Copy edited version posted 1:10pm est, 12/11/2012.

“Hartz-4 Jobs” in the U.S.A. too ...


Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

November 29, 2012

[See Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung November 29, 2012: “Anne Will: Lieber ein schlechter job—oder keiner?” by Patrick Bernau. Re: the results of the launching of “Hartz IV” jobs in Germany; or, the like, in particular, in both Germany and the U.S.A. today.]

A Certain Kind of Thesis:

Germany’s prominent journalist Anne Will, has presented a summary account of the situation among what now appear to have come to be regarded as the implicitly permanent poor of Germany. She has presented the image of a situation which has a relative likeness to the increasingly prevalent, self-imposed misery of the previous generation of the members of what had already been established as a chronically imposed class of permanent poor in Germany: a generation of the permanently impoverished victims of a “green disease” comprised of both vanishing skilled employment and the reign of “cheap jobs” which had been set into motion a generation earlier.

Anne Will’s own account for the specific case in Germany, is fairly stated for as much as she claimed. Unfortunately, while her account presents some aspects of the current state of economic sickness there, it presents nothing which I could recognize as an actual prospect of a remedy, whether either there, in Germany, or even for the ominously threatened current fate of the similar kinds of victims of U.S. President Barack Obama’s savage destruction of the remains of actually skilled and productive labor within the U.S.A. The same pattern in a downward direction, since, had been a pattern launched by the assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy, a pattern which has coincided with the extended decline of the U.S. economy, which had been set into motion with the launching of an approximate decade of seemingly endless war in Indo-China.

What journalist Anne Will described as the present state of the children and the youth strata of the original “Hartz IV” ranks there, now, must be said of the growing mass of not only the induced uselessness among the Hartz-IV adolescents and children of Germany, but also of the children on the streets and other new wastelands of the United States presently. The relevant, deprived youth classes of both nations, had, typically, lost access to any clear idea of meaningful employment in general, at the same point that the present ranks of adolescents now tend, by and large, as journalist Will’s report indicates, to move toward an understandable, outright rejection of the merely nominal opportunities proffered, often even where they had been available.

In both Germany, and now, in our United States under President Barack Obama, a threatened doom, even the prospective extinction of the respective, formerly sovereign nations, now converges on a pattern of deeply embittered outcomes of the original Hartz-IV generation, and the self-inflicted whims of the still younger generation of the ostensibly hopeless. So, there exists, now, something tending to bring back the darkest part of Europe’s Thirteenth Century, a darkness which hovers, like an imagined, deeply dark, thermonuclear cloud, over both those and other nations.

Thus, the difference between then and now, lies between what had been the imposed chronic poverty among Germany’s original “Hartz IV” victims, which is to be compared to the accelerating rate of spread of a self-inflicted cultural-economic suicide among their present and the comparable U.S. young adults’ generation’s present, seemingly “hopelessly green” and youthful offspring. Those latter actualities here are reasonably comparable to what is implied in Anne Will’s presently indicated recount of trends in, for example, Germany.

The deeper meaning of the problem of the class of children and youth presented for Germany, the United States, and elsewhere, now, can not be properly understood until we have put the evidence of the conditions of those children and youth together with comparisons made to the notoriously evil Liverpool health-care policies under Britain’s Tony Blair, and to those increasingly drug-trafficking-soaked, depraved conditions imposed under the Queen’s ostensible crony, U.S. President Barack Obama. The contemporary policies for the care of the ageing, for example, correspond to the initial phases of the virtually identical program of genocide practiced under the early years of the Adolf Hitler regime. All of these and related facts must be situated in the context of British imperial Queen Elizabeth’s avowed policies for reducing the world’s population, from an approximate seven billions living human beings, to her intended, “green” intentions to reduce that population to a near one billions.

What, therefore, might be even some mere semblance to the actual cure for this implicitly global, man-made catastrophe? Will there never be a remedy for this trend toward a Hellish state of ruin now menacing all of the nations of this planet? What would be the result if we failed to remove the spawn of evil embodied in the policy of mass genocide, demanded against the nations of world by the same British-Saudi reigns of terror in September 11, 2001, or by our own British puppet-President Obama’s own program of accelerated death-rates now already leading a global descent into hopelessness?

Now, Her Majesty, the Queen of England’s United Kingdom and her Empire, has demanded an explicit, and rapid, “green” reduction of the world’s current population, from an estimated seven billions human souls, world wide, into a descent from a present level of seven billions persons, to her proposed, approximately one billion.

There, precisely, and there alone, lies the sign of the common cause of the particular disasters of both the “Hartz IV” tragedy in Germany presently, and also similar effects throughout Europe generally, or in the United States, too. Meanwhile, each and all among these targets remain under the Queen’s and Tony Blair’s own genocidal policies, as in the U.S.A. under President Barack today. There, in those converging trends, lies the true “green” root of the “Hartz IV” tragedy of Germany itself today. That effect will persist, and worsen, until its common causes were uprooted.

Now, since I have just stated that much about some very noticeable aspects of the identified crisis-problem, the only decent response to the crisis-matters which I have identified this far in this present account, must be considered as a matter of the choice of an actually systemic, and immediately prospective change: a change away from the evil policy which has created the present, artificially induced, assortment of currently spreading, trans-Atlantic monetary, economic and social catastrophes.

This kind of crisis among nations has been a chronic disorder among the known cultures of the trans-Atlantic world, since approximately the same time that U.S. President John F. Kennedy was assassinated to make way for that ruinous decade of U.S. war in Indo-China.

Treason in America

To actually bring the needed remedies for the U.S.A., and others, into play, requires a clearer insight into the nature of that specific quality of systemic corruption of the United States since the successfully intended assassination of President John F. Kennedy. That Kennedy assassination was the crucial factor which led a United States which had then been experiencing a renewed Franklin-Roosevelt mode of a great economic recovery under Kennedy, but which was set into what has been a U.S.A. permanently plunged, beginning then, into what has now become, ever since, a cultural, and, therefore, yawning economic abyss.

The essence of this present crisis in the U.S.A., like that among the related nations of Europe, and among effects elsewhere, has been a type of corruption which had been driven, once again, by British imperial penetrations, penetrations which had been “pulled off” by aid of massively spreading the Queen’s own drug-trafficking and related corruptions of certain leading, and also chronically treasonous circles inside the United States.

The most notable offenders in these matters, have been those whose guilt is to be read in the effects of a treasonous reign under the British agents who have been operating, like a chronically recurring character of a national disease, within the United States, that always under British imperial direction since the election of the chronic swindler and lackey known as U.S. President Andrew Jackson.

This recurring corruption by that moral disease, has been typified by the role which London had assigned to the American traitor and British spy, Aaron Burr, who was the controlling factor in the disastrous fraud conducted under the nominal leaderships of the British sub-agent Aaron Burr, of traitor-in-fact Andrew Jackson, and of the party-system which the Jackson administration installed under British direction of the campaign of treason which Aaron Burr led on Britain’s behalf.

That British imperial scheme, has been a system installed through the instruments of not only President Jackson, but, more significantly, the Manhattan and Boston-based treason of British-controlled banking under such British agents such as British spy, and American traitor, Aaron Burr. All this, was done together with New York banker Martin van Buren, and the leading financial powers of the British empire itself.

So, it has been the cases of recurring assassinations of a number of U.S. Presidents, not only the most critically outstanding cases, such as those of Abraham Lincoln, James Garfield, William McKinley, Warren Harding, and, then, John F. Kennedy, and also his brother, the Robert Kennedy who had been qualified as a virtual Democratic nominee then ripe for nomination and probable election as a next U.S. President. Each of these leading cases which I have just enumerated here, has been clearly exemplary of the forced changes, directly contrary to the U.S. patriotic interests, which the British financier and related interests had been clearly pre-committed to eliminating from the options for a continued personal existence.

Nothing is clearer on this account, than the cases of leading targets of our outstandingly great U.S. national leaders such as former Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton, John Quincy Adams, and, add to those cases, such victims of assassination as Abraham Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, the two Kennedys, and, probably, also, other members of their same Kennedy family, who might have been considered as a future threat to prompt an uncovering of the truth of the cases of the murdered John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert.

Now, the failure to restore the control of the Presidency of the United States to its original constitutional intention, despite wretches such as Aaron Burr, Andrew Jackson, Martin van Buren, and their version of an original Democratic Party system, has brought the very continued existence of our U.S. Republic into an immediate verge of its own self-destruction. That has been an effort of destruction conducted, for example, willfully under the combination of two Bushes, father and son, and one Obama. The trigger for such an ugly consequence as that, has been the currently standing repeal of the Glass-Steagall law, for which no decent alternative exists, if the United States itself were to be enabled to survive the present threat of an outbreak of thermonuclear warfare under the shared direction of the British monarchy and its Obama puppet.

What I have just summarized, now requires some crucially important, broader and deeper historical explorations here. For this purpose, Nicholas of Cusa is among the very best references in all modern history to date. I shall now proceed again, from there.


Now, let us look back to the then temporary victory of what is sometimes recalled as the great Fourteenth-century Renaissance. View that history in its roots, as that might be viewed as emerging from within the age of two great scientists of that time, Filippo Brunelleschi, and the far greater and deeper role of the Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa who crafted the miracle which had impelled Cusa and his immediate associates to launch the following, particular, three great modern achievements of mankind:

(1) The uniqueness of those innovations in modern physical science for which Brunelleschi was already crucial for his own part; but, far greater achievements lay, foremost, in the far deeper, actual foundations of both all of the initiatives of uniquely competent modern science which have been contributed by Nicholas of Cusa, and, also, (2), the impulse, also by Cusa, of the specific impetus for what was to become known as the creation of a new quality of civilization launched across the Atlantic waters, a revolutionary development which Cusa had inspired, in particular, as that specific inspiration which had been ordered as also (3), the explicitly specific impetus for the achievement of Christopher Columbus’ design for the specific quality of intention motivating that specific approach to selection of the intended fruits of his actually timely crossing of that ocean to a new civilization on the opposing shore.

Now consider the intention of Columbus, as he had come to understand that mission of Nicholas of Cusa which would lead Columbus himself through the years preceding his own actual crossing of the Atlantic, as a matter of his explicitly stated intention. It was an intention which had been supplied, specifically, by Columbus’ detailed adoption of what he had both studied, and had carried out, carried out as representing the instructions of Cusa. Without the aid of that specific insight shared, so, as by Columbus, and despite all of his putatively “rival” mariners, the United States, in particular, could never have been born, as it succeeded in the region of Massachusetts Bay: first, by the Mayflower settlement, and, then by the development of the Massachusetts Bay Colony under the Winthrops and Mathers.

I reflect here my own knowledge of the history of the birth and continued development of civilization in the western hemisphere. Without the detailed essentials of the history of our republic’s civilization as launched within North America, most notably, none of the achievements of an actually modern European civilization could have actually been realized as intended, on either shore of the Atlantic uniquely, by the saintly Cusa himself. This could not have been achieved without the original guidance supplied from the work of Nicholas of Cusa in both this intention, and its achievement. It was Cusa’s impassioned intention, which, in and of itself, defined the issues of the continuing conflict of good and evil which has shaped the goodness expressed in the evolving the root-history of the modern world, as now.

Whether you, as the reader here, or others, have recognized this fact, or not: it is often the case, in all actually known history in general, that mankind’s greatest achievements have often been the fruit of a discovery which an actual discoverer had almost never actually understood with any actually completed understanding of the underlying sense of direction inherent in the choice of potential direction of man’s fate. Cusa, if anyone, could have done it.

I explain.

Simply stated: ours is a human nature whose development could never have been competently defined, this far, as an actually completed development of our experience of the merely momentary limit of our experience of our future, nor with a fully adequate insight into the present implications for mankind’s future over the course of several coming generations. The thematic principle of all known forms of life, is “change.” Lack of principled change forward, whether by mankind, or by lower forms of life, ultimately leads toward extinctions, such as, ultimately, that which threatens the future of our present Sun.

Yet, the higher-ranking evidence now, is that only mankind could (potentially) survive as an exception to such a cruel finality. Our distinction from all other presently known species, is a matter of the subject of the development of the unique qualities of the powers awarded as the fruit of a specifically unbounded human creative will, and, more emphatically, the power of that will to change the future of all existing species, a potency which no other presently known species possesses, and in which it seems, this far, that even the best among us can succeed only to a relatively limited degree of variability.

I explain.

What Makes Sense in Real Science

Thus, for example, let us now focus attention on the virtually keystone implications of the discoveries respecting fundamental scientific principle which had been made by Nicholas of Cusa. Most among us, can not: the legacy of serfdom has been too deeply embedded in the burdens of submission to oligarchical traditions.

We must now reckon with the needed future of history’s direction which must become an urgently sweeping change in direction of not only the U.S.A. itself, but from the ruinous turn in planetary affairs set into motion by the voluntary action represented by the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. This experience shows us the actual identity of his role as a true leader who was murdered for his offense to the cause of evil. This turn had come, even frequently, as in the treasonous-like crushing of such devotions as those which had already inspired the discoverer Columbus. Competent attempts at rising above even what might seem to be an intended approximate “finality” for progress, whether by saint or demon, had never come easily. This is made clearer, especially, when we have come to recognize ourselves as faced with those consequently more profound implications which remain to be adduced, ultimately, from that discovery of the future as in itself.

So, for example: what came to be acknowledged, by some actually leading intellects, as Cusa’s most essential discoveries in physical science, had shown the pathway to supply what had then been only the initial basis for what would have become, later, the unique discovery of the fundamental principle of physical space-time. That means the inclusion of Johannes Kepler’s unique discovery of the universal principle of nature which was expressed as his notion of a “vicarious hypothesis.”

That fact requires special attention here and now, for the following reasons.

Two Related Principles

Kepler’s use of the choice of language associated with “vicarious hypothesis,” points toward a principle which remains, to the present date, a physically efficient principle, a principle which relevant opinion from among the opponents of his work, most frequently regarded as being either outrightly unknowable, or, as having been merely regarded as the effect of a sorely misunderstood “thought-object,” as it might have been so frequently mis-located within the ranks of relevant university classrooms still today. The same is to be said, fairly, of the vicious quality of ignorance which usually prevails in the recent several centuries’ disgusting misuse of the term “metaphor.”

The root of the errors of common contemporary practice toward which I have just pointed, is expressed in a common popular, or related malpractice; it is a malpractice which resides in the mistakenly presumed, but, nonetheless, essentially silly belief in a “self-evidence” of what are regarded, foolishly, as so-called “universal principles” of mere human sense-perception.

Thus, the crudest, but most popular expression of the folly of current popular opinion, takes the same form as the silliness of that errant physicist who argues for the alleged “wisdom” of the “practical man’s” knowledge of what are crudely defined as “universal physical principles.” The doubtful merit of presumptions such as those, limits the duped victim, inherently, to a state of blinded faith in what are actually merely fictitious “principles” of naive belief in “sense-certainty.”

Consequently, the implied presumption of the all-too typical reductionist of the secondary, or university classroom, such as those who are either “Newtonians,” or even worse, is the essentially foolish notion that sense-perception is “a principle in itself” which might be implored even to define, as if deductively, what the efficient reign of a universal law of the universe might be: or, as the attributed, inevitably ultimate propensity of all apples to bounce, as we might imagine, off Sir Isaac Newton’s head.

I do not exaggerate in the least in ridiculing the “dupe-ishness” of such failures as those of the actual Isaac Newton. To similar effect, the proverbial, so-called “practical man,” enjoys the pleasure he takes from his choice of self-adulations, delusions which all work to the effect that the laws of the universe are supposed—by him—to be prescribed, in advance, by the crude, essential reductionist’s sordid belief in an expressed practice of mere sense-perception.

The point I make on that account, is not merely necessary, but profound.

The Nature of the Human Mind?

As I have implicitly argued, repeatedly for this case, since the time I launched my successes as a practicing forecaster, during the latter half of the 1950s, the fact is, that there is no existing universe, either in whole or part, which can be properly adopted as being a deductively completed state of existence. That warning, by the way, is the implied conclusion of Johannes Kepler’s emphasis on the universe’s never-completed state of actual existence, as by his specific notion expressed as the actually universal physical principle of “vicarious hypothesis,” as is also the case for the related notion of an efficiently unfolding future embedded in the true intention of the concept of “metaphor,” as when that term of Classical drama appears as an experience performed, never deductively, but as if mysteriously, but therefore successfully, on stage, as if it, too, were to have partaken of a quality akin to that of the ontological actuality of another sort of “vicarious hypothesis,” or, as Bernhard Riemann did in the concluding, ontologically ironic sense of his own habilitation dissertation. All notions of sense-perception, reference nothing more than existences caught, as if frozen in the mid-stream of the existence’s transitions to a new ontological state of actuality.1See my earlier treatment of these two, closely related subjects of ontological principle on the subjects of “Vicarious Hypothesis” and “Metaphor,” in a publication titled “Metaphor,” September 19, 2012, EIR, Oct. 5, 2012, [EIR:, or LaRouche PAC:], and, also, “The Friday Project,” Sunday September 30, 2012, EIR, Oct. 12, 2012 [, or LaRouche PAC:].

To carry the same argument forward, the common characteristic of both living processes generally, as also of mankind most emphatically, “time” is also measured in terms of an increase of what is considered as “fatally inevitable” progress of the state of living processes, when that is properly “measured” by the standard of successively higher “levels” of characteristic advances in the intensity of states of relative “energy-flux density” in the universe, and that, also, most emphatically:

the required advances in energy-flux density of all successful continuations of progress of the characteristic increase of characteristic progress, as opposite to the frequent alternative of social degeneration within human societies. Any human culture within the ranks of mankind, which proceeds to successively lower “energy-flux densities” per capita, as the so-called “environmentalists” propose this in their particularly foolish fashion, defines a notion of society which is best identified as that of a candidate for its own willful extinction. “Environmentalists” are, therefore, not to be considered as truly sane, morally or otherwise.

Such are the keystones to be referenced in the unfolding of this present report.

What Is Otherwise Not Silly About Sense-Perception?

It was once spoken, that by the curious, but marvelously insightful, ancient Greek thinker Heraclitus, to the effect, that [the same] water does not flow under the same bridge twice. Whatever else might be true, that view so attributed to Heraclitus would be most difficult for actually competent scientists to flatly reject today.

On this account, since the late 1970s, I had come to admire the 1960, German, ironically humorous motion-picture drama, Spukschloss im Spessart’s recurring recitative, “Die Hauptsache ist der Effekt ... .” [“The main thing is the effect.”] The quite serious implication of that motion picture’s thematic recitative, is among the “secret” motives for my recurring, inward outburst of (now accustomed) silently bitter mirth, in reaction to the incidences of the presence of a sense of relief expressed within a truly underlying, existential, very deep bitterness, still lurking in a piece of Classical irony drawn from “post-World War II” experiences.

The most essential, but rarely actually understood evidence of the difference of man from beast, lies in the uniqueness of our human species, that we, alone, among all presently known living creatures, have the intrinsic potential to recognize our own latent experiences of a future which is knowable to mankind. Most frequently, today’s human beings pretend to be optimists, when they are actually victims of the pessimism expressed by the sophistry: “The more things change, the more they are the same.” Such poor human creatures prefer to predict what they believe must be repeated. Hence, the bitter-sweet double-irony expressed in “the post-World War II” mirth of Spukschloss im Spessart.

That drama is a matter of a bitter pessimism which is reeking with laughter. We laugh at our own foolishness, and laugh the loudest when we choose to accept the notion that we remain what we always, unfortunately, were. For the poorly hidden pessimist contained within the clown, we are all mere peasants preyed upon by whoever, or whatever reigns. Sadomasochistic pleasure is taken from one’s own bitter-sweet faith in an incurable destiny of recurring defeat.

The truth is, that that bitter-sweet masochism is the doubly-ironical destiny of Hamlet’s “peasant-slave,” or the victim in Nero’s arena. Defeat, even, in the end, doom, becomes the frightened slave’s religious devotion. We are taught by “our alleged betters” to accept an ultimate defeat; we do this, because the world has been long under the reign of a satanic Olympian Zeus, or the same in another guise. We are told, in one fashion or another, that this is “what we must come to expect,” as being, in the end of it all, more or less slaves who seek a moment when they might believe, if in merely a passing moment of pitiable self-delusion that they were, or might have been kings.

I, like true science, have a different view of this universe than that of the traditional peasant-slave mentality. I know the certainty of the existence of life, as it must be recognized in the evolutionary progress of living species-types, and, in a much higher meaning for our human species. So, Shakespeare’s pitiable Hamlet cries out, “O what a rogue and peasant slave am I!”, and, then, “To be, or not to be,” and, then, in the conclusion, “enterprises of great pith and moment, with this regard, their currents turn awry, and lose the name of action.”

But, in truth, all that to which Hamlet confessed in that fashion, has been the lie which is the evil that witches tell to credulously terrified children. In truth, the history of living species, were the recurring upheavals, of upward development of the quality of living species. The lesson from the history of mankind, as above all other known living species, is that man’s natural destiny, tyrants and fools aside, is the notion of an intrinsic immortality of the human species, the power of mankind to change itself, from relatively lower, to those higher powers to exist in the universe as we have come to know this through scientific progress. The Creator did not make mankind, in our assigned likeness, to be doomed slaves in the pit of some Roman arena.

However, all that just said being true—nonetheless—there is a persisting habit of submission to slavery by whole peoples, a trait which is essentially contrary to the biology of the human species. That is a trait of submission to evil embedded in an infection with a descent from slaves. The natural characteristic of the human species, is, thus, in accord with physical-scientific progress through those anti-entropic sequences typified by the instance of physical-scientific progress. It is the humilities of an heritage of slaves, which impel us to destroy ourselves for the wicked pleasure of creatures of the ultimate evil of a Satan, a Zeus, or Her Majesty, the Queen.

The Alternatives

There are some among us, who reject the temper of slaves, and who may revolt against it. The resisters to the worship of slavery, including Philo of Alexandria, among us, while relatively less frequent in our society at the present moment, show a different temperament, a different choice of destiny. We join Philo in rejecting Euclid’s evil doctrine of a dead creation.2Cf. the revised, second edition of Verdi’s Otello, which was re-designed around Boito’s particularly notable, special soliloquy for the character Iago’s assigned: “I believe in a cruel god...” Our nobler trait is found among what have been those whose intention is that death shall not be the end of the future meaning of their having lived.

Such persons are typified by those who conceived of the appropriate purpose of every human life as being to bring into being a better world than we had found it. This, if this is properly understood, is the dedication of the honorable parent and child alike. Every living type of species exists under that universal law of life. For most species, the motive lies in the mere unfolding of life as such. For mankind, there is a higher destiny, a destiny sometimes called “progress”: that no generation of a human species must fail to create a higher standard of quality and power of the human species than those who had come before them. The true meaning of humanity, contrary to the evil notion of the current British monarch, is a universal principle of anti-entropy.

All persons who are morally qualified to assume a leading influence within our societies. are those committed to an explicitly anti-entropic law of human life, rather than a post-war submission to the bitter-sweet irony of ridiculing a Spukschloss im Spessart.


The fundamental principle which distinguishes the human species from all other living species presently known to us, is the uniqueness of mankind’s essential dependency upon our own species’ power to control both the expression and use of what lies within the category of what we call, categorically, as “fire.”

Since the discoveries of such exceptional cases of the leaders of science as the notable cases (which are notable for our immediate subject here), of Bernhard Riemann’s habilitation dissertation itself most notably for his part, and that of Max Planck and Albert Einstein, we are, therefore, presently occupied with admiration for the existence of powers beyond those of merely nuclear fission. We tend, being the species which we are in truth, toward promoting the presently leading advances in the achievements made accessible to our species, such as those from the discoveries of Nicholas of Cusa and his follower Johannes Kepler, through those beyond nuclear fission, into the higher domains of thermonuclear fusion and matter-antimatter subjects, and what we have yet to uncover as also being our own.

There has been a recent change in science’s practical outlook on certain crucial matters of the region of Solar space situated between the orbits of Mars and Venus. Therefore, now, although the recent landing of the space-craft “Curiosity” on Mars is only a significant example of the direction in which future development of mankind’s role on Mars must proceed, “Curiosity” has implied, in the meanwhile, a higher emphasis on a continuing direction of further developments which include essential measures of the indispensable defense of what must become continued human life on our planet Earth. I mean the matters of security of Earth with respect to the effects of asteroids and comets located within, or passing through that continued development of the space which lies between the orbits of Mars and Venus in our the Solar system.

Clearly, if we reflect on such matters as this appropriately, the qualities of power on which mankind shall depend, are defined, for our use, by that to which we must find ourselves enabled to become, as with respect to the higher orders of those powers which mankind had not yet found himself enabled to master. Those considerations take us beyond the generally-considered view of the Solar system, from here on Earth. No known presently native resident on Mars, for example, actually speaks our Earthling’s language up to the present time; as for the future beyond that in itself, until we have reached such points as having settled underground bases on our Moon, and also developed an adequately sophisticated use of thermonuclear fusion as the instrument for an approximate week’s journey between bases on a Martian moon, and a return destination from Mars to our own moon, the prospects for direct human operations on Mars will remain constrained within tracks of cosmic radiation to Mars, and returned from Mars through pathways of ricochet, to Earth, ultimately, thus, mapping the way through the asteroids and kindred fragments back toward Earth. “The defense of Earth” will be a featured goal.

No longer will the Solar planets themselves be relatively independent objects: mankind’s base on Earth will thus bring this region into an Earth-based system of the region of space so mapped by interactions.

Nonetheless, systems operating among Earth, Mars, and some locations within the asteroid-belt bounded by the Venus-Mars region, will therefore be an increasingly important function on behalf of defense of Earth against both asteroids and, hopefully, comets, too. Since we Earthlings do not speak “Martian,” radiation among points linked by a measure of “the speed of light” typifies the means by which we are obliged to meet the challenge of “management” which already, implicitly, confronts us with the challenge of dealing with those boundaries of nearby space, for the duration of an early future generation, and beyond.

This prospective challenge is not entirely new to mankind. The method was crafted by Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa for his De Docta Ignorantia, and as that work of Cusa was supplemented in a crucial way by Johannes Kepler’s discovery of the irony of an endlessly expanding sort of containment of the universe, and of the notion of the human mind, as this conception is expressed most conveniently for us, presently, by the Kepler’s universal physical principle of “vicarious hypothesis.”

The leaders of scientific development are to be distinguished from virtually empty chatter in such as those effects associated with the most revolutionary world-outlook in the presently known system of the history of mankind within our Solar system, such as that of Nicholas of Cusa and his followers. However, with the advent of hoaxsters such as the duped worshipers of what have been identified as Newtonian concoctions, a corrupted science, such as that associated with the foolish name of the foolish, and less than useless magician, Isaac Newton, has taken a turn toward substituting those inherently fraudulent claims of a scientifically fraudulent Newtonism which is claimed to work to the effect of defining the universe as a subject of merely sense-perception, rather than a competent science’s view of man as being dedicated to acquiring qualities of power which then become part of our human experience of principles originating in the existence of a universe. This must replace the silly clutter of the reductionists’ academic cult of devotion to the worship of both Euclid, and that of bare sense-perception per se, and the outright frauds foisted on a too credulous scientific body of practice which was rendered fraudulently hegemonic by the influence of the sometimes-also-Marxian criminal-changeling and general mountebank Bertrand Russell who was also worshipped by his devotee Aleksandr I. Oparin.

The leading category of well-known culprits in this matter, has been defined by the wrecking-role of the Newtonian-like, Aristotelean-Euclidean cult of so-called “sense-certainty.” That has been opposed to a practice of an honest science, one which is based on the notion of mankind working according to the lessons adduced from the notion of a Creator, rather than the a-priorist methods of radical reductionists, such as those in the likeness of Aristotle, Euclid, Friedrich Nietzsche, et al.

At first reading of such facts presented in evidence, it might appear to be the case, that the remedy for the offenses of those reductionist culprits and their cult of “sense-certainty,” might be considered as “elementary” in nature; but, that is possible only insofar as the subject-matter is associated with the simplistic, merely mathematical-deductive notions of some merely imagined discoveries of universal physical principles. The proof of the inherent fraud in the reductionist conceptions associated with the doctrine of such malicious fools as Euclid and Aristotle, was that aptly presented, if not with finality, by Philo of Alexandria. Whereas, the Aristotelean and Euclidean cults of pseudo-science have been premised on the bare presumption of arbitrary faith in an axiomatic quality of “oligarchical principle.”

Thus, that much said so far: the work of such exemplary scientists as Bernhard Riemann and those among his successors, such as Max Planck and Albert Einstein, is, of course, already to be contrasted with the inherently fraudulent concoctions of such hoaxsters as the late Bertrand Russell and his followers clustered in the British-led scientific “witch-hunts” of the 1920s and beyond.

This Brings Us to “Creativity

The particular significance of the use of the term “creativity” for our purposes in this present location, is to be restricted to references to the specific quality of “human creativity,” or, to restate the term as a matter of systemic distinctions, of the unimpaired definition of human creativity, which is to say, that which excludes expressions of the “reductionist” viewpoint of the intrinsically incompetent species of statistical economic forecasting.

As I have repeatedly referenced that matter of distinctions in earlier published locations, the characteristic expression of what is truly human creativity is to be defined only as the ability to discover a universal principle which discredits the application of the term “creative” to the likenesses of statistical forecasting. This is also the essential distinction of human creativity from the novelties associated with the supposed “clevernesses” attributable to mere beasts and mere statisticians, such as Euclid, alike. Philo’s denunciation of the inherent incompetence of Euclid’s ontological presumptions, and Carl Gauss’s avoidance of committing himself in the matters of the failures of both Lobatschevski and Jonas Bolyai respecting notions of “non-Euclidean” geometries (despite Wolfgang Bolyai’s wishes for Gauss’s support of Jonas in this matter),are to be considered as exemplary on this account. The best-known corrections of both Euclidean and customary so-called “non-Euclidean” geometries, share the same common, and also stubborn, systemic errors of presumptions actually, or virtually “a priori.”

Seeking Remedies

It has been more or less typical of the sources of lost competence in science, that the most notable systemically ontological destruction wreaked on physical science, is to be located in the influence of such cases as the Cartesians and the Newtonians in degrading physics into what is, in essentials of practice, a merely deductive branch of quasi-Euclidean-Aristotelean mathematics (e.g., “statistics”). For such as those, the notion of a principle of life, or of the cognitive processes of human life, is essentially a mere process under the category of what have been the relatively trivial arts of deductive mathematics.

The contemporary hallmark of such impaired intellectual life, has been that even the notion of universal physical principles has been degraded into the farcical notions associated with a system of academic belief to the effect that what are identified in practice as the principles of the universe itself, were degraded into a set of the mere presumptions of human sense-perception. Max Planck’s influence was deeply rooted within German science’s institutions; whereas, the comparable genius, Albert Einstein was virtually sidelined by Bertrand Russell to a virtual commentator whose voice was greatly admired from a discreet distance, while clowns of the Bertrand Russell gang, such as dubious, and highly expendable Norbert Wiener and John von Neumann, typified the product circulated in a marketplace better suited to mere academic chatter of what turned out in the end to have been only popularized British-designed charlatans of their time.

The issue to be considered on that account, is the fact, on the one side, that life is an actual principle, but that mere statistical records of that which had happened to have lived, are by no means a measure of the principle of life itself. For those charlatans, nothing new about life has changed for them since the dead thing known as Euclid.


1See my earlier treatment of these two, closely related subjects of ontological principle on the subjects of “Vicarious Hypothesis” and “Metaphor,” in a publication titled “Metaphor,” September 19, 2012, EIR, Oct. 5, 2012, [EIR:, or LaRouche PAC:], and, also, “The Friday Project,” Sunday September 30, 2012, EIR, Oct. 12, 2012 [, or LaRouche PAC:].
2Cf. the revised, second edition of Verdi’s Otello, which was re-designed around Boito’s particularly notable, special soliloquy for the character Iago’s assigned: “I believe in a cruel god...”