Upgraded document posted 11:45am EDT, 7/2/2013.

To: Intl. Economic Policy

THE GREAT ONTOLOGICAL PARADOX

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

June 28, 2013


The Massachusetts Bay Colony had survived, up to a certain point, in spite of the Anglo-Dutch tyranny’s murderous crushing of the original Massachusetts Bay Colony’s Pine Tree Shilling system. In the course of my own, and some others’ current efforts, we must present the U.S. population with a clear statement respecting what had been the actually efficient nature, and also the defeat of the original, Seventeenth-century Massachusetts Bay Colony’s Pine Tree Shilling system. We should recall that there had been the later Eighteenth- Century efforts by Benjamin Franklin, on such subjects as a proposed paper currency. The same kindred spirit of American efforts, had led through the success of Alexander Hamilton’s unique solution for the creation of a U.S. national economy, one which is premised as according to law, still, premised upon a relentless commitment to the often violated principles of a true U.S.A. credit system, instead of the follies of a mere monetarist (e.g., “mere money”) system.

That unique achievement in the history our United States, at least this far, was, initially, both launched and completed as the work done by the original U.S. Treasury’s Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton’s unique genius thus became the essential operating principle of law underlying the adopted Federal Constitution of our United States of America. Indeed, the adopted draft for our U.S. Constitution had not become actually operational until Hamilton’s principle of a credit-system for our U.S. Constitution was set into actual progress. That is the principle-in-fact on which an original, or today’s operating design of our economy’s continuing healthy function could actually rely.

Betwixt then and now, despite the declarations of which I and some others among us have repeatedly uttered, there had often been prolonged intervals during which there were apparently no durable effort to defend the general U.S. public with an intended, officially continued affirmation of the principles of a true credit system. Our own American monetarists were chiefly in the way.

The tendency has been, as a matter of fact, that our best choice for an attempted, actually competent practice, has been to press, still presently, as times have required, for either a continuation, or a restoration of the original Glass-Steagall’s strict renewal: which would not occur without sustaining an efficient and persisting presentation of an actually needed life-and-death pursuit in support of an efficient presentation of those principles of a credit-system which had been presented originally to the general citizenry of the U.S.A., then under President Franklin Roosevelt, as now.

During these recent months, since the travesty of the recent reelection of an increasingly wretched President Barack Obama, we are confronted with a bitter choice between the virtual extinction of our republic, and the restitution of the great nation which we had been once upon a past time. Such, in summary, are among the urgent matters now immediately before our nation, and also the world at large, the faction on which the continued existence of our republic still now depends.

What, therefore, is the lesson, now, so urgently needed to be learned?

The Dark Side of Early U.S. History

The darkest side of our own U.S. republic’s earlier history, came with a U.S. Presidency captive to the influence of Britain’s recurring appearance of its own agent, which was the same Aaron Burr who was notorious for his many acts of murder, including the historically crucial assassination of Alexander Hamilton. When Hamilton had been murdered by Aaron Burr, Burr himself had then fled to escape from the United States, first into Canada, and, then, during extended periods, into Britain: all that time, Burr was working in, and under the direction and protection of the highest rank of the British intelligence service rooted in London itself. He later returned, recurrently, often for fairly long periods, as he had done during his role as the leader of the treasonous operation which had brought about the election of the wretched President Andrew Jackson.

Jackson himself had come into the U.S. Presidency for two successive terms under the initial backing of the British agent and traitor Aaron Burr, but also as Jackson’s accomplice and immediate successor President Martin van Buren. Indeed, the outcome of the election of Jackson had turned out to have been the continuing preparation of a U.S. Civil War launched from within the United States by the combined forces of the British monarchy and also by the same forces behind the British interests also operating in an alliance with the slavery interests inside United States territory. The British empire, combined with what became, and kindred British activities which often actually dominated the U.S. Presidency, even after the victory led by President Abraham Lincoln.

What had happened, was that the same British empire which had created and directed the Confederacy, had combined with strong British and southern backing during most of the period leading into what would become known as the U.S.A.’s Civil War. Yet, much the same might be said of the more or less treasonous scoundrels such as U.S. Presidents Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson (who revived the Ku Klux Klan, bigger than ever before, from his office in the White House), Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, Harry S Truman (a Winston Churchill hack), and the Bush family of Hitler-backer Prescott Bush and his offspring, the sometime U.S. Vice-Presidents and Presidents, first, H.W., and, later, George W. Bush. The latter two Bushes (“being all wet in mind”) did not burn, but also went into what are to be known as their several holdings of sundry very high-ranking offices—which is to say, “very smelly.” Those among our citizens who had been inclined to silliness, would defend such wretched choices of President, as would those who would say: “But he is what we have chosen as our President!” Costly prizes gained, indeed, but in the service of whom?

Notable Wall Street figures have not only been dominant influences in their swindles, whether as individuals, or batches, but all have been the increasingly dominant agents of the British empire and of those kindred functions which all converge on the legacy of Aaron Burr.

It has been otherwise notable, respecting the scoundrels who have, regrettably, often occupied our Presidency, that what has actually been done, instead of what should had been done, has been a medley of some occasional mere gestures of the sort called “cover-up”: “Oh, yes, we should get around to that, some time soon. Give us more time to let things work out.” However, in most cases, what would actually occur after we had thought we might have installed a concept of Glass-Steagall actually based on the installation of a credit system, it turned our to have been, instead, what the general citizenry had been left to believe, to their sorrow, the fraud of a monetarist system thinly disguised.

Admittedly, some relative handfuls from among our authors have written down words which might be explained (with some strange difficulties) as being “a credit system,” but which had been, actually, a poorly disguised “monetarist system,” instead. It actually was in its performances; but, in such a case, how many among our traditionally all-too-credulous citizens, would, nonetheless, take those mere gestures seriously? In fact, a stable actual credit-system has the intended, happy effect, of ridding a monetarist system from our national practice, ridding us from that what should have been done, axiomatically, against that which all included national and related public practice required. The, the magic words, “instead of,” or, “it would be more practical,” unfortunately, seem to vanish down the drains provided at the sides of the gutters.

Therefore, we must, finally, shift our attention, away from a foolish, mere money-economy, into what must now become, again, an actually healthy, physical one.


Chapter 1:

THE WORLDS’ SYSTEM

Now, here, as of the June 29, 2013, there must be an update. This need has been the motive for a set of patriotic surges of up-gradings of our own association’s treatments of such matters as patriotic impulses which had been motivated under a personal publication which I have named, for special good reasons in matters of science, as of good taste. Name it The Great Ontological Paradox.

This time, the pivot of my treatment has been shifted from the customary Earth-bound outlook, to an emphasis, from Earth as such, to the entire region located, inclusively, and relatively more immediately, in a range from no less than Earth to Mars. That specific region which has thus been chosen by me for this occasion, is, admittedly, not very large when compared to the Solar system as a whole, or our Galaxy, of course; but, in the present case, it serves us here as a starting-point of reference, for bringing a much-needed understanding of such systems into view.

The principle involved in this account, means that I am presenting here what is, unfortunately, a presently rarely actually understood view, a vew which is analogous to not only the (rarely actually understood) William Shakespeare’s introduction of his principle of “Chorus” from King Henry V (a subject which I have given a general treatment in an earlier publication).1Nicholas of Cusa, Kepler, & Shakespeare, June 11, 2013. In that play, Shakespeare locates the voice of what was actually reality, to be that of Chorus, not the voices of what would be ordinarily be considered those parts assigned to the mere role of actors otherwise placed as the “real-life” actors on the stage.

Shakespeare’s use of the name of “Chorus” in his Henry V, should have warned the truly witting sorts of directors, actors, and audiences, of the Classically traditional use of the term “Chorus” in notably repeatable Classical Greek drama.

So, in the instance of his King Henry V, in but what he employs for this case, the parts assigned to the other players are the voices of the often silly, and often doomed fools, which the Classical Greek “Chorus” assigns to the roles of all their standard sorts of doomed fools, which the Chorus has told are the voices of the doomed who occupy the familiar parts of the players designated as “actually on stage.”

It is the voice of a Chorus which is that of “spirits” which supply the voice of that reality which is played as if like the ghost in Hamlet. That, thus corrected way, by treating the distinction of nominal shadow as holding fate in his hand, Shakespeare’s “Chorus” is identified as the voice of that reality which dooms the ill-fated characters presented as among the roles of the principal players engaged in the contention of the stage.

So, by the means of introducing the role assigned to “Chorus,” that as according to the standard of the Classical Greek tragedy, there is an urgently needed change of emphasis, which is also essential for showing the profound, scientific reasons related to Johannes Kepler’s inversion of that which he selected in (correctly) defining vicarious hypothesis as a meaning directly opposite to the customary academic mis-interpreting of Kepler’s language), and exactly as I had done according, to my stated principle in my Nicholas of Cusa, Kepler & Shakespeare.2The Hoax of Sense Per Se, June 25, 2013.

I shall now explain that point, as this is necessary for approaching the general argument which I shall bring into play from this point, onward. As a preliminary step inserted for the comfort of the serious reader, I shall now signal that I am placing emphasis on a general principle which I have known as one from since centuries past, as Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa’s De Docta Ignorantia, the same reference which Johannes Kepler presented in respect to Kepler’s universal physical principle of vicarious hypothesis; and, the same universal physical principle employed by the greatest playwrights in the following of such as Friedrich Schiller’s composing of the Wallenstein Trilogy and, notably, also, the great post-World War II performance of Franz Schubert’s Ninth Symphony in the last great performance of that which was directed by Wilhelm Furtwängler, a specific performance to which I have repeatedly referred in my hearing of that unique closing performance of that work during Furtwängler’s own lifetime.

In such cases of the greatest of performances of masterpieces of such as the few I have presented for the purpose of supplying an economical sampling of the work of the greatest of artistic geniuses, the result which the examples of Schiller’s work provide, as also by the direction which great Furtwängler’s own best performance of that Schubert performance epitomizes. Such a great performance is not accomplished by reading “faithfully” the mere the notes of the printed scores, or of comparable occasions. In all great drama, as in real history, it is the mind, like that of “Chorus,” which speaks, as if from far above, and that for a higher reason, not the bare score which governs the performance of both text and notes, nor, also, of the real-life history of the persons of the composers and also the directors of the performance. The truth never lies in any mere bare script per se.3As I have written on the subject in recent, earlier publications, what Shakespeare does with the Chorus of William Shakespeare’s King Henry V, is typical of the cases in which in which “the overtone must be treated as the primary meaning of the text.” Notably, for the present publication in the making, “it is the ‘overtones’ which are really the essence of the music.” The same principle is crucial for the astronomical subjects I shall reference in the later part of the physical-scientific matters considered as in the content of this present report. The principle which I have been referencing in the course of this present report as a whole, is that sense-perception is not reality, but, rather, there, too, is a mere shadow cast on the universe, rather than the substance of the content. Spoken otherwise, the Greek Classical, blinded chorus, is the only one which actually sees the truth of such performances. That applies to astronomy, too. In other words, that which appears to be what is immediately experienced, is actually merely a distorted shadow cast to lure and defame the unseen reality.

As From Legend to Mars; God & “Chorus”

From this point onwards, for a while, I shall be persistently emphatic on the subject of the crucial, actual nature of the implications of Shakespeare’s treatment of Chorus.

Consider those implications of an image of that work and its performance which is merely a false set of, essentially, empty images, but actually the mere shadow of what had been mistaken for the reality of what was, actually, the really existing, but apparently unseen experience.

Similarly, when we employ the presumption of projecting self-certainty of what might appear to us as “radiated” to or from Earth, and, which the mere observer mistakenly presumes to be the “true image” attributed to be the actuality of the suspected object from Solar space, is actually the produce of what has occurred when the imagined powers of human sense-perception become what the imputed viewer’s mechanism his own sense-perception thinks he has “seen” when he or she has adopted a sense-deception generated by nothing as much as his own whimsical act of imagined his own will to believe. This does not mean that human sense-perception has erred within the mere image of the body of what seems to be that which is imaged.

It means that it is that the “Chorus” of Classical-Greek tragedy and of Shakespeare’s mind itself, is the voice of a higher, ruling power, as is the clearly explicit intention of Shakespeare in the matter of King Henry V. It is, there, in Shakespeare’s belief in his choice of the form of a belief adumbrated in a sense-perceptual event. Sense-perception has been embedded, thus, within the body of the human imagination itself; such drama which might appear to be that which has hidden that truth which is to be located, in what the putative human observer has mistakenly presumed to have been a direct experience in the imagined form of the reality of the specific object observed.

In the ordinary case, an act of sense-perception has probably actually occurred, but the object has the outward attributes, not of itself, but what the observer fails to recognize as being, chiefly, an image of his own powers of projection of what the observer “blames” on the fabrication, crafted by his own powers of sense-perception: another case fairly considered from the standpoint of the legend of “Mirror, mirror, on the Wall. . .” What one wishes to believe, is often that which is the most attractive, rather than truth.

I would add the warning, that there is another need for warnings on this account. What men and women tend to see, even notable scientific observers, it will often be what they will have wished to have seen, which may have been a fantasy from which complex illusions influence the choice of type of an imagined meaning of presumed sense-perception might have been harvested. I have put this point in that way for the implied reason.

Take the matter of people deceived by the act of some desire to be deceived in a certain fashion: a not uncommon source of consequent, delayed effects in the realm of unpleasantnesses.

Much could be made of examples of the type which I have just referenced as merely matters of useful illustrations of a point made as a matter of warnings. When I am emphasizing here, in this case, is the lesson actually given by Johannes Kepler in the subject, again, of an other likeness to a “Ghost in Hamlet:” a vicarious hypothesis.


Chapter II: Mars

WHO RUNS THE WORLDS WE KNOW?

Academic science was never what it was often presumed to be. The “give-away” for that unhappy reality, is the evidence of the generally now-growing presumption, or, regret, of so-called scientists or “the would-be like,” as like, often, a so-called science taught in schools, which is written, axiomatically, as if on a presumably blank page, all of which had formerly served many professors, teachers, and credulous students, as their most essential, and merely alleged (and absolutely empty) principle. Chorus was far wiser; and the Classical Greeks for whom I have respect, as did Plato, who already knew that!

Admittedly, what is taught to the credulous, in sundry sorts of schools, for their students and of by their teachers, had included, varying for more or less, good or poor, but, usually, even rated as relatively indispensable content, that in schools, most notably in secondary schools, had been, until the recently ongoing raids of destruction of both the purging of schools of qualified senior secondary teachers, to make way, under the Obama regime, for a presently growing flood of what are baldly utter frauds, rapidly flooded with the empty content of vacuous minds, in place of what used to be employed by seriously qualified schools and veteran scholars alike.

It must be emphasized here, that the recent decades’ surging trends in homicides and the like, as among student populations, is a signal of the currently intellectual, deep decline which continues to dominate generation after generation, that with the ruinous influence on practically everything under the culture currently radiating from not only a center presently located in the trans-Atlantic regions, but also as a trend radiating from the influence of the Anglo-Dutch tradition which had spread throughout the planet since the middle of the Seventeenth Century, spreading in the form and content of the presently continuing campaign of sheer evil, which has remained dedicated to the pure evil of the persisting effort to annihilate what had, then, been just recently the 1648 Peace of Westphalia.

The relatively most recent decades’ tend into a collapse of our present society, which had been typified by the trends set into motion by that “green epidemic” which has set the pace for the moral and intellectual collapse in intellectual life during a span over more than seven decades since the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and his brother, Robert. The “Obama generation” in government, merely reflects the existence of that generalized moral and intellectual degeneration which now menaces the very continued existence of what we had once seen as civilized societies. The worst of its all, is that the older are presently expected to idolize the plunging decadence of the much younger, a trend which had already gripped the selections of our largely Bush-league Presidents, such as Obama.

The span of history which I have just referenced above, reflects most precisely, the very long history of regions such as the Mediterranean region, a history characterized in our society’s memory of a domination of relevant world human cultures by an oligarchical system of mass-murderously inclined tyrants and the slaves, a system which the tyrants keep under control in a manner merely coincident with the Roman oligarchy’s most memorable butchery of the Christians. Still today, from the standpoint of cultural trends, the butchers’ class is still, recurringly on top.

Indeed, this pattern defines the core of the motive uttered on behalf of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa by his closest associates, to cross the great oceans, in order to reach opposing shores where man might life in decency on distant, opposing shores. Christopher Columbus became assigned to become the most noted bearer of the mission which was thus assigned by Cusa, and, therefore, to those who lived long enough to experience the triumph of freedom which was the intention embedded in the mission of Christopher Columbus.

Indeed, despite the continued reign of butchery and other debasements left over from horrors such as the Roman Empire, there has been, fortunately, a legacy of, specifically, Cusa’s devotion, which has not yet defeated, but has been challenged to serve cause, that, most notably, by the process which produced the United States of America. Despite the taints and such which the creation of the United States of America has failed, thus far, to defeat, without the United States existence, mankind were likely already “gone to Hell”—never despise the efforts of an honest missionary.

At the same time that we American citizens had hoped for a complete success over the evil of such successive expressions of evil as the accumulated Roman and Anglo-Dutch tyrants, which, with their likenesses, which has dominated most of the recent three centuries, there has been a maturing requirement for a great change, a great outburst of achievement still awaiting the expression of our species’ rise from a single regular planet, Earth. What has been holding us back from recognizing the challenges still awaiting beyond the orbit of Earth now, has become a signal that mankind must reach goals beyond an incestuous practice of “Earth worship.”

For me, this does not imply any devotion to an immediate “colonization” of Mars, or matters of that likeness; schemes such as that for the near future, are the folly of the ignorant, or malicious hoaxsters. Leave a priority on such as the “Colonization of Mars,” to what is suited to the fantasies of small-minded fantasists, our outright hoaxsters. Science must be devoted to knowledgeable practice of devotion to man’s mission wherever such is needed. The fantasy of capture of human residence on Mars for its own sake, is a fool’s errand, although the effect of such a development must come about in an actually, in suitable way, in the course of, almost assuredly, the later half of this century (barring presently unforseen catastrophes).

I have a specific motive for saying this, as you shall hear, or read from me in due course of this report.

Out most urgent task respecting these matters, is to free mankind of an habituated belief in sense-perception as such. Kepler’s vicarious hypothesis all over again! It is the belief in “sense-perception as such,” which is the babbling idiot in the room.


Chapter III:

FROM BEHIND THE SHADOWS

Throughout the remainder of this present report, the crucial theme to be heard throughout, is that: “sense-perception is merely a crude substitute for reality.” The responsible agency, which supersedes the folly of mere “sense-perception,” is what is properly named “mind” as such.

In Chapter II: Life As Such And As Mind, of my June 11, June 30 publication, Nicholas of Cusa, Kepler and Shakespeare, and pages 20-26 of the author’s draft version, I had focused attention on the difference between a valid concept of “mind,” and the functions of what is merely sense-perception; and, I had done so with the strongest suitable evidence and emphasis for that occasion.

Human sense-perception is essentially, merely, one might say, a product of human biology, which has been developed through the use of those specific forms of animal perception which are suitable for such services as human sense-perception. However, once we have gone to the subject of human reactions to experiences of relevance for such applications, as for the attempting mapping of the experiences belonging to Solar space, but outside the domain of sense-perception per se, some properly embarrassing facts about human sense-perception come into play. Mankind succumbs to the temptations which are to be identified as the follies of proceeding along the course of “bass-ackward.” We are tempted to measure the universe far outside the climate of Planet Earth, for which no accommodation to life “in outer space” had been installed. In fact, of course, mankind has acquired experience on planet Earth, but from exposure to relevant effects which were generated within the Solar system, chiefly long before human, or other known existence of human-like, or other living beings had been introduced to existence within the Solar system.

The mistake of the biologists might be mistakenly classed as having been “an honest mistake,” or, the really silly custom of Earthlings to attribute the specific sense-perceptive faculties of living specimens on Earth to an original Sun, planets and galaxy before Earth had existed: which, is certainly a very embarrassing “boo-boo” to be written on the reputations of many highly-rated Earthling scientists, and many others as well. Mankind has been obliged to base his existence in the origins given to us by the stars.

Or, to paraphrase the point at hand here, the human species must modestly trace our origins to provisions of the stars, or, as said by a great leading astronaut, Ad Astra!

I had just stated that, not as quip, but as a most crucial clue to the intentions of our Solar system (and far more than that), and, therefore, the intention which we must learn to acquire as if from the stars, the galaxy, and beyond, as the only root from which we can adduce the origins and purpose of our own existence. That is really Creation.

Get things right, for a really big change to come. Change, lest we, become, like so-called “greenies,” “dumber than rocks.”

The Practical Way of Seeing Things

In order to shorten the argument, but without cheating anybody, continue, hot-footed on the track which I have just indicated in this chapter so far. The only thing which we know concerning mankind’s efficient participation in the universe, or whatever is the universe in which the existence of mankind is sustained as an historical process, is a product of the actually noëtic principle of life per se.

This fact, and it is a fact beyond reasonable considerations, has the peculiar implication, that if the Solar System, and Galaxy, and beyond, were to be shown to have been dominated by a noëtic principle, then most of what has been attributed to a non-noëtic Solar system, Galaxy, and beyond, must be reëxamined in a profoundly serious way. This would suggest, very strongly, that mankind’s approach to processes within a large reign attributed to the Solar system, must be redefined in a profound way. If the principle of life operates on Mars, for example, the entire present presumptions respecting our appropriate approach to accelerating a development of life on Mars, must be “scrapped,” to be superseded by a perspective for developing the processes of life in Mars, for example.

What I have just stated, is not merely a fresh way of approaching the subject Mars; it requires a freshly revolutionary, noëtic, approach to our perspective for dealing with man’s proper mission for dealing with the developmental considerations to be introduced to the Solar system and beyond.

That also means, as I have indicated such considerations earlier in this present chapter, that a new outlook on the universe for mankind must be taken into account. It is, above all other considerations at hand, a new, practical self-conception of mankind.

Footnotes

1Nicholas of Cusa, Kepler, & Shakespeare, June 11, 2013.
2The Hoax of Sense Per Se, June 25, 2013.
3As I have written on the subject in recent, earlier publications, what Shakespeare does with the Chorus of William Shakespeare’s King Henry V, is typical of the cases in which in which “the overtone must be treated as the primary meaning of the text.” Notably, for the present publication in the making, “it is the ‘overtones’ which are really the essence of the music.” The same principle is crucial for the astronomical subjects I shall reference in the later part of the physical-scientific matters considered as in the content of this present report. The principle which I have been referencing in the course of this present report as a whole, is that sense-perception is not reality, but, rather, there, too, is a mere shadow cast on the universe, rather than the substance of the content. Spoken otherwise, the Greek Classical, blinded chorus, is the only one which actually sees the truth of such performances. That applies to astronomy, too. In other words, that which appears to be what is immediately experienced, is actually merely a distorted shadow cast to lure and defame the unseen reality.