The word revolution is a banker’s term. It was used by the owners of the East India Company when they launched their first revolution, in England, in 1688. It was called the Glorious Revolution. A revolution is a well-planned, well-financed affair that succeeds and is permanent in nature. It is always part of a bigger plan for a better world. The Glorious, Industrial, American and French revolutions are all interrelated, and they opened the door to the great world we live in today. A war, an uprising, a rebellion, a revolt, or a military coup can only be called a revolution if it succeeds and is permanent in nature, in other words, if it has the international financiers’ approval.
When the owners of the East India Company decided to finance the construction of the chateau de Versailles, it was with the aim of destroying the Holy Roman Empire. Naturally, they started with the most obvious target, France, its crown jewel. The construction of the chateau was the first step in a long series of events that would lead to the French Revolution. Construction of the chateau began in 1661, and by 1678, it looked like the chateau we know today. Once things were well under way in France, the owners of the East India Company turned their full attention to the upcoming Glorious Revolution. In 1688, that revolution would give England a constitutional monarchy, and the world a new form of government called democracy.
After his father’s execution in 1649, Charles II of England had fled to the Netherlands where he had lived in exile until he had been invited back in 1660 after Cromwell’s demise. He subsequently wore the English crown from 1660 until his death in 1685. As the shareholders of the East India Company had expected, much of England grumbled under his rule because he was for letting Catholics sit in parliament, and because he had befriended King Louis XIV of France. The shareholders of the East India Company, who effectively ran the Netherlands, did their best to encourage the antipapist feelings, hoping to have him deposed and replaced with a constitutional monarch. When, in 1672, king Charles asked Louis XIV to do him a favor and declare war on the Netherlands, it was time to act and figure out a plan.
Since Charles II had no legitimate heir, his younger brother, James II, a catholic, was next in line. They would wait for Charles’ term to run out, while continuing to stoke anti-royalist feelings among English parliamentarians. Then, since James II had a daughter who was being raised as an Anglican, arranging a marriage between her and William III seemed to be a good long-term goal. As a Catholic, James II would be easy to overthrow, and when the time came, the crown would be handed to Mary who was next in line.
In 1677, the marriage between Mary II of England and William III of Orange was celebrated in St. James Palace, and it wasn’t a happy affair. At fifteen, an arranged marriage with a much older and repulsive William was not meant to make Mary happy, and she cried throughout the whole ceremony. She had a very unhappy life, especially while in the Netherlands, where she lived for the first eleven years of their marriage. William was a homosexual who spent most of his time leading a double life away from home, and Mary spent all that time in a castle on the outskirts of The Hague. She returned to England in 1688 after the “Immortal Seven” invited her and her husband to come to England and wear the crown. William landed in England with a small army, and he marched on London without hardly firing a shot. James II took off for France, and parliament subsequently declared the crown vacant. William and Mary were then both offered the crown after signing the Bill of Rights which precluded that they submit to parliament’s authority and have no catholic descendants. That series of events is known in the history books as the Glorious Revolution.
However, that was only half of what was to be democracy, England now needed a financial institution. And as it so happened, not about to throw in the towel, and wanting James II to reclaim the crown of England, the Pope gave the financiers the perfect opportunity to create the Bank of England. The French king’s powerful navy gave the English navy a good drubbing as it went about invading England by way of Ireland. Naturally, the English parliament was asked by King William to retaliate and build a strong navy. But since no public funds were available, and since the credit of William III’s government was non-existent, it was impossible for parliament to borrow the huge sums needed. The East India Company shareholders were waiting for just that moment. They readily offered to become private subscribers providing they be incorporated into a company that would be known as the Bank of England. The bank was to be given exclusive lending rights to the government, and it was to be the only entity allowed to issue bank notes or coin money. Once the conditions were accepted, the necessary funds were raised in a matter of days, and the private financial institution known to this day as the Bank of England was created
For the first time in the history of mankind, the bankers were sure of being repaid in an orderly and just fashion. Parliament got rid of the antiquated Farmers’ General tax collection system inherited from France and proceeded to develop the country’s infrastructure in order to be better able to collect taxes. The shareholders of the East India Company had wanted an autonomous parliament because they were banking on a human foible whereby the people’s representatives, once their political campaigns, elections and salaries properly funded, would want to prove their worth and do things before taxes were collected. Since the Bank of England’s shareholders, now established in the City and in control of the English monetary system, could accept or refuse to finance the parliamentarians’ projects, they indirectly controlled all important developments in the country. That was democracy then, just as it today, and it’s the owners of the East India Company who created the concept. Democracy can only work if the concerned country is indebted, and a democracy is always indebted.
If democracy has proven itself to be the best political system in the world, it’s because people representation and monetary control are separate. The people’s representatives manage things while the bankers decide what’s to be managed by increasing or decreasing the flow of credit. If the one who prints the money is the same as the one who spends it, that is, if the parliamentarians do the printing and the spending, the system can only implode.