The Emancipation of Nesta Webster: The Plot Against Civilization pp. 29-32

 One of the more interesting (in a frightening way) aspects of the conspiracy world is how much they seem to hate women. This isn’t hyperbole either. Conspiracy theorists on the right-wing extremist side want to return the world to an idealistic utopia where the men are in charge, everything is earned by their own grit, and women have literally no place in that world. Poke and prod enough with the question: what do you want to see happen; and you’ll get there.

This is especially the case now where you have the case for “trad wives” and the conspiracy world effectively dominated by alleged “alpha males” who view people like Jordan Peterson as philosophers and aspire to the ranks of accused sex trafficker Andrew Tate. It’s more open now and in our past books we haven’t really seen it either. The Protocols was written at a time when no one assumed a woman could hold a position of power, Robison is writing at a time where if voting was a possibility, women weren’t allowed to do it, and Kaysing—well he didn’t mention anything really.

We get to Webster’s book and women in the UK will have to wait seven more years from the time of publication before they can vote (1928). So, it will be interesting to see what Webster makes of the Illuminati’s attitude toward women. What we know from our previous readings, is that Weishaupt wanted women in the Illuminati; they were not going to be equal to the men, but they would still be admitted. This was progressive for the time.

Webster claims that the women members would be divided into two classes: “virtuous women who would give an air of respectability to the order” while the second “who would help satisfy those brothers who have a penchant for pleasure.”

I’m not quite certain if the second group is specifically prostitution or they just mean something akin to a Geisha. We know, from Robison (who isn’t cited in this section), that Weishaupt was aware of the potential for abuse and his system was that women would teach women, but the headmistress would answer to one of the men. There was always to be a wall between the men of the Illuminati and the female students. I don’t know what this says about the possibility of the second group being prostitutes, but it’s at least worth pointing out.

This inclusion of women was only done because it would swell the ranks of members and thus provide funds for the society. Webster treats this like a bad thing, but isn’t that the point of creating these groups? To have lots of members. This reminds me of a criticism against Disney when they cast someone of a different race/ethnicity in a role: “they’re only doing that for money.” Ok, and…?

If they wanted to influence society, they should be casting the widest net possible for members. If one half of the population is being ignored, and the other half is fractured about certain positions, taking that other half into the fold just makes sense. Weishaupt also, gasp, tried to recruit the poor and uneducated into his society about spreading education. I’m not sure what Webster’s issue is, is she upset that poor people are being recruited or that no one else thought of this? Is she trying to make her reader upset in the same way that Robison was trying to shock the reader with stories of unescorted women attending the opera with exposed shoulders?

That’s it. She drops the subject of women entirely to talk about spies. Here we get a mix of conspiracy and reality. The Illuminati did place members in various professional occupations, but again, this is about expanding their influence. They tried to recruit important people because they wanted to become something more influential than an 18th century club for Bavarian nerds. What confuses me about this revelation is that it’s no different than how the Labour party, the Socialist party, or the Conservative party recruited people. The difference is that the Illuminati is wholly a product of enlightenment thinking and this challenges the orthodoxy.

Most of what follows next is a telling of how the Freemasons recruited Weishaupt. This is a different telling of the story than I have heard. From my reading, Weishaupt was already a Mason when he created the Illuminati. He created the latter because he didn’t like the conformity of Masonry and rigid hierarchy. It was in Masonry that he was inspired to make rituals and keep secrecy. Here, Webster, has the Masons recruiting the Illuminati because they represented a way to complete their mission.

“But it was not until the Congres de Wilhelmsbad that the alliance between Illuminism and Freemasonry was finally sealed. This assembly, of which the importance to the subsequent history of the world has never been appreciated by historians, met for the first time on the 16th of July 1782, and included representatives of all the Secret Societies—Martinists as well as Freemasons and Illuminati—which now numbered no less than three million members all over the world.”

I love this paragraph because it lays out exactly what the conspiracy is—a great conference of the secret societies. However, the problem is that we cannot trust this information. The Illuminati never extended outside of Bavaria and the idea that the Masons would need them is ridiculous considering that Masonic lodges existed throughout the entirety of Europe. If anything, such a union would be more like a Walmart buying up all of the stores in an area to crush competition.

Conspiracy theory lore runs with Webster’s interpretation, but the only evidence for it is that a high-ranking member of the Masons, Baron Knigge was also in the Illuminati, and he attended the meeting. If the Illuminati took over the Masons here, it’s a bit odd that Knigge would abandon the Illuminati two years later.

“What passed at this terrible congress will never be known to the outside world, for even those men who had been drawn unwittingly into the movement and now heard for the first time the real designs of the leaders, were under oath to reveal nothing.”

I love this kind of sentence because it completely reveals that Webster (or her source) is making this up. It’s also completely implausible. If they kept the secret they agreed to the plan that’s the only possible explanation. This is the conspiracy theorists’ paradox: it’s so secret and so competent but only we happy few can know the secret.

The most important thing though is that Webster has laid out the conspiracy. The Illuminati took over Freemasonry (and I guess the Martinists) and now can begin their campaign. We can assume that it’s about the French Revolution which is going to begin formally on Bastille Day merely seven years later, but we will have to find out.