A Lesson On Origins

By Michael Kirsch

May 3, 2010 (LPAC)-- Have you ever found yourself using words without stopping to consider their meaning? As the case of today’s common place economics discussion of “free trade” demonstrates, if one adopts the language of the devil, one may soon be incapable of recognizing the sophistry of his arguments.

Serious patriots of nations who intend to move their nations toward sovereign action against the suicidal tendency toward hyperinflationary blowout, as expressed in the current orgy of such action being taken by Europe now, must take into consideration a few very important facts about the historical and scientific nature of the fraud of “free trade” and related bailout and austerity policies which they might prefer to abandon.

They should know first, that the suffering of peoples and their nations presently being experienced around the world is due to a willful fraud, hatched by Paolo Sarpi’s adjustment to the method of Venetian usury in his time, and, by 1714, a fraud increasingly run from London, hatched in order to destroy creativity by taking over science and then transmuting that scientific ideology into an empiricist economics doctrine. That economics doctrine bases itself on the belief that mankind’s mind doesn’t really exist, and secondly, on the expertise of a scientific tradition which is designed according to that false and twisted view of man as beast, ruling out the demonstrable efficiency of human creativity which establishes the power of the very nation-states, for which that system of empiricist economics was designed to destroy.

In order to grasp the nature of the present disintegrating system which nations are now falling on their swords to defend, it is necessary to realize that the dominant dynamic of recent history, since the 15th century up to the present, has been an attack against the nation-state system by monetarist interests. To answer the question of what particular expression that attack took for modern times, one need only travel back in one’s mind to the role of that mentioned Paolo Sarpi and his flank to take over science from the inside by popularizing scientific empiricism.1 For the fact remains ever more true, that the basis for the belief in the “free trade” economics of Adam Smith lies in nothing other than just that scientific empiricism.

The pivotal turning point marked by Gottfried Leibniz’s death, and Antonio Conti’s operation afterwards in creating and spreading the Newtonian version of scientific empiricism throughout Europe, as the means to destroy the creative legacy of Leibniz, demonstrates to all cognizant thinkers that what has reigned since then to present day, as a continued attempt of the monetarist interests spreading from Venice to the Netherlands and England, who later, by application of Conti’s fraud of empiricism, popularized Smith’s “free trade” attack against sovereign government—as through the British East India Company—is the only real obstacle to human progress. Today’s action by European nations to join together in a self-inflicted orgy of hyperinflationary national suicide, is merely the effect of the long time belief in that Smith system which was created then.

A recent review of the history of Europe since Conti's operation against Leibniz has indisputably shown that most of the justified screaming and shouts of horror since then, have come as a consequence of sovereign nations placing the value of the human mind as second to the religious belief in Adam Smith. As Lyndon LaRouche has recently stressed, the cult of Adam Smith is established upon axioms which are summed up in a single paragraph in his The Theory of Moral Sentiments, in an argument that became “free trade” by Smith years later, only in different terms.

The Paper Thin Veil

Smith’s argument for why a nation should put its faith in the fabled self-regulating monetary system, lies in a doubled layered and yet flimsy argument:

First, he asserts man is fundamentally a greedy worm: “It is not the love of our neighbor, it is not the love of mankind, which upon many occasions prompts us to the practice of” virtue, but only the selfish desire for things we want; in fact people are supposedly so naturally selfish and bestial that “ if [the fear of punishment] did not stand up within them in his defence, and overawe them into a respect for his innocence, they would, like wild beasts, be at all times ready to fly upon [each other] and a man would enter an assembly of men as he enters a den of lions.” Without that fear, “the immense fabric of human society.... must in a moment crumble into atoms.” His purpose in setting up this first layer of this silly sophistry, is to introduce the second.

Having asserted that the existence of society depends on a set of punishments, he states that mankind has no capability to reason out the proper means for establishing such an order of society, only an instinct to sympathize with his fellow man’s resentment, learning by observation to approve of the act of punishments. This system of pure sensory observed behaviorism, the sum of kinematic feeling states is the force governing and regulating over mankind's bestial nature. Smith then asserts:

“With regard to all those ends which…may be regarded…as the favourite ends of nature, she has constantly in this manner not only endowed mankind with an appetite for the end which she proposes, but likewise with an appetite for the means by which alone this end can be brought about, for their own sakes, and independent of their tendency to produce it…..But though we are in this manner endowed with a very strong desire of those ends, it has not been entrusted to the slow and uncertain determinations of our reason, to find out the proper means of bringing them about. Nature has directed us to the greater part of these by original and immediate instincts. Hunger, thirst, the passion which unites the two sexes, the love of pleasure, and the dread of pain, prompt us to apply those means for their own sakes, and without any consideration of their tendency to those beneficent ends which the great Director of nature intended to produce by them.”[emphasis added]

According to Smith’s second layer of sophistry, the universe was designed for nothing but those desires, and even though, as he maintains, the ability to reason and use one’s mind to organize society is non-existent, everything will work out if mankind just puts his useless mind aside and follows that view of man, which he likewise introduced as his first layer of sophistry. By denying human creativity and ruling out the existence of knowable truth or principles, governments are then encouraged to accept the idea that there is no knowable way to govern their own affairs, since such a society works according not to principle, but to the kinematic interaction of the effects of feeling states.

There lies the sole reasoning, and the only argument he later gives, for why nations should hand over their sovereign power to an “invisible hand.” The adoption of Adam Smith’s medicine of national suicide, mistakenly called “free trade” is based on nothing more than this double layered sophistry made by him in that location.

Now Look at the Folly

Peoples of global civilization suffer, nations are looted, and governments adopt foolish policy due to their belief in this fakery of Smith, which, as it turns out, finds its authority in nothing more than the denial that the human mind exists, a fact, which should make governments who've adopted Smith's Wealth of Nations as their policy rather uneasy, especially considering the accelerating disintegration of the world economy as a consequence in having fell for it.

It may be comforting for governments, who are ignorant of the relationships monetarist empires intend to have with them, to have believed that Smith's doctrine of economics is founded upon some valid type of science or study of industries and successful economies; however, that comfort is an illusion which rests in their own ignorance of the fact, that his system is an attack against the very idea of man upon which all sovereign nation-states and their governments were ever established.

Just as the acceptance of the axioms of scientific empiricism shackles the minds of would be creative citizens of nation-states from increasing the power of their nations, so the consequences of swallowing this hoax are well known: economics becomes reduced to monetary statistical descriptions of effects, which are no longer effects that represent a development of human society developed and regulated by human creativity, but rather, an arbitrarily guided process by enemies of those nation-states, deriving a profit from the destruction of the nation, while getting its citizens to foolishly look at manipulated figures as a sign of increase in their economy—the “GDP”, speculative earnings, and the like—rather than the real physical living standard, which is tumbling downward.

Today’s continued hyperinflationary bailout of the United States, and now Europe, and Russia’s adherence to similar foolishness, has been done on the argument that the financial markets need to be given enough financial liquidity to regain their steam, and that if the creditors of nations are served, then it will benefit the economy. How have these nations and their citizens all become so stupid, as to accept as religious belief that the prosperity of their economies lies in surrendering the governance of their economies to a supposed impartial “free market”, which magically corrects itself, or a like disembodied monetarist banking system with a large appetite for bailouts from those sovereign governments?

This is an old swindle, based on the kinds of lies which empiricism was created for, lies serving Venetian usury, and Sarpi’s popularization of such usury with a science of statistical economics delivered through the successful scientific fraud pushed upon Europe in the form of Galileo, Descartes, and Newton. With Antonio Conti’s Newtonianism having strangled Europe, Adam Smith was simply the economic corollary of that successful reemergence of the Sarpi model of a science without creativity’s knowable principles, a model which had been temporarily overthrown by Leibniz.

Therefore, in today’s global crisis, patriots who consider themselves opposed to the destruction of their nations, patriots who would not join their fellow citizens in drinking the Kool-Aid of national suicide by hyperinflation and austerity, must themselves attack the root of the problem. As long as “free trade” and related financial market swindles are attacked in the language for which they were created and used, the barbed, hooked bait has already been swallowed. The policies of monetarism, must be understood as completely fraudulent doctrines and therefore the languages associated with them as fraudulent languages.

It were truer to say, that “free trade”, the expression of the belief in the “invisible hand” and self-regulating magic of the market, is simply the application of the above assertions of human nature; therefore, in fact, it is even more true to say, that praising “free trade” is akin to letting the devil rape you, and then bragging over your conquest.

This is why, were citizens of nations not to start from the knowledge that the currently bankrupt global monetary system is fraudulent for precisely the fact that it is based on ruling out the existence of the human mind, rejecting the real economy which depends on the development of mankind in his relation with discovery of the physical universe, they were to lose. As soon as human creativity is accepted as the valid truth that it is, it immediately implies that it is the sole purpose and reason for sovereign governments, and the essence of economy. Human ideas are the sole power capable of transforming the economy to a higher state, ideas which express a creative principle infecting the purpose of the whole economy, as well as those governments which implement discoveries according to a confidence in the knowability of principle.

Monetarists are, and have always been, conscious of the effects of human discovery. Paolo Sarpi’s witting replacement for those effects with a fraud, is the most relevant case for understanding the nature of the present day consequences of following Adam Smith. Those consequences are the simple outcomes of a dynamically infected culture of people who have not yet recognized the source from which Adam Smith’s economic model flows.




See "Venice and Leibniz: The Battle for a Science of Economy," Michael Kirsch; December 24, 2010

Citizens Electoral Council © 2016
Best viewed at 1024x768.
Please provide technical feedback to webadmin@cecaust.com.au
All electoral content is authorised by National Secretary, Craig Isherwood, 595 Sydney Rd, Coburg VIC 3058.