Then, and Now:
THE CASE OF THE INEDIBLE PROFESSOR
by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
Date: July 7, 1997
As Edgar Allen Poe's Detective Dupin would emphasize, seemingly obscure clues sometimes lead to cracking a major crime.(1) That clue might be ever so small, so obscure, but, nonetheless, of crucial importance for reaching the discovery. Whether in a case of mass-killing of children, such as the case at hand, or pursuit of discovery of principle in experimental science, to serve our purpose, that clue need satisfy but two requirements: it must be, not only undeniably true, as a matter of fact; it must, also, call into question all the investigator's earlier assumptions respecting the larger matter under investigation. This is the same method underlying all great discoveries of principle in science. Typical is the present case, the Case of the Inedible Professor.
First, a necessary few prefatory words, to situate the crime.
I turn your attention here, to the subject of your neighbor's mental condition. Under present, global conditions, in addition to onrushing securities, monetary, and economic crises, that mental condition should be recognized as a subject of great, and presently increasing personal importance to each and every reader. What kinds of insanity are likely to break out in your neighborhood, as these crises accelerate rapidly during the coming months?
In this present report, our subject is the most monstrously dangerous of the sundry forms of cultish "New Age" lunacies, spreading, like strawfire, around Europe and the Americas today. However, before turning to that subject itself, consider, briefly, the most cmmonplace obstacles which, today, tend to prevent adult Americans from recognizing certain kinds of crucially important facts, which, in the well-known manner of speaking, may said to lie directly under their noses.
That blindness reflects the fact, that the typical Twentieth-Century North American neighbor, including most among those bent down with the weight of terminal degrees, is usually, at heart, an anti-intellectual populist. This trait is most shamelessly displayed, when he, or she, is "under the influence," "letting one's hair down," or, when his, or her attention is focussed simply upon "how to win friends and influence people." In such populist moods, he, or she, stubbornly resists the suggestion, that matters of law-making, or decisions by ruling executive agencies, ought to be premised on any consideration which is not readily accepted by a majority of "popular opinion." According to his populist self-deception, any fact which can not be be "broken down" into the simple words and sentences which are readily understood by a typical citizen, need not be taken into account in formulating policies or related judgments of a political significance: so, deadly viruses--and, infectious varieties of mental disorders, undetected, spread.
In effect, imagine yourself telling your neighbor to look in the mirror, before it is too late. Some among you might be wise to join in that exercize. Like the legendary lemmings, typical American pragmatists delude themselves, that "popular opinion" must continue to direct the collective behavior of their species, at all times.
We have come into a time, as I shall indicate by means of the case reported here, when such populist blindness to certain kinds of facts, represents far too great a risk to be tolerated any longer. We --not only our crisis-stricken U.S.A., but the entire world-- have come into a time, in which, if the U.S. population continues to follow in those pathways of so-called "popular opinion" which have been building up during the recent thirty years, we must expect not only the early threat of disintegration of the U.S.A., during the several years immediately ahead; but, this must also lead to the collapse of this global civilization.
This represents not the certainty, but certainly the presently looming threat, of a early, chain-reaction-like collapse of this planet, now, into a planet-wide "New Dark Age" of a type worse than that which struck Europe, then, during the middle of the Fourteenth Century.(2) Were that threat not turned away, this would mean, perhaps, no less than two generations of collapse of the population of this planet, down to no more than several hundreds millions, and perhaps as low as tens of millions --through the work of the legendary "Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse." Later, a new, civilized form of society might emerge, at the far end of such a planetary New Dark Age.
Under such conditions, your typical, shallow-minded populist (e.g., "Libertarian") of a neighbor were likely, either to go bezerk --into "flight forward," as it is said in military parlance, or, in the alternative, to cuddle up in foetal-like position, sucking a pacifier of some sort, squatting in what will do duty for the bottom of a fox-hole. You have reason to pay attention to the clues of any altered state of your neighbor's mind.
The facts which most populists might prefer to ignore, bear directly upon the changes in policy which we must make, if our civilization is to outlive the present century. Unless we change our ways, which means violating many of the most impassioned popular beliefs acquired during recent decades, this doom will strike, possibly, perhaps probably before the scheduled A.D. 2000 U.S. national election-campaign.
Such a catastrophe might be prevented, if we cease doing what a growing majority among "Baby Boomers" have been doing, increasingly, during the recent thirty-odd years.
We can save this civilization, but not without a profound change in the way the minds of our populist neighbors have been conditioned to react to "hot button" issues. Some very tough soul-searching must be done, and that very quickly: otherwise, those neighbors should kiss their young children, or grandchildren goodbye, now, while the children are still alive to be kissed. Yes, there are external forces to be recognized, and to be defeated; however, we shall not succeed in defeating the enemy from without, unless your neighbor, and you, are prepared to seek out, find, and destroy the enemy within --each within his, or her individual self.
That enemy within ourselves, speaks with the voice of that specific authority which prompts one to say something akin to, "This is the way experience has taught me to think, about ... ."
For reasons which will soon be made clearer to you here, the key to insight into the crime documented in the following report, is an exploration of one of the ways in which the enemy within your neighbor's mind, is currently misleading him, either to support, or to tolerate, or simply to ignore, a certain leading threat to the continued existence of our civilization. That is, a threat of collapse of this civilization, which, unless defeated, will, by madman's hand, or in some other way, destroy many among our civilization's young children, and grandchildren, during the course of the relatively few years immediately ahead.
A warning of that danger, is to be recognized in the worst holocaust since Nazi-occupied eastern Europe during World War II, the worst holocaust since the post-war Nuremberg Trials. Face the fact, of the mass-murder of millions of Hutus and others, in Central Africa, at the behest of the highest ranking authorities associated with the ruling agency of the British Commonwealth, the London Privy Council. Tell your neighbor to find, in searching his own soul, why he, or she has permitted this to continue, why he, or she has not, already, efficiently, demanded action by our government, to crush those British interests which continue to spread that evil.
With that in view. Ask your neighbor: "Are you, like Shakespeare's tragic Hamlet, clinging so fearfully to habits which have become familiar, that you would walk blindly to your own, and your children's doom, as Hamlet did, rather than change that same flaw, deep within yourselves, which impels you into complicit negligence in an Africa genocide already in the process of spreading into the Americas?" What kind of a mind dwells within the perpetrators of this evil? As Shakespeare's Horatio warned the audience, in the close of the Hamlet tragedy: let this bloody carnage warn you, and your neighbor; let the tragedy of Africa be presently reviewed, "Even while men's minds are wild: lest more mischance on plots and errors happen." If you can not induce your neighbor to act, in such a way as to prevent the enemy from continuing that horror, what is wrong with your own mind?
Today's Africa Parallel To Auschwitz
These are already times of horrifying madnesses, like the worst which gripped the world between August 1914 and August 1945. This infectious madness, on the one side, threatens entire nations with new forms of holocaust, while, on the other side, it inspires an increase in the likelihood of monstrous crimes in your family's neighborhood.
Just as the British Empire acted then, during the years of wartime Auschwitz, to suppress information on the Nazi holocaust against Jews and others, so the same empire, now, covers up for a comparable, ongoing holocaust against Hutus and others in central Africa. Now, the British Privy Council, the central authority for the entirety of that world-empire known as the British Commonwealth, is the new "Hitler" behind such new "Himmlers" of Africa as Uganda's President Yoweri Museveni and his puppet, the most notorious of the former street-level thieves and thugs of the region, Laurent Desiré Kabila. The question now being addressed to the British Royal Family, and other relevancies, is, why did they cover up for the crimes of the Nazis then, and why do they, now, not only cover up, but perpetrate, the similar crimes of the British Privy Council's apparatus, or our subject, Dawkins, today?
Now, more than five years have passed since I first smelled something extraordinarily nasty, in the sudden prominence of a new, veritable "Mr. Hyde," an Oxford University professor of zoology, named Richard Dawkins.(3) This Dawkins is the perpetrator, the subject of this investigation.
I first put Dawkins on my list of suspicious characters, at the time of my reading of the relevant item from the April 16, 1992 edition of the London Independent. Since that time, Dawkins has come to the surface repeatedly, as an energetic proponent of the worst features of Charles Darwin's work; in each such account Dawkins was depicted by the British -- or, if you are fastidious in such matters, "brutish"-- press, as a figure of increased celebrity and influence. I would not say, that mass-murderer Richard Dawkins, is a new Adolf Hitler; his mental state was certainly, a candidate for the same category of disregard for the sanctity of human life as Adolf Hitler's favorite bio-racist, Darwinist Dr. Ernst Rüdin, or the infamous Dr. Mengele.
I refer to the Rüdin who was, then, the founder of the German Society for Race Hygiene, 1932 President of the International Federation of Eugenics Societies,(4) and a principal architect of what came to be known as the Nazi "holocaust" of "weeding out" what Hitler and Rüdin's doctrine defined as superfluous populations.
There is no exaggeration in making that comparison of Dawkins to Hitler's Rüdin. Just as Darwinist Rüdin was, then, a leading Nazi architect of the mass-murder of Jews and others, as was done in Hitler's concentration-camp-centered, slave-labor system, so the Malthusian Professor Dawkins has now achieved a featured position among "bio-ethical," academic apologists for the policy which the British Privy Council is implementing, in London's holocaust against millions of Hutus and others, still ongoing in central Africa. It is made quite clear, that whether the inedible Professor Dawkins has uttered his views on the subject of Africa publicly, or not, his uttered principles respecting human populations supply the premises for the presently ongoing British holocaust within Africa, just as Nazi race-theorist Rüdin's Darwinism supplied the design for Hitler's holocaust. It is this state of mind, shared between Rüdin and Dawkins, which has been the father to Dawkins' wicked deeds.
This criminal ideology's spread is not limited to immediate environs of Oxford. The scale of the genocide which Uganda's President Yoweri Museveni and Congo's Laurent Kabila are conducting in central Africa today, is documented, beyond credible refutation, by eyewitnesses, and by public and private agencies, as reported widely among the world's leading news media, and by others.(5) In U.S.A., just as Hitler had his admirers in the 1930s U.S.A., then, so, now, Museveni, Kabila, and Baroness Caroline Cox's British intelligence front-organization, Christian Solidarity International (CSI), have their backers in high places here today.(6) In fact, as EIR has documented this, while the British Privy Council's agent, Museveni, coordinates the genocide in Central Africa, the operation is funded, and enjoys support of British Privy Council-linked mercenaries, in coordination with the British Commonwealth's raw-materials cartel.(7) Behind this holocaust, is the same mental state, of Dar Es Salaam-indoctrinated, Fanonist(8) mass-murderers Museveni and Kabila, exhibited, on a smaller scale, by the case of Dawkins.
All of Africa, at least all of sub-Sahara Africa, is now targetted for the same treatment already suffered in Yoweri Museveni's Hutu Holocaust. Beyond Zaire, Britain's targets include Sierra Leone, Zambia, Angola, Congo-Brazzaville, Kenya, Cameroon, Nigeria, and, of course, fresh onslaughts against Sudan.(9) Meanwhile, the same British Privy Council's operation is already being deployed, with complicity of Henry A. Kissinger crony Luigi Einaudi's Bush-League accomplices, in the U.S. Department of Defense and State Department, and Congress, into South America, targetting Peru, and other South American nations.(10)
To understand the case of Dawkins, one must take into account the kindred ideology pervading relevant policy-shaping circles in today's United Kingdom. For this Hitlerian enterprise we have described occurring in Africa, the apparatus immediately deployed by the Privy Council's Commonwealth, under privatized covers, is, now, the same apparatus used, then, by the old British Empire against India and Africa.
Immediately under the direction of the Privy Council, now, is what was known, then, as the British Colonial Office, now euphemized under the title of "Overseas Development." What was known, then, as the administration of British imperial genocide --against drug-trafficker Queen Victoria's sundry, little black, brown, and yellow brothers and sisters, was run by the Privy Council under an agency known then as "Crown Agents," now euphemized as "Crown Resources." Now, as then, the genocide is being done in the financial interest of British Commonwealth-based private syndicates, such as the British Commonwealth's raw-materials cartels. Then, the enforcers for the Crown Agents' operations, used mercenary forces of the type then headed by Charles George "Chinese" Gordon; now, the same category of British mercenaries deployed by the same, euphemized, imperial colonial apparatus, is deployed under such rubrics for seconded British SAS veterans as "Executive Outcomes."(11) These mercenaries are also being considered now for use as a private army enforcing the imperial decrees of the United Nations Organization (UNO), a prospective role for which they are being "vetted" by a UNO General Secretary, who is at the same time a Commonwealth representative of the British Privy Council's authority!
All that I have just written, on Britain's Africa policy, above, is a summary of what has been documented in earlier reports by EIR. My subject here, is a different expression of this same British criminality, the monstrously perverted ideology, which London and its accomplices have constructed, in the attempt to motivate, and to appear, to the credulous, to justify what London's Privy Council, wittingly, pushes forward. This is a British ideology, which is, now, in the process of becoming the most monstrous mass-extermination of people in the known existence of the human species.
That Darwinist ideology is the madness which threatens such results, if it is not already in occupation of your neighbor's mind, as it lies within the perverted mind of Richard Dawkins.
The difference between now and then, seems to be, that, then, when Darwinist Hitler conducted his genocidal horror against millions of Jews and others, what Hitler did was called "eugenics." Now, it is called "bio-ethics," or, "sociobiology."(12) The difference between now and then, is that the scale of mass-murder is much wider, and the personal character of the proponents of "sociobiology," such as Dawkins, much more degraded than even that of Hitler's admirers.
In all this, the parallel to the relationship of Hitler to Rüdin, then, is conspicuous now. Dawkins' offense is a sign of the present times of kookish Lord William Rees-Mogg's London.
Just as today's putative new Hitler, Britain's Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, a former princeling of Greece's monarchy, is, globally, the highest-ranking figure behind this genocide,(13) perpetrator Dawkins had emerged, during the recent five years, as a rising figure within the Duke's propaganda-machine, one, at least, among "the new Rüdins." It is urgent, to be forewarned this time, to study the perverted minds of today's new Ernst Rüdins. So, it is urgent, now, to dissect the minds of such as neo-Darwinist Richard Dawkins, and his associates of today's "sociobiological" Malthusianism, as it was, then, to study such writings as Hitler's Mein Kampf, of "eugenicists" such as Darwinist Ernst Rüdin, and the deeds and writings of Dr. Josef Menegle, and of rabidly Nazi existentialists such as Freiburg Professor Martin Heidegger.(14)
It is the tainted state of mind, which is the father to the criminal deed.
Who In The Dickens Is Dawkins?
Did you know, before reading this, that the world-capital of lunacy today, is Buckingham Palace, London? Consider a few facts which anyone could know, who had taken the trouble to investigate the Dawkins case with suitable care.
If one knows the current British pride called the Royal Family, one knows why that family, and its Church of England hierarchy, is pushing, through the World Council of Churches, and other relevant channels, a genocidal form of paganism as its proposed world, "ecumenical" religion. However, to understand why supposedly civilized nations put up with such British pranks, is another matter. To understand how British society would have the shamelessness to put the perpetrator, professed atheist and Oxford Professor, Richard Dawkins, on public display, it is sufficient to know that the bottom of the British oligarchy's satanic depths of perversity, is something the like of which was not yet fully exposed, even in the worst aspects of war-time, Nazi-occupied Europe.
To understand why so many continental Europeans, and Americans, and perhaps your neighbor, too, tolerate such disgusting British displays, we must take a certain historical fact into account. On the latter account, to sum up the relevant ironies of the recent two centuries of European civilization, the pattern is, that the more the French pseudo-sciences of anthropology, sociology, psychology, and the Hobbesian, "deconstructionist," modern-language cult of written "text," have proliferated in the curricula of our universities, and within the increasingly irrational, positivist practice of U.S. criminal and civil law, the less educated people, everywhere, know about the human mind, and, the less is their ability to recognize the reasons why, they themselves, or their unsuspected neighbor, like the subway exhibitionist in the raincoat, will behave as they do.
"In the beginning was the deed," the Mephistopheles of Johann Goethe's Faust lied. In truth: In the beginning, was the mind, which was father to the deed. To understand Hitler's deeds, one must understand Ernst Rüdin's thoughts, and take note of those who, in the U.S.A. and Britain, as also in France and Germany, supported the kind of paganist existentialsm --that of Friedrich Nietzsche and Nazi Professor Martin Heidegger, for example-- which led the Hitler regime to transform Rüdin's devilish thoughts into satanic deeds. For, as Propaganda Minister Josef Goebbels emphasized, Hitler, like Professor Richard Dawkins, had he won World War II, intended to exterminate Christianity on this planet.(15) In the end, was the deed; in the beginning, was the mind.
Look at the minds of both the Queen's drone(16) and Professor Dawkins, to discover, there, what evil deeds such men of Dawkins' state of mind may do.
Formally, the continuing Nazi-like role of the Duke of Edinburgh is traced to his partnership with former Nazi-SS member Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands,(17) in founding both the World Wildlife Fund and its adjunct "1001 Club." This formed the cockroach-nest, from which spewed into the light of day, such proliferating crawlies as the 1963 education report of the Paris-based OECD organization of Britain's Dr. Alexander King, and King's subsequent launching, together with Lord Solly Zuckermann, and others, of both the Club of Rome and the Dzherman Gvishiani-led, Malthusian back-channel to Ivan Frolov's Moscow, the Laxenberg, Austria-based International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA). Today, that World Wildlife Fund, later renamed the "Worldwide Fund for Nature," is, like the Delphi cult of Gaea, Python-Dionysus, and Apollo, the mother-cult for a proliferating pantheon of direct offshoots and fellow-travellers of the same, axiomatically satanic assumptions.(18)
Notably, it was largely through the British Royal Family's key channel of underground connections into the U.S. "establishment," Canon Ed West's and Gregory Bateson's New York City Episcopal Cathedral of St. John the Divine, that the influences of Prince Philip's new paganism were inserted, as a paganist "ecology" cult, during 1969-1970, into the highly suggestible, labile opinion of that anarchist "far left," the U.S.A.'s "rock-drug-sex" youth-counterculture. This reflected the same quality of spread of criminal predisposition for "Clockwork Orange" deeds, infecting the same generations of Britons.
The pivotal feature of the Duke's spread of neo-paganism, is an assault focussed against no less than Britain's own King James Authorized Version of the Bible, most conspicuously. On that account, the most prominent issue repeatedly posed by the Duke and his international "ecology movement," is the passage, Genesis 1:26-28, commonly central to all Mosaic religious belief, that of Christianity and Islam included. All Christian and related constraints on the mind, and deed, were being weakened, even sundered by the Duke's ideological rampage.
Dawkins' putative father-figure, the Duke, added a strategic political dimension to his role as prophet of an Anti-Christ. Like Queen Victoria's Lord Palmerston, who was the co-author, with such as British Wall Street agent August Belmont,(19) of the Confederate States of America, the Duke has openly campaigned for the break-up of the United States, going so far in his effrontery as to affirm this view publicly in Washington, D.C., itself.(20)
This trend continues. Currently, since the June 1997 "Denver G-7 Meeting," the Duke's direct attack on the axiomatic right of his family's traditional enemy, the U.S.A. to exist, has been echoed by Britain's union-busting, Labour Party Prime Minister in motley, Tony Blair. Professed neo-Thatcherite "Tinny" Blair, has trumpeted the demand for a harsh shut-down of ten percent, or more of the already poverty-stricken economy of the U.S. At the time of that G-7 meeting, and since, Blair has attempted to bring the leading nations of continental Europe to join his lynch-mob attack on the United States, upon that, our republic, which stands for the moment as the only credible potential obstacle to the British Commonwealth's post-Soviet grab for total domination of the world's economic and political life.
Following a certain Byzantine tradition, the Duke's self-designated lackey, Dawkins, for his part, played Bishop Arius to the former Greek princeling's Pontifex Maximus. He, like virtually all the key ideologues of today's "ecology movement," is a Darwinist, an atheist, and a common peddler of pseudo-scientific hoaxes, all in the tradition of Thomas Huxley, and, of satanists Aldous and Julian Huxley, too.(21) Although Dawkins' doctrine on religion and related matters, is also readily shown to be a depraved extremity in the practice of pseudo-science, it represents an ideology of the type which is indispensable for luring today's formerly Christian civilization of western Europe and the Americas, into "bio-ethical" toleration of openly practised forms of systematic mass-murder, thus promoting openly the crimes which Hitler's myrmidons conducted in semi-secrecy, behind the heavily guarded walls of the Nazi regime's privatized prison-labor system.
The Prince Consort's paganism, and Dawkins' atheism, are to be recognized as two facets of the satanic coin. Can we believe, that the mind which is wont to murder millions, for the sake of a pagan religious belief, would balk at killing a mere few children?
The key to the crime, is the inevitable consequences for the cultures of Europe and the Americas, of a successful campaign to eradicate the tradition of Christianity from modern European civilization. Once we loose those constraints which are associated with the Mosaic principle, that the individual person is made in the image of God the Creator, all devils are unleashed. Butchery as public entertainment, as by decree of mephistophelean Associate Justice Antonin Scalia's U.S. Supreme Court, for example, or, evil on a smaller or larger scale, by private groups and individual perpetrators, becomes the order of the day. Such is the case of Dawkins. Such is the crime of that excessively influential Duke of Edinburgh, who did so much to make possible the Dawkinses of our present day.
Where lies the individual's responsible for authorship of a crime, and where does the accountability for control of that individual's motives (and, therefore, consequent actions) lie, otherwise, with some class of persons. I speak not of a class as a mere collection of many individuals. I speak of that type of class of such persons, the which functions as an agency, as if in and for itself, a class which thus represents an efficiently sovereign individuality, an agency, in imitation of the Roman pater familias, which compels, and acts through its influence over the mind-set of its individual members of its family?
Take the case of the murderous horde of camp-followers of Wallenstein's army; does the body of the crime lie within a few camp-followers, or is the criminality of such packs of simulated hyenas, a characteristic extension of that army itself? Who --or, what institution-- should be placed in the dock as co-defendent for Dawkins' crime? Who in the Dickens is Dawkins? Was his crime that of an Artful Dodger, or a Fagin? What was the crime of Ernst Rüdin, or of Averell Harriman's family, which, in 1932, publicly supported Rüdin's so-called "racial purification" dogma, and, then, assisted Britain's Montagu Norman, in bringing Adolf Hitler to power in Germany? Perhaps, the Prince Consort were the Fagin in Dawkins' case?
Why The Duke Hates Christianity
Christianity is now nearly two thousand years old. However, a Christian form of society, is slightly more than five hundred years old, dating from the establishment of the first approximation of a modern sovereign nation-state, that of France under King Louis XI (1461-1483), and, with qualification, the influence of Queen Isabella upon the monarchy of Spain. No political form of society, prior to the great ecumenical Council of Florence, the origin of Louis XI's recreated France, can be fairly described as Christian; all were viciously pagan expressions of the oligarchical, imperial form of law and society, dating from the evil that was the empires of ancient Mesopotamia.
The crux of this definition of political affairs, is the Christian's comprehension of the Mosaic conception of man and woman as made in the image of God the Creator, a creature made to exert dominion over all things within this universe. That image is not, of course, the bodily image of the mortal personality; it is the image of those mental-creative powers of the sovereign individual person, by means of which mankind increases the human species' power over this universe, per capita, per square kilometer of our Earth's surface, through such validated, revolutionary discoveries of physical and cognitive principle, as overturn, absolutely, all previously extant belief. It is this power of the sovereign individual mind, to change human nature, to higher states, and also to change the universe in manners more agreeable to changing human requirements.
In addition, Christianity introduced the universality of all persons, their equality before the Creator. On that account, individual human life became sacred under Christianity, as it had never been before. Yet, although Christianity has existed for nearly 2,000 years, a form of society fit for mankind has existed as an idea for practice, only since the great, Fifteenth-Century, "Golden Renaissance." This is the key to understanding the unconcealed, largely openly stated, evil intentions of the Duke's oligarchical class, the class which controls what may be euphemistically identified as his "mind and morality."
The outcome of that Fifteenth-Century change, wrought as the fruit of long, preceding struggle by Christianity, was the establishment of the principle, that the purpose for replacing the previously established feudal and other oligarchical forms, by a republican form of perfectly sovereign nation-state, was to shift the function of government from service to the ruling oligarchy, to providing each and all individual persons of the nation, the access to that opportunity for personal development, and for the useful expression of that development, by means of which the individual might have the opportunity to realize a permanent meaning for his, or her passage through mortal life, might realize a meaning for personal identity efficiently located within the more durable reality of the Creator's simultaneity of eternity.
Naturally, the enemies of Christianity, represented chiefly by both the feudal landowners and the financier oligarchy, sought to crush that new political form of society. This new form of society, as expressed embryonically in Louis XI's recreated France, we in the U.S.A. may rightly recognize, as the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., did, like President Abraham Lincoln before him, as Benjamin Franklin's Leibnizian intent, which underlies the original composition of our Federal Constitutional Republic. These enemies, rooted in the feudal landowning and financier classes, sought to kill the new form of society at birth. The initiator of that pro-feudalists' attempted infanticide, was the dominant maritime-financier power of Europe at that time, Venice.
Thus, the wars between France, on the one side, and Venice and allies and instruments, on the other, established the pattern which shaped the entirety of European civilization, from the time of the mid-Fifteenth-Century Council of Florence, until the present day. The betrayal of the anti-Venice alliance, the League of Cambrai, by a corrupt Pope Julius II, followed by Julius' inducing treacherous Spain to go over to alliance with Venice, against France, produced a stand-off which became the characteristic feature of the internal history of European civilization --both in Europe, and the Americas-- to the present time.
During the last phase of the war of the League of Cambrai, Venice launched a counter-offensive, breaking France from such crucial allies as the Papacy --which Venice dominated throughout the following decades of that century, and from Spain, and Tudor England. At the same time, Venice pitted those it had turned against France, against one another, as witnessed in Venice's capture of the mentally unbalanced King Henry VIII of England, in the fate of foolish King Philip II's Spanish Armada, and in the self-immolation of Sixteenth-Century Spain in its bloody, lunatic adventures in the Netherlands. "Divide and conquer"--sometimes called "balance of power" politics-- became the watchword of Venetian, Netherlands, and later British strategic doctrine, ever since, down to the present moment.
During the course of that Sixteenth Century, the struggle between republican and oligarchical forces, was hewn into the shape it would assume beyond the middle of the Seventeenth Century, up to the present moment.
During the last decades of that century, a differentiated faction emerged as the majority power within Venice. This was the feudalist Tweedledee called Case Nuove, to distinguish it from the opposing Venice-controlled faction, the feudalist Tweedledum called Case Vecchie. The majority faction, headed by Ockham follower, and atheist, Paolo Sarpi, entered into a pact with such creatures as England's Cecils, to the stated purpose of creating a clone of Venice, as a new, great imperial maritime-financier power, in the so-called "Protestant" north of Europe. This pact established what was to emerge, beginning 1688-1714, as a new Anglo-Dutch imperial power, the "New Venice," to supersede the old Venice which the League of Cambrai had shown to be situated in a place of strategic vulnerability, at the north of the Adriatic.
A glance at the population and demographic charts for known human pre-historical and historical times, points to the nature of the stand-off between republican and oligarchical factions of the recent four to five centuries.
From the time of the establishing of the Roman Empire, until the Fifteenth Century, the human population of this planet had never broken through a ceiling seemingly fixed --as if by the Malthusian Code of Diocletian-- at several hundred millions living individuals. From the time of the Golden Renaissance, including, prominently, the preparation of Louis XI's France, the potential relative population-density, and demographic characteristic of populations improved spectacularly, reaching the level of more five billions today. Despite all of the evils perpetrated by Europe during this period (e.g., African slave-trade, British genocide through famines in India, British imperial genocide through drug-trafficking into China), until about thirty years ago, the net impact of modern European nation-state culture upon the world outside Europe and North America, was to foster the greatest rate of net improvement in the general human condition in all known or inferrable human existence.
The essence of the matter lies in the political principles of the new republican form of sovereign nation-state based upon Christian principle. The practical expression of this benefit can be summed up in four terms: state-directed development of basic economic infrastructure; growing commitments toward establishing a truly universalized public education for all young; growing commitments to scientific and technological progress; and, the responsibility of the form of constitutional sovereign nation-state republic for guaranteeing those natural rights of the individual which are owing to a creature made in the image of the Creator.
This change meant that the new form of nation-state fostered rates of realized advances in science and technology far beyond anything which could be acccomplished by an oligarchical society. Thus, the nation-state was inherently superior in its economic and warfare potential to any oligarchical state. Thus, it might be defeated --temporarily, but it remained too powerful to be simply exterminated on the field of battle.
For the longer term, the emergence of the sovereign nation-state spelled the threatened doom of the feudal system, especially the power of the land-owning aristocracy. The financier oligarchy proved wittier than the brutishly slow-witted feudal serf-masters of Europe. Over the centuries, the neo-Venetian, Anglo-Dutch maritime-financier oligarchy played continental Europe against itself. Especially after 1848, the feudal landowning class was afforded the opportunity of becoming either museum-pieces, or being assmilated into the ranks of the financier oligarchy. Out of this emerged dotty Queen Victoria's Nineteenth-Century British Empire, and two World Wars, the first of which neo-Venetian London caused, he second of which it promoted, in the attempt to secure the Anglo-Dutch-centered financier oligarchy's virtually absolute power over the world as a whole.
The United Kingdom was never a nation; since its establishment, with the accession of George I, it always was, and is an empire, now called the British Commonwealth. That Commonwealth is ruled through the British Privy Council, a body which is a special administrative agency for a British imperial monarchy, which functions in the capacity of an hereditary Venetian, financier-oligarchical Doge-ship. The United Kingdom itself, is today what Jonathan Swift saw it during the years of King George I, as a land of the Houyhnhnms, where, now as then, the subjects, like the infamous, pro-satanic Beatles, may be described as degraded to the rank of Yahoos.
Since the 1814-1815 Congress of Vienna, the crucial features of world history under this stand-off, are, the leading role of the United States --periodically-- in cooperation with its traditional allies of the middle to late Nineteenth Century [in chronological order: Russia, Germany, and Japan], in fostering high rates of scientific and technological progress. On this account, the United States' strategic policy against our avowed mortal adversary, the British monarchy, was an echo of the strategic doctrine which France's foolish Louis XIV had been wiser to have accepted from his Minister Jean-Baptiste Colbert: to defeat the Anglo-Dutch enemy in the domain of physical-economic, technological growth, rather than being lured into foolish, ulcerating, ruinous, cabinet warfare. Otherwise, during the present Century to date, no nation on this planet, has enjoyed net physical-economic growth except under the conditions of either preparation for, or conduct of major warfare.
As the Anglo-Dutch financier oligarchy has spread its tentacles deep into places such as the U.S.A.'s Wall Street, the predatory, arachnoid monetarism of the financier-oligarchical parasite class, sucks so much juice from its victim, the physical economy, that no net economic growth, or perhaps very little, can occur. Until the U.S. developments of 1962-1963, the exception had been times of war, or preparation for general warfare, when national security interest demanded that the Wall Street parasites be kept somewhat in check, so that the economy might be permitted to supply a credible economic basis for national defense. This has been more or less as characteristic of the post-1917 history of the Soviet Union, as of the U.S.A. and western continental Europe.
The fact, that the twin impact of the 1962 missiles crisis and 1963 Kennedy assassination, had virtually assured inalterable commitment of both the U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. to a "process of detente," meant that the oligarchical class could now proceed to rid itself of that unwanted encumbrance, its ancient enemy, as represented by the factions which represented the forces for scientific and technological progress in physical economy.
This change, this oligarchical gobbling-up of its ancient adversary, could not be accomplished all at once. At a minimum, a generation must pass, until the late 1980s, or early to middle 1990s, before such a radical change in the course of history could be set fully into motion. The generations in the two upper ranks of leading institutions of Europe, North America, and elsewhere, would not tolerate so sudden a reversal in operating cultural paradigms as the British-led oligarchy demanded. Let age cull the flock: a generation must pass, until those corruptible youth entering university during the late 1960s, had passed upward, through the institutions of power, into the topmost positions in government, finance, industry, education, churches, and elsewhere. In the meantime, the oligarchy worked to condition, mold, and select that 1960s and early 1970s crop of university graduates, to ensure, that, predominantly, all who rise to the top in sundry branches of public and private life, will be conditioned to look at the world in ways which the Duke of Edinburgh and his ilk will consider useful. On this account, London is frantically engaged in attempting to cull its lately detected error of omission, a U.S. President Bill Clinton, from that 1960s "Baby Boomer" herd.
In order to eliminate what the Venetian tradition wishes to bury forever, the republican spirit, it must also destroy that which gave birth and continuing inspiration to republicanism, Christianity.
This means reverting to the feudal policy of keeping the general population stupid, and stupefied, a goal brought much closer by the destructive characteristics of all educational reforms in curriculum introduced during the present century of Europe and the Americas. The Anglo-Dutch Houynhnms will not sleep peacefully, until that which they deem the inferior classes, is fully reduced to the qualities found desirable in constantly rutting Yahoos. It means that the technological population-potential of this planet will be collapsed, rapidly toward world-populations of the period from the beginning of the Roman Empire through to Europe's Fourteenth Century "New Dark Age."
It means hecatombs of homicidal madness like those practised by the forces of Yoweri Museveni and Laurent Kabila in Africa. It means nightmares of famine, disease, and lunatic homicide in all its potential varieties. It means Walpurgis Night the world over, until every existing national border has vanished from the map of the world, and the population has settled to level as low as mere tens of millions of brutish survivors of the worst holocaust of famine and disease ever imagined. It is Social Darwinism at the outermost extreme.
The Christian imperative, demands that the policy of society be subordinated, axiomatically, to the specifications implied by Genesis 1:26-28. These imperatives could not be realized, without eradicating everything which the Duke of Edinburgh and his ecologist-paganist lackeys demand. It requires the full restoration of the principles of the Golden Renaissance, of the principles of the modern sovereign form of nation-state committed to scientific and technological progress. It means the end to the toleration of the financier-oligarchical practice of usury in any form.
How To Free a Brainwashed Generation
To understand the inner dynamic of politics of the U.S.A. today, one must take into account the two leading experiences which impacted that generation of "Baby Boomers" which is now in reach of completing its occupation of nearly all the highest positions of power in public and private life. It must be said of most representatives of this social stratum: like the subway exhibitionist in the raincoat, they have shown very little insight into the origin of those impulses which fatefully, perhaps tragically, predetermine this stratum's own, collective behavior. This is the fact from which one must begin, to understand how the dirty Duke's mob is able to control so much of the top-down political behavior of the governments of Europe --including the former Soviet bloc-- and the Americas today.
To free itself from the shackles of self-imposed doom which now control it, this presently hegemonic stratum from the post-war generation, must know, first, that it is wearing such shackles, and that it is possible, not to put those shackles upon itself when it awakens each next morning.
The first blow to strike the U.S.A.'s so-called "Baby Boomer" generation, occurred either shortly before, or not many years after each of its representatives was born. (Analogous processes ruled in Europe and throughout Central and South America.) That blow was called "President Harry Truman." The second decisive catastrophe, was a combination of events, during the early through middle 1960s: the 1962 missiles crisis; the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and, later, his brother Robert; the Vietnam War; and, the asssassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. It was the combination of the indirect impact, which the "Baby Boomer" generation suffered from the former, and the direct impact of the latter events of the 1960s, which reduced the majority among the university-student populations of the middle to late 1960s, into a "shell-shock"-like mental state, of acutely heightened state of lability, of suggestibility, which made possible the induced cultural-paradigm shift adopted by the overwhelming majority among them.
To understand the way in which the dirty Duke has been permitted to conduct his scalawaggery, the two blows to which I have just referred, must be situated historically, as follows.
During, and for several decades following the phased destruction of France, by the Franco-British Treaty of 1783, the 1789-1794 ascent to dictatorial power of the Duke of Orleans and Robespierre's Jacobins, and the 1814 Congress of Vienna, the United States was alone in the world, a small nation on these North Atlantic shores, with no significant allies abroad. As outgoing President George Washington warned against seeking alliances among the the then-existing European powers, our government was the only representative of freedom still in power at that time, in any part of this planet. As Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, more than two decades later, warned President James Monroe, the United States shared no community of principle, either with Foreign Minister Canning's British Empire, or the continental European members of Prince Metternich's (un)Holy Alliance.
Nonetheless, our republic survived. Our survival, and the influence of the Franklin-Hamilton-Carey model, the "American System of political-economy," became the rallying-point for all patriots of Europe, and elsewhere, against the financier-oligarchical evil of the British "free trade" system. Under the leadership of President Abraham Lincoln, the promise of our 1789 new-born constitutional republic was restored; the U.S.A. became, and remained for a while, the world's leading military and economic power, technologically the most advanced anywhere on this planet. This success continued into the late 1870s, despite the corrosive, 1873-1907 effects wrought by British spy August Belmont's Wall Street-controlled Democratic Party, corrosive effects, centered in that treasonous U.S. Specie Resumption Act, which plunged us into a series of artificially induced, deep economic depressions, from 1873 onward.
The list of our immediate allies during that period of our world leadership in economy, featured Czar Alexander II of Russia, who had acted to prevent our enemies, Britain, France, and Spain, from destroying us during our Civil War. It also featured those political and scientific factions in Germany, which were associated with the tradition of Friedrich Schiller; with Schiller's students and collaborators, the von Humboldt brothers; and, with the scientific circles associated with both Carl F. Gauss and Alexander von Humboldt. We had provided our friend, Japan, the secrets of the American System of political-economy, upon which Japan's economic potential continues to depend, hereditarily, to the present day. We had sponsored the emergence of a new, patriotic movement for freeing China from the grip of British imperialism, a movement led by our friend, Dr. Sun Yat Sen. Meanwhile, our former enemy, Napoleon III's France, had been replaced, after events of 1870, by republican currents not unfriendly to the common aims of the U.S.A. and Czar Alexander II.
Then, just as Venice had acted, following its rescue by a corrupted Pope Julius II, and by Spain's treachery, to divide the former members of the League of Cambrai against one another, so Britain acted under the leadership of the son of dotty old Queen Victoria, the Prince of Wales and later King Edward VII. The name of the game was "geopolitics;" the substance was to put the U.S. allies of the Eurasian continent against one another's throat, a process launched by bringing back to power in France, in 1898, an assortment of the worst, pro-British, legitimist, Bonapartist, and other scum of France's national political life. The result, created entirely by the British Empire, was called World War I.(22) At the close of that war, foolish France was bled almost to death, Germany in a similar state, Russia seemingly destroyed, Japan in the pocket of the British empire, and, China torn, seemingly without end, by London-orchestrated internal strife.
Meanwhile, the dominant role of our patriotic tradition, which had dominated the U.S.A. since Lincoln, was superseded, through the assassination of patriotic President William McKinley, by a terrorist assassination deployed under the cover of a British nest of scoundrels led by professed "tyrannicide" Emma Goldman, and based at her Henry Street Settlement House. An evil spawn of the Confederacy, raving Anglophile Teddy Roosevelt, became President, and, not long after, a spawn and backer of the Ku Klux Klan, President Woodrow Wilson. That Roosevelt, together with the Wilson who revived the Ku Klu Klan, personally, from the White House, switched the U.S.A. from its traditional, anti-British allies, Russia and Germany, to an alliance with our mortal adversary, the British Empire.
There were still many patriots among my own generation, into and beyond World War II, patriots who despised what they, like President Franklin Roosevelt, knew our mortal adversary, the British Empire, to represent. Unfortunately, far more than ninety percent of my generation, the parents of the "Baby Boomers," turned morally rotten, as a result of the impact of our return from war, not to a Roosevelt, but a Truman administration.
What President Truman represented, throughout, from his 1945 inauguration, until the inauguration of President Eisenhower, was the direct opposite of Franklin Roosevelt on most of the crucial issues of national policy, especially economic and foreign policy. Most of us returning from war, sensed ourselves, and our nation, betrayed by the arrangements made among Truman, Winston Churchill, and Britain's Clement Atlee. For most among us, Truman (read Harriman's, Kuhn-Loeb's, and Morgan's "Wall Street") had, with no necessity for doing so, returned us to a 1946-1948 renewal of the 1930s Great Depression, just as, in fact, the Wilson administration (read Morgan's and Jacob Schiff's "Wall Street") had willfully plunged the U.S.A. into an unnecessary, deep depression, at the close of World War I. At the same time, in 1946, we were told that we were at the verge of a new world war, this time against our war-time ally, the Soviet Union.
Under these conditions, the overwhelming majority of my generation went crazy. Later, the syndrome was called "McCarthyism." Those of us who were less easily swayed by gossip, knew that it was always really "Trumanism." It was a time, of "Do nothing to get into trouble; do nothing which might worry our friends; do nothing which might jeopardize our family's economic security...." It was a time to be "politically correct." It was a time to teach the immorality of prudence to one's children, and to be certain that the neighbors and others would never observe us rearing our children in any way which was not considered a fashionable, if passing fad, in such neighborhoods, at such times.
This was expressed in university and professional populations from my generation, by a phenomenon which Jena university's Professor Friedrich Schiller had identified, during the 1790s, as the Brotgelehrte, a term which I think Schiller would agree, were best translated, freely, into our contemporary English, as "those who sing to earn their supper, not for the benefit of music." Few studied to know science, for example, but merely to learn it; most were in a hurry to secure employment on the pretext of nominal qualifications for such, relatively well-paid, employable pretenses. Similar moods permeated the non-professional strata among the rest of my generation's employees, and their wives.
Once the salty tyranny of Trumanism had been superseded by more flexible moods of the 1950s "Eisenhoweverism," the result of this corruption among my generation, took the form sometimes described with justified cruelty, as "the Organization Man."
In that fashion, those parents misguided their children into the 1960s. Now, put yourself into the mind of such an adolescent, confronted, successively, by the developments to which I have assigned the role of the second shock. Many of you are from that generation, but few of those know, then, or now, what really happened to their own, young mind, on the way to their future mid-life-crises, and similar benefits of contemporary adult life. Most among them are so pleased with the explanation they have adopted to explain away all those experiences, that they would prefer not to be annoyed with the truth.
Look back at the historical perspective I have summarized just above; to assist you in developing your own perspective, I summarize my own experience in relationship to the maternal side of my ancestry.
The oldest living relative I recall meeting, was from my great-grandparents' generation. My maternal relatives' principal locale, Woodbury, Ohio, was named for a great-grandparent, he the chief figure brought back to life by anecdotes at my grandparents' family table, one Daniel Wood, a Quaker abolitionist chased from his native Carolinas, a born contemporary of Abraham Lincoln, an associate of the Whig circles of Henry Clay, and, the chief operator of an "underground railway station," on the route to Canada, north of Columbus. This indicates, that my family nurture, reaches back in terms of such recalled experience, to near a point, as had my birth occurred at the beginning of the Nineteenth Century. This is now the closing decade of the Twentieth Century: an experience of nearly two centuries. I compare my own experience with that of those African-Americans, who recall grandparents, like the escaped slaves aided by Daniel Wood, whose lives dated, from a time of slavery before Abraham Lincoln's Presidency.
The first step toward competence in study of history, is to recognize those kinds of cultural transmission, the which, reaching back centuries, are embedded, in some way, within ourselves, today. Just as many among us, each probably has conscious recollection of some experienced breaks with our parents, and other forebears, respecting some axiomatic features of judgment, culture is the history of such blendings of mixed tradition, and breaks with traditional axioms. Thus, history proceeds.
It is only when we understand ourselves historically, in that way, that we actually know ourselves. Unless we understand ourselves, so, how could we ever account for the reasons we behave as we do, or, how might we change our axiomatic assumptions, in order to free ourselves from the "Hamlet-like" grip of acquired traditions whose continued influence would destroy us? It is only when we apply a Socratic passion for truth-seeking, to judging which of our forebears', or our own choices of axiomatic assumptions are true, and which false, that we know anything about anything, either the history of the past, or the present as current history, or even who we ourselves might be, or what good, given our present beliefs, we might be to ourselves, or to anyone else.
In the main, the campus "Baby Boomer" generation, as I observed them from a most advantageous position, during the middle to late 1960s, were extremely uncritical in the way they adopted new axiomatic qualities of assumptions, or, simply new fads, one, rapidly, after the other, during those and later years. I was reminded often, then, of the time of the celebrated Berlin "trolley-car strike" of the early 1930s, shortly before Hitler came to power, when the Communist Party and the Nazi Party's Sturmabteilung were swapping large chunks of their respective memberships back-and-forth. That, in Berlin, expressed a degree of lability, which had been extruded under conditions of stress analogous to those which produced the student ferment around the Anti-War movement of the middle to late 1960s. Anyone who had studied, and understood the Nazi and Italian fascist insurgencies, as I had, recognized the Ford Foundation-funded, self-styled "SDS Crazies" of 1968, as indistinguishable in characteristic features from Mussolini's squadristi or Gregor Strasser's Nazi Jugendbewegung.
In general, although these university students were to be classed as "bright," usually "quick-witted," and so on, they seemed, at first glance, to be shallow-minded in their cognitive powers, this almost in direct proportion to the apparent impassionment of their expressed belief. Generally speaking, the so-called "Maoists" rivalled the local imitations of the French Situationists in the manifest separation of both word and deed from intellect. The shallowness, as typified by those I observed, closely and directly, who became the hard-core of the "Weatherman" terrorist cadre, was a want of the ability to develop genuine moral commitment, a moral shallowness which I recognized immediately as acquired from their parental households and peer groups of the 1950s. They were seeking a literary pretense for passion, to match the intensity of their purely irrational fears and hatreds. Numerous such cases suggested a Hermann Hesse's Steppenwolf, expressing his purblind, feral hatred toward society in general, by masturbating publicly, so to speak, on the campus equivalent of the Village Square.
Hence, the pervasive pseudo-intellectuality of their political and related opinions. They were not passionate about ideas, in the sense a budding true scientist is; they were seeking ideas as costumes with which to adorn --perhaps "Adorno"(23)-- their naked, irrational, existentialist passions. Ideas were not the fruit of cognitive commitment; as for Heidegger's prospective recruit to the Nazi Party, these university populations had been "thrown" into the ideas they adopted during this period of their greatly heightened lability and suggestibility. For them, ideas were things which "they let happen." Not, "What's the truth?" but, "Hey, man, what's happening?"
Both the first and second of the two shocks were evident in this behavior. The second shock, produced the "shell-shocked" state of lability, suggestibility, without which the spread of the "New Left" and related "New Age" ideologies could not have been induced within the 1960s "Baby Boomers." The Truman era's turn from morality, to the safety of amoral "political correctness," to the truth-hating immorality blended of populism and pragmatism, had deprived the '68ers of that childhood and adolescent development of moral structure in personal character, which might have helped more than the relative handful among them who did find a mooring in Reason, to resist the induced "New Age" ideology, at some time during the recent thirty-odd years.
Thus, among a majority of those labile, suggestible, confused campus youth, including many who were not active in the streets during that time, the dirty Duke's lackeys, such as the most unwholesome, self-anointed priestess of Isis, Dame Margaret Mead, recruited the constituency for what the London Tavistock Clinic and Institute classed as a "cultural paradigm-shift."
It is this cultural paradigm-shift, presently ensconced in a so-called "mainstream" majority among the top-most executive and related positions of public and private life, which is destroying this civilization from within. This stratum within those positions, typifies the shift in axiomatic cultural values, which made the crime of Richard Dawkins possible.
Could the "Baby Boomer" free himself, or herself, from the grip of such monstrous insanity? Certainly, it is possible. However, there is only one way in which it might be brought about in time to save this civilization from its self-induced doom.
The clue to such a happy alternative can be found in the unfavorable comparison which American "Baby Boomers" suffer, and to some significant degree the members of my own, and my parents', earlier generations, when measured against the moral and cultural standard of Germans educated under the pre-Chancellor Willy Brandt, Classical Humanist rigor of the Humboldt educational reforms.(24) That difference boils down to this: the German who met the Schiller-Humboldt standard of Humboldt's educational reforms, knew his subject-matter. The American who had the relative misfortune to be educated under the influence upon education of William James' and John Dewey's anti-rational American pragmatism, rarely knew his subject-matter; he, or she had merely learned (chiefly) to borrow opinions concerning the subject-matter, as "mainstream" Americans presently borrow their opinions of the day from the morning newspaper, or television and radio programming: from "following the news," like the man with the cart and shovel following the circus elephants.
Schiller and Wilhelm von Humboldt did not exaggerate, when they insisted, that the specific superiority of their proposed educational reform, was that it assigned to education the function of developing the moral character of the future citizen. To anyone in the Platonic tradition upon which Christianity and the successes of modern civilization rely, there is nothing arbitrary in that claim.
As I have belabored this matter for the past four and a half decades of my adult life, and addressed this often in some fine detail in print, the quality which defines the individual as "made in the image of the Creator," is those developable, sovereign cognitive processes of the individual person's mind, by means of which we may replicate, as in a Classical Humanist mode of education, the original act of discovery of a validated principle, one originally discovered decades, or centuries before the student's time. This is the same principle, by means of which mankind generates new valid discoveries of principles, through the sovereign cognitive processes of individual members of society. Here, the Christian recognizes the agapic quality demanded by the Apostle Paul's celebrated I Corinthians 13, that quality which is the individual person in the living image of the Creator.
Classical Humanist programs represent the form of education, which walks the student through the experience of reliving, as exactly as possible, the original act of discovery, within the sovereign cognitive processes of an original discoverer. This is more or less indispensable, to enable students to locate their personal identity as a thinking being, and to locate this efficiently, and rationally, not only within historical humanity, and its future, as a whole. This is key to equipping that student to locate his essential identity, in the simultaneity of eternity. Those who merely learn from classroom and textbook, as dogs learn to do tricks, lack that moral sense of themselves.
Whenever one meets an unfortunate, "Get out of my face!" person, who objects to placing devotion to truth-seeking above deference to mere opinions, we have met a person crippled in the structure of his developed moral and intellectual character. Such was the characteristic vulnerability which that slavering Mephistopheles, the dirty Duke, and his ilk, found as their lawful prey, among the majority of the university student population of the middle to late 1960s.
There could be no hope for the continuation of civilization, without acting upon the matter as I have just defined it here. How does one turn such an addled mind, as that of one among those "Baby Boomers" now ensconced in leading posts, back to sanity, and that before it is too late to do so? The answer is, to turn to Classical Humanist principles of reeducation, the same principles by means of which validated new discoveries of physical principles make sweeping revolutions in science, and the general human practice flowing from science.
The fact is, that the world is gripped by the onrush of the most devastating financial, monetary, and economic crisis in all known history of mankind. This crisis is caused by the cultural paradigm-shift which took over the policy-shaping trends of the planet during the middle to late 1960s. If the brunt of this crisis, as undeniable fact, is presented in direct contrast to the prevailing beliefs which have caused this debacle, the mind so perplexed by that juxtaposition, is forced, as the mind of any scientific discoverer is forced, to break free of present, axiomatic habits of belief, to make a revolution in belief.
Look closely at the fraudulent claims, by many in government and elsewhere, the claims that the economy is growing, although, some admit, the inequity of the economy is also growing. The economy is not growing. As measured in physical-economic market-baskets, the U.S. economy, in particular, has been contracting at a rate in excess of two percent per year, each year, since 1970. On what basis, apart from the now customary practice of simply making up statistics to fit the purposes of propaganda, do these "Baby Boomers" in leading positions of public and private life, insist that black is white, and white is, at the same time, purple?
The answer to that question is simple. They design their yardstick to fit their cloth. They measure performance in the economy in the utilitarian terms of the radical empiricist, such as economists John Stuart Mill, William Jevons, systems analysis' John von Neumann, and the marginal utilitarians generally. They measure success in an economy by the increase in those cultural changes which please them, and the desired decrease of those past cultural standards which displease them.
What displeases them is government investment in improvement and maintenance of basic economic infrastructure. What pleases them is the closing down of relatively high-paying employment in industrial and agricultural scientific and and technological progress. What pleases them is a shift in household income, from one to one-and-a-half relatively skilled, well-paying jobs, to three, four or even more full- and part-time, very poorly paying jobs. And, so on.
This may be summarized as another case of a society plunging into the depths of a positive-feedback loop. The worse things become, the more what they dislike is eliminated. What they dislike is that on which the physical-economic existence of the society depends. The more they are pleased, the worse things have become. They call this progress, and work to continue the process. Sane men and women, call it doom. Hence, the appearance of the "positive feed-back loop." Hence, while men and women of such perverse, New Age opinions reign, civilization is inevitably doomed.
Thus, that great crisis, which is now bankrupting every part of this world, preparing to pop and burn all presently popular, paper financial and monetary fantasies, comes as a great blessing. For, nothing less than something so violent, so awesomely devastating to generally accepted, lunatic opinion about economy as those delusions prevailing in the Heritage Foundation's neo-conservative madhouse today, could provoke the tradition-sodden minds of today's incumbent leaderships, to return to reality, at last.
We could not simply return to the policies of the early 1960s, when John F. Kennedy was President, when Charles DeGaulle was President of France, and Konrad Adenauer the Chancellor of Germany. The Tavistockian cultural-paradigm shift of the middle to late 1960s, overturned the uneasy balance, the stand-off between republican and oligarchical forces, which had been the overall characteristic of history during the preceding four-hundred-fifty- odd years. The only available alternative, is to eradicate the power of the oligarchical faction altogether.
Thus, all mankind stands before the greatest moment in the history of mankind, certainly the greatest moment in the past two thousand years. Either we purge this planet of the presently hegemonic ideology of the presently reigning "free trade," and "New Age" cults, or the entire planet will continue its present plunge into the worst planetary Dark Age in all presently known human existence. Beside that apocalyptic choice, no different issue could be considered of significant importance, by any sane human being.
On the other side, stands the dirty Duke, and his Dawkins. Christopher Marlowe, Will Shakespeare's friend, and the playwright of Dr. Faustus, would have understood Mephistopheles Philip and his bargain-basement Faust, Dawkins. Let us consider thus the crime of dirty Dawkins himself.
The Crime of Dirty Dawkins
Dawkins is a Fagin. He conducts a school for mass-murderers; he is a present-day Ernst Rüdin of crime, if not yet a Dr. Mengele. This Fagin's victims are already countless; unless he is stopped, there will be many more. From the first, he was clearly a suspect; to prove the connection is what took the work. In the end, the clues led to a simple solution; the work was getting there. Here is how I uncovered his crime.
Here, at the outset, I emphasized Poe's Dupin principle, that seemingly obscure clues sometimes lead to solving a major crime. Two typical cases of validated discoveries of fundamental physical principle, illustrate the nature of the clue which, five years ago, first warned me that Oxford's Richard Dawkins would probably turn out to be an important criminal.
The two examples of such methods of detection, are familiar to the reader of the published output of my collaborators and myself. The first, is the measurement, by Archimedes' contemporary and correspondent, Eratosthenes, of the circumference of the Earth's polar meridian, during the Third Century B.C.(25) The second, is Carl Gauss collaborator Wilhelm Weber's experimental proof of the Ampere-Weber "angular force" principle of electrodynamics, using the same method of discovery and proof employed, more than 2,000 years earlier, by the Platonic Academy's Eratosthenes.(26) In both cases, the clue which led to the discovery of a universal principle of nature, was very small in magnitude. So, was the crucial clue in the Dawkins case. The cases are not merely analogous; the principle of scientific discovery, is the principle of individual cognition upon which the generation, and replication of all valid original discovery of principle depends.
Against the background of my extant published work on these topics, the following summary of the method of investigation should be sufficient.
By constructing an astrophysical, geodetic experiment which tested the assumption that the Earth is flat, Eratosthenes proved, that at every infinitesimal distance, in any direction of the compass, from any point on the Earth's surface, there is a very small, infinitesimal, bending, indicating a downward change in direction. This virtually infinitesimal clue, required that the number of dimensions employed to measure action on the Earth's surface, must be increased from the two dimensions of a plane surface, to the three dimensions of the surface of a spheroid. Weber understood the experimental evidence of an electrodynamical "angular force" in the work of the Monge Ecole Polytechnique's A.-M. Ampere, to be attributable to the determination of magnetism on what we recognize in this century as the atomic scale. Weber constructed experimental designs, on the macrophysical scale, to test this assumption of principle respecting events on the microphysical (e.g., atomic) scale. In fact, this proved to be the first functional breakthrough in defining scale for the atomic domain.
All of this success was based on very tiny, Gaussian clues, all clues usually overlooked, or willfully ignored, by less successful investigators.
The principle represented by both the cited Eratosthenes and Weber experiments, was that perfected by Carl F. Gauss's development and application of biquadratic residues to the experimental domains of astrophysics, geodesy, and geomagnetism. In the course of this work in physics, Gauss developed a general theory of curved surfaces. This tradition, as polished by Gauss's contributions, provided the largest component in the foundations of the argument which Bernhard Riemann presented in his 1854 habilitation dissertation.(27)
Of crucial relevance for us here, is the fact that, to this aspect of his habilitation dissertation, Riemann added one additional point, his developed views on the implications, for both physics and mathematics, of the cognitive processes by means of which discoveries of physical principle are generated. This, as those familiar with my life's work already know, is the feature of Riemann's work which I had integrated into my own discoveries, beginning 1952. That usually overlooked feature of his work, on which my own discoveries placed the emphasis, is the recognition that Riemann's habilitation dissertation reflects Riemann's elsewhere stated, Classically Platonic views on the principled form in which ideas generated by the cognitive processes, are representable in the domains of physics and mathematics.(28) It is that feature of the Platonic method of science, which bears directly upon the case of Dawkins.
The relevant general implication of Riemann's 1854 discovery, is, that each time we discover a principle which corrects a flaw in our previously established scientific belief, we change the entire nature of our belief, by the way in which that added principle must, thereafter, be taken into account. Thus, as in the referenced cases of discoveries by Eratosthenes and Weber, the small clues which led to overturning our previously established beliefs, force us to redefine the former subjects of our investigations, and that in a sweeping way. In exactly that sense, and that fashion, the relevant, eccentric features of Dawkins' views on biology, should force us to look at Dawkins, not simply as a zoologist trained in biology, but at the real "Mr. Hyde," behind the mask of Dawkins' play-acting of the part of "Dr. Jekyll."
It is conventionally assumed, that as politics, according to atheist Thomas Jefferson,(29) should be ruled by separation of "church from state," so, "science from theology." The latter presumption might be restated: "Opinions about theological matters, are not to intrude upon the contemporary science curriculum." Such shibboleths are, factually, nonsense. Without Christianity, the sovreign nation-state, including our own Federal constitutional republic, could never have come into existence; the person who attempts to explain the 1789 U.S. Constitution, for example, from the standpoint of excluding religion from politics, exhibits himself as a fool, a bungler, or, simply, a hoaxster. The person who insists that science must positively exclude the existence of God, as Dawkins did, is doubly a fool, or worse.
While pretending, as loudly as he might, to push theology out of science, Dawkins has, in fact, efficiently located all of that which he asserts as "science," within the bounds of a classically Christian subject, the Platonic ontological proof of the existence of God. The radical-positivist extreme of Dawkins' update of Social Darwinism, which he insists is science, turns out to be nothing better than a ranting illiterate's essay in bad theology.
On the latter point, we might say, that the more the perpetrator thought he had executed the design for a perfect crime, the more precisely he autographed his spoor with the hallmark of his design. Just so, the clever bug, Dawkins, placed himself under the microscope of the relevant entomologist, my microscope. This was no common bug; it is a creature which runs a school for mass-murderers. Other relevant facts were noted, but all converged on the same result: "Bugsy" Dawkins' Fagin-like character.
Dawkins' defenders will plead, "He was only speaking in his professional capacity." The evidence says differently.(30) So was Hitler's Ernst Rüdin, a professional psychiatrist; the Hjalmar Horace Greeley Schacht who put Hitler into power (with the backing of Britain's Montagu Norman and banker Averell Harriman), was a Brooklyn, N.Y.-born professional in banking, whose father had made his career as agent for Wall Street's House of Morgan; Mengele, like the wicked Dr. Francois Quesnay before him, was a physician. Put aside the Aristotelean claptrap of "professional objectivity," supplied by Dawkins' defenders; Riemann's principle aids us in defining his true profession. Consider the expectable populist reading of Dawkins' case. Depart the relatively less inelegant sophistries of Aristotle, to consider briefly the street-corner variety of populist argument: "You are wrong. Professor Dawkins' views on religion have nothing to do with his competence as a zoologist!"
No, my dear populist critic: it is you who are wrong. Dawkins himself insists, absolutely, that his views on religion are integral, and most pervasively so, to the entirety of his professional practice and knowledge of biology in general, and zoology more narrowly. Thus, Dawkins himself stakes his life's work in biology, on the wager, that, if his views on religion are wrong, then everything he says about the putative professional topics of biology and zoology, is also wrong.
Then comes the populist's last, desperate rejoinder: "No. You are wrong. Dawkins has a right to his own opinion on the subject of religion."
"Then, dear populist, do you award this exemption merely to British atheists, or, would you extend the same courtesy to the Thugee cult of British-occupied India? Or, perhaps, do you decree a distinction between those opinions whose right to be respected, you defend, and the right of the believer of those opinions to act upon his belief? If a man shall not act upon his belief, upon what basis do you recommend that he shall he choose to act?
"Besides, since Dawkins is a very radical sort of Social Darwinist, his religious belief might represent a mortal danger to the existence of you, or any among your circle of friends and immediate family. Do you not see, with that bloody contingency in view, that Dawkins appears to influence the policy of a British establishment which is not loathe to mass-murder, as its ongoing holocaust in Africa shows? Therefore, should you not examine the axiomatic premises, and implications of Dawkins' religious beliefs a bit more closely, before you so recklessly endorse what you allege to be his right to possess, and act upon such premises?
"In any case, your argument is arbitrary, and utterly irrational. You simply assert your shibboleth, with no rational evidence to support it. Like many who follow today's mindless fashion in street-corner liberalism, you follow 'mainstream' fads in opinion, as our fellow with the cart and shovel follows the circus elephant. Worst of all, you reject the notion that truth exists. You abhor that quality of truthfulness, which is essential to the very existence of justice under law, and, indeed, all aspects of civilized relations within, and among nations."
The clinical point intended by introduction of that fictional exchange, is, I think, made with sufficient clarity for our purposes here. Focus upon the heart of the matter. Two things must be considered as the crucial argument of the case. First: What is the formal implication for Dawkins' biology, of arguing that biology shows belief in God to be a pathology, of biology, akin to a "computer virus"? Second: What is the nub of the crime in Dawkins' folly, as in such cases as Nazi race-theorist, psychiatrist Ernst Rüdin, or Nazi judges who promoted, and were convicted for crimes against humanity, then, on the same general, Nuremberg-Code premises applicable to Dawkins, now? What general harm, in the sense of criminality, must necessarily follow, as deeds, from Dawkins' mere influential advocacy of his "computer virus" doctrine?
The issue of criminality in Dawkins' case, is derived from the proposition, that if one, on the one side, removes from self-enforcing law, that individual's right to life which is derived uniquely from Christianity, and, on the other side, judges that the world is overpopulated by its present number of human individuals, the combination of those two assumptions of that syllogism, is, by deduction, a criminal state of mind, an advocacy of mass-murder, of genocide. This state of mind implies a wont to perpetrate, or to foster crimes against humanity, whenever practice so influenced touches the practice of officials of government, or of those other professionals whose practice affects decisions of life, death, and health, of definable categories of persons.
The pivot of Dawkins' relevant argument, is the denial of any categorical difference between the category of the beasts, and the category of persons. Thus, if one finds nothing objectionable in eating cow-meat, or pig-meat, monkeys, or, snails for that matter, there could be no moral offense in stuffing, cooking, and serving pickled Beatle, or even the inedible Professor Dawkins himself, at some Oxford faculty luncheon, this coming Autumn, for example. I think Jonathan Swift might have put in a word on the subject of culling the herd of British Ministers of those genetically flawed specimens which have bad feet, or unmusical voices, or, like Tony Blair, exceptionally uncouth personal diplomacy.
Thus, the matter of policy here hangs on the issue, whether or not, there exists a specific difference of principle, which puts all persons in one category, and all other living creatures in a different category. In other words, can science, as we have come to think of science since Nicholas of Cusa's De docta ignorantia, show us evidence which accords with what Christianity claims, respecting the Mosaic tradition of man and woman made in the image of the Creator? The answer is, "Yes." That answer is the final bit of scientific evidence which will serve to convict Dawkins of mass-murder, rather than negligent manslaughter by some poor beast --as Dawkins claims himself to be, who is incapable of knowing any better (but, himself, too inedible to be consumed by man).
Implicitly, the biologist would insist, the difference must be biological. In fact, our knowledge of that distinction is chiefly economic: that the human species has demonstrated its ability to increase its potential relative population-density, as a species, in ways which no lower species can do. Although this capacity of the human individual must correlate with some feature of the biological substrate of cognitive processes within the individual mind, the connections have not been made.
Shift gears for just a moment. We, as living organisms, pass through our vital processes bits and pieces of junkyard iron, other minerals, and still other substances, such as oxygen and so on. These elements come into us, as in the form of food, and then pass through us, and out of us. When these have departed our metabolism, have we lost part of our living organism? Is the cognitive process which employs the substrate of biological processes within the individual, a production of that biological process, its epiphenomenon, for example? Were it not simpler said, that thought requires that the services it enjoys from the biological substrate must be appropriate to sustaining those cognitive functions? Only foolish braggarts seek to claim more than they know. Is it not essential to emphasize the lesson implicit in Plato's celebrated Parmenides, that we exist as a type of process of continual change, rather than a fixed object? Leave it there, and go on from that, to relevant facts which I do know with certainty.
Look at what thought does, historically. Look to where this historical quality is reflected within the processes of the individual mind. Look at these processes from Riemann's standpoint, and my own.
The fixed, functional type of human individual is characterized by the changing relationship of that fixed type of individual, to his, or her species as a whole. This relationship is situated in terms of the human species' changing relationship to the universe of which it, and its principle of change, is, functionally, an integral part. The process of change associated with that fixed type of human individual, is located in respect to those changes in ideas, governing social practice, which regulate the species' changing relationship to the universe of which it itself is a functional part, of which this principle of change, originating within the individual mind, is a functional part.
These considerations situate all validatable claims to human knowledge, the subject-matters of biology and theology included, under the authority of a single, unifying conception of Analysis Situs. That is to stress, that, by the nature of the evidence accessible to us, the domain of knowledge pertains to a nine-cell division of phenomena. This nine-cell array, is derived from the division of local phenomena among three mutually distinct, functional types, and three classifications of the relationship of such phenomena to our ability to conceive the evidence presented. The three functional types are: ostensibly non-living; living, but non-cognitive; and, cognitive. The three classifications of evidence bearing upon these types and their interconnections, are astrophysical, microphysical, and macrophysical. Knowledge, then, pertains to the actual functional, meta-mathematical relations of ordering identified by permutations among these nine cells. This, in turn, locates, implicitly, a single, subsuming ordering principle of ordering of relations, determining the ordering-principle characteristic of the ordering of a universal principle of change, respecting each and all existent permutations among those nine cells.
These notions of meta-mathematical ordering of relations,(31) pertain to such relatively simple distinctions in natural processes, as right- and left-handedness. On a relatively higher level, we have the meta-mathematical notions of entropy and anti-entropy, as meta-mathematical characteristics of so-distinguished types of processes. Generally, prior to the hoax of "information theory," the meta-mathematical notion of "anti-entropy," and the use of the term "negative entropy," signified living processes as a prototype, as distinct from localities within processes which were clinically and otherwise definable as either "non-living," or "dead." The notion of "anti-entropy," has special, direct bearing upon all of the relevant issues of the Dawkins case. This can be expressed in terms of my discovery in physical economy, as that expression is supplied the method of measurement implicit in Riemann's discoveries.
In all related matters, this meta-geometrical notion of Analysis Situs, is to be viewed from the vantage-point of the ontological paradox --the One/Many paradox-- of Plato's Parmenides. That general principle of Analysis Situs, is: that One whose existence efficiently subsumes the corresponding Many, is relatively, ontologically primary. The mathematical expression of such, relatively primary meta-mathematical principles, is merely, as the Platonic Academy's Eratosthenes understood in his estimate for the length of the meridian, a measurement of shadows, an adumbration, not the efficient, ontological location of causality.
As my associate, Dino De Paoli, has stressed, in his Milan-Paris lectures on the subject of contemporary Darwinism, the root of the common professional incompetence of all Malthusian currents in biology, especially radical empiricist (positivist) types, such as Dawkins, is a tragically fateful reliance on Aristotle's fraudulent representation of knowledge, as expressing the contemplative standpoint of the observer outside the domain of the subject-matter.(32) With man, as De Paoli rightly emphasizes, he who observes, observes himself: who can speak, as one who stands outside the human species, and is, therefore, no member of the human species, who, therefore, in fact, may not even exist? Who would wish to claim "scientific objectivity," under such conditions, to prove, therefore, perhaps, that he, and his opinions with him, do not exist? Imagine a Darwinian candidate for high U.S. elective office, who, if he is consistent, must present himself to his electorate as "the man whose implicit claim to political acuity is, that, by profession, he does not exist"?
For the case of Dawkins, I must go further than De Paoli's referenced argument. Man is defined by the role which the individual person plays, in the shaping of mankind's changing relationship to the universe as a whole.
This references a process, which exists in the extremely small, the moment of validatable social act of discovery of a new principle of nature (or, of human cognition itself), occurring within the sovereign precincts of cognition by the individual person, an event, which is subsumed historically by the process of mankind's willful increase of both manifest potential relative population-density and accompanying improvements in the demographic characteristics of households in general. This process of advancement reflects a cumulative succession of validatable discoveries of principle of nature (including cognition within nature). This defines a Riemannian series of the type: n to n+1 dimensions.
The increase of both mankind's potential relative population-density and demographic characteristics, expresses an anti-entropic process of change in man's practised relationship to the universe as a whole. The Riemannian series, which represents the ordering of the discoveries which brings about this anti-entropic change, is representable mathematically as a process of increase of adumbrated cardinality of human willful action. The latter is, therefore the only experimentally sustainable, mathematical-physical definition of anti-entropy.
This anti-entropy, in turn, expresses the power of cognition to command obedience from the universe. Conversely, the evidence shows that only when mankind acts according to that anti-entropic principle of cognition, does the universe increase its relative submissiveness to mankind's dominion. Thus, we are confronted with such experimental evidence, that the built-in design of the adducible set of laws of the universe, is intrinsically anti-entropic. Hence, Genesis 1:26-28.
That is how Darwin, and now Dawkins was attempting to monkey with man, in their attempts, like those of the dirty Duke, to degrade man to a mere ape. That is the reality of the domain into which the hubristic Dawkins wandered with his silly, radical-empiricist theological pretenses. That is his stupidity, not his crime; his crime is his, and the dirty Duke's disposition to act to enforce his stupidity, at the expense of human life.
How the Crime Is Perpetrated
This were not feasible politically, had the "Baby Boomer" generation not been brainwashed as it was, beginning more than thirty years ago, and had not that thus-addled generation, continued to cling to that induced set of "New Age" beliefs, up to the point that its generation had occupied more and more of the top-most policy-shaping positions in public and private life.
That, thus-addled generation, was induced to accept a "New Age" perversion, whose openly expressed central feature was a two-facetted proposition. It was turned against the optimistic standpoint of commitment to progress through scientific and technological progress, and, at the same time, to adopt a hateful attitude toward those specific qualities of cognition upon which scientific and technological progress depend. That generation's conception of God, man, and the universe, was perverted in the same way. That generation's induced rejection of cognition as the nature of the human individual, has functioned during the recent three decades as a downward, entropic ordering-principle in the present and future life of the world's population as a whole.
The fault lies not so much in the policies derived from the influence of this "New Age" mentality. The fault lies in the underlying hypothesis, in the relatively permanent set of definitions, axioms, and postulates from which the ever ephmeral present and future policies of the New Age type are derived as passing fads. To locate the efficient character of this New Age policy, so emplaced in power, one must focus upon the continuing hypothesis itself, rather than any particular passing expressions of that hypothesis. In short, the efficient effect of the emplacement of that induced, New Age ideological mind-set, within a majority of highly placed positions of public and private life, ensures the kind of impending doom of the civilization which tolerates such misleadership, which Bible-readers associate with reflections on the downfall of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Only if we see, tightly juxtaposed, this relationship between ideology and its physical and related effects, will our minds discover the passion needed to free themselves, and our civilization from the grip of a New Age ideology, which, if allowed to continue its reign over popular opinion, will doom us all.
In that setting, the ideology of Professor Dawkins is a Fagin's criminality, in the specific sense provided by the relevant case of first impression, the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi offenders. In the circumstance in which the dirty double, the Duke and Dawkins, find resonance for their criminal ideology in the pervasive "New Age" of the "Baby Boomers" and their like, the effect of Dawkins' doings, is like throwing lighted matches into a cellar filled with hot gasoline. In this circumstances, unless the dirty double are halted in their tracks on this account, this planet shall undergo a holocaust beyond all known historical and pre-historical precedent. That is the ultimate criminality.
1. Edgar Allan Poe was a qualified member of the U.S. patriotic society known as the Society of the Cincinnati. After rising rapidly to the top enlisted rank in the U.S. Army, he entered Sylvanus Thayer's West Point Military Academy, from which he was discharged for reasons of health (epilepsy). He became a trusted counterintelligence agent for the U.S., focussing attention upon British subversive operations run by head of the British Foreign Service, Jeremy Bentham, and, later, Bentham's protegé, Lord Palmerston. Poe was murdered, in Baltimore, Md., while investigating subversive operations run under the auspices of Britain's Mazzinian "Young America" association. He died of suspicious complications associated with the attack, in a Baltimore hospital, in October 1849. While employed earlier as a New York City newspaper reporter, he had demonstrated extraordinary skills in criminal investigation. This success in real-life criminal investigations, led to his famous series of fictional cases, in some of which stories Poe borrowed the name of a famous contemporary of his anong French scientists of Gaspard Monge's Ecole Polytechnique. As Britain's Sir Arthur Conan Doyle points out, through the mouth of his own fictional, dope-sniffing detective, the "Sherlock Holmes" series was propagated as a "black propaganda" effort, to discredit the widely-read Poe and Poe's investigative methods.
2. Barbara Tuchman, Distant Mirror.... (...:...,19..
3. Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., "On the Subject of God," Fidelio, Spring 1993.
4. Webster Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (Washington, D.C.: Executive Intelligence Review, 1992), p. 49. Rüdin was elected President of that Federation during a New York City meeting of the Harriman-sponsored 1932 meeting of the New York Eugenics Congress. At that time, the New York Eugenics Congress's endorsement of the Nazi race doctrine was featured on the front page of the New York Times.
5. EIR Special Report: Never Again! London's genocide against Africans Washington, D.C.: Executive Intelligence Review, June 1997), 94 pp.
6. e.g., Inside the U.S. Congress, the head of Baroness Caroline Cox's British intelligence front-organization, CSI, Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ). Also, there, Cox's personal stooge, Representative Frank Wolf (R-VA), and Museveni dupe, and former Prudential Life official, Representative Donald Payne (D-NJ).
7. Linda de Hoyos, et al., "British targets in Africa: The quagmire is spreading," June 20, 1997. Virtually all of the financial interests engaged in funding the genocide in central Africa are members of the London-centered British Commonwealth strategic metals cartel. Hence, were the U..S. government to take on the genocide in Africa directly, the U.S. would be forced virtually to declare the British Commonwealth to be the principal strategic adversary of the United States, which would mean lifting the security clearances of all present and former British fellow-travellers, such as Sir Henry A. Kissinger and Sir George Bush. Although former U.S. President Sir Bush is head of the advisory board of the Barrick Gold, International, which played a key part in funding Museveni's and Kabila's Hutu holocaust in Zaire, Barrick Gold is a British Commonwealth concern, based in Canada, not a U.S. firm.
8. The inner core of that group of African fascists which is conducting the ongoing genocide within central and neighboring regions of Africa, are chiefly products of a training program in violence conducted, under the patronage of former Tanzania President Julius Nyerere, at Dar Es Salaam university. [See EIR:... ] The central figure of this collection of butchers, is Uganda's President Yoweri Museveni. All were indoctrinated in the specific variety of fascism associated with Jean-Paul Sartre protegé Frantz Fanon. Not only was Fanon an intellectual grandchild of Nazi Professor Martin Heidegger; Fanon's doctrine is Nazi-like, in both form and genocidal propensities, for the same reason that Heidegger's existentialist teachings express the inner core of the Nazi personality-type.
9. Linda de Hoyos, op. cit.
10. ... "... ," Executive Intelligence Review, July 18, 1997.
11. "... ," Executive Intelligence Review, July 18. 1997.
12. Brian Appleyard, "..." London Sunday Times, July 6, 1997. See Mark J. Burdman,"...," the immediately following article here.
13. ... "... ," Executive Intelligence Review, July 18, 1997.
14. Since Nazi ideologue Heidegger's specially accelerated de-Nazification, which was arranged by his French existentialist followers, a highly convoluted effort has been maintained, in the effort to assert that Heidegger "was not really a Nazi." This myth was exploded recently, in Germany, with the appearance of [[author, title, (...:provenance,1987?)]]. That latter book was useful, but should not have been needed. Nietzsche follower Heidegger's elaborated doctrine of "thrownness," like the existentialism of his followers Jean-Paul Sartre and Frantz Fanon, expresses the same fascism inhering in the existentialist current underlying all of those "Conservative Revolution" currents flowing into the composition of Adolf Hitler's Nazi Party and regime [As this is identified by insider Dr. Armin Mohler's Die Konservative Revolution in Deutschland: 1918-1932 (Darmstadt: 1972)]. With Heidegger's existentialism, as with Herman Hesse's Steppenwolf, we touch the essence of the philosophical currents flowing into the Nazi regime.
15. For Adolf Hitler, as for his and Martin Heidegger's Friedrich Nietzsche, the alleged crime of the Jews, was to have given birth to Jesus Christ.
16. See [[On Prince Philip, 24:30]]
17. On the day of his marriage to the Netherlands princess, Bernhard sent a letter of resignation from the Nazi-SS, personally, to Adolf Hitler. The bridegroom's signature to that letter was placed immediately beneath the customary "Heil Hitler!" [[published location of recent report on this letter.]] From that time, until recently, this letter and its implications were the subject of a carefully observed official lie among the Netherlands establishment. Since the Duke of Edinburgh's marriage to Princess Elizabeth, similar courtesies have been observed in Britain, respecting the Duke's own family and educational pedigrees.
18. In Mediterranean civilization, "Satan" = Siva, Osiris, Baal, Moloch, Python, Dionysus, Abraxis, Mithra. The "Mother/Consort" of Satan in these cults is known as Shakti, Ishtar, Athtar, Astarte, Isis, Gaea, Cybele, et al. These identify the ancient roots of the pagan Gnostic, "mystery religion" cults of this satanic disposition. In modern times, the term "Gnostic" is associated more frequently with paganist syncretic fusions of Gnostic paganism with some symbolic allusions to Christianity. The latter include the Gnostic tradition of Simon Magus and Basilides, or Manicheanism and its expression as those Bogomils otherwise commonly known in England as "Cathars" or French "buggers."
19. [[August Belmont letters on break-up of U.S.A.]]
20. [[Date, provenance of utterance. Other notable proposals to the same general effect.]]
21. During the late 1920s, the Huxley brothers, Julian and Aldous, were inducted into Aleister Crowley's pro-satanic, theosophical cult of the "Golden Dawn." The natural psychotomimetic drug ergotamine, used in theosophical rituals, was later synthesized as LSD-25, by British intelligence's Tavistock Clinic. In the proliferation of LSD-25 and related "recreational substances," Aldous Huxley others represented the same creepy Crowley cult's key role, through Gregory Bateson, et al., in inserting the "rock-drug-sex" youth-counterculture into the highly labile strata among the 1960s university-campus youth. Notably, in this and other respects, both Huxley brothers were associated with the "Open Conspiracy" of both H. G. Wells and Bertrand Russell. Aldous continued Well's utopianism cloaked as "science fiction," with his own Brave New World, and went on, with Bertrand Russell, to found the Peace Pledge Union, before returning with Russell, to the U.S.A., for Russell's 1938 launching of the kookish Russell-Hutchins Unification of the Sciences cult, which became the basis for hard core of post-World War II atomic-age, utopian cult-formations around "information theory," "systems analysis," "artificial intelligence," and "ecologism," etc., in the post-World War II U.S.A.
22. A folly assisted by such lame-brained historical anachronisms as the Austro-Hungarian and Russian emperors, in falling prey to British manipulations, and the folly of the German Kaiser, in tampering fatally with von Schlieffen's prudent design of the famous right-encirclement flanking attack which would have ended the war, and the British Empire's power, within weeks.
23. The reference is to the "Frankfurt School's" Theodor Adorno, who, together with the London Tavistock Clinic (and, Institute) typifies the leading, purely synthetic "New Left" ideology which was conduited into the '68er generations of Europe and the Americas.
24. In Germany today, there is almost a species difference in cognitive development, between Germany's Gymnasium-educated strata of the 1968 tumult, and the comparable strata graduated from secondary schools and universities in the post-Brandt-reform times. The cultural down-shift in that country, during the recent ten years or so, is stunningly precipitous, recalling a Weimar Germany literary image, the spectacle of a dead man marching to his grave, bearing the shovel with which to bury himself.
25. See Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., "The Essential Role of 'Time-Reversal' in Mathematical Economics," Executive Intelligence Review, Oct. 11, 1996; pp. 21-23. Also published in Fidelio, Winter 1996, pp. 6-9.
26. Cf. Laurence Hecht et al., "The Significance of the 1845 Gauss-Weber Correspondence," 21st Century Science & Technology, Fall 1996; pp. 21-43. See also, in 21st Century Science & Technology, Spring 1997z: Dr. Remi Saumont, "The Battle Over the Laws of Electrodynamics" (pp. 53-60), and Dr. Jonathan Tennenbaum, "Demonstrating Gauss and Weber's Magnetometer" (pp. 61-62). The present writer's concern with the Ampere-Weber "angular force" was prompted by a fellow-member of the Fusion Energy Foundation, Professor Robert Moon of Chicago University. During that time, 1975, the rage in the field of fusion-energy was the subject of the so-called "Coulomb Force," the mechanistic notion of repulsion of like-charged particles, which the professional gossip of the period projected upon the scale of nuclear-fusion actions. During a meeting of several associates of the future Fusion Energy Foundation, Moon presented to me, the summary evidence, that this faith in the "Coulomb Force" was wrongly attributed to events on that scale of microphysics, pointing out that the popular belief was the product of a deliberate hoax which had been willfully embedded in the electrodynamics of J. Clerk Maxwell. Laurence Hecht, who later became a close collaborator of Professor Moon, kept on that track until the relevant proofs of the work of Gauss, Riemann, and Weber, were reexamined and resolved.
27. For discussion of this, see LaRouche, op. cit.
28. Zur Psychologie und Metaphysik, Bernhard Riemanns Gesammelte Mathematische Werke H. Weber, ed. (New York: Dover Publications reprint, 1953) pp. 509-520. Cross-reference this to the notice given in Riemann's habilitation dissertation [Werke p. 273], in which Riemann states that the clues to his discoveries respecting the concept of n-fold extended magnitudes depend not only the work on biquadratic residues by Gauss, but also work of anti-Kantian J. F. Herbart, the subject of Riemann's Zur Psychologie und Metaphysik.
29. As Alexander Hamilton pointed out, in orchestrating the first selection of Jefferson as President of the United States, Jefferson was not a good man, but, unlike the British Foreign Service's agent Aaron Burr, Jefferson was no traitor. Jefferson believed in being kind to his African-American slaves, going not only to such extremes as legally manumitting them, but, according to documents from that time, bestowed upon some of the latter women the empyreal privilege of being taken to share Jefferson's bed. Like today's promoters of "Black English"/"Ebonics" at Harvard University's Education Department, he did not regard even those blessed women as fully human. Like those Harvard racists who defend "Ebonics" and related Yahooisms as expressing the non-cognitive, "emotional-associative" mental behavior which Harvard deems "natural" to the African, Jefferson did not believe in the existence of the individual human soul. Theologically, he was a "mortalist," in the tradition of Padua's Pietro Pomponazzi, and of the "Father" of the anti-Renaissance "Enlightenment," Ockhamite Paolo Sarpi. He was, in brief, an atheist like Sarpi, and a dutiful follower of the pro-slavery "mortalist" John Locke and drug-traffickers' agent Adam Smith. He worked, under the pretext of separating religion from politics, to impose his religion, atheism, upon the law of the United States.
30. Consider the relevant, fictional case of the professional confidence-man, who took up part-time employment delivering pizza, as a cover for his customary activities. In the capacity of the pizza-man, this fellow walked a few blocks from Washington, D.C.'s J. Edgar Hoover Building, dialed a number on a pay-phone, and informed the party at the other end: "I have to tell you, that I just came from the office of the Director of the FBI."
31. Better said, "meta-geometrical." The idea of Analysis Situs, is essentially geometrical, rather than algebraic. This point is rendered more transparent by reflections on Carl Gauss's process of refinement of the notion of biquadratic residues, beginning his celebrated dissertation Disquisitiones arithmeticae. That is, the hierarchy of orderings of series of series of geometrical, and hypergeometrical forms, as already implicit in Johannes Kepler's specifications for the development of what became Leibniz's discovery of the calculus, as distinct from the useless contrivance of Isaac Newton, or the castrated calculus as subjected to Ockhamite delimitation by Augustin Cauchy. Leibniz's demand for a generalization of Kepler's problem of orbital calculations, to the higher level of the issue of the determination of non-constant curvature in the infinitesimally small, is the basis within geometry which locates the points of conceptual access to the higher, meta-mathematical domain of Analysis Situs.
32. Dino De Paoli, "Was Darwin an Evolutionist, or Just a Social Reformer," manuscript to be published, both in German translation, and in English later this year.