Edited version posted: 2/22/2013 1:25pm est.

Who really owns you?

IT IS TIME FOR YOU TO THINK, REALLY

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

February 10, 2013


It appears currently, that in Washington, D.C., as also in the British world empire, for example, the expected practice among some high-ranking interests today, is, to bury any unwanted truth under a virtual manure-pile filled with a combination of “talking points” mixed with that pile of monetarist fraud called “quantitative easing.” After which, truth can be more readily, first muffled, and then buried: all done with the presumed assurance that no intelligent historians would be so rude as to bring the evaded subject of truth up again.

What follows from that, is the following:

The clearly evident intention behind that currently rampant, monetarist fraud, is, first to flood the world with an implicitly worthless avalanche of an intrinsically worthless mass of “quantitative easing,” as is being done now; and, then, very soon, to turn about and repudiate all of that infinite debt of Ben “Bubbles” Bernanke’s hoax of “monetarist easing;” but, with, or without Bernanke, then, to turn about to creating a new, universal version of allegedly lawful money, to replace the repudiated obligations of Bernanke’s bubble-economy of hyper-inflationary “quantitative easing,” by a relatively, extremely small quantity of new nominal “money,” which will be intended to serve as a replacement for what had been simply cancelled as what had been the former category of “Bernanke” and kindred, repudiated money of the most of the rest of you folk.

Thus, it is presently intended, that the newly defined super-rich, will be reborn-again as the still relatively super-rich, while billions of the population of the world would die en-masse, choked to death by attempting to exist, as done by trying to live on the lost nominal “values” of a freshly repudiated former currency. All that after such “giant bubbles” resembling the intrinsic fraud of what had been “quantitative easing” had been not simply repudiated, but replaced on so gigantic a scale as would have been intended for now.


Chapter I: An aim for what is a so-called modern history, usually misses, and that for a very good reason!

THE PRESENT WORLD-EMPIRE

To understand both the present reality and its future, you must re-examine the present meaning of “lessons of past experience,” as if those were an echo of memories of the ancient Roman empire and its sequels. Compare the former, recently lost sovereignties of continental Europe, with what has become the presently almost stateless condition of the former composition of western continental Europe. Ask oneself: In what degree is the condition of Europe today, comparable to the state of the conquered subjects of ancient Rome in its time; or, the state of a Europe before a British empire’s recent crushing of the Peace of Westphalia; or, the hyperinflation imposed upon Weimar Germany in an earlier century?

Whatever past empires might have been, the period of what had been actually sovereign nation-states, now seems to have been brought very nearly to an end, into a state of affairs which, now, might seem to have been brought about by what a British scoundrel, Tony Blair, had done to murder the achievement of what had been the Peace of Westphalia. That wretch, Blair, has done his part in this by means of seemingly little more than slight adjustments in the name, costumes, dates and experiences of whatever passes for the presently, rapidly expiring customs of the Atlantic regions.

What, then, is now “reality?” Better asked: “Where has reality gone?” “Where did it go?” If it had ever existed, to where had it gone, and by what means? Perhaps, “Who has murdered it?” Or, “Is there still a future for mankind in Europe?”

Look at matters from a slightly different track: compare the sudden recent example of what has been lately defined by the irony of a recently re-resurrected, twisted mere corpse of England’s Richard III, which, having been a lost cause, which it now, apparently, is, has now been finally brought back for a moment on stage, to a reign of an irony piled upon irony. Let who will, now shout: “For the moment, nothing seems to be reality. The King is already dead! Long live the King! Now bury him—again!” “History” as we have often heard of it from around the world of the past, seems, suddenly, to have been customarily extended as if under the memory of a long siege of Troy, which, in the end, was never actually a myth.

Such are the curious ironies of a real history.

A Search for Implications

If we scrap both the choice of the sundry lying, or the simply ignorant versions of what is claimed to have been considered the course of a fairly known history, we seem, currently, left with what were soon to become relics little better than being some scattered, occasionally accrued, lost facts as such. Despite that, as I shall insist here, we should have learned, long since, that no system of what are merely “so-called facts-to-present-date,” could ever actually be an efficiently real account of an actual history. That has been true for a truly elementary reason: for the reason that the customary accounts presented, had failed to include an account for any actual future.

The truth is, contrary to common belief, that no truthful account of the actual future can be competently adduced from what had been merely the past. That has been, truthfully, the experience of every passing species of living creature, which has existed on Earth this far. That is the truth of great events in our galaxy. That is the principle which separates the experience of life, from that of death.

The indispensable reality which must be recognized, is that mere facts concerning manifested apparent intentions, are landmarks which have been left, like dead footprints from where actual men and women might have walked; yet, despite that, mere footprints and the like were never the real matters which are to be confused with the true outcomes experienced as the knowledgeable form of the processes of history. The past does not contain the footsteps which mark that present which exists only in the future: the arrogant powers of a merely present time, lack that actually existing experience of the future which is called “foresight.” Yet, all living existence depends upon foresight, or lack of foresight of someone, or of some mere thing.

I emphasize, that while we might experiment with the suggestion that the knowable intentions were expressed in the course of the process of leaving those footprints which had been left behind in the forward march of history, these intentions left by the past, were never the true causes for the direction of that which a mere description of the actually historically past events and their footprints could have left behind them. As I shall explain, and then emphasize repeatedly in the course of this present report, the great, underlying motives of real history, are not to be located in causes which even some of the truly most applauded conduct of real nations, and of their men and women, should consider as having been the actual intention which the work of the human mind should have contributed to the creation of a future history, whether among living species, or the universe in an experience of its entirety.

Nonetheless, it might seem to some stubbornly misguided souls, that my profession as a successful forecaster in economic processes, has been, and remains, merely that which some learned, but confused folk might wish to prefer to describe, mistakenly, as being that of “a contrarian.” All of which means, in fact, that I have searched, with some modest degree of a relatively unique success, for access to the real, future causes and their outcomes for a future history, rather than that of most of those who have been considered, as by their own very selves, to be “merely historians of a past experience.”

I have come to prefer the causes which even the putatively best leading historians, or the like, appear to have either overlooked, or had simply lied about, either maliciously, or merely for the lack of anything which appears, to them, to be something better to do. Mostly, most of the time, even what might have seemed to have been the best of historians, have usually overlooked the most crucial among those actually real, but rarely mentioned varieties of the radically changing pattern of footsteps left behind in the course of an actual human history. All of my several principal, and successful, forecasts as a working economist, have been essentially of that characteristic. The past, like King Richard III, is always included in that which was buried in a mere appearance of some merely hoped-for future.

“The Hard Facts, Despite It All”

At this point, it would be appropriate to, briefly, narrow the range of the discussion in progress up to this point. Now, as I have recommended, and as I have done in several recent reports, let us, for the moment, confine the scope of what I have indicated here, to a concentration on those falsehoods which are represented, specifically, by reliance on what is merely ordinary human sense-perception, even when the past as merely such has been considered as a purportedly “scientific” sense-perception.

The first steps of that greatly narrowed range of topics among those who have been considered as actually competent historians and their like, bespeak footprints which have still not been understood, even among most of those who have been putatively the best historians and kindred strategic thinkers. Even among those I could identify as being fairly considered as “strategic thinkers,” their whole role fits within that greatly reduced range of targets which I have just identified; they tend to be victims of a class of errors defined by reliance on mere sense-perceptions, as precisely such mistakes as those reveal the commonplace error of a prevalent, persisting belief in what is actually the fallacy of what is called “sense-certainty.”

In a somewhat longer-range view of history than that, if we were to keep within the bounds of those parameters which I have just presented for your consideration here, it is what has been the crucially important, but neither, yet, truly-understood, nor even known, underlying principles, which have befuddled even the otherwise relatively most respectable historians and forecasters.

To restate that point. It is fairly said, that even what are sometimes justly considered as the best scientists, historians, or statesmen, had relied on the track of the mere footprints left as history, rather than relying upon an effort to discover what had actually made those footprints. What those persons have missed in their inquiries, is not what had actually seemed to be the expressed intention of the individual actor, but, rather, has lain in consequences which he or she had almost never effectively considered: “the mysterious hand of a future fate.”

What, then, has been the cause of what even a seemingly perfected quality of conventionally historical outlook has widely overlooked?

“An Answer to That Question”

There has been a commonplace error which must be considered, and corrected, as it must be done here. That error is expressed as a disposition to rely on sense-perception, even fairly often, choosing that misguided belief for the purpose of defining what is intended to pass for the alleged discovery of universal physical principles. Therefore, one must demand: What is the proof of that sense-perception, upon which habitual science-sniffers appear to rely as their choice of what passes, for them, as what they treat as if truly universal, but which is often a false notion of a physical principle?

On that account, there is the need for a new, better definition of a competent account of human history, which must be a history which includes the knowably efficient existence of the role of the future. This must now be reconsidered, and refined, with far greater rigor, and, then, radically redefined, again, appropriately, even as if to bring the evidence out from the popular hiding-places, where it has been dwelling amid those usual mists and myths mistaken for the systemic actuality of progress in human history, or its rejection.

There is a principle of reason in the actual record of history; but, the customary approach to what had been deemed a more or less respectable regard for the matter of motives, misses the point. It neglects the underlying, rarely considered, but actually underlying motives specific to knowledge of the future, motives which even the most careful historians have often missed, motives which actually lurk as if hidden deeply by mankind’s merely ostensible motives.

That brings us to the issues of the inherently systemic fallacy of what has been accepted, wrongly, as the principles often attributed to the notion of mere sense-perception as such. On that latter account, the ostensibly best among the putative experts, had customarily failed to consider the actually efficient quality of the deeply underlying actual motives embedded in those mists which have been created by mankind’s customarily credulous confidence in what had been merely sense-perception itself. That has been the cause for such errors as those which have been popularly recommended as a worship of the alleged evidence of mere sense perception.

At this point, let us take the most serious of our historians hypothetically at their word, but, therefore, only for carefully defined clinical purposes. Then, and only then, locate the systemically ontological folly embedded within the apparent depths of their knowledge and its mere sincerities.

What is the role of a history which is to be seen from the specific viewpoint of the future? In other words, seen from the standpoint of those universal physical principles which could not be actually known from any other standpoint than that of reference to an actuality of the future.

A Typically Useful Question-Mark

There have been notable, but relatively brief interruptions in the past, imperialist systems of repressions, interruptions such as, for example, the case of that relatively excellent, and also exceptionally important medieval figure of history, Charlemagne as Rosa Luxemburg had known him.

With the passing of what was, in fact, a truly great Charlemagne, the experience then was as if history had slid backwards, that at a generally accelerating rate, all, with some rare exceptions, toward a fresh interval of “the same old imperialist crap.” While Charlemagne had still lived, he had remained truly outstanding, and so within the dwindling powers of his radiated influence since the death which had followed his relatively brief reign.

It had been a reign which was outstanding for the reason of some of the physical-economic institutions which he had founded during his life-time, such as the creation of Europe’s continental water-transport system, and his method of census, and his system of development of the needed qualities of government, and the other wonderful accomplishments of the government of his time. Those accomplishments of his, as fairly considered by the historian Rosa Luxemburg, had been among the most excellent works of that page in history, which, on that account, had lived on, not only in memory, but, even more emphatically, in the practices and those profound benefits from that time, which have survived to be resurrected in memory, up through the present day.

What he had achieved as durable qualities of those created effects of his reign, remain, still, as traceable to what Rosa Luxemburg had correctly noted in the course of her own scholarly achievements, as among the world’s leading economists of her own time. Nonetheless, we must ask: what had directed the motives of that quality which he had actually represented as the relative great genius of his, Charlemagne’s, relatively brief reign? Behind the well-defined apparent motives, what is the underlying motive for the motives themselves, those of then, or now? The honest answer to such questions is neither obvious, nor simple in any degree. They require the wisdom gained from the effect of true discoveries of universal principles.

The great economic and closely related accomplishments of Charlemagne, had been chiefly economic (physically) in their effects, as in economic and social accomplishments traced, chiefly, in events of development covering a territory corresponding to that of the combined territory represented, chiefly, by the combination of both the same territory as that of modern France, and also of that territory on which a modern Germany has been established, a Germany which had come into its proper existence under that influence of the circles of U.S.A. President Abraham Lincoln, which had contributed to a continuing leadership of Chancellor Bismarck, a leadership which had been continued, in effect, until his ouster by British interests, in 1890—British interests which had actually launched World War I, and its sequels from the exact moment at which Bismarck had been toppled from future power.

Those relevant developments by Charlemagne, to which I had referred, included the great internal continental system of “water roads” centered on both the rivers and canals of France and the internal water-ways of Germany, including a crucially important inland navigational system based on the union of the Rhine, the Danube, and the rivers of France, a creation which was completed only as late as during the 1990s.

Otherwise, Charlemagne himself had entered into great diplomatic and related agreements with many regions of Europe and the Middle East, including his exemplary close relationship to the Abassid monarch of the same period of time, Haroun al Raschid.

For the rest of it all, European history, in particular, so far, has been, most frequently, and with brief exceptions, chiefly an onset of interims betwixt sundry bloody carnivals of horrors, to the very present date; even the leading exceptions which have been notable, even still today, were largely passing odd pages from a tattered history. There seem to have been certain motives for what had happened; but, what were the hidden motives which had made the other motives possible?

On such account, the riddles of history might appear to most, to be unending. The best riddles are to be found at the point that “practical experiments” are superseded by the discovery of new, higher ranking, universal physical principles, principles which reject the silliness of the notions of deduction—which is what qualifies the latter to be examined in the corrective light of what might be principles.

I now return attention to precisely that presently urgent matter of the definition of what is actually a universal principle, but, after we have turned our attention, temporarily, to descriptions of the ground on which the evidence of suspected principles might be found. Do not forget, that through it all, I am not merely an economist, but one with certain exceptional, and proven qualifications of insight and foresight for the purposes to which I am dedicated on behalf of you and your progeny.


Chapter 2: “I am an American!”

HISTORY ON THE FIELD OF PLAY


Mere labels, mere descriptions, are never actually science, but are, usually, directly the contrary in their natures. At its best, merely taught history is little better than a footprint of that which had once been an account molded by either the hands and minds of competent scientists, or merely those others who must now be returned into a more careful study of a now much-neglected, former role of actually scientific progress. Such is the root of the trans-Atlantic and still broader crisis of mankind now.

Consider the set of the nations of continental western and central Europe, as to be seen over the course traced from ancient into present times, and which have now been recently sucked into becoming returned to the condition of a virtually stateless, merely local colony of the British empire. For example: a collection of captive, former nations, otherwise known presently as the so-called “Euro System.” This had been a patch of what had become, at one time or another, and sooner or later, the sometimes former nation-states whose only actively surviving form of serious expression at the present moment, today, is what has become known as the recent tragedy of the presently contemporary, seemingly stateless, and accelerating threatened disasters of a “Euro System.”

The United Kingdom is not actually a nation—although it could become such under proper preconditions; it is a mere “motto” used by what is, essentially, a now centuries-long reign of a world-wide empire. In such matters as those confronting Europe now, what British imperial reign and its influence has done, was that done not merely to continental Europe, but to the continents of Eurasia, Africa, the Americas, and others.

Europe is not the only victim presently. During the course of the formation of the history of our own United States of America, our own participation in these presently trans-Atlantic and Mediterranean times, had already lost, at least temporarily, most of our republic’s originally won sovereignty, a quality of sovereignty which had been lost through such sources of corruption as the instrumentality of the installation of the loutish mere British puppet of that British spy, Aaron Burr, that nasty puppet known as that thoroughly despicable President Andrew Jackson who had duped many Americans of the past and present, into the deluded belief that Jackson should be regarded as “respectable.”

Following the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln, a former pupil of John Quincy Adams, and the greatest of all Presidents since George Washington, we of our United States had regained our sovereignty in a Civil War among our ranks, a conflict which had been created entirely by the British monarchy and its international financial apparatus: albeit regained for only a time. For that foolishness among us then, we have paid a horrid, actually bloody price, which would have been mitigated had a victorious President Lincoln continued to live in defiance of his intended assassins deployed from the British monarchy.

Similarly, another most notable, later assassination, that of President William McKinley, threw the same U.S. Presidency into a virtual political garbage-pit, into the snare of being a virtual British satrapy once more, this time under such as a treasonously inclined, swinish Theodore Roosevelt, and under a kindred, temporarily reigning scoundrel and overt leader of the revived Ku Klux Klan, President Woodrow Wilson. In the main, the U.S.A. of the 1920s fared little better.

So, with one curious exception to a pack of the mostly Twentieth-century scoundrels in our Presidency, until the election of the truly great President Franklin Roosevelt, the Presidency of the United States had been occupied, with a rare exception, by more or less viciously treasonous stuff representing the legacy of the British spy Aaron Burr, and Burr’s habitual mere flunky, Andrew Jackson.

But, then, with the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, and, thus, under the despicable Harry S Truman foisted upon a politically besieged President Franklin Roosevelt, the United States again became a disgrace to itself, this time under implicitly treasonous pressures directed from Churchill’s London.

Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy gave us back much of our actual sovereignty, temporarily, for as long as they had lived; the assassinations of John Kennedy and his brother Robert, still keep that which had been our once great republic, as a captive to an economic and political tail-spin under such as a failed and nasty George W. Bush, Jr., and the British-empire-created Barack Obama, both of whom have proven themselves, in fact, to be, this far, the very worst substitutes for true patriots of our republic’s virtually lost sovereignty.

The proper general summation of this report which I am presenting as the range of matters to be considered here and now, will be the fact, that, despite the wonderful Peace of Westphalia, the future British empire had begun to emerge as visibly an imperial power with rise of the New Venetian Party’s wars, first that of a France under the impact of William III of Orange, but which has now been, long since, a globally dominant imperial power throughout the planet, more or less permanently to present date. So far, numerous moments of a set of quaint pseudo-sovereignties are to be taken into consideration. This insult to the respective nations of Europe did not begin with the Roman Empire, but. there has been, so far, no end to the specific evil which ancient Rome, and its presently continued, Venice and its included Modena branch as an offshoot, represent still today. So, the bench-mark for the history to be considered in this present report, must now be located here.

“Go along, to get along,” may not be treason, but without the populist legacy within our institutions of government, actual treason would not have been tolerated very much under our Federal Constitution. Most of our people had been respectable, had they not sought out the companionship of that which is, both politically and morally, tantamount to syphilis.

In the meantime, the customary British myth about “little England,” is nothing more than just another silly “talking point” employed for the edification of the pitifully credulous. In short, true sovereignty among respective nations, has been, considered in the large, this far, pretty much in the role of a collection of seductive dreams with little durable substance. If we refuse to accept that judgment, we were blinding ourselves to the most general of long-standing, presently global realities.

Nicholas of Cusa’s Legacy

That much said this far, now take the following, crucially exemplary case of the influence of Nicholas of Cusa on the destiny, and the consequences of that work of Christopher Columbus which had been inspired by the work of Nicholas of Cusa. Our republic may have become “sad shakes” now; but our United States also has had a wonderful legacy which may be traced chiefly to the impact of the legacy of one among the greatest geniuses of known modern times, Nicholas of Cusa, the true central figure of the greatest trends toward progress in modern trans-Atlantic history since the Great Renaissance.

For that purpose, we must study the Massachusetts of the Seventeenth-century Winthrops and Mathers; study it as a fairly crucial and also pivotal case in point. Had I been free to prevent a monstrosity perpetrated against my highly esteemed, late colleague and historian, Graham Lowry, he would have been permitted to continue the exceptionally gifted work which he had represented, that as far, and for so long as his circumstances permitted, as in his only partly completed, projected series on the true history of our republic. We of our United States should all be richer, and wiser, for the memory of those achievements and intentions, still today.

The lesson especially to be learned, is that Truth is not a collection of facts. It is a grasp of those forces of influence which distinguishes the genius of creative insight from mockery. There was no one among those who tried to shut Graham’s voice up, who had not turned out to have been “a holier-than-thou skunk” during my enforced absence from my customary duties. Too often, it is forgotten, that “power” and “honor” are usually not evidence of truth. Corruption comes cheaper on the marketplaces of what is describable as “opportunism.”

To understand all this, and more, you must, absolutely, consider the deep and also vast relationship of the work of Nicholas of Cusa for the role of Christopher Columbus in the shaping of world history since their overlapping times. We must, therefore, give special recognition, to that explicitly declared mission of Cusa, which had, in turn, persuaded Christopher Columbus to found the benchmark for a new republic, a benchmark whose existence was explicitly premised on what was to happen on the shores of the Americas.

In all of this, the deep precedents for the unique role of Columbus’s mission must not be overlooked. Without the role of Columbus, there would have been no United States, and without the genius of Nicholas of Cusa, before the historic role of Columbus, there would have been none of the achievements accomplished through the keystone-work of Christopher Columbus.

To illustrate those achievements and their varied consequences, it were sufficiently exemplary, to consider the circumstances which led to not only the discovery of the New England colony, but even the brilliant success of the establishment of the New England colony, prior to the time it was crushed by those forces of the “New Venetian” establishment of William III et al., which had been built up in the Netherlands wars. These were wars, first, against the France of the silly Louis XIV; and, second, against the British Isles; and, thirdly, the suppression and crushing of what had been the wonderful New England territory crafted under the leadership of the Winthrops and the Mathers.

In the latter of those three instances, what emerged from the late Seventeenth-century crushing of New England by the agencies of the continuing “Venetian Empire,” was an Eighteenth-century rebirth of the earlier intentions of the Winthrops and Mathers, a rebirth typified most forcefully in the personality and work of the great master-statesman, and political heir of those same Winthrops and Mathers, Benjamin Franklin.

However, all that said this far, now taken into a certain account, consider: what is the systemic error deeply embedded in the current teaching even among the presently relatively best of our historians this far?

Now, having completed a broad-brush overview of the particular subject-matters to be taken into account here and now, we may bring a better order into an historical perspective whose selected certain elements we have considered here this far, and more. Our principal, and principled target for this scientific expedition into the realm of truth, is the systemically savage fallacies inherent in the current, still conventional, but mistaken notion of human sense-perception as such. To escape from the inherent errors intrinsic to faith in sense-perception, it is essential to be freed from the great error of the relatively best historians, the specific error of belief in the alleged “self-evidence” of what is merely sense-perception.

Such is the spread of the truly underlying semblance of principle for truly attempted understanding of human history, to the present date. Now, let you be enabled to “begin to get my point here,” even if only by degrees.

What Is the Future?

The moment has now come in this report, to insert an explanation of the proper human meaning of the concept of an ontological distinction of actual human access to knowledge of the future.

The clearest modern definition of an ontologically actual notion of an experience of a future, was supplied by Nicholas of Cusa in, most notably, his De Docta Ignorantia. The best practical demonstration of Cusa’s discovery in that location, has been provided by his scientific heir, by Johannes Kepler’s unique discovery of the principled conception of vicarious hypothesis. Unfortunately, the notion of vicarious hypothesis, as actually presented by Kepler, has been poorly interpreted; however, it can be better appreciated if we recognize that conception itself as being ontologically congruent with the concept of metaphor as it occurs in the dramas of William Shakespeare and the principles of musical composition expressed in the preludes and fugues of Johann Sebastian Bach.

The most vicious of the customary errors of popular opinion on this account, is the prevalence of a desperate belief in the ontological notion of “sense-certainty.” The best choice of contemporary remedies for the prevalent popular confusion in connection with these matters, is to examine the typical cases of the successfully demonstrated discovery of universal physical principles by such modern physical scientists as Max Planck and Albert Einstein. Those discoveries conveniently typify cases of explicit knowledge of an experience of the future; that prowess in creativity so typified, also typifies the actual experience of a discovery of a principled expression of the future which is fully congruent with the practice of forecasting in which I have repeatedly had such an experience in forecasting oncoming expressions of the discovery of future, qualitative changes in mankind’s available choices of his fate.

No comparable benefit can be adduced from mere sense-perception as such. My own earliest experience with that kind of choice, is what I experienced, contrary to Euclidean doctrines, in a youthful study, during my secondary education, of the principled characteristics of constructions with steel beams, during some repeated visits to the Charlestown Navy Yard in metropolitan Boston. The principle which I adopted as being “natural,” from my point of view, then, was merely typical of any human being’s potential insight into the actual experience of knowing a cause in the future.

The issue which arises commonly in connection with such discoveries, is the relative “brainwashing” of students and others in what passes for “standard” secondary and later education commonly. Man’s power of the human will, as that was demonstrated by Kepler’s discovery of the essential principle of the Solar system’s organization, is not, by any means, the only type of relevant case. It has been the best illustration of the essential principle which distinguishes mankind from the beasts, as by Bernhard Riemann, Max Planck, and Albert Einstein, too, as, probably, Heraclitus as well, Shakespeare and Bach included.

The principle which I have indicated, thus, here, is a natural power of the member of the human species, if that power is not suppressed within, and by society. On this account, it is not merely possible, but indispensable, to recognize that the cultures with which some of the better-informed have been indoctrinated, have been crafted, to large degree, as effects of a conditioning to accept the fate of a suppressed majority in this history of the conflict between mankind and its oligarchical cultural conditioning according to what has been the “tradition” induced among the so-called “lower classes.” The long history of the systemic fraud of a Euclidean geometry illustrates the point.


Chapter 3: Some needed descriptions.

WHAT THE CURRENT QUEEN OF ENGLAND APPEARS NOT TO WISH YOU TO KNOW 1Or, Perhaps She’s Lying About That, Too!


I remind you, that the current fact is, that the Queen of England and the Saudi system, are among the joined exemplary elements among leading cases of members of an actually world empire which is fairly identified, presently, as a present world empire distinguished by roots originally planted since no later than ancient Rome. That much said, now take into account, again, the added common history of the murderous traitor Aaron Burr, and his henchmen, Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren, for examples.

Since a later time than their record presents, as added facts, all with rather slight interruptions, such as those of the most excellent, relatively recent Presidents such as Franklin Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy, the financial system of the United States has been dominated, most of its time, by the British empire’s customary, and continuing predatory role, as in its top-down control over our United States’ nation, through most among what had been the incumbent Presidencies, whether each were, in turn, great, good, or even very bad (such as George W. Bush, Jr., and, worst of all, the mass-murderously inclined Barack Obama).

However, that much taken into account, the essential feature of the presently global system of a monetarist tyranny which continues to dominate the United States through the role of a global monetarist system, is that of a system whose center of power has been, most nearly, the heritage of the presently British successor to the continuity which it shares with the nominally defunct, original Roman Empire. The existing, trans-Atlantic-centered “money system,” serves as key-holder to what is, in fact, still presently, both a very dirty aspect of a very much real British empire, in fact, but also a very real Roman empire scarcely hidden within the British husk.

Within that virtual prison-yard of the nations which the British empire continues to represent as that current Anglo-Saudi interest which had launched both the original “9-11” murders against the citizens of the United States, and the expression of the same interest’s role in the continuation of the self-same such practices still today, there still remains a tattered, but still specifically “American” system of resistance: a resistance inherent in the legacy which had been defined by the founding of our Constitutional republic, whenever that republic had exerted the power native to the intention expressed in the birth of our Federal Constitution, and, also, as in the legacy remaining from the tradition of the de facto, Seventeenth-century republic-in-fact which is represented today by the memory of the Massachusetts Bay Colony under the leadership of the Winthrops and Mathers, and consequently, their starring heir, Benjamin Franklin.

It is crucial for our purposes here, that the foundations of the Massachusetts Bay Colony in its Seventeenth-century heyday, were laid, essentially, as the legacy of the greatest scientific genius of the “Golden Renaissance” which is associated with that same Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa who, among his many other revolutionary achievements, had laid the foundations for all competent expressions of modern physical science, with, most emphatically, his De Docta Ignorantia.

It was the same Nicholas of Cusa, whose policies had inspired Christopher Columbus’s essential intention in reaching the region of the Carribean, and the effects of Columbus’ impact on the future of the great surge of what would include the unique accomplishment of the establishment of our United States of America.

The question which the immediately preceding paragraph here ultimately implies, is “What underlies the actual meaning of that American Revolution?” Where can the underlying “pay-dirt” of our republic be located?

The Roots of the American System

First of all, we do not exaggerate if and when we may claim to see a very special place for the role and destiny of our republic among all other nations. So, even despite those several evil Presidents and comparable scoundrels who have contrived to find a leading position in our republic’s affairs, it must be taken into account, that, obviously, there are two most notable kinds of defects in the quality of the U.S. republic’s, and also Europe’s present functioning.

The most readily accessible evidence on this account, is the stink of corruption expressed by our republic’s seemingly chronic pollution with the overreaching role of a British empire whose true origins exist only in its expression as bearing the legacy of the Roman Empire. All of the relevant, Europe-centered empires of the world have been, in fact, outgrowths of the same tradition as that of the original Roman Empire; the corruption of the United States (chiefly from London), had already been tainted in that same direction.

This fact, respecting the still extant, Roman origins of the British imperial system, is, still, the present juridical basis for the existence of that British empire which was established by the general, 1783 Treaty of Versailles, which provided the same context for the subsumed Peace of Paris signed directly with United States itself.

If we attend to the miraculous achievement of the U.S.A.’s original finance minister, Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin protegé Hamilton had been, in fact, the greatest genius in his crafting of the greatest national economic policy ever visibly known to mankind. The notion of a credit system, instead of a monetarist system, had been the most urgent and vital reform of national economies in all presently known history since that time. All of the relevant failures of the United States’ system throughout the full span of its existence to date, have been the consequence of the grave error of the recurring substitution of a monetarist system for a credit system.

Indeed, the one, most singular measure on which the continued existence of the United States now depends, is the return to Hamilton’s principle of a credit system, instead of a money system launched in the name of such relevant figures as a soiled Thomas Jefferson acting under the influence of a British agent committed to the destruction of the United States, that being the same Aaron Burr who was the British controller (and virtual personal owner) of President Andrew Jackson.

Later, Abraham Lincoln’s victory over that British slaveholding Confederacy’s monetarist and slavery system, the system which had been launched fully, and officially under the successive, British-owned Presidencies of Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren, is to be remembered for Lincoln’s contrasting model of the greenback system, a system which had snatched the safe existence of the United States by the means of President Abraham Lincoln’s “Greenback system” of national credit, rather than submit to the mercenaries of European monetarism.

Jackson, a perennial stooge for that traitor and professional assassin Aaron Burr who was still a proprietor-in-fact of the Jackson Presidency, performed the specific function which Burr’s arrangements assigned to the Presidency of both Jackson and that of van Buren, an arrangement employed for their looting of the government and people of the United States, in their time. That pair did so, by destroying the credit of the United States, all for the prominently presented intention of turning the United States into virtually a mere victim of the British empire. Exactly that was done, to a large degree, as the result of an operation conducted from London, via the region of New York City and the swindlers in Massachusetts.

That is the crucial point in fact which must be made clear in this report’s present chapter. That subject is currently the indispensable basis for rescuing the people of the United States from a mass-murderous, present form of destruction of the physical economy of the United States and willful, Wall Street-steered, effectively increasing rates of economic mass murder among the present great majority of our citizens, all that on behalf of Wall Street and its minions.

Uniquely American: The Credit System

Few among our professional economists, presently, have even the slightest competence in respect to the essentially requisite principles of a national economy. The problem here, is not that our citizens are stupid in these matters; the fact is that most of them are, simply, actually incompetent respecting a very specific matter: their widespread, specific ignorance respecting the threat from our deadliest adversary, the British-empire-dominated, and global, monetarist system.

Whereas, a still productively inclined, but diminishing portion of our citizens have now virtually lost all actual competence over the direction of the economic affairs of our republic. Our republic is currently at the point that the citizenry still attempts to explain, especially to themselves, their own, actually foolish, efforts to derive an increase in national per-capita wealth from popular indoctrinations in the role of the mind-control exerted over even the minds of nearly all among our citizens. That is a popular opinion which is rooted and controlled by blind faith in the presumption that the true origin of wealth lies only within the oligarchical province of money per se.

The Hamilton Factor

The extraordinarily brilliant, and consummately creative Alexander Hamilton, had acted to the effect of rescuing the United States from that national bankruptcy which immediately threatened the very continued existence of the United States from the start of its national victory. Anyone who does not recognize that, is no true statesman. Hamilton’s action had rescued the threatened young U.S. republic from an immediately threatened resumption of the virtual British captivity of the U.S. population, as under the direction by Wall Street presently.

The U.S.A. was enabled, through the adoption of Hamilton’s measures, to avoid, for a time, a renewed captivity to that British empire from which we had just escaped by our American-led victory of the United States. That escape, secured by Hamilton’s role as the economics genius of the first Administration of President George Washington, had freed the United States from the threatened, ruinous, monetarist ideology intended to be imposed upon our republic. This role by Hamilton, and only this, enabled the United States to continue even to exist in its original constitutional terms, whereas the policies of even grouchy President John Adams and the largely indifferent, and systemically incompetent, and “slippery” President Thomas Jefferson, had allowed our republic’s enemy, the British agent Aaron Burr, to run amok, despite all of the known, wicked offenses of Burr.

The same Jefferson who repeatedly played crony to the traitor Aaron Burr, and who had failed our nation so recklessly in his promoting Burr, thus destroyed, for a certain time, much of what had been repeatedly shown to have been the uniquely competent, and necessary, policies of Alexander Hamilton; as Hamilton’s intentions had, later, been adopted in the expression of the wonderful achievements of both President James Monroe, and his immediate successor, the great genius, and the most persistent and ultimately most effective national leader of his own time as our nation’s leader, John Quincy Adams.

At that point in time, the enemy of the United States, the British agent Aaron Burr appeared on the surface yet again, this time in his role as the chief of the responsible British agents in both the creation and the control of the Presidency of Andrew Jackson.

Simply said, the economy of our nation presently still depends, economically and otherwise, on the fostering of the rising productive powers of labor, a gain achieved uniquely, as ultimately, through science-driven progress in the accelerating development of the productive powers of labor. That is, indeed, the only policy of national practice which is not assuredly idiotic in its intrinsic nature, as also in its innate consequences.2No durable species, even one lasting for a significant lapse of time, could have survived, but for a general rise of the quality of life of the current array of living species. The current population policies of Britain’s Queen, are, accordingly, fraudulent, or more stupid than those reported by the alleged-to-be vampire bats sustained within the attic (or, belfry) of the domicile of the British Royal Family.

A monetarist policy is always clinically insane in its inherently ultimate effects, just as the U.S. has experienced the fact of that effect under the most regrettable choices of Presidents George W. Bush, Jr. and Barack Obama. The ruined years since the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and of his very important brother Robert, attest to the evidence of this, in fact. Nonetheless, this republic of ours had then never fully escaped from the downward trajectory of that particular form of monetarist trend which has reigned, almost consistently, since the death of President Franklin Roosevelt and the assassination of Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt’s choice, President John F. Kennedy.

And are some among you here, still so foolish as to believe that monetarism is good for you?

The Wider Consequences of the Same

The virtually either criminal insanity, or something similar, of Mr. Bernanke’s (and others’) queasy practice of “quantitative easing,” demands an immediate form of relief which could not be provided without special means of indispensable qualities of corrective consideration at this time. In fact, that practice of Bernanke himself, et al., represents, in the effect of what he has done, what has been an inherently criminal practice, both in respect to even the simply national interest of our people, and in respect to crucially important matters of international affairs. “Quantitative easing” is merely an inveterate swindler’s name for a perpetually terminal state of hyperinflation, one now entering a phase comparable to the panic-phase of Weimar Germany’s hyperinflation.

The fact that monetarist beliefs are systemically insane in their inherent quality, obviously does not really exonerate any kind of practice of such implicitly criminal beliefs as those; they are beliefs in practice which belong, for classification, to the category of the greatest magnitude of known frauds, or worse crimes, ever known to mankind, even simply as a matter of fact respecting the inherent consequences of that practice.

Meanwhile, the fact that some governments, such as sometimes our own, may have engaged in such foolish practices from time to time, does not remove them from the category of the guilt of inherently fraudulent practices actually intended against the general welfare of both our own and other nations. If we wish to be truly generous, we might let the monetarist culprits off with either their proverbial bare skins, or as much as what might be barely sufficient to cover over that which is the most unsightly.

In former times, in its variety among human cultures, mankind has been confronted with the inalienable obligation to increase the special quality of fertility which the human species has secured, uniquely, through the increase of the productive powers of labor.

This requirement is implicitly universal respecting the universal obligation to promote society’s practice of aggressive increases of the net effect of the productive form of labor, directly, or indirectly, as the case may dictate. The principal channel of choice for this practice, the proper technical term for this purpose, is the increase of the effective energy-flux density of the application of labor, an obligation which includes the Creator’s command delivered to mankind, to progress to higher qualities of human society’s productive powers of labor, per capita, a rising rate of that density of productivity, the which is specifically inherent in the systematic increase of the energy-flux density both of modes of human labor generally, and in related respects.

For example. Presently, we are also being confronted with the increasing urgency of programs and measures which are required for the accelerated increase of the productive powers of labor. Consider this as in respect to such considerations as including the need to defend us from the threats from asteroids and also comets, a need for defense which now requires very-high rates of increase of applied energy-flux density for the use of mankind on Earth. Indeed, even the ability of society to maintain a minimal level of per-capita productivity, demands an endlessly continuing increase of the physically defined, productive powers of human labor: i.e., scientific progress measured in terms of increases of the application of thermonuclear-fusion and still higher “energy-flux densities” globally and beyond.

Captain John Smith had rightly required, taking into account consideration of his place and time, that the product of the needed productive powers of labor must be obligatory for those who are able. That was a simple approach to the matter at hand, then. But a more suitable consequence, such as a benefit for and within society, is clearly fitting. The underlying principle, then, as to be as applied to the threats of asteroids and comets, should be evident.


Chapter 4: The Present Future of The Human Species

NOW, NEXT


The known history of those former, or presently living species which have inhabited Earth, as at one time, or another, includes my choice of a categorical distinction of the actually human species from all other, previously, or presently known varieties of species. In the main, whether directly, or, indirectly, all of those species have a presently relatively greater, or lesser degree of dependency upon that which our human species does, or, in the alternative, does not do. For certain reasons, that pattern will appear for the present time, as never to change as a matter of principle, but that will tend to remain for as long as mankind is enabled to continue to inhabit both Earth, and also relevant other parts of the Solar system.

We of our human species, represent a “super-species,” to be defined so as one which is inherently endowed with an already demonstrated, voluntary power for creating, willfully, the elements of ultimately virtually limitless evolutionary progress in our species’ willful power to effect categorically useful transformations, upward, done preferably as chiefly willfully, in our nature.

That defines the most essential of the possible issues of evolutionary progress to be considered here. I mean the voluntary power of the human species to evolve into becoming qualitatively higher forms of practiced existence, as through the essential distinction of the noëtic nature of the human mind.3It is to be noted, and emphasized, that I follow the fruits of the cooperation between Max Planck and Wolfgang Köhler, in the indispensable, practical distinction between “human brain” and “human mind.” It is the political implications to be associated, thus, with the human species, as I shall have presented an argument to such an effect, in opening this present chapter.

Therefore, the time has now come, to consider what is next for mankind, provided the presently widespread lust for foolishness does not prevent our species’ continued existence.

The presently, relatively fresh reminder of the distinction of those specifically human noëtic powers called “creativity,” is prompted for us from a consideration of the implications of mankind’s relatively recent capabilities for attaining communications required for the placement of controlled devices on objects within nearby space (and beyond), and for the somewhat distant prospect of becoming an actively living presence of mankind on Mars, and also required increasing prospects for control over such destinations as asteroids to be found in the reach of the regions of betwixt the orbits of Earth and Mars. The time when mankind had superseded a landing on, and return from the Moon, by similar achievements with asteroids and Mars, marks a profound change from what are ostensibly the previous limits for defining what “man” had meant to represent as “man on Earth.”

The present fact, that such changes in the very definition of the meaning of “human species,” have been now “touched” (so to speak), foretells the necessary arrival of a qualitative change in even the very meaning of the notion of mankind.

To speak of what must presently be considered as temporary obstacles to mankind’s role within the bounds of certain qualities to be found in nearby space, the prospective openings for achievements are now already foreseeable as both practical and with vast practical implications for us within our present part of the Solar system. We may, in fact, treat such a prospective potency of our species as if it were a matter of implicitly accomplished possibilities, in principle, for mankind presently. The impetus which this outlook supplies to our immediate prospects for mankind’s inhering, clearly potential powers as a species, already supplies us with the basis for confidence in the prospects for mankind’s advances toward necessary actions to be counted as prospects for important steps into what is, so to speak, “space.”

The presently existing imperatives for “defense of Earth” are sufficient qualifications for reactivating the now foolishly neglected NASA perspectives, including addressing the immediate implications for the notion of “man in space” as an assuredly present capability in immediate view. That is the limit which I impose upon myself, for relatively immediate purposes of suggested national and global policy-planning.

To place those just-stated, typical prospects within the future history of the progress of our human species, we need only begin our investigations by reviewing the history of mankind’s distinctive nature as a species. Man is “the fire-bringer.” Mankind’s origins as a “fire-bringer,” have now passed simply nuclear fission, into the domains of both thermonuclear fusion and what have been named, since Albert Einstein’s work, as “matter/anti-matter” potencies. Thermonuclear fusion, when arranged in an appropriate way, brings the reasonable access of man to, and return from Mars, as a visibly prospective, if somewhat still distant level of achievement. Higher-order capabilities of unmanned means for important investigations conducted at great distances within the Solar system, have already entered the category of higher order means for useful purposes.

All that I wish to accomplish of these already stated accounts, here, are being brought forth by me presently, to provide a suitable prospective for preparing the realization of greater goals ahead.

The principle so implied, is that mankind is capable of becoming a master of accomplishments beyond the presently imagined limits of what mankind must, even soon, reach during a not-really-distant future. Think of what is demonstrated on such an account, as a mere span of four generations, such as that of the Nineteenth, or Twentieth centuries. Translate even those relatively mediocre goals accomplished within the span of the recent four centuries of progress in physical science (and also the frequent retrogressions). These facts duly considered, what is, then, the truly intrinsic distinction of man from beast, other than cumulatively great leaps in human progress?


Chapter 5: Saudi imperialism?

THE BRITISH-SAUDI EMPIRE OF TODAY


I am well-known among some actually leading figures of several or more nations, well-known among those limited circles best qualified to react to my exceptionally specific skills as an forecaster. For example, on that account, on January 3, 2001, I had passed a warning to a relevant leading figure and his wife, forewarning them to expect a serious terrorist threat to our United States to appear during the course of that year. During the late Spring and Summer of that same year, I had tracked several likely, trend-like signs of such a major event. On September 11, 2001, that event hit me (among any others) with a certain degree of surprise as to exact timing, but I had recognized, since my forecast of January 2nd of that same year, the situation and its implications, immediately, and presented the details of my reactions during an ongoing radio broadcast of a blow-by-blow account of the breaking developments.4Cf. [EIR, Sept. 21, 2001] [[http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2001/eirv28n36-20010921/index.html]]

During that same lapse of time, my associates and I had tracked developments which conformed to a prelude for a terrorist event. The cases of which I registered warnings of such a class of event during that same year, became serious enough to be classed as a forewarning of a threatened action in progress near Washington, D.C. What actually happened was what would become known as “9-11:” September 11, 2001, which was soon proven to have been an actually Anglo-Saudi-organized terrorist action, an attack which had been prepared in collusion with Saudi Arabian leading circles, and in cooperation against the United States, also, with a leading role of the British monarchy’s BAE institution. Unfortunately, the facts have been suppressed by the role of lying by both the administrations of George W. Bush, Jr., and, now, Barack Obama.

These essentials are now to be classified under the rough category of “long since,” except for the present fact, of another, clear-cut case of a new “9-11” terrorist attack which had struck in Libya’s Benghazi region, in the Autumn of this just-past year. This new “9-11” attack, has been in fact, a continuation of what had begun in public attention since September 11, 2001. In the case of, now, both those “9-11” attacks, the U.S.A.’s Barack Obama Presidency had sought to conceal, fraudulently, even impeachably, the relevant facts of the combined two cases.

The “Brutish” Empire Acts

To understand that situation in an adequate manner, we must consider the consequences of a process of developments, since the bloody reign of William III in the British Isles, through the time of the 1763 Peace of Paris, which Britain had signed as the conclusive peace treaty with the United States. That date marked a coincident set of treaties of a then newly-established British, Roman-style world empire. The shaping of the empire has been altered since 1763, but the essential characteristics of that British world empire, as an overruling system of collected, relatively local satrapies, has never changed.

It is to be emphasized on this account, that the British empire is somewhat like a chameleon, which changes its colors, to fit the background of the role it is playing, as if diplomatically, according to the circumstances of not only place and time, but in accord with that which is the momentary choice of which nation, and so forth, is being wooed or crushed at the time. It is what “British Empire” has always meant: it has been, in principle, an heir of the original Roman empire, in intention, underlying methods, and embedded consequential disasters.

A Helpful Key to Understanding

The lack of actual understanding of the underlying nature of the present world monetarist’s crisis, is typified, for example, by William H. Gross’s “Credit Supernova!”5http://www.pimco.com/EN/Insights/Pages/Credit-Supernova.aspx He is right in describing the immediate instant of (what is now!) the present date’s situation of the financial universe as, from his choice of vantage-point, a virtual “Credit Supernova.” What he misses entirely, is the actually underlying nature of a real economy. In other words, Gross has no solution, because, although he has diagnosed the disease itself well, considering all else, he has proceeded in an intrinsically wrong way. There is nothing to fear if we cease attempting to “bail out” that global financial system which is the actual cause of the onrushing global catastrophe.

The actually catastrophic error which Gross’ words imply, is the actually insane presumption that money as such is a real determinant of human values. Alexander Hamilton had already defined both the problem, and its remedy, in four statements on the subject of economic principles: his two 1790 reports on Public Credit and a National Bank, his extended 1791 Report on the Subject of Manufactures, and his Opinion on the Constitutionality of the National Bank of 1791. Credit and money are in no respect congruent conceptions, except in the respect that money has no intrinsic value except in its incarnation as a means of an otherwise useless conveyance of the signaled presence of wealth by the messenger-service of mere money.

There is an example to be employed as an illustration of the point I have just stated, an illustration carried over from the progressive evolution of living species toward successively higher orders of the equivalent of higher “energy flux densities” in the ordering of progress in the advancement of the evolution of living species. It is the creative (i.e., noëtic “powers”) of successive advances in the relative qualities of living species, which are expressed in the effects comparable to the notions of increases of effective expressions of “energy-flux density,” which are the basis for the increase of the productive power of human noëtically driven increments in the relative value of human labor.

To derive economic growth, the standard of human productive labor, is necessary; however, to seek to derive relative economic values from money-as-such, is a form of insanity more or less congruent with the intrinsically stupid, and implicit social criminality of what Bernanke and his accomplices currently represent.

What I have just stated respecting the distinction of productive from merely monetarist “values,” provides the only actually competent basis for any national economy.

The most significant of the offspring of the span from the Roman Empire, to today’s actual British empire, are typified more or less exactly by the original model of the Roman Empire. The system of rulership relies to a very large extent on the jackal-like blend of sneak, coward, and opportunist, as that is played, from place to place, and time to time, among the political organizations of the subordinate elements of a British empire modeled on the original Roman. Britain rules less by the force it commands, which is chiefly the disgustingly whorish cupidity which it exploits among its subordinates—i.e., the so-called notions of “alliances.”

The varieties of ways in which Russia has been duped and cheated by Venetian and British swindlers, up to the present moments, since the ouster of Chancellor Bismarck, is exemplary, whether Czarist Russia, Communist Russia, or what-have-you. The case of the way Bertrand Russell, as also Russell’s relevant successors, had played Russia diplomatically, which is to say, often, “egotistically,” whether Communist or otherwise, is typical of the dirty hand of British imperial diplomacy, to virtually the present instant.

I find no systematic fault in the existence of relations among nation-states as such. It is when those nation-states fall into the customary trap of British imperial diplomacy, that the “Little British Isles” so often swindles the nations of the world by playing on the national egotisms deeply rooted in language-national pride. I knew Russia of the 1990s rather well for an outsider, knowing that an honest cooperation between Russia and the United States of President Bill Clinton would have been a pathway to successful development of cooperation among respectively sovereign nations. President Clinton was brought down at that juncture when I had acted on this account. From the effect of that development, neither the U.S.A. nor Russia, has regained the common interest which were available when both nations could each have been, simultaneously, itself.

A comparable case had existed on the verge of the reunification of a divided Germany. A British orchestration among President François Mitterrand’s France, Britain’s Margaret Thatcher, and the U.S.A.’s “goofy” George H.W. Bush, all combined in effect with the assassination of Chairman Alfred Herrhausen of Deutsche Bank, pushed the administration of Chancellor Helmut Kohl, over the edge into a capitulation to that British Empire’s Euro-system hoax which created the wretched peril among the nations of continental Europe—including that of Russia—to the present date.

It is past time that that empire itself be dissolved. The imminent collapse, just now, of the U.S.A.’s capitulation to a commitment to the “monetary easing” of Ben Bernanke, brings the world as a whole to the edge of the greatest, and actually global, financial collapse in all human history up to the present date.

The British-Saudi Swindle

The British-Saudi swindle has been the source of the “9-11’s” of both 2001, as under the George W. Bush Presidency, and that of the Barack Obama Presidency in Benghazi in 2012. The origins of those connections are actually to be traced in their roots to the role of that British conquest of India which was an integral feature of the creation of the original British world empire.

The particular, most distinguishing difference between a national, or comparable economy, and an empire such as that of Ancient Rome or the British-Saudi imperialist operations of the present time, is that the British empire does not give an essential “damn” about economic progress as such. The empire’s appetite is essentially power, rather than physical-economic progress; currently, it demands that previous human progress be irreparably undone. In fact, as the present Queen of England has made the issue of relative values very, very clear: her drive is, as she has indicated repeatedly, to reduce the population of the entire planet through a practiced genocide bringing it from seven billions, to approximately one billion living human persons (or perhaps very much less).

The essential feature at the root of the British empire, as for the Roman earlier, is to use physical power as a promotion and defense of empire as such. Beyond that narrowly defined intention, the overriding intention is to secure the bestialization of what might be regarded as the relatively “lower” classes. We see that policy today, through studying the bestialization being promoted against the U.S. population today (for example) in the name of a program of “environmentalism” which, when combined with the spread of drug-trafficking, can only bring about mass-death rates among the U.S.A. and also Europe, as it has been done, generally, to Africa, and so on.

The interdependency of the acceleration of drug-trafficking and stupefaction of the populations of nations, is presently the very essence of British imperial drug-pushing strategy and related intentions. The bestialization being now shaped, by the emphasis supplied by Wall Street, is typical of the evil which is otherwise characteristic of Wall Street. The problem here, is that most leaders in our United States have recently lacked even the simple “guts” to resist the destruction of our republic.

That evil is essentially a matter of conflicting moralities, the one of human morality, rather than that of predators of such as Wall Street. For the rest of the matter, the evils spring from cowardice. The root of the matter is older than the destruction of ancient Troy. The root is the same evil characteristic of oligarchy as such, purely as evil as the Emperor Nero in his time.


Chapter 6: The actual science of economy.

IT HAS BEEN NAMED “REASON”


In no case, has the method of sense-perception actually defined a universal principle of nature: the universe does not await permission given by something on Earth as responsible for the discovery of a truly universal physical principle. Such dubious devices must be recognized as characteristic of such ancient charlatans as the notorious Euclid, and what Ludwig Beethoven warned, prophetically, would probably be the unfortunately ruinous destiny of “the talented boy,” Franz Liszt; or, worse, the all-sidedly monstrous hoaxster, Richard Wagner; and the, still worse, gibberish-like, popular musical product of the post World War II phase of the Twentieth Century.

These are not matters of “mere opinion,” but of efficiently scientific fact; the proof for this resides within the effect on the quality of mind and morals of the subject considered. There are several conveniently accessible proofs available. Among modern scientific proofs, there have been the Renaissance leaders Filippo Brunelleschi, Nicholas of Cusa, and among the most notable from the Seventeenth Century’s leaders, Johannes Kepler, Pierre de Fermat, and the modern Gottfried Leibniz. It were best to define the issues with better insight into the underlying issues along those historical lines.

Greed is not an appetite specific to decent people. Mission for the advancement of the intellectual powers and related goals of mankind, is a matter of essential, moral principles properly required among even simply decent human beings, and nothing less than that.

We represent, as human beings, the only living species presently known to us, which is capable of enabling even our species to continue to live as such a species, not a species in greed, or brutish ignorance, but as we represent the only presently known living species which is capable of doing some genuine good through the progress of the forced achievements of increased creative powers of action for both mankind and the improvement of our planet’s usefulness.

There is a correlative factor, which has been a leading concern of mine over the greatest part of my life to date: the liberation of my human race from the presently continued general stultification, called euphemistically, “being practical,” contrary to the noëtic potentialities of our species. This is a matter to be identified in relatively simple terms, as the ability of the human mind, when not crippled by malicious influences, to foresee an actual future. The tyranny of the demand to be “practical,” otherwise often named so, is, in fact, the greatest evil, in its effects, even to the degree of explicit bestiality, encountered within the ranks of mankind this far.

The source of the problematic error against which I have just warned, lies in the effort to bring the behavior of the individual human mind into an attempted, precise correlation with the common terms of literal meanings, a correlation which is the primary impulse for brutish intellectual and related behavior within the human population generally. The antidote for such trends into bestiality, is found in what is fairly regarded as both Classical artistic and scientific discovery and use of principles. The model for that standard was provided efficiently by our use of two closely related terms of science and artistic composition: Johannes Kepler’s vicarious hypothesis and the intrinsically related term, metaphor.

The first of these terms, was first defined by Johannes Kepler’s discovery of the ontological principle of physical science, and the second is the comparably “subtle” implications of Classical artistic composition, such as those of William Shakespeare’s dramas and John Sebastian Bach’s sets of preludes and fugues. Both of these just-stated standards, take the imagination out of the brutalizing domain of simply literal sense-perception, into the domain of the human mind, as such.

In both of the cases which I have just emphasized as distinct from raw sense-perception, as such, the actually noëtic powers of the actual human mind are brought into play, in the domain sometimes identified as the “creative imagination.” That is, in fact, the only domain in which human creativity achieves its true realization. It is known as the domain of Classical artistic composition and its realization; but, it is also the only true principle of an actualized physical science.

If, for example, you were to find yourself at a certain degree of distance from the raw experience of sitting in a chair in an audience, such that your mind is distracted from the pressures supplied to the seat of you pants, such that you are listening, not to the actors as perceived so, but standing in a position proximate to experiencing the drama as on-stage; thus, you may have experienced a jolt of sorts, whenever the curtain closed briefly on an act or scene of the drama presented before you. The same principle appears in well-performed, great, Classical musical composition. That is to speak of the specificity of the Classical imagination, a means by which we are enabled, if willing, to enter a domain of the imagination where the only true reality resides, that of human creativity in its own true nature, that for us, as for the great artist and physicist Max Planck, for example, or an Albert Einstein with his violin.

Where there is a simultaneity of Classical drama and other art, there is a place of momentary residence of the human soul.

That is the objective, which truly serves all great things which humanity could know.

Footnotes

1Or, Perhaps She’s Lying About That, Too!
2No durable species, even one lasting for a significant lapse of time, could have survived, but for a general rise of the quality of life of the current array of living species. The current population policies of Britain’s Queen, are, accordingly, fraudulent, or more stupid than those reported by the alleged-to-be vampire bats sustained within the attic (or, belfry) of the domicile of the British Royal Family.
3It is to be noted, and emphasized, that I follow the fruits of the cooperation between Max Planck and Wolfgang Köhler, in the indispensable, practical distinction between “human brain” and “human mind.”
4Cf. [EIR, Sept. 21, 2001] [[http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2001/eirv28n36-20010921/index.html]]
5http://www.pimco.com/EN/Insights/Pages/Credit-Supernova.aspx