are the most enlightened of men, and perhaps they alone are free. When wants are durable, servitude is also lasting. Safety is a durable want. Had men refrained from all injustice, they would have remained free; it was injustice which made them bend beneath the yoke. To acquire safety, they deposited the whole force in the hands of one man; and thus created a new evil, that of fear. The work of their own hands frightened them; and to live in safety they robbed themselves of that very safety. This is the cause of our governments.-Where then shall we find a protecting force? In union; but how rare, alas! is that union, except in our new and secret associations, better guided by wisdom, and leagued in straiter [sic] bonds! and hence it is that nature itself inclines us toward these associations. ... Nature drew men from the savage state and re-united them in civil societies; from these societies we proceed to further wishes, and to a wiser choice. New associations present themselves to these wishes, and by their means we return to the state whence we came, not again to run the former course, but better to enjoy our new destiny-let us explain this mystery.
Men then had passed from their peaceable state to the yoke of servitude; Eden, that terrestrial paradise, was lost to them. Subject of sin and slavery, they were reduced to servitude and obliged to gain their bread by the sweat of their brow.-In the number of these men some promised to protect, and thus became their chiefs-at first they reigned over herds or clans-these were soon conquered, or united together in order to form a numerous people; hence arose nations and their chiefs-kings of nations. At the formation of states and nations, the world ceased to be a great family, to be a single empire; the great bond of nature was rend asunder ... [T]hey ceased to acknowledge a common name-Nationalism, or the love for a particular nation, took place of the general love. With the division of the globe, and of its states, benevolence was restrained within certain limits, beyond which it could no longer trespass.-Then it became a merit to extend the bounds of states at the expence [sic] of the neighbouring ones. Then it became lawful to abuse, offend, and despise foreigners, to attain that end-and this virtue was styled patriotism, and he was styled a patriot who, just toward his countrymen, and unjust to others, was blind to the merits of strangers, and believed the very vices of his own country to be perfections.-In such a case, why not restrain that lover within a narrower compass, to citizens living in the same town, or to the members of one family; or why even should not each person have concentrated his affections in himself. We really beheld Patriotism generating Localism, the confined spirit of families, and at length Egoism. Hence the origin of states and governments, and of civil society, has really proved to be the seed of discord, and Patriotism has found its punishment in itself.... Diminish, reject that love of the country, and mankind will once more learn to know and love each other as men. Partiality being cast aside, that union of hearts will once more appear and expand itself-on the contraryu, extend the bonds of Patriotism, and you will teach man that it is impossible to blame the closer contraction of love, to a single family, to a single person, in a word, to the strictest Egoism."