Proofed and edited version posted: 10/27/2011 2:45pm edt.
On mid-day, Wednesday, October 19th, during a full hour’s span of the broadcast LPAC Weekly Report, my associates had joined in presenting the essential preconditions which were required to rescue both the U.S. republic, and also mankind more widely. We worked in the effort to rescue society from what has now become a virtually immediate threat of a massive wave of, virtually paleolithic “extinctions” against the presently crumbling, trans-Atlantic cultures of mankind. The report reported here presents certain among the most essential features of a wave of threatened Hitler-like “extinctions” now authored by such as U.S. President Barack Obama and his British royal accomplices, but it also points toward some urgently needed, hopeful remedies required to bring such bestiality as theirs to an end.
As I shall identify that universal principle of science in this report, the human species has been distinguished from other species by what I have defined as “an expression of physical science to be known as the principle of credit.” That notion is the most crucial, and also most hopeful option, but, therefore, also, for some persons, the most rejected of those conceptions on which the continued existence of the human species now depends for guidance. The unfortunate fact about that principle, is that the crucial elements of the practice of that particular knowledge had remained, largely, as being limited, heretofore, largely to my own knowledge of relevant types of physical-economic functions. This has been knowledge gathered, so far, during recent decades. Now, most recently, since my September 30th national broadcast, that knowledge has now begun to be spread somewhat more widely.
On the evening of September 30th, first, and then, in greater detail in the October 19th LaRouche-PAC “Weekly Report,” the proverbial “ice” has finally broken publicly.
Among most people until now, much of this important knowledge had remained widely neglected. It had been knowledge which seemed to have been a kind of knowledge more or less easily avoided by most, even among those stubbornly careless persons who had been given adequate access to that knowledge, but had declined to master it. The result had been, that what had been put in jeopardy in that way, until now, had been the same, actually indispensable universal physical principle, the so-called “credit principle,” which I identified, summarily, by the presentation of the set of a brief series of questions and answers delivered during my live national broadcast of September 30, 2011.
Since that September 30th broadcast, certain leading economists, and others of similar disposition, had reacted to that broadcast by announcing their recognition of this point of knowledge, after hearing the dialogue with which that report had concluded.
So, presently, a notable amount of relevant detail on this same subject, is now being included on the record, this time in the extended remarks on this same subject both by me and by some among my associates, as in the instance of the continuation of that national broadcast’s theme now expressed in the already mentioned audio-visual “Weekly Report” of this past Wednesday, October 19th.
On the one side of the experience of societies, it can be argued that that specifically human potential for a rigorously scientific definition of creativity, should already have become commonly accessible to relevant scientists. This is something which should have been known scientifically in such circles by virtue of consideration given to the uniqueness of an intelligent mankind’s inherent nature. Despite such helpful developments as that would represent, the negligent error from the past still persists today among the large majority of relevant categories of professionals.
That needed correction should have been made by means of both the actually creative nature of the quality of the voluntary exercise of that discovery, and by the application of those universal principles of specifically human knowledge and action which are absent, categorically, among all other known varieties of living species. However, it often remains the case, that societies, and most of the individuals of which they are composed, still lack effective knowledge of that very principle which defines the domain of their naturally given creative potential.
So, even among many scientists, it may be often their inclination even to defy this evidence; they have often been even induced either to fear such branches of knowledge, or they simply evade such academically “troublesome” knowledge, because it is “not recognized as having been popular among the relatively ignorant.” Often, such negligence has been spread under the influence of the dupes of Bertrand Russell’s swindles who had been taken in—“in droves!”—by the radically reductionist swindles of the late 1920s Solvay conference. Or, for kindred reasons, some might even hate that capacity for actually creative willfulness on which the expression of human creativity depends, on which the presently continued survival of the cultures of the human species may have depended.
The subject which I have now introduced in this present location, and in this fashion, requires further, and broader clarification bearing on the essential, most principled features of the ancient through modern history of European civilization. I emphasize the fact, that the subject which we consider here, is not a mere matter of opinion. This is the subject of a rigorously scientific matter. It is no “mere matter of science;” it is also a matter on which the continued existence of a human civilization presently depends. It requires a rigorous study of the impact of that civilization’s emergence and its effects on a much wider region and the deep future of our planet.
Therefore, those preliminary remarks uttered, I now proceed as follows:
The subject on which any and all competent consideration of national or global physical economy among nations absolutely depends at this time, is the notion of a science of physical economy.1Lyndon LaRouche, Three Steps To Recovery?, EIR, vol. 38, no. 40, October 14, 2011. Or, Lyndon LaRouche PAC (http://www.larouchepac.com/node/19759). That notion is an expression of the human power for deep insight which that science’s root-expression combines with the characteristic features of the persistence and progress on which the human species depends otherwise. At the present instance, civilization finds itself trapped, that more or less desperately, at the brink of the global effects of a presently onrushing, general physical-economic breakdown-crisis of a virtually world-wide, British-imperialism-dominated system of oligarchical degeneracy, especially among the trans-Atlantic regions. Under present trans-Atlantic policy-shaping trends, we are between two days and a pair of weeks distant from a presently threatened, hyperinflationary breakdown-crisis in the trans-Atlantic financial systems: a hopeless breakdown now facing trans-Atlantic humanity at this present moment. Only a sudden and very radical shift to a strict Glass-Steagall policy could prevent such a general collapse of the trans-Atlantic region at this time.
Without at least a relatively primitive range of understanding of this matter so far, there could be no competent appreciation of the nature of, and the remedies for the deadly peril on which the rescue of the trans-Atlantic region (in particular) now depends.
In bringing that aforesaid, specific issue to bear respecting the principled features of the present trans-Atlantic plunge into a virtually terminal general breakdown-crisis of the entirety of British imperialism-dominated trans-Atlantic civilization, we, who possess the active intelligence required to understand the present world’s economic-breakdown-crisis currently in progress, must proceed from the foundations of a notion of the specific implications of a principle of creativity which I had introduced in Chapter I of my “Three Steps to Recovery.”
That notion is expressed as a principle to be conceived as being inherent in the distinction of a human principle of civilization, a principle unique to mankind among all other known species. It is to be fairly described as a principle which stands in opposition to the cultural characteristics of behavior of those actual human beings who are driven, like virtually human “cattle,” into what is virtually a form of virtual captives cast in the roles of virtually dumb, British, or similar sorts of talking beasts.
This is a subject of those specific kinds of consciously creative powers of the human mind, the which are typified by the principles associated with the work of such pioneers in modern European civilization as the great modern scientist Nicholas of Cusa and his followers, including such avowed followers of Cusa as both Leonardo da Vinci and Johannes Kepler. That latter pair from among the great minds of those times, typify great minds who have been widely defamed by the proponents of all those hateful varieties of oligarchical doctrines, such as those of the late Bertrand Russell, or, earlier, the notorious charlatan Adam Smith, whose offal-like intellectual product is mistakenly treated, even officially, for “science.”
Thus, even scientific giants among the followers of Brunelleschi and Cusa, such as Leonardo da Vinci and Kepler, typify those forms of Classical expressions of culture, which have been hated by such as the late Bertrand Russell of “Cambridge systems analysis” notoriety. The modernist tradition of Russell, is that which has been spread by such dupes of Russell as the devotees of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, “IIASA,” and their likenesses, such as John v. Neumann and Norbert Wiener.2The form of overt British styles of evil expressed by Wiener, is to be found luridly displayed in Wiener’s The Human Use of Human Beings.
Some useful indications bearing on the lack of actual creativity (rather than mere innovations) within parts or entireties of some human cultures, or stratifications of “sub-cultures,” are of the nature of errors located among actually well-known strata of ostensibly literate human cultures, including those from ancient through contemporary affairs. Those errors are to be located, chiefly, in instances of what are to be recognized as oligarchical cultures. Such is the legacy of ancient cultures of a series associated with that same oligarchical principle which is to be associated within a series of leading empires, beginning with such origins as that of ancient imperial Rome, as these expressions of perversity which have been continued through those decadent forms of neo-Roman imperialism met in the lurid instance of the Emperor Nero, or, among modern circles, the present-day British empire of Queen Elizabeth II today.
The specifically Roman imperial forms of degenerate cultures, such that of the British monarchy of today, or those cultures of the same elemental traits, represent a specific type of oligarchical decadence which is notable as being from among what are known to have been, or to be literate cultures. In the history of Mediterranean cultures, the notable types of oligarchical decadence are found in exemplary cases such as ruling systems such as those of the Babylonian heritage, of the Persian (Achaemenid) Empire, of the series of the Roman, Byzantine, and “Venetian-crusader” systems of imperialism, and of the modern British imperialism established through the agency of the New Venetian Empire of Paolo Sarpi and, later, Sarpi’s follower, William of Orange.
The latter, the New Venetian empire of Sarpi follower William of Orange, is one typically represented by that original neo-Romantic maritime imperialism which was set into motion by such followers of Paolo Sarpi as William of Orange. Such is the origin of a modern British imperialism which was established as a British empire-in-fact, with the1763 Peace of Paris; this was the same treaty which set into motion the beginnings, in 1763, of the rise of the British ( or, better said, “brutish”) imperial conquest of India.
To understand the strategic characteristics of the modern British empire’s post-1763 origins in that “Seven Years War” which had concluded with that Peace of Paris, we must turn close attention to both the deeper and the more immediate roots of that continuing moral conflict between, on the one side, the British empire dated since that “Seven Years War,” a war which is to be sharply contrasted, on the other, with the system of government and culture represented by the American Revolution’s struggle against a shamelessly mass-murderously Romantic, British imperial tyranny which has been continued to the present day of the reign of Queen Elizabeth II.3The stipulated goal under current British royal family circles’ policies, has been recently set at a hastened reduction of the human population to the order of one billion souls—a far, far greater slaughter than that of Adolf Hitler’s regime.
That division requires us to emphasize the fact, that whereas, European nations and peoples have often revolted against the New-Venetian tyranny of the followers of Paolo Sarpi and his follower William of Orange, those same European nations have often submitted to that same British tyranny, and that, often, most importunely. Such is the case of that insanely mass-murderous British puppet, U.S. President Barack Obama.
Therefore, to understand the world system centered in the imperialism of the British empire of today, we require insight into a far deeper realm than were usually considered the root of this history of the trans-Atlantic conflict situated, principally in the domain of the North Atlantic.
That is the conflict which has been the source of the strife between the (predominately) patriotic current of the American revolution against the British imperialism of the followers of systemic irrationalism of a Paolo Sarpi. That British irrationalism persists, still today, through the followers of that rabid irrationalist, Adam Smith, who explicitly denied the existence of any semblance of rational beliefs among his duped believers. He and his dupes have continued their foolishness up to the present day of the lunatic, conventional practice of statistical forecasting methods. It is the persisting credulity of those dupes which has done much to make possible the ruinous continued existence of a British empire into the present modern times.
To define the category within which the European maritime-based civilization and its internal, now trans-Atlantic strife, are to be principally located, we must focus attention on the implications of the flight of the descendants of Europe into North America since the time of the exoduses of such as the Seventeenth-century Mayflower compact and that system of credit introduced to the Massachusetts Bay Colony of the Winthrops and Mathers, which has laid the foundations for the central principle of the founding of the U.S. Federal Constitution.
Such are the essentials of an introduction to those underlying principles of a modern practice of physical science on which any competent expression of economic science depends.
Excepting the remarkable reforms of Charlemagne made in his time, there is no significant medieval indication of an effective insight into the principles of a practiced ancient or medieval economic science, other than that of the explicitly stated, leading features of Charlemagne’s leadership on this account during those past times.4It were proper to qualify that by stating that this holds generally for times subsequent to the life of Plato, and, also, implicitly, Eratosthenes. The nearest approach to a competently defined, modern form of political science, is located in the implications of the work of the Renaissance’s Nicholas of Cusa;5E.g., De Docta Ignoratia. the first blush of a competent form of a modern era’s economic science, is to be located in the period of the great credit-system reforms of the independent Massachusetts Bay Colony under the leaderships of the Winthrops and the Mathers.
The physical-economic development of the productive powers of labor in what was developed to become the original United States, is to be located in the heyday of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, that under the Seventeenth-century reign of the interval under a sovereign form of that colony. Notably, the system of the development of the American economy before and during the founding and development of the United States, had been based on such crucially significant means as that of the development of systems of integrated rivers and canals under Charlemagne; that development under Charlemagne, was the model for the development of the territory of North America under the same methods of rivers, canals, and a trans-continental American economy (e.g., transcontinental rail) copied from the precedents of Charlemagne’s reign in the territories typified by the commonality roughly represented by the territory of France and Germany presently.6Indeed, the division of the territory of France from Germany, which occurred, originally, following the death of Charlemagne, became the means for organizing those conflicts within the territory of Europe through which the rebirths of the old Roman Empire were established in medieval and modern Europe up to the present day. In his later years, France’s Fifth Republic President Charles de Gaulle expressed his acquired insight into the importance of establishing an anti-British-imperialist Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals, as my wife, Helga, and I, conspired with others in such an attempt during the period following the “Fall of the Wall.” The development of technology has already created the preconditions, today, under which wars among nations are an enterprise in criminalizing insanity, as we have seen in the cases of the policies of the series of Anglo-American and related, medieval-like warfares since the assassinations of U.S. President John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert. The great strategic struggles of mankind are to found within, and beyond the borders of our Solar System and that galaxy which contains the origins of our weather systems.
In the competent notion of a science of economy, the active agent is not money, nor the exchange of money as such. It is to be located in the increase of the physical-economic growth of the “energy-flux density,” per-capita and per-square-kilometer’s measure of the increase of the physically productive expressions of the creative powers of human labor.
That much said along those lines this far, we are situated in the implacable conflict between the principle of the republic and that of the empires. Speaking in physical, rather than mere political terminologies, the most competent choice of a technical name for “imperialism,” is that “oligarchical principle” based on the rule of society by the notion of “money as such,” as expressed by the essential principle of action typified by the infamous Olympian motives of the exemplary Peloponnesian wars.
That much said, now go directly to the heart of the matter: The Credit Principle as I presented the essence of that matter, briefly in the question-and-answer epilogue to my September 30, 2011, LPAC National television broadcast.7For background, turn to the thesis of my cited Three Steps to Recovery, Chapter I. “The Human Principle.”
The evidence of the functional difference of man from beast, is to be recognized in the evidence of the effects of science-driven, willful human physical-economic progress. That, in turn, depends upon the condition that this represents a net progress in mankind’s power to exist at rates which outrun forms of depletion inherent in the function of attributable physical time.
This power, which is unique to the human species, is expressed in the most typical fashion as the increase of the power of the human individual and in his environment as measured fairly in both relative capital-intensity of modes of production, and in the relationship of the development of “basic economic infrastructure” to relatively higher intensities of energy-flux density as expressed per capita, by the relative rates of increase of the human population, by the relative longevity of the population, and by the effectively applied relative productivity per capita.
That set of points is illustrated most conveniently in the following modality.
The power of the human species to exist, depends on effects which are illustrated by the increase of energy-flux density per capita and per square kilometer. Those advances in the condition of the human individual, are fairly described in estimates, as being dependent upon the increase of the productive physical powers of labor, and upon related functions, per capita and per square kilometer. In other words, the continued existence of the human species depends upon an effective increase of the applied energy-flux density of power above and beyond the factor attributable to “the friction” of entropic tendencies.
The significance of that requirement, lies in the role of the quality of science-driven progress attributable to the development of the creative powers of the human mind, as this is fairly illustrated by the case of the increase of effective energy-flux density achieved through the quality of the fundamental physical advances in that energy-flux density, as this process is typified by leaps upward in scientific creativity per capita and per square kilometer of territory.
On that account, we must take into account what is fairly identified as the principle of evil which is attributable to that mythical Olympian Zeus who is otherwise identified as the expression of the evil, oligarchical principles of “zero growth,” “low technology”, and “population-size control.” Think of the mythical Olympian Zeus, and of the actual British empire of today, as each is equivalent to being a virtual “Satan.”8Compare this with the denunciation of Aristotle by the Philo of Alexandria who was the friend of the Christian Saint Peter. Aristotle is described by Philo, implicitly, as the Satanic image of the modern Friedrich Nietzsche, and as the mother of the cults of both Euclid and Zeus. Aristotle’s god was, like Nietzsche’s, the prophet of the satanic religious belief of “God is dead.” Euclid, for example, like Aristotle, proclaimed the “God is dead” doctrine, in effect. He argued, thus, that once the Creator had generated a universe, that the universe would be described as completed, and therefore incapable of any further creating. It was such a pro-Satanic doctrine, which has been derived from the oligarchical dogma of the Olympian Zeus, et al., which had persisted in such expressions as the apriorism fraud of Euclidean geometry. A story within the story of The Brothers Karamazov, suggests a similarly pro-Satanic argument.
It must be emphasized here, that the oligarchical
principle, on which the secular dogmas of the British monarchy’s population-control doctrines are premised, is precisely such a pro-Satanic, Nietzsche-like oligarchical notion, a notion which is premised, today, as by the British oligarchical doctrine of the Adolf Hitler-like, mass-murderous population-reduction dogma of Britain’s Schellnhuber, and, similarly, President Barack Obama’s own evil doctrine.9It is notable, that Bertrand Russell, writing in 1951, was a leading proponent of the genocide currently demanded by the British monarchy’s asset Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, who has been a rabid proponent of the British royal circles’ proposal to reduce the Earth’s human population most suddenly and most radically, to no more than one billion wretched folk. Russell wrote: “... War, so far, has had no very great effect on this increase [of population], which continued through each of the world wars ... but, perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could spread throughout the world once in every generation, survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full ... The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of it? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other peoples’ ...” [Excerpted from a book planned and commissioned by me: Carol White, The New Dark Ages Conspiracy, 1980]. That Bertrand Russell dogma, is the dogma of the so-called “environmentalist movement” supported by the British royal family’s household circles of the World Wildlife Fund still today.
All actually competent varieties of economic forecasts, on which I enjoy a relative monopoly so far in these times, have been consistently proven by me to have been (scientifically and systemically) competent. “Scientifically and systemically,” as used, thus, as terms used by me here, are not mere descriptions, no mere hyperbole; they are absolutely physical-scientific terms employed by me to indicate “a matter of universal, physical-scientific principle.”
I explain, as follows. The point I have just stated may be approached for explanations in a variety of choices of sequences of description; however, whatever the ordering of the terms of the argument, the outcome is approximately the same in effect, one, perhaps, preferred over the other, as a matter of intellectual taste. The outcome of any of those approaches is the initiate’s encounter with a universal physical principle which most actually mentionable professionals in the domain of economic studies had never imagined before. However, happily, it has been recently demonstrated, that actually leading economists, as measured in performances, are often capable of discovering that principle, even almost immediately.10Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., “LaRouche Emergency Address: TransPacific Alliance Can Re-Launch Bankrupt Economy,” EIR, October 7, 2011; [transcript of LaRouche LPAC-TV National Address delivered Sept. 30, 2011 (http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2011/2011_30-39/2011-39/pdf/04-13_3839.pdf), or see Lyndon LaRouche PAC (http://www.larouchepac.com/node/19691) Also, LPAC Weekly Report, Oct. 19, 2011 (.http://www.larouchepac.com/node/19900).
It is perfectible admissible to identify the most typical failures of even most leading performers among economists, until most recently, as representing “a presently timely blunder of ‘belief in the follies of Laplace-ianism’.” The same point may be identified as being a principle of human life which is not presently known to occur in any other known living species than mankind. In short, “it is time for mankind to grow up,” would-be so-called “economists” most particularly.
The crucial evidence which defines the scientific, rather than the, unfortunately, presently still popular, mistaken “meaning” of “time,” is located essentially in the practiced discovery of universal physical principles which mark the “clock-work like” transition of principles of human behavior associated with the generation-to-generation succession of mankind’s progress through fresh discoveries of universal physical principles. I mean, especially, that succession in scientific progress which began, predominantly, with the series of crucial modern discoveries in physical science which began with, and explicitly followed the precedents supplied in modern science since the pioneering work of the Renaissance which is signalled by the discoveries of Filippo Brunelleschi and Nicholas of Cusa. It has been the latter’s achievements whose uniquely original discoveries included the great wave of modern transcontinental navigations.
There is a certain leading source of complexities in that picture of history. To wit: the history of mankind and its cultures has been often held back, even nearly destroyed by the evil of the oligarchical systems, as in the case of the opposition to Plato (e.g., the legend of Prometheus), an opposition expressed by the evil influence of such as the figure of the Olympian Zeus and the evil of Aristotle’s sundry varieties of deadly poisons. It is the intellectually and morally retarded behaviors of the nations and populations corrupted by the oligarchical cultures and their trends, which has embodied the force of those human evils, such as that of the current Queen of England and her lackeys, such as Barack Obama, which have underlain the influence of the oligarchical cultures such as those from ancient Rome through the present-day empires.
It will be most helpful, at this stage of our present report, to provide a convenient summary of the natural precedent for the rise and fall of attempted advances in the conditions of life of (either living or once) living species, that in order that we might refute that lying farce called the Nineteenth Century introduction of that blatant fraud known as “The Second Law of Thermodynamics.”
I summarize that latter point, briefly, as follows.
The existence of known types of living species during a span of archeological investigations, since such as approximately a half-billion years ago, shows a leading trend in such heritages which shows life on Earth as steered in an upward train of increasing energy-flux density which has culminated in the combined biologies and biological potentials for actually expressed human mental life which defines the planet as naturally impelled to successively more powerful forms of life, especially human life, as so expressed for human progress in rising rates of energy-flux densities of human life per capita and per square kilometer of territory. It is that characteristic of human life, as distinct from all other known living species, which demonstrates mankind’s inherently potential destiny now in mankind’s leap into a leading role in extra-terrestrial human development of man’s rising role, in not only the reach of our Solar system, but also, our rising practical influence into the galaxy which our Solar system inhabits.
Thus, the actual history which is natural to the human species, as opposed to the effects produced by the inherent depravity of the oligarchical systems such as those of the fabled, oligarchical Olympian Zeus, is to be traced along a pathway of defiant development, against the oligarchical principles of such as the Roman and British empires. The natural inclination of the human species, is of increased population and per-capita power of existence, all, so far, in defiance against the oligarchical depravity of many leading cultures of mankind.
Witness, for example, the inherent depravity of those socialized cultures which not mere hold back, but demand a reversal of human culture, setting mankind back, as the specifically ungodly, oligarchical characteristics of today’s morally and physically degenerating and pro-mass-murderous do, such as those of the British monarchy and President Barack Obama.
That moral, and actually biological degeneracy of such as the so-called “modernists” presently, such as British puppet Barack Obama, is the true epitome of manifest evil. My point here, on that account of scientific matters, is that there is no “natural depravity” like that expressed by the current British monarchy, but only the malicious decadence inherent in that oligarchical principle’s modern expression of the reign of the British empire spawned by the likes of the New Venetian Party’s William of Orange and the followers of the virtual founder of contemporary global imperialism, Lord Shelburne, since that time. One may freely throw wretches such as England’s monstrous Henry VIII and Paolo Sarpi’s heritage of the New Venetian Party into the same rubbish-bin of lost cultural moralities which have served as instruments of scientific backwardness in the times of the history known to us presently from the past to present times.
All notable, and known general backwardness in human progress as such, has been the fruit of sheer evils such as those of the societies ordered in coincidence with the oligarchical principle. Once that point is adequately presented, the most important of the failures which have occurred within the powers of mankind, have been made clear. No other source of backwardness and related evils is to be blamed on an alleged lack of human natural qualities.
What confronts human society with its great shame, is nothing other than that evil, known as “the oligarchical principle,” which, having once captured, seduced, and degraded naturally human beings, has been a state of affairs in which the early captors of relatively ignorant human populations, has held them in a captivity like that in which African slaves were held captive, not only in the Americas, but Africans taken into captivity, also by Africans prior to their captivity in the Americas, and Americans who are still kept largely within the effects of a slave-system among most of the current population of the Americas generally still today. The votes cast for U.S. Presidents such as the pathetic George W. Bush, Jr., and the luridly pro-Satanic British royal puppet, Barack Obama, illustrate that oligarchical tradition which has held most of the human population of our planet in virtual intellectual-cultural servitude, such as that typified by the inherent moral depravity of what was expressed by the 1950 launching of that Congress for Cultural Freedom which supplied the monstrous wave of immorality regnant throughout Europe since (and also actually before that time).
The greatest enemy of mankind known to us today, is that of the legacy of the same “oligarchical principle” currently centered in the British empire today since the murderous occupation of the British Isles under the flag of the same legacy of Paolo Sarpi expressed in the invasion of the Netherlands and the British Isles as the New Venetian party of the mass-murderous predator known as William of Orange.
All major warfare presently known to us concerning our historical knowledge of warfare on this planet, has been a product of either the “infectious disease-like” practice of warfare, or the necessary resistance to the oligarchical evil’s extensive periods of reign upon relatively large regions of habitation. The practice of cannibalism, or its likeness, is the characteristic of a part of the human species whose policies and practices are no longer human.
Now, with the advent of nuclear and thermonuclear means, the only legitimate expression of a necessary form of a general form of warfare has been resistance up to or beyond nuclear defense against a foe whose threat is an expression of a modern technological form of oligarchical interest. All other forms of warfare or its like, are actionably criminal, clearly so if the violator is of the quality of the current British imperially reigning oligarchy and its allied puppets. That evil oligarchical expression must be defeated, and, thereupon, excised from positions of power, at all necessary risk.
Otherwise, there were no just reason to license warfare. The British empire is the most likely true cause for waging such forms of warfare of resistance beyond those of necessary restoration of peace, and, hopefully, durably peaceful accommodation among sovereign nation-state republics.
Nonetheless, despite the aforesaid restrictions against warfare or mass-murderous actions such as those just conducted in Libya, especially the war-criminal quality of the crimes condoned by President Barack Obama and others in those unconstitutional and related forms of unlawful forms of action taken by Obama in the instance of Libya, it was, in this case, the Obama administration and its relevant accomplices which were, de facto, and also U.S. Constitutionally, the party of evil.
Two crucial sets of facts must be added to those aforesaid issues of the case at hand. First, the conduct of President Obama as the leading feature of the policies launched under his reign which are Adolf-Hitler-like crimes against humanity taken by Obama under British royal influence. Second, and no less significant, it has been fully demonstrated in fact, as by me personally since April 2009, that President Obama is, in a fully functional sense, not only a remarkably exact image of the character and expressed practices of the Roman Emperor Nero, but that my explicit exposure of those Nero-like actions of Obama which were precisely defined by me, had been already stated with relatively full and great precision, in the course of my report to that international webcast. There is nothing in Obama’s character, as of the present day, which I had not identified with precision during that April 2009 web-cast.
I have made numerous fully validated major economic and related forecasts, in my role as an economist since my Summer 1956 forecast of a late-February-early-March 1957, very deep U.S. recession to erupt at that forecast time. My persistent warning since 1966 of a likely major U.S. monetary crisis which had occurred in August 1971, was, notably, contrary to all notable other relatively notable economists, and to numerous others, at later times up to the present moment. I would rank the great precision of my April 2009 forecast of the character of President Obama, as having been the most precise, and most significant of virtually all the forecasts which I had made up to approximately the present date.
If Barack Obama is not impeached out of office very soon, not only will there not be a still-existing United States very, very soon, but the kind of mass-murder which struck ancient Rome under the later days of the Emperor Nero; there will be a scale of mass-murder comparable to, but far more extensive than that which the citizens of ancient Rome experienced from the Emperor Nero. The details of the likeness of Obama to the Emperor Nero is one of the greatest of likenesses to the Emperor Nero in all well-known history of trans-Atlantic civilization.
The exactitude of the likeness of Obama to the mass-murderous Emperor Nero, is so exact in details, that it is already certain that the British monarchy, which actually placed Obama in the Presidency, must have found in Obama its choice of a prospective U.S. occupant of the Presidency who must have been most carefully pre-selected as the type of psychotic personally selected to bring about the self-destruction of the United States.
Therefore, I have privately made an additional forecast of future history, which I shall withhold from public circulation at this time.
That much said in this chapter this far, I shall now proceed with the essential foresight into the presently accelerating economic crisis as such.
The most typically incompetent form of economic forecasting, is premised on the presumption that the introduction of a new physical principle, is necessarily to be located within the specific time and place within which that forecast is first made. That blundering presumption has depended largely on the current prevalent, incompetent presumption of such sources as what are to be regarded as such “authorities” as the notorious Adam Smith found among modern British economists, their dupes and other followers.
The fact is, that any true discovery of principle is expressed only along the course of the lapse of time which has led to both the introduction and implementation of that discovery. In practical terms, that historical fact is presently the most important discovery in physical science up through any present that the lapsed time leading into the discovery and its realization, has been in the process during which its initialization and fulfillment have occurred. The presumption that physical time is a matter of specific “clock time,” has been one of the most perniciously significant, but, nonetheless, one of the most popular and important delusions in the popular practice of physical science still today.
Thus, as I had emphasized in the course of the questions and answers of my recent September 30th national address, that any actually true discovery of a principle changes the lawful characteristics of any specific character of contemporary physical time.
This quality of change is known to us, presently, only as a characteristic of specifically human behavior within the bounds of a physical space-time, rather than that defined as “clock time.” For this purpose, we must place the emphasis on effects which correspond to a discovery of universal physical principles as such, or those comparable principles which are to be classified as either human-generated actions on the universe, or on the specific consequences of the experiencing of those specific qualities of actions.
The latter qualifications demand a bit of emphasis on explanations.
No physical principle could exist as if in something tantamount to the hypothetical notion of a physical principle of action existing within “empty space.” There are no “stand-alone principles” existing which actually correspond to “a principle in any quality of space other than its own,” nor is there any existence of “empty space.” There is only action in “physical time,” and as expressed in terms of reference to “physical time.”
In effect, the characteristic of the human species is the willful change as actions which change the system of “physical time.”11As in entering the revolutionary (physical-economic mode) specific to the culture of a new century. It is the act of the qualitative change in mode which inhabits the specific quality of action befitting a notion of “‘physical time,’ as qualitatively distinct from ‘clock time’.”
All of those preceding matters of emphasis are absolutely indispensable for any comprehensive apprehension of the ordering of human activity within the universe. Without that specific quality of development in physical science and its correlatives, there is no competent scientific practice in general. On this account, the conception of relativity, as of Albert Einstein and those of comparable, anti-Bertrand Russell practices, is indispensable, scientifically, for all subject-matters. The notion of physically relative time is indispensable for a competently, generally progressive notion of the physical universe in physical, rather than simply clock-time.
During a lapsed time which has occupied much of the recent dozen months of our “Basement” activity, since our August 2010 abandonment of the existence of a primitive’s notion of the existence of what had been damned by relevant actually leading scientists since more than a century ago, we had good reason to join in damning the silly notion of “space by itself” and “time by itself.” Our same “Basement” crew responsible for most of this scientific research, has expended considerable, relatively comprehensive attention on approximately a half-billion years scrutiny of the leading records of the subject of the series of evolutionary development of living species, their origins, their existence, and the related evolutionary history. Most of the evidence treated in this process, is to be fairly considered as factually standard as presently known as fairly modern “catholic” evidence, as familiar to, relatively speaking, the most highly qualified sources employed on behalf of our team’s own original work in this and closely related fields.
The most profound among the implications of this line of investigations, has corresponded to the fruits of my own, original earlier advances in the notion of the principles of physical space-time as such, especially as situated within the domain of the science of the specific considerations of physical economy. The principal obstacle to comprehension of the issues of a science of physical economy today, has been, scientifically, relatively impotent doctrines of “clock-time.” Whereas the notion of physical time itself, has been a relatively long-standing conception of my own independent work, the situation of my own, earlier discoveries and practice within the context of our “Basement” crew, has been a crucially important setting for both the continuing of my own earlier discoveries on this account, and the great benefit of collaboration with my “Basement” associates, especially since the Summer of 2010. The “Basement” has represented the true principle of a virtually daily functioning team, rather than a mere collection of separate bodies expressing related interests. More and more, that team’s activities have been extended, quite naturally, toward international scientific circles of collaborative, specific scientific interests shared in common.
Admittedly, teams of similar qualities have become long since traditional among the best qualities of academic and related scientific circles and teams back to the times of such original modern scientists as Filippo Brunelleschi, Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, and the pack of modern geniuses among such explicit followers of Cusa, and his greatest followers in the domain of physical science, such as the greatest of them as Leonardo da Vinci and Johannes Kepler. However, the explicit function of physical space-time, as I have identified that here, has lacked any adequate semblance of treatment of the actual notion of physical time, as distinct from a rare kind of clock-time up to the present time.
Such was the concept which I had presented in the answers to the questions presented to me in the course of the recent September 30th national broadcast. and in the already designated LPAC Weekly Report of Wednesday, October 19th.
Much more on those same stated lines of inquiry is to be said and written in the course of the remaining time yet to come.