Conspiracy Theorists are constantly accused of having an overly simplified view of things. This is in my view absurd, we're fully aware of the complexities of politics, our theories only add more layers of complexity, not take any away. Maybe we do indeed sound simplistic about it sometimes, but if you really pay attention we're not, not the best of us. I kind of addressed this already in one of my earliest posts. That was made in it's earliest form before I came to many of the conclusions I have now however.
In the early history of Masonic conspiracies, no where is this more frequently an issue then The French Revolution. By accusing Masonic instigators of being the architects we're accused of being ignorant of the hardships faced by the common people of France that had been building up for generations before modern Freemasonry was even formed in the 17teens. I can assure you I have no such ignorance, one does not watch all 40 episodes of Rose of Versailles in one day loving every minute of it if they have no sympathy for the plight of peasants. Also my favorite Musical is Les Miserables, which leads me to recommend this LesMis/RoV AMV.
And I express my Biblical disapproval of Monarchism on another Blog.
It's likely France was targeted precisely because of all the circumstances that made it a fertile ground for Revolution. But I'll go well beyond that, I do believe Revolution was inevitable in France even if the conspirators had done nothing. It's more about them seeking to control the Revolution, just as the elite have hijacked and taken control of the Tea Party and Occupy Wallstreet movements today.
The main thing I do not think would have been the case if the Revolution had grown organically is how strongly it was driven by Atheist, Deist and anti-Christian sentiments. That is something that was inserted by certain egotistical intellectuals who thought the Revolution needed them in order to work. Yes the Catholic clergy was corrupt and out of touch, but previously in most countries people getting sick of them lead to Protestantism. So anti-Catholic sentiments may have been inevitable, but there were French Protestants who'd been victimized by the Crown before "Rationalism" started.
The claim has been made by some that the King was trying to work with the Revolutionaries to come to some agreement like a Constitutional Monarchy. I do not currently feel qualified to asses the accuracy of that claim.
For evidence to general Masonic Influence on the Revolution read this article by Terry Meleanson.
There are indeed some conspiracy theorists who feel compelled to tie the Bavarian Illuminati to just one of the many factions among the revolutionaries. But I don't see things as that simple, just as the modern conspirators attached themselves to Republicans and Democrats, so I believe it was then too. Any discussion of specifically the Illuminati's role should be viewed in the context of my earlier post on them.
Bode became chief executive of the order in 1784, he traveled to France in 1787. He recruited many Illuminati from the Masonic Lodges of France. Particularly the Philalethes. Among people proven and documented to have become Illuminati at this time were Charles-Pierre-Paul, Marquis de Savalette de Langes (1745-1797) and Alexandre-Louis Roëttiers de Montaleau (1748-1808). Both of whom had direct ties to the Duke of Orleans, the Grand Master of French Freemasonry leading up to the Revolution. Montaleau become the head of French Freemasonry after the Revolution.
Another known Illuminati member to contribute to the Revolution was Johann Caspar [Jean Gaspard] Schweizer (1754-1811).
It is popular to speculate members beyond those we can prove, Terry Melanson suspects Mirabeu, and Marco di Luchetti suspects Nicolas Bonneville. For both of them having defended the Illuminati is the main circumstantial evidence, which Thomas Jefferson also did.
The thing that's important to remember is the Illuminati as it originally was was dying in 1787, Bode helped form a secret society within French Freemasonry at that time, and it's possible only the earliest direct recruits of his were initiated into the Illuminati proper, but those who become part of this new order without such an initiation were no less important to it.
Luchetti seems to feel Bonneville was a direct recruit of Bode however, If Bode's own records of his 1787 trip had mentioned Bonneville as a recruit I don't think Melanson would be as skeptical of his membership as he is.
The key thing is, almost anyone in French Masonry could have been officially or unofficially a part of what Bode started, it's impossible to know for sure.
Brissiot was also a known Freemason. Brissiot and Bonneville were the real ideological leaders of the early Revolution, before it was hijacked by jerks like Marat and Robespierre. Eventually Brissiot and his allies became derogatorily known as the Girondions
The thing that does work against the usual conspiracy theory narrative is that the men most responsible for the Terror (Marat, Danton, Robsepierre, ect) are the ones least likely to have Illuminati connections, and flimsy even in their Masonic connections. It seems the Masons unleashed a monster they couldn't control. Buonarroti was the one person with debatable Illuminati ties who was of Robsepierre's way of thinking, he'll be discussed in a future post eventually.
Bonneville's camp were indeed the men in the Revolution most ideologically similar to the political theories advocated by Weishaupt and Kingge. And besides being so anti-Christian I don't consider what their political ideas were to be the worst. But the way Weishaupt ran the order showed he tended to be very controlling. I enjoy a great deal of Luchetti's political analysis, but he slips on the secret society aspect. Another chief villain of Luchetti's narrative is Buonarroti.