Executive Intelligence Review
This article appears in the April 30, 2004 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.


When Even Scientists
Were Brainwashed

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

April 7, 2004

The subject of this report is the nature of that historically specific quality of mass-insanity which has brought the world at large into the presently erupting, global, monetary-financial, economic, and strategic crisis. This is the worst crisis in the history of modern European culture since the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia ended those monstrous, Venice-inspired European religious wars, led by Habsburg Spain, of the 1511-1648 interval. The specific tactic employed here, for addressing the present manifestation of that political mass-insanity, is to show the nature and root of the relevant mass psychological disorientation of populations and institutions. The subject is treated here from the reference-point of the reflections of the way in which that more general problem is expressed within the bounds of the established, elementary presumptions of currently taught physical science.

I situate that report from the following point of historical reference in the domain of physical science itself.

The founding and development of what became the Fusion Energy Foundation (FEF), brought into play a broad, and expanding base of task-oriented scientific and related activities. Over a period of more than a decade, this reached the level of involving more than 100,000 scientists, engineers, and other relevant persons. The growth and persistence of the influence of this association was most remarkable, until it was shut down, in 1987, by means of what was subsequently ruled, on the official record, to have been a prosecutor's fraud upon the bankruptcy court.

That was the fraud, principally against me, which had been perpetrated by a politically motivated action of the Alexandria, Virginia U.S. Attorney, Henry Hudson. That fraud was plotted and orchestrated through the guiding intention of a U.S. Justice Department team then headed by its Criminal Division head, William Weld of Boston, Massachusetts. Weld was the same wretch who had set up the situation, in October 1986, for the assassination of me and others by a large task-force of Federally-deployed armed forces. Only intervention of higher authority had prevented that mass-murder from being carried out under Weld's direction. The purpose of these interlocked, nested frauds by factions within the U.S. government, was to eliminate me physically from my established position as among leading international figures of U.S. political life. The evidence is, that the clear intent of that effort from those corrupt quarters, was to eliminate me either by assassination, or by a railroad-style trial intended to send me to die of old age in Federal prison.

The political motives of those officials and other influentials sharing that malicious intention, is abundantly clear from any informed reading of the available record and correlated other evidence.

According to the court records from 1987 and 1988, this fraud was accomplished by aid of witting complicity by the chief judge of the notorious Federal Fourth Circuit's Alexandria, Virginia court, the crucial trial judge in the relevant case. The latter complicity included that judge's infamous Rule 11 prescription, excluding even essential forms of relevant evidence from the proceedings in which the defendants in that case were railroaded, without allowing the defendants reasonable time or related elements of opportunity to prepare a competent defense against hastily presented, actually fraudulent charges.[1] One of my certified prior political enemies was the foreman of that jury, who secured that position by implicitly perjuring himself in what passed for a voir dire proceeding on that occasion! All of this was part of corrupt, purely politically motivated operations coordinated with the notorious Internal Security section of the Justice Department. Had what was later shown to have been a pre-contaminated jury done an honest job, instead of what occurred, I would have been exonerated; but, in that case, I probably would have been murdered soon after I departed the courtroom a free man.

One of the most prominent elements of then current world history behind the motives for that corrupt operation, had been the FEF, which had been the institution which had become known for its leading role in generating continuing support for my personal initiative, later adopted by President Ronald Reagan, for initiating and crafting the economic science-driver alternative represented by a Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), the proposal which I and President Reagan proposed to the Soviet Union, and to other nations, including our European allies. The proposal was made by me, and proposed to, and ultimately adopted by the President Reagan who presented it publicly to the Soviet Union on a TV broadcast of the evening of March 23, 1983.

It had been my intention in crafting that proposal, both to offer the Soviet Union a way out the expected medium-term financial crisis which menaced both super-powers (and others), while building an escape-hatch for the U.S.A. itself from the Russell-Szilard trap of "Mutual and Assured Destruction" (MAD). Notably, it had been my known international role in fostering the preconditions for both the President's launching of SDI, and my continued work on behalf of that policy after March 1983, which, taken together with my 1984 candidacy for the Democratic Presidential nomination, had been the principal among the motivating issues behind a five-year effort, January 1984-January 1989, to eliminate me physically from the world's political scene, either by long imprisonment or death. Not by accident, the deployment of the Federal forces which would have killed me by the morning of October 7, 1986, had occurred while President Reagan was on his way to Reykjavik, Iceland, where he would once again present the SDI to the Soviet Union. In fact, a television rebroadcast of the deployment against me was made in Reykjavik at the time the President was re-introducing the SDI proposal there.

The central driver of that and some of the other most notable among FEF's numerous and varied achievements, reflected my commitment to a mission-oriented dedication to the implications of reviewing the principal accomplishments of Plato, Kepler, Leibniz, and Riemann, and adopting these as the exemplary guides to creative work by our association.[2] From my vantage-point, I would have said then, and do still today, that the most important of the contributions to that from among the professional scientists, came from the influence of the now late Professor Robert Moon. Moon, at my first meeting with him, which occurred in the context of founding what became FEF, had presented me with a case which is for me typically memorable, still today. That case was the principled significance of the Ampère-Weber-Gauss discovery, partly assisted by Bernhard Riemann, of an electrodynamic principle which the influence of the philosophically reductionist school of Lagrange, Cauchy, Clausius, Grassmann, et al. had viciously excluded from the relevant standard university curricula. This was typical of Professor Moon's courage, as a scientist, in defending what were important, experimentally unique scientific truths, against fraudulent, politically arranged conventional mythologies in science, such as that of Clausius et al.; Professor Moon's action resonates in the annals of modern science to the present day.

Overall, the work of the non-profit FEF foundation filled an important niche in the support of science during that period. The specific quality of driving force which distinguished that institution, apart from, and significantly above the sometimes remarkable contributions by other leaders of the association, was located, chiefly, in the complementary intersection of my own and Professor Moon's leading influence. The case of my unique initiative, in defining, during the 1977-1979 interval, what President Ronald Reagan later adopted publicly as what he named SDI, in his March 23, 1983 televised address, is an outcome which serves as a leading example of the characteristics of my association with the remarkable Professor Moon. It also expressed the creative scientific spirit of the association as a whole.

Reference to that experience provides a most efficient way of presenting today's subject: of showing the extent to which today's prevalent, pro-reductionist form of globally extended European culture is, quite literally, brainwashing: a brainwashing which defines the reductionism of modern Aristotelianism and the neo-Ockhamite empiricism of Venice's Paolo Sarpi, as a leading, continuing tragic factor in the life and destiny of that current of modern European civilization generally.[3] In this report, I shall now show the nature of the conditions which promote the same kinds of problems, which occur as prominent, frictional problems among the ranks of scientists and others. These were problems which stirred even the atmosphere of the work of the association itself. I shall contrast the exemplary successes of the FEF, and the basis for those persisting internal frictions which had spilled over from the existing science community generally, and shall show how that provides an appropriate reference for the subject-matter which I address in the following pages. The case of the SDI will serve as our principal point of implied reference for this purpose.

The specific historical relevance of that subject of discussion now, is the following.

1. The Cultural Crisis of the Recent Century

The disorder, and induced boredom which pollutes much of the teaching of physical science today, is not a failure of science as such. It is the result of a more general, underlying disorder: a disorder of a type which has flowed into the work of scientific teaching, from the more widespread, recently accelerated cultural pessimism of the society in which that teaching is practiced. In attacking the most typical frauds met in the modern mathematics classroom, the same fraud against the calculus to which Carl Gauss pointed in his 1799 exposure of the hoax of Euler, Lagrange, and others, we discover that the belief which compelled an otherwise skilled mathematical formalist, such as Leonhard Euler, into his stubborn, maliciously motivated folly on this issue, is not a product of physical science, but, rather springs from certain dark, dank, and putrid waters of belief; from sources which have nothing to do with the generally assumed subject-matter of physical science itself.

It were impossible to locate and understand the axiomatically underlying sources of Euler's relevant pathological conceit, without focussing on its roots in an axiomatic irrationality. This irrationality influenced the Twentieth Century in an extreme way, through the influence of such radicals as Bertrand Russell and his clones. Typical of those clones, is the way in which Wiener and von Neumann polluted the Twentieth Century's classrooms; it is a corruption which has spilled over, as those same pathological influences, into the present young century. That pattern of corruption, as it is encountered in Euler, or the influence of radical positivists Russell, Wiener, and von Neumann today, can not be competently understood without treating the issues involved as a process of ebbs and flows, since as far back as the birth of European science as pre-Euclidean Classical Greek philosophy. I trace that connection here.

So, working within the context of globally extended European cultures since ancient Athens, the cause for the perennial failure of what is called "democracy," is the axiomatic substitution of a modern form of sophistry which often passes for widely accepted mere opinion—such as an a priori, fallacious type of axiomatic opinion. Typical of this in modern times, is the method of Descartes, which he and his followers have in place of the function of a scientifically validatable principle of truthfulness.

When we say "democracy," we intend to refer to the increasing participation of the entirety of a society, in deliberations on all important matters of policy. There is no doubt that the birth of the modern European nation-state in the Fifteenth-Century European Renaissance, unleashed a kind of relative democratization which has been an indispensable factor in all general improvements in the productive powers of labor, standard of living, and degree of political freedom which have occurred since. Indeed, in no part of history of humanity as a whole, has society's progress in these matters matched the pace and scope of the benefits unleashed by that Renaissance.

This continuing progress in modern European civilization, until recently, must be traced in the history of government itself. This superiority in progress, over all known preceding forms of society, has been due to the establishment of the first modern nation-states, Louis XI's France and Henry VII's England. The possibility of creating such nation-states depended, in turn, on the premises defined by the preceding, great ecumenical Council of Florence in which Nicholas of Cusa played a crucial kind of specific role. Studying the same matter more deeply, the adoption of that Socratic principle of agape which was promoted, most notably, by the Christian Apostle Paul's I Corinthians 13, as the notion of the common good, or general welfare, is the foundation upon which instances of the sovereign nation-state's healthy existence, and persistence, have depended, without exception, still today. This is the same principle identified by Gottfried Leibniz, as that notion of the pursuit of happiness conveyed into the founding of U.S. Independence, from Leibniz's attack, in his New Essays on Human Understanding, on John Locke's decadent, pernicious views.[4]

The Platonic conception of agape, as recognized as a matter of principle by Christianity, is properly identified as the fundamental constitutional principle of a true republic in general, and a modern democratic form of constitutional republic in particular. This principle is central to the U.S. Declaration of Independence and to that statement of intent governing the existence of the U.S., which is the Preamble of the Federal Constitution.

This concept, as underscored by Leibniz, rests upon the principled nature of the absolute difference between human and beast. That is a revolutionary point of difference between us and the lower species of life, a difference which is expressed essentially by the human individual's unique capacity to discover and employ efficient universal physical principles whose existence can not be directly accessed by sense-perception. It is through the exercise of that sovereign capacity of the individual person, that mankind has risen to levels vastly above the potential relative population-density which had been possible under the fixed potential for a species of higher ape. This activity is the soul and essence of physical science.

It is in the pursuit of the fruitful expression of that same specifically human capacity reflected as fundamental scientific progress, and also in other ways, that mortal man touches immortal happiness. The promotion of the rights of mankind so endowed, so allowed, is the principled basis for the sovereignty of the republic. It is the basis for the principle of promotion of the general welfare, and, therefore, of the means to fulfil the duty of the living to better the welfare of their posterity.

It is through those processes of communication, which are typified by the Platonic form of Socratic dialogue, as typified by valid methods of physical science, that the people of a society are enabled to generate, and to replicate valid discoveries of universal physical principle. The definition of truthfulness, both for science, and otherwise, lies exactly here.

The idea of "democracy" is a morally and functionally valid one, only if we mean a society which is dominated by that principle of dialogue represented by Plato, which is truthful; rather than a beast-like society ruled by the tyranny of so-called popular or kindred forms of mere opinion. If "democracy" signifies the pursuit of truth as Plato's Socratic principle defines this; democracy were noble. If it signifies the substitution of mere opinion for Socratic dialogue, then, as the judicial murder of Socrates attests, a democracy ruled by the tyranny of mere opinion, as at Athens then, is evil, and dangerous to the society of its believers. This is shown for the case of the ancient Athens of Pericles and Thrasymachus, by the doom of that city—which had been, prior to such corruption, the noblest and best expression of the upward impulse of Classical ancient Greek society—through its criminality in launching and conducting the Peloponnesian War.[5]

The controlling presence of evil in a society was typified then, by the systemic irrationality of the Delphi cult, and of philosophical reductionists such as the Eleatics and their successors, such as the Sophists and Aristotelians. In modern Europe, evil as typified by the influence of the empiricist followers of Venice's Paolo Sarpi, is typical of the early influence of such mental disorders in the roots of European culture today. The principal errors in ideas about science today, are to be traced from a general moral failure within U.S. society, increasingly, over the lapse of time, to date, since the untimely death of President Franklin Roosevelt. To understand the relevant causal connections for this kind of decadence, we must abandon the foolish habit of considering currently prevalent practices as being "normal" simply because they happen to be currently prevalent. We must recognize, and confess, that, often, the name of "democracy" is used as if it were a surrogate for the arbitrary power of an emperor, king, or tyrant. Often, the tyranny of a popularized false opinion, the tyranny of forms of widespread irrationalism, became the instrument by which the majority of a people may do a willful injury to themselves as grievous as might, otherwise, be expected of a lonely dictator.

The human species is intrinsically good, when it is true to itself. Contrary to preacher Jonathan Edwards and his followers today, God does not have bad taste. Man is, by nature, the noblest and best of all living creatures. It fails to be its good self, when it permits its passions to bring it to descend into infantile beastliness, as populism typifies the most common form of that moral corruption which has sometimes led from populist notions of democracy into fascism. On this account, as in the United States itself, the degradation of the behavior of a great people and nation is the consequence of a lack of exceptional men and women, who, in becoming leaders, are able to bring out the better qualities of their people. Often, the doom of a great nation is the result of either a lack of such leaders, or their rejection by corrupt populist littleness of the people, as in the case of the Athens of Pericles, or the slide of pre-1939 Germany or Italy into fascism and world war.

Abraham Lincoln's famous warning typifies the problem for the case of the U.S.A.: You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time. Lincoln's warning sums up the U.S. republic's internal experience, the ebbs and flows of our shifts from achievement, to lunacy, back to achievement, and so on, over the entire span of that people's experience, from the beginning of that republic, through the present day. In a constitutional republic such as ours, no tyrant can prevail for a significant time, unless the majority of the people themselves have been first become corrupted, as today, to an effect coinciding with Lincoln's famous aphorism.

The art of tyranny is: Corrupt the people first, and they will probably come to accept, or even demand the tyrant. The deep cultural pessimism fostered in Germany's post-war population of the 1920s, generated the potential which Britain's Montagu Norman and others exploited to place Adolf Hitler in power. The populists' deluded faith in their perverted definitions of "democracy," is the cherished delusion, that tyrants come to power by acting against the will of the people. Exactly the opposite is true; It is the corruption of the opinion and morals of the people, which paves the broad highway down which the tyrant marches to triumphant acclaim by the popular will, as Hitler did in Germany, and elsewhere. Later, the foolish people who cheered for the rise of the tyrant, may come to regret what they have done; but, even then, they will rarely allow that bitter lesson to remind them that, essentially, they did this to themselves.

Thus, as in the notable case of Nazi Germany, the tyranny of popular opinion may lead to a people's imposition of an incarnate tyrant, and perhaps, also, an incurable system of tyranny, upon themselves. The means by which a people's popular opinion brings a monstrous tyranny upon them as in that case, is the adoption of a Romantic's sort of entertainment-oriented fantasy life, such as what is expressed in the pathology of a mass of screaming fanatics at a sports event, such as feeding Christians to the lions in ancient Rome, or a Nuremberg rally in Hitler's Germany. It is the substitution of what is, or pretends to be a democratic quality of popular opinion, for truth, which is the usual root of a people's self-inflicted tyrannies. The United States, among others, has been experiencing a decades-long repetition of that kind of long wave of alternating surge of flow and temporary ebb of a continuing flood of corruption by such tainted popular opinion.

Therefore, in the history of modern Germany or the U.S.A., for example, the study of how corruption of the greater mass of popular opinion, as in the United States recently, creates the appetite for a threatened or actual tyranny, as today, must be a foremost concern of the study and application of political science. In this report, I reference a crucial aspect of the recurring experience of this problem which had to be overcome, again, and again, in each step forward made by FEF. I reference that experience here, to go, as directly as possible, to the inner core of that recent and continuing, British Fabian Society-like corruption of popular opinion, the which is the leading source-cause of the presently immediate internal threat to the continued survival of the U.S.A—and also, the United Kingdom itself.[6]

The scientists most attracted to FEF were drawn from men and women of an exceptional quality of development of their character, like physical chemist Robert Moon, as in our men and women of notable achievements in the domain of experimental physical science. It was the same in Europe in the past, and is expressed in a comparable fashion, to my personal knowledge of the situation, among the surviving leading scientists of Russia today. In the laboratory, or comparable settings, they were excellent models of the role of the Platonic method of hypothesis in the work of discovering universal physical and related principles. They were able, as experimentalists, to conceptualize a unique demonstration of a principle, not as a mere mathematical formula, as if at the customary mathematician's blackboard, but as a definite object of the mind, as what Riemann defined by his qualified use and application of Herbart's notion of Geistesmasse.[7]

The Trouble With Science Today

The trouble for many of these good scientists has often erupted, when the time came to submit an experimentally solid discovery of theirs to that virtual "Babylonian priesthood" to whom the accepted practice of today's society has entrusted the contemporary defense of the rabidly reductionist faith of "generally accepted classroom mathematics," the faith of Newton, Euler, Lagrange, et al. In short, with the ascent of those empiricists, "Things suddenly turned weird!" As Carl Gauss showed, in his 1799 attacks on the cardinal follies of Euler, Lagrange, et al., this was something external to physical science, something smacking of the quality of the same kind of evil which was the Spanish Inquisition of that rabidly anti-Semitic Thomas Torquemada who was adopted as a model for what was to become the fascism of Adolf Hitler, adopted by the intellectual, satanic founder of what became modern fascism, the Savoyard Martinist freemason, Joseph de Maistre. So, often, an evil influence had intruded along the march from the experimental laboratory to the Babylonian priesthood's torture-rack, the mathematical reductionist's "generally accepted classroom" blackboard.[8]

The existence of this intruding external evil, this generally traditional, but pathological division of science from art, is the object which Britain's notable C.P. Snow described as the paradox of "two cultures": physical science versus the rest.[9]

In effect, what Snow pointed toward, is the fact that the name of physical science is customarily assumed to bear the burden of representing a meaningful, experimental standard of truthfulness; whereas, popular opinion, and the currently popular opinion respecting the arts, tend toward enjoying the privilege of considering acceptable whatever a kaleidoscopically turbulent mass of evolving, currently fashionable opinion chooses. When experimental science is compelled to share the same bed with the widespread irrationalism of generally accepted, and academically taught "liberal arts" today, truth has been thrown out the window, and who knows what foul mental diseases (such as existentialism) may come in. The meaning of scientific "truthfulness" in general, is either degraded to a matter of a witness' crude, naive notion of sense-perception; or, it may appear as a theorem of physical science as explained at the blackboard in terms of "generally accepted classroom mathematics."

This is not only the exclusion of truthfulness from science; but, from opinion generally—as today's press is mostly freed from the encumbrance of laws banning maliciously reckless disregard for truth. As a consequent replacement for truth, we have such abominations as opinion by a chiefly lying press. Crooked courts, or, official decrees by lying official perverts, are typical of many cases in which the replacement of any kind of truthfulness, has occurred by the authority of mere opinion. In modern experience, when the standard of so-called scientific truthfulness itself is systemically false, it were more or less inevitable, as today, that no reliable standard of truth will long prevail in public affairs. Thus, as U.S. President Abraham Lincoln said famously: The substitution of a sophistical kind of popular opinion has been repeatedly the chief agency of moral corruption in recent generations, as, again, over the recent four decades now.

The role of that kind of corruption in the practice and teaching of science, provides the relatively simplest demonstration of the principled source of the tendency for corruption which is, otherwise, currently rampant in virtually all aspects of social life. The refusal, or simple evasion of the moral obligation to deliberate the launching of a policy of practice according to the Platonic principle of Socratic dialogue among those choosing a course of action, is the typical result. Today, that is the most frequent cause for prevalence of the inanities and outright evils which may be perpetrated by, and within a so-called "democratic" society, or a free association of any kind within society. This kind of widespread perversion, is what I shall refer to, below, as the kind of general pathology which I identify as a "fishbowl" mentality.

A typical, concentrated expression of this, is the application of the immoral, sophistical doctrine of legal "finality" to instances such as executions of condemned persons, even when the facts prompting the judicial decision were discovered to contradict the claims on which the previous decision had been based. Such and kindred uses of "finality"—as in the case of the sophist Justice Antonin Scalia's Pontius Pilate-like intervention in the matter of the 2000-2001 Presidential succession, or the similar practices of the evil murderer and torturer, the anti-Semitic Spanish Inquisition's Thomas Torquemada—are often shown by experience to have been the cruelest crimes against humanity, and even an entire society.[10]

Reflection on this problem prompts us to define, and then combine the implications of two questions. First, what is the physical standard of truth which should be superimposed upon "generally accepted classroom mathematics"? Second: what is the comparable, appropriate standard for matters other than physical science? Third: how are the two standards to be reflected as a single principle of truthfulness governing both? Those are the intertwined questions which I address in terms of the lessons to be adduced from the starting-point of my own and FEF's experience with the development of what became known as the U.S. Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).

1.1 The Continuing Utopian Menace

Now, against the background of the argument here thus far, let us turn our attention to a leading aspect of the way in which the kind of problem, the problem represented by a surrogate for religious fanaticism, the continuing menace of strategic utopianism, which we have identified, has become a dominant feature of world events today. I shall situate the continued importance of my proposal for what became known as the SDI at a later point in this report, against the background I shall summarize here, now.

The matter we are considering in this report is not only complex, but the complexities themselves are an indispensable, essential part of a subject which is little understood, but on which the successful outcome of the present crisis depends. For example, as we turn now to the political source of the present world crisis, the cultural impact of the British Empire on the world's physical science and political culture, the reader should not forget that the point toward which we are working here, is the social-political motive for that Empire's tendency to suppress all competent knowledge of both the underlying, controlling principles of effective science, and also of the nature of truth in artistic culture and political practice.

The question we must pose, and answer, as I do that in this report, is: What were the forces in modern history which, in effect, considered it necessary for their continued political power, to uproot the idea of truth as a systemic principle? The solution for that riddle, of how the systemically pathological features of modern culture were embedded, is found in the systemic, empiricist features of the 1763-2004 history of the continuing British Empire and its impact on the world as a whole, especially upon globally extended European culture.

With this purpose in view, look now at certain characteristic features of Twentieth-Century history as a bench-mark for study of the cultural problem of globally extended modern European civilization as a whole.

The Twentieth Century as a whole should be remembered by future historians as, chiefly, the symbol—if but a mere part of a more than a century-long single source—of the persistently recurring periods of tragedy experienced by globally extended European civilization. At the start of this tragedy, there was the deep-going cultural decadence which accompanied the Edward VII-led, 1892-1904 onset of World War I, and the 1920s aftermath of that war. For our purposes in this report, it is sufficient to focus on the later portion of that process, its recent eighty-odd years of history, the period since the infamous Versailles Treaty which bridged the connection between two World Wars, and also laid the basis for the present threat of a global form of spreading asymmetric warfare, a form of warfare which might be the world's plunge into a protracted new dark age comparable to that of Europe's Fourteenth Century.

The key to most of the past seventy-two years of world history, since the March 1930 fall of Weimar Germany's Hermann Müller government, is expressed, in a concentrated way, in the crisis-reeking early years following the initial outbreak of the Great Depression. The most crucial turn is located between, on the one side: Germany's capitulation to Adolf Hitler's appointment as Chancellor, on Jan. 31, 1933, and Hermann Göring's Feb. 27, 1933 Reichstag Fire; on the opposing side: the inauguration of U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt, at a time just shortly after that assumption of dictatorial power by Hitler. It was Hitler's rise to power, through the infamous Notverordnung issued on the pretext of the Reichstag Fire, then, at a time even prior to Roosevelt's inauguration, which made World War II, or some variant of it, inevitable. Worse: Had Hoover, rather than Roosevelt, been elected, or had Roosevelt not survived the high risk of assassination, to be inaugurated, Hitler or his imperial successors might be ruling the world today.

That conflict between the policies of Hitler and Roosevelt has persisted to the present day, today, and is more acute, more ominous than during any time since the British Prince of Wales, later King Edward VII, began organizing Europe, beginning 1892-1904 developments in France, and by aid of the Fashoda incident of 1898, for what would become the so-called World War I. The most crucially relevant connections are, very briefly, as follows.

The Role of the British Empire

To understand the issues underlying that war, and the parallel threat represented by the Dick Cheney-Tony Blair echo of Hitler today, we must focus our attention on an institution, the France-Savoy-based Martinist freemasonic order, created by the British East India Company of Lord Shelburne's time, the freemasonic order which pre-organized both the French Revolution against Louis XVI, and the dictator Napoleon Bonaparte, and which produced, later, the Synarchist organization which organized the post-Versailles, fascist takeover of western and central continental Europe, during the 1922-1945 interval. The issues which prompted the Synarchists of 1919-1945, to organize the fascist regimes of that period, are the same issues of international private banking which are behind the roles of Tony Blair's 10 Downing Street and Vice-President Dick Cheney, as also Hjalmar Schacht-like George Shultz, and kindred scoundrels today.

It must be understood, that the British East India Company was an outgrowth of the neo-Venetian Anglo-Dutch banking-commerce associations, which had established the previously-planned British monarchy with the 1716 accession of George I. This was not merely an echo of the former character of Venice as a financier-oligarchical form of maritime power; it was a creation of those financier and related interests of Venice, which chose to reincarnate a thing in their likeness in the seas and related coastal areas of Northern Europe. In a typically Venetian way, that British private Company contrived to set the rest of continental Europe into what became known as the Seven Years War, a war against Frederick the Great's Prussia by every other power of the European continent. In the process, while France was distracted by this continental enterprise, the diligent British East India Company effectively took over India and grabbed France's principal territories in North America. As a consequence, the victory of the British East India Company in the 1763 Treaty of Paris, established the Company as the de facto British Empire which continues to exist, if in a tattered form, to the present day.

This idea of empire, as sketched by Lord Shelburne's lackey Gibbon, used the Venetian faction of the founder of empiricism, Paolo Sarpi, and, later, Paris-based Abbé Antonio Conti, to create the Martinist cult of the circles of Voltaire, d'Alembert, Cagliostro, Mesmer, et al., and, most notably, the most Satanically evil Savoyard, Joseph de Maistre, in France. This British-sponsored freemasonic interest, assisted by Shelburne's personal assets Necker and Philippe Egalité, pre-organized and conducted the French Revolution launched on July 14, 1789, while Shelburne's lackey Jeremy Bentham deployed British agents such as Danton and Marat, trained in and dispatched from London, to unleash what become known as the Jacobin Terror. Bentham, who earned the British Foreign Office its international notoriety during the ill-conceived remainder of his lifetime, created Lord Palmerston, and set the stage for Palmerston's launching of Mazzini as his puppet and controller of the Young Europe and Young America operations which toppled Britain's rival, Metternich, and put British agent Napoleon III on the throne of France. This set into motion what became that Confederacy which was intended to destroy the United States and to balkanize the remains of both the U.S.A. and other nations, such as Mexico, into a condition of squabbling local tyrannies suitable for British management of the Americas as a whole.

Given the unpleasant end of Shelburne's chosen model, the Roman Empire, Shelburne was at great pains to discover means by which such a doom as overtook that earlier empire might not overcome the recently born British East India Company's empire. To this end, the pathetic Mr. Gibbon was employed as Shelburne's scholarly, if emotionally disturbed lackey. Both Gibbon and the German Mommsen, are typical of the ideologues who managed the misleading accounting of history since ancient Greece, in a way intended to make the universe perpetually safe for an eternal British Empire.

These facts must not be read as presuming the existence of some primary British interest contrary to the tradition of the Venetian financier-oligarchy. The British East India Company, and its new empire, were then, and remained, the embodiment of a far-flung, international financier-oligarchical interest according to the Venetian model imported to England, among other places, by such notable Venetian Satan-helpers as Francesco Zorzi, the marriage-counsellor of Henry VIII, and, the Paolo Sarpi who launched English empiricism through notable assistance from such of his protégés as Galileo, Francis Bacon, and Thomas Hobbes.

Those leading features of that Venetian model adopted by England and the British monarchy later, are relevant to my development of the proposal which became known as President Reagan's public proposal of the SDI to Soviet General Secretary Andropov. The crucially relevant features of that proposal, are essentially two.

First, the British imperialists' conviction, that the potentially powerfully challenging forces of the Eurasian continent and the Americas, must be repeatedly set at one another's throats in such a way as to prevent the emergence of any power in the world which might be a capable threat to the continued existence of the empire which Shelburne had led in his time. World War I is a prime example of this British strategy (the slaughter of Britons in that war was a matter of the regime's relatively cheerful indifference to the interests of the British population; it was the City's "Old Lady" and what she represented, not human interests, which were intended to be served in such a gruesome fashion. For the "Old Lady," sacrifices must, obviously be made, when the occasion appears to warrant this service to cause of perpetuating the empire.)

The present threat of a fascist coup in the U.S.A., such as one by forces associated with Dick Cheney and George Shultz, and the echoes of Lazard Frères' pre-1945 France, goes to the heart of the second principal feature of the Shelburne policy-model.

On this second account, the kind of Anglo-Dutch Liberal model which reigns in western and central Europe today, is based on three elements which pass for "constitutional" among the credulous sorts of victims of such arrangements. One, obviously, is the non-parliamentary state apparatus. The second, is the parliamentary government, which is readily overthrown whenever the emergence of a crisis prompts the bankers to demand such adjustments. The third is the equivalent of what is commonly recognized today as an independent central banking system, which is the part of the government which is owned by the Venetian-style, international financier oligarchy, and which often prevails over state and parliament, as it did, so often, in continental Europe between 1922 and 1945.

However, for all nations, whether of the Anglo-Dutch Liberal model, or not, the kinds of international financial systems existing still today will, by their nature, lead repeatedly to the kinds of financial-monetary crises in which the bankers install a fascist dictatorship, or the equivalent, in order to ensure that the bankers, not the people, will be saved as financial powers, even if the people must be forced to die en masse to bring that happy financiers' remedy about.

Hence, since the establishment of the Venice-style of neo-Roman, British empire-in-fact, by the relevant 1763 Treaty of Paris, the world has been dominated politically by the ebbs and flows of either cyclical or systemic financial-monetary crises, as the world is presently dominated by the onrush of, not a cyclical, but a systemic crisis of the monetary-financial-economic system as a whole, an immediately threatened general breakdown-crisis. Among leading political and financial circles around the planet, many presently acknowledge this privately, although many of them, for reasons of political discretion, and reflections on the risks inherent in mortality, lie their heads off about this matter publicly.

These key features of Anglo-Dutch Liberal culture to date, are to be understood as the political and cultural reflection of, chiefly, the empiricist dogma introduced to Europe by Venice's Paolo Sarpi. Empiricism is a modern echo of the ruinous reign of sophistry by which Athens virtually destroyed itself in the course and aftermath of the culturally suicidal Peloponnesian War. The rottenness within modern European culture since the beginning of the 18th Century is found, essentially, in the influence of not only Sarpi and his household lackey Galileo, but also their protégés Sir Francis Bacon and Thomas Hobbes, and in such Anglo-Dutch liberals as John Locke, Isaac Newton, Bernard Mandeville, Voltaire, David Hume, François Quesnay, the "curry Wurst" composer Rameau, Adam Smith, Leonhard Euler, Jeremy Bentham, and Immanuel Kant. The specific moral-intellectual rot permeating the cultures of Europe and the U.S.A. today, is rooted in the systemic features common to these creatures of the Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century "Enlightenment." The British Empire is the pivotal expression of the Anglo-Dutch variety of the empiricism otherwise known as Romanticism and its outgrowth, existentialism.

London and Fascism

This brings us to that child of the post-World War I Versailles Treaty which is the 1922-1945 reign of fascism on the continent of Europe. The causes of the specific characteristics of that period are rooted in the folly of what was known as the "Versailles" monetary-financial system. Just as a core of the Nazi system was taken into the womb of the Anglo-American victors in World War II, the systemic features of fascism, in its character as a special outgrowth of empiricism, is the root of the especially vicious features of globally extended Anglo-American Liberalism today.

That said: identify fascism summarily, as an outgrowth of the Versailles system, in the following way.

Rather than writing down, as in lawful bankruptcy, the unpayable mass of British, French, and related war-debt accumulated during 1914-1917, Versailles proposed to avoid that remedy (in the main), by the following swindle. Woodrow Wilson's Secretary of State, Lansing, a man designed by disposition to earn much guilt himself, proclaimed, with a cupidity typical of him, that Germany must bear the total guilt for that recent war which had been diligently organized, not by Germans, but by the now-deceased British emperor Edward VII. It might have been suggested that President Woodrow Wilson was so preoccupied with mass-production of uniforms and burnable crosses for his Ku Klux Klan organization at the time, that he made no objection to Lansing's fraud. The relevant majority of the presumably great thinkers assembled as victorious vultures in those post-war proceedings, agreed to this fraud without a serious quibble. John Maynard Keynes did make a noise, but it was only a self-righteous, ineffable footnote on the proceedings. The Germans would pay the reparations needed to feed the bankrupt French and British bankers, out of which sums the British and French would be enabled to pay their war-debts to the eagerly waiting, hungry vultures, the Wall Street financiers.

The hitch, as Keynes noted, is that the whole reparations scheme was a house-of-cards. Simply, as long as Germany was prevented from breaking out of the conditions imposed through Versailles, Germany could never pay the prescribed war-debt. The attempt of Germany to do so, produced the hyperbolic-like spiral of inflation, and then hyperinflation, of 1921-1923. The inability to repeat that kind of bail-out at the close of the decade, led to the fall of the German parliamentary government of Hermann Müller. This become the opportunity for the Bank of England's Montagu Norman, Harriman, et al., to proceed with successive fundings of their intended placement of the Weberian (e.g., "charismatic") psychopath Adolf Hitler, into power in Germany.

From Versailles on, all relevant higher-ranking financial authorities knew, as Keynes did, that the Versailles system based on reparations could not work. It was doomed, from the start, by its own design. Those private financiers and others who mobilized the Synarchist International for the purpose of putting fascist governments into power, already knew the truth about the system at the time of Versailles. They took the view, in effect: "Good! Let it blow up! We will bring in fascist governments everywhere!" The same kind of private financier interest, many of whom are biologically or otherwise direct descendants of the Synarchist financier circles of the Versailles Treaty and its aftermath, have made the same choice, once again, for the world at large, nearly a century later, today. In fact, the determination of the circles of Allen Dulles and James J. Angleton, during and following World War II, to bring about a form of fascist economy, known as a "globalized" world system of "universal fascism," was a continuation of the Nazi utopian goal which Dulles et al. shared with those Nazis whom they had ushered into the post-war American and related allied establishments. That legacy of Allen Dulles, Angleton, the Buckleyites, the late Roy M. Cohn, et al., has been continued by certain Anglo-American factional circles to the present day. The fascist network adopted by Dulles, et al., is the leading terrorist and related menace to civilization today.

Once you know that, you begin to understand the significance of the close connections among 10 Downing Street's "New Labour" Fabians around Blair, Vice-President and international carpet-bagger Dick Cheney, and Tony Blair's fellow-travellers in and around the Democratic Leadership Council in the U.S.A. still today. For the purposes of such fellows, new Nazi-like movements do not have to be built up de novo, as if from scratch; they never went away.

As noted and documented earlier, Hitler was put into power by the backing from the collaborators of the Bank of England's Montagu Norman, chiefly financier interests centered in London and New York City. Initially, the intent of those forces in London was to keep the potentially deadly rival, the U.S.A., out of what became World War II. Conditions changed. Edward VIII was dumped, and Churchill led the opposition to those powerful circles in Britain who intended to bring Britain and its navy into the continental fascist scheme to destroy the Soviet Union, and then destroy the naval and related power of the U.S.A. Churchill's motive was simple; he needed no one to teach him affection for fascism, but Churchill represented those who would not make a pact with Europe which would lead to the early dissolution of that British Empire established, in fact, by the 1763 Treaty of Paris. Churchill did not object to fascism; he objected to the development of a Germany-based "universal fascism" order, which would make the British a chess-piece of world politics, rather than the intended Anglo-American "cousins" as the hegemonic player.

Hitler and his regime are now long dead, but, as I have already noted, the surviving core of the Nazi apparatus is now entering its third adult generation through a pact struck between a core of the Nazi apparatus and right-wing Anglo-American circles typified by figures such as Allen Dulles and James J. Angleton. It is still a serious contender within the ranks of the pro-fascist thrust toward world power today. So, the inner core of the fascist rampage of 1922-1945 was tucked within the relevant part of the post-war Anglo-American establishment; and, so, the pestilence which had already created two "world wars," lived on, to plague the world still today.

Unfortunately, with the death of President Roosevelt, the United States under his successor, Harry S Truman, joined with the right-wing of the United Kingdom in making a remarkable right-turn. This right-wing adoption of key elements of the Nazi apparatus, as part of the post-war Anglo-American system, was not mystifying, if one takes into account that the issue which had prompted certain right-wing U.S. financiers and their British cousins to support President Franklin Roosevelt's war-time leadership temporarily, was simply the antipathy of those Brits and the American anglophiles for surrendering what they regarded as their English-speaking union to the yoke of a continental tyrant. As I have stated above, they did not object to Hitler because he was fascist, but because he was a continental figure. In the late Summer of 1944, once the U.S.-led Normandy breakthrough had sealed the fate of Hitler's regime, the British and U.S.A. right-wingers readily, even greedily absorbed that Nazi talent which they regarded as useful to their yearning for world government along the same lines Göring and Company had sought to create international mega-corporations in a globalized economy run by international financier oligarchical syndicates, rather than national capitals.

This right-wing turn was typified by negotiations, by a portion of Anglo-American establishment which brought a core of the Nazi apparatus, around such figures as Hjalmar Schacht, Otto Skorzeny, Schellenberg, Wolf, and the fascist Synarchist International's financier network, into the post-war Anglo-American system, including the functions of NATO. The collaboration between those Nazi and Anglo-American circles, produced its so-called "utopian" faction of strategic policy-shaping of the post-war period to date. This faction, which relied significantly on using complicit Franco's fascist Spain for planting, and continued support, of Nazi influences into post-war Central and South America, was defined not only by an initial commitment to so-called "preventive warfare" against the Soviet Union, but by the dominant role of Bertrand Russell and his collaborators in defining a global policy of "world government won through the terror of nuclear-fission weaponry," as the needless nuclear bombing of the civilian populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki attests. The launching of the doctrine of "world government preventive nuclear war," by the British Fabian Society's Mephistophelean Bertrand Russell, combined with the needless nuclear bombing of the civilian populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, defined the launching of the utopian right-wing doctrine of the nuclear right-wing factions in the U.S., Britain, and NATO, down to the present day.

This nuclear policy defines that "utopian" faction to which President Dwight Eisenhower referred as a "military-industrial complex," the banker-run complex of that time, of which more decadent Vice-President Cheney and his neo-conservatives, like the similarly morally and intellectually decayed current incumbents of 10 Downing Street, are representative today.

Truman's folly in adopting Bertrand Russell's, and Winston Churchill's "utopian" orientation toward "preventive nuclear war" against the Soviet Union, led to the quagmire of the U.S. war in Korea, and the stunning revelation that the Soviet Union had achieved priority in development and successful testing of a deployable thermonuclear-fusion weapon. This situation led to Truman's retirement and the Eisenhower alternative. "Preventive nuclear war" gave way. However, "preventive nuclear war" returned, during Dick Cheney's stint as Secretary of Defense, under President George H.W. Bush, Sr. At that time, Cheney et al. saw the collapse of the Soviet Union's power as the opportunity to revive a "preventive nuclear war" doctrine. Now, with the pathetic son of the father serving as resident dummy in the White House, George Shultz's retained ventriloquists, Cheney, neo-Wellsian Condoleezza Rice, et al., are putting the evil Mr. Cheney's nuclear madness into operation—unless they are prevented by a U.S. suddenly come back to its senses, now.

In the meantime, back during the 1950s, the seed of what Cheney represents today, was planted with the consolidation of Soviet General Secretary Khrushchev's position as Stalin's successor. Khrushchev, in concert with Russell, the latter the original architect of the doctrine of imperial world government through preventive nuclear war, put on the table what was to become known as "mutual and assured thermonuclear destruction," otherwise known as "detente." The missile-crisis of 1962 was an expression of that Russell-Khrushchev relationship. With the collapse of Soviet power during the 1989-1992 interval, Cheney et al. shifted from "detente," back to that pushing for preventive nuclear war which remains Cheney's policy, as Vice-President, today.

So, in that way, this Anglo-American-based outgrowth of the fascist overlordship of western and central continental Europe during the 1922-1945 interval, became known as the military utopianism reflected in the brutish moral criminality and barefaced lying of Vice-President Dick Cheney and his 10 Downing Street Fabian cronies today.

To understand this utopianism in a deeper, more effective way, we must recognize it as essentially the creation of two Fabian Society fathers, the utopian H.G. Wells of The Open Conspiracy notoriety, and Bertrand Russell's leading role in designing and promoting the doctrine of "world government through (perpetual) preventive nuclear warfare."

The Russell doctrine was already being put through mass-rehearsals, prior to Hiroshima, by the Joseph de Maistre-style of Churchill-Lindemann doctrine of mass-murder of civilian populations, through creating fire-storm holocausts against the large non-military targets in Germany. The attempted British fire-storm in Berlin did not succeed, because the relevant Berlin avenues were too wide for the scheme to succeed; it was intended, for a while, to use the U.S. nuclear weapons on Berlin; but, the bomb was not ready for that use at the time it might have been so used. Instead, the Truman Administration consoled itself with the strategically counterproductive fire-bombing of the civilian population of Tokyo, and President Truman's utterly useless, militarily, nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

1.2 When I Came on Stage

I became, suddenly, a political figure on the world stage during Aug. 15-30, 1971. There were three factors involved in bringing this about.

The first factor, was simply factual. I was the only known economist of note who had accurately forecast publicly that kind of developments, and their outcome, developments which had been set into motion by policies responsible for a series of grave monetary crises during the 1967-1971 interval. Every notable economics textbook, its author, and its forecasts were shown, suddenly and in the most undeniable way, that my forecast had not only been accurate; but, more important, the only competent method of forecasting which was then visible on the world stage. My success on this occasion had international reverberations. Fortunately, but I think not accidentally, I have never spoiled that professional record as an economist during the decades since.

The second factor was an issue of the economic profession's prevalent range of doctrines. Since my humiliating defeat of Keynesian Professor Abba Lerner, chosen to challenge me on behalf of the profession in a celebrated, late 1971 debate, no economist opposed to my views has ever dared to challenge me in open classical debate format on economic and related policy-matters since. Usually, an outpouring of irrelevant, lying defamation is employed as a way of fending off the challenge to debate some terrified target of my challenge to such an encounter.

The third factor was political. I had warned that were the radical, anti-Franklin Roosevelt policy-changes in economic policy not reversed, the world was headed toward the only kind of regime which coincided with the effects of Nixon's policy: fascism, world-wide.

One point of explanation of my most unusual successes in this and related domains, should be made clear as an integral feature of the method which permeates the subsuming subject of this report as a whole.

More significant than all other factors responsible for the customary incompetence of economists and others posing as long-range forecasters, is the myth of the existence of an absolute, "the inevitable event." Whenever someone claims to have foreseen some event which he, or she claims to been an unconditionally predetermined inevitability, that forecaster is self-exposed as intrinsically incompetent in that sort of work. As the success of Frederick the Great against the Austrians at Leuthen attests—or the defeat of both Napoleon Bonaparte's and his successor Hitler's invasion of Russia—the commander who saw the available choice of flanking action which another had overlooked, often secured victory precisely because his opponent had planned an "inevitable" victory. There are no unconditional, monotonic inevitabilities of specific events in the universe. What is "unconditional" is the imminence of a limited array of critical choices. In the case of the present world monetary-financial collapse, the characteristic feature of the overall situation, is a narrowing of the margin of those choices which might be considered acceptable to one or another of the relevant parties.

Take the case of the presently looming threat of rather immediate collapse into a general, global breakdown-crisis, of the world's present monetary-financial system. All of the choices adopted by leading relevant authorities, thus far, in the attempt to postpone the point of general collapse of that system, have the following net effect.

The adoption of a system of "post-industrial" economy by the U.S.A., Britain, and others, was associated with a second rule of thumb, radically extended forms of "free trade." The growth of "outsourcing" through the means of a "floating-exchange-rate" monetary system, over an initial period 1971-1982, created the preconditions for accelerated looting of weaker nations. This, in turn, paved the way for "outsourcing," and for the radical extreme of "outsourcing," which Ross Perot, in 1992, described as "that great sucking sound." The result was the collapsing of higher-price capital investment and productive employment in the U.S.A., the U.K., and other more industrialized nations, through aid of a low-wage policy for the new exporting nations, which latter was an echo of the same form of primitive capital accumulation practiced by Hermann Göring's steering of the practices of the Nazi mega-cartels employing forced and concentration-camp labor.

As a result, the physical-capital ratios, per capita and per square-kilometer, of most of the world, including a massive looting and destruction of the single greatest, 1989-2004 part of this world-wide destruction, the former Soviet Union, has reduced the net physical-capital of the world, while hyperinflationary methods, especially the "John Law"-style financial-derivatives innovations launched by U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, have unleashed what is, in fact, the greatest hyperinflationary bubble in history, a bubble more than ready to be popped now.

During the course of this time, especially since the oncoming systemic collapse of the world system was clearly visible, in 1987, the highest-ranking fools of the world, and others, have often congratulated themselves on their cleverness in postponing the already ripe collapse, by intrinsically hyperinflationary methods which made the next crisis more deadly than the preceding ones. Witness: the outsourcing bubble ("great sucking sound") which Vice-President Al Gore pushed. Witness: the IT bubble, financed by Alan Greenspan's lunacy, and premised on the terror of a touted collapse of the world on Jan. 1, 2000. Witness: the British and Greenspan's lunatic mortgage-backed-securities bubble. Witness: the Fall 1998 decision to use a massive outpouring of a hyperinflationary "wall of money," in the attempt to ensure that the general collapse would occur under President Clinton's successor; thus, the punishment so implicitly intended for Gore, which fell actually upon a Bush who successfully snatched the brass ring of folly from the foolish fingers of rival Gore.

So, over the entire period, beginning with Aug. 15, 1971, the Anglo-American hegemons have led the world in general, step by step along the road toward ultimate doom. At each critical point, there were alternatives. The only good alternative, was to scrap the radical change in economic policy which had been launched, in the wake of the Kennedy assassination, by the pro-utopian faction. The second class of alternatives, which represented no more than medium-term, or even short-term stop-gap measures, like that taken by President Clinton in the last quarter of 1998, always led to a worse threat of collapse than the preceding charlatan's nostrum.

Through all of this, there was a different sort of available choice. Scrap the system these charlatans were defending, and return to the proven principles of the Roosevelt recovery which had carried the United States and others, from March 1933 through the death of President Kennedy. Those geniuses were fleeing, in fact, toward their legendary meeting with doom, in Samara.

A concise summary of the way I foresaw the end toward which my rival economists were misleading their clients, runs as follows.

The mathematical-physical paradigm for the doom now descending upon the present world monetary-financial system, is Bernhard Riemann's famous analysis of the way in which a sonic shock-wave is generated, and also transcended. The relevant comparison is as follows.

What we are facing is not a recession, or cyclical depression. We are now faced with a systemic disintegration of that existing system. The only escape to safety, is by dumping that system, in favor of a return to a type of new system not inconsistent with the recovery methods which President Franklin Roosevelt applied to both the U.S. economic recovery, and the extension of that to rebuilding a war-shattered world—the original, Roosevelt-defined, Bretton Woods system. The operation to be performed is comparable to the achievement of "breaking the sound barrier" as the latter was originally defined by Riemann. The possibility of survival under these conditions, depends upon applying the lessons of FDR's successes to the process of placing the existing system into receivership by sovereign governments, for government-supervised reorganization in bankruptcy under conditions of a government-credit-launched general economic recovery.

The "sound barrier" in this case is not a fixed value, but a relative one. The "sound barrier" analogue, against which the hyperinflationary surge of monetary-financial aggregate is being thrown, is determined by a ratio of the rate of increase of such aggregate, relative to the rate of contraction of real physical assets, per capita and per square kilometer. The kind of mathematical function so described may be viewed, in first approximation, as hyperbolic.[11] In this case, the increase of the financial-monetary aggregate is tied to a function of decline of net physical output per capita and per square kilometer. This is the case because the increase of credit to feed the financial-monetary bubble, depends upon what is termed "primitive (e.g., parasitical) capital accumulation" against the physical basis. The result is an apparent increase of the steepness of the hyperbolic curve of financial-monetary aggregate, relative to each increment in of time. Time itself is relative, in this case. The rate at which the economy is looted to prevent it from collapse, determines the relative time expressed by the function overall.

When the steepness of the hyperbolic-like curve approaches "straight up," an absolute limit for the system has been approached very nearly. In that interval, which expresses itself with increasingly wild turbulence, the boundary layer reflecting the outer limit of the existence of the world monetary-financial system has been reached.

But even at the point, there is an option. Change the system, as I have proposed consistently over about four decades. It is the unwillingness of the relevant parties to consider changing the system itself, as I have proposed, which is the only reason they have to fear what they might regard as the inevitable doom of the world-system. Therefore, they fear and hate me, because my existence, by emphasizing that the collapse of the world economy is by no means inevitable, implicitly threatens the world they wish to have. As empiricist James Clerk Maxwell explained his fraudulent refusal to acknowledge his borrowings from the discoveries of Gauss, Weber, and Riemann, Maxwell and his British colleagues had wittingly refused to acknowledge the existence of "any geometries but our own."

Finally, on this matter of "inevitability." The rationale usually employed in a kind of formalist's defense of the notion of inevitability, is the same type of argument central to the underlying folly of all Aristotelian thinking, and also of the neo-Aristotelian modes known as empiricism, positivism, and existentialism. The problem is typified in the writings of Kepler, such as his The New Astronomy, in Kepler's focus on the fraud, in astronomy, by the Aristotelian Claudius Ptolemy and the pro-Aristotelian follies of Copernicus and Tycho Brahe. This is otherwise to be recognized, to the same net effect, as the pathologically anti-Promethean ideology of the Delphi cult, and the Eleatics, Sophists, Aristotelians, and empiricists generally. The core of the aspect of that issue which is of relevance in the present immediate context of the principles of forecasting, is expressed by the difference between the concept of "power," by pre-Aristotelian Classical Greek science, and Aristotle's proposed substitute for "power," "energy." Energy is an effect; power is the action whose footprint may often be termed "energy."

When we recognize that a failed self-esteemed forecaster thinks in terms of statistical or kindred extrapolations from observed effects, to the effect of assuming that an adduced pattern of effects is the motive for the subsequent outcome, we have put our finger on the deepest source of that forecaster's incompetence.

The essential distinction of man from the beast, is the individual human mind's sovereign power of cognitive insight, a power corresponding exactly to Plato's principle of hypothesis. The discovery of a previously unknown physical principle, by the Platonic method of hypothesis, equips us with efficient knowledge of some otherwise invisible, but already efficiently existing principle of the universe, a principle which existed implicitly in the entire scope of Creation itself. The adoption of that discovered principle, when practiced by man, is a power of man to change the universe.

The very existence of man as a distinct species, resides entirely in that point I have just summarized. It is the motivating intent to cause a form of action, which expresses a discovered universal physical principle, which is the sole cause for the continued existence of the human species. Change, so defined, is the only form of existence actually known to mankind. Thus the passion to change the universe, rather than following intellectually and morally rotten Rome in preferring the illusion of fixed permanent laws of a mythical universe—the Aristotelian or comparable source of that deadly delusion which is to be recognized in the form of belief in inevitable outcomes.

This was the characteristic principle of evil ruling Rome; this was the utopia envisaged by Diocletian. This is the evil represented by the idea of a perpetual British empire, as by Lord Shelburne's crew, or a "Thousand-Year Reich," or the almost or actually Satanic belief in submission to a pre-fixed state of nature, as by the mentally and morally crippled "greenie." The search for a permanent ordering of the universe is an impulse which cripples its believer, intellectually and morally. At its least worst, it renders the victim of such a delusion psycho-sexually impotent. As a policy which the victim of such a delusion seeks to impose upon others, or society generally, it is the evil from which empires and fascism like Hitler's and Michael Ledeen's spread.

The economists whose wrath I have thus requickened by these remarks, represent a lackey-like dedication to fostering their careers in service to their actual or would-be master. They are apologists for their master, even comparable to parish priests of a Satanic-like cult. They wish to keep the world within the bounds of their master's pleasure. They are psycho-sexually inert, as faithful harem eunuchs are, to the effect of their seeking to assure only inevitably predetermined outcomes, because they have no reason to exist, but to defend their masters' delusions against all disturbing noises. They are stupid, because, for that reason, they wish to appear stupid.

Why My Enemies Feared My Superiority

As official documents, later released, attest, during 1973 the national Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was engaged, through its assets in the leadership of the Communist Party U.S.A., in a plan to bring about my personal elimination. Our detection of that operation, during December 1973, led to the abortion of actual Communist Party deployments coinciding with what the later released official FBI internal document confirmed. The Loudoun County, Virginia events of October 6-7, 1986 and the Alexandria trial of 1988, are to be understood as essentially a continuation of a persisting pattern of similar intention and character over that period, extending to London's 10 Downing Street-based, Cheney-linked, operations in Europe and elsewhere, today.

The aversive operations of kindred nature from sundry agencies and the financier oligarchy-controlled press, were escalated by several crucial features of my 1976 U.S. Presidential campaign, which was effectively a campaign against Henry A. Kissinger's utopian successor, Trilateral Commission founder and presumptive National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski, obviously, was not pleased by my tampering with the intended success of several of his nastier ventures. The reaction zoomed with the SDI campaign, lost some of its vigor with my imprisonment, but erupted into successive escalations in 1996, the 2000 Democratic Presidential campaign, and my critical interventions into the worsening U.S. situation under the current President. The pattern here is not a succession of events, but, rather a continuing process which generates a succession of discrete effects. I illustrate the process by identifying a few of its exemplary effects.

My development of the proposal which President Reagan named the SDI, began with my reaction to a discovery of a document which chanced to fall into my hands during the 1976 Presidential campaign. That information became the most widely recognized feature of my 1976 Presidential campaign, and the subject of an election-eve, nationwide TV broadcast that year. For that alone, some of the establishment have never forgiven me to the present day.

During the 1975-1976 run-up to Zbigniew Brzezinski's replacing what had been his former Harvard bedfellow, under "house mother" Professor William Yandell Elliott, Henry A. Kissinger's position as National Security Advisor,[12] I chanced upon what is fairly termed "hot and solid evidence," that a section of the proposed Carter Administration—a section associated with utopian J. Rodney Schlesinger—was tinkering with an intention to stage what would readily become a nuclear standoff with the Soviet Union. Therefore, my 1976 U.S. Presidential candidacy featured my sounding the alarm against this feature of the incoming Brzezinski Administration's schemes. That warning succeeded in its purpose; there were no more such squeaks about "present danger" from Schlesinger's niche in the Brzezinski cabal during President Carter's term. Nonetheless, I had learned the lesson from that experience; the United States must find a science-aided alternative to the dead-end game of "Peace through Mutual Thermonuclear Terror."

My ability to turn an accumulation of scattered scientific and related facts into a strategic doctrine, depended upon a feature of my knowledge which lay outside the bounds of the generally accepted notions of the science-classroom. I have tended to rely, pedagogically, more and more on what I describe as "the fishbowl syndrome" to portray to others the characteristic way in which cultures tend to cling, stubbornly, to systemic delusions which tend to ensure a self-inflicted downfall or severe injury of an entire nation, an entire culture.

The post-1954 effort to restructure the entire cultures of Europe and the Americas, in particular, around development of what came to be known as "detente," is an example of that sort of systemic pathology. The Kissinger and Brzezinski phases of this variety of utopian strategic doctrine, was the pathology which I addressed in my design for an alternative to this utopian nightmare, an alternative expressed in the form of what became known as a "Strategic Defense Initiative."

What became known as "SDI," at least in the way I defined it, was based on an understanding of the relevant aspects of the prevalent "fishbowl syndrome" of that time. The solution for the challenge so defined could not have been developed into what became known as SDI, except from the standpoint which I had contributed to the founding and developing of the FEF.

About the same time I acquired the evidence of the nuclear-war-like intentions of Trilateral Commission circles associated with James Rodney Schlesinger, a fight had already broken out within the Defense Department over the issue of development of what the diplomatic lexicon identifies as "new physical principles" of defense against nuclear-armed intercontinental missiles. In the process, the then-current head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Lt.-General Daniel P. Graham, was a typical, fanatical opponent of such development. Graham was later to become a leading, rather savage 1982-83 opponent of both me and Dr. Edward Teller on this issue. Graham demanded, as in his 1982 campaign for a kookish scheme called "High Frontier," that missile defense be limited to systems which had already, correctly been defined as obsolete back during the early 1960s.

During the second half of 1977, I was informed of the fight over the development of "new physical principles" ongoing within the Pentagon. I took the side of the proponents of "new physical principles," but I knew that those boosting the use of these principles there had not yet grasped the deeper implications of what they were supporting. In response, I recognized that without a general change in strategic doctrine, "new physical principles" could be degraded into the character of a technological gimmick. I concentrated on developing the needed doctrine, the doctrine which became known later, as SDI.

Before continuing with the process leading to the most recent reaction of the commitment to preventive nuclear war by Cheney et al., we must lay the groundwork with a look at those processes of the human mind which permitted modern society to drive into the kind of lunacy which Cheney merely typifies today.

These developments have divided the military professionals and related political circles of the U.S.A. between two factions, the sane (the "traditionalists" typified by Generals of the Armies MacArthur and Eisenhower) and the lunatic "utopians," typified by the followers of Churchill, Lindemann, Bertrand Russell, and RAND warrior clans, et al. The latter set of dangerous lunatics are to be diagnosed as a special case of what I have found it convenient to describe as a typical "fishbowl mentality."

Since I am, as I have qualified this, a Promethean, I do not seek to fix hopelessly dysfunctional systems; I save my efforts to the purpose of making the necessary change in the system. My advantage, in crafting the original design for the policy which became known as the original, March 23, 1983 doctrine of SDI, differed from all others: In the sense that I used the idea of the implications of "new physical principles," to a strategic political end, a change in the world political system, as the basis for the employment of relevant scientific-technological and related military-systems changes in the strategic configuration which had to be revolutionized. In effect, all of this, combined, was a fresh application of the same principle, applied to the 1945-1983 strategic conflict, which Cardinal Mazarin, et al., had applied, in the Treaty of Westphalia, to bring the Thirty Years War of 1618-1648 to a peaceful conclusion.

The objective of modern warfare is its unavoidable function as the securing of a peace which could be achieved in no other way. Thus, the design of forces, weapons-systems, and their applications must be designed accordingly. To achieve that result, we must start backwards in time, from the peace sought, to the selection of the means needed to bring that about.

Therefore, the crucial point of reference by me, to the Soviet side of the equation, was the fact that the Soviet military-scientific establishment could produce what were, under the circumstances on their side, relative miracles of applied science; whereas, the performance of the civilian side of the economy, frankly, stunk, as most learned relevant Soviet publications acknowledged to the degree political discretion permitted. The peace-making objective for the U.S.A., must therefore focus on that irony of the situation. That was my approach in 1982-1983, when I conducted an authorized back-channel dialogue with the Soviet government's representative on behalf of President Reagan's National Security Council.

The U.S. approach to defense, at that time, was based largely on technologically obsolescent junk produced by Wall Street's favorite military contractors. Gen. Daniel Graham's "High Frontier"—not merely "high," but virtually psychedelic—reflected that folly. The object must be to shift the military-hardware parameters to a long-term agreement on a shift from Bertrand Russell-style, obsolete weapons of mutually assured destruction, to higher order technologies which could become the weapons for escaping that deadly paradox, but, but, but would provide a science-driver up shift of the economies participating in the agreement. This up shift must occur in a way consistent with the principle of "the advantage of the other" which produced the miraculous end of a virtual dark age of religious warfare, in the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia.

My view had a certain novelty, but it was completely consistent with the principles of nation-building-based strategic defense which had been developed by Lazare Carnot, Gerhard Scharnhorst, and our own science-engineering-based military professionals, through the service of Generals of the Armies MacArthur and Eisenhower. It was the Christian principle, of give your ostensible adversary bread in exchange for a stone.

This traditionalist implication of my design was widely recognized and supported among leading military-professional and related circles in Europe and elsewhere. That very fact, however, points to the reasons I was so bitterly hated for my role in the matter of SDI. I was threatening to take away the cookies of the fascist babies, merely typified by Vice-President Cheney, buzzards who had their gizzards set for a utopian enterprise of world government achieved through nuclear terror. Hence, the cry: "Eliminate him!"

1.3 'The Fishbowl Syndrome'

By "fishbowl" I mean the a state of mind in which the individual's view of the universe is viciously out of physical, cause-effect correspondence with that real universe in which he is engaged in reciprocal action.

What is recognizable as the "reductionist" form of belief, represents a wide variety of specific sets of belief, which all together, while otherwise differing among themselves, are mental disorders of a common type, mental disorders which, even when otherwise specifically distinct from one another, share a common, specific quality of flawed characteristics. The more readily understandable expressions of such mental disorders, are encountered in the influence of the forms of reductionist pathologies encountered in physical science, but, most emphatically, within the domain of mathematics. In modern European cultures, the bulk of these pathologies afflicting mathematical science are traced, as it is said, "hereditarily," from an overlap of currents rooted in Aristotelianism and empiricism. Today, the best opportunity to gain an overview of the functional characteristics of reductionist disorders in the practice of physical science, is the revolutionary work of Bernhard Riemann

The truth is, that the essential difference which separates all men and women absolutely, and equally, from all other living species, is the Platonic principle of Socratic hypothesis. Man is able to see, and to prove the existence of objects called "universal physical principles," which can not be seen as objects of sense-perception. As man accumulates knowledge and mastery of these universal principles, which pre-Euclidean Greek science knew as "powers" (i.e., dynamis), mankind's power in, and over the universe is increased to such effects as increasing society's potential relative population-density, as measurable per-capita and per-square-kilometer of the Earth's surface.

Thus, the mind of the human individual expresses a power which is generated for action within the mental processes of a living person, but which can not be identified as a product of the individual's biology. There is no basis for arbitrary, or otherwise irrational speculation in this distinction. The universe, as recognized by ancient Classical Greek scientists and, in a notable modern case, V.I. Vernadsky, is a manifold of three multiply-connected phase-spaces, which latter we distinguish experimentally as the abiotic, the living, and, lastly, what is termed the noëtic, or cognitive. The point to be emphasized, is that the human individual's acquisition of efficient knowledge of a discovered, experimentally validated, universal physical principle expresses the active presence of a fully efficient universal phase-space, a phase space which requires an experimental method distinct from the methods sufficient for either abiotic phase-space, or a merely living phase-space.

This is the matter of the fraudulent argument which Carl Gauss refuted in his 1799 attack on the hoax of Euler, Lagrange, et al.

Modern studies of the astronomical characteristics of Egyptian astronomy from before the erection of the great pyramids, confirmed the Greek accounts, as by Plato and others, that the notably leading elements of Greek scientific culture came from Egypt. This was expressed by that Pythagorean notion of "spherics," which served as the basis for pre-Aristotelian, and pre-Euclidean geometry. Four most elementary features of the Pythagorean science of Plato et al., are the construction of the doubling of the line, the construction of the doubling of the square, the construction of the doubling of the cube, and the Platonic solids. The first three of these four, are the points of reference employed by Gauss to show the fraudulent character of those notions of a fundamental theorem of algebra associated with d'Alembert, Euler, and Lagrange. The action which generates each those three constructions is a power as the Pythagoreans and Plato define the meaning of power (Gr.: dynamis). The doubling of the cube is the simplest and clearest representation of the principle underlying all cases, as the relevant problem was posed by Cardan to his successors. Thus, Gauss's 1799 argument against Euler and Lagrange, implicitly defines the physical significance of the complex domain underlying the general notion of a fundamental theorem of algebra.

These discoveries of universal physical principle, are not merely methods of mathematical description, as if at the blackboard. They represent the discovery, and wielding, by man, of efficiently acting universal physical principles which existed before man's acquaintance with their existence. The principle of experimental proof signifies man's demonstration of his ability to secure willful control over the use of that principle, that in ways which may change the way in which the universe unfolds from that point on. That is to say, that, as Vernadsky emphasized, just as the acting principle of life works in a way which is external to the abiotic processes of Earth, to generate the change known as the transformation of the ostensibly abiotic planet into a Biosphere, man's willful use of discovered universal physical principles, superimposes those qualitative changes which, cumulatively, transform the planet from a Biosphere to define the Noösphere. A true discovery of any universal physical principle, is a grasp of the power to make a willful change in the ordering of the universe. The universal physical principle discovered, existed, and functioned in the universe before man first discovered it. Nonetheless, when man not only discovers, but deploys such a principle, man's willful action in using that principle changes the universe. Hence, such discoveries are to be recognizing as acting "powers" for changing the world, in the sense of that usage by pre-Euclidean Greeks such as the Pythagoreans, Heraclitus, and Plato.

In physical science, "power," so defined as the desired alternative to the term of superstition named "energy," means either a power by which we willfully change the universe, or a power which bounds the pathway of action of a principle which we are willfully deploying. This notion, and the distinctions it incorporates, have been made qualitatively clearer by the original discoveries of Bernard Riemann.

Modern insight into this feature of universal physical science as such, depends upon the revolutionary discovery central to Bernhard Riemann's 1854 habilitation dissertation. This work freed science from all remaining obligation to believe in such "fishbowl"-like substitutes for knowledge as the definitions, axioms, and postulates of a Euclidean deductive system. In place of so-called "self-evident," a priori assumptions, competent science now declares that we know nothing except what we know as a relatively unique quality of experimental proof of some Platonic form of hypothesis which serves us efficiently as a man-discovered universal physical principle. Henceforth, from that, man is freed by Riemann's demonstration, beginning his celebrated, 1854 habilitation dissertation, from all definitions, axioms, and postulates, and the kinds of deductive method associated with them.

Not only are the a priori kinds of definitions, axioms, and postulates false, inherently. The acceptance of such a set of beliefs corrupts the mind of the duped believer, to the effect of erecting a mental barrier, within which false universe, the individual's and society's ability to act is self-confined, as we may say of a pet fish ostensibly content to continue swimming out his life within a fishbowl.

Take the example of a currently widespread, popular delusion, the notion of a physical principle of "free trade," as a relevant illustrative case in point.

From the standpoint of physical reality, rather than financial-accounting mythologies, the term "profit" has no rational meaning, except as indicating an anti-entropic form of action which generates more power than is required to generate it. This physical definition of profit may be restated as the portion of the total physical output, when that is expressed in the form of power, which must be allotted, beyond maintaining the existence of the producer and the means the producer employs, to produce the relevant total outcome.

In a modern physical economy, three features of this process are outstanding. The replacement of the family which provided the producer an equal or better functional condition. The replacement of the means of production used, in an equal or better function condition. The replacement of the infrastructure of society, on which the equal or better existence of that society and its means of production depend.

However, in the practice of "free trade," the following insanity occurs.

The price of goods is reduced, by lowering the quality of the labor employed. The price of goods is reduced, by cannibalizing the existing physical capital. The price of goods is reduced, temporarily, by depletion of the pre-existing natural conditions and standard of life, up to the point of a general state of at least relative collapse of the system.

In the unfortunate case, that a nation, or nations are deluded into believing that "free trade's" changes must necessarily lead to an improvement: On principle, the point at which the depletion of society by cannibalizing populations, means of production, and infrastructure (including nature itself), will approach the condition of a breakdown of the system, defines a boundary of that foolish society's continued existence in that form. That defines a "fishbowl." Either the system is reformed, to eliminate the "free trade" factor, or the society collapses. "Get out of the fishbowl, or die."

Reliance on "free trade" as the factor of social practice whose application must be perfected, as in the case of so-called "globalization" versions of the "free trade" cult today, tends to eliminate all factors of economic-policy-directed activity which might be seen by relevant "free trade" ideological fanatics as exceptions to the perfected, universal application of the "free trade" rule. This is precisely the effect which has been seen as a trend in the Americas and Europe during the post-1987 interval. This trend is the underlying cause of the onrushing general breakdown of the present, U.S.-Britain-dominated, financial-derivatives-rotted-out, world monetary-financial system. So, our incumbent U.S. President, cap-and-bells aroused, hears that "free trade's" effects are ruining the economy; "That means we need a heavier dose of free trade," he replies.

Look at the lunatic's "fishbowl" of "I believe in free trade," as it has shaped the devolution of the U.S. political-economic system since the aftermath of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy by the Nazi-linked interests which the cats, Allen Dulles and James J. Angleton dragged in from their Nazi recruits in Germany, François Genoud's Switzerland, and northern Italy, once President Franklin Roosevelt had died.

There were important flaws in post-Franklin Roosevelt monetary, economic, and foreign policies prior to the removal of the "military-industrial-complex's" obstacle, Kennedy. However, those new policies which have led into the U.S. economic disasters of the past forty years, were not a product of the FDR legacy which persisted among the economic policies of the 1933-1963 interval. The presently onrushing collapse of the end-phase of the post-Kennedy world monetary-financial system, is the product of an intention to bring about what Henry Kissinger crony, and wild-eyed right-wing utopian Michael Ledeen, has praised as a "universal fascist" mode of imperial world government.

As I have summarized this point, respecting "fishbowl" ideologies, in sundry earlier locations, we have the following.

Riemann freed mathematical physics from the grip of so-called "self-evident," a priori definitions, axioms, and postulates. After that, not only are they no longer necessary; the continued reliance on such assumptions is specifically pathological in nature, and in ultimate consequences. Assumptions of that type fall among, chiefly, three general classes. A.) A type of assumption which has at least an experimentally grounded, shadowy correspondence to the existence of a lurking principle. B.) A type of assumption, such as "free trade," which is perniciously false. C.) A failure to keep an active sort of open-mindedness about the existence of actual universal principles beyond present knowledge.

This composition of the essentially reductionist form of axiomatic and kindred assumptions, is otherwise flawed by the general view that these assumptions, the best or worst of them, can be treated as independently axiomatic factors, rather than as part of a Riemannian form of multiply-connected array. Since this may appear strange to those lacking experience on this ground, I must explain this point.

In a Riemannian physical geometry, the only allowed assumptions of an axiomatic implication, are discovered hypotheses which have been validated, as universal physical or subsumed principles, by a quality of experiment which is designated as "unique": an experiment which, by its nature, shows the principle to be not only valid experimentally, but absolutely, or relatively universal. No other form or quality of assumption is allowed as equivalent to one of axiomatic universality.

That does mean that Euclidean space and time (and the Cartesian outgrowth of that delusion) are to be banned from present and future science. The remedy is elementary: return to the pre-Euclidean notion of spherics which the Pythagoreans and Plato adopted from the methods of Egyptian spherical astronomy. All of the great achievements of European science have been rooted in the notions of a physical, rather than formally abstract geometry, as typified by the root of competent modern science in the work of the followers of Thales, the Pythagoreans, and Plato.

The trouble with a priori assumptions, even those which are not malicious, is that they incorporate a margin of a polluting kind of practical error, that as a hereditary feature of the practice of that belief. So, a culture which has adopted even not terribly bad working assumptions, in place of actually universal physical principles, must tend to collapse in the longer term, because of the cumulative effect of the margin of error in a practical assumption.

The notion of truth, in the strictly higher sense, presumes a practical correspondence of the image of the universe in the mind of the actor (an actor such as a society), and the real universe. Therefore, we must be occupied by attention to those systemic features of a set of axiomatic-like beliefs which are in contradiction to the way in which the universe actually works. By systemic, we should intend to point toward a stubbornly vicious practical conflict between the consequences of an axiomatic quality of decision-making, and the assumed consequences. A case in point, is the way in which lunatic belief in "free trade" has played a leading role as a systemic feature of the forty-year decline of the U.S. economy, from the world's leading producer nation, to the pile of post-industrial garbage which the economy has become today.

A state of mind which is both relatively free of false axiomatic assumptions, and also actively seeking new, positive improvements in its roster of assumptions, is a truthful mind. A contrary opinion, is a man progressing, step by step, toward doom. The doom is the fruit of the lie. Thus, the imagined intention of strolling toward paradise, turns out, in the end, to be a descent into Hell. That is the "fishbowl" of paranoia which has come to dominate the U.S.A. under the temporary reign of the soon-to-retire Baby Boomer generation today.

2. Economy and Science

The theme of this report so far has been, that the present world monetary-financial system is presently in the terminal, breakdown phase of a general collapse. The end of the world is by no means inevitable on this account; but there is, in fact, no possible way in which that present system could be revived, as if in something resembling its present form. The present onrush of that general economic collapse, combined with the intersecting onrush toward an ultimately global form of generalized asymmetric warfare, is the principal feature of the present world crisis-situation. Only the replacement of the present monetary-financial system by a new one, a new one organized through the putting of the old into government receivership for reorganization, represents a feasible alternative to onrushing doom.

In the meantime, as noted above, I am not only the most successful long-range forecaster of recent decades, but perhaps the only person presently living who has an at least adequate comprehension of the most urgent issues posed by the economic aspects of this crisis. While my superiority on this account is something which I have earned by a unique and important discovery in the domain of a science of physical economy, it must be emphasized, for practical strategic reasons, that my advantage on this account is much more a result of the general failure of those who might be considered my rivals in this profession, than my own accomplishment. In the world of fools, I am a man.

To understand the topics which I have brought together so far in this report, we must conclude this report by introducing a summary, if simplified representation of the most significant scientific implications of my discovery, and point out those of its implications which are of paramount relevance for the subsuming subject and assigned mission of this report as a whole.

The branch of scientific inquiry which reflects both truthful universal physical principles and also those social principles we may properly associate with principles of Classical artistic composition, is the science of physical economy, as I have improved qualitatively upon the original discoveries of the founder of this branch of science, Gottfried Leibniz. The history of that discovery of mine has a homely aspect. This aspect touches upon the nature of the distinction between the pompous lecturer whose classroom manner implies that his wisdom jumped from the brow of Minerva, and the homely individual whose impassioned, stubborn will developed a discovery from the grimy dirt up.

Start with the grime.

When I had not yet reached 16, my father, an accomplished consultant in footwear manufacturing, threw me into the pond, so to speak, doing Summer-time factory work in a shoe factory, where I was initially apprenticed as what is known as a "hand-dinker" at the lordly wage of 25 cents per hour. Diocletian be cursed! It is what his father had done to him, and what he was doing to me.

The relevant point is simply my persuasion then, after a few days, that there must be a better way to do this job. Anyone who has actually done meaningful factory labor, and who is not rendered inert by the experience, becomes the kind of person on whom the institution of the factory suggestion-box was focussed: there must be a better way to do this job, to accomplish this result, to improve the product, and to have the gratifying sense of fun with which a useful form of progress rewards its author.

This effect tends to be specific to that sort of employment, as distinct from the generality of "white collar employment."

My father was a strict pacifist, but tended toward rages. (Over the decades since, I have found rage, ironically, but not actually surprisingly, a common characteristic of pacifists.) When he asked me, one day, how is the work going, I replied that I was enjoying it. He darkened. He became furious! I thought he was about to strike me! He had come from a school of thought in which work was fulfilling one's duty to suffer, and a view in which unpaid time which was unoccupied by such suffering was economically and morally worthless. As Shakespeare put the word into the mouth of Cassius, my father's misfortune was that he, although not without a brilliant, and cultivated side to his intellect, and a technical side, too, also had the ideology of an underling. I was already, by that age, a devout Promethean. I thought of work as an opportunity for making useful discoveries, even if of such minor consequence as "hand-dinking," and had a deep moral commitment to saving my time through discovery of better methods, as precious.

That was the homely kind of adolescent experience which was later reflected in my instant, and justified contempt for Professor Norbert Wiener's notion of statistical "information theory." It was that reaction against what I considered the irrationality in Wiener's argument for "information theory," which led me, from early 1948 on, into 1953, to develop and complete my essential discoveries in a science of physical economy.

Once one has actually made an original discovery of a scientific quality, as I have done in that matter, life thereafter is changed in a special way. One's discovery of principle becomes, in a meaningful part, one's self. It is, as Kepler showed in his The New Astronomy, a discovered physical principle embedded as one's efficient intention. The experience of acting under the efficient governance of that intention, shapes one's character and related motives in a deep-going way; the principle, as it develops through experience, becomes a characteristic feature of one's personal character. We come to see every experience in terms of the exhibited reflection of the way our now-familiar principle operates universally.

So, when I see a patch of land-area today, I see its expressed relative potential population-density. I see the collective, guilty insanity of the Baby Boomer generation in the collapse of our once productive agricultural and industrial areas, and in the virtual criminality of the asocial effects produced by today's generality of real-estate practices. I see poverty not as personal misfortune of the individual, but as economic folly which is a product of our foolish, current economic policies, for which the nation is now paying dearly in lost real (physical) national income. I also recognize that today's typical Baby Boomers, even presumably well-educated professionals, are simply not capable, in experience, education, or moral conditioning, of recognizing any of the crucial principles on which a successful economy depends. What a fishbowl mentality they represent! They are, in general, an uncultured generation, of relatively primitive instincts, lacking the characteristics of a culture with economic survival-potential. As the history of legislation and voting shows, they usually prefer bad policies, even very bad policies, over even simply decent ones. Looking back across known history, they represent the cultural potential of a self-doomed culture. As a qualified economist, with many decades under my belt, this kind of evidence proves conclusively that, unless the trend of our Baby Boomer generation is changed, and that radically, soon, this nation will not continue to exist in a recognizable form. They are living, mentally, in a "fishbowl," and the contents of the fishbowl are about to be dumped, you probably know where.

In a science of physical economy, the apparent division between art and science is dissolved. In physical science, the sovereign powers of hypothesizing of the individual mind, are juxtaposed, experimentally, to nature as represented by the combined abiotic and living domains. In Classical art, and in the politics which is properly informed by Classical art, the individual's sovereign powers of hypothesizing are focussed upon the subject of task-oriented relations among the individual members of a society considered more or less as a whole. In physical economy, these two departments are united, in practice, as one. The science of physical economy is both a physical science and a science of art.

For example, in Classical drama, such as the tragedies of Aeschylus, Shakespeare, and Schiller, the competent author is definable as one who has always recreated a specific page of history to be performed and observed on the stage of the audience's imagination. Any drama must be costumed—if anything other than ordinary street-clothes of today are worn—according to the actual costuming of the period and place of history referenced, and must never be represented as anything but as a true representation of the historically specific characteristics of the culture of that time and place. Any different treatment of a Classical drama is a Romantic's fraud. All Classical art, like drama, communicates by ironical inference, never by symbolism. That is to say, that Classical art, such as a J.S. Bach fugue, or a late Beethoven quartet, is always based on creating a thought-object for which no term exists in the previously established vocabulary. The artist's composition, and its appropriate performance, forces the mind of the audience (and the performer) to generate a definite thought-object (e.g., Geistesmasse) which did not previously exist in the vocabulary. The name of the artistic composition then becomes the speakable name for the newly created idea.

The inability to grasp the notion of ideas which function as the equivalent of universal physical principles within the domain of Classical artistic composition, and of statecraft, has the same root as the empiricist corruption which Carl Gauss addressed, in 1799, in his attack on Euler, Lagrange, et al. The denial of the existence of an efficient form of hypothesis, which is the burden of Euler's fraud on the matter of the complex domain, can be, and, in fact, must be traced in European civilization to the attacks on the Pythagoreans by the Eleatics and Sophists, and the attacks on Plato by Aristotle.[13] The empiricists deny the existence of that principle of hypothesis, by means of which, and no other, the experience of a stubborn apparent paradox leads to the discovery of a universal physical principle. Instead of cognition, empiricists insist that all that is knowable must be known by deduction from an appropriate choice of a priori assumptions.

Thus, the empiricist, like Thomas Huxley and Frederick Engels, denies the knowable existence of categorical difference between a man and an ape.[14] So, a man from Sun Systems joins the pack of wild-eyed hyenas who insist, as foolish Minsky and Chomsky have followed the clever, but maliciously silly hoaxsters Wiener and von Neumann, in claiming the possibility of building a human mind out of virtual Erector Set parts.

The same fallacy is the root-origin of the notions of thermodynamical entropy introduced by Clausius, Grassmann, Kelvin, Helmholtz, Maxwell, and the Machian Boltzmann. At the least worst of the work-product of those reductionists, they commit two cardinal acts of scientific incompetence. First, their argument assumes that the universe is primarily, axiomatically abiotic, as the social thought of Bertrand Russell acolytes Norbert Wiener and John von Neumann does. This is the source of their definition of "entropy." They insist on ignoring the fact that the universe is Riemannian, composed of multiply-connected phase-spaces, of which the intrinsically anti-entropic principles of life and noësis are included, efficient intentions (motives). Second, they attempt to measure general thermodynamic processes in terms of Aristotle's impotent concept of "energy," rather than the Pythagorean concept of "power' (dynamis). As I have written above, "energy," to the extent it is a meaningful term, points to an effect, not a motive, not an intention. "Energy" is an effect, not a universal physical principle.

In the case of the strictly physical aspect of economy, it is the discovery and application of a universal physical principle, or its technological derivative, which is the only physical source of real profit in the economy as a whole. Furthermore, the real profit of an economy is never competently defined as the sum-total of the profits attributed to local enterprises. Already, with technology expressed at the work-place, we have human passion, human motives. This is the passion associated with the intention to introduce a discovered principle to a physical process.

The silent ("shut up and do your work!") man is never the exemplar of productivity. It is the transmission of motive among people, which is the means by which a principle, discovered by a person, becomes the efficiently motivated practice of many. This motivation depends upon universal principles, which are different than the physical principles of abiotic and living processes per se, but are universal principles of the noëtic domain.

Take language, for example. Grammar, and, sometimes, even dictionaries, have their uses, but the most important aspects of communication intrinsically violate any fixed doctrines of grammar and dictionaries alike. The generation and communication of ideas respecting principle occurs in the paradoxical features of statements, as the ideas of a Bach fugue illustrate the same point (nothing is more hideously inhuman, than hearing a Bach fugue performed without creative insight into the function of irony). Just as an apparent anomaly in the orbit of Mars led Kepler to a uniquely original discovery of universal gravitation, all communication of ideas involves the comprehension of an experienced paradox as a thought-object of the quality of Geistesmasse. It is in the psychological tension of experiencing a meaning which exists only as a mocking irony lurking among the cracks of a grammarian's funeral service, that efficient ideas are communicated. It is only in the shared experience of such forms of irony, that discoveries of universal physical principles are communicated among persons.

Hence, as four decades of experience has shown, "programmed learning" is the direct road to intellectual failure, and, often bankruptcy. "Programmed learning" in schools, produces students who pass multiple-choice, computer-scored examinations, without the pains of coming to actually know anything. "Power Point" lectures, thus, spread nothing so efficiently and broadly as intellectual, or, probably, also financial bankruptcy. Communicating only "information," is imparting ignorance, and, sometimes worse, very bad taste.

With those considerations now taken into account, consider the task of measuring the performance of an economy.

The Reign of Baby Boomer Terror

The Baby Boomer should not be blamed for having been reared to become a Baby Boomer. Our intent should not be to kill him, but to cure him of a condition largely not of his own making. I know, and was watching how and why it happened, while he or she was still young. The real trouble for today's society starts, when the Baby Boomer refuses to admit that he is sick in the relevant sense of that term.

The proper definition of the Baby Boomer, is one born about the time President Harry Truman dropped the bombs and launched a fascist-like right-wing turn in U.S. affairs. The parents of this Baby Boomer had usually been transformed into what I viewed, at the time, as the "stinking cowards" they had become, out of their personal, psychological underling's fear of the Gestapo-like deployments of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

For me, for as far back as I can recall, I would have always preferred the risk of death for a good cause, to cowardly dishonor. My policy has been; in dangerous times, always take steps to be certain that you are living, as efficiently as possible, for a cause that is worth dying for. Some regular-guy sort of businessman, the golf fan type, or the late fascist Roy M. Cohn's slimy cousin, Dick Morris—for a case in point—would shudder at the thought that they might be caught dead while visiting a house of prostitution; the idea that their death at the place might appear in the local press, would surely unnerve most of them, as it did Dick Morris. I suspect many of that type have reason to suffer such fears. For me, to be "knocked off" while I might be pursuing a dumb career, has been among my habitual aversions.

Most of the veterans of the war I knew from the late 1940s, were of a different temper. They "adjusted," in the course of time, especially those who drifted into what were ideologically "White Collar" communities, where mothers, especially, taught their children to lie as a matter of policy. "Don't associate with...." "Don't be caught saying...." "Remember, your father could lose his nice job...." These conditions of the parental households and the relevant sort of (especially) "White Collar" communities of the 1950s, produced the likely university-entrant of the middle to late 1960s, who has become the pace-setter core of the Baby Boomer generation, in their late fifties, or early sixties today. A parallel, if somewhat differently colored phenomenon is found in Western Europe. Globally extended contemporary European culture has been polluted by this relatively hegemonic pattern.

The crystallizing factor in the experience of the Baby Boomer generation, has been the relevant events of the first half of the 1960s: the utopians' launching of the Bay of Pigs once Eisenhower was safely out of the Presidency; the utopians' promotion of the hoax known as Rachel Carson's fraudulent Silent Spring; the utopians' missile-crisis of 1962; the utopians' assassination of President Kennedy; the utopians' use of the murder of Kennedy as the opportunity to launch the death-trap of what became asymmetric warfare in Indo-China; the utopians' assassinations of the Rev. Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy in 1968.

These events were situated within the previously prepared context associated with essentially-fascist Fabians H.G. Wells' and Bertrand Russell's launching of a countercultural movement associated with the London Tavistock Clinic; the psychoto-mimetic experiences, under Satanist Aleister Crowley, of the Huxley brothers, Aldous and Julian, and Bertrand Russell's and Robert Hutchins' launching of the Unification of Sciences project, out of which the creators of the doctrine of "preventive nuclear warfare" launched the pilot forms, during the 1930s and 1940s, of the rock-drug-sex counterculture, "information society," "environmentalism," and similar modes of systemic self-degradation of youth which exploded during the middle to late 1960s.

The combined effect of the induced cowardice, and practiced, immoral sophistry of the "White Collar" climate of the late 1940s and 1950s, intersected the shock of the terror unleashed during the early 1960s, to produce what appeared from the outside to be curiously kaleidoscopic, Island of Dr. Moreau-like transmogrifications of the (especially) university-campus-situated Baby Boomers of the period from the middle 1960s through early 1970s. Above all, they were conditioned to hate the blue-collar industrial worker and technologically progressive farmer, and the "industrial society" which that producer represented in their opinion.

Those and related effects on that degeneration of a generation, produced a present-day, ruined, and now bankrupt form of national and (largely) world economy, which has reached the point of disintegrating as before your eyes. The Baby Boomer generation, especially the university graduate who entered what he or she viewed as professional life, was, first, conditioned to, and then became an instrument of the policies which not only caused the collapse of the U.S. and other economies, but have conditioned the Baby Boomer generation of the post-1987 period, into using their rise to top-ranking, or nearly-top-ranking positions of influence, to defend the policies causing the growing catastrophe, rather than correcting them.

With the concomitantly ongoing ruin of the conditions of life of the lower eighty percentiles of family-income groups, and the attrition by death, illnesses, and physical-economic circumstances of the World War II generation of young adults, the stratum of Baby Boomers has risen, which sees itself as "The We Are Wonderful" set, as the necessarily reigning upper twenty percent, the so-called "suburbanite" voter. While their own conditions of life become increasingly precarious, they have generally adopted a device, sometimes referred to as "comfort zones," fantasies into which they flee, in the effort to block out the pains and anxieties caused by the terrible world which they themselves have largely built.

This flight into lunatic "comfort zones" has taken a special form in the Democratic Party, in particular, through the affinity developed with the Fabian fascists of London, gathered around a Cheney-ally Prime Minister Tony Blair, who is, in his own way, not only quite as nasty as Cheney, but actually outranks Cheney in evil on the imperial scale. The indecent union between Blair and the Democratic Leadership Council set, explains much about the way in which the Democratic National Committee has developed a hateful sort of disregard for the welfare of the lower eighty percentiles of the nation's family households, as if to block the view of the world which might be seen from the parapets of the upper twenty-percentiles' "comfort zone" fantasies.

What is shocking in the sheer ugliness of widespread such fantasy-ridden Baby Boomer decadence today, is the indifference to the highly visible rot and doom their generation's hegemony itself has contributed, through its pathetic ideology, to the conditions of life of even those Baby Boomers themselves.

On this account, we need a rejection of monetarism, in favor of my science of physical economy, not only for saving our nation's economy from collapse, but to provide the ideologized Baby Boomer "suburbanite" himself an image of the reality which he must come to accept, if he is not go over, suddenly and whole hog, into something like Nazism, as happened in Germany over the course of the Weimar period.

The Specter of Desolation

Think of the map of the U.S.A. Imagine yourself looking downward from about 10,000 feet above the surface of the land, as you criss-cross the nation's territory, in your imagination. Make a series of such surveys. Make such a trip back to 1933. Try 1940, then 1945, then 1954, then 1963, then 1970, 1975, 1982, 1987, 1992, 1996, 2000, and today. Build up a simulation of a lapsed-time image of the unfolding process of change.

Concentrate on several subject-matters. The condition of forests, fields, and so on generally. Where does the population live? What sectors of the economy are dying, such as the once mighty industrial and agricultural regions? What about the shifting percentiles of relative concentration of the population as a whole?

The image you have, which becomes clearer since about the aftermath of 1971-72, is a destruction of the national economy of the U.S.A., as, now, entire areas have become something like ghost towns, with the population packed, more and more, into more and more densely populated zones of hyperactive futility.

From the standpoint of sanity, which the science of physical economy represents, there are two ratios (think of them as like angular ratios, as in astronomy) which are the paramount parameters of first-approximation physical assessment of a national economy as a whole: physically, what is the state of the economy, and its physical productivity, by area, and as a whole, per square kilometer, and per capita?

Brothers and sisters, our country is dying; it is dying, more and more, and now more and more rapidly, of what has been done to it by our people themselves, over the course of the recent four decades. You, mostly you, above all, have done this to our nation; we have, thus, done it to ourselves.

See what is broke. Fix what is needed and useful which has been broken. Above all, diagnose and uproot those changes in values and mental habits which have misgoverned our nation, and its future, more and more, during the recent forty years. If enough of you disagree with me about this matter, your worries are soon over; you will fairly soon not be around much longer to complain. Perhaps that latter condition is comfort for some our citizens; it will certainly cause them to cease to complain.

[1] The indictment itself was typical of a "conspiracy theory" run hog-wild. The charges against all defendants were conspiracy to commit financial fraud. The basis for the allegations presented was the financial injury done to the relevant associations by a continuing conspiracy led by the Federal government itself. This included the trial Judge Albert V. Bryan, Jr.'s own complicity, in protecting the prosecution's fraud upon the bankruptcy court, under a Rule 11 construction. That trial was scheduled to prevent a retrial of the subject of a long mistrial in Federal Court in Boston, Massachusetts, which had concluded with an affirmation of the jurors' intent to exonerate the defendants. The Alexandria, Virginia trial was scheduled by Judge Bryan to pre-empt the Boston retrial, where the defendants would have almost certainly won. See Railroad! (Washington, D.C.: Commission to Investigate Human Rights Violations, 1989).

[2] Later, still during the early days of FEF, it was my wife Helga's collaboration with the leading scholarly figure, R. Haubst, of the Cusanas Gesellschaft, which led to our recognition of the role of Cusa as the virtual "Rosetta Stone" which provided the key to the connection of the Greek Classic to the Fifteenth-Century Renaissance. Today, we would place Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa securely in the position of the link between Plato and Kepler in that series, as Kepler himself argued in his time.

[3] The Fifteenth-Century Renaissance, which revived a previously shattered Papacy, represented a revival of a Christian Apostolic tradition whose Platonic characteristics had been stressed so emphatically by the Apostles John and Paul. The corruption which had led into the Fourteenth-Century New Dark Age, and shattering of the Papacy, was a reflection of the gnostic ultramontane cult of opposition to sovereign nation-states, which had dominated European civilization during the hegemony of a horrid alliance of the Venetian financier-oligarchy, the Norman chivalry, and the followers of Mathilda of Tuscany. Venice's treacherous role in orchestrating the fall of Constantinople, had enabled Venice's oligarchy to effect a resurgence, especially during the interval of religious warfare, 1511-1648. It was during that interval that a continuing effort was made by the Venice-led forces to uproot the institutions of the preceding Renaissance. The philosophical corruption employed and deployed by Venice is best typified by the attack on the work of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa by Venice's Francesco Zorzi, a hater of modern science, and the marriage counsellor to England's Henry VIII, who led in demanding the supremacy of Aristotle against Plato and the early Apostles; and, the later "lord of Venice," Paolo Sarpi, who concocted a modern empiricism modelled upon the lunatic medieval doctrine of William of Ockham (Occam). It was the same Venice, as typified by the roles of Zorzi, Plantagenet pretender Cardinal Pole, and Venice-trained Thomas Cromwell, which orchestrated those schisms in the Christian church which were exploited to cause and promote the religious warfare of the 1511-1648 interval.

[4] See Philip Valenti, "The Anti-Newtonian Roots of the American Revolution," EIR, Dec. 1, 1995.

[5] Typical of the category of absolute denials of the existence of truth, is the case of the "Frankfurt School" elements of what are fairly described as fascists such as, notably, Theodor Adorno and Hannah Arendt, and the school of drama of the frankly diabolical Bertolt Brecht. The existentialists, such as Arendt's Nazi intimate Martin Heidegger, based their so-called philosophy on an explicit denial of the existence of truth. In the case of Arendt, she based her denial of the existence of truth, on the reading of Immanuel Kant by Karl Jaspers. Her argument was a correct reading of the implications of Kant's doctrine. This denial of truth, as by her, formed the based for the pernicious, implicitly Nietzschean doctrine of The Authoritarian Personality, and related sophistry expressed as ritual, hyperventilated chants against "conspiracy theories," which has been deployed in the United States since the late 1940s. Cf. Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., "When Economics Becomes Science," EIR, Dec. 18, 1998.

[6] The U.S. defeat, under Lincoln, of the treasonous, London-sponsored Confederacy, established us as a nation too powerful to be destroyed simply by repetition of that kind of subversion. So, the British successors of Lord Shelburne's Jeremy Bentham and his Lord Palmerston adopted a modified approach to the same ultimate end, an approach which became known as the Fabian Society of such leading notables as the utopian protégé of Thomas Huxley, H.G. Wells, and U.S.-hater Bertrand Russell. The Blair government at 10 Downing Street today, with its shamelessly intimate, Fabian Society ties to its accomplice U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney, is a nest of such war-like, lying, virtual fascists of the Wells-Russell tradition, fascists strutting in New-Left-wing costumes today. Of the Downing Street-Cheney intimacies, it may be fairly said, that a buzzard which flies on two left wings, tends to veer to the far, far right, when careening in search of its beloved carrion.

[7] Cf. Riemann, Werke, H. Weber, ed. (New York: Dover, 1953), Anhang. The name of an experimentally validatable universal physical principle is not a card-index guide to a mathematical formula on file. The name of the principle is the name of the actual physical object as a mental object, and the mathematical formula is merely the description of the shadow of the object. The idea of that object is associated with the willful setting of the object into efficient motion; the mathematics is an effort to describe the behavior of that object (i.e., a Pythagorean-Platonic power to act) when it is set into motion. This notion was introduced to policies of education by Herbart; Riemann found in Herbart's Göttingen lectures the psychological key to defining the anti-Euclidean physical geometry of his 1854 habilitation dissertation. Thus, as Riemann emphasized in that location, he carried forward to its necessary further development, the notion of an anti-Euclidean geometry which Carl Gauss had developed under the tutelage of the great Eighteenth-Century mathematicians Kästner and Zimmermann. Riemann's notion of Geistesmasse is key for understanding the adoption of Riemann's integration of the germ of the higher geometry of Abel's work into his own work. This notion of Geistesmasse is also key to understanding the application of my own contributions to a science of physical economy. This corresponds to the requirements of Riemann's notion of the geometrical principles of Abelian, multi-phase-spaced functions for conceptualizing V.I. Vernadsky's functional notion of the Noösphere, and for an appreciation of my own view of Vernadsky's explicit reliance on Riemann. There is an ongoing pedagogical series on this implication of Riemannian Abelian functions, which is being conducted as an educational program among my associates.

[8] I acknowledge my borrowing this usage of "Babylonian priesthood" from J.M. Keynes' published report on his examination of the contents of that famous chest of Isaac Newton's scientific papers. Keynes reported, that this chest, whose contents had not gone through any supposed fire, contained no hint of Newton's actual tendencies to discover a differential calculus, but, rather, was a collection of some of the worst sort of black magic in the form of medieval alchemy. For example, this same term used by Keynes was also employed, independently, by others, at a notable meeting of some FEF veteran scientists at Ibykus farm at the close of 1988.

[9] C.P. Snow, Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution (London and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993 reprint).

[10] It is emphatically relevant to the point being developed in this present report, that the report that it was "the Jews" who were responsible for the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ, is not an expression of opinion; it was a falsehood spoken out of malicious disregard for truth. Under Roman imperial law, the only authority which could order a public crucifixion was the Roman Emperor; in this case, the Tiberius reposing at Capri during the time of Christ's crucifixion. The only authorized surrogate for Tiberius present in Judea at that time, was Tiberius' son-in-law, the Procurator Pontius Pilate. Pilate's motive for his order in this case was that Jesus was a Jew, specifically one with the rumored reputation of being an insurrectionary "King of the Jews," ostensibly the pretender of a Jewish population largely in a state of virtual revolt against the Roman occupation forces. The Jewish "Quislings" who howled for Christ's death, were the collaborators of the Roman occupation. Nero later crucified the Apostle Peter, on a related charge, as the Apostle Paul was also murdered by Rome for the same continuing reason of Rome's imperial policy. The crusades, including the Albigensian crusade and the Norman conquest of Anglo-Saxon England, were an expression of the fraudulent, actually Roman, not Christian, ultramontane legacy of the doctrine of Pontifex Maximus, as under Roman imperial law. The Inquisition under Torquemada was an expression of the same heathen bestiality expressed in the Norman Inquisition's burning alive of Jeanne d'Arc. The fraud, that the crucifixion of Christ was a Jewish conspiracy, was concocted as a cover for what became the so-called ultramontane dogma which dominated the medieval period associated with that Venice-Norman-Cluniac-Welf alliance, whose fraudulent "donation of Constantine" myth was a device for attributing the origins of the Christian church not to Christ and the Apostles of his generation, but, rather to contrary purpose, rooting the authority of the church as an opponent of the existence of sovereign nation-states, in the church's allegedly imperial, integrist legitimacy within the Pantheon of the Roman imperial doctrine. Such is the evil of mere opinion.

[11] Actually, the comparison to geometric determination of the catenary function, as Leibniz and Bernouilli defined this in connection with Leibniz's principle of universal physical least-action, were more appropriate. For present purposes of illustration, the notion of the lower-power hyperbolic function will be adequate.

[12] Elliott, noted as an American agent of British intelligence influence, was a prominent member of a right-wing association, with Fabian connections, known as the Nashville Agrarians. That association represented the tradition of the Tennessee founders of the original Ku Klux Klan. Den mother Elliott's charges in his Harvard department of government, where Kissinger was reared, have been more or less consistently agents of the so-called "utopian" (i.e., "universal fascist," Schacht) faction in U.S. military affairs to the present day.

[13] While many pro-Aristotelian theologians would be angered by hearing me say this, it is a true fact of epistemology, that Aristotle denies the actually knowable existence of either God or a human soul. The result of Aristotle's method, is to transform the word "God" or "soul" from the status of an actuality, to a matter of induced (e.g., taught) belief, to a fantastic sort of Romantic fantasy. This is the same problem expressed by Claudius Ptolemy's Aristotelian fraud against previously known astronomy, and the kindred folly of Copernicus and Tycho Brahe.

[14] For example, Euler's denial of Nicholas of Cusa's and Leibniz's proofs of the existence of a well-defined transcendental, and Felix Klein's fraudulent attribution of the discovery of the transcendental to Hermite and Lindemann, are an expression of the insistence of Euler that nothing will be considered to exist unless it is deductively derivable, essentially, from arithmetic. What Euler thus does, as did the Eleatics, sophists, and Aristotelians before him, is the same central argument which Kant, in his Critiques, derives from the work of Euler and Lagrange, committing the same error which Gauss, in 1799, points out in the work of the Martinist d'Alembert, as well as Euler and Lagrange.

Subscribe to EIW