A federally-registered independent political party
Note: This is an un-edited, pre-release document.
The Galaxy, Imperialism and Us:
SCIENCE -VS.- OLIGARCHISM
By Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
January 9, 2012
We turn now, to this second. and concluding volume of the report on the subject of the metaphor, the entirety of which I had identified as under the general category Of Mind and Man.
By January 7th, I had completed a large part of what had been my original intention to have been published under the title of “The Mystery of Your Time.” Originally, I had intended to include the entirety of what was to be the completion of my portrait of man’s perpetually extended imagination of an actual universe in a single document, a portrait which might have been described as: “Of The Human Mind To Be Seen Through the Prism of Einstein’s Finite but Unbounded universe.” It could have been described otherwise, as being my exposition on what can be fairly identified as “the cause and cure of the problematic nature of trust in the subject of sense-perception as such.”
During the course of composing what I would presently emphasize as being the contrast between two successive stages of development within that process as a whole, I made the editorial decision to emphasize a specific division between those two categories, hence the necessary change, from what had been, originally one document, to two, the second of which has now been ordered as matters are presented to you here.
Our universe is one which, for us, should be recognized by competent authorities as a process which is being constantly extended into all “dimensions” of human mental life, when such mental life must be recognized by us as expressing a certain higher order of physical reality, one higher than that which might be attributed to ordinary animal life; this division involves a reality which is necessary(i.e., as “a vicarious hypothesis”) a true physical principle, in the Platonic terms of “a Platonic higher hypothesis,” as also stated in the particular case of Kepler’s principle of universal gravitation) whether or not we had actually sensed those factors directly, or not.
Since our civilization had passed, at least implicitly so, from the domain of the Earth-bound, into the outskirts of our galaxy as defined by thermonuclear fusion and still higher means, such as “matter-antimatter relations,” we must now educate our minds in those higher forms which are to be shown to be characteristic of human intervention into the subject-matters of that galaxy.
Therefore, now, as we reconsider the reality of man’s place within our galaxy from the standpoint of a consequently, systemically improved view of physical science now, it must now come to appear to us, that our universe is one within which our human conceptions should always be considered to exist as being willfully extended by means of creative forms of ontological transformation in methods.
Those changes are reflected to us as changes in the way in which we attempt to understand those universal physical principles which had,previously, yet to be recognized as the oncoming importance of realities which had previously remained beyond the reach of today’s experience heretofore, and which would have remained so until the necessary changes in thinking concerning such matters were introduced, as I have emphasized that distinction in this present, second volume.
That means, that changes such as those, are matters which are of presently critical importance in the process of confronting ourselves, here and now.1As I have emphasized in my remarks to the Saturday midday meeting of our leadership of January 14th, with the report on the Mars project delivered then, and with the reports by our association put into place during the course of that week, science’s work has reached an interim goal of insight into projected interplanetary explorations, at a time which the war-cry of the circles of Max Planck and Albert Einstein had declared more than a century ago, that: space and time have ceased to exist for those working on the frontiers of physical science. That is an affirmation now to be presented in a fresh view of what will have become a reality, if the British monarchy and its captive puppet, U.S. President Barack Obama, cease to be tolerated as obstacles to the achievement of such ends. The relevant demonstrations of that point had been placed on the LPAC website earlier during that week.
Does that seem to be a bit complicated? Of course it does, but that is a necessary difference. It will, as usual in such matters, remain complicated until we have actually come to master it; then it will be, consequently, made simpler, which will clear the way for much needed, new, still higher orders of challenges yet to come.
This enriching, presently new set of considerations, may be properly identified by aid of a mode of attention pointing toward a direction which had been expressed as Classical metaphor, as scientist Bernhard Riemann had already emphasized in the concluding portion of his 1854 habilitation dissertation. It was the direction which had been pointed out by Bernhard Riemann earlier, as a direction chosen later by Max Planck and Albert Einstein, which they had shown to us at the beginning of the Twentieth Century, as Vladimir Vernadsky had, subsequently, discovered the principles of life and human mind, respecting all these three stages, rather than deduction from mere sense-perception as such.2[Translation by LaRouche:] Riemann: “We are now being drawn into the domain of a higher science, within the domain of physics, into which the auspices of today’s proceedings will not permit us to intrude.” Therefore, I am permitted to enjoy the company among those enjoying the permission to intrude. [“Es fuhert dies hinueber in das Gebiet einer andern Wissenschaft, in das Gebiet der Physik, welches wohl die Natur der heutigen Veranlassung nicht zu betreten erlaubht.”] Riemann’s emphasis, there, is made most clear by observing the content of the third, and concluding section of his habilitation dissertation, where the ontological implications of his work on Abelian functions are to be recognized. The “problem,” if you had wished to call it that, lies in the following reality:
The world of sense-perceptions is, actually, one with which we must merely cope.
For example: there have been certain cases among those persons who had lost some of those senses in the relatively enfeebled state during infancy, or childhood, but who had succeeded in lifenonetheless. That illustrates the fact, that “we” are not merely identical with what our mere senses “might tell us.” Nonetheless, we might be (for example) assisted to outflank such difficulties in a certain way; we might be served by what are in the nature of prosthetic devices, and, or, of special training, as in the case of Helen Keller, which might serve us as being something like added “attachments” which should have happened to be delivered “in the box” from which our living being appeared. Then, in such a case, one might ask oneself:
“If changessuch as those were expressed as mere biological events, were actually in the nature of our own mere senses, what could possibly be ‘really me?’”3There are principally three states of experience in the process separating (1) human sense-perception, (2) scientific-experimental knowledge of that experience (an action of the mind, rather than the senses), and (3) the actual idea adduced from within the actual system of our universe. This may be properly adduced from the third and concluding portion of Bernhard Riemann’s 1854 habilitation dissertation, and expressed in provisional applications by such as Max Planck and Albert Einstein.
Thus, the achievement of truly human “sanity,” is to be found in means which are efficiently beyond bare sense-perception as such: whatever the nature of the “package” in which those “signals” are delivered. This is the case, more notably, with our ability to experience an experiment which affords us a contact with the real universe “somewhere out there,” a contact which may serve us as “spiritual” proof of the existence of a “me” which is independent of, and beyond Shakespeare’s mere “bare bodkin” of sense-perception as such. That is the place of the universal principle of metaphor, as otherwise expressed by the role of Kepler’s notion of “vicarious hypotheses.”
Thus, it has happened, as similar experiences have often occurred to me during my past experiences, that it should have turned out to be the case, that this consideration has served as strong evidence for the required division of this present report, here, into two successive parts, divided by the view from sense-perception, on the one side, and, as I have emphasized immediately earlier, the higher ontological vantage-point, on the other. This has been motivated, for me, by what I had come to foresee as the implications of the fact, that there existed an added urgency of the subject beyond sense-perception itself, an agency which required my providing my sharper emphasis, here, on a qualitatively overriding content, ontologically, and that in some added, greater depth than I might have anticipated in any specific way at its outset.
So, as in the presently rare instance of contemporary production of truly Classical poetry, we encounter the actual foundation of a competent physical science, such as the product of such as a Shakespeare and Percy Bysshe Shelley for Classical poetry, and in music, similarly, in the tradition of Johann Sebastian Bach: such is the ability to find one’s true self, not in bare sense-perception as such, but by means of the principle rightly called “metaphor,” the same through which Johannes Kepler discovered the principle of gravitation (i.e., through the means of metaphor), means which may be regarded as his notion of “vicarious hypothesis.”
This latter result becomes a potentially available, waiting source of our justified, and, indeed, a mandatory so-called “self-confidence” in a highly personalized sense of something which could be honestly called “truth,” including “physical-scientific truth”4The Mystery of Your Time. beyond which exists only beyond what is merely bare sense-certainty.
Since early during the present transition from the first volume of this two-part report, as situated within the present complement to the earlier section of this present report, the subject of this report is now emerging in a new form in the second portion of this report. So, in this way, I, too, had come to realize the following, as I had done this repeatedly in the earlier course of my life:
that the entirety of my chosen subject in the union of these two successive parts, has involved the succession of an initial, more than ordinary preparation of the necessary introductory arguments. What I present now, in this second component of the parts of the subject-matter which I have already emphasized here this second volume of this report as a whole, is something which is a qualitatively more challenging, presently concluding portion of my argument in these two volumes. It is, therefore, a combination which I saw as one which, for several reasons, might be better presented to the audience in two successive reports, each of those two parts almost seeming to stare at the other, so divided, rather than a single report.
Therefore, in the proverbial “other words,” I had been prompted to consider the fact, respecting the preparation of this present report, that those deeper subject-matters which were the more advanced considerations with which I confront the subject of mankind here and now, had required a more elaborated form of what will be my concluding argument for these two present reports, within these pages. This would require greater attention than I had first anticipated for this occasion at the outset of the first section of this report.Therefore, I had assigned the more challenging, concluding topic of the intended exposition, the subject of the human creative imagination as such, to be assigned to a separate piece, while looking back, at the same time, to the subjects of the first portion, as I will have done in these following pages.
I believe that true discovery was always like that, that in one kind and degree of sensibility, or another. It is often something just like that, which sets the discoverer onward-bound.
Introduction to The Added Subject:
As an afterthought of considerable relevance, I had now interrupted what had been my text in the preceding, first part of this report. I have introduced a necessary interpolation, introduced into this second volume of the report, which introduces the matters bearing on a distinctly relevant summation of a recent discussion of the subject of the notion of Riemannian insight into the bare meaning of Abelian functions as such, as in some relevant brief exchanges with a colleague some months earlier. I reference that matter in passing here, as something of profound, added relevance to the subject of the entire outcome of the content of this second part of this two-part report on the notion of human scientific creativity.
Consequently, for me, the most striking effect of Riemann’s treatment of the subject of Abelian functions, is the following.
True scientific method, by its deepest nature, is, like Classical poetry and drama, inherently metaphorical in the substance of its most deeply underlying character and meaning. This was typified for modern science earlier by breakthrough in scientific method presented to modern physical science by Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa’s De Docta Ignorantia. This tradition of trends in modern science, has been continued again, and, again, during the just concluded century, as, typically, by the most crucial among the discoveries of such exemplars Max Planck and Albert Einstein, and as greatly amplified by treatments of both life-as-such, and human creativity, by V. I Vernadsky. This principle of discovery demands that we carry that principle, as in retrospect, over into the related, self-reflexive category of Riemann’s treatment of the physics-implication to be considered in the concluding, third section of his habilitation dissertation, without need of much further detailed argument on that subject than is supplied in that document there.
What is crucial in my argument bearing on this matter here, is the fact that sense-perception per se can not be regarded as a truthful representative of the reality lurking “behind” a sense-perceptual experience. What Johannes Kepler identified as the principled nature of the method of “vicarious hypothesis” must be employed, if we are to escape the disease of the blind folly inherent in the naive notion of bare sense-perceptual evidence as such.
On that just-stated account, it is therefore not only necessary, but essential, that we regard that conception as reflecting a virtual dialogue conducted as if between two virtual personalities, each speaking a different language unknown to the other. The one a language based on sense-perception as primary, such as a typical spoken language; the other, a “language” consistent with the essential notion of what I choose to regard as a specifically Riemannian Abelian “language” crafted for the use of physical science.
Therefore, let us designate one as the nominal subject-matter; and, the other, the higher subject-matter, the matter of the presence and role of identity of the observer/reporter as being the primary subject of the dialogue: thus, replacing the misguiding presumptions of sense-perception per se. True science is that expressed by the scientist looking at his subject of that occasion as an insight into the specific character of his own mental state, that done as an observer of the process: the putative observer is now being observed from Kepler’s categorically higher vantage-point of “vicarious hypothesis.”
The same meaning is characteristic of all competent use of the term “metaphor.” I explain this summarily, as follows.
I have interpolated this special subject at this particular point, here, because it goes more directly than otherwise, to the nature of those mental processes which must be called into play if we are to grasp the deeper implications of the point which Riemann himself was developing respecting the matter of Abelian functions during the same period of his work-in-progress during the process of his development of his 1854 habilitation dissertation.
This is to be adduced, most emphatically, in the summary arguments contained in third, closing section of that habilitation dissertation (especially its closing, ironical sentence), and by reference to his crucial contributions to the notion of human scientific and related creativity in that way.
So, to understand the creative aspects of the functions of the human mind, whether in either Classical poetry and music, or physical science, it were to be recommended that we choose the mind of the thinker, as such, as being the higher agency, the human mind, rather than the human brain; it is that mind which we must include as the principal, highest, and also deepest subject of any validatable scientific discovery: the self-criticism of a mind examining the way it, that mind, thinks, in itself, as the primary subject-matter of any serious consideration: “vicarious hypothesis.” The consequent subject-matter of primary significance, is the mind engaged in the study of the effective principle of the human mind itself.5My distinction of “mind” from the mere “brain,” will be clarified at a suitable, later point in this report.
The crucial point of argument, is that we must not presume, that the statistical or comparable “evidence” provided as “sense-certainty,” is some kind of “self-evident” authority for defining reality. Rather, as Johannes Kepler relied on the device of the principled notion of a “vicarious hypothesis,” both for defining the relevant notion of some Solar orbits, as in his The New Astronomy, and for the actual discovery of the system of planetary orbits (Mysterium Cosmographicum), a notion in which we must create a synthesized, standard of truth which is demonstrably independent of the inherent follies of a form of pagan worship known as sense-certainty.
In what might be regarded as the subject of some scientific inquiry, the thinking mind of the scientist (for example) has tended to be, this far, rarely conscious of the essential role of the truly underlying principle of metaphor as the latter is known by the greatest poets.
Therefore, from that standpoint, consider the third, concluding section of Riemann’s 1854 habilitation dissertation as exemplifying this standpoint, the standpoint of metaphor, as being the location of the human mind at the highest of the presently known categories of man examining the underlying presumptions of the individual’s own mind as such.6Again, see the matter of the God-principle’s scientific meaning, later, below.
So, as in the case of the essential part of the matter I am setting before you in these two successive reports, the mind can not be permitted to proceed on some set of its own mere impulses; the mind must discover, and employ the mind’s powers for the critical examination of its own powers, as from a still higher, ontological standpoint than mere sense-perception (such as is done according to the principle of metaphor, or Kepler’s vicarious hypotheses), a standpoint of actively conscious insight into the accompanying, actively functional role of metaphor, as Riemann does with the relevant examples featured in the third and closing segment of his habilitation dissertation, and his treatment of Abelian functions as a mode of escape from the misleading, presumed object of perception.
Riemann’s method provides the means for an escape effected by means of a reciprocal interaction between the human mind of the scientist and the putative subject which is being examined, as Johannes Kepler had already done in the discovery of the principal of the orbital system, done through the specific role of the principle of “vicarious hypothesis.”7It was not necessary to go further than this on that point, since this specifically ontological correction, as provided by Riemann is all that need be added on that subject in this location. See the explication of the “God principle” inherent in “human nature,” an extremely important, scientific, as much as theological conception for the highest-ranking implication of the notion of science, which will be clarified at the most suitable, much later point, here.
Within the course of this presently second “book” of “this two-book” report, that subject will prove to have been the crucial subject-matter of this report, when that report will have been considered in its entirety.
THE SUBJECT OF MAN IS US
The expressed essence of mankind’s access to physical-scientific validity, is the uniqueness of the fact, that, among all living creatures, only mankind depends upon the use—and control!—of fire, voluntarily.
The use of forms of fire which represent increasing “energy-flux density,” is the fact and essential distinction of mankind as a living species, as man’s mind has been the agency which has synthesized mankind’s development of muclear, thermonuclear, and matter/anti-matter abilities. Physical science could not, therefore, be an expression of so silly a set of presumptions as those specific to a Euclidean geometry, or, the kindred folly, of the absurd belief that Isaac Newton had been any actual, or even an honestly failed attempt at a relationship to the principle of gravitation.
It should be considered a scientifically sound practice, to treat both the ancient and modern, known history of Mediterranean human cultures, when combined, as being, generally, clinically, typical of the succession of experiences in the arenas of civilized cultures. These include fruits of experience which had existed at a still earlier time, as something which had been developed, originally, as ancient-until-modern products of predominantly long-ranging maritime cultures.
Hence, although the existence of the actually human species on Earth, is fairly estimated to have been dated to approximately six, or a few millions years ago, as contrasted with the estimate of a half-billions years for life on Earth generally.
Any relevant approach to what might be known to us as actual civilizations which we know as such today, might be usefully traced to the evidence of developments internal to some particular kinds of human social processes, which may have existed since about the time of the great flushing of what would, become the then defined Black Sea region by a great flood of salt water into what had been a fresh-water body, by a massive, salt water influx into the Black Sea (as reported to have occurred about 5,600 B.C.).8The common, most simply manifest distinction of the fossil remains of species of ancient apes, from those of human fossils, is mankind’s willful use of fire. The 5,600 dating for the flooding of the Black Sea with its historical salt-water content, is not to be confused with other sources of post-glacial floodings, such as fresh-water melts. The wooden-timber, human artefacts in the fresh-water domain of the Black Sea, is crucial evidence.
Since such times as those, the dominant features of specifically characteristic social forms of Mediterranean-centered cultures had emerged, as a fair approximation, respecting the notion of the internal systemic forms of political-social civilization.9I mean organized human society in the broader sense, as the case of the “wooden housing communities” of areas which had been, earlier, regions “flooded over” by the great saline flood to which I have referred.
That broader view of such an history of human life on Earth, and in travel to locations such as Moon-based, thermonuclear-fusion-driven travel to Mars, which, once taken into account, should have transformed creditable scientific associations’ present knowledge of the existence of an ancient history, since such times, to view matters from what are a succession of qualitatively higher forms of outlook on both our universe, and ourselves.
This realization of what the associates of Max Planck (1858-1947) (despite his brutish adversary, the reductionist fanatic Ernst Mach), and Albert Einstein (1879-1955), and despite the evil fanatic Bertrand Russell, had understood as bearing some crucial factors for future space-travel, more than a century ago.
For my own experience up to this point in time, this had been largely influenced, according to the standpoint of my own accumulation of knowledge of cultures in the orbit of the Mediterranean since the period of World War II. My travel abroad, to India and Burma, during the war and until nearly a year later, following, has always remained the consequent foundation of virtually the entirety of my post-World War II outlook on experience of the world since. Thus, it came about, as for me, that we are presently obliged to act to supersede those typical cases which are relatively describable as our available knowledge, which should have been “generally known as civilized cultures,” have been chiefly shaped, or, often better said, misshaped.
This implies, for me, now, the presently probable early end of the reign, over humanity, by what are properly classed as societies dominated by what are called the “oligarchical models.” That will end, now, very soon, either in one way, or in an awful other fashion.10It is correct, and important to emphasize, that I speak and write from my relevant advantages earned as a consistently successful economic forecaster, since my first such forecast presented for the mid-1956 forecast of the characteristics and forecast date of timing of the first great U.S.A. deep recession, during a forecast interval between the last days of February and the first days of March 1957. My failed rivals, up through the present date since, have relied on statistical-forecasting methods akin to a monetarist’s variety of virtually tea-leaf readings; I have relied on physical-economic methods.
So be it: travel to Mars by means of a stream of thermonuclear propulsion and its reversal, now presents the prospect for a process of development which could now enter a process leading to the freeing mankind from limitation to Earth, now more than a century after the scientific possibility of human “space-travel” had been implicitly set into motion, as a matter of principles, by the included discoveries of such as Max Planck and Albert Einstein, and since actual adoption of a Moon-landing perspective, Germany, during the late 1920s.
Thus, it is against that background of more than a century, that actually competent scientists are now enabled, on principle, to define the willful creation of mankind’s higher destiny from a higher vantage-point than ever before this present time. That experience is, on one repeatable account, “an eerie sensation;” but, in another, it represents a potential source more powerful sense of things which is the only real, if discovered truth about what is becoming our present and future experience, now.
We must now accustom ourselves to seeing our present and future in that different quality of outlook, than is still customary for most among us, respecting the present and future meaning of our present lives.
While mankind had virtually waited for this breakthrough to come into being, there had been a succession of long-term sweeps of ancient maritime qualities of oligarchical systems within the region flanking the Mediterranean, such as that from the relatively late appearance of the ancient Roman Empire, as from Rome, up into today’s modern British empire, or, in an earlier case, the broader, global span from what is marked out as the actual dating of the events referenced in the story of the Iliad (c. somewhere between 800 and 1200 BC), to the Peloponnesian War (c. 5th-Century B.C.), or, in another similarly broad dimension, the relatively modern “apparent birth” of the Crab Nebula. All competent definitions of “history” are to be compared by us, up to the present time, with the developments of life on Earth, especially human life (a relatively few millions years), and since a fairly documented half-billions years of life under the influence of our present galaxy, to our present date.
Some reflection on the history of man over the span since known ancient times, is essential, if we are to acquire a sense of the actually reality of the experience of human life.
Since Sumer, For Example:
Ancient Sumer, with its written cuneiform language, for example, had been, ostensibly, a culture with maritime roots, a culture spawned from the still ancient, rising levels of the waters of the Indian Ocean. It is a relevant model to be considered in comparison to early Egyptian cultures, such as that of the Great Pyramid at Giza (c. BC. 2500) That latter development was a work which appears to have been a high-point of the engineering by highly skilled, free-born craftsmen, whose skills were routed in trans-oceanic navigation, working engineering teams, domiciled in the immediate vicinity of that highly skilled craftsmen’s scientific design. That case should also remind us of the genius what was adopted, much later, as the work of a great Egyptian scientist of a maritime-cultural background working in the heritage of Plato, the stunning genius of Eratosthenes (d. BC 195), who is presently known as the creative mind who first measured the size of the Earth, from observations based within a specific, relatively small region of the land of the Nile.
There has been an important, recently marked improvement, an increase in the noted awareness, among some reporting specialists, respecting the relative importance of galactic factors, as more contrasted against, than compared with what are to be associated with merely solar conditions, as, for example, in the instance of “weather” determined by influences approaching the quality of a sub-galactic to galactic scale. Those factors are, indeed, presently assuming an increasingly, direct importance for the “weather conditions” which we, while still dwelling on Earth, we are now experiencing not only from within our Solar system, but also, our increasing sensibility respecting the developments of the galaxy generally, within some part of which our species’ existence is contained. As our attention reaches out, even beyond Earth, into our actual awareness of our anticipated reach into a personal awareness of the reality of the inside of our own galaxy, there is yet another sense of an experience of the reality which we inhabit personally.
The first step in that direction takes us into accepting an awareness of life in what has become modern civilization. Beyond that, we begin to sense a creepy awareness our being “inside” the galaxy which contains our species’ existence as part of our Solar system.
Entering Fearfully Modern Times
To focus our attention to modern times in this manner, I recommend that we reassess our place as “Americans” looking inside the history of Europe and beyond, a freshened outlook which I have just identified as to be seen as a predicament of our trans-Atlantic societies presently. Therefore, I wish to remind you of the tell-tale experience of France’s Marshall Ney, when reporting in as the commander of the rear-guard for leading a continuing retreat by Napoleon’s failed Russian expedition.
Marshall Ney, in reporting in from the Russian winter which he had left behind him, had reported directly to the Emperor Napoleon: “Iam [the entiretyof ]your rear guard.” Those who appreciate the importance of the “eerie” in history, would have sensed Ney’s specter-like arrival there, ominously, as the augur of the arrival of Napoleon’s doom at Waterloo, and, indeed, also the ruin of continental Europe and much of world at large under the domination of the encroaching grip of that new Roman Empire which is the British tyranny’s acute stage of downward-plunging depravity at the present time.11Since the aftermath of the Battle of Waterloo, it had been argued by some, that had Marshall Ney caught up with Napoleon’s own main body of forces on the evening before the battle at Waterloo, rather than the next day after that battle, Napoleon might have egained the upper hand on the continental field of battle, rather than hise rout. The truth is that Napoleon was already, like Shakespeare’s MacBeth, already well past the condition of “fey.” I would wish to contend that well before Waterloo, Napoleon, like Shakespeare’s Macbeth, was already destined to doom. Betwixt fact and fiction, not only was the doom of both Macbeth and Napoleon’s Waterloo already the fruit of a condition which had preceded the ill-fated outcome of both those defeated figures; there is nothing speculative in the similarities of the facts and fictions of both cases. As I shall show here in the due course of this second part of my two-part report, there was certain kind of determining principle in the active force common to the fictional case of Macbeth and the true case of Napoleon’s Waterloo.
Human psychology has been shown, repeatedly, to be mistaken in its frequently attempted role as a substitute for actual science, as in the case of the successive defeats of Napoleon in those times, as the proof of the uniqueness of Kepler’s discovery of the principle of gravitation richly portrays that same point, in a different, but related way.
So, similarly, today’s intelligent weather specialists, as illustrated by the cases of both our own “basement team,” and leading scientists with notably superior success in these matters, seem to express with a certain likeness to grim determination, respecting their frustration over a too-long neglected fact: the fact of the intermesh of our Solar system within the bounds of that galaxy which reigns, alternately, as if from now above, or then below, the “plane” of the galaxy as a whole. The assurances of a grimmer rash of “galactic” and related weather” forecasts, now compel our relevant specialists to take such higher, galactic factors increasingly into account. sometimes with delight, but, otherwise, grim consideration.
It must now be recognized, as I had emphasized in the closely related, earlier part of this report, that the essential fact to be considered, is that human sense-perception, on which both thought and communication of ideas have chiefly depended, remains, traditionally, is a pitiably crude instrument on which to rely for the trying to understand the mighty prospect of times and spaces to be presented, now, to a presently Earth-bound mankind now lodged in increasingly worrying, present times.
That has been, and remains the case, either by default, or by the intent of a malicious suppression of evidence uttered by a sort of the “privileged few.”
Mankind’s Present Enemies
I mean, for example, the case of the shutting-down of NASA’s manned space program by the order which was uttered by a systemically wicked U.S. President Obama’s decree. The case of the aberrant, psycho-pathologically savage, “Emperor Nero-like” Obama, has presented an appropriate illustration of the intrinsically evil effect of periodic attempts at the dulling down of our contemporaries’ popular wits, done for the purposes of pro-genocidal policies of British imperial population-control.
I point to a currently poisonous weakening of the human individual mind, and its morals, which has been commonly practiced, repeatedly, since ancient times, by then reigning, oligarchical tyrannies, such as that of the ancient Roman empire, and its present descendant, the British empire still today.
The essentially relevant point to be emphasized, is that our planetary system’s manifest principle, runs directly contrary to that great lie (of a “Second Law of Thermodynamics”) which had been fostered by such included cases of shameless hoaxsters such as Pierre Simon Laplace and Rudolf Clausius.
The role of life on Earth is properly anti-entropic, and demandingly so. The fraud, called “The Second Law of Thermodynamics,” is shown to be a political lie concocted on the behalf of an oligarchical tradition of an oligarchical system, which defines its class’s “natural interest” as keeping the majority of the human species barefooted, ignorant, foolish, savagely uncivilized, and increasingly fewer, exactly as the evil Bertrand Russell proposed a practice of permanent, Hitler-like population-homicide as a “green” policy of perpetual mass-murder, in his 1946 proposal for a “preventive” nuclear war against the Soviet Union, and his 1951 call for regular The Impact of Science on Society.
The British monarchy’s present commitment to reduction of the present human population from a current seven billions living persons, to a rapidly accomplished reduction to one billion, or less, is only typical of the same oligarchical principle of the fabled Olympian Zeus which has been dominant in Europe and beyond during the four Roman empires, from ancient Rome itself through the self-professed New Venetian party’s creation of the British Empire by such means as the “Seven Years War” which established and continued that British empire up through the present date.
This murderous, oligarchical cruelty of British lackey and U.S. President Obama, is typified by the British imperial monarchy’s habit of stupefying the minds of political leaders, and, then, seeking a savage reduction of the “mass of the population,” especially by aid of the “dumbing down” of its actually and prospectively educated ranks, as such, to transform once bright persons into the bestialized illiterates produced among the U.S. youth by British influences on U.S. culture.
This recent generations’ practicing, since the 1950 Congress for Cultural Freedom, of thevirtual brain-damaging methods of conditioning of the habits of the succession of the ranks of younger generations, has been conducted in the lying name of that population’s allegedly “own good,” has been decreed by the imperial “wisdom” of that British monarchy which has loudly demanded a rapid collapse of the human population, from a present seven billions persons; a lunge into a rapid process of exterminations, from seven billions into a mere one billion, or less: all of this as the depraved desires and practices of the brutish British puppet, Barack Obama, typifies this condition.
That present state of affairs has come about as the current trans-Atlantic trend into the onrushing. accelerating decline of mankind, especially in the trans-Atlantic domain, since the assassinations of U.S. President John F. Kennedy and then his brother Robert, the latter the then prospective new President. Since then, there had been, virtually, no honestly direct, and generally recognized correlation, between human sense-perception as such, and the subject which the person usually believes, however foolish his or her actual knowledge of the economic progress, or retrogression of society.
That has been a curious, but nonetheless true fact, as I think than I shall have made the point clear enough here, at an early point in what I am writing here. So, for example, the distinction to be made for the audience’s reflections, is not only between the contrast of “foot” to the “footprint;” but, rather, the net effect on mankind, of that part of our universe on which the relevant “foot,” or comparable sort of organ had acted.
Mind and Metaphor
The natural remedy for the errors which have tended to be prompted by the challenge of this apparent ambiguity to which I have just referred, has the specific quality of a nameable subject-matter: the remedy presented by the challenge of the universal principle ofmetaphor. This is the same notion of metaphor, which appeared as the working principle of discovery in Johannes Kepler’s use of the concept of vicarious hypothesis; it is a form of notion which appeared, first, in Kepler’s The New Astronomy, and, then, appeared, again, in a more crucial role, in his uniquely original discovery of the principle of gravitation.
This definition of metaphor, is, for example, is not only a principle of physical science, but is also the true principle of all truly Classical modes of artistic composition, as in the specific case of the Classical poetry of such exemplars as the dramas of William Shakespeare and the subject of the concluding paragraph of Percy Bysshe Shelley’s A Defence of Poetry. It is, indeed, the true expression of the principle of the potentially creative powers of the human intellect, in both Classical artistic composition, and, also, in any valid notion of physical science, just as Kepler’s uniquely original discovery of the principle of gravitation typifies this principle. All valid approaches to the subject of the discovery of physical-scientific principle, shares that same distinction inhering in the (presently rarely-known, but true) principle of metaphor, as rarely known even among many otherwise literate scientists and scholars, so far, today. 12Even in the celebrated German motion-picture Das Spukschloss im Spessart (1960): “die Hauptsache ist der Effekt!” [“the important thing is the effect!] Indeed, it is the expression of a human principle of the human mind. Call it, properly: the principle of sense-uncertainty, as represented by the normal function of the human mind.
In the process of sense-perception, the action of perceiving is “the act of sensing,” as ontologically distinct from the blurred notion of the “truly literal” image of that which is “ostensibly sensed,” an error of belief which reaches the point of becoming not only problematic, but even widely pathological in its effects on the believer, as has been shown to have been the frequent case presently.
These considerations, when we have taken them into account in viewing the performance of Classical or comparable the drama on the Classical stage, is characteristic of a stage which includes such as those of Wolfgang Köhler et al. These are affirmable modern geniuses, who appear without reasonable doubt of their relevance and importance, but, not yet, expressed with any exact “finality” presently known to me. That us not a fault; it is a reflection of the future-oriented, relevant principle of science, a doubt of the past and pursuit of the present and future, on which all competent shaping of opinion depends with a certain relative absoluteness. The name of the true future is always that of a change from yesterday’s alleged certainties.
For our purposes inthisreport, I limit the discussion to those matters in which I am both able, and properly obliged to proceed with no worse than that fairly approximated “certainty,” the “state of intellectual weather” which must precede the storms of the mind preceding successful, true discoveries of true principles.
Henceforth, for the present moment here, I shall usually emphasize the role of metaphor in Classical artistic composition, first, and, after that, later, the role of metaphor in physical science.
A Science Lesson From Shakespeare
For the present moment, I shall limit my argument in this matter, temporarily, to subjects of what can be classed as an ontological quality of irony comparable to Shakespeare’s use, in Shakespeare’s composition of MacBeth, of the notion of an efficient, but false effect of an alleged identity of the drama’s actual “Birnam Forest,” and of a certain resemblance of the simulation of the “moving grove” of author Shales[eare’s artificed simulation of “Birnam wood,” and of the efficient effect of that cleverly fashioned fantasy, by means of which the fictional MacBeth’s ultimate doom was brought about.
The relevance of the particular case of Shakespeare dramas such as MacBeth, lies precisely in the nature of this distinction of a human fate which hangs between what is wrongly considered to be real, as against what is substantially a real effect of what is merely the effect of a merely imagined cause, or, the use, and the effect of deception to induce belief in the allegedly substantive consequence of what is merely fancy.
So, the real world becomes, for those of us who think clearly of such matters, in the apparent likeness of a stage of such curious dramas as those for which the sight of that which was real, has been mislain. And for what is the substantial outcome of that induced fantasy which has moved what is becoming the fate of the characters of the actors in a mischanced, lost war: a war performed on the crafted reality of the living stage. Compare that with the earlier case of the function performed by opening, and later interventions by “ Chorus” in the intrinsically pathological case which Shakespeare portrays (with historical validity) as Henry V.13“When one really thinks about it,” it should have been apparent to scholars, that Shakespeare had intended the effect of a replication of a Classical Greek chorus. I suggest that a team recruited from among my associates (of, perhaps, three or four representing both sexes) perform each of all designated parts by “chorus” in a section or two relevant passages taken from Shakespeare’s own. For actual performances, as of relevant fragments which merit the same kind of treatment. For fanciful good effects, imaginet the chorus appear in costuming as a Classical Greek “Chorus.” “All the world’s a stage ...”
Juxtapose such considerations as those to the recent cases of the Republican Party’s current Presidential campaigns, thus far. There is no correspondence between the irrelevant fantasies of those Republican candidates’ public performance “on stage,” and the reality of the situation with which the nation is actually confronted. The roles of the Chorus and the actors on stage from Henry V, when compared with the role of the imagined “Birmam Wood,” have been reversed, and, then, re-reversed!
Such is the essentially tragic quality of the folly entrenched in the popular, deductive notion of “sense-certainty.”
What I have just presented as two illustrations of a crucially important point, is to be compared, for effect, with the crucial point presented in the closing paragraph of Percy Shelley’s A Defence of Poetry. However, none of this is actually to be treated as a mere matter of entertainments. “All the world is” really “a stage,” but that in the same ironical sense as that of Keats’ Ode on a Grecian Urn.
Nonetheless, despite that which I have said in this matter thus far, we have not yet touched, here, this far, the essential reality of all of this which I have presented as argument this far. Ask, for example: Shall we devote the passion of our action to what is the real universe, as distinct from mere fantasy, whether fantasy be charming, or not? All actors and poets tell stories, sometimes charming stories; sometimes not, sometimes frauds. Which among these, nonetheless, might be real? On which stage shall we entrust, or enshrine, our true cause?
Dramatic warfare and irony have a certain, crucial kind of likeness. Take war, for an example.
A Case of War & Imperialism
In the end, all empires which we have known from the past, were self-destroyed, yet they have been, this far, reborn repeatedly, in the same principle which had been their folly. The principle which accounts for such an historical consistency, has two aspects.
First, every empire has been doomed in its present expression, by virtue of the fact that each such enterprise depends upon suppressing the subject nations and peoples in respect to the effects of scientific and related progress. Yet, the stupidity which had been cultivated in a people by a previously extant empire, becomes the cultural germ of the decadence which breeds its successor, as this is illustrated by the succession of the Ancient Roman Empire, of Byzantine, of the old Venetian Party’s Crusader system, and of the modern British empire sprung from the self-proclaimed. Sarpian, New Venetian party of such as William of Orange. These and kindred phenomena fall under the classification of an infection with a potentially deadly sort of systemic disease of the corrupted human mind.
The most important instrument of power by which an empire is created, or simply perpetuated, is the cultivated folly of greedy, so-called “practical” backwardness induced within the general population. It is such a combination of disposition for ignorance, that by the lustfully greedy passions of the people, such that those same passions serve as themeans by aid of which an imperial tyranny gains compelling power over them by means of the exertion of the general population’s own foolish will.
The great power which distinguishes mankind from the mere beasts, is man’s natural and relatively unique potentiality for what corresponds to scientific progress as in the required perpetual increase of the energy-flux densty in the practice of sane societies. and, as such progress is always typified by an increase of the energy-flux density of the productive role exerted, as the practice of science, by leading stratum of the human individuals. It is that increase of power of the human individuals by means of both Classical forms of artistic composition and its other expression, that true physical science of a sort typified presently by the great V. I. Vernadsky, which is the indispensable instrumentality by means of which a people avoids the ugly fate of what is called “cultural backwardness,” such as the monstrous depravity of that horrid, great, mass-murderous fraud which is named “environmentalism” presently.
On this account, we have the following illustrative case.
Prussia’s Frederick the Great was an awesomely capable expert in the practice of the applied strategy of warfare. In this he was smarter than Hannibal had been at Cannae, but, like Hannibal, made some potentially fatal mistakes akin to Hannibal’s, on his own part, as in the larger scale of reality, as in Hannibal’s protracted, fatal folly, his attempt at the protracted occupation of Italy.
Nonetheless, In the end, our subject here, Frederick, had come to recognize that he had been entrapped into fighting an admirable form of fight, but on something akin, in effect, to taking a wrong side in nature, so to speak, in that “Seven Years War.” We should be reminded of the irony of Shakespeare’s Lear. What we have done, becomes our undoing through the means of that which we had neglected to do, like most of our leading U.S. Democrats so far who have virtually doomed us all through their cowardly submission to the brutishness of such as the Presidencies of the treasonously motivated Presidents George W. Bush, Jr. and the mentally disturbed, British puppet, Barack Obama, thus far.
Yet, matters at hand were not so simple as that might seem to some.
For Frederick the Great, for example, his problem was the brutishness of the reign of the system of the common reign of oligarchy throughout the capitals of Europe – throughout the oligarchy’s reign of its own very narrow, specific interest, over the governments of the nations of continental Europe, as Wall Street is destroying itself by its hyperinflationary acquisition of merely nominal wealth..
Similarly, ancient Rome had won its positions, as the British empire had won repeatedly, through Roman-imperial-style methods used against the peoples of continental Europe. Similarly, France’s Louis XIV had virtually destroyed France by rejecting the council of his better, the masterly science-driver Jean-Baptiste Colbert. Louis XIV’s rejection of Colbert’s warning, resulted in the virtual destroyed of France by the virtually Cartesian, New Venetian Party of the followers of Paolo Sarpi, as the misguided Hannibal dawdled too long in the prolonged occupation of Roman Italy.
Later, the British had achieved a similar effect of what seems to some to have been success, that over other nations, as in two world wars so far. Those British victories had been brought about for reason of the stubborn foolishness of the defeated powers’ in their submission to the oligarchical relics which exerted control over each nation through a European-centered oligarchical relics of feudalism among the crowned heads of Europe. It was the same, in principle, in the matter of the Roman empire’s successors in the feudal relics expressed as the controlling relics of power embedded in the form of the governance of Europe, as under “the rule of British imperial “governance” over continental western and central Europe, through the destruction of economies and their civilizations, now.
British-controlled “Wall Street’s” dictatorial control over the U.S. government, is a similarly immoral, mental sickness among the leading influences within the U.S.A. today. So, the mighty United States was systemically weakened, and is now nearly crushed, notably since the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, and the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and of his brother, the likely Presidential candidate Robert Kennedy, which brought Richard Nixon into the Presidency. The ruin of the United States proceeded with great help from President Harry S Truman’s figurative kissing the rump of Winston Churchill, but also by aid of the assassinations, in British and Wall Street service, by the mightily, merely seductive influence of the evil British imperial monarchy.
So, neither side of the European forces in their wars had been actually “a right side.” All of the warring partisans in that virtually perpetual recurrence of the principle of the “Seven Years War,” had been playing the part of duped fools, while the British themselves, played the greedy parts of British imperial prey among themselves, as the British have virtually destroyed the nations of western and central Europe (and, to a certain large degree, the United States, too) once again, as in the orginalli in the “Seven Years War,” as in continental western and central Europe, still today.
This, both von Moltke and Chancellor, Bismarck, had foreseen, and warned Germany against falling into the “Seven Years War” trap of the British strategy for World War I, as they had delivered such warnings well in advance of Germany’s engagement in that war. In the end, as for all empires, the British successes are, by their nature, the root of their ultimate doom. Evil, in the end, writes its own epitaph. Hopefully, it will not be, in the end, the shared doom of us all.All of the wars of the British’s creation were “Seven Years Wars,”as both von Moltke and Bismarck had warned the foolish crowned emperors and the like of two so-called “World Wars,” and as the British monarchy and its Wall Street accomplices wrecked the United States in a protracted ten years of “A Seven Years War” in Indo-China.
Europe Since The Death of Leibniz
The general rule which corresponds to what I have just indicated for the case of Friedrich of Prussia, was what was key to the self-inflicted doom of France under Louis XIV.
So, I repeat the warning I had given above: The crushing of what had been the power of France’s science, as the case of Gottfried Leibniz illustrates the environment under France’s Jean-Baptiste Colbert, a Colbertism which stood in opposition to the inherently fatally stubborn folly of a Louis XIV whose entire family was almost felled for his own credulousness in face Paolo-Sarpian schemes of the Seventh-Century New Venetian party of such as William of Orange.
So, I repeat: the case of Louix XIV’s follies, in Louis’ folly of falling into the Cartesian-like trap of Louis’ greedy stupidity for which France fell prey to the Netherlands-based New Venetian party, a party soon to be represented by William of Orange’s rape of a British Isles already greatly weakened by the foolish heirs of a Queen Elizabeth I whose sometimes murderous follies exposed the lunatic soul of Henry VIII virtually rattling inside her, thus illustrates the crucial point I am making, with a certain special degree of relevance.
The most significant development for the world the aftermath of the founding of the British kingdom, was unleashed under King George II during the so-called “Seven Years War” of 1756-1763, a war which , had been a plan cooked-up by the enemies of Gottfried Leibniz’s key, temporary role in defense of the cause of Queen Anne’s patriots of England at that time.
The enemy of Leibniz’s scientific and related leadership, had been the heritage of a then-deceased member, the New Venetian Party’s William of Orange. So, of William of Orange’s own “political ancestor,” the New Venetian party of the heritage of Paolo Sarpi, the same Sarpi whose role had spawned the creation of the regime of the England’s James I, the same Sarpi who had sparked the infamous Thirty Years War of the Seventeenth Century, and whose in spirit inhabits the the British empire still today. This was the same Paolo Sarpi whose active influence (even when he were centuries dead), grips most among the governments of western Europe, still today.
William of Orange himself had been a certain kind of reincarnation of the same Venetian Party (as that of Zorzi) which had actually created and controlled England’s Henry VIII, as then under the direction of the same Francesco Zorzi (aka Giorgi), the Venetian monetarist cleric who had controlled the “brainwashing” of the puppet-monarch and mass-murderous sex-toy Henry VIII in a certain likeness to the Emperor Nero. This was the Zorzi who had, thus, orchestrated from England, the later, Venetian destruction of some among the greatest achievements of the Fifteenth-century Renaissance.
Briefly, this was the same Zorzi who had risen to notoriety in both Venice and England, through his leading role in an attack on the living legacy of the leading intellectual figure of the Fifteenth Century Renaissance, Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa. This was the Zorzi who, thus, had launched the extended religious warfare between the Catholic and Protestant factions throughout Europe. This was the same Zorzi also known by the slightly Anglicized name of “Giorgi,” who had controlled England through the orchestrated role of Zorzi’s dupe, the Nero-like, Obama-like psychotic, Henry VIII.
Paolo Sarpi thus followed Zorzi’s earlier role, by orchestrating the policy which became the Thirty Years War.
Later, Sarpi’s most notable successor in British history, Abbé Antonio Schinella Conti, played a key role in creating the merely faked scientist Isaac Newton (run by a committee of clever scoundrels) in service to the same tradition as Zorzi and Sarpi before Conti.
So, the New Venetian party of William of Orange, et al., had orchestrated the Dutch wars against France, before raping and occupying the British Isles, and mass-murders in Ireland, as the same the anti-Leibniz party of the charlatan Sarpi who had played the leading role in orchestrating that “Seven Years War” which has served as the model for the orchestration of the major wars which trapped the duped nations of continental Europe into creating the British empire which continues as a dominant factor in the history of Europe and the trans-Atlantic region, to the present date.
Such has been the intended, British-directed launching of thermonuclear warfare, using the British Royal household’s mere U.S. puppet-President Obama, against the nations of Asia (and others) presently.
DRAMA GOES TO WAR
The development of science is essentially a matter of politics, if and when politics is correctly perceived, and clearly so when the root-history of mankind is taken duly into account. True politics is, thus, located in such matters as our human species’ crucial relationship to the Solar system and to the galaxy which that Solar system inhabits.
The essence of the nature of mankind, as distinguished from other qualities of living species, is, that, mankind is the only type of known species of individual which is known to be represented by those of its members who serve as being voluntarily creative. In the most elementary kind of its expression, this is demonstrated to signify, that only mankind embodies such a qualitative advantage absent in all other presently known living species. From his source, we secure those gains typified by the crucially distinctive advantage of our the voluntary, Promethean use of fire.
That means man’s proper ability to change the quality of the preconditions for human existence, and that upward, without upper limit, as this is shown by the presently pre-established, future capability of that constant acceleration-deceleration could travel to Mars, or back, within approximately a week, as from Earth to Mars, as by way of a stopover on our Moon, because we could could enable members of our species to reach Mars (and return), by means of a vehicle powered by a streaming of thermonuclear fusion
This capability for development of the power of such expressions of “fire” by mankind, is only limited, chiefly, by that hatred of progress which is expressed by those particular ancient Delphic Greeks, for example, which called themselves “gods,” or, by another name for the same pathological expression of “evil” which is the species-characteristic of human societies which have been caused to degenerate into the diseased condition known as the oligarchical system, diseased creatures such as those of today’s British Empire under Queen Elizabeth II.
God & The Queen
“Why pick on that Queen?” She is not unintelligent, and, more important than that, she serves as a key clog in what she has plainly confessed, frankly, to be the imperial system which she represents. Her mentality must certainly contain personal aspects which I would not pretend to know even at close range to her attending parasites of the current British monarchy. Nonetheless; respecting my knowledge of the matter, her significance is what she has become by virtue of her heritage and the global institutions to which she has been accustomed, and which it is her accumulated habit to represent. She is actually an “empress” in the most proper definition of the matters at hand. Those who would not consider her an empress in the full meaning of that term, are being very foolish about many very important things, such as nuclear warfare, for example, and also about a British-led imperialist program of genocide which is committed to reduce the human population of this planet, rather quickly, from a present level of approximately seven billions persons, to one or less.
It is all essentially a part of the imperial system which she has inherited, together with its inherent missions, and which is, indeed, manifestly her political-strategic, imperialist conscience.
President Barack Obama, for example, is a moronic, but also rabid mad dog in her royal kennel, a virtual copy, for his time, of the murderously insane Emperor Nero. He obeys her orders, more or less, but he is the mere, mass-murderous sort of mad dog in the British kennel, not the master of either himself, or that kennel. In the last analysis, it is the Queen who represents the imperial interest, while the brutishly half-witted Obama merely barks, snarls, and, more and more frequently, bites and kills, as might any vicious mad dog allowed loose from the kennel. He does not actually make imperial policy, he is only another one of the Queen’s mad dogs lunging in a Hitler-like, genocidal binge, until whenever she might choose to relieve herself of the embarrasment of his stinking presence.
The subject of the mere Obama now put aside for the moment, the subject of the Queen is the far more serious, real business in the present global matters of strategy.
Once we have taken the powers and related roles of that Queen into account, we may, and, indeed, must shift our emphasis from her, to the institution to which she has been called to serve, as if by incarnation. Otherwise, if you do not understand this, you understand nothing about the present world strategic situation. That institution is the empire whose interests and power are rooted in an ancient oligarchical system older than the siege of Troy.
That Queen is but the one which, for the moment, has inherited her relevant authority and duties in the imperial system. The personality of such a figure is not to be underestimated; her role is not that of an irrelevant consideration. Comparatively speaking, the personality of the Emperor Nero, Obama’s spiritual descendant-in-fact, was a fact, but the essence of the position he occupied was more significant than the position itself. It was that position which Obama had inherited from financial generosity of the hand of the British monarchy, which was the essence of the institution which he has momentarily inhabited. Just so, must we regard the threat to the planet as a whole represented by the British monarchy which the Queen serves momentarily at this time. It is that institution of British imperialism, not Obama, not even the Queen herself, who reigns over what Obama does as the mass-murderous current President of the afflicted United States.
Some few among us in the United States today, understand such matters, more or less so as I do, or would do so. We, the so-called “witting,”do as I do; they act according to the duties and missions which we have inherited from our system, as the Queen does, with opposite intention, in hers, each among us according to their call to serve their mission, as I do. It is the very essence of the crisis into which the world has now entered, that this must be understood accordingly. We are presently, on the wobbly brink of a pending outburst of virtually global, general thermonuclear war; do not make yourself the silly, quite certainly damned fool who refuses to accept that fact.
Thus, in the midst of all that, to understand how the human mind functions, or fails to function, as since from the launch of religious warfare which erupted, in its first phase, in Europe in A.D. 1492, we must examine more closely the case of those Venetian interests which had controlled the Crusades in their creating the holocaust of a more than a century or so earlier, a holocaust orchestrated by what had been used by that spawn of the original, collapse Rome, which had reemerged from medieval Venetian interests’ roots, to destroy the wretched feudal system of the Fourteenth-century from within.
I shall return to the foregoing strategic matters of statecraft, after the following, clarifying observations.
Examine the Issues of This Chapter So
The second phase of that religious warfare of 1492-1648, which had depended on the Venetian “brainwashing” of the mentally depraved Henry VIII, provided the preconditions for a new Roman empire, which became the present British empire: so, this was the way in which the pathway to the present British empire was being prepared.
That had been the antecedent which had created the England of Shakespeare’s personal political adversary, the regime of the James I, which acquired Paolo Sarpi’s part in creating what would become the “The Thirty Years War,” and which would become the Venetian party’s ruin of Louis XIV’s France, and, then, the ruinous “Seven Year’s War,” all of which, and of its like, was brought off by playing the nations of Europe in wars against one another. This had established the British Empire, in point of fact, at the February 1763 Peace of Paris.
That new system of warfare, more than a century after the 1763 Peace of Paris, was re-launched, in 1890, as a “World War,” a deed done with the British-Monarchy’s directed ouster of Germany’s Chancellor Bismarck, also in 1890. That was a war which had then set into motion the batched series of was culminating in so-called “World War I,” all of which was launched as bloodshed with the assassination of France’s President Sadi Carnot, with the British-Japan treaty of warfare against China in the middle of the 1890s, and which had led, directly, into the Russo-Japan War, the Balkan wars, and, thus, two World Wars, and many more, of this recently past century.
The orchestration of World War II by the British Empire followed the same “Seven Years War” model as the original “Seven Years War,” and, now, by the British imperial intent to use the British puppet-President of the United States, Barack Obama, presently, to launch a war whose principal choice of target is a thermonuclear attack aimed at the included destruction of Russia and Asia (chiefly China), a war who aftereffects which neither continental Europe nor the U.S.A. could survive.
In all probability, if the clinically insane British imperial puppet, President Barack Obama, were to continue in office, even briefly now, the United States would, from the present moment of outlook, almost certainly enter a world-wide thermonuclear warfare, a war which could, indeed, fulfill the presently stated as an avowed British imperial intention, reduce the world’s population from seven billions, to not more than one billions persons. It is that thermonuclear warfare which must presently be prevented, as, probably, only the prompt ouster of the mentally unsuitable British puppet Obama could assure this.
That prospect has, admittedly, complications, but it is the thermonuclear warfare which the mass-murderous lunatic, the British puppet known as the pro-genocidal British puppet Obama intends, which must be put aside immediately. Look back to the earlier history of warfare since the 1890 British ouster of Germany’s Chancellor Bismarck, the Bismarck whose presence in government had been the chief obstacle to unleashing the series of wars which had prepared the way for what became World War I, and all the later important warfare of both the Twentieth Century and the opening decade and more of the Twenty-First Century.
Science & The British Empire
That Fabian Society associate, Frederick Engels (the former controller of his British dupe, Karl Marx), had played his part, during the early 1890s, in enlisting the British intelligence services’ adoption and sponsorship of the infamous “Parvus” (Alexander Helphand), the Parvus who has been notorious since that time, for his role as a British arms trafficker and as the author of the explicitly stated policy of “Permanent War, the Permanent Revolution,” the same policy of as the policy of all British warfare and revolutionary practices since that time.
That had been intended to be British strategic expression of those policies’ existence as expressions of a “permanent” state of warfare and revolutions since the invasion and occupation of the British Isles by the Netherlands-based New Venetian party’s William of Orange, before the British monarchy had yet existed.
Just so, there had been the similar case with the original Roman Empire on which the present British Empire had been modeled, since the onset of the Seven Years War of 1756-63, as by the policies of such as that Lord Shelburne who became the founder of the British Foreign Office in 1782, as the still present policy of the British monarchy and its present U.S. agent, the treasonously inclined President Barack Obama whose programs for destroying the U.S. economy from within, illustrate up to the present moment this report is written.
The British imperial scheme is not that of a mere series of warfares and related affairs.
The British empire of today, is still coherent with the built-in, genetic-like intention of the original Roman Empire (in particular) which, as Lord Shelburne knew, is the true ancestor of the British empire of today. Like that Roman Empire, the British empire does not merely launch and fight wars. It conducts the combined bestialization of the British flock, All that evil has been done as it was against the colonies and commonwealths, and has been done after the fashion of such as a Lord Bertrand Russell who had demanded exactly such practices throughout his life, as since his 1946 declaration for the launching of an unprovoked, “preventive nuclear war” against the named target of the Soviet Union.
We must now act quickly, and firmly, to bring all that which represents the oligarchical tradition to a close. The continued existence of our human species, demands that we bring the existence of imperialism to an immediate halt, in favor of an essentially peaceful system of cooperation among truly sovereign nation-states. That means to emphasize, that that requires putting an end to monetarist systems; those are systems, which, by their nature, put nations at the mercy of the form of imperialism which is inherent in monetarist systems.
Consider the following factors.
WHEN INVENTION WERE IN CONTROL
What I have written here so far, should be sufficient to indicate that, heretofore, the principal ills of society, have been voluntarily inflicted upon society by its own culpable consent of “popular opinion.” That is to say that, for the most part, that the practiced body of law under which societies have been self-ruled, have been, chiefly, either were simply massively violated in practice, even absurd, or, more likely, had been ruinously misguided, as if imposed upon them from their inception. The essential fault for this is located in the cult of monetarism, which is to say that they were rooted in the same system of oligarchism described by Homer in the Trojan war, and repeated in the Peloponnesian War.
The original sovereign law of our United States of America had been an exception to what had been a customarily pro-oligarchical rule of law among societies other than our own; but, often, since the founding of the law of the United States, that law hd been violated, as under President Andrew Jackson’s treasonous overthrowing of the U.S. Bank, that done at the behest of Aaron Burr’s successor, Wall Street “land bank” swindler, and author of the ruinous Panic of 1837, Martin van Buren.14Thus, it had been under President Andrew Jackson that Jackson, who had been the puppet of Wall Street’s Martin van Buren, that the Bank of the United States was shut down by Martin van Buren puppet, Andrew Jackson, a virtually treasonous swindle, called van Buren’s Wall Street Land Bank swindle against the United States which led into the “Panic of 1837.” Van Buren had been, in fact, the British Foreign Office agent Aaron Burr’s successor on Wall Street.
What had been violated then, were such noble precedents as the sovereignty of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, a colony which had existed prior to the tyranny of the New Venetian party’s William of Orange, contrary to that which had been reestablished under the original U.S. Federal Constitution.
The violation of our Constitution, as by the swindlers Jackson and van Buren, had occurred chiefly through the overreaching influence among nations, by that tyranny known as both the British Empire, and, also, the precedents of the agents of the British monetarist system’s imperialism since that February 1763 Peace of Paris which had established the British imperial tyranny under the misleading name of that so-called “Peace of Paris” of 1763.
The problems of combined tyrannies and misrule, by the heirs of the Sarpian New Venetian party which William of Orange represented, has been a tradition of tyrannies which needs to be corrected, urgently, now. These have been problems which can be attributed, even in our United States, to the susceptibilities which are, principally, intrinsic in certain popular misconceptions which have been rooted and embedded in the vulgar habits of mere sense-perception.
The Standpoint of Science
This brings our attention back to the matters of science. From the standpoint of science, there are two principal types of relevant political-cultural mistakes which have been built into the way in which most of contemporary society has prevented mankind from making a competent reading of the role of sense-perceptions:
One of these has been the set of systemic mistakes inherent in what has been established as the popularity of sense-perception as such.
The second, subsumed source of confusion, is the ontological misconception which inheres in the influence represented by the role of money as such (monetarism), especially when that influence is employed as the basis of the presently continued tyranny of monetarist systems throughout the world at large, as still today.
In other words, our nation has often been ruined by the self-inflicted hoax which is expressed, in effect, as the traditional “chains of delusion.”
The nature of that delusion is to be known as being a malicious psychological effect, but. also, actually, as a popular defect, which, among its most notable effects, is a failure among human beings in society to recognize a crucially important quality of physical principle. That failure, is the inability to recognize the existence of a universal physical principle which supplies the potential alternative to those twin tyrannies embedded in both, first, by the susceptibilities of certain currents of popular opinion, and, second, by the exertion of tyrannies by an individual, or the similar tyranny by any of the social classes which is typified by its reflection of the so-called “oligarchical principle.”
The pathological nature intrinsic to the belief in monetarism, has been the most typical root of such wretchednesses of societies still today, as in the swindles of that London-steered Wall Street which has plunged our Unied States into a condition of Federal Reserve bankruptcy from which the present form of U.S.A. government could not survive. Recognition of that kind of specific defect in present-day, as in earlier forms of human society, defines the now urgently needed, universal physical principle on which an actual remedy for society now depends. Name this remedy as being the systemic complementarity of the inherently sovereign nature of the human individual, a nature which reaches beyond the bounds of that higher principle of the actual sovereignty inhering in the rights and obligations of human society. It must be a credit system; not a monetarist system; it must be a return to the U.S.A.’s contitutional commitment to a Federal Constitutional credit-system, not the presently hopelessly bankrupt monetarist hyperinflation.
In other words, this means the existence of the sovereignty of humanity as a species, a sovereignty which bounds the effective, proper sovereignty of the powers of creativity of the individual. The notion of the powers of the individual’s discovery of true universal physical principles, is what must be treated as essential, on the condition that that notion is recognized, not as sense-perception as such, but, rather, as the properly governing principle which must reign within and over society, rather than by the crudeness and customary folly of deduction.
There must be a reign by the creative powers of the human mind, which must be expressed as if a biological characteristic, such as Cotton Mather’s “the compulsion to do good,” as if a reflection of a higher universal principle of the law within the universe.
That is the principle under whose rule the content of these two segments of the present report are jointly premised.
Beyond the Bounds of Sense-Perception
Earlier in this virtual two-volume report, I had referenced the good humor of the 1960 Das Spukschloss im Spessart’s “Die Hauptsache ist der Effekt.” It expressed an appropriate conception, on the condition that both the speaker and hearer had shared recognition of the higher-ranking implications of such a bit of ditty. We should know the existence of universal physical principles “by their effects.”
Such is our access to the principled existence of our human species, as Bernhard Riemann’s own 1857 treatment of the subject of Abelian functions was, probably, implicitly intended to suggest: that the universe, while self-expanding, is “intended” to be crafted “from the top, down.” The further implication is, that that principle acts on its own account, but that it may also react to us, and that its reaction to us also shapes more than even our own species’ ultimate destiny. This is also clearly implicit in the concluding argument in the concluding, capital sub-section section “3“ of his habilitation dissertation.
There are excellent premises for advancing that view of the matter; also, there are some important certainties, in addition to other interesting, as probable, implications. What I argue here, is, in my current best estimate of actuality, for which the crucial point, which I shall argue henceforth, should be certainly beyond reasonable doubt under the increasingly wretched conditions of our people at this present time, especially under the present U.S. Presidency.
Physical Time: For Example
The problems which confront me on this account, against which I shall continue to argue here henceforth, are as follows.
Among the most typical aspects of the certainties for which I shall argue henceforth, is what is typified by the effects of, especially, thermonuclear determination of lapsed time of movements within the framework of a physical time, rather than “time as such.” The notions of the imagined existence of a “fixed time” and a “fixed space,” are now to be discarded, a change with presently, wonderfully good consequences for the very continued existence of mankind.
Perhaps the most useful of the current examples to be taken under consideration is the well-defined prospect of scientific developments with the prospect of a lapsed time of travel from Earth (or Earth-Moon) departure to destination Mars (and return) of about a week’s duration each way (but at a generation or two later).. This action, made feasible through the appropriate application of the physical principle of thermonuclear fusion, has already brought to an end the early notion of mankind’s prospective influence within our Solar system and beyond. Nuclear fission, thermonuclear fusion, and the prospect of what has been labeled as the prospect of “matter-anti-matter” motives, has changed the prospect for what might seem to be almost anything and everything concerning mankind’s role within the bounds of our Solar System, and within the galaxy which our Solar system inhabits within itself.
Now, as in a century past, we have thus affirmed that time as such, and space as such, can not continue to be considered as defining the bounds of our mortal existence. The same foresight had been already implicit in the concluding section of Bernhard Riemann’s 1854 habilitation dissertation. Now, the established experimental parameters for thermonuclear fusion, have shown us the fairly estimable sort of typical prospect for the effects of such relatively immediate prospects for mankind within this present century. Another great leap, roughly comparable to that from thermonuclear to “matter-antimatter” reactions, lurks before us as our future.
Actually, the most momentous implication of the advances in mankind’s power, is the “revolution in the concept of time,” which the prospect of a week-long distance of man to Mars, portends this. That specific subject is “handy” for presenting a powerful change in the human condition which might, otherwise, be willfully overlooked.
The Psychology of Travel in Time
The effect of a lapsed time, from launch to end of in-flight time, of one week, from Moon to Mars, must be considered from the fresh standpoint defined as follows.
The customary bounds from life to death of a human being, ranges, presently, in the order of a century, during which fifty years from the end of adolescence, to actual or virtual retirement for most, marks the expected span of a working life, in the main. If we presume a “normal life-span” measured in travel in space, as from Moon launch to Mars landing, as being in what had once become about a week, against the lapsed time of a travel to the Massachusetts Bay colony by ship, then, we are presented with what should be a rather startling psychological fact for most; there are, in fact, two principal facts to be considered.
Today, when we measure the life-spans of individuals and the adult members of households, as I am prompted to do, as within an experience in the range of a hundred years, more or les, as I have indicated immediately above. When we take into account the necessary time of a rising quota of space-travel between Earth and other relevant points such as Mars, and include the now rapidly increasing importance of measures of humanly active defense of Earth from a rising tide of requirements for defense of people on Earth from migrant asteroids and kindred problems, the amount of increase of the production and maintenance of a rising tide of defensive systems (as against some asteroid killing off much, or even all of human life on Earth) the inner portion of the Solar system, and even beyond occupies an increased product of defensive and related space-systems. Reverse the way in which President Obama has put the human species at increasingly grave risk by destroying systems needed for the defense of people on Earth! This warns us that we are not to be concerned with exceptional travel between Moon and Mars; rather, we must consider the importance of a vast rate of increase of economically essential measures which must be adopted for both human beings remaining on Earth, and the development of systems placed at a distance from Earth.
This requires an accelerating increase of productivity for mankind on Earth, and within the Solar system.
At the start, Moon and mankind are the primary economic factors for defining our future. It does not end there, the advances in science and technology which this entails, and the distances within the relevant parts of such combined terrestrial and extraterrestrial region, mean a rate and depth of increase of the per capita productivity of mankind, soon beyond the means of all present imaginations. The included result is an increase of human productivity which is measurable in an increased number of generations of the equivalent of today’s “normal” economic life-spans beyond what could be imagined today, even for the case in which the average length of a normal life-span (in a fixed place) is not increased.
We shall be mining a vast range of places within the range of the “asteroid belt” for materials employed on Earth and in locations such as Mars, and “artificial” locations created for other locations within that “belt.”
Once thermonuclear fusion proposal has reached the time that the distance to Mars is reached within the lapsed-time span of one week, the human species’ notion of itself will be radically transformed, in awareness, destiny and accomplishments. Simply ask one question: “How many parts of a standard generation of a single human life” is required for travel between Earth and Mars?” With that, there is a deep change in the understood meaning of human life, its dignity, its mission, and its security.
There is one particular change, which has been embedded in the beginning of this present, two-volume report. The time has now come in this report, when I shall now place that subject before here.
THE GALACTIC PROSPECT
Said as simply as it seems possible, that if I limit our attention, in this report, only to the relevant outlook from life on Earth itself, our Solar system occupies only a tiny part of a galaxy, in which the Grab Nebula is, for us, virtually, an unthinkably vast and powerful phenomenon. It is only when we have come to study our relatively tiny place in that galaxy, that we may have even begun to appreciate the scale and related implications of our functional relationship to the Cosmos.
For my part, in all this, I see our place in that universe optimistically, despite the fact that our Solar system itself is, very much a late-comer, and a tiny and a very vulnerable part in the apparently universal scheme of things.
Now, once we will have taken into account the present prospect of the use of thermonuclear fusion as a mode of propulsion within that which we were formerly accustomed to regard as each of the far-distanced planets of our Solar System, it has now become, suddenly, the subject of a presently astonishing present change in the way we think about the objects of that System and their interrelationships.
Then, everything is changed by our facing the present reality of the evidence which shows feasible rates of progress in applied energy capabilities, such that the time should be fast approaching, over a relatively few decades of accelerating development, when the planet Mars will be about one week’s distance from Earth in lapsed human travel time, under the presently oncoming means of thermonuclear propulsion. The still more distant prospect of a future, so-called “matter/anti-matter” propulsion, seems to shrink the galaxy greatly. Such sets of developments in progress as these successive options, now present us with the prospect for magnifying matters of progress in “energy-flux densities,” to our great practical advantage. That prospective progress, acting in this way, gives us a wonder-filled meaning for the notion of mankind’s existence, as we reach out in our grand imagination, as if to claim it all to be “our” rapidly expanding universe. Ultimately, however humble we might choose, or merely wish to be, should we not be pleased to recognize that we are, each and all, a part of all this?
How could we fear death in the way most people to now, if we could sense ourselves as an integral part of great things of which we shall be a magnificent part still, long, long after we have been deceased? We remain, in that way, a deathless presence in the continuing process of development within our universe.
So, suddenly, the field of the planets and stars cease to be the canopy under which we had sensed our existence to be contained. Let us free ourselves from fearful sense of hopeless containment, when the planet Mars will become approximately a week away from our arrival at Mars’ satellite, and when the asteroid “belt” is something we are preventing from sometimes throwing enormous, and sometimes menacing rocks in the direction of threatened damage, or even fatality to our Earth, as we must now consider this danger, when we recognize that even a single very bad such rock might end much or all of human life on Earth (unless we bring that part of Earth’s environment under mankind’s control), and unless we find a place for ourselves which could prevent the awful thing which might happen should we fail to develop our economy as we could.
From that prospect, everything is suddenly very, very different than it had ever been so far in our recollection of what might have been before these presently, wonderfully knowledgeable times, a recollection which we can now experience (hopefully) with happiness, but only by means of a virtually miraculous, but feas9ible benefits for today which will continue to bring fresh benefits of human progress to be delivered, in effect, as benefits which will be experienced as benefits from which each person’s great-great-grand-children will be enabled to enjoy in advance.15Imagine the launching of NAWPA at is programmed level of employment and scale of produced output, funding that program through the application of a Federal credit system, rather than a monetarist system.
It is now time for all of us to change our way of thinking of about what will appear today as almost everything, including a freshly refined sense of the meaning of “the human mind.” Whatever lies out there in our proper hope for the outcome of our future, it is our duty to make its outcome earlier, longer, and better. That view of the role of the human mind must now be our subject here.
Then, that much said, when you now consider the crude means which human perception represents within that scope of mankind’s present and further capability, why are we still self-imprisoned with the ridiculously crude form of intellectual instruction known as the means represented by what must come to be regarded as primitively crude, merely biological modes of sense-perceptions?
Why did we ever think, and speak, in such crudely formed terms of communication, as in the use of what was no better than being a matter of mere sense-perception?
Admittedly, sense-perception was never entirely bad! It was, and remains useful, largely in readily understandable, practical ways. But, was sense-perception not merely a certain kind of “baby-talk,” a baby laughing foolishly at the stars, merely out of the influence of infantile confusion? But, let us not complain at that; after all. we and our family’s membersshould not continue to live as merely babies, forever.
We see the reflection of ourselves, in that we shall have spent our lives to accomplish, so that future generations would be enabled to continue to enjoy, long after we had been deceased. Reach out, and grab the Devil with a very firm grip around his oligarchical neck.
Science & Metaphor
So, rejoice! At earlier points within this present, two-volume report, up to this time, I had referred to the essential distinction of that real meaning of metaphor which has been, heretofore, only for the knowledgeable use of really literate people: people such as the famous Plato, or a Nicholas of Cusa, for a Johannes Kepler or a William Shakespeare, a Gottfried Leibniz, as for Classical playwrights and poets such as a Gottfried Lessing, Friedrich Schiller, and, for exemplary scientists such as the geniuses Carl F. Gauss, Lejeune Dirichlet, Alexander von Humboldt, Bernhard Riemann, Max Planck, Albert Einstein, and a V. I. Vernadsky.
Good living is a matter of the way in which you will have lived it.
For my special purposes bearing on the special treatment of the role of language here, now, in the future, we must include both the great Classical poets and playwrights and the post-Leibniz geniuses Riemann, Planck and his collaborator Wolfgang Koehler, and V. I. Vernadsky.
There are certain things about all this, which I must now explain.
The choice of “problem” which I have selected for the purpose of introducing the crucial subject of the concluding chapters of this report, is the intrinsic incompetence of the so-called “literal meanings of words.”
I mean such cases as the nominalist’s use of words which has been adopted as a merely named object, an object used for the purposes of pretending to represent the content of a process by a mere name. I mean a name which is a pathetically barren substitute for the experiencing of an actual process in motion, particularly so when actual progress for the future is involved.
Consider the case of the use of a mathematical formula, when that is being used merely as an assigned name, rather than the actual experience of generating of a relevant conception: when mere statistics are used where actual creative were required, instead.
The latter is admissible when the speaker and hearer actually know the subject as that of an experienced process, as distinguished from a mere formulation. I would wish that the true intention be experienced by both the speaker and hearer, but only when both are experiencing that which is cited as a quality of passion to which the name has already been indicated, rather than the other way about, as by a grammatical “definition” in world-play.
This brings our attention to the proper notion of what is called “metaphor.”
“Metaphor” is not merely a word, a mere description; it is a concept, but not merely a concept. It is a name given to the nameless great concept among all words.
As I have emphasized this same point, in other terms, earlier here, the appropriate definitions are always expressed in the quality of the physical principle of metaphor, just as Johannes Kepler’s use of the quality of metaphor associated with his use of the notion associated with the term “vicarious hypothesis,” as in both his The New Astronomy and in the unique choice of process in defining the principle of universal gravitation: a conception which Kepler had adopted from the central principle of physical science, as that principle has been expressed by Nicholas of Cusa’s De Docta Ignorantia.
On The Subject of Forecasting
In order to better situate the subject-matter just identified, the following set of facts must be dragged on stage.
As I had already emphasized, repeatedly, in earlier portions of this report: In all successful advances in the history of mankind, attempts at the form of forecasting which is called statistical methods will continue to fail, more or less catastrophically, now as in, specifically, as by by putative rivals, in past and in the future alike. I repeat for emphasis: On this account, all known cases of economic forecasting contrary to my own methods, have failed, and for precisely that reason. Such has been “on the record” since what is to be defined as my precisely successful, first general forecast was made as I had reported my in success as a management consulting specialist which I had projected during the late Summer of 1956. That occurred as a uniquely successful forecast for that time, a forecast of an event which had occurred, as the most important such event for that time, one which occurred with a precision of a range of plus or minus a few days, at the close of February, or beginning of March, 1957.
It happened as the most significantly determining event in the U.S. economy of that entire decade.16This is not to overlook the crucial part played all this by General Dwight D. Eisenhower, both as former commanding General, Presidential candidate, and President. Ridding our Presidency of President Harry S Truman was a wonderful development for that time.
In that case, my fellow executives of that firm “bet against me,” during September-October 1956 and beyond, were all shown to have been wrong. In that case, their crucial mistake was the error of relying on statistical methods of “mathematical probability,” rather than diagnosis of what had been their a choice of a wrong, although, admittedly prevalent policy of practice, in that case, U.S. national policy.
That firm itself, survived its immediate error, a bit painfully, but it continued to back, still more during the remaining years of the 1950s, and also beyond. All of this was an outcome of the policy which they. like most other forecasters, had insisted on upholding in that clash over policies adopted for forecasting, up through the present day. In general. Specialists of the same failed method of forecasting, class of forecasters, where have remained in the majority of practice still to the present day; they have never improved with respect to their failure in the matter of their failure to meet the challenge of the the 1957 crisis, up to today’s provebial last moment..
Under President John F. Kennedy administration, there was a rising upturn, for a time: began to correct that, but when President Kennedy was assassinated, an assassination motivated by the twin issues of his economic reforms and his blocking the plan for launching a ruinous decade of bloodshed in a prolonged, useless war in Indo-China as measures intended by the British for the ruinous effects that assassination has represented for our United States since that time.
The underlying fact here, is that the trend of the shaping economic policy an economic practice of the United States since the assassination of President John F. Kennedy has been, in effect, increasingly, clinically insane.
There is a clear principle to be considered here.
“Monopoly” Is Still A Board Game
Since the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, and, later, his brother Robert, nothing about the United States’ economy as a whole has ever “gone right.” Since that time, if the incumbent President of the United States were not a drooling idiot, or rabid specimen in his own right, he had advisors who, unless overruled, would surely assist in assuring that he would be made to “look like”an idiot, drooling or not, for reason of his contemptible performance in permitting others to mislead him into playing the fool in office, as President Jimmy Carter had done. The general physical-economic condition of the United States and its population has been, in net effect as a whole, “worser and worser.”
Virtually endless, wasting, ruinous and ultimately purposeless warfare of the sort we have come to expect from the notably chronically vicious and lying former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, has maintained a pattern of accelerating ruin throughout the virtual entirety of the Trans-Atlantic part of the world, a process becoming worse and worse, at an accelerating rate, ever since.
So, for example, today, we may consider the grave failure of U.S. economic policy during the reign of Dick Cheney’s nasty puppet, George W. Bush, Jr.. His father, President George H. W. Bush, had not been an intellectual prize, either. Former former Vice-President Al Gore’s performance, had he not lost to Bush, it would have been at least as bad as that of Bush, had he won). The outcome of the Presidency of President Barack Obama, must be regarded as “almost infinitely” worse. If a President does not make almost everything worse, as poor Jimmy Carter did, such “electable” successors as George H. W. Bush, as George W. Bush, Jr. did, or a mass-murderously insane President Barack Obama has already done.
Those cases and the related failures of “the Wall Street variety,” are epidemic since mid-1960s of Europe and North America, and have done worse throughout the course of the trans-Atlantic region since the election of U.S. President Richard Nixon. On the record, the dumbest on record have been those who supported a vote against my then widely popular August 2007 Homeowners’ and Bank Protection Act that same year. The blocking of my drafted legislation has since proven to have been, in effect, the most misguided of the relatively high-ranking political figures has been those who supported the hyper-inflationary “Bail-Out” policy first rammed through in 2008.
In each of those referenced cases, the relatively consistent intellectual (and, also, moral) failure of the failed forecasters, such as those whose failure struck in the post-1957 financial crisis, was essentially a moral failure, far, far more than a technical error in judgment. As I have stated just above, their “bet on the wrong horse” was, admittedly, an error of judgment; but, the way in which they chose the wrong method of forecasting, was not merely a technical, but yet another case of a moral failure of the same type which has been almost consistently characteristic of the political judgment of the policy-shaping of the U.S. economy and its governments since the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
It has been the very worst, the most immoral trend of policy-shaping experienced, since that 1968-2012 rise of “the 68ers.” which has represented, biologically, as virtually two consequent generations of downward trends in the intellectual qualities of the trans-Atlantic world, virtually world-wide.
It was whoever might be what were usually considered to be the leading monetarist, who could be depended upon for the worst resulting effect on the economy. Some might object to that fact when stated by me, but their objection is just another aspect of their foolish mistake.
Study the net physical productivity of the labor-forces, per-capita, as measured in the ability to perform a net improvement in physical productivity and in trends in physical standard of living and net physical productivity and physically defined capital-intensity, in energy-flux-density in power and physical productivity, per capita. The trans-Atlantic world has been marching, as if backwards in time, and has named the result of that performance as “progress,” with more such ruin intended to come. It is a trend which can be traced among the generations of new-born persons dating from births in the immediate post-World War II U.S.A.: the equivalent of three full U.S. generations of downward contributions to what is called accelerating rates of “progress” by persons born since the close of U.S. World War II the growth of the deadly “green pestilence,” for example..
In fact, so-called “improvements” in the northern half of the trans-Atlantic region, are now customarily, but also fraudulently, and also stupidly, attributed to “cost-savings” defined by a recently accelerating decline in physical productivity and plummeting standards of living for all but for those who have served, chiefly, as the worse-than-useless rich, that since the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and the consequent hoax of the Warren Commission.
The set of facts, developed by my current associates, facts which I have just referenced, above, must be situated against the evidence based on a half-billions years of living processes on Earth, an approximately half-billions years during which the new forms of life and those which (most of them) have outlived their time, have arrived and been discontinued (about 98% in net effect).17A major, presently crucial addition to that history will be presented very soon. The net effect of this set of facts which have set a pattern over approximately a half-billions years of life on Earth, is that the so-called “Second Law of Thermodynamics” was always a lie; the trend in the effect of forms of life, which must be always guided toward a general long-term increase in the energy-flux-density of life on Earth, including human life.
Amid this, the so-called “Green policy” will always remain either a case of stupidity, or as an outright lie, or, more likely, a homicidal poison, as in the tradition of that vicious, mass-homicidal hoaxster Bertrand Russell. All of that is a product of a form of ignorance which is a pitiable, but not really a tolerable form of what is to be recognize as having been a lie in effect.
Since the British Empire was consolidated under King George III and by the assistance of the sexual and related proceedings of the “count the Countesses” sexual diversions of the infamous, post-Napoleonic, mass-Congress of Vienna,18See the book-length, ciculated, but still unpublished paper of Rachel and Al Douglas. the traditional imperial-oligarchical systems, such as those of the original Roman Empire and its outgrowths through the present British Empire, have engaged in mass-killings of what were regarded by the imperialists as “excess population.” Now, the same old, “same-old” has assumed what might only only a slight change in that policy, albeit a great increase in the rations of intended victims caused chiefly by the British monarchy.. Greece today, under the economic-population policy of Greece under the “Euro system,” is only one example of what is intended for numerous nations to come, as by the British puppet known as President Barack Obama, for the United States.
Now, the same mass-killers have resorted to what they appear to regard as a their last resort: “The planet can not tolerate any further increase in the human population.” Desperation drives hope, and hope brings progress.
Admittedly, the only likely immediate prospect for habitable regions nearby are our Moon and Mars, which are, admittedly, not yet prime choices for human habitation. However, to the extent that we are utilizing an existing category of scientific capabilities in the category of thermonuclear propulsion, developing the tunnels of the Moon as a place of assembly for flights to Mars and other such destinations, we must include the defense of Earth against gravely menacing, “renegade” asteroids, being brought into practical successes—once President Obama were, now, first removed from office.
The increase in the successive rises in energy-flux density of sources of applied power, will not merely reduce the time of travel, to and from Mars, to approximately a week in flight between the moons of Earth and Mars, but the advances in physical-science technologies, first, thermonuclear fusion, and, later, higher orders of energy-flux densities, not only brings travel to and from these points into our reach, but involves the order of magnitude of applied energy-flux density fitting the fairly estimated means for pioneering human habitation in such locations.
Scientist Krafft Ehricke’s “extra-terrestial imperative” which suggests such enterprises “abroad in nearby space,” are not needs based on shortage of places of habitation on Earth, but such obviously urgent needs as the effective defense of the existence of life on Earth from wandering, errant asteroids. Mankind requires an accelerating advance in the effect of what we call science and its technologies. Experience with Earth satelites and the like, demonstrate that the ratio of “devices” with assigned functions akin to those of Earth-orbitting satellites, to human habitation in “space” will, of necessity, penetrate deeply into other parts of our galaxy, and beyond.
Mining of asteroids will be a major “industry” within the Solar system, the inner planetary region notably.
On this recent January 27, 2012, the three of us assembled under the providence of our “Basement Team,” acting as a collective, virtual master of ceremonies. We three were the working experts for the week’s The Weekly Report, spent about an hour presenting an expert summary of the physical principles which have regulated the existence and population’s destinies over the course of about a half-billions year. The shock presented to the viewers in the course of that report, emphasized that the so-called “great kills” of living species were not a disaster for life on Earth, but, precisely the contrary. The lesson of that set of facts, is that it is the “greenies” who are naturally self-destined to go the way of that failed species of the same class of failures known as these dinosaurs who ceased to be useful to our Creator.
Indeed, the evidence is that life is committed to the increase of the populations which increase both the numbers and productivity of species which increase the power of living species fit to survive (as the”greenies,” by choice, were the new variety of the equivalent of a “suddenly foredoomed set of dinosaurs.”
The full audio-visual broadcast of that report, is widely available to those who desire it. It is a report which could help, that considerably, in the effort to save your life, despite the deadly threat of death from the influence of the charlatans known as “the greenies,” under the guidance of such as President Barack Obama and his mistress, the Queen of England.
Here, competent theology assumes the immortal duties of scientific creativity, which should be considered in this following chapter, in the light of the Apostle Paul’s I Corinthians 13. As such, we must also recognize what might be regarded as a Satan, the emperor who practices the evil of such satanic creatures as the Olympian Zeus, and also such ministers of evil as the “green” oligarchical cult of today. A bit of theology on this subject, here and now, would be an important challenge gesture at this juncture.
THE THEOLOGICAL FACTOR
Now, the time has come to present what will be, for most among you, something which you probably had not expected from me, but which, nonetheless, you should come to recognize, on deeper reflection, as being an indispensable truth respecting the relationships among both science and religions.
Examine that notion in the following terms of reference.
So, far in modern society, the available evidence indicates, that while various parts of the history of mankind differ respecting the quality of man’s commitments and intelligence, only a tiny fraction of mankind, from any generation known to us this far, has shown an adequate grasp of the actual character of the practical significance of what I have just written as the immediately preceding two paragraphs. Simply, behind all of the actually publicized discoveries made in the laboratory, or comparable settings, it is an unavoidably truthful fact, that all discoveries of principle depend upon the notion of a single universal principle. That is a principle upon which, in turn, the actually provable proof of any ostensibly true principle will have depended.
I recommend the exemplary representation of this point made in modern physical science, a point which has been that introduced by the virtual founder of modern science, Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, as in his De Docta Ignorantia.
The essential, practical truth, behind this process, a process which might merely seem to be a matter in conflict, is to be located in the fact, that the principal forms of organized societies known to us from history, are societies which still cling, regrettably, to a merely implied presumption of practice19There are numerous cases of inherited of past traditions of practice which not recognized by society, but which erupt to assume power under relevant promptings. The modern belief in money is thus shattered under the impact of a relevant type of systemic crisis. from which those nations still in existence today, have derived their misguided traditions of government. These are such traditions, for example, which define the traditional notion of, in some sense, “a ruling class,” a social stratum, or cult, which has been composed of what were originally known as “gods,” the latter considered today as persons in the likeness of the relevant, aspiring oligarchical stereotypes.
Typical cases of such likenesses are found among the oligarchical classes of many varieties of societies, whether they are rightly classes as societies under the rule of some form of oligarchical tyranny, as in the case of the siege of Troy, or as the evil role performed by cult of Delphi, or the specific characteristics of the particular case of Sparta in the Peloponnesian War, and also including the oligarchical ruling classes in the Roman Empire and its outgrowths as Byzantium, as, likewise, under the self-doomed system of the Crusaders under the Venetian monetarist system, and, today, the contemporary British Empire.
For example: the basis for nearly all systems of political-economy, has been lodged within what is strictly defined as “The Oligarchical Principle,” as that is typified by such agencies as the Roman Empire, or, the earlier Olympian tyranny under the legendary pillar of Evil, the Olympian Zeus and its associated Delphic cult of Apollo which each played a key role of evil, both in its own right, and as an outgrowth of the monetarist system spawned as the Cult of Delphi. The question posed to mankind, thus, leading scientists emphatically included, remains: “What is the principle which properly underlies the foundations of all else that which could be rightly considered to be the underlying principle of principles?”
Here is where the issue of the ultimate principle is to be located.
This fact is best typified for all modern physical (and related) science, by, in the one case, the fundamental principle of Nicholas of Cusa’s De Docta Ignorantia. In a second case, we have the great principle of Russia’s V. I. Vernadsky’s definition of both an existing universal physical principle of life, and also the great, higher principle of the actually expressed creative potential of human mind, a potential which has had no known equal among all other things or principles which might be imagined.
What I have just identified, is, above all else, the principle expressed, and that uniquely, by that principle of human creativity which European history (in particular) recognizes only in the likeness of the principle of a Creator, as being the highest quality of creative expression which is to be secured in the knowable form of the existence of the creative powers of the human mind.
What we must, thus, learn from that arrangement which I have just now described at this point, pertains to the evil expressed as that of the role of the oligarchical traditions, traditions whose inherent quality of an evil permeates the innermost nature of the ruling, oligarchical traditions of political currents in European societies. These are, still today, reflections of religious traditions whose roots are reflected in the three immediately leading elements20Graeco-Roman, Egyptian, West-Asian. brought together by that set of negotiations conducted in the Isle of Capri, from which the original of the four stages of the Roman Empire (to date) was launched.21There is no error in that characterization, on the condition that we accept that as a description of the relatively immediate setting of the bringing together of outstanding elements in the process at that time. More broadly considered, the formation of the civilization within, or closely associated with the Mediterranean and the riparian systems of Asia. had all converged, in effect, from what had been more deeply rooted maritime cultures, which were built up as maritime cultures entering the Mediterranean either from trans-Atlantic maritime roots in the Caribbean region , or as in the case of the ancestry of Sumer, from the maritime cultures of the Indian ocean penetrating the riparian system of Mesopotamia. The maritime cultural roots converge in establishing an array of the dominant set of religious beliefs of the Mediterranean region, and thus, consider the example from the history of Greece from the Trojan war through the Peloponnesian wars.
The Evil of Monetarism
The existence of that which we know by the common name of “monetarism,” is an intrinsically evil system. Instead of organized discovery, trade, and progress in terms of the increase of the physical powers of the labor of mankind to exist, and to progress, monetarism, such as that of London and Wall Street a substitute which is an external interest viciously contrary to human physical progress, called monetarism, intrudes.
The most notable exception to the oligarchical systems based on a monetarist system, has been the creation of what was to become the United States (across the waters of the western shore of the North Atlantic) which was first established most clearly as the Massachusetts Bay Colony, until that anti-monetarist settlement was crushed by the influence of that the New Venetian party which led its military forces along the way into the British Isles, forces under the command of the predator William of Orange. All European systems to date, excepting that under Charlemagne and that under the Great Ecumentical Council of Florence, have remained, except for relatively brief exceptions such as France’s Louis XI, in the status of monetarist systems under oligarchical supremacies.
The monetarist systems have been in the form and content of what has been has been the persistent system of trans-Atlantic role under glacial ancient and post-glacical modern societies, except to the degree that the tradition of the Massachusetts Bay Company under the Winthrops and Mathers persisted as the root of the anti-oligarchical influence of both the United States and, later, the influence of a United States which was, essentially, a revival of the policies of the Massachusetts Bay colony under the auspices of the original U.S. Federal Constitution, and of the positive influence which that United States had fostered among nations influenced by the benefits of both the original Massachusetts Bay Colony and the original formation and influence of the United States itself.
The specific influence of the U.S. Federal Constitution as an echo of the leadership of the Winthrops and Mathers, has continued to be the chief obstacle to the London-centered enemy of modern European civilization to the present date.22The systemic corruption of our United States began under Presidents Andrew Jackson and Martin van Buren defined the roots of the anglophile, monetarist corruption (e.g.“Wall Street”)of our Presidency, to the present day.
In the better known portions of the history of human society, the sharing of the tasks, products, and distribution of production of the means of mankind’s production of its means of production, were entrusted to the purpose of promoting the prosperity of the both members of society, and the increase of the productive powers of both those members of society and the advancement of those powers by and for mankind as a whole.
The monetarist system inherently violates that great principle, contrary to such exemplary achievements as the Massachusetts’ Bay Colony and its Pinetree Schilling, until those institutions were crushed by the New Venetian Party representing the Venetian monetarist heritage of Paolo Sarpi, during about a century prior to the creation of the U.S. Federal Constitution.
The Principle of Creativity& Its Foe
For example, still to the present day, the customary notion of a principle of government appears to be that of a set of monetarist systems, which traces its traditional authority to rule over the populations, from its origins in a specific kind of religious fraud known as monetarism: the worship of that falsified notion of “money” as such. Money as such is, thus, to be distinguished from, and in opposition to the truly republican principle to be designated, in physical-scientific opposition to monetarism, scientifically, which is based on the principle of credit, rather than a monetarist system based on a usurious notion of money, rather than physical progress.
Therefore, we must emphasize that, although, on the one side, the principle to which I have pointed in this report, thus far, does apply to the case of the human individual as such, the prosperity of the individual could not be achieved without locating that as an effect in the social process as a whole, as the Massachusetts Pinetree schilling had done as a system of credit, rather than the wealth of the individual as such.
Nor could the social process be represented by a mere gratification of what were ostensibly the needs of a living generation. The benefit must be expressed in nothing less than the succession of living generations: “the species”: in a principle of universal progress of the condition and the contributions of the human species of a specific society considered in its entirety.
The keystone issue is located in the expressed development of the true creative powers of the human species, for only for a present generation of humanity, for the Solar System, the Galaxy and their future beyond.
In Came Corruption!
For example, it had long been the popular fantasy of oligarchy, to have made the claim for themselves of having been based on a nakedlybaldclaim of being “gods,” notably the so-called “pagan gods,” gods in the same sense as the Olympian tribe of the fabled Zeus. The British empire and its appendages among many not exactly sovereign nations, as for the case of the formerly sovereign nations, such as those of western and central continental Europe, are now being reduced, almost completely, to less than colonies under the merely colonial status of “governance” under the imperial reign of the British Empire and its Lord Rothschild’s swindle, presently.
The case of the “Gods of Olympus,” is typical of the essentially theological basis for the modern belief in monetary systems of government, including the presently crumbling system of “governance” (the break-up of the system of nation-states in western and central continental Europe) in the name of a stateless “Euro” system, a system which which was imposed on western and central Europe as a condition for settling the reunification of two Germanies.
In a related matter, we are presently faced with an surging system of the mass-killing of those who do not fit the standards for a reigning theology represented by a reigning pagan-religious tyranny of an oligarchy bearing such British hallmarks as “London” and London’s de facto colony, “Wall Street.” Assemblies like those of gatherings of the British Royal Family, are crafted to appear as caricatures of the assembly of the public gatherings of the legendary Olympian gatherings of Zeus’s depraved and murderous Olympian deities.
For example, those self-esteemed “pagan gods” have, according to accounts, often found it to be convenient to engage in what they might have chosen as “culling the human flock.” In plain fact, the ancient Romans, like today’s British empire, have often planned a mass-murderous reduction of their own and other populations, whenever the actual, or prospective size of the flock might be considered troublesome, or simply inconvenient, as in the opinion of the alleged “gods” themselves. Thus, the British imperial monetary has demanded a reduction of the world’s population from a present seven billions persons, to the rapid reduction of the human population to not more than one billion, a system far more evil than the regime of Adolf Hitler (who was actually created, and backed by the British monarchy for about a decade, before Winston Churchill discovered that continuing the British policy of backing Adolf Hitler or Hitler-like policies, had been (temporarily) bad policy..
Just so, the British Royal Family of today has insisted a severe reduction of our planet’s human population from a current seven billions souls, to mere one billion, and to a empire whose rulers are committed, for the sake of their own convenience, to bring about a rapid and very deep reduction of the population of the world at large: a plunge from a recent measurement of seven billions living persons. to a maximum of one billion, or less. Similarly, throughout the trans-Atlantic region currently, the populations of such places as western and central Europe and the United States, are being subjected to a mass-murderous, hyper-inflationary use of monetarist utterances, in the form of hyperinflation of increasing worthless “money,” as a means for bringing on a mass-murderous collapse of the means of existence of the present levels of population.23The “Basement crew” has developed a crucially important demonstration of the fact that the four “mass kills” of failed types of specimens which permanently failed as species of life, was not a disaster for living species, but only a result of a failed design whose destruction was brought about by the failed species itself. Since that report is to be presently in a more elaborated form soon, I shall not report on the details of this matter in this present report.
Thus, a systemic mass murder of that same oligarchical sort which Adolf Hitler’s system prescribed, as for Jews and other similarly selected classes of victims, has a clear record as a religious practice, as, for example, and, otherwise, as the British have done this, and that repeatedly, to far greater degree than a Hitler did. Consider the case of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth, under the order forwarded to Pontius Pilate in Palestine by the Roman Emperor Tiberius in Capri, and also the executions of the Apostles Peter and Paul under the Roman emperor Nero. The case of the Emperor Nero, might be considered as a case of amazing likeness, is similar in both amplitude and much detail to the mentality of President Barack Obama. There is an increasing number of such instances which are now to be traced to the design of the presently accelerating trend in out-and-out murder prompted by the petulance of Obama’s criminally insane mentality.
The Evil Traditions Must Be Ended!
Such a notion of oligarchical forms of pagan law-practice, as found in the stubborn case of that expression of oligarchical immorality which is to be recognized in the Aristotelean doctrine of Euclidean geometry, still today. Indeed, it was never better than merely a pagan religious tradition, which enabled the teaching of Euclidean geometry to be tolerated for as long as it did. Euclidean geometry is an important, fraudulent case of a stubbornly persistent, obscene form of pagan religious dogma related to the oligarchical, anti-U.S.-Constitutional hoax called “money.”
There has been, presently, a certain sort of weak-willed cowardice, even among very prominent citizens in our own United States. who, still today, when exposed to repeatedly flagrant expressions of mass-murderous criminality by President Barack Obama, pretend not to see the echo of the smokestacks present within Nazi Germany, as, is being promoted as a rising trend of willful and flagrant murder practiced, in copy of the Hitler pseudo-law, against U.S. citizens under the Obama administration.
In an earlier place in these two present volumes’ present document, I had emphasized that the truly Classical condemnation of a related evil embedded in Euclid on this account, was delivered by a famous associate of the Christian Apostle Peter, the Philo sometimes known as “of Alexandria.”
I have repeatedly referred to Philo’s denunciation of Euclid, and have done so precisely because Euclid’s argument is of exactly the same principle, in both functional form and in content, as that was copied by the “God is dead” proposition of Friedrich Nietzsche, or, earlier, the implicit argument of the leading enemy of Plato in his own time, that Aristotle who has served as the epitome of the evil of the oligarchical principle in his times.
Similarly, Isaac Newton, in fact, never succeeded in actually proving anything honestly; he was a shabby echo of the same hoaxster, Antonio Schinella Conti, who acted as the “mouthpiece” for a system whose underlying presumptions had been copied, by Conti, from the New Venetian Party’s wretched Rene Descartes, and had been worked up from the original New Venetian party’s Cartesian model.
You can not honestly keep the subject of religion out of science, nor can you honestly regard neither Aristotle, nor Euclid as actually scientists in any decent sense of that name.
It should be obvious, that, apart from the intrinsically fraudulent claims of the pagan gods, and sundry similarly depraved cults, there is something within the matter of existing religious beliefs which involves a far deeper meaning, including a specifically scientific meeting, than encounter among nearly all those who pass for believers. Truth is often sacrificed for the sake of a corrupted body of so-called “popular,” or merely “official” opinion which denies even the simplest of proofs as: (“You can’t say that here!)
The mandatory significance of the necessity of considering the cases of such evil as that of Euclid in this fashion, can be traced to the evidence of the inherent fraud of pagan-religious qualities common to all significance instances of ancient (and modern) oligarchical law. The contemporary fostering of the fraudulent oligarchical dogma of “environmentalism,” is a currently important example of religious-like outbreaks of mass-insanity, such as that of Euclid, which are typical of all oligarchical forms of political systems and their monstrous perversions in the name of “law.”
Philo Attacks The “Flat Earth” Religions
As I had already emphasized, above, repeatedly, it has been of urgent importance that we consider the face of the the friend of the Apostle Peter, Philo of Alexandria, who had focused his denunciation of Euclid on Euclid’s insistence that the universe had ceased its development with Euclid’s a-prioristic argument for a permanent end to any continuation of a universal process of creation: the same argument as Nietzsche’s “God is dead!” That presumption by Euclid, was systemically coincident, in point of fact, with the doctrine of Aristotle, as it was expressed to similar effect in Nietzsche’s proclamation of “God is dead.”
What, one might well ask: “What is the common root of that formal consistency of the evils represented by Euclid, Aristotle, and Nietzsche?
The answer is readily to be found in the consistency which is characteristic of the oligarchical social system: the system most commonly associated with the original Roman Empire and Lord Shelburne’s British Empire. It is same Oligarchical Principle as that of the British monarchy presently: for example, sometimes expressed as the slogan: “For one to be born, room must be made for that by the death of another.” The implicit 1951 dogma of the intrinsically evil Bertrand Russell, precisely.24Bertrand Russell: The Impact of Science on Society (1951).
Notably, saying that one believes in the existence of a Creator, and using the word “Creator,” does not necessarily have the same meaning. In fact, the customary use of “Creator” does not involve any notion of a process of creation; what is usually implicit in the actual use of that term, refers to what is merely a finite act, rather than creation as a notion of the continuing process of creation which Philo and the Christian Apostles, for example, had intended.
Recently, my associate Sky Jason Shields, led the three of us, our customary master of ceremonies, in a crucially important LPAC Weekly Report of January 28th,25Weekly Report, January 28, and in an extended report of Feb, 1, 2012. in which Sky Shield’s presented his unique quality of evidentiary proof of a recurring, systemic quality of mistake committed by those specialists who had written of the periodic, so-called “great kills” of species, such as the dinosaurs, when, in fact, the extinction of the relevant species had been the result of the triumphant emergence of superior living species which had superseded and replaced the relevant, deservedly extinct ones.26“Survival of the fittest?” The triumphant of the principle of anti-entropy against the fraudulent cult-dogma of the doctrines of such as Euclid, Aristotle, Pierre Simon Laplace, and Nietzsche. Close examination of the characteristics of those failed species, pointed clearly to the faults of such as the dinosaurs, as their intrinsic unfitness to survive, where often smaller, but superior species from the same time-period had launched the flourishing of “their noëtic tribes from that point onwards.”
In such cases as those, as Sky Shields has shown, it was not the case that the failed species had been replaced by newcomers; the failed species had not been enabled to survive, not because of the action of some “rival;” the cause of their extinction was the failed design of those dinosaurs themselves, whose time of fatal obsolescene had come: because they were, in themselves, a failed species under the continuing conditions of progress in their immediate universe during that time. So, like those dinosaurs, as it had been for the failed species called the dinosaurs, so it is for those who choose to continue the recent performances of “political dinosaurs” among the U.S. Republican and Democratic parties of today, parties of failed believers who are presently threatened with a certain kind of extinction, not by rivals, but their own foolishness in their dealing with the present, self-inflicted crisis among the British-dominated leaders in the North Atlantic system.
In a related sense of things, the appropriate remedy for such errors as that of Euclid et alia, and the self-doomed dinosaurs, lies in the principle which I have defined as the principle of metaphor in earlier chapters here, as the appropriate alternative method is, on principle, typified by Johannes Kepler’s notion of what I have already referenced here, repeatedly, as his familiar adoption of the principle of “vicarious hypothesis.”
Similarly, the dirty spasm of clear folly, or fraud, which has shown by all those in the community of putative scientists who have defended the fraudulent claim placed by the cult of the devotees of that Sir Isaac Newton who appears to have been virtually created out of the dung thrown by the actual creator of the foolish Isaac Newton, by the devices of Antonio Schinella Conti. Similarly, we have today the fraud of those who pretend to be practicing science, while they are actually enlisting themselves in the outright mass-murder represented by today’s shameless “environmentalists” who insist on measures of mass-murder in the name of “nature.” They do this, not for any other reason that they have considered it politically advantageous to be political whores.
Nonetheless, despite both those political whores generally and the Queen of England and President Obama in particular, honest science still exists, although in a dwindling minority, despite the rabid spread of the Queen of England’s current rash of the “green disease.” . It is those malefactors in power, not nature, which is now in the process what would be the wiping out of a massive chunk of the U.S.A.’s population, during the crisis now looming for the coming phases of our crises, unless the so-called “environmentalists” in the footsteps of the disgusting President Theodore Roosevelt are removed from positions of political power.
Meanwhile, the actual builder of Eighteenth Century European science, had been the same Gottfried Leibniz who was himself a product of the same tradition of an avowed follower of the founder of modern European science, Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa. Cusa had been the principal author of the all competent modern science. This, included such avowed students of Cusa as the Johannes Kepler whose work was derived from his Cusa’s De Docta Ignorantia, from which Johannes Kepler derived his discoveries, as Gottfried Leibniz, in turn, had developed the original specifications of a calculus from the work of Kepler.
Fortunately, or, unfortunately, as you might prefer, the mere fact of a defense of Euclidean geometry, or a defense of the fraud of the claim for Isaac Newton, reveals a systemic fraud which is spread in the manner of a foul disease, a hoax motivated either by malice or blind ignorance. Such a fraud, in either case, does not necessarily indicate a general incompetence in scientific practice, as such; but, it does indicate some related form of a systemic flaw within their other mental and moral outlooks on scientific matters, a flaw which has been usually induced by the role of “getting a university degree, not for reason of science, but out of a desire for what might be considered as profitable present and future, temporary, personal business.
Now return to the argument contained in Kepler’s use of “vicarious hypothesis,” the notion which typifies the principle of metaphor. That notion is the true principle of “reason,” rather than any among the more conventional preferences presently. That is a conception which is explicitly developed by Nicholas of Cusa in his De Docta Ignorantia. It was passed, explicitly, to such as Kepler, who passed it, in his writings, to such of his explicit followers as Gottfried Leibniz, whose work prompted all competent science, in turn, thereafter.
A Timely Comment
At this point, I shall change the nominal subject of this chapter momentarily, for a significant purpose. That is to emphasize the fact, that, in today’s society, truth is usually pushed aside, or even denied, with the accompanying intention of influencing others by aid of either simply denying the truth, or asserting that is it not relevant to one’s intentions.
The successfully crooked attorney, or a judge, might have exploited a form of speech such as: “M Feces Onna Write Sill Abbell.” (Trans.: Emphasis on the right syllable.”) Such babbles, whether delived from benches, or otherwise, are no longer named “lies,” but only “spin;” it is now time to outlaw the form of lying which is miscalled, “euphemistically, “spin.” Perhaps in proceedings in courts of law, and sometimes elsewhere: “Oops! What she really meant to say was . . . ” For some, “opportunity” is spelled “opportunism.” Jonathan Swift would have understood the language of Laputa, or, frequently, today’s courts of law, like those of his own time and place, quite well.
The question is: “Did you intend to enjoy the benefit of winning the argument, or did you intend to dupe your hearer to the effect of intending to fool him, in the hope cheating him to the effect of affording yourself some sort of hoped-for advantage?” That is to say: “Dale Carnegie-wise.” Most rhetoric, political or otherwise, these days, is aimed at exactly such a result.
Similarly, I have experienced the pleasure of people “lying to my face,” while they knew that I knew what they were saying was outrightly false. Similarly, people who would ordinarily proudly profess that they would never lie, would lie outrageously when the advantage sought by a marriage-partner. some other variety of implicitly devoted ally of the moment, thinks himself, or herself obliged to lie for the advantage of a business associate, or membership in some business or other associate, or simply out zeal to secure a benefit from a business or similar quality of influence.
Often, Judges lie, most political leaders lie, and so it goes on, and one, more and more most days. Scientists often lie about science, for kindred motives. I have witnessed frequent lies from certain U.S. Presidents. Often when I was much younger than today, as, therefore, less seasoned in receiving lying abuse, I was gratified when some prominent part of the public press, or other loud-mouths lie their heads off about me, since I new it was some sort ot lying; but, these days, I am, sometimes also ashamed, when I suspect that I had been sometimes tempted to gloat over the evidence that such wretched people as those have exposed the fact that my would-be enemies, including some nominally high-ranking officials, have thus exposed the truth that they were perhaps lying, or even simply worthless persons.
That much said on those accounts, such misconducts as those to which I have commented here, the crucial fact of the matter, is that the welfare of society depends upon a reliable source of truth. “Spin” is really outright lying, since spin is motivated by the intention to deceive by aid of lies. “Spin” is just a lie by another name, and among one of the greatest crimes against society by a matter of habit.
Does “spin” have any proper use? Only to expose it as the expression of an intention to lie.
Return to the beginning paragraphs of this chapter: What does it all mean?
What the relatively wisest among us have come to understand—or, must nearly understand, is that the meaning of our individual lives does not lie within the ostensibly bounds of what we, as individuals, or as a society, express. The universe is a process of creativity, and we must become, as we are assembled to such a cause, as a participant in the intention of contribute to the higher level of creativity, ultimately the universe itself.
Our potential for true creativity, so defined, is the true meaning of our individual lives. Lacking that specific devotion, we become almost nothing.
That presents us with something more specific to be said, in concluding this present chapter:
The evidence of, in particular, approximately the recent half-billions years, presents us with a persistent trend of progress in the development of living species and their effects, from relatively lower levels of quality of species, toward higher: directly contrary to that hoax a “Second Law of Thermodynamics,” of such hoaxsters as Rudolf Clausius and Pierre-Simon Laplace, life has moved in an upward trend of development, from relatively inferior, to relatively superior systems of life on our planet. The Creator is, indeed, truly a Creator, and we are, therefore in principle, truly made in His Likeness.
THE LANGUAGE OF OUR GALAXY
Now, return to the beginnings of these respective two volumes. As I had implicitly foretold, in the first volume of this report, the ability of our human species to fulfill that which must be regarded as its reason for continued existence, lies within our choice of those motives which define the relationship of our personal existence to that universe which we inhabit in part.
We have a personal relationship to-it-all in looking at the stars. The idea of our relationship to our galaxy may fascinate us personally.
In retrospect, now, the fact that our individual lives are stunningly transitory for us as individuals, does not take away any part of what is implicitly our immortal duty to serve mankind, or mankind’s implicitly unique obligation to serve “the universalities” which mankind implicitly inhabits, before each of were born, until long past our demise. It is an obligation which continues far behind our past and also oure biological demise. Yet, only a few among us appear to have been enabled to acquire, and to maintain a passion for those immortal dimensions to which the Christian Apostle Paul alluded in his I Corinthians 13, and to which Johannes Brahms found himself reawakened to duty in the cause of a devoted memory of departed friends
Matters such as those may be judged by some persons, to be little more than a fleeting and nominal responsibility shrouded in a grave-side moment. I have had a different point of view, one which has recurred during most of the moments which I have experienced in the act of writing these two volumes: that of looking at oneself as we might see, or have seen others, either still living, deceased, or yet to become.
Typical was the way I looked at my self as from the inside of my intended action, while look at myself acting from the outside, at a distance. This was my attitude to such organs as speaking while I heard myself speaking as from “the outside,” in working my way through the notion of the connection of the biological action of the effort to communicate to the ideas which we attribute to that expression of which we treat as heard or though ideas as such.
If ideas spoken from the mouths or pens of those who speak to us only from those who lived only in our the past are communications, what does that mean in respect to the way in which ideas, which have no connection to the mortal, biological means of human communication, can transmitted as John Keats treated communication with the figures on a Grecian Urn? Answers to such questions as that could not be competently defined except according to the principle of metaphor, to Kepler’s principle of “vicarious hypothesis.”
So the effects which might be incurred if we do not embrace such an implicitly immortal responsibility for our thoughts and actions in full, as Nicholas of Cusa’s principle of De Docta Ignorantia, and also the Apostle Paul’s I Corinthians 13, should be taken by us as a forewarning of something awesomely menacing, and yet precious, against, or for a current society in the implied eternal duty of each, and all of us. As I put that thought to poetry more than a half-century ago: “Bending stars like reeds.”
So, contrary to much ordinary opinion, our individual life is not an individual existence, but, rather, is expressed as something whose efficient existence transcends a succession of generations, as I can trace my own direct experience of living ancestors whom I had known in the proverbial living flesh over a succession of spanning three family generations spanning 150 years to date, and, according to genealogists, whereas the cultural reach of my family history in North America dates from the Plymouth landing, and, in Canada, to the landings which had been organized under the influence of France’s Jean-Baptiste Colbert, 27This has included an Irish ancestry within the United Statesdated in the U.S.A. of similar vintageas effects which live still, in effect, in the active shaping of human history still today.
In the end of it all, there is, ultimately, nothing merely personal in the course of the history of anyone or anything.
The actions of significant minds in the history transcend successive generations, even millennia, and which, in time and place produce an certain immortal consequence within the course of successive generations, peoples, and places, have a wonderful consequence which transcends the existence of human flesh. That is our essential immortality, the meaning of our lives when we were biologically deceased.
In that same light, presently, the advent of mankind’s acquired power in the dimension of thermonuclear fusion, has presented us, over the span of more than a century of science, with a tangible prescience of the evidence that “neither time by itself, nor space by itself” actually exist as fixed parameters of mankind’s properly permanent place within a universality which actually defies the boundaries of a fictitious notion of space and time.
The question, now, is, therefore, how should we presently define, assess, and meet the responsibility which those improved notions of our existence in the universe now imply? How shall we, with our meager powers of what we call speech and the like, meet that vast dimension of our implicit responsibilities within this universe? How should it be that could we, like some poor wretches, limited to a form of uttered speech, or a like sense-perceptual basis, might be enabled to “converse” competently with the universe which our existence inhabits? What is the likelihood that we might become as extinct as the foolishly misconceived dinosaurs became, unless we maintain a level of anti-entropic development which increases our net physical contribution for the future of mankind as measured per capita.
Is it, then, credible, under such conceived circumstances such as those toward which I have pointed in such a fashion, to believe that a form of language premised upon animal forms of local biology, “inhabits” the biology-as-such of a true representation of those ideas which have shown the quality of a species of “power” of human speech which coincides with the creative powers of a self-developing human species?
The solution for that sort of paradox, requires that the language which could competently express the function of “human reason” can not be attributed to what we regard as our mere use of a literal form of spoken, or speech-based written language as such. This challenge can be restated, in other words, under the provisions of the closing, third, section of Bernhard Riemann’s 1854 habilitation dissertation implies. Consider the relevant argument of the celebrated concluding sentence of that dissertation, in which Riemann warns against the existence of an inherent incompetence reposing in a mere mathematics.
The challenge which that evidence, as by Riemann there, represents, does not present our mind with that which might appear to some, to be “a hopeless case.” As I had emphasized repeatedly during the first volume of this report, the only competent notion of a human language lies in the attributable power of the principle of metaphor, or what Johannes Kepler references repeatedly as the method of a vicarious hypothesis. To present that notion in a more convenient manner, consider the way in which the same notion of vicarious hypothesis is represented by the proper use of the term metaphor.
Consider, for example, the method of composition employed and defined by Johann Sebastian Bach, as in contrast to the demented sort of so-called “musical performances” which have demonstrated the destruction of the capacity for sanity represented by the degenerate trends in “popular” musical composition which have been worsened over the course of successive generations since approximately the close of the Nineteenth Century, and, much worse since the intellectually destructive influence of the post-World War II Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF).28My debate against Professor Sidney Hook’s associate Abba Lerner at Queens College, of Dec. 2, 1971, typifies, on Hook’s and Lerner’s part, the ruinous intellectual effects of the post-World War II Congress for Cultural Freedom. Those effects typify the catastrophic effects of reductionism, generally, on the cultures of mankind.
The practical meaning of the counsel which I have just presented in opening this chapter, is best typified by those notions which must be expressed, but which can not be expressed in the prose of a spoken language. For such higher missions as I have referenced in this chapter this far, and earlier, a higher power must be mustered, the power of irony which only the true metaphor of Classical poetry could express, that of such as Nicholas of Cusa and his follower Johannes Kepler, as Dante Alighieri, William Shakespeare, Gotthold Lessing, and Friedrich Schiller.
Let us interrupt the preceding accounts, to identify some relevant features, on background, of my own adolescent and early adult life, just to situate the subject-matter of my own part in the present world situation.
A Future Physical Economist
I was still lodged within the legal age of 15, during the Summer preceding my September birthday, when my father consigned my summer-times, repeatedly, to a lowly apprenticeship as a hand-dinker in a shoe-manufacturing plant in Peabody, Massachusetts, a feasible walking distance from my residence in the City of Lynn. (I saved money by walking the distance between home and workplace, unless it were raining.) Rebel as I have always been for as far back as I could remember, it follows that my duties at the work bench were virtually bereft of any serious intellectual requirements. Under those circumstances, I escaped the boredom inherent in the situation by resorting, during that Summer, to extended “thought experiments” respecting the meaning of the technology of economic progress in the field of manufacturing in general. By it were time for me to return to school, I had worked through a truly competent conception of the physical meaning of technological progress in manufacturing in general, enjoying freedom from intellectual submission to such misconceived, academic subjects as the pseudo-science of Euclidean geometry, the which I had come, in earlier years, rightly, to despise at first sight.29I did have a certain advantage in the machinist’s training of my paternal grandfather and my father.
In the meanwhile, at the age of 15 years, and so occupied against the boredom of a menial job, I had, in fact, acquired a credible insight into what could pass for the principles of physical-economic progress—mostly done behind the mask of the lowly circumstance of a hand-dinker’s monotonous bench. The result was that the owner of the factory, Benny Shapiro, was pleased with my performance during that year’s summertime, on his account, and I on my own.
In the meantime, between the first Summer at that job, and my return from a military service completed abroad, I wished no more part in a pretense of submitting to what I had despised as Euclidean masturbation in the abused name of “science.” On that account, the presented university curriculum which I had suffered at my father’s behest, was one which my conscience would not permit me to tolerate any longer. My qualifications as a successful professional economist in forecasting, from the start, have remained the kernel of my profession since my 1953 “conversion” to the opening and closing sections of Bernhard Riemann’s habilitation dissertation, to the present day; whatever else, I have been, in fact, the best of the economists in performed results in the matters of forecasting and the like, since then, to the present day. This fact became of international importance as was shown in my December 2, 1971 defeat of Professor Abba Lerner who was then presented, as my opponent in a widely heralded Queens College debate, as the leading British economist in the time of that occasion.30The celebrity of that debate was prompted by the fact that among all of the most notable economists for that occasion were assembled in what proven to have been a vain attempt to discredit my unique achievements in economic forecasting, as compared with the failure of all of them to have failed to recognize what I had forecast as the breakdown-crisis of August 1971. Abba Lerner lost the debate, as it is said “hands down.” Professor Sidney Hook, a leading 1950 founder of The Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), had remarked on the day following Abba Lerner’s defeat: “Your man” had clearly won that debate, “but” he will never be allowed on any important platform again. As far as Hook’s influence reached, that has been the case up to the present day. They remain afraid of my role on that account, throughout most among the leading circles of the trans-Atlantic community to the present date, with some relatively rare, but important exceptions.
That experience, so reported by me, contains the evidence of a crucially important lesson in statecraft, and the like. Existing social systems, including those of so-called “higher education” of certified professionals, may lead to skills which are not unjustly considered competent, even indispensably useful in their own way; but, something even more important than that may be lost along that way. Careers may remain available, on the condition that a certain, often disgusting moral price is paid in service to the established conventions of the so-called “powers above.” The root of such abuse of the name of “the professional,” lies in the tradition of the oligarchical principle.
The Present Threat of Thermonuclear War
Now, as I approach my ninetieth birthday some months down the way, past times are overtaken. The world hovers presently at the delicately balanced, or, if you prefer, unbalanced threat of a “World War III,” a commitment which is being organized by the British empire, with devotion from the British Queen’s own “Emperor Nero-like” U.S. President Barack Obama, That intended war against Eurasian targets of British-orchestrated thermonuclear warfare, is virtually on the edge of becoming a reality weeks, or even months prior to the November U.S. general election. Only the reluctance of sane U.S. circles to allow such a catastrophe, combined with the resolute resistance to submission by Russia and China, have prevented that warfare from having occurred either at the close of 2011 or the months of 2012 this far. Should that war not be prevented, civilization as we have known it, were virtually ended, as the British monarchy has echoed the pro-genocidalist Bertrand Russell, in calling, presently, for a reduction of the human population from seven billions, to less than one billions persons to remain on Earth.
Admittedly, there could be the option that some targets of British imperial homicide might give up the fight, in which case civilization would be quickly finished in that fashion. Otherwise, unless the British empire backs down, or President Obama is ousted from office in a timely fashion, a thermonuclear holocaust were virtually inevitable. It those who lend support to Obama who will be guilty of the greatest crime against humanity.
It must be recognized, that such a war launched at the behest of President Obama’s evil British and kindred masters, would be launched at British direction through a preemptive thermo-nuclear attack on, principally Russia, China, and other Eurasian nations. Such warfare would leave little to kill after the initial attacks. The subsequent extinction of the human species through the effects of the aftermath, can not be excluded. As of the moment, the actual occurrence of a U.S. general election in November 2012 is most unlikely were President Barack Obama not expelled from office under Section 4 of the U.S. 25th Amendment, or some action to the same effect. Were Obama not retired to place of personal safety outside of the office of the Presidency, that during the near term ahead, the likelihood of a “next election” in November were probably a wet dream of childish dreamers. The Republicans are currently as silly, but perhaps nastier than the corresponding Democrats of this moment.
Once that much were said, as I have done so far, here, next, is where I come in presently.
The Problem Of Lifetimes
With that much said, I return to the opening intention of these two volumes being completed here.
Those among us who have benefitted from good sources in higher education have been presented with strong evidence that the form of language we employ for ordinary communication, is necessarily an awkward or worse attempt worth one’s way around the inherent failures of ordinary conversation used as an attempted vehicle for scientific communication. The most useful illustration of this point occurs in the case of a sentence in which the subject is a scientific, rather than street-wise conversation. When such conversations encounter the point at which a scientific principle is the included subject, the speakers point in the direction of the suggested location, give that object a socially convenient name, but convey no actual expression of the actual content of that action which is presented as named.
In one respect, such difficulties are inevitable, since the powers of human speech are incapable of reaching conceptions whose scientific nature can not be encompassed by straightforward attempts at expressing ideas whose intrinsic order of magnitude is much finer than the human system of sense-perceptions are intrinsically incapable of generating. The best we can do with such cases, is to create a construction of the actual process to be represented. At worst, the fanatically unlearned person protests at any failure to delimit communications to scientifically illiterate speech, and, worse, to insist that is that such illiteracy is the standard for all public and otherwise official communication.
It was exactly such frauds of the actually or feigned illiterate, such as the case of the trained scientist who defends the idiot Isaac Newton as an alleged genius (who discovered only things for which there is no scientific truth), such as the hoaxster Pierre-Simon Laplace, the hoaxster Rudolf Clausius, and the authors of the outright liars known as the “environmentalists” who claim to have improved science by denying the existence of its content.
There should be no mystery concerning such populist frauds, when we have taken into account the oligarchical principle expressed by the fraud of Euclidean geometry. The inherent intention of the oligachy is delimited the size of the human population, and suppressing the knowledge by which the lower social classes are induced to accept stupidity in place of science and Classical artistic composition. By means of the instruments through which we are enabled to discover finer principles and their execution, the language of a scientifically qualified people will access the means for the efficient expression of those ideas which exist only in the higher domain of instruments through which we can devise and control the devices which take us in those grander and tinier domains which no simple use of raw sense-perception could reach directly by the provable language of the very vast and infinitely small.
Furthermore, as we come to understand the processes which we investigate, we learn what were otherwise the inaccessible secrets of our own composition and functions, which, in that way, lead to an expanding domain of qualities of all those processes we discover, thus freeing us from the habit of brutish nominalismwhich often falls prey to the disgusting use of what is called “common sense.”
So, our progress in the application of thermonuclear fusion and “anti-matter” processes define the new, vaster, tinier and deeper processes which were otherwise beyond our society’s reach.
The Scientific Method: Metaphor
What I have described in the preceding volumes, pages, and paragraphs, were composed with the intention to break through the tomb-like walls of simple sense-certainty, to reach a sense of real meaning of human mortality, to the necessary truth of human life, that we are nothing if we are not immortals. Everything in our universe has an immortal meaning lodged in the essential consequences which shape the course of history. In that manner and degree, we are immortal, for better or for worse. We are the consequence of what we have become in our effect on the course of an implied history of the development of our universe. It is those actions which are the only true eternity, the only true humanity.
In all that, as Robert Burns told us, we are accountable to mankind, and mankind to us. In is in that way that we actually live as persons. It is ideas, defined as I have defined them in these two volumes, which is all that is really important, and which is, on that account, truly immortal actions.
So, a remarkable genius, Johannes Kepler, who owed almost everything of importance to his great predecessor, Nicholas of Cusa, knew that the survival of civilization depended, and still depends upon the radiation of those ideas, as I have defined the efficient history of ideas in this present chapter, is the only meaning, the only purpose for the existence of those ideas which are the authors of course of history, for the better, or the worst. That is the essence of science, of Classical artistic composition, and of warfare, and the true meaning, for the better or worse, of the immortality of the human soul which is the true domain of our universe as we have been made capable of knowing that universe.
As for the role of language in communication, the following must be said on behalf of the conclusion of this report.
When we take into account the evidences of the progress and decadences of human societies, we should consider ourselves as obliged to define a certain quality of directedness, for good, or bad, in those immortal expressions of mankind’s actions as individuals, within the intended progress of a society which transcends the ordinary notions of human mortality.
During the interval which has occupied much of me during the interval this two-volume work has been underway, the subsuming direction of this particular authorship has been reenforced by, chiefly, the progress of my immediate associates in matters of scientific and related progress on their part, a progress in which we have been interacting to a common direction of intention, chiefly upward intention.
My featured intention in the process of this writing, has been to put forward a notion of the physical dimension of a notion of human progress which is not inconsistent with the greatest modern intellects, such as that of Nicholas of Cusa who largely founded a competent modern science, a science which is not apart from the proper intention of bringing humanity upward toward a succession of achievements which, by their nature as moral and scientific progress from the lesser to the more powerful force of progress, define an immortal quality of directedness to the actions deserving of the notion of progress to a higher state of achievement of mankind within this universe.
The particular emphasis in this two-volume utterance, has been to convey a sense of a true “location” of creativity with respect to what were otherwise a crude notion of mankind’s progress. That requires a playing down of the literal notion of the spoken language as the conveyance of a moral authority for mankind’s speech, and for the notion of human mortality, too. The quality of action is to be relocated from the literality of language and intention of action, relocated to the immortal reality of effect, as Kepler’s notion of “vicarious hypothesis” (true metaphor!) represents the ontologically transcendental notion of the principle of action which shapes the direction and relatively transcendental quality of mankind’s upward, or downward course in historical rise or fall of mankind in not merely history, but the shift in moral direction of our species’ role within, and upon our universe.
1As I have emphasized in my remarks to the Saturday midday meeting of our leadership of January 14th, with the report on the Mars project delivered then, and with the reports by our association put into place during the course of that week, science’s work has reached an interim goal of insight into projected interplanetary explorations, at a time which the war-cry of the circles of Max Planck and Albert Einstein had declared more than a century ago, that: space and time have ceased to exist for those working on the frontiers of physical science. That is an affirmation now to be presented in a fresh view of what will have become a reality, if the British monarchy and its captive puppet, U.S. President Barack Obama, cease to be tolerated as obstacles to the achievement of such ends. The relevant demonstrations of that point had been placed on the LPAC website earlier during that week.
2[Translation by LaRouche:] Riemann: “We are now being drawn into the domain of a higher science, within the domain of physics, into which the auspices of today’s proceedings will not permit us to intrude.” Therefore, I am permitted to enjoy the company among those enjoying the permission to intrude. [“Es fuhert dies hinueber in das Gebiet einer andern Wissenschaft, in das Gebiet der Physik, welches wohl die Natur der heutigen Veranlassung nicht zu betreten erlaubht.”] Riemann’s emphasis, there, is made most clear by observing the content of the third, and concluding section of his habilitation dissertation, where the ontological implications of his work on Abelian functions are to be recognized.
3There are principally three states of experience in the process separating (1) human sense-perception, (2) scientific-experimental knowledge of that experience (an action of the mind, rather than the senses), and (3) the actual idea adduced from within the actual system of our universe. This may be properly adduced from the third and concluding portion of Bernhard Riemann’s 1854 habilitation dissertation, and expressed in provisional applications by such as Max Planck and Albert Einstein.
5My distinction of “mind” from the mere “brain,” will be clarified at a suitable, later point in this report.
6Again, see the matter of the God-principle’s scientific meaning, later, below.
7It was not necessary to go further than this on that point, since this specifically ontological correction, as provided by Riemann is all that need be added on that subject in this location. See the explication of the “God principle” inherent in “human nature,” an extremely important, scientific, as much as theological conception for the highest-ranking implication of the notion of science, which will be clarified at the most suitable, much later point, here.
8The common, most simply manifest distinction of the fossil remains of species of ancient apes, from those of human fossils, is mankind’s willful use of fire. The 5,600 dating for the flooding of the Black Sea with its historical salt-water content, is not to be confused with other sources of post-glacial floodings, such as fresh-water melts. The wooden-timber, human artefacts in the fresh-water domain of the Black Sea, is crucial evidence.
9I mean organized human society in the broader sense, as the case of the “wooden housing communities” of areas which had been, earlier, regions “flooded over” by the great saline flood to which I have referred.
10It is correct, and important to emphasize, that I speak and write from my relevant advantages earned as a consistently successful economic forecaster, since my first such forecast presented for the mid-1956 forecast of the characteristics and forecast date of timing of the first great U.S.A. deep recession, during a forecast interval between the last days of February and the first days of March 1957. My failed rivals, up through the present date since, have relied on statistical-forecasting methods akin to a monetarist’s variety of virtually tea-leaf readings; I have relied on physical-economic methods.
11Since the aftermath of the Battle of Waterloo, it had been argued by some, that had Marshall Ney caught up with Napoleon’s own main body of forces on the evening before the battle at Waterloo, rather than the next day after that battle, Napoleon might have egained the upper hand on the continental field of battle, rather than hise rout. The truth is that Napoleon was already, like Shakespeare’s MacBeth, already well past the condition of “fey.” I would wish to contend that well before Waterloo, Napoleon, like Shakespeare’s Macbeth, was already destined to doom. Betwixt fact and fiction, not only was the doom of both Macbeth and Napoleon’s Waterloo already the fruit of a condition which had preceded the ill-fated outcome of both those defeated figures; there is nothing speculative in the similarities of the facts and fictions of both cases. As I shall show here in the due course of this second part of my two-part report, there was certain kind of determining principle in the active force common to the fictional case of Macbeth and the true case of Napoleon’s Waterloo.
12Even in the celebrated German motion-picture Das Spukschloss im Spessart (1960): “die Hauptsache ist der Effekt!” [“the important thing is the effect!] Indeed, it is the expression of a human principle of the human mind. Call it, properly: the principle of sense-uncertainty, as represented by the normal function of the human mind.
13“When one really thinks about it,” it should have been apparent to scholars, that Shakespeare had intended the effect of a replication of a Classical Greek chorus. I suggest that a team recruited from among my associates (of, perhaps, three or four representing both sexes) perform each of all designated parts by “chorus” in a section or two relevant passages taken from Shakespeare’s own. For actual performances, as of relevant fragments which merit the same kind of treatment. For fanciful good effects, imaginet the chorus appear in costuming as a Classical Greek “Chorus.” “All the world’s a stage ...”
14Thus, it had been under President Andrew Jackson that Jackson, who had been the puppet of Wall Street’s Martin van Buren, that the Bank of the United States was shut down by Martin van Buren puppet, Andrew Jackson, a virtually treasonous swindle, called van Buren’s Wall Street Land Bank swindle against the United States which led into the “Panic of 1837.” Van Buren had been, in fact, the British Foreign Office agent Aaron Burr’s successor on Wall Street.
15Imagine the launching of NAWPA at is programmed level of employment and scale of produced output, funding that program through the application of a Federal credit system, rather than a monetarist system.
16This is not to overlook the crucial part played all this by General Dwight D. Eisenhower, both as former commanding General, Presidential candidate, and President. Ridding our Presidency of President Harry S Truman was a wonderful development for that time.
17A major, presently crucial addition to that history will be presented very soon.
18See the book-length, ciculated, but still unpublished paper of Rachel and Al Douglas.
19There are numerous cases of inherited of past traditions of practice which not recognized by society, but which erupt to assume power under relevant promptings. The modern belief in money is thus shattered under the impact of a relevant type of systemic crisis.
21There is no error in that characterization, on the condition that we accept that as a description of the relatively immediate setting of the bringing together of outstanding elements in the process at that time. More broadly considered, the formation of the civilization within, or closely associated with the Mediterranean and the riparian systems of Asia. had all converged, in effect, from what had been more deeply rooted maritime cultures, which were built up as maritime cultures entering the Mediterranean either from trans-Atlantic maritime roots in the Caribbean region , or as in the case of the ancestry of Sumer, from the maritime cultures of the Indian ocean penetrating the riparian system of Mesopotamia. The maritime cultural roots converge in establishing an array of the dominant set of religious beliefs of the Mediterranean region, and thus, consider the example from the history of Greece from the Trojan war through the Peloponnesian wars.
22The systemic corruption of our United States began under Presidents Andrew Jackson and Martin van Buren defined the roots of the anglophile, monetarist corruption (e.g.“Wall Street”)of our Presidency, to the present day.
23The “Basement crew” has developed a crucially important demonstration of the fact that the four “mass kills” of failed types of specimens which permanently failed as species of life, was not a disaster for living species, but only a result of a failed design whose destruction was brought about by the failed species itself. Since that report is to be presently in a more elaborated form soon, I shall not report on the details of this matter in this present report.
24Bertrand Russell: The Impact of Science on Society (1951).
25Weekly Report, January 28, and in an extended report of Feb, 1, 2012.
26“Survival of the fittest?” The triumphant of the principle of anti-entropy against the fraudulent cult-dogma of the doctrines of such as Euclid, Aristotle, Pierre Simon Laplace, and Nietzsche.
27This has included an Irish ancestry within the United Statesdated in the U.S.A. of similar vintage
28My debate against Professor Sidney Hook’s associate Abba Lerner at Queens College, of Dec. 2, 1971, typifies, on Hook’s and Lerner’s part, the ruinous intellectual effects of the post-World War II Congress for Cultural Freedom.
29I did have a certain advantage in the machinist’s training of my paternal grandfather and my father.
30The celebrity of that debate was prompted by the fact that among all of the most notable economists for that occasion were assembled in what proven to have been a vain attempt to discredit my unique achievements in economic forecasting, as compared with the failure of all of them to have failed to recognize what I had forecast as the breakdown-crisis of August 1971. Abba Lerner lost the debate, as it is said “hands down.” Professor Sidney Hook, a leading 1950 founder of The Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), had remarked on the day following Abba Lerner’s defeat: “Your man” had clearly won that debate, “but” he will never be allowed on any important platform again. As far as Hook’s influence reached, that has been the case up to the present day. They remain afraid of my role on that account, throughout most among the leading circles of the trans-Atlantic community to the present date, with some relatively rare, but important exceptions.