“THE DESTRUCTION OF THE
DESTRUCTION OF THE
The highest level of achievement of civilization within the Mediterranean region during the feudal times prior to the later great ecumenical Council of Florence, had been that achieved by the collaboration expressed as a ‘Peace of Faith’ between Christianity and Islam during the time of the collaboration between France’s Charlemagne (A.D. 742-814) and the Baghdad Caliphate under Caliph Haroun el Raschid (A.D. 786-809). The “second Roman empire,” also known as Byzantium, directed acts of subversion and violence against both of the parties to this friendship.
With the death of Charlemagne, that Roman Empire reacted ever more forcefully in working to eradicate Charlemagne’s kingdom (a kingdom which had embraced France and most of later modern Germany) through Byzantium’s dupes and agents. The result was the destruction of not only much of France’s and Germany’s achievements under Charlemagne, but continued as also the decline and destruction of the Baghdad Caliphate, as through the combination of monetarists’ methods of subversion of the Baghdad economy, and by the associated use of certain culturally brutish, imported, Turkic elements of crude muscle brought into the “Middle East” from a region of what is called “Iran” today, brought in to destroy the Arab Caliphate, and to spread that destruction, from within, throughout much of the Islamic world.
The outcome of those processes of destruction, came to be expressed by a subsequent mortal conflict of ideas launched by the forces of what was self-identified as “the Destruction,” by forces of “The Destruction” centered then in Anatolia, a process which came to be called “the Destruction of ‘the Destruction of the Destruction’.” These words meant an action, against that Classical movement whose center was then located in the region of Spain. Those forces of retrogression then identified themselves with that intended “Destruction” of the forces of Ibn Sina’s “Destruction of The Destruction.” The next time an actual “peace of faith” among the religions would have been presented, occurred when that would be launched during the “Golden Renaissance,” launched by Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, as his De Pace Fidei.
Notably, it was in that still extended historical context, that the fabled 11th-Century role of the “Cid” came on stage. The worst of later Spanish, Fourteenth-century history was brought into the royal marriage-bed of Iberia by the Habsburg conquests of the Spanish bedroom as if by a disease, like that of the catalogued Spanish conquests of Don Giovanni.
Today, the present role of Kentucky’s puppet-Senator-elect, Rand Paul, parodies the “Destruction” which had been orchestrated in medieval times, that by the hand of a decaying Byzantium and its Habsburg successors, such as those in the trans-Atlantic community today. The result threatens to become part of an early destruction of our United States by the so-called “Austrian School’s” traditionally “Habsburg,” international forces of avowed “creative destruction,” forces presently controlling the ideology of the puppet-Senator-elect, Rand Paul.
It is precisely the implicitly fascist ideology of the modern dionysians which came to be known as that of Friedrich Nietzsche, Werner Sombart, and Joseph Schumpeter, which presently controls the mind of the unfortunate Kentucky’s new Senator-elect. Rand Paul’s is a poisonous ideology, a parasitical inclination which, as Virginia’s famous Captain John Smith insisted, has no legitimate existence within the territory of what was to become our constitutional United States.
Let us not be snooty about all this. Honest humility compels us to admit, that as of the USA.’s most recent mid-term election, the U.S.A. is dominated, for at least this moment, by what is actually a fascist President Obama, aided by an incoming, fascist-dominated, Republican body in the House of Representatives, of which the worst to be said is the following:
Our United States has been transformed from the great republic it was under President Franklin Roosevelt, into a de facto puppet of the British Empire. That has been the case, increasingly, since a wave of British-directed assassinations, of one Kennedy, President John F. Kennedy, and, of his brother, a likely U.S. President, Robert Kennedy, and, otherwise, the attempt, later, at the nearly successful assassination of another President, Ronald Reagan. Now, we are faced with still another part of the same pattern, the appointment of such as a British-empire-owned fascist, former head of the Federal Reserve System, Alan Greenspan, such as, also, a President, George H.W. Bush, who was the son of a backer of Adolf Hitler’s rise to power, Brown Brothers Harriman’s Prescott Bush, and, then, H.W.’s foolish and malicious son, George W. Bush, Jr. Now, we have, not another Bush, but an outrightly fascist, virtual psychopath in the traditions of the Emperor Nero and Adolf Hitler, President Barack Obama.
We have also, just now, elected what purports itself to be a fascist-directed majority of the U.S. House of Representatives, while the incumbent mental case, President Barack Obama, apparently lacking a proper sense of personal identity, has reprogrammed himself as a virtually Republican variety of fascist in the Hitler model: all this now, under that worst general economic breakdown-crisis of the trans-Atlantic region of the world since the post-Dante Alighieri, Fourteenth-century “New Dark Age.”
There is no room for doubt that the entirety of the new Senator-Elect for Kentucky, Rand Paul, or, at least his mouth, is a fascist with expressed, genocidal intentions against the great mass of the citizens of the United States. Unfortunately, Rand Paul is not the only case of a nominal, or perhaps actual Republican of expressed fascist inclinations. He has shown himself to have been one of a type which has been swept into the incoming, aching body of the U.S. Congress in the latest round. President Barack Obama and Rand Paul are, in practice, representative of one and the same political party operating across nominal party lines, an arrangement which is, in practice, a fascist partisanship, at this time. For clarity, might we not, therefore, simply give Rand’s voice its own proper, distinct description, as the voice of a fascist?
Meanwhile, under the regimes of such ideologues as those, not only in the Americas, but across the Atlantic into a Europe under the proverbial “iron heel” of British, imperialism, there is a hyper-inflationary imperialist occupation of Ireland and of continental Europe by and large.
However, a glimpse of one, somewhat less unfortunate side of the latest U.S. electoral mishap, shows, that if any hope is to be found, it lies in the fact that much of the support for the combination of the Nero-like Obama and the present, so-called Republican slate, was based upon a most unfortunate misunderstanding, as among a very large portion of the vote just recently cast for the Republican slate. Much of the vote garnered by the Republican slate in that election, if not actually the majority, was contributed by what had been many among the lower-ranking, well-meaning supporters of the Republican Party’s “Tea Party” group, a group whose rank-and-file had been attracted by, and also confused and blinded by its Obama-provoked hatred against the evil role of a Democratic Party operating under the Presidential control of the increasingly despised regime of President Obama.
Secondly, once the participants in the ordinary portion of the vote for the Republican slate were to awaken to recognize their terrible, current mistake, the presently over-confident pack of incoming Republican representatives, such as a top-down part of the “Tea Party” group, will find its own base coming soon to hate the fascist component of the Republican vote, and to hate that component even more bitterly than it did the Obama Democratic administration, in more or less the same way they had hated the administration of the insanely evil Obama against which many misguided Tea Party supporters had thought they were resisting, then, during the run-up to this most recent election. We thus seem to have entered a phase, since the Presidential candidacy of former Vice-President Gore, at which any leading U.S. Presidential candidate, or political party winning today’s election, is the leading party of prospective losers for the next general round of elections, the next candidate to enjoy popular contempt that time around.
Thus, that would have been the unpleasant result for President George W. Bush: had former President Bill Clinton not been felled for a time by a cardiac ailment at the time he was, President George W. Bush, Jr., would have been replaced by Senator John F. Kerry, even despite the important role of the Bush administration’s concealing of the essential truth concerning the authorship of “9-11.”
Unfortunately, in the meantime, since then, the Obama Administration and the pro-fascist Republicans’ slate are in practice, virtually the same, actually fascist political party-in-fact. The error of the better aspect of the Democratic Party’s leadership, is their mistaken reluctance to admit that the Obama faction of the Democratic Party, is just as much a Hitler-like expression of fascism as are the worst among the Republicans of this moment, such as Rand Paul. Therefore, only the ouster of the mentally disqualified President Obama, could tend to free the United States from what would otherwise become, very rapidly, the worst, literally existential nightmare in all U.S.A. history to date.
The result of that widespread misunderstanding concerning today’s Republican and Democratic parties, not only represents an awful mistake among the credulous; it will be made clear, very soon, that to those misguided voters who thought that the Republicans would be a lesser evil, that the error of misunderstanding, into which they were misled, must now be regarded as an ungodly mistake on their own part. Voting against those whom you had happened to hate the most, only to be misled into joining the cause of an even worse enemy, is not necessarily a wise choice, as those recent Tea Party rank-and-filers may be greatly pained to recognize soon.
The danger in that pattern of behavior, is, that the public reaction to the mass-murderous atrocities pushed by such elements within the new Congress, may turn out as producing the eruption of a seething mass of “Jacobin-like” rage and chaos, the which, as France’s Jacobin Terror and Napoleon’s terror should have forewarned us, our nation might not survive. In the situation at this present moment, the worst of all choices would be for the Democrats to seek some form of morally tainted reconciliation with the fascist element within a Republican party allied with the explicitly fascist (“creative destructionist”) austerity-programs of an implicitly criminally insane, Nero-like President Barack Obama.
After all, as the case of Rand Paul should remind us, it was the grandfather of George W. Bush, Jr., Prescott Bush of Brown Brothers Harriman, who rescued Adolf Hitler financially in time for Hitler to take over Germany. The certain recurring elements of occasionally expressed consistency among the three successive generations of Bush-Leaguers on this account, have not to be considered as a coincidental effect.
In the meantime, the chief guilt for bringing that frankly fascist sort of nominally Republican scheme into existence, lies with a Democratic Party which, already, had almost destroyed itself by capitulating to the accomplished facts of the assassinations of President Kennedy and his brother Robert, and had, thus, brought our U.S.A., bloody step by bloody step, over intervening decades, to tolerate, today, the already Hitler-like, fascist program of nominally Democratic President Barack Obama. Meanwhile, in all of this, as at those times, has been to be seen today, the highly ironical fact that I was the only intellectually qualified candidate for U.S. President presented during the time of the 1988 election, that said still now with respect to the conditions of the U.S. economy since the interval from the 1987 time of financial-market “crash,” through the impending Presidency of George H.W. Bush, when I was being sent to prison on a precautionary, maliciously crafted, politically motivated set of crafted indictments, then, like those now pointed against leading, eminently honorable Democratic Representatives Charles Rangel and Maxine Waters.1Through the assistance of certain “rotten apples” among the defendants’ attorneys and also certain complicit figures among the defendants, I was prevented from taking the stand in my own defense; my defense was thus prevented on the most crucial point of the case as a whole. Without that assistance from inside the defense in that case, including certain defense attorneys, the fraudulent character of the content of the primary count against me on the wrongful charge of intended tax fraud, could not have been concealed. It was this factor among a hastily imposed set of some dubious choices forced by haste from among the roster of defense attorneys, which facilitated the prosecution’s entire case for shifting the trial from the retrial in Boston, to Alexandria. Thus, the retrial in Boston, which has been shown to have been winnable there, was superseded by a new case which depended on the non-occurrence of what had been the priority of the Boston retrial. Although the charges in Alexandria were different than those of the trial in Boston, the intention of the Justice Department was exactly the same, and, was, clearly, an intention to prevent the retrial in Boston from occurring, for fear of the probable indications that I would win it, and thus ruin the relevant U.S. Attorney-General’s scheme for a foreseeable (“Bush-league”) victory in Alexandria. Whatever the Alexandria trial judge’s own opinion, the crew, from inside the Justice Department associated with the cause of the worried Presidential candidate, George H.W. Bush, was determined that there would be no correction of the error once wrought in Alexandria. Sometimes, the law is not the overriding consideration in the proceedings of justice.
Now, if the combined, frankly fascist agendas of both virtually Republican President Barack Obama and the new Republican House of Representatives’ majority, are permitted to be carried out, not only is our United States being virtually destroyed in what should be seen as a clearly most treasonous way, but the chain-reaction-like result of the imminently threatened, British orchestrated, hyper-inflationary disintegration of the U.S.A., would ensure a general breakdown and virtual disintegration of all of the nations of the planet, that in rapid and short order now.
So much for the fabled “magic of the marketplace,” whether in matters of finance, or the market-place for justice. Given those facts, the question ought to be: what is the underlying force of evil which lurks among us now?
This brings us to the deeper issue which underlies all of that which I have stated here thus far.
All Classical tragedy locates its failure, not as that of an individual, but of one or another entire culture, that during an implied specific period of time. From among such great historians and dramatists as Aeschylus, Shakespeare, and Friedrich Schiller, there are no heroes among the essential characters presented in a drama which conforms to the standard of Classical tragedy. Notable as merely apparent exceptions, are such cases of what are, functionally, supplementary characters employed as background for mapping the setting of the tragic drama itself, as in the case of Cicero in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, who, allegedly, “Spoke Greek;” or the part of “Horatio” in Shakespeare’s Hamlet.
“Cicero’s” appearance in Julius Caesar, as if “on background,” moors the process of that tragedy to its principled location-of-reference, as the part of Horatio does for Shakespeare’s Hamlet. So, there was, in real life, the deadly folly of the years of religious wars begun under the Habsburgs, from A.D. 1492, through the Netherlands warfare during which, as Friedrich Schiller emphasized, man killed man as beast, rather than man, until the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, which had been continued, up to that time, in a fashion akin to the British Empire’s launching of now approximately a hundred and twenty years of a state of virtually permanent, world warfare, from the ouster of Bismarck, in 1890, through to the continuation of that global pattern of warfare past the present day.
For such reasons, this period of warfare since the 1890 British Royal Family’s ouster of Bismarck, must be defined as a process which has been subsumed by a governing tragic principle, rather than, mistakenly, a tragedy subsumed by that warfare. For the case of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, the voice of Cicero’s combined role as both a character referenced in the drama, and also a true-life factor in history, expresses a crucially significant feature of the play, by introducing the shadow of an implicitly reigning principle which subsumes that history, rather than its being a part within it. Similarly, the part played by Horatio subsumes the entire sweep of the skein of events of the development within the drama of Hamlet.
To suggest that these and other actually Classical modes of drama bearing upon processes viewed by the playwright from within real history, are “merely fiction,” are the contemptible fantasies spread among those who were both illiterate in principle and were partaking of the beliefs of a foolish man’s bad taste respecting the execution expressed in the opinions of the playwright and director.
Take the rather crucial sort of illustrative case of the usually wretched sort of mis-performances of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Don Giovanni, an opera which was composed in faithful representation of a real-life principle of history, and which was taken, by Mozart, from what was then current real-life history and its indicated issues. The representation of the implications of the character “Don Giovanni” and of the subject-matter of the drama, is historically true to life as to matters of historical principle of the tragically specific, real-life history of Europe in that time. Mozart and his librettist and historian Lorenzo Da Ponte, subsume a relevant, historical principle of the actual process to which that drama implicitly refers. Mozart’s genius subsumes the aspect of then current European real-life history which is the essential subject of that drama.
The failure of the typical performance of what passes for a presentation of that opera, reflects the same corrupting unwillingness to face the truth of that drama on stage, the truth which Mozart demands of the epilogue with which the drama is concluded. The frauds go so far to the extreme as to simply eliminate that conclusive and integral closing episode from the staging. Thus, history subsumes and condemns the fraudulent staging of what are Mozart’s both explicit and implicit intentions, just as the dramas of Orson Welles were costumed anachronistically, to serve as largely a fraud on the principle of historically specific, actual truth required of Classical drama. Such is the nature of truly Classical tragedy and its relationship to the relevant aspect of the real history of mankind.
Thus, on such accounts as the referenced instances provided here, the typical expression of Classical tragedy can be considered as consistent with the notion of monetary systems, in the following respect. The system of values by which the process of Classical tragedy is regulated, is not essentially fictitious; rather, the composition is ordered internally by a principle which is as true to the real principle of real history, that insofar as the playwright and director of the performance are willing and able to present the subsuming principle which the drama is capable of expressing in its performance.
So, all that meets the standard of truly Classical drama, as from Homer through Friedrich Schiller, is the expression of a visible, true principle of the historical process to which it refers. It is to the degree that the design and performance of the play meets that standard, that the drama is artistically truthful among the attempted apprehensions of the principles of real-life history and the strategies which must flow from those principles. The outcome must adduce insight into a relevant principle of real-life history. Otherwise, the drama would fail its proper, implicitly sacred mission: to unveil the principles which truthfully order, and may thus remedy the often tattered, taught history of mankind.
It is, thus, this same aspect of the properly truthful principle of Classical drama, which should inform military and comparable practice of strategic thinking. There was probably no justified war sought by our United States since the close of the clearly mandatory U.S.A. commitment to World War II, which had been brought to a close in August 1945. General Douglas MacArthur warned, as heeded by President John F. Kennedy, that there must be no protracted U.S. land-war in Asia, and deplored the prospect of a virtually decade-long war which only the assassination of President Kennedy permitted to occur. That was a long war whose effect dropped the U.S.A. from the world’s greatest economic and political power, to the wretched and ruined mess we became between 1968 and 1972, and beyond, up to the present date. It was a war which could not have happened had President John F. Kennedy not been assassinated.
Admittedly, the Soviet Union’s Nikita Khrushchov was intolerable, as the example of adventurist Khrushchov’s lunatic behavior in Paris with Presidents Charles de Gaulle and Dwight D. Eisenhower attests, and as the Cuba missile crisis attests. The ruin of Russia and other former parts of the Soviet Union today, was a direct result of a similar folly of Yuri Andropov’s worse than merely absurd rejection of President Ronald Reagan’s proffer of SDI, as also the much more contemptible performance by the Mikhail Gorbachov who came to lead the Soviet Union to the worst possible outcome for Russia and other former member-states of the Soviet Union, a few years later.
The unleashing of the economic potential of what had been the U.S.A. bequeathed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, had been the greatest strategic power for global good which this planet had ever known up to that time. The failure of U.S.A. policy on this account, was not inevitable for any reason but for the exemplary fact that Wall Street stooge Harry S Truman was a tool of the same tandem of Wall Street and the Bank of England which had brought Adolf Hitler to power in the 1930s, the same legacy of the Prescott Bush who had funded Hitler’s rise to power over Germany, as that tendency for shameful behavior was later echoed in the policy-shaping outlooks under Presidents George H.W. Bush, and his querulous offspring, George W. Bush, Jr., and, now, so called Democrats such as Barack Obama.
Granted, progress in needed planetary directions, is seldom simple or easy; but progress in that direction is a form of victory for humanity for which there is no comparable substitute. It had always been our extraordinary, superior gift for true economic progress which had been the great strategic power for peace and progress of U.S. strategic relations with the world at large, as under the leadership of President Franklin Roosevelt, and as in what I have already referenced here as having been the counsels of President John F. Kennedy and General Douglas MacArthur. That could become, once more, the essence of U.S. strategy and economic practice, the day after the immediately ensuing becoming of our next tomorrows.
It is the inherent superiority of the U.S. economic and political system over the long-term perspective of the British empire, as under the leadership of President Franklin Roosevelt, which remains the essence of a successful role of the United States as a leader in promoting the advancement of the economy, of freedom, and general improvement of the conditions of life throughout the planet, and into regions of the Solar System and beyond. The principle of Genesis is, that we must be increasingly fruitful, and multiply, as this is made possible through fundamental scientific and comparable advances to higher states of productivity per capita and per square kilometer of the Earth’s surface.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, like his ancestor Isaac Roosevelt, knew that; British-controlled Wall Street stooge Harry S Truman did not wish to hear of such elementary decencies.
To be specific about the causes for the post-John F. Kennedy U.S.A.’s miseries, the following must be stated here.
The post-war intention of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, must be directly contrasted with the implications of policies resembling “The Destruction,” this time the view of a modern version of the original “Destruction of the ‘Destruction of the Destruction’,” that of the British-directed policies of the Roosevelt hater who had come to be known in 1944 as Wall Street’s choice of a Vice-President Harry S Truman, a man of other vices.
Consider some crucial facts of this history.
As to the political factors which had brought the unsavory Truman into the 1944 Vice-Presidential nomination, the key to that development, as I have reported this on earlier occasions, lay in a certain political side-effect of the successful defeat of the Nazi forces in France through the time of the Normandy breakthrough of June 1944. At that same time, the leading German commanders in the field planned the immediate negotiation of Germany’s surrender. British intelligence assisted the Nazi regime in effecting the murder of those German military commanders. During the same interval, General Montgomery’s deliberate sabotage, through his calculated, and vastly deadly misuse of the distraction from victory supplied by the diversionary, First Army operation by Churchill’s squeaky, rabidly racist Montgomery himself, precluded a successful U.S. military defeat of Germany itself until the following mid-year. These developments following the sweeping, Allied breakthrough in France, coincided in time with Wall Street’s return to the British policies of the period prior to the Fall of France to the Wehrmacht “blitzkrieg.” After the successes in June 1944, the Wall Street of the Harriman firm’s Prescott Bush, and Britain, returned to the more or less treasonous kinds of pro-fascist U.S. practices which had been represented by the anti-Roosevelt policies of the pre-1940 years.
That post-June 1944 shift in Wall Street’s and London’s strategic-political postures, from a partner of the U.S.A., to an anti-Franklin Roosevelt posture, was the key to the 1944 foisting of Wall Street hack and U.S. Senator Harry S Truman on the Democratic Party’s Vice-Presidential candidacy that same year. Truman, like the Wall Street to which he was attached more than merely spiritually, and which had earlier played a leading role in putting Adolf Hitler into power in Germany, went back to what was, in fact, an anti-U.S.A. policy of the form which Generals such as Douglas MacArthur and Dwight D. Eisenhower understood as the notion of the “difficult alliance” of the U.S.A. with Britain in the necessary war against Hitler. To understand the later roles of MacArthur and Eisenhower during the post-Truman years of the 1950s and some of the 1960s, and the patriotic faction of the more traditional patriots among the veterans of the OSS, this continuing pattern in U.S.A.-British strategic relations must be taken more fully into account.
The remnant of that patriotic fraction among the World War II veterans of our institutions, continued to be a dwindling, but still significant factor in shaping our institutions and policies through much of the 1970s and, beyond, into the 1980s, for as long as a significant part of that grouping existed as a functioning part of our nation’s political system. Today, the flag they bore still flies, but the survivors are aged and few. What remains of that remnant of those former, veteran heroes, is barely a memory, but it is the best strategic memory from recent national history which we World War II veterans of the past still possess today. Soon, I, too, will have passed on; and, it is on that account, most emphatically, that I speak to you on behalf of that wind-worn flag today.
The most crucial of the ruinous developments of our republic’s strategic position in the world, occurred when President Richard Nixon’s circle of Arthur Burns, George Shultz, et al., steered President Nixon into nullifying the fixed-exchange-rate system of global economic stability which President Franklin Roosevelt had won, in defeat of the contrary intention of Britain’s Winston Churchill, and John Maynard Keynes, in 1944, at Bretton Woods.
Later, during that same interval in 1971 when the British empire moved to wreck the U.S.A.’s economy through Richard Nixon’s folly, the British empire proceeded with launching a replacement for the U.S. dollar in the form of Lord Jacob Rothschild’s 1971 launching of what became a new world empire, the empire of the now virtually bankrupt Inter-Alpha Group, which has been, since that time, the leading monetarist, if highly superinflated, imperial political and monetary power in the world at large today. The monetarist tyranny exerted by the British empire is today’s world empire, and is also what should be recognized as the contentious, leading enemy of the continued existence of our United States. The fascist banner of “creative destruction,” as also carried by such as Senator-elect Rand Paul, as it had been borne by Friedrich Nietzsche, Werner Sombart, Joseph Schumpeter, Britain’s Harold Wilson, Tony Blair, and Harvard’s reject Larry Summers, is the guidon of our republic’s most evil adversaries, that from without and within, now as then, today.
To introduce a merely useful approximation, the idea of the use of money in valid ways, but not that of monetarism, is to be considered, pedagogically, as the statement of a valid simplification of the following issue of policy today, but, no more than merely just that.
This is so in respect to the role of monetary systems in a world economy rooted in maritime cultures’ history, up to the present time. We can say, fairly, on that historical account, that the role of money in the world today has always been the hallmark of what is rightly defined as the tendency for imperialism. To make the relevant point clearer, I must say that money as such is not a valid valuation of the functional role, as in production and consumption, of the physical content to be compared with the mere prices assigned to the services and other commodities produced and consumed. That much is all that is represented as an attempted approximation of value, if at all, within the range of those monetary systems which arose from the leading role of Mediterranean maritime cultures since the decline of what is commonly called “the Persian Empire” of yore. Money can be, and should be employed; this, provided it exists as and remains an expression of a system of national credit, rather than a monetary system as such.
This is key for understanding the fact of the uniqueness of my accumulation of accomplishments as a remarkably successful forecaster of crucial turning-points within the physical economy of the U.S.A. and other European-referenced economies, that since my first, Summer 1956, professional forecast of a deep U.S. recession certain to strike between February and March 1957. More notably, it includes my uniquely successful, continuing, mid-to-late 1960s forecast of a threatened general breakdown of the then-existing organization of the present world monetary-financial system, a collapse which I had forecast then to occur, approximately, either at the end of the 1960s, or beginning of the 1970s.2My earliest forecast of a probable general crisis of the international system by approximately the close of the 1960s decade, had been first considered during my studies made, following my successful forecast of the 1957 recession, in 1959-1961. My long-range forecast for the 1960s as a whole had a very specific kind of a big “If.” If the United States failed to change its ways from those persisting in the close of the 1950s, we must expect a building crisis during the latter half of the 1960s, leading into a breakup of the present world monetary system inherited from President Franklin Roosevelt. Kennedy, until his assassination, represented something akin to the remedy for which I had hoped at the beginning of the 1960s decade. The contrasting economic policies of the post-Kennedy years brought about the breakdown which I had foreseen as to be feared for the close of the 1960s or beginning of the 1970s. My 1966 forecasts anticipated the crash of the existing system which was likely for the beginning of the 1970s, unless an appropriate reform prevented this. It happened in August 1971 exactly as I had forecast the effects of the actions by such Nixon advisors as the Arthur Burns whose policies had shaped the 1957 recession, and Burns’ implied successor, George Shultz.
There is no common economic interest expressed as value among nations which do not share equitably in a fixed-exchange rate credit-system among them. Otherwise, their economic interests, as nations, are systemically controversial, and even maliciously so.
Since 1956-57, each of my publicized forecasts has been realized in their character as successful forecasts, that according to standards provided in the terms I had specified, prior to, and since the 1971 wrecking of the Bretton Woods fixed-exchange-rate credit-system. Nonetheless, I continue to emphasize that I have never made something akin to the otherwise customary monetarist statistical forecasts; my emphasis has always been, since mid-1956, with emphasis placed on physical-economy-based forecasts. This principle of mine was not a quirk in any respect; it is the only way in which competent forecasts can actually be crafted. The disaster which has taken over the planet in its entirety since August 2007 is most typical of this. The persisting success of my methods of forecasting, with respect to their putative rivals, has been, and remains the result of a method of forecasting premised on the physical principles inherent in a credit-system of a type coherent with the notion of credit-systems characteristic of the Hamiltonian principles of a physically based credit-system, rather than a monetarist system as such.
There are some deeper implications for this, in physical principles, but what I have just stated here, thus far, will be sufficiently precise for this moment.
In principle, my adopted method of forecasting, since that 1956 forecast, has been thoroughly consistent with the expressed intention of Alexander Hamilton’s role in prompting the composition of the U.S. Federal Constitution, by showing the implications of a system of national banking, and what, in consequence, became the deeply underlying intent of the original U.S. Federal Constitution, including the most essential of its principled features as a whole, the so-called “general welfare clause” embodied in the Preamble of that Constitution. This central feature of our Federal Constitution has been the most essential of the systemic distinctions of the superiority of the American system, when employed, from those of our proverbial cousins in Europe.
That distinction is not an injury to the honest intentions of our European partners, nor those of the other nations of the Americas. It is a distinction, all other matters considered as one, expressed as the great advantage to humanity as a whole of the role of our United States for as long as we had continued to adhere to the principles of our own Federal Constitution as the intention was understood by Benjamin Franklin and by the other principal authors of our republic’s self-conception. This, it must be clear, is not a matter of the polygamy practiced by the British empire, nor in the form of the antique harem of nations composed as Ottoman or Habsburg concubines, nor the system of virtual monetarist slavery which the British propagandists have lately introduced as the model for a European Union; it must become an harmonious system of perfect national sovereignties, each and all freed of the monetarist and comparable shackles of empire.
This method, of political-economy, when employed as a method of forecasting, as I have continued to improve my own practice incrementally, that by qualitative steps, continues, over the course of recent decades, as being actually the only approach to forecasting which is actually competent for the practical needs of the world’s nations of today.
The relevant difference lies in the matter of the choice of the subject-matter to be measured. The case of Alexander Hamilton’s unique and successful reforms in U.S. banking, from which our U.S. Federal Constitution was derived, is exemplary.
As I have emphasized in locations published earlier, the use of money under the Hamiltonian style of conditionalities which is a policy of practice embedded in the legacy of that Secretary of the Treasury who was the organizer of the Republic’s nationalist banking system which saved our young republic, Alexander Hamilton, reflects a more deeply underlying set of physical principles, principles of a credit-system, not a monetary system, clearly defined by Hamilton and carried forward under the provisions of the First and Second National Bank of the United States.
This was demonstrated afresh by the disastrous effects of the wrecking of the Second National Bank by the follower of the erstwhile Aaron Burr, Burr successor and Wall Street’s Martin van Buren, who controlled Andrew Jackson. That pair of treasonous scoundrels, Jackson and his master van Buren, was used, as former Secretary of State and former President John Quincy Adams had understood the principle at issue in this matter, to bring on, by the actions of van Buren’s Wall Street puppet Jackson, what became that Panic of 1837 which cleared the way for preparing the massive U.S. Civil War of the first half of the 1860s.
Consider the recurring, inherently treasonous spirit of Wall Street, and of the British East India Company’s interest in what has become known as the Boston Vault; both were a faction intimately tied to British imperialism’s special interests, the tradition of a so-called “Liberal” faction of monetarism which has continued to inflict the greatest harm to our republic from within our borders, as since the role which the British East India Company played within our America since the February 1763 Peace of Paris, and since the consequent rise to power of the British East India Company’s Lord Shelburne, to be a British world, monetarist empire in the making.
The so-called Austrian school of fascism, to which I have referred earlier in this report, is a product whose creation and continuing practice reflects the ties of Prince Metternich to the British empire, ties which are the remarkable feature of the manner in which the British Empire and the Habsburgs ran the infamous Congress of Vienna, while, as historical researches have shown, the Royal and relevant other representatives of other nations were being warmed in sharing beds with cooperating local countesses and the like.
The best way to approach the task of presenting this aspect of U.S. economic history to the citizen who owns a reasonably literate knowledge of the other kinds of general facts respecting our national history, is to present and emphasize the history of Massachusetts’ struggle against its British adversaries over the period from the 1620 Mayflower landing to the close of that century, and, thereafter, a review of the history of the Eighteenth- century North America from the vantage-point of Benjamin Franklin. This history has been marked out by the historian, the late H. Graham Lowry, in part by author Allen Salisbury, and, by my associate Anton Chaitkin more recently. The same issue is illuminated in the pages of the monumental volume of Dope, Inc. which has come to be a historical study of crucial, global strategic significance in its own right. The conflict between the emergence of the U.S. republic and its conflict with the British Empire since the February 1763 launching of the British Empire at the Peace of Paris, points to the centuries of a titanic conflict between two among the planet’s political giants, the United States of America and its heretofore permanently chronic foe since, implicitly, the February 1763 launching of the British Empire in the Treaty of Paris.
Once that first hurdle is overcome, we are obliged to plunge into the primary and other deep-rooted realities underlying, and largely determining features of our own nation’s history, and its conflicts. These are reflected in what might pass among the less witting for the ordinary features of the political-economic surface of the records over the span of recent times leading into the post-August 2007 destruction of the U.S. economy under Presidents Bush and Obama, since the turn into a general economic collapse dated since August 2007.
For this purpose, a brief summary of the bare essentials of an actual physical science of economy, including the indication of certain essentials of a much deeper, physical-scientific treatment, is required, as here, within this present chapter of the present report as a whole.
From the standpoint of what my associates and I know, the presently available scientific basis for defining the essential notions of the principles of physical economy, has been located, recently, by my relevant associates in the virtual regulation of life within our Solar System and on Earth itself, within certain long-term relationships between the relatively recently born Solar System and its relationship, as a subsumed appendage of the great galaxy to whose rim our Solar System as a whole is attached. The most significant of the elementary indicators shown thus, pertain to what have been associated by relevant scientific researches, as being identified as the harmonic relations, as also experienced on Earth itself, among certain great cycles from among the galactic relations of the Solar System to its habitat on the rim of the galaxy, relations which correspond to certain considered processes of the specific type related to living processes considered on Earth itself.3Cf. “Our Extraterrestrial Imperative, Episode 2–Cosmic Rays,” (http://larouchepac.com/node/16049). For our purposes here, the practical importance of that recently presented evidence, is that it provides us invaluable hints as to the manner in which mankind’s willful behavior interacts within the long-term (e.g., 60 millions years), life-related developments experienced as having occurred on Earth. This is shown to pertain to relatively nearby experience of the kinds of long-term processes of change which are forced into our considerations by, most notably, the range of fundamental achievements by the late V.I. Vernadsky, who has been the true discoverer of the proof of the actual principle, rather than the mere phenomenon, of the Noösphere.
The relevance of that and related matters for us here, today, bears upon current updates of my own accumulated accomplishments in the matter of my development a science of physical economy as since the time (i.e., 1953) I had been fully won over to the authority of Bernhard Riemann and his collaborators for the purpose of defining physical-economic principles for today, experiences through which I have been enabled to develop a science of physical economy to what is, scientifically, a relatively modest, but nonetheless fully authoritative level, the level which, today, represents, by far, the most competent approach to long-term economic forecasting and planning of development known to exist from any scientific source on these economic issues today.
So, the more I am enriched by my associates’ pioneering in relevant studies of the aspects of the universe which effect changes in the conditions of life on Earth, the more useful the range of accomplishments which are placed within the reach of relevant contributions enriching the progress which I am enabled to report respecting the development of a relevant set of currently applicable aspects of a science of physical economy as such.
So, for example, the implications of a contemporary launching of the long-postponed NAWAPA project, now leads our attention quickly to matters even beyond the matter of science-driven opportunities and effects available to not merely North America, but also the Earth in its entirety. The mere application of NAWAPA, when approached in this way, brings us into active participation in shaping the planetary and broader environmental conditions which are, in fact, the actively determining interrelationship between the processes of development of projects typified by NAWAPA throughout the surface and vicinity of Earth to the continuing, active relationship of life within the Solar System, and within the domains within which life on Earth, and human life, most emphatically, interacts with the respective envelopes represented by functions of the galaxy and within our Solar system within that galaxy.
Within my own immediate domain of practice of an applied science of physical economy, there are certain definitely, if broadly defined physical principles of application which present the relationship of human progress, where it might actually occur, to relative leaps in the applied energy-flux-density which are required to overcome the threatened depletion of the relatively richest of the usable raw materials on which the maintenance and improvement of the conditions of human life on Earth depend. It is from that standpoint of reference to a science of applied physical economy, that today’s presentation of an ongoing progress in a competent science of economy depends, even absolutely.
Although the notion of a rule-of-thumb “law” of physical economy, as measured as increases in energy-flux density, was introduced by the intersecting effects of the work, as during the 1970s and 1980s, by both U.S.A. and Soviet scientists such as those working in the fields of nuclear and thermonuclear science, the fact persists, that the most crucial approach to be adopted for the purpose of a science of physical economy, is to be located, most emphatically, as lying, essentially, in the school of Academician V.I. Vernadsky.
Going, once more, to deep background bearing on these foregoing points of reference to my own work in the field of physical economy, the origin of my actual current practice in physical economy as such, dates from my adoption of the influence of the work of Bernhard Riemann, since 1953, a choice which depended, most emphatically, on the relevant aspect of the revolutionary features contained within his habilitation dissertation, features which coincided with relevant contempt for the a-priorist presumptions of a Euclidean or kindred geometry since my early adolescence.
My later successes as a professional economist, already during the course of the 1950s, were typical of the outcomes of this set of connections, as exemplified by the success of my mid-1956 forecast of the 1957 recession’s outbreak by no later than March 1957, a forecast which depended upon those relatively elementary considerations adopted in 1953. The Riemannian approach to defining a physical-economic principle of what I later chose to state, during the 1970s, in terms of a function of increasing “energy-flux density,” remains, apart from all subsequent improvements, the core of my method of economic forecasting in terms of energy-flux-density expressed per-capita and per square kilometer of the human occupation and related activity which is relevant to a notion of physical economy. Review some highlights of that history.
On relevant points of background respecting physical economy as such:
Looking back toward today, now, I saw that the foundation of a discovery of an actual science of physical economy, which began with my attention to such matters as the developments in Sumer, depended upon that notion of astronomical calendars employed among cultures participating in the range of knowledge essential to trans-oceanic, stellar navigation, as viewed from the standpoint of cycles such as the famous Platonic cycle, with emphasis on that accomplished prior to that period of great glacial melt raising the waters of the oceans of the world by about four hundred feet from the level reached during the relevant period of great glaciation.
Thus, historically, economy was advanced in general progress from its roots in the maritime cultural-basis associated with a generalized maritime form of physical-economic culture, one based on the display provided by treating the stellar universe as a finite system, in a notion which is a precedent for Albert Einstein’s reading of Johannes Kepler’s uniquely original discovery of gravitation as proof of a finite, but unbounded Solar System.
The next leap forward to a point well beyond the fall of Sumer, reflected future developments beyond maritime supremacy throughout the Mediterranean region and its vicinities, as typified by achievements such as those led by Charlemagne, through the integration of maritime culture with the development of inland cultures in some depth, through integrating riparian systems with connecting systems of canals, as under Charlemagne.
The achievements of Charlemagne’s model of physical-economic development, provided the foundation for the subsequent development of railway systems introduced, initially, as complements in the form of enhanced riparian systems. The next leap upward, to a higher platform for economic progress, was brought into being, first inside our United States, by the notion of the geopolitical implications of trans-continental railway systems, a notion which defined an economy geopolitically, as qualitatively superior to a mere maritime economy. The transition, during, essentially, the Twentieth Century, as effected through aircraft, to space exploration, represents a scientific revolution in practice, which, coupled with the massive employment of nuclear fission and then thermonuclear fusion, brings mankind to a point proximate to the foreseeable brink of man’s conquest of nearby regions of Solar space.
At the same time, that human cultural-economic progress demands qualitative increases–leaps–in the order of magnitude of energy-flux density, as to nuclear fission, and from nuclear fission to thermonuclear fusion. In this way, mankind comes toward the verge of reaching out from the bounds of Earth, into nearby Solar space, and, thence, toward interventions into the far greater order of developments found in the great galaxy which our Solar System inhabits.
It is the power expressed by such qualitative, even more than quantitative leaps in mankind’s power as within, today, our universe, per capita, and per square kilometer of Earthly habitation, that the power of mankind to overcome, and even remedy the depletion which the draining of the relatively richest concentration of raw materials apparently represents, if only superficially, which implicitly defines a competent practical notion of the practice of a science of physical economy.
The most characteristic feature of long-ranging progress in the general standard of living and population-potential of the human species on Earth, is associated with the most essential of the primitively universal and fundamental, functional distinctions of the man from the monkey or great ape: mankind’s dependency on the use fire. No other living species known to us depends upon the willfully predetermined increase of the standard of energy-flux density employed for the purposes of both maintaining and increasing the potential population-density of its species.
For the benefit of university freshmen or the like, the relevant, convenient sort of practical pedagogical, relative measurement of such a function of change would be to measure the increase of the energy-flux density of a rate of “flow” through a conductor of fixed circular cross-section. This corresponds, by intention of practice, to the increase of energy-flux density mapped in progress from burning of ordinary combustible rubbish, to wood, to charcoal, to coal, to coke, to petroleum (strongly suspected to be a product of action by long-standing living processes on Earth), to natural gas, etc., to nuclear fission, to thermonuclear fusion, and to the notional target of controllable matter-antimatter reactions.
It is a notable point of illustration of the point just made, that the use of helium-3 mined on the Moon, implies the feasibility of a thermonuclear-fusion propulsion reaching up toward a potential of moving a projectile accelerating toward and down from the speed of light between launch from the Moon to a moon orbiting Mars. Whatever we might discover such a conjectured “thought experiment” to imply, the point of mentioning that “thought- experiment,” is that that brings our attention to a necessary point of hypothesizing where the subject invoked by the conjecture is “relativistic speeds.”
The merit of that “thought experiment” lies in the accumulation of evidence showing that we have been too long encumbered, that largely due to the malicious influence of the evil Bertrand Russell in the setting of the 1920s Solvay Conferences, by reading the achievements of Mendeleyev et al. in terms of the unprovable notion of the existence of regions of relatively “empty space.” The evidence bearing on today’s experience is that the reading of what is called the Periodic Table must be adjusted to reflect a notion of space-time, rather than space and time, which is rooted, experimentally, in the evidence of a universal system of physical space-time defined from the standpoint of reference to singularities situated within a universal domain of cosmic radiation.
The conclusions to be drawn in that direction today, are clarified, and that most forcefully, by a long-neglected body of evidence respecting the actual distinction of the functions of the human mind, a distinction posed by the thought, as by Max Planck’s associate Wolfgang Köhler, a thought which I have reached from a different standpoint, as reported in various locations during recent years.
That conjectural “thought-experiment” by Köhler, respecting the character of the true proof of such conclusions, also runs, as it might be said, “smack into” my own now long-standing demonstration of the actually known reality that the conjectural notion of the existence of “space as such,” is to be recognized as being a popular fallacy, once we take its implication of such ignorance into fuller consideration of the consequences of such ignorance. We will return to that specific issue in the concluding chapter of this report.
The recent decades’ long-ranging trends toward existential demoralization within the generality of public opinion of trans-Atlantic national cultures, are typified by such evidence supplied, as the deepening cultural demoralization of the populations of the national cultures of the Americas and within Europe and the Mediterranean regions more broadly since the death of U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt. A trend toward strictly fascist-like culture echoing that of the interval between the assassination of U.S. President William McKinley, and now, as shown since the combined effects of the 1890 British Royal Family’s ouster of German Chancellor Bismarck and the assassination of U.S. President William McKinley, through the run-up into fascism and two consequent “World Wars,” was unleashed in increasingly full effect by the inauguration of U.S. President Harry S Truman and the assassination of President John F. Kennedy on behalf of British imperialism’s existential interests in promoting the U.S. plunge into a disastrously foolish, long, wasting war in Indo-China.
The evidence on the latter point is broadly clear, despite the lack of certain important, but not decisive missing details. What remains as clear, is that the clearly well-defined correlative of this cultural decline in trans-Atlantic cultures, is the destruction of the Classical artistic culture on which the rise of civilization out of the morass of Europe’s Fourteenth Century, had depended for its inspiration, a rise whose importance had been shown in Europe’s ability to recover from the collapse of civilization associated with that rise of the Habsburg succession, whose effects were typified by the 1492-1648 religious warfare caused by the successive roles of the Aristotelean and Sarpian cultural epidemics of that interval. The American Revolution, as sometimes assisted in a crucial way by some leading forces of Europe, had been the definitive source for the prompting of recoveries in European civilization generally, until the definitive downturn set into motion through the long U.S. war in Indo-China.
I shall return to this subject, to indicate the relevant conclusions to be considered on this point, within the next chapter of this report.
The highly practical, ontological problem which confronts qualified statesmen, as this problem is exhibited in varying forms of its expression today, is that of the small-mindedness which popularized customs have bred into not only the relative illiteracy of populations, but even most of the layers of leading personalities, in the realities of mankind’s role and vital interest in shaping the course of national and world history. Thus, the more sensitive among the surviving, actually literate souls, now await, in a state of existentialist fear and trembling (as Kierkegaard wrote), the news of the death through aging of the last competent historian known to man.
Nowhere is this incompetence among today’s statesmen exhibited more clearly, and in no crasser manner, than in the ideas respecting money represented by the current, clinically insane President of the United States, and his henchmen among the current rash of hacks coming temporarily to the fore within the incoming pack of Republicans entering the House of Representatives today.
Few Democratic members of Congress have appeared to be as stupid as Republicans such as pathetically crude and vicious Senator-elect Rand Paul, but the Democratic Party cases tend to behave so more out of moral corruption, rather than shortage of I.Q., or simply a seizure by the gutlessness which has pervaded that body within the recent years since the presentation of an arbitrary, false doctrine propounded for the event of “9-11.”
Look, now, to U.S. history in retrospect, from its beginnings. Take into account developments leading directly into the creation of our constitutional United States, much on the subject of national economy which was presented with startlingly brilliant insight by the circles associated with the Winthrops and Mathers from among the members of the Seventeenth-century Massachusetts Bay Colony, as echoed by Cotton Mather’s follower Benjamin Franklin and by the genius of the magnificent Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton, later. One of the more notable writings on this subject was presented by the leading economic genius from the middle to late Nineteenth Century, Henry C. Carey, as the matter was outlined in practical terms in his relatively brief 1838 The Credit System in France, Great Britain and the United States (Augustus Kelley, 1974).
I sum up the argument for the specifically American notion of the credit system, as follows.
As Carey also emphasizes, as had Benjamin Franklin in a modest proposal echoing the Winthrops and Mathers concerning the use of a paper currency, as in the design of the Massachusetts credit-system of the Seventeenth Century Massachusetts Bay Colony, and as in Alexander Hamilton’s design for the unique model of the U.S.A.’s constitutional credit-system in national banking, the American system is a system of managed public indebtedness based on the repayment of the uttered debt (credit extended) for such useful aims as both public improvements (e.g., infrastructure) and production of such as agricultural and manufactured goods.
The relevant point is to be illustrated by the case of the post-August 2007 bail-out by the capricious, and inherently bankrupt foolishness of the successive George W. Bush, Jr. and the maliciously insane Barack Obama Administrations, and, also, by the complicit Federal Reserve System under the mis-leadership of the bungling Bernanke’s re-enactment of the Weimar Germany 1923 hyperinflationary bubble. The crucial fact is, that the money uttered as fiat assets by a government or a central banking system with governmental powers, is a fraud against the interests of both the nation and of those foolish enough to put implicit faith in that fraudulent doctrine under which the Federal Reserve System has been operating since the catastrophic market crash of October 1987.
Honest credit would have been uttered against the standard of accountability of the national sovereign, which, in turn, must premise that utterance on the use of the utterance as investment in an amount of projected future wealth newly uttered within the domain, not of monetary speculation, but the creation of an increase of the physical wealth of the nation and its ordinary households, an increase in the uttering of Federal credit which is devoted to energizing a greater contribution to the physically efficient wealth of the nation than the amount of credit pledged by the uttering of a currency, and to do this exactly as President Franklin D. Roosevelt did so successfully through the adoption of the Glass-Steagall standard to be seen as a reflection of the deepest economic principle of the creation of our U.S. Federal Constitution.
Today, every evasion of that view of Glass-Steagall provided by the intent and practice of President Franklin D. Roosevelt is a criminal fraud against the people and nation of our United States, and, by consequent implications, the present and future population of the planet as a whole.
However, it is also legitimate practice of responsible governments to utter credit both for the conduct of necessary wars, if those wars are more than credit-worthy in an essential respect, and for assistance to worthy other nations.
Carey’s Credit System is sufficient in the respect that he employs it to inform the readers of the principle of the credit-system as such. His larger intention is demonstrated by the seemingly miraculous, subsequent growth of the United States’ national economy under the conditions of the relatively gigantic debt which the U.S. incurred under President Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War of a defense against the real enemy of the U.S.A. in that war, the British Empire which had created the British puppet known as the Confederacy. The continued use of Greenback currency utterance during the relevant part of the 1870s, shows itself to be the genesis of the transformation of the United States from its condition in 1861, to emerge during the 1870s as the greatest economic power, in rate of physical growth and technology, in the world, and as the model for agro-industrial wealth-production used for the great leap in the standard of living and productive powers of labor, under the post-1877 leadership of Germany’s Chancellor Bismarck, the growth of economic progress which was the British Empire’s chief motive for organizing the Anglo-Japan war against China in the middle to late 1890s, the attack on Korea and Russia in 1905, and the launching of the Anglo-French geopolitical war against Germany of 1914.4Had U.S. President William McKinley not been assassinated in 1901, the British Empire would probably still be faced with paying war-reparations to Germany, still today. Without U.S. backing to Britain supplied by the Confederacy-tainted British assets Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Ku Klux Klan devotee Woodrow Wilson, Britain would have lost the war which it had started by its launching of the Balkan wars of a lunatic old fool, and British puppet, the Habsburg Emperor of Austro-Hungary.
The debt of the United States under President Franklin Roosevelt, was incurred to utter credit for putting the unemployed to work, that, as much as possible, for useful improvements, but also to keep the population alive with prospects for a better future, and for the great public works and related projects which gave the United States the sources of power to rescue the world from the follies of the British Empire in its role of creating its Hitler puppet-regime, which blew up in its face, with the Wehrmacht’s overrunning a largely fascist French ruling party of 1940.
It was British puppets of a Wall Street variety, such as President Harry Truman, whose policies, to a very large degree, wasted the great productive potential which the U.S.A. under Truman, and, later, the guidance of Arthur Burns, allowed to go to waste during the 1945-1960 interval, until President John F. Kennedy had come in to attempt to reverse the tendency toward ruin which the Truman Administration had set into motion.
What I have said in these pages on the subject of public credit so far, is more than simply true; however, the truly spectacular implications of what I am now just about to say, touch matters of far greater importance, and that of a vaster scale.
Unfortunately, most teachers and practitioners of the black arts of monetary theory have no actual knowledge of the principles of economy. Their repertoire contains no actually efficient factor of the kinds of physical evidence which correspond to the way in which an actual net physical growth of useful physical output, per capita and per square kilometer of a nation, can be actually generated. Like any typical swindler, what these economists actually taught is a charlatan’s variant on the theme of the celebrated “three-shell pea game:” the pebble vanishes in a manner, which, according to the swindler, is the infamous “magic of the marketplace.”
If confronted with the standards of physical experiment required for crucial laboratory experimental tests of principle, the magical powers of the disappearing “pea,” itself, vanish from the scene. So, the sheer idiocy of a designated incoming Senator from Kentucky is exposed for the sheer swindle which it is.
That is the reason that the very continued existence of our United States is at the brink of disintegrating under the influence of both the Obama Administration and the explicitly fascist dogmas of the likes of the pathetic Rand Paul today.
In the course of reaching the concluding paragraph of the preceding chapter, I made reference to an actually known reality which is implicit in the commonplace error expressed as the conjectural notion of the existence of “space as such.” That error points to a popular fallacy, once we take crucially relevant, other matters into consideration. I had outlined some of the implications of that notion, there, insofar as saying that much as was essential to the subject immediately under way at that point. However, I had already touched on a matter which reaches, implicitly, way beyond that point, leaving the subject in that state of suspension until we had come to matters assigned to this present chapter. We now proceed to matters assigned to this chapter, accordingly, as follows.
That much said to situate the relationship between the discussion in that chapter and this present one, our subject now, involves two crucially important, intimately related subject-matters.
- The organization of physical space-time.
- The relevance of identifying the true nature of the human mind.
Both subjects, which I had addressed in several publications during the course of the recent years, depend upon recognizing the deadly fallacy of attributing the power of human knowledge as lying within the limits of the popular, but ultimately absurd presumption of sense-certainty. It is that still-popular delusion, the belief that sense-certainty is an absolute truth, as, for example, the perverts Aristotle and Euclid hypothesized, which relegates the self-estimation of many persons on this planet, still today, to conceptions which define mankind axiomatically as a variety of beast, as the case of the pathetic dupe, Senator-elect Rand Paul, situates him among the ranks of the present-day variety of the fascism of French existentialists and their Mussolini and Hitler outgrowths, as in the likenesses of Friedrich Nietzsche, Werner Sombart, Joseph Schumpeter, former British (should we not prefer “brutish”) Prime Ministers Harold Wilson and Tony Blair, or the likenesses of Texas’ Senator Phil Gramm, and Presidents George W. Bush, Jr., and Barack Obama. Differences in brand-labels aside, the common quality of these figures is that they are, essentially, politically inhuman.
Some of those who profess to be insulted by the remark which I have just delivered, thereby neglect the most essential fact of the matter, the fact that the common feature of the beliefs of those types which I have just accused here, is that they are, each and all, morally inhuman in the indicated, relevant aspects.
As I shall emphasize in the following completion of this report, the effect which we encounter in the explicitly fascist dogmas presented by dupes of what is widely known as the so-called “Austrian School” defined by the notion of “creative destruction,” is that which is widely expressed today, as during the most recent U.S. Congressional elections, by the widespread presumption that the actual meaning of the individual human life, is limited to the bounds of that implicitly heathen notion, that the actual intellectual life of the person lies between the book-ends of the birth and death of the sensory experiences of the mortal incarnation of the individual person. Such a mistaken, but presently widespread belief, is the typical expression of a denial of the most essential feature of human morality. Hence, from that, Nazism and its likenesses come as “seemingly natural” to such deluded believers, as the case of the explicit, intentionally mass-murderous proposals of Senator-elect Rand Paul illustrates the pattern typical of that same syndrome.
The essential distinction of man from beasts, lies within the specific domain of those creative powers of the human mind through which mankind revolutionizes the conditions of human life on this planet (or, beyond), to such effect that mankind is not a fixed type of species, but is implicitly enabled to undergo a continuing, revolutionary progress, rightly identified as specifically human “creativity,” as by the great scientists and the great creative minds in the domain of Classical modes of artistic composition, as in the quality of the existence of our species which is not willfully accessible to any other known class of living creature. This feature of human creativity, is all that distinguishes the behavior of mankind from the mere beasts. Here lies the key of insight into the depravity of such cases as those comparable to the expression of the present doctrine of Senator-elect Rand Paul. So, Rand Paul’s stated world-outlook misdefines mankind, including that of the citizens of our United States, as a collection of beasts awaiting the death administered in his legislative slaughter-house. He is, in respect of that intent, no better than, perhaps even worse than the Adolf Hitler who expressed, and carried out a similar practice on mankind, as by the help of Britain’s present asset, George Soros in his time, as still today, among the various, targetted nations of the British empire’s currently intended victims of such programs as those of the World Wildlife Fund.
Such perverts are of the type which kill, but then deny their personal responsibility for the effect of their actions upon the victims of such policies as Rand Paul’s present advocacies. Implicitly, Phil Gramm is an example of this same type; his indifference to reason, is the key to understanding what sort of economy has been cooked up in his kitchen. Yet, although the moral effects of the perversion of such opinion as theirs, when practiced, can not be denied any more than the crimes for which others were convicted in the Nuremberg trials; yet the apologists for such pathetic cases as Phil Gramm, then or now, refuse, even hysterically, as did certain Nazi doctors placed on trial, to recognize a connection between the stated economic policies of a Phil Gramm, and those policies’ effects when applied to official practices of a government. It has been as if they could argue: “I made the policy, but I am not responsible for the actions of those who executed my design.” Reducing the number of those designated as “useless eaters,” as boldly implicit in Senator-elect Rand Paul’s declarations, can be proven, as for Gramm’s kind of behavior, to have been “a necessary good,” in the tradition of the “useless eaters” policies, as those policies were examined in the relevant Nuremberg proceedings.
It must not be overlooked, that Nazism’s practices had originated as extensions of the policies explicitly expressed, repeatedly, by Britain’s Bertrand Russell, and were implicit in those of H.G. Wells. During the period prior to the Wehrmacht’s overrunning France, the British system, with its notable Wall Street accomplices, had been the authors of the direction of Hitler to the overrunning of the Slavic regions of Eastern Europe, and of the extensive reduction of the populations declared to be undesired. The change in British policy came only when the fall of France presented the British empire with the prospect of its being gobbled up by the Nazi regime, that at the time when the highly ranking, fascist co-thinkers of Russell and Wells discovered that Nazism was about to liquidate the British Empire itself.
Hence, what the quoted General Eisenhower once referenced as the U.S.A.’s difficult alliance with its on-again, off-again, inherently untrustworthy British ally of that time.
Yet, through all of those past events, as during the 1920s, Russell and Wells and their immediate circles, were committed to policies of practice whose effect was entirely consistent with the genocidal schemes conducted in the practice of the Nazis. Why be astonished by this fact? Has the present British empire’s activity in, and against African nations and peoples, as in the targeting of Sudan by British wretches such as George Soros, been any different than Britain’s continuing practices by its “co-stinkers” among us inside the United States, or than Nazi Germany’s policies practiced against Eastern Europe in that time? Is there, then, any clear distinction to be made, on these accounts, between the Nazi regime, the British empire, and what is being put forward now by such as Senator-elect Rand Paul and his fellow “co-stinkers.”
What, then, is the moral dividing-line between man and beast? “When Adam delved and Eve spanned, who, then, was Everyman?”
The systemic fallacy which underlies the typical expression of mankind’s potential threat to mankind itself, lies in a naive presumption, a presumption carried to the extreme by the followers of that cult of Liberalism associated with such followers of Paolo Sarpi as Adam Smith. That presumption is that set forth in Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments, that man’s knowledge of reality is delimited to the guidance of pleasure and pain. That is the very essence of the meaning of that pro-Satanic dogma known as modern European Liberalism. That is key to each and all of the vast crimes against humanity perpetrated by the British empire over the course of the Eighteenth, Nineteenth, and Twentieth centuries, and up to the present instance of this just concluded U.S. Federal election, a policy continued thus, since the followers of William of Orange. That has been the mortal issue which separates the Constitution of our United States from the brutish indifference to the cause of human morality by such British advocates of empire as Bertrand Russell and the World Wildlife Fund up through the present date.
Such is the shadow which the Habsburg ideologies of Metternich, his lackey Hegel, and their followers Nietzsche, Sombart, and Schumpeter, have spread upon Europe and beyond, as through the reign of Hitler, up through the present moment, today.
What, then, is the alternative?
The problem of defining the nature of the actual human mind, the same problem to which I have pointed, at least implicitly, throughout this present report thus far, is the error of presuming that the feature of the human mind which distinguishes man from the apes, is contained within the scope of sense-perception.
Excepting those cases which have a certain likeness to “short-circuits,” or, even the fatal form of fires associated with a fool’s planting a solar collector on the roof of his house, the proper function of human sense-perception is delimited to sense-perception’s legitimate role as a domain of shadows cast by reality, rather than the reality which has cast the shadow.
The significance of that distinction to which I have, thus, just pointed, is featured in the concluding, third section of Bernhard Riemann’s 1854 habilitation dissertation.5Über die Hypothesen, welche der Geometrie zu Grunde liegen. The reference here is to Section III. Anwendung auf den Raum. Put most simply, when we employ special instruments for examining symptomatic evidence in realms which are so very large, or so immeasurably very small that instruments which merely amplify sense-perception do not reach, we must abandon certain customary presumptions carried over from the habits of interpreting sense-perceptions generally. It is for this same reason, as Riemann states in the concluding sentence of his 1854 dissertation, that when we enter the domain of physics, rather than mere mathematics, we must abandon the domain of the habits of the mere mathematician, that we may enter that domain of physical science from which mere mathematics must be prevented from entering.6“Es führt dies hinüber in das Gebiet einer andern Wissenschaft, in das Gebiet der Physik, welches wohl die Natur der heutigen Veranlassung nicht zu betreten erlaubt.” [This path leads out into the realm of another science [physics–LaRouche], into which the nature of this present occasion [mathematics] forbids us to penetrate.] As translated by Professor Henry S. White.
Thus, the cautionary observations of the concluding, third section of Riemann’s habilitation dissertation, do, indeed, fulfill the declaration of purpose which was set forth in its opening paragraphs. The great curse of an a-priorist misrepresentation of the methods of physical science, such as those which are inherent in the pervasive incompetence of a Euclidean geometry, has been carried over, especially in the plagues spread by the Machians and the dupes of Bertrand Russell, into the worst among the follies ruining the practice of physical science generally, and, therefore, the inherent incompetence of what have been the prevalent attempts to define a systematic understanding of physical-economic processes today.
The argument to be brought forward on that account, here, goes as follows.
First of all, as to the customary social diseases of the minds of Twentieth-century mathematicians:
The root of the malpractice by such dupes as those of Bertrand Russell or his followers from among the devotees of the Laxenberg branch of the Austrian school of Schumpeter, et al., is not mathematics as such, but, rather, the legacy of Paolo Sarpi and his English-speaking devotee Adam Smith, as Smith presents his case within his 1759 Theory of Moral Sentiments. The latter is the writing which secured Smith the patronage of the British East India Company’s Lord Shelburne. Russell, however, goes all the way back to Sarpi’s not-so-secret, actually, Aristotelean doctrine, an arrangement which Smith and Smith’s own dupes seem not to have understood.
Sarpi is actually as much a devotee of Aristotle as any fanatical Aristotelean among Sarpi’s putative adversaries from within the Council of Trent. Russell’s allusions-in-fact to Sarpi’s heritage demonstrate the connections. Sarpi is presenting the Liberal doctrine as a belief-structure designed for the edification of idiots. What is echoed in this way, is the ancient Greek dogma traced through the pro-Satanic cult of Delphi, which is premised upon the designated distinction of the alleged “gods” of the ancient Greek legends, from the “mere mortals.” Bertrand Russell classes himself in all of his own full regalia as a professed educator of the Creator himself, as being “a god” in that ancient Greek sense: a status which no mere dupe such as an advocate of Adam Smith’s teaching, such as a Senator-elect Rand Paul, could ever have understood.
The consequent argument thus assumes the following form.
Once we had granted the conditional validity of qualified sense-perceptions as being accurate in the degree of being sense-perceptions, then, contrary to Smith, for example, where, then, is the location of the human individual’s and society’s access to the real universe for which sense-perception is no better than a shadow cast?
The appropriate reply should be recognized from the start, that, if sense-perceptions are merely shadows of reality, why should we not agree, that there is a reality, knowable by mankind, within the access of a mind which, in itself, is not defined, ontologically, by sense-perception as such?
This desirable solution for that apparent paradox, is not as obscure as many, such as an Aristotle, or Sarpi, would prefer that we fools believe in the way in which Adam Smith insists that we limit our powers of access to knowledge, as the fools who trust Adam Smith would do.
The relevant rebuttal to this criticism by the Liberal fool’s opinion, is nothing other than the evidence of experimentally driven qualities of crucial-experimental methods in science. An excellent example of that corrective, is pointed out by Johannes Kepler’s uniquely original discovery of the principle of universal gravitation, that within the scope of his Harmonies of the Worlds, as shown even more emphatically by Albert Einstein’s clarification of Kepler’s discovery, as in the fact that Kepler’s proof has shown, implicitly, that the existing universe is finite, but, nevertheless, presently not limited (“bounded”) in what it may become.
In short the notion of a “second law of thermodynamics,” is not merely an error, but was, originally, a deliberate fraud, with no competent sort of original, crucial-experimental basis. It was never better than an outright fraud, an outright hoax of the stage-magician’s variety.
What sense-perception provides is evidence; but, the reality does not lie in the experiment itself, but, rather, in the efficiency of the discovery, the efficiency of a principle of which the sense-perception is merely a shadow. Reality, as a matter and subject of human knowledge, does not lie in the so-called evidence of sense-perception as such, but, rather, in the personality of the mind which has discovered the universal principles for which the relevant sense-perceptions are merely shadows.
What we consider, conventionally, as human sense-perceptions are merely shadows cast by reality upon the conceptual powers of a human mind which treats the functions of sense-perception themselves as like the sensory array built into the functions of a robotic device. The mind’s function depends, to a very large degree, on that form of “instrumentation” which is merely typified by the standard notion of the mere senses which, so to speak, “come with the box.” The actual human mind exists as that entity which uses sense-perception, but is not contained within it.
Our attention should have been called to this fact, by the considerations which I have referenced from the third section of Riemann’s habilitation dissertation. Our reliance on a repertoire of instrumentation which extends our experimental reach into the very large and very smallest, by taking away the relationship to ordinary notions of sense-certainty, has demonstrated for us the role of a far greater power than is allowed by what had been the conventional, but mistaken notions of the mind as in reciprocal relationship to what was mistakenly presumed to be the actual ontological nature of the human mind. It is the actual human mind, as distinguished by the mind’s actually ontologically creative powers, which is the “location” of the actual mind of the human individuality, in respect to which the powers of sense-perception as such are merely accessories, attachments.
It is that real knowledge, as distinct from the mere shadows which are sense-perceptions as such, which is the ontological location of the existence of the individual human mind. Opinions which differ from this are those best suited to the existential needs of humanoid puppets.
In the close of World War II, an assembly of what could pass for the most evil persons of the trans-Atlantic world, launched a practice of moral degeneracy known as “The Congress for Cultural Freedom,” an assembly which served as the banner for the states of degeneracy associated with post-1944 existentialism, and, also as a reflection of the same moral degeneracy as met in the Laxenberg, Austria IIASA organization, as in the continuation of the existentialism which had run rampant in such forms as Nazism, cloaked under altered costuming in the pre-World War II form of Nazism, and post-World War II forms of existentialism.
The extensive moral destruction of increasing rations of the populations of the trans-Atlantic, post-World War II cultures, operated, in its more essential respects as the down-shift of the self-conception of the human personality to the status of a thing, rather than an expression of the creative powers of the normal human being. Therein lay the essence of the doctrines associated, from the 1920s, onward, for example, with the circles of Bertrand Russell, H.G. Wells, and the post-war trans-Atlantic existentialists. The sensual experience as such, replaced the experience of the creative insights of the mind. Sex, in whatever forms of superseding the customary with the novel, appeared and replaced the location of the human personal sense of identity as within the innately creative powers of the human mind.
The most readily available evidence of this, is the moral degeneracy exhibited by those who insist on the indefensibly wasteful use of windmills and solar collectors, in place of high energy-flux-density modes of generation of power. The advocacy of such persons toward the world outside their skins, is an explicit expression of the consequence of a loss of an actually human identity, of a preference for the presence of skin, over the identity of the actual human mind.
Hence, the existentialists. Hence, poor, foolish dupes such as Senator-elect Rand Paul.