Copy-edited version. Posted 10:44am edt, 8/27/2012.
The following is a report bearing upon the current prospects for the survival of mankind. I include within it, not only the consideration of presently crucial trends and developments, but add, and will conclude with some necessary, deeper references to the roots of these matters of forecasting, with emphasis on roots dating from the late 1950s through the 1970s and 1980s.
The first issue of principle to be kept in mind, in reading the report as a whole, is the pathological implications of reliance on the intrinsically incompetent, but still popular, statistical-mathematical modes of economic forecasting. However, let us come to that point in the history of this process in due course. First, let us consider the immediate crisis-situation itself.
At this present moment, there are two mutually contradictory options respecting the continued survival of the human species. One, is typified by the present lurch toward virtually global thermonuclear war, an option which is presently centered in the strategic policies of either U.S. President Barack Obama himself, or someone using Obama as if he were a mere puppet. The only realistic choice of alternative to that at the present point of the trans-Atlantic economic-breakdown crisis, would be the triple-point package which I have presented as what would be the only presently available alternative to a currently onrushing economic breakdown crisis:
- Immediate re-enactment of President Franklin Roosevelt’s 1933 Glass-Steagall Act.
- Replacing the presently hopelessly bankrupt, present U.S. monetarist system, by a banking system based on the principle of national credit.
- The immediate launching of a modern replication (NAWAPA XXI) of the original NAWAPA program of management of North American water-resources, estimated to provide 4 million skilled places of employment, as supplemented by an additional 2 million other high-quality machine-tool-grade and closely related places of employment, including the re-establishment of a “full throttle” NASA program for defense of Earth in the range of Mars-orbit and beyond.
Were Obama to succeed in his prospective candidacy for a second term in office, two consequences were the likely ones: (a) thermonuclear warfare is more or less an immediate likelihood, and, (b) a near-extinction of the human species might be reasonably expected to occur either soon after President Obama’s renomination, or not distant from the time of his actual re-election. Under those two conditions, human life on this planet could not be reasonably expected to escape the actual, or virtual near-doom of mankind which an actually needless thermonuclear war between the U.S.A. and Obama’s presently continuing list of designated targets implies. That list has included: nations such as Libya (already done by lawbreaker Obama), Syria, and Iran (actively targeted now), and includes the thermonuclear powers Russia and China as intended targets for a thermonuclear war launched as the nominal intention of a President Obama.
I must add to that list of threats, the cowardice which I have recently witnessed from so many U.S. citizens on that account. That still surprises me, but only with its enormity, once all were considered in the light of all those relevant factors which I have seen since the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert. “How were it possible, that thinking adult citizens of the United States would even imagine that Obama’s intention is not the inception of thermonuclear warfare against a group of targeted nations including Russia, China and others?” It would be a war launched with full-blast qualities of thermonuclear blows, on both sides. It would be a war, which would represent a commitment to virtual extinction of the present world population, either by the attacks themselves, or as the aftermath expressed as the fruit of the consequences facing every part of this planet after an opening of full-scale exchange of fire, by and against both Obama and his selected targets. How dumb (or, simply cowardly) could so many among our nation’s putative leaders have become!?
Such a war as that which Barack Obama has implicitly demanded of the U.S.A., as since his unlawful Libya atrocity, would mean, in its effects, the virtually inevitable extinction of the human species on Earth. Who, then, could be so dumb or silly, then, as to wish his re-election? Above all else, Obama must go into a forced retirement tantamount to what should have been his impeachment long since, while there were still a living human species in our republic to defend. Admittedly, we of the United States have fallen a long way down on the scale of moral values since heroes of the likeness of our President Franklin D. Roosevelt, or Roosevelt’s martyred follower, John F. Kennedy; but, despite our self-inflicted disgrace on that account, we still have an honorable right, as human beings, to continue to exist, an existence which the continued incumbency of President Barack Obama would, according to him, deny us.
Happily, this will not be the end of the crucial matters at hand. There are at least a few good reasons for hope, as follows.
With the successful arrival of “Curiosity” at its intended destination, an entirely new, hopeful state of strategic affairs has been delivered: the safe arrival of “Curiosity” at its intended destination. “Curiosity’s” successful landing, now brings mankind, as a whole, to the feasibility of proceeding to organize the defense of Earth against presently existing, deadly threats to Earth from the region of space including Earth, such as Mars, and the vicinity of Venus. It gives us, among other benefits, the justified hope to believe, that the human species might find succor, whenever, and wherever it is within the reach that is needed, for the continuation of that great mission which we have yet to come to know fully.
On the other hand, one “rather awesome rock,” for example, unless prevented, could mean a more or less vast destruction of some region on the surface of Earth, or even, in the extreme case, the extinction of the human species. This would include those silly victims who had insisted: “I didn’t read what you are saying in any newspaper which I read.” Wars fought “on the table,” should not be aimed to annihilate the table itself.
However, “motives for peace” aside, it should have been evident, long since, that the human species was not created with the intention of gratifying those homicidal impulses which have been exhibited by a Barack Obama, as those impulses have been shown toward a Libya, and now to Syria, Iran, and others, of anyone with a temperament like Obama’s own. To understand this situation, we must bring the nation’s overview of its obligations in decision-making in such matters, beyond the domain of even what has been long known as that of “the oligarchical principle,” and outside what have been the underlying phenomena of that specifically “oligarchical” type, already long-since typified by the case of the temperament of the original Roman Empire of creatures such as that Emperor Nero whom Obama has tended to mimic in his Hitler-like health-care policies thus far, and his habits of outright homicide thus far. The oligarchical principle must be efficiently excluded from the permitted strategic practice of nations.
As the greatest of our known poets and dramatists already knew, and historians and statesmen should have known, the oligarchical prototype is one which serves a chosen sort of a wicked master all its own. The institution of humanity which sane human beings must recognize as their proper constituency, is typified by those who are prepared to discover evidence supporting the possible past residence of the human species, or its likeness, on Mars, or beyond, a species on whose behalf we must be determined to build whatever defense might be needed on behalf of any species with the characteristics of our own.
When we will have taken adequately into account what we have come to recognize now as if our own mission, we must then recognize an implicit mission assigned to the future development of our human species, or its future likeness. It is a development arising from our devoted search for a fuller understanding of what a distant destiny would have us become. That is key to the proper morality which must guide us henceforth.
That much said by, perhaps, some ancient poet within us, turn now to the science of what is to be fairly recognized as the more awesome among the presently immediate implications of certain developments of recent decades of history, up to the present date. The present threat to the continued existance of the human species should now be clear to those thinking clearly respecting the facts of the matter: the question is, how did this present horror come about, and how might we be rid of it?
Let us now proceed accordingly, clear-headed and at a reasonable pace. Begin with a convenient definition of the need for an unbroken link of the wishful close of what was called “World War II,” otherwise to be recognized as the presently organized beginning of what was to begin the long march into a presently, immediately threatened thermonuclear World War III. The attempt to launch such a war, as by U.S. President Barack Obama, is to be recognized and banned, on the premises of its nature, as the gravest of all possible crimes against humanity, as to be judged as under natural law.
We must, therefore, now consider relevant precedents and related examples.
The presently continuing threat, as by President Barack Obama presently, of mutual, threatened war of implicit self-extinction of the human species, was first set into apparently actual motion, as a proposal for nuclear war which had been proposed publicly by British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Bertrand Russell, during the close of the Summer of 1946.
At that time, the British threat of such pre-emptive actions by those primary sources, was presumed, from and by London, to occur under the influence of the British empire’s Winston Churchill and Churchill’s puppet of that moment, U.S. President Harry S Truman. This was the case, when they had unleashed a far worse than merely useless, nuclear bombardment of an already hopelessly defeated Japan. General Douglas MacArthur’s forces had won President Franklin Roosevelt’s war in the Pacific; Churchill and Truman concluded it as a wicked farce—and new wars to come.
Then, behind this turn at that time, there was not only Churchill, but that cowardly and eternally insolent terrorist, the Bertrand Russell who declared, in September 1946, his personal commitment to the launching of a “preventive” nuclear warfare against what had been up about that time, a U.S. war-time ally, the Soviet Union.1See Bertrand Russell, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Nos. 5-6, Sept. 1, 1946. At that time, Bertrand Russell et al. had proceeded under the misguided presumption that the Soviet Union did not have the ability to create and deploy even nuclear-fission weapons systems. The real targets of Churchill and of his lackey, Wall Street “maven” Harry S Truman, had implicitly presumed, that their immediate threat of nuclear warfare was to be continued for as long as Russell and others had remained confident that Russia lacked the capability to have produced a deployable nuclear arsenal.
The discovery that the Soviet Union was already in possession of nuclear combat capabilities, induced Russell et al. to postpone nuclear-fission warfare until such time that actually thermonuclear warfare would be recognized as a serious intention, on both sides of the so-called “Cold War.” Then came the time a Soviet Union’s adventurous Nikita Khrushchov had launched a giant nuclear package (if of questionable merit as an actual weapons system) as a threat of nuclear war: for all of which Bertrand Russell was much pleased with himself.
The real military targets of Wall Street’s “trained monkey” Truman, and of Winston Churchill and Churchill’s followers throughout the remaining years of Bertrand Russell’s life-time, were the post-war Soviet Union, and ultimately also China. The included purpose of that hoax backed by both Wall Street “maven” President Truman and Winston Churchill, was to preserve the British empire as an off-again, on-again, world empire, in effect—with hope for sufficient backing from the U.S.A.2The chief effect of the role of Harry S Truman, first, as Vice-President, and then President, was to wreck what had been the potency of a United States operating under the leadership of President Franklin Roosevelt. The final, post-Franklin Roosevelt interval of World War II, and the manner in which the post-Roosevelt take-down was conducted under President Truman, up to the moment of Dwight Eisenhower’s election as President, was qualitative in its effects. Later, with the convenient assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the effects soon became virtually permanent. This becomes clear, once the understanding of the meaning of the physical principle of economy, “energy-flux density” in the rate of increase of per-capita productive powers of labor, is taken into account. That had been the monarchy’s practiced intention up through the recent days of inherently wicked creatures such as Tony Blair.
However, those intentions for nuclear warfare were only a preliminary. The death of the Soviet Union’s Josef Stalin and accession of the adventurous, but also confused and desperate Nikita Khrushchov as Soviet head of state, had overlapped the London/Wall Street intention to supersede nuclear warfare with an emerging mid- 1950s intent toward thermonuclear “extermination warfare.”3Khrushchov rose to power through a channel which the British intelligence services created and managed under the supervision of “the most evil man of his time,” Bertrand Russell. Khrushchov was neither the first, nor the last Soviet leader to serve the British imperialist interest and direction on this account. Worshipful Soviet dupes of London were often left to weep at the feet of London: “How could you in London have betrayed us in this way?” That pattern continues today in certain quarters. It were, admittedly, difficult to see the future clearly, while peering between the cheeks of a London backside; I recall, very clearly, and accurately a number of cases of this virtù. Implicitly, thus, thermonuclear warfare was “on the table” as a feasible general military policy of practice during the latter half of the 1950s.
With the fall of Khrushchov, and the assassination of the President of the U.S.A., President John F. Kennedy, there had still been a hope, among many American citizens, for the continuation of the creative nature of the economic and strategic intentions of President Kennedy. The assassinations of President Kennedy, and, later, of his brother, Robert Kennedy, had actually unleashed what has been, since that time, a persisting change for the worse, even now the worst, in U.S. policy, a policy which has been since continued, in various expressions, all to a common effect, up to the present time. This decades-long decline of the U.S. economy, has been continued as an accelerating trend through the terms of the Presidencies of George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, and has been accelerated precipitously under the Presidencies of whining George H.W. Bush’s, son, “Goof-Ball” George W., Jr., and worst of them of all so far, the murderously accelerating economic-breakdown-process instituted under President Barack Obama.4I have never accepted the notion that the then-recently installed Soviet dictator Yuri Andropov was “honestly duped” in the matter of his radically irrational rejection of President Ronald Reagan’s intentions respecting the SDI. The evidence is to be recognized in the economic implications of Andropov’s trend of policies in the direction which had been set into position by Andropov’s ties to Bertrand Russell, et al. In effect, Andropov was acting as a British agent since somewhere along his peregrinations around the Hungarian crisis. The history of Andropov’s political evolution since the Hungarian Revolt, tilts the pointer of history toward factors pertaining to the radical shift in Andropov’s career since that time. At the time he had entered the highest office, he was documented as deeply engaged in British matters. However, Khrushchov had risen to power in the Soviet Union under similar direction and sponsorship of Bertrand Russell’s arrangements. On that account, we must look deep into London’s imperial reaction to the defeat of London’s own puppet, the Confederacy created by the British circles which had put U.S. President Jackson into place as their chronically enraged puppet. President Abraham Lincoln’s defeat of London’s Confederacy puppet-system, had cleared the way for the rise of the new, Bismarck-orchestrated alliance of Russia and Germany. It was the London-orchestrated ouster of Bismarck which had set into motion several strategically crucial steps into “The First World War.” It was the consequent assassination of the President of France Sadi Carnot, and, especially, the British Prince of Wales’ orchestration of the Japan-Britain alliance against China and eventually Russia in the Far East, which brought matters around to the launching the Balkan War. Any competent strategist today should have realized that, first, “World War I” had actually begun with the British royal family’s ouster of Bismarck in 1890, and that “World War II” was a reflex of “World War I.” The state of threatened “global thermonuclear warfare” now, is to be recognized accordingly. The true science of war thus far, has been the science of the shaping of history.
In approaching the subject of the nuclear and related sorts of strategic threat-potentials of the late 1950s and 1960s, we must take into account the fact that the increase of intensity of weaponry of the qualities of nuclear, thermonuclear and more advanced qualities of weapons systems, converges on a point at which the means of warfare mean virtually assured human extermination. This crucial point in calculations must not be limited to the direct delivery of destructive effects of the bombardment or related means, but must consider the overriding by-product-effects of having deployed such destructive force.
For example, the present level of indicated thermonuclear exchanges among indicated forces has been already well-understood by relevant authorities, as meaning human extinction. There are only two general classes of conditions under which we would consider the presently asserted, threat-intent against Russia and China, in particular, as having crossed the threshold away from all possible sanity: the by-product effects of the indicated level of launch of attack reach the state of likelihood of a general extinction of the human species. The only hypothetical case under which any power would seek to do what President Barack Obama has postured as his intention, would be a program of unbridled acceleration from mass-murder, into human extinction. That, as a mission-intention, could only exist under the condition that the leader of the nation which would launch such warfare were clinically insane personally, or that he, or she would prefer to bring on human extinction, rather than submit to humanly rational behavior.
Since the only public presentation of a treatment of such implications, is that of President Barack Obama, the question posed is clearly that either (a.) Barack Obama is only bluffing; (b.) that he is clinically insane; or, (c.) that, given the role of our Federal Constitution respecting war, he is prepared to destroy the human species, unless his Emperor-Nero-like fantasies are the ruling consideration for him personally. Adolf Hitler, anyone?
That much said respecting Obama as such, a less commonplace version of the same paradoxical predicament in policy-shaping follows.
Thus, certain matters should have become clear, since the first, 1983, rejection of U.S. President Ronald Reagan’s backing for a Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), a rejection which had become “hardened,” with the approaching election of the administration under President George H.W. Bush. The trend in U.S. and related strategic policy-outlook since 1983, has been a commitment of both the witting and the witless to the pathway toward thermonuclear extermination, one which President Barack Obama now brings to the brink of systemic virtual human extermination now. One must never put “practical politicians” in charge of serious strategic decision-making again! You need not defeat them as readily as they will ruin themselves with their own “practical way of scheming;” but, you must defeat them, in any case. Unfortunately, such “practical schemers” as those, may bring about the destruction of everyone with their “practical way of scheming,” as we witness precisely that sort of suicidal “cleverness” among our scheming “practical political authorities” of much of our present U.S. leadership of today, particularly those reckless and cowardly folk who will not resist the re-election of the current President.
Now, look back, again, to the resistance to President Ronald Reagan’s attempts at reaching an “SDI” agreement during his two successive terms in office. We should recall how stupid the cleverness of some “practical politicians,” such as Reagan’s leading opponents in this matter, can turn out to have been. Looking back to then, from here, in the meantime, as I had warned repeatedly since 1983, we had come to experience the fall and subsequent break-up of the Soviet Union which I projected (in 1983) to occur “within about five years,” as that should have been recognized even in 1983, as coming under then continuing trends which had been set into motion by, as I had forecast during 1983, “about 1988.”
The Fall of the Soviet Union
As I had foreseen, and had warned repeatedly since the “SDI” initiative in which I played a certain keystone role leading into 1983, the fall of the Soviet Union was used immediately, with the fall of the East Germany “DDR,” the subsequent Polish crisis, and the sequel of 1991, as the occasion to launch the destruction of the sovereignty of the nations of both continental western and central Europe. This change was prompted by the threats uttered by France’s Socialist President François Mitterrand, against Germany at that time, and was implemented on the entirety of western and central continental Europe by the order of Britain’s Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and U.S. President George H.W. Bush (the son of the one-time supporter of the career of Adolf Hitler, Prescott Bush). It was that action by Mitterrand et al., in concert with Britain’s Margaret Thatcher, and wobbly U.S. President George H.W. Bush, who had created, then, the mess which is the hyperinflationary disintegration of western and central continental Europe presently—into a threatened new “Schachtian” model for an hyperinflationary hoax of pretended “economic resurrection.”
However, the preconditions for what Mitterrand did to destroy Western Europe, as we see the remains of that today, had been aided through U.S. complicity, that specifically of U.S. President George H.W. Bush, then squatting in London, in supporting the London-France destruction of the sovereignties of what had been the sovereign states of Western Europe through threats of military action delivered via Mitterrand’s France. Thus, the destruction of the sovereignties of Eastern Europe has served as the lever for the destruction of Western Europe, and now, with President Barack Obama, the system of nation-states of the world at large.
This was a ruinous action in willful violation of the Westphalian Principle, effected with aid of the complicity of President George H.W. Bush,5And, thus, implicitly his relevant violation of the U.S. Federal Constitution, while serving as U.S. President. of the western and central European continent, which has been conducted under the pretext of establishing a “Euro system,” a system under which all the nations of western and central Europe would be undergoing a systemic kind of thorough-going, “post-Westphalian” extinction of the residue of their past sovereignties. In the meanwhile, more and more under the recent nearly a dozen years, as under the obscenity of the George W. Bush, Jr. and Obama administrations, during the global process of, especially, the trans-Atlantic region, the course of strategic history has converged at an accelerating rate, toward a London-directed, but U.S.-conducted intention for the extinction of not only the region of western Asia, but the threatened thermonuclear extinction of Russia, China, and others: all of this has been, so far, intended in favor of a one-world empire in the heritage of what had once been the Roman Empire, an intended world empire of not much more than, at most, about a billion persons, mostly stupefied echoes of the most brutal of ancient oligarchical cults
In summary on this subject of the European crisis at this present time, the selected means for imposing such an intention, was the precondition of the absolute supremacy for the conduct of thermonuclear exterminations. Therefore, the policy of neither peace nor war, for as long as possible, between the United States’ party, and that of Russia and its party. Actual warfare would mean the ultimate consequence of the virtual extinction of all relevant parties.
Would it be, as the poet spoke, that “with this regard, their currents turn awry, and lose the name of action...”?6Wm. Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act III. Scene 1,
That much said; return to the case of scientist Edward Teller’s participation in the August 20-23, 1983 proceedings at Erice, Italy.7See http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1983/eirv10n34-19830906/eirv10n34-19830906_016-beam_weapons_strategy_relaunched.pdf Turn to the still present, still strategically crucial issue of the SDI and my personal role in this continuing strategic process.
How did those SDI-centered events of the early 1980s come about? How had I come to emerge as a significant factor in the course of what was to be a leading factor in that moment of world history since the Autumn of 1977? How did I happen to become the pivotal figure in the process, leading from my U.S. Presidential election-campaign of 1976, into the time when the U.S. Presidency of President Ronald Reagan had held victory for mankind briefly in his hands in 1983? For President Reagan, this was no stunt, but a commitment to which he remained devoted throughout his terms in office, and even his commitment to the belief that, even later than that, the proposed “SDI” must be realized at some foreseeable future time.
Between my commitments on the matter of economic policies, commitments which I had developed during processes going into the matter of the deep recession of the late 1950s, I have been a uniquely successful economic forecaster of that time, and was to be recognized, in fact, as a leading forecaster of the period of the 1971 crisis, and beyond; so, there had been a process in motion which led through the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) of the late 1970s and early 1980s.8Ed. Note: Pivotal was LaRouche’s debate with leading Keynesian economist, Abba Lerner, at Queens College, Dec. 2, 1971, where he so exposed Lerner’s fascist policies, that the latter’s colleagues determined they would never give LaRouche the chance for such a public debate again.
This was not a matter of an isolated event, or events. It was a “living process” which has continued to exist since those times, through to the present date. Consider some obscured actual roots of my part in what became later expressed as obscured but essential elements of seeds of later flourishing history.
Back during the 1956-1957 interval, I had been a rising influence within my own territory of corporate operations, in my then rising role as an executive of a management consulting organization, up to that time. During the latter part of that time, in the meantime, I had received several approaches from the FBI of that “period,” approaches which had begun with an agent’s projected actions which I regarded as in the nature of “silly filibustering,” and which I explained in some concise terms to the FBI agent who approached me with his proposal for cooperation.
The FBI then decided to “punish” me, by measures which included, in effect, the break-up of my marriage to a wife who believed the lies of her wrong friends, and, later, a period of extended unpleasantnesses extended into the Spring 1968 political eruption at Columbia University, and affairs beyond, even internationally. The change in the quality and scale of my influences here and abroad, came at the onset of the August 1971 collapse of the economic policies of the existing monetarist system under President Richard Nixon, which suddenly changed things for me on an increasingly grander scale, later reaching even trans-oceanic dimensions.9It is sometimes rightly said, that who you do is more significant than what you do. For me, personally and otherwise, that is not a quip; it is my personal history in today’s world at large. Sometimes, implications are the most significant of all practical facts.
It happened that I had been the only publicly known economist who had presented an actually competent forecast of the major financial crisis of the U.S. economy over the course of the 1968-1971 period. This development brought a significant change in my status internationally. Within the U.S. itself, I had been the only relatively well-known economist at that time (especially in the New York City region and somewhat beyond) who had forecast the exact kind of economic crisis which had struck in August 1971. Those facts were widespread, and also irrefutable in fact.
Many seeds cast in history remain merely seeds. Others become history. The seed, in my personal case, was an exceptionally successful economic forecast of a major recession, one which would soon disrupt the U.S. economy severely with an economic crisis which struck suddenly in the automobile and related industries in the February-March 1957 “deep recession” of the late 1950s. My method of economic forecasting was suddenly confirmed, whereas the statistical methods still in vogue today, had failed, suddenly and persistently, for that past time, and more emphatically, now. The same issue was expressed on a far broader and deeper scale, in President Richard Nixon’s relative economic breakdown-crisis of early August 1971. Suddenly, in the late Summer of 1971, the unique quality of my successes as an economic forecaster since 1956, seemed to explode into virtually global directions over the remaining months leading into a globally publicized, December 2, 1971 debate, in which I was the relevant principal in the matter of those international crises which had suddenly seized the imagination as a leading factor in the economic process of the preceding months. The effects of that have never diminished but for brief intervals, with new crises kindling the old fires into often still greater dimensions. History is fairly often like that, especially during intervals of widespread economic or related forms of crises.
As was said of the alleged kicking of a cow in Chicago, small beginnings sometimes have gigantic consequences, even if they were merely rumors.
The root of that development in my case is to be traced, in turn, back to my forecast within that firm which I had first presented formally in August 1956: the most serious recession of the period, which, I warned, must almost certainly tend to erupt by February-March 1957.10A specific factor of timing predetermined by the influence of credit-system factors specific to those industries. A relevant, but later reform of the contract relations between the industries and the automobile dealerships, was of crucial significance for the industry’s credit practices. Other executives of the consulting firm bureaucracy in disagreement with me, emphatically, at that time, and later, based their stubborn rejection of my forecast as premised on admiration for “statistical forecasting methods,” which I warned would be entirely irrelevant for this case. The crisis broke out during the end of February 1957, and earliest March. What I had foreseen was now changing everything in the economy at that moment.
There had been nothing unusual in the opposition to my forecast. It happened that the methods of forecasting used by my rivals in that firm, were based chiefly on deductive statistical methods, which I knew were then, as now, always wrong, and also, usually, intrinsically incompetent, then, as now; but they also expressed prevalent popular opinion among economists of those, as also still present times. What had begun during the second half of the 1950s, did not end there; it came back to the surface beginning in early 1968. Meanwhile, there had been a crucial change, during a brief several years, toward an economic renaissance which had intervened during the course of what were to be merely several years of the U.S. Presidency under John F. Kennedy.
Then, as now, the prevailing incompetence exhibited by most of those considered as qualified economists, is a reflection of the accounting doctrine’s influence on forecasting the future in no other aspect but that of extrapolation enhanced by cheating the credulous. The failure which that method inherently represents, is illustrated by the case of every competent discovery of a previously undiscovered principle. The effect of that problem runs as follows.
Consider every class of living creature excepting mankind. Those creatures are characterized by the inability to discover a new physical principle. Thus, the great majority of all living creatures, excepting mankind, are condemned to ultimate extinction, unless mankind enables them to outflank such a tragic destiny. Mankind, who exhibits the relevant point in the most convenient modes, is the only known living creature which actually chooses to use fire as an essential basis for its existence. This function of fire is locatable in the specifically noëtic characteristic of the human species, the characteristic which separates mankind as superior to every other known variety of living species.
It happens, that no true invention of a principle of nature can be derived from what can be specifically defined as deductive. In other words, Sherlock Homes relied upon drug addictions, otherwise, a creature of his specific nature could never imagined that he had deduced a principle of nature. The manner in which the accounting systems are obliged to function in respect to calculations, tends to ensure that, only in rare cases, are trained economists competent in the actualities of the scientific progress on which the sustaining and advancement of the physical economy of nations and their cultures absolutely depend. Thus, the typical “environmentalist” of today, is also functionally insane in precisely this particular sense of the matter.
In the actual history of economies, the most crucial distinction is to be found in an estimated ration of a human population, even at pre-school levels of education, who have become habituated in a significant degree to a form of noëtic development which foreshadows the creative Classical artistic and physical scientist of the adolescent and adult levels of development. It is, therefore, of great importance, to estimate the ration of the employable adolescent and adult populations which are properly identified as “creative,” or, to choose a more rigorous terminology, noëtic development. I mean, the discovery of new principles of nature, principles of a categorical type which include Classical modes of artistic composition and related expression.
It is the rate of incidence, development, and progress, in those specifically noëtic modes of scientific and Classical-artistic expression in the young, and in the ration of employment of persons of those types, which tends to pre-determine the ability of societies to generate a combination of Classical-artistic and physical-scientific development and expression which is indispensable for preventing a society from degenerating into a direction of its collapse for reason of stagnant trends in habits. Thus, just the typical monetarist accountant, such as the Wall Street types, may be vigorous in his active practice, but his adopted nature is to produce a net less-than-nothing of real value devoted to the purposes of promoting the welfare of mankind.
The cases of the two categories of banking supply illustration of this point. The banker who is engaged with good conscience, must rely upon the progress, including significant noëtic progress, of both the banker’s clients and also a supply of a quality of clientele which is engaged in physical-creative growth of scientifically progressive increase of the productive powers of labor.
The investment banker may sometimes take the same course of action, to which I would have no objection as along as he stays in his particular neck of the economic woods. With such honest investment bankers, the Obama administration’s cronies of Obama’s Geithner, would prefer to have nothing to do; their own company would, therefore, not be missed by actually respectable investment bankers. No honest and also intelligent banker would wish to be associated, or consign his children to the custody of a society ruled by a President Barack Obama. Indeed competent bankers, including those among investment bankers, will be moving in droves toward seeking the safe-harbor which Glass-Steagall uniquely affords.
Similarly, a so-called “green policy for economy” is inherently a recipe for mass death-rates within any society which accepts such a standard of practice. It is only the increase of the energy-flux density of physically productive increase of per-capita physical output, which stands between society and increased death-rates in societies. (Human life can not stand still.) This point is the same, in respect to such effects, as the defense of the continued existence of the human species on our planet and also beyond. The need of means for defending our own planet, requires us to adopt responsibility for our planet’s own neighborhood.
The interval of the John F. Kennedy administration had seen a reversal of the trend of which I had warned during 1966-71 and beyond. However, the burying of the truth of the Kennedy assassination, plunged the United States into a trend of economic decline which has been continued, in fact, during the entire span of U.S. national history since the moment the “cover up” of the Kennedy assassination had been put into play. That led into the fall of President Richard Nixon and the following interim of the late 1970s. With the still later defeat of the initiative for the SDI and the subsequent, disgusting performance of President George H.W. Bush, the U.S.A. slid into a perpetual economic decline, ever since, to the present date.
However, during the short life of the Kennedy Presidency, a curiously ironical fact had crossed my path. It was the name of a young fellow from Arkansas, “Bill” Clinton, who turned up as a name among a group of apparent admirers of President Kennedy. One must be careful in reporting history!
In the meantime, other things had happened. The election, and later years in office of President William Jefferson Clinton had been a factor of relative stabilization, up to the launching of the campaign for the attempt to impeach him. Nonetheless, during the Clinton years, there were important developments up through the point of the attempted impeachment; but, there was no reversal of what continued to be an actually accelerating decline toward collapse in the U.S. and European economies.
President Clinton had attempted to address the economic crisis, if in a limited, but constructive way, coming out of the Summer of 1998 into the political catastrophe dumped into his lap during the Autumn; but, otherwise, he had done nothing to reverse the continuing process of economic decline of the U.S. economy which had been set into motion, originally, by the effect of the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and John’s brother and Presidential pre-candidate Robert Kennedy. Since President Clinton’s retirement from office, the U.S. economy has been careening along a course of national economic disintegration. With this approaching Autumn, the apparent prospect for the U.S.A. is that of nothing as much as pure destruction, even something much worse, unless President Obama is soon placed “on the skids.”
I shall now shift the course of the report to the subject of the principles which have shaped European and trans-Atlantic shaping of history, up to the verge of the present dates.
In the course of what has come to be identified as “European history,” some among us who are the proud bearers of the tradition of the “European cultural vintage,” have come to converge on the notion of an Homeric account of the fall of the criminally butchered city-state of Troy. Whatever the weak points of the available, historical accounts, the fact remains, that European civilization has been dominated, at least for most of the rather reasonably known times, by the persistence of what is known as “The Oligarchical System.” We, whether Europeans, or with their nominal descendants in the Americas, for example, have continued to be dominated by the tradition of that Mediterranean-pivoted oligarchical system, which is now principally associated with the social-political imagery associated with the descent of the Roman empire.
The view contrary to my own, that of the so-called “Greenie” or “Environmentalist” traditions, is a product of the oligarchical principle as that has been traced, from the Homeric legacy, to the oligarchical system which is, with relatively rare exceptions, usually employed to a common definition of both ordinary and extraordinary human minds, alike. The former populations tend to be classed, in some instances, as a talking variety of what are seemingly like virtually mere cattle, or, better said, virtually the type of foolish slave who forges his own shackles, shackles which he often installs as a kind of habit, to serve him as the predator ravishing his own mind.
Those human beings who are stubbornly disinclined to bear a slave’s submission to an oligarchical rule, as typified by the case of the American Revolutionaries who fought against the oligarchical legacy of those persons who are like willing slaves, like those who, even habitually, wear the shackles of a New Venetian party of that William of Orange, et al., who was the typical adversary of the great cultural achievements of the Massachusetts Bay settlement of the Winthrops and Mathers, must be considered against the background of such elements of post-Troy history generally.
The temporary crushing of what was to become our later United States, must also be examined for its value as among lessons of history, lessons which include what are still threatened to be imposed upon them according to the rule of the same oligarchical tradition of evil which slaughtered the Christians on behalf of the principle of the Roman empire, or such as the Jews under Adolf Hitler’s following. Take the evil tyrannies, which are rooted in that oligarchical tradition which is presently named as the “Greenies,” for example, or the Roman mass-murders of Christians in the arena or otherwise. These episodes in history happen, and have always lurked in the shadows of even the greatest human endeavors, unless we are sufficiently armed and alert to prevent such insurgencies of evil.
“A greenie,” for example, who adopts his, or her code of practice, may be not only a slave in his or her own right, but a slave who tends to commit atrocities against those who do not inflict slavery upon themselves, as on others. So, the “Greenie’s” habits have become increasingly a menace to the continued existence of the human species in a general way.
The physical evidence which supplies the proof for my argument here, is efficiently locatable in a contrast of what are fairly called “normal members” of the human species, to the beasts generally. The essential distinction of the human species in its healthy, normal state, is defined as human in its typical behavior, as I have noted in the preceding chapter of this report, defined by a habit of a willful reliance upon a principle of increase of relative energy-flux density, as opposed to the bestiality common to all species other than mankind. The qualified, apparent exception to that propensity for slaughter, is to be found in the training of breeds of animal species, in those practices prompted, essentially, by human training of specimens of animal varieties, as under conditions of animal husbandry. There is, thus, an increasing tendency toward limiting the cultivation of animal species to those species and types whose induced behavior is not inconvenient for mankind.
The distinction of mankind from beasts, including emphasis in favor of specifically cultivated varieties, is precisely that. I recapitulate, in a fresh form, what I have written on this account earlier, as a needed preliminary note.
The crucial test of that distinction of man from beast, is located in the uniqueness of the human personality with respect to that of all other, known forms of life. We might therefore speak, truthfully: of the creative intellect which is specific to the human species. It were better, to make the distinction of the human species from other species, by beginning with a practical choice of an alternate approach to describing a standard: mankind’s progress in the mastery of fire—increase in energy-flux density across the boundaries which mark the birth of successive generations of the culture of a successful form of organized society.11Many forms of society have existed which were, or still are, inherently defective, the oligarchical models most notably. That means, as I have repeatedly treated the subject in earlier locations, a distinction consistent with the notion of an order of rank among distinct species of both the qualities and the applications of fire. In fact, the notion of the principled order of the definitions of “fire” is coherent with the orderable notion of “value,” as “value” is to be located in the hierarchical-like ordering of relatively lower, to reach higher physical states of matter, as these changes are employed as policies of practice by human societies.
Herein lies an exact distinction of man from beast, or man’s organized, willful progress in development of practice, from relatively lower “energy-flux densities,” to higher.
This brings us back to what must follow from a related argument presented in the immediately preceding chapter of this present report.
For example, mankind’s science is currently progressing from ordinary combustion, through, successively, thermonuclear fusion and matter-antimatter reactions. This represents a state of human scientific progress associated, typically, at root, with the inseparable categories of (1) physics, and (2) of the Classical musical qualifications of Max Planck and Albert Einstein, and the general principle of mind associated with the achievements of (3) Planck’s collaborator Wolfgang Köhler, creating thus a set of principles respecting the still scarcely known, deeper principles of the human mind. Each and all of these “factors” urgently need to be understood as matters of principle.
The most crucial issues, at this stage of the history of such processes, pertain to the errors associated with popular views respecting the principles of human comprehension. The worst aspect of the short-falls in even the practice of scientific principles today, are those associated with the widely popular, but incompetent notions respecting “human sense-certainty.” This problem is one which I recently addressed in my “Next, Beyond Mars,”12See Feature in this issue, or Lyndon LaRouche PAC [http://larouchepac.com/node/23679]. in which I dealt with the critical issue of communications implicitly confronting us with the success of the presently new, crucially ironical phase of the developments presented to us implicitly by the results of “Curiosity’s” progress so far.
As I have emphasized in an earlier report, when we consider the specific advances in sophistication incorporated in the design and deployment of “Curiosity,” we should consider ourselves impelled to recognize a certain important bit of irony. This means, to deprecate the attempt to correlate the functions of the human mind with sense-perception as such, and to shift attention to the implications of the transmission of what is called “information” when the transmission is located as a process connecting points of “broadcast” of functional platforms on Mars to the speed of light exchanged between Earth and Mars. Factors come into play, thus, such that we can no longer tolerate the notion that the human intellect is an extension of the function of an array of sense-perceptions per se: when we must admit that it is the process of transmission itself, which enables us to define the process as a whole. Fourteen minutes difference has a crucially subsuming role, especially when we take into consideration the implications of the need to master control over the masses of asteroid-like aggregations which contain the threats to Earth and the like from the asteroids converging on destinies such as targeting of mankind’s refuge known to us as “Earth.”
Our objective must be to attempt to gain such forms of control of that apparent debris which could end up as mines in space for the complex of Earth and Moon which might be gathered to our future advantage there.
In that process, and related matters, the included objective is to free mankind from that superstition which is known as “sense perception.” The important thing might be, indeed, “the effect;” but, more important is “that which generates the apparent effect.” Our objective should be to discover how to gain increasing “leverage” in so-called “space” in control of the processes which include the rubble in the space-volumes from Mars-orbit to Jupiter-orbit.
Now, to clarify the point I had introduced above, return attention to the matter of mind-as-such, as presented by Köhler to Max Planck, and as adopted by Planck. I have met very little beyond bare-bones evidence which reaches to the crucial aspects of Köhler’s core-argument. This may well be among the effects left behind by the sequence of so-called “World War I,” and the lunatic characteristics of the influence of such as Bertrand Russell’s role in the scientific debates and cultisms of the post-World War I 1920s. Whatever the case adduced from such latter sources, the general point which the Köhler-Planck discussion presents, is that all human knowledge is a category of the essentially indivisible, that to such effect that the mind is to be considered as conditionally partitioned, but not categorically. It is we, in effect, who partition knowledge between experiences, rather than accreting separatable categories of experiences. We are, so to speak, responsible for assimilating a defensible conception into a continuity of a unified idea.
That suggests that we distinguish the nameable “tag” such as a name from the substance to which that “tag” has been attached. The ontological actual essence of the idea as such, is distinguished from that which is the named shadow of the “tag.” Thus, the substance of human thought, is thus distinguishable in degree from the name given to an adopted “objective” aspect of the process to be considered. This comes directly to the surface in the experience of the recovery of a previously familiar name-likeness of an actually relevant process of thought—as if in recall of an interrupted memory, which remains knowable, if its recovery is properly motivated with respect to the entirety of the domain.
This is a typical sort of ordinary problem, as in either recalling old names or recognizing that which is to be named.
The crucial significance of all considerations along these lines, can not be efficiently separated from the implications of the discovery of a new concept—one not known, or named before: a kind of synthesis of a new idea, rather than some sort of synonym: in new categories of discoveries corresponding to an independently original conception based on a previously unknown experience. This points in the direction of a true cognitive process. Significantly, the work of Planck and Einstein, especially in respect to the importance of Classical musical composition for both of them, as of Johann Sebastian Bach, or Wilhelm Furtwängler, brings the focus of our attention on “these implied connections.”
Or, a more precisely defined notion to similar effect, is found in the pathological features of the reduction of ideas to the functional characteristics of the domain of fixed parts, as in playing the notes, rather than performing the actual music.
Those among us who have shared some knowledge of the kinds of scientific mission-orientation underlying the launching of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) and kindred missions, who share it more or less immediately, as I do, or as do younger persons committed to this same legacy, can not overlook what I recall as Dr. Edward Teller’s leading contributions to what became known by both of us as “The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).” We must also focus a mission-orientation commitment to the defense of Dr. Teller’s leading role in today’s crucial goal of defending both the parts, and, ultimately, the whole of our planet Earth against what might be considered, in the rough, as “space debris.”
At the same time, we recall with some touches of bitterness, that minds such as those of Max Planck and Albert Einstein point us toward leading thinkers from the generation of Max Planck and Albert Einstein who have represented something which tended to become lost in the course of what is recalled as “World War I” and post-“World War II” scientific and musical society. Much that had been beautiful as scientific achievement, became relatively mired in the cheap-shot qualities of practice which became all too familiar in the generation educated under post-World War II conditions. In effect, these, my own recollections, must also have often occurred to a qualified “Martian” such as my ironical sometime critic, Dr. Teller.
Dr. Teller is remembered with a particular emphasis on the subject of the SDI and today’s increasing concern for the need of means of defense against asteroids which have been, are, or may be deadly threats to large parts of the population of Earth, or, ultimately, worse. Those of my associates now, recognize that a very serious concern is needed against this general threat, especially in light of our stunning lack of knowledge respecting the awesomely great mass of potentially threatening asteroids whose identities we have yet to locate.
All of this which I have just presented as content within this present chapter of the report, now separates the practice of science prior to “Curiosity,” from the larger category which the success of “Curiosity” has prompted to be recognized as an entirely new and much greater pathway to be opened now, when the foothold of mankind on Mars has just gained an awesomely greater mission-objective in all conceivable respects. The particular mission to which Dr. Teller had devoted particular attention, the threat to man on Earth from asteroids, should be long remembered, together with his famous mustering of efforts on behalf of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) as the quality of humanity in science which the present threat of thermonuclear warfare demands of us all today.
With that, will come a further, very special concern of my own: the true meaning of the human mind.