Executive Intelligence Review
This webcast presentation appears in the May 8, 2009 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
LAROUCHE'S APRIL 28 WEBCAST

The Other Shoe Will Now Drop

Lyndon LaRouche gave this webcast address in Washington D.C. April 28, with a satellite link to a gathering in New York City. The webcast was co-hosted by LaRouche's national spokespersons, Harley Schlanger in Washington, and Debra Freeman in New York. The event was sponsored by the Lyndon LaRouche Political Action Committee (LPAC), and was simultaneously carried on the Internet at the LPAC website, where video of the webcast and discussion are on file. To see a PDF version of the address, plus the dialogue which followed, use this link.

Harley Schlanger: Good afternoon. I'm Harley Schlanger, and on behalf of the LaRouche Political Action Committee, I would like to welcome you all to today's webcast.

Just over two weeks ago, on April 11, economist and statesman Lyndon LaRouche delivered a shock, when he described the urgent crisis facing our nation and the world, due to what he developed as President Obama's "Narcissus Syndrome." Due to his obsessive desire to be popular, the President has been following the policy dictates of his chief economic advisor, Larry Summers, the kingpin of a nest of vipers in the Obama Administration, who call themselves "behavioral economists." In that webcast, and in the question-and-answer period which followed, Mr. LaRouche did what he is famous for: He told the truth, about Summers, Peter Orszag, and the whole group, in a relentless exposition of why, if Summers is not removed, and if the so-called free-market policies, including the bailout he is pushing on behalf of the criminal swindle run by the City of London and Wall Street, if they are not stopped, not only will the Obama Presidency collapse, but the lives of billions of people on this planet will be endangered by a hyperinflationary blowout collapse of the global financial system.

While many people responded initially with fear to what Mr. LaRouche said, I know that many of those who are fearful also know that he is right. Today, with human civilization hanging by a fraying thread, it is more necessary than ever, that Mr. LaRouche continue to speak truthfully about the crisis, and about the axiomatic flaws that cause many of you to shrink in fear, instead of taking up the clear solutions he has provided, to reverse this crisis.

For today's webcast, we are here in Washington, D.C., and we're linked, as well, to New York City through a satellite broadcast, where my colleague, LaRouche's national spokesman Debra Freeman, will participate in the question and answer.

It is now my great honor, to introduce Lyndon LaRouche.

Clinical Insanity Leading to Hyperinflation

Lyndon LaRouche: Thank you.

We just had another report from the conversations among various political circles on the world economic situation, and they're still all crazy. They are debating which of two scenarios might be the rescue of the world economy, or bringing some order into it. All of this is junk. It never would work. It's a complete failure.

We are now in the process—we are approaching, as in Germany, in 1923: In the immediate aftermath of the Versailles agreements, Germany went into a plunge, into a depression. And then, in order for Germany to pay its Versailles debts which had been ordered, it went into a hyperinflationary phase, in the Spring of 1923, and by November of 1923, the hyperinflation had blown out the very existence of a German economy.

We're now in a somewhat comparable situation today, in the United States, and in the world at large. We are now in what appears to be a deflationary process, where jobs are disappearing—something like 700,000 a month—in the United States. And that rate of job loss is going to accelerate, as the way it goes now. We're headed toward a general physical collapse of the U.S. economy, and that's in the short term.

Now, we're going to go to another phase with this bailout process, of attempting to manage an inflationary process, to try to keep the values of bank assets and so forth, up. Which will now do the same thing it did in Germany, in the late Spring, Summer, and Autumn of 1923: The entire world system, not just the U.S. system, but the entire world system will blow out, in a financial breakdown crisis of a hyperinflationary type, such as that that hit Germany in the Autumn, November of 1923. That's what we face.

In response to this reality, everyone I hear, from every official quarter, is completely incompetent and insane, in terms of the effect. This is clinical insanity. And unless the present policies of the United States in particular, are reversed from what they've been since the President went to London, there is no chance for the United States. And if the United States goes, the entire world economy will go.

What we are faced with, is the potentiality, within a relatively short period of time, that a process will occur, especially if the so-called environmentalist program is adopted—if an environmentalist policy is applied to the present situation—cap and trade: Cap and trade is Hitler policy. It's mass murder! If that policy were to be adopted under these conditions, these global conditions, then the population of the planet would fall rapidly, from 6.7 billion people to less than 2. And less than 2 billion people is the policy of the British monarchy, as stated repeatedly by Prince Philip. The policy is to reduce the world population to less than 2 billion people, by cap-and-trade methods.

So, as long as the U.S. government supports cap and trade, as long as the Obama Administration supports cap and trade, you're looking for a genocide globally, and in the United States, beyond belief.

Now, this coincides with a phenomenon of which there is some debate. But the debate is not about the danger of the present swine flu and related problems. What has happened, is, the breakdown—as always—the breakdown of a physical economy, particularly a global physical economy, as has been happening recently, always leads to the outbreak of conditions for mass pandemics. And we have a virtual explosion of a global, mass pandemic situation on our hands today. As long as the present policies, the present economic policies of the present administration, the present Obama Administration, are continued, there is nothing you can do. You may inhibit the problem, but you can't stop it. We're now at a breakdown crisis: The preconditions for mass death throughout the planet are already there.

So, unless the Obama Administration is induced to change its policy—radically—from everything it has done, since the trip to London by President Obama—if that is not done, we're in a global catastrophe beyond belief. And no part of the world is exempt from that catastrophe. This is global.

For Example: China and Russia

There are other things.

You know, people don't think in terms of what a global system is. Take the case of China and Russia, as two primary cases. Russia, to a lesser degree, China to a greater degree: China was induced to reorient itself to become an export economy. We dumped, and closed down U.S. industries. We transported that production to China. And China's cheap labor replaced U.S. labor. We shut down our factories, we closed down our production capabilities, and we exported it to China. Why? Because China would work more cheaply than we would. So, now China is faced with a situation, where its whole economy is on the verge of a general collapse. Because not only is the collapse of the world market, through this financial collapse, collapsing the economy of China, but China has no possibility, under the present system, of ever recovering from this collapse, which will only become worse.

So, as long as the present world international monetary system and policies continue, China is condemned to vast rates of mass death. And other parts of the world as well.

Russia was not a production exporter; essentially, it was a petroleum and gas exporter. Russia depended upon this. Then Russia found out that contrary to the opinion of leading circles in Russia that this crash in the United States would not affect Russia, it would not affect all of Europe, that they would be exempt—they found very quickly that they're not exempt. And the Russian economy is now in a crisis, a deep crisis, where its present economic policies will not work, and will only lead to a perpetuation of this crisis.

Europe is crashing. Western and Central European economies are collapsing. The British economy is collapsing. India is not yet collapsing, because India has a rather mild degree of export dependency for its economy. Europe is in a hopeless situation: Western and Central Europe are presently ungovernable, because they have no sovereignty. Globalization has eliminated the factor of sovereignty among the states of Western and Central Europe. The British are also part of this: They are in the dominant position, relatively, politically. But the British economy is a hopeless mess. It has no intrinsic, very little intrinsic, ability to ever recover, under its own power, even under the best policy.

So, in the center of all this, is that the world market, the world financial market, is based largely on dollar denominations. It's into a dollar market. Now, all the other markets are collapsing. The dollar market is collapsing. It's collapsing at an accelerating rate, which means, that unless you fix the United States, unless you fix U.S. policy, the whole world is going into a chain-reaction collapse, which can easily bring about, within a generation or two, the kind of rates of death, from starvation, disease and so forth, which will reduce the world's population to the goals of Prince Philip and the World Wildlife Fund, which is less than 2 billion people, from now, presently, 6.7 billion people.

I cite this fact at the opening, to indicate the absolute insanity, of assuming there will ever be a recovery, under the present world system, or assuming that there will ever be a survival of the United States, under the current Presidency's current policies. Therefore, from a world scale, since it's the dollar system which must be sustained, in order to maintain the world market for countries such as China, Russia, and so forth, therefore the U.S. economy must be fixed, now, or else the world as a whole, goes to Hell! That's the situation.

That's the reality. Anybody who argues against that, is contributing to insanity. They're contributing to the destruction of civilization. The Obama Administration must now change its policy, and very damn soon! Otherwise, the planet as a whole is going to Hell. Because of the dependency upon the essential credit potential, of the United States dollar—not the United States economy, the United States dollar; unless that potential remains, as a potential for supporting physical production—not supporting financial paper, supporting physical production.

In other words, we need long-term treaty agreements among nations, such as China, which will, in turn, provide the credit for production of food, infrastructure, and industry. Not finance! Don't bail out banks, as such. What you do, is put banks through reorganization: You take all of the crap out of the banks, and you freeze it. You take the part of the banks that corresponds to real assets, production assets, and you support the banks, as under the U.S. system.

The World Monetary System Is the Disease

What you also have to do, is you have to, in this process, eliminate the present world monetary system! Because the present world monetary system is the disease which is killing the world. So therefore, forget the IMF! The IMF is a bankrupt, useless institution. It has no value, whatsoever. Get rid of it! It's a pestilence. You want to survive? Get rid of the IMF. But you have to replace it, not just get rid of it.

In order to replace it, what do you have to do? You have to go back to the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution provides the only basis for a system which leads to the recovery of the world's economy today. No nation of this planet can survive, without this action by the United States. Because otherwise, if the United States goes, every other part of the world will go into a Dark Age, as a chain-reaction effect.

Go back to the 14th Century: You had a similar situation in the 14th Century. Germany's situation is an example of what can happen. But Germany in 1923 was a special case, Weimar Germany. It was operating under restrictions which were imposed by the Versailles conditionalities. And therefore, it was a frozen nation and could not operate on a world scale in any way. Therefore, as long as it was going to pay the conditionalities, specified by Versailles, it was going to go into hyperinflation, and collapse. It had no other alternative. And this was done directly by the British, with the support of Woodrow Wilson and company. That's how it happened; and by the French government of that time, which acted like a bunch of pigs in that situation.

The British had started the war, but Germany was accused of having the sole war guilt. It was the British who organized World War I, or what's called World War I. They organized it by getting the Chancellor of Germany, Bismarck, fired. Then they killed the President of France, Sadi Carnot. Then they organized Japan to agree to go to permanent warfare against the United States, China, and Russia. And that policy, of going against the United States, an agreement between the British and Japan, reached in 1894, with the war launched in 1895, determined the general history of the world from 1890—the ouster of Bismarck—until the Summer of 1945, which was the official close of World War II.

And the British did it! The same British Empire which is steering policies today. The same British Empire which is controlling the policies of the President of the United States at this time, and has been controlling him ever since his visit to London, recently. The President of the United States currently has done nothing good, but only bad things, to the U.S. economy and to the world, since that trip to London, the trip he should never have made. And it was only his own ego that got in the way of seeing reality: He wanted to be embraced by the Queen, who is the center, practically, the female version of Satan, at this particular time.

She's the head of that! This little woman, who's shrinking and shrinking, and shrinking, as she gets older. This little woman, is officially the center of Satan's operations globally. She's evil! She's the world's biggest drug pusher, officially. You know anyone who died of drugs, anyone who suffered from drug addiction? Blame her! The British have been running the international drug trade since the 1790s, when they started the business. They conducted the Opium War against China. They're conducting an Opium War against all of the Americas, today, right now: Legalization of marijuana, legalization of other drugs, destroys nations and destroys people!

You look at the condition of China, in the latter part of the 19th Century, as a result of the Opium Wars: The destruction of the morality of the Chinese people, the ability to function, was crucially impaired, by the spread of drugs! This was an intentional policy of the British Empire against China. Which was then reinforced, by the agreement of the British monarchy, the Prince of Wales, with the Mikado, to launch warfare—first, at that time, against China and Russia. Japan was organized to conduct war against China and Russia!

And later, in the early 1920s, the British conducted an agreement, which was aimed at an attack on Pearl Harbor by Japan. The Japan attack on Pearl Harbor, was based on an agreement which the British had reached with Japan, including the United States in the targets, together with Germany and Russia, of Japan at that time. The British Empire!

These are facts. This is the truth! The contrary is either foolishness or lies; or stupidity, ignorance, or lies. The British Empire is the enemy of the United States and civilization! Once you understand that—.

Well, take the case of the Middle East, so-called: Why do Arabs and Israelis kill each other? Why is there a threat of an attack upon Iran? Why are these things occurring? The British Empire! The Queen, the good, old little Queen, the shrinking Queen. I don't recommend queens.

No, this is the purpose of the process.

What Is This Empire?

What's behind this? Why? What is this empire? What does it represent? Where the hell did it come from, and I do mean Hell.

Well, it's a long story: Empire is a fairly old story in known history, and in European history, it centers around a process which pivoted upon the Peloponnesian War. Greece, Athens, had become a great power, a maritime power, in that period, through the defeat of the Persian Empire. At that time, Athens turned evil, and started what became known as the Peloponnesian War. As a result of this process, Greek civilization went into a collapse phase. And despite the efforts of a group around Plato to reverse that process, the arrival of Aristotle as a replacement for Plato, ensured a certain degeneration of the entire culture of the Mediterranean from that time on.

From that point on, centered upon the cult of Delphi, the Apollo/Dionysian cult, which was also a big maritime financial cult, which was operating the predatory financial operations, and monetary operations, throughout the Mediterranean. You had the beginning of a process of empire.

Now, this process was somewhat screwed up by Alexander the Great. But with the death of Alexander the Great, there was a continuing process of trying to form an empire based on the Mediterranean's maritime role, its financial-maritime role. This led to the efforts to unite the Middle East, to unite Egypt and Italy—Rome—as a maritime force to control the entire Mediterranean, with one big financial imperial order. And through an agreement with a cult from the Middle East, an agreement reached on the Isle of Capri, the agreement was struck to get rid of Cleopatra and others, and to establish a single empire for the entire region, based on the Mediterranean. This became known as the Roman Empire. It went through quite a process, but the so-called Caesar Augustus, or Augustus Caesar, actually established by agreement with a religious cult on the Isle of Capri, established a world empire, whose headquarters was nominally Rome, under which the Middle East, Egypt, and the power of Rome in the Mediterranean, dominated the world.

Now, this empire was essentially a financial empire, and when you look at it as a financial empire, you understand it. It had two principles, which you will see expressed in the Middle East today. The first principle is religious warfare. Now religious warfare has two forms. Religious warfare has, first of all, the form of explicit religious conflicts. You get a number of religions each to hate each other, and kill each other, because of religious hatred. But there's another form of religious hatred, which is not necessarily religious; it's called, cultural. So there's a relationship between religious warfare as such, and cultural warfare, which has the same form, as like race hatred, or national hatreds among peoples.

The way an empire operates, an empire has always been, in the history of Europe, all empires have been financial empires, essentially. They're not empires of nations, they're not sovereign systems of nations. The nations are ruled, the groups of nations, are ruled by a financial power, a monetary-financial power. That's the empire. And nations may exist under the empire, but they have no ultimate authority. The rule of law, of international law, is made by financial interests, not by national political interests: Nations are simply subsidiary captives of an international interest—like the British Empire today.

Look at the British people: They're fat and stupid. They're not really an empire. They have a very bad diet—intellectual diet as well as other diet. You think these poor slobs are an empire? You think they control—the United Kingdom controls the world, these slobs? They don't know which way to get up in the morning, poor fellows!

No, but Britain is the seat of power, of official power of the Queen, and the monarchy. And the monarchy is the agency of a Venetian-based, international financial-monetary system. It's an international financial-monetary system, that controls the empire.

The U.S. Credit System; Not a Monetary System

For example, today: We have an international monetary system; what is it? Let's look at the U.S. Constitution. What's the monetary system look like from the standpoint of the U.S. Constitution? Under our Constitution—it was a key point of the Constitution too, the way it was formed—after we had won the Revolutionary War, we had banks, which were banks which had been created by various colonies earlier, what had been colonies. And these banks were bankrupt because of the war debt. So, what happened as a result of that, was that Alexander Hamilton proposed measures of creating a national government, which would then take responsibility for dealing with the war debts of the local banks of the states. This led to the formation of the U.S. Federal Constitution.

In other words, the U.S. Federal Constitution was based on this idea, this principle; it's a central feature of it: The General Welfare is based on maintaining the security of the nation, economically and financially.

So we set up a system, which was intended to be a fixed-exchange-rate system, under which, money could not be uttered, by the United States, or within the United States, unless it was authorized by a vote of the Congress, and the consent and agreement of the President of the United States. So that we did not have a monetary system; we had a credit system: A vote, by the Congress and the President, to utter a certain amount of credit, as debt of the Federal government, is the basis for our currency.

In the case of Europe, or a monetary system, the monetary system is international, in which private interests generate credit, and the credit uttered by the private interests, is absorbed into the international system. Now, this system, in this present form, was established about 1000 A.D. It already existed in the form of the Roman Empire, but it was established in a new form, with the collapse of Byzantium as a power, and the rise of Venice, as the center of the maritime financial power of the Mediterranean region and beyond, established a new kind of empire, between the crisis collapse of Byzantium in that period, and 1066, which was the Norman Conquest of England. During that period, there was a change, in which the Venetian interest took power over all the other interests in the European region.

To the present day, Europe is ruled by a Venetian monetarist system, which has undergone various kinds of technical modifications, but it still exists. The collapse in the 14th Century, into a Dark Age, was a temporary collapse of the Venetian system. The collapse we're going through today, is a collapse of the Venetian system. The British Empire, which was created by Paolo Sarpi's circles, is a special form of this process. It's the Venetian system. And the Venetian system operates on a monetary system, first, the monetary authority of this international consortium of monetary interests; and then on a lower level, subordinate to that, is the so-called banking interest. So, the banks don't create the monetary system, as such. It is the monetary system that consolidates the banks into a system, which, in turn, now governs the nations.

This is the so-called idea of "free economy," "free trade." Free trade means, that the governments do not exert any control over their economy. Because they consent to a free trade, which means that the international financier interest controls all the economies which accede toward free trade.

The most important development in the United States, in defeating the United States and destroying it, since Truman, who also started the process, occurred with the breakup of the fixed-exchange-rate system of the Bretton Woods system. Because, now, the pirates, the parasites, the gangsters, took over the world economy. And we got into a long-term inflationary process, under which the power of industry and agriculture, and infrastructure, which is the basis of national economy—that is, the improvement of basic physical-economic infrastructure, together with the agriculture and the manufacturing industry, is the basis for any healthy economy.

To have a healthy economy, you have to have a protectionist system, which protects the nation, against the inherently predatory role of international monetarist power! And the only way you can do that, which is the way Roosevelt specified, is with an international fixed-exchange-rate system. You bring the monetary systems under the control of the respective sovereign governments, using the model of the U.S. Constitution, that no currency can be uttered, or the equivalent credit, can be uttered by any nation, except by the authority of its government. This is a regulated system. And the relation among the states in this system, the member-states, which are sovereign states, is sovereign agreements, treaty agreements, among nation-states.

The Case of China

For example, let's take the case of China: What're we going to do about China? Well, without the Obama Administration changing its character, there's no hope for China. Right, now, the administration, the present Obama Administration, is one of the enemies of China! It's the leading enemy of China. Not because Obama hates China, but because his policies hate China.

See, China made a mistake: It gambled on the assumption that by taking the production, which was done in Europe and the United States in particular, taking that production and those production facilities away from the United States, transporting them to the cheap-labor market of China, they would now supply the world with physical needs produced by China, at a low price, and we would tear down the high-cost, high-price industries of the United States and Western Europe—such as Germany in particular. So, that was insanity.

Now, China has created an over-dependency, like a new drug habit—not drugs, but dependency upon the world market for its cheap-labor goods. Now that the market has collapsed, and will collapse even more so, China has no hope for survival, for avoiding a collapse into general chaos. Because they never can build up again, the world market on which China has depended until the recent time, since the Nixon years. There's only one way that can be solved: If the United States takes the initiative, of creating and establishing a new international system, a new international credit system—a fixed-exchange-rate credit system, back to what Roosevelt intended—not what Truman intended, but what Roosevelt had intended in 1944, where he opposed the British system—go back to that kind of system, under our Constitution. Under those conditions we can organize international credit.

Now, China's requirement is not to produce cheap-labor goods. China's requirement is the development of its population and the conditions of production in its own country. This means a very large increase in infrastructure development. These involve investments which will have a life of investment of 25 to 50, to 100 years; like, for example, the Three Gorges Dam is that type, that long-term type. Generally, major water projects are 100-year projects, or longer. And they're crucial on the planet, now.

The planet also requires nuclear power. There is no possibility of civilization on this plant, today, without a massive increase in nuclear power. No other source of power is competent; every other source of power, every other project is totally incompetent! Only nuclear power can save civilization, provided we do the other things that go with that.

So therefore, China requires, in particular, like other countries, a large-scale investment, not in export markets; they require a large-scale investment in basic economic infrastructure, high-technology infrastructure, large-scale water projects, area-territorial development projects, and major power projects, water projects. Because you have to build up the level of productivity of the Chinese people themselves, so they have an autonomous ability to survive. And this is going to take 50 to 100 years to do that.

Therefore, you have to have a credit system which provides for a 50- to 100-year credit system, for the development of the continent of Asia, because this problem is throughout virtually all of continental Asia; a system which builds up an economic basis, a physical-economic technological basis, under which these countries now become truly self-sufficient, in their ability to function as autonomous nations.

We're going to have to reorient the United States and Europe: Get rid of everything that smells green! Just get it outta here! Take the Queen of England and her crazy husband, her fascist husband, and put them into retirement—and take their stupid son along with them! And take Al Gore. Let Al Gore be the lackey who opens the door for them—that's all he's good for. If he can get in the door, with his fat body, huh? I mean, say, "Hey, fatso!" And he's also a traitor to the United States, so we have no use for him.

So that's the direction we have to go in. If we go in that direction, that means we create long-term treaty agreements, in a manner which is consistent with the U.S. Constitution, with these countries, to provide the long-term credit agreements, which enable these long-term investments which are necessary to rebuild the world, to occur. That's our only hope, to do that.

And we have to eliminate everything that does two things: We have to eliminate every arrangement which is globalization. The Tower of Babel was a bad idea! Eliminate it! That's crucial. And we also have to go to a high-technology project basis, a basis of scientific-driven technological and cultural progress for every culture on the planet. We have to raise the productive power, and the creative powers throughout this planet. That can only be done by sovereign nation-states. Why? Culture!

Man Did Not Come from Apes

Just take another subject here, which is very crucial at this point. If you go back in pre-history; go back up to about a million years, look back at archeological sites up to a million years ago. Now, you find little pieces of bone and similar kinds of things, which attest to something that looks like a human being, or maybe a monkey or an ape, and you find these samples as fossil samples. Archeology goes back about a million years, probably goes back 2 million years, but fossils are not too durable, really, most of the time.

So, how can you tell that a fossil which looks like a monkey, or something, has similar characteristics to an ape, how do you know whether that's an ape or a human being? Because apes and human beings are absolutely different. Man did not come from apes. The characteristic of human behavior is not something you find in any ape. The generation of creativity, which is unique to human beings!—does not exist among the apes. Don't marry an ape! It won't work. It won't work—it won't work biologically, and it won't work intellectually. Just try living with a couple of adult chimpanzees in your house for a couple of days, and you'll know what the story is. It doesn't work!

How do we know the difference? How does an archeologist tell you that this is definitely a human fossil? Because of the signs of a campfire! No ape uses fire for cooking. They may accidentally set fire to the joint, like Mrs. O'Leary's cow in Chicago! But that's about all they can do. So the very fact that you find an organized activity around fire sites, associated with things that look, in fossil form, like traces of humanoids or something similar, you have found a human culture. Only human beings make fire, and use it. And you try some of the cooking you get if you don't use a little bit of fire—you may find yourself in trouble.

So, therefore, the characteristic of humanity, and its history and development, is the use of fire! All human beings, who are qualified as human beings, use fire. Human culture depends on fire. Fire takes many forms. And in order for culture to progress, fire has to increase, in a certain respect: Fire has to increase, in what we call, today, energy flux-density, and this is characterized by the relative temperature, the relative physical temperature, of the fire you're using. Man's progress depends upon the ability to increase the level, the equivalent of temperature, today.

To maintain a global civilization of the present population can not be done, unless you're using nuclear fission, or a higher degree of energy flux-density of fire.

What's wrong with this fire business? According to Aeschylus, who wrote his famous Prometheus Trilogy, and in the Prometheus Bound, in particular, fire is prohibited to mankind. Mankind must not use fire! So, this god, this Satan, who was called in that case Zeus, or similar things, says, you must not use fire. Mankind must not have access to fire: That's a secret thing that mankind must not have.

What does that do? If you abort the use of fire, as expressed by scientific and technological progress, then you are condemning man to a barbaric condition of life, a subhuman condition of life. Now, fire does not simply mean "fire," as such. But the principle of fire, we know as in the distinction of ape from man, takes many forms, and these forms go, for example, from the burning of rubbish, the burning of wood, the burning of charcoal, and going on to higher orders, like chemistry—oil, so forth—and up to a higher level of energy flux-density, which is many times the energy flux-density of anything else: nuclear fission. And then, there's still an orders-of-magnitude higher degree of temperature, called thermonuclear fusion; and then, there's so-called matter/antimatter reactions, which is several orders of magnitude greater than that, which we have not yet learned how to control.

So, man's increase of the fire, or the equivalent of fire, used by mankind, determines the conditions of life under which human beings can live. If you want to maintain a population of more than 2 billion people, you certainly do have to use nuclear power, today. Anyone who says you mustn't use nuclear power, is saying, you must reduce the world population to less than 2 billion people, from 6.5 or 6.7 billion today. You must be a mass-murderer! To deny anybody, including your own country, the right to use nuclear power, is mass murder! Because you will have to reduce the population to correspond to the level of energy flux-density you're employing.

Anybody who's a greenie, is an idiot! Or a criminal. Any President who proposes a green policy, is either an idiot or a criminal! And is a mass murderer beyond belief in these conditions. We now have a world population which is in the order of magnitude of 6.7 billion people: We have a culture on this planet, which at best is capable of supporting, sustaining support of, 5 billion people! The difference between those requirements and going to 10 billion people, is what? Nuclear power!

We Need Nuclear Power

Look, for example: We're drawing down fossil water resources. That is, the ability to get drinkable water, safe, drinkable water, despite the fact the oceans are full of water—saltwater—which requires a development beyond present freshwater resources.

For example, let's take India: India's living in a large part on drawing down fossil water. Some of this water was deposited in a glacial period, 1 million years ago. Now we're going to draw it down. We're already drawing down other resources.

Look at what's happening in the Western Plains of the United States: We're drawing down the water! The land level is sinking, because we're using up the water. The problem is a lack of freshwater resources throughout the world, and the present level of population can not be sustained under present water policies.

However: If we go to mass development of nuclear power, using both the uranium cycle and the thorium cycle of nuclear fission, we can desalinate water, efficiently; you can not desalinate water economically, except by very high energy flux-density.

So therefore, if we're going to survive, even maintain the present world population level, we have to go to nuclear power, as our only power. Get those damned windmills down! Don Quixote! Where are you?

We have to get rid of these solar reactors. Look, what do you want in your backyard—you want a solar reactor, or a tree? Which would you prefer? A solar reactor is a parasitical operation: It costs more in energy flux-density terms to use than it provides. After all, all it is, is the incidental sunlight which is hitting the surface of the Earth—what's that? That's a very poor source of power! And solar collectors will not help you! Actually, solar collectors cost more to build and operate, than they give you! They're a waste! They're insanity.

Windmills—my God! The President may be a windmill, but that's from his speeches. But that is not what we need for an energy source. Talking all day, he still won't supply much energy.

So, therefore, these are the kinds of questions that have to be faced, real questions: What does it take, to provide not only a larger population, which we're faced with, but what does it require to raise the standard of living of the existing population? When you consider the conditions of life of most of the population of this planet, it's extremely poor, for just this reason. There is no development. They're starving. China is in desperate straits, with its present population. Not because it's overpopulated, but because it's underpowered! China's population is not the problem, it's the lack of power! It's a lot of very poor people! Who depend upon very poor standards of living and productivity.

Man Exists in the Noösphere

Therefore, when you look at these kinds of considerations, you say, what must be the policy of nations? And then you come to the next point: What is this difference between man and ape, which is associated with human productivity? It's called "creativity," which does not exist in any form of animal life. It's the difference between the Noösphere, and the Biosphere.

What is creativity? Well, it takes two forms: In the simplest form, when we're dealing with the abiotic, the so-called Lithosphere, the pre-living processes on this planet, and then dealing in the second, with the so-called Biosphere, which is the living processes, or things which exist only as products of living processes, or the acts of living processes, called the Biosphere. The planet is changing. Our planet is changing in its composition: We have a Lithosphere, which is the part of the planet which is still merely the byproduct of pre-human conditions, pre-living conditions; then we have a growing part of the planet, more and more, the Biosphere, living processes and products of living processes, are taking a larger percentile of the total mass of the planet.

But, then, look at the Noösphere! And look at the things that exist on this planet, and the mass of things that exist on this planet as the product of human activity. Human creative activity. Not animal activity, but human activity! That is increasing more rapidly than the Biosphere. That is creativity! Human creativity.

The human mind, the difference between the human being and the animal, and the ape, is creativity. And most people don't even know what creativity is! We're conducting educational programs, for example, in the Basement and so forth, where we're dealing precisely with the history of creativity, physical scientific creativity and cultural creativity. This is a very specific quality which the human mind has, which no animal existence has. And our ability, to change the universe—we're not part of the animal kingdom! We're on a qualitatively higher level than any animal kingdom.

We are in the Noösphere, not the Biosphere. We are changing the universe, as we find it, by the application of our creative powers, and their development, to the requirements of life on Earth. And if we survive this administration, this Obama Administration, we're going to be dealing with the Solar System on that same basis: We are going to transform the Solar System, if we survive. That's our destiny! It's our nature! It's what makes us different from the ape. No monkey would ever think of going to Mars. Only a man is crazy enough to do it. And able to do it!

So, these are the problems. So what we have is, in the post-war period, this anti-progress tendency, the anti-science tendency. And what it really is, is a rejection of the difference between man and an ape: "We want to keep our neighbors as monkeys, pet monkeys, or pet baboons, or pet chimpanzees. We don't want to develop the people as people."

Now, how does this thing operate? Well, you have the three levels you have to deal with: You have the level of the Lithosphere, dealing with inanimate objects. Then you have the Biosphere, which consists of things which have come into existence only through the action of life, on the Lithosphere. Then you have a third one, which is the Noösphere: Things that come into existence, only as a result of human mental creative powers. That's what creativity represents. This is a power of the individual human mind. Ah, but it has a factor of immortality in it.

Because if you examine anything, there are two things you really examine: One area you examine from the standpoint of physical science. You're examining those powers of mankind, to change and improve the Biosphere and the Lithosphere, from the standpoint of preconditions of human existence, of increased amounts of human existence; of the ability of mankind to reach out and begin to control the Solar System, as well as this planet. That's one aspect of it.

Classical Culture: The Soul of Man

But then, you have this other aspect of creativity, which is called art. The first is called physical science. The second is called Classical art—and it's only Classical art, not any other kind of art. Daubings by chimpanzees on walls, is not art! Chimpanzees have no artistic creativity, and people who think they do, probably don't have artistic creativity either. Or, somebody who can do a chimpanzee-like painting, is not really a human being at that.

Human beings function in terms of what we call "Classical culture." Classical music, for example, the tradition of Bach, and the derivatives of Johann Sebastian Bach, is a measure of what is decent music. Anything else is not really decent music. It has not developed to the point of decent music by a modern standard of culture.

This is extremely important—also poetry, Classical poetry, or what we know as Classical poetry in the English language, or German language, or Italian. These forms of culture are essential to the human being. They're not "entertainment." They may be entertaining, but they are not entertainment. This comes to the soul of man: With Classical culture, you're dealing with mankind, as such, as what this is a power of mankind to develop. The power to think scientifically, physically and so forth, actually comes as a product of a function of Classical art, like Classical poetry or Classical music, which is irony: Classical irony.

And therefore, if you like Schiller, in German, or if you like Shelley, in English, and understand it; if you understand Beethoven and Mozart and so forth, as opposed to the junk you hear on the radios today, or similar sources today, then you begin to understand that it is the creative power, expressed by Classical artistic composition and its performance, as applied by man, to man, which mobilizes the creative powers of mind for doing the things which pertain to controlling and developing the Biosphere and the Lithosphere.

Now, this is associated largely with languages. Classical culture is always associated with a language, which means a culture, so that people communicate ideas, in terms of a language-culture. They develop the power of ideas through development of the language culture. This is why the Classical poetry of a people, of successful cultures, is so important to us. Because it's only through Classical culture, that people are able to transmit creative powers of thinking from one generation to another. And it is precisely those creative powers of thinking, associated with Classical music, Classical poetry, in the various language groups, which determine the ability of that language-group to develop in physical terms.

The idea of freedom in culture to do this, is the essence of the meaning of human freedom. It's not freedom to crap on any corner you wish to. Freedom is the ability to develop a Classical culture, to a higher level of realization, and in turn, through that realization, to take the Biosphere and the Noösphere as challenges, for human creativity.

For example: This is the essence of the meaning of the desire of human beings for immortality. Any creative discovery, of any principle, in art or physical science—how is it transmitted? How is it developed? Well, it starts when somebody makes a contribution toward a creative discovery. That creative discovery is reenacted in the mind of somebody else, who then carries that discovery a further step. So that, essentially, when you go through successive generations within a culture, you find there's a process of a development, in which the core of creativity is a process of continuous development of ideas which are creative in their nature.

And therefore, to have a human race, you have to recognize that there are different cultures in this human race, and you have to give autonomy to each culture, for the sake of the creativity which is associated with the use of language—language and music. And therefore, you have to have sovereignty of peoples, based on their cultures, their choice of culture!

That doesn't mean they come to different thoughts than the other: It means that the process of development from infancy—and remember, the highest rate of development of the human being comes immediately after birth, and by the age of 3, you begin to slow down, in your creative powers. The human individual is learning to speak languages—use them! Make jokes! A baby that can make jokes is one which, you say, "This thing is intelligent, because it makes a joke!" No, it makes a joke on you. It plays a trick on you, right? Babies play tricks on their parents, and so forth. And the ability to play tricks increases. This ability to play tricks in a child, is a manifestation, precisely, of the potentiality for creativity.

Thus, we need sovereign nation-states which represented cultures, used as the medium of development of the individual human being. These experiences can be transmitted from one nation, one national culture to another, but they have to be respected in their origins. You have to replicate the continuity of this process, of this use of a language, for the development and self-development of a people.

Man's Immortal Destiny: To Change the Universe

That means that you have to have a society organized around the idea of creativity. And you have to think of man as in the image of the Creator, to do that. Because, you have a constant creative process, of the development of the universe, of the development of the Solar System, of its history; the development of mankind, the change in the character of the planet, the change in the improvement of the Biosphere, the development of the Noösphere. And going on, to take and manage this Solar System—and then beyond that: To change the universe! More and more, in more and more degrees, at a higher rate. The role of man, man's destiny in the universe, is an immortal destiny, in which people who are dead share with those who are living.

And the sense of the value of the human being, in moral value of the human being in this sense, is the meaning of morality. All morality will go to that test. And that's precisely what we're destroying.

What is this Administration doing? It's bought into environmentalism, which is Satanic! In its effect. It will destroy the United States, and destroy its people. It's Satanic! That's the effect: The United States will disappear, if we don't change this policy very soon! If Obama continues this policy, for another couple years, the United States is finished! And maybe most of the planet is finished, too.

So, this is not a question of someone's "opinion"; this is a question of an obligation, a moral obligation, to have a policy of the United States which corresponds, not only to the requirements of humanity as a whole, but to the requirements of our role, within humanity as a whole. The world depends upon our getting out of this mess. Because without the contribution of the United States, as a nation, as a constitutional republic, it is nearly impossible, today, given the role of the dollar up to now, given the requirement for making the dollar viable, for the world as a whole, in order to ensure that China and other nations, have a right to continue to live.

Without that kind of system, there's no hope for humanity, except a Dark Age. And maybe we'll go back through the chimpanzee process of recovery, later on, a thousand years from now, or whatever.

So, we are dealing with a moral issue. The President's opinion is not worth anything if it's wrong! It has no authority if it's wrong! He's associating with people he shouldn't associate with, like these behavioral economist creeps. Like this chief advisor, who spends most of the face-time with him, in the White House. The President has no right to do this! He may be elected, and if the United States tolerates this thing to continue, the way he behaves, they're responsible: We bring the destruction upon ourselves, by allowing him to behave in this way! We have a moral responsibility as citizens to tell this guy: "Straighten up! Cut it out. Fire these guys! Fire the behavioral economists. The behaviorists. Fire Larry Summers. Get him out of there." That's our job.

This is a moral question! You want to oppose me on this, you're immoral! Because the effect of your opposing me, is immoral: It's destructive of humanity! We have to stand up on our hind legs.

Now, the resources on this. You've got a problem: You've got the upper 20% of family-income brackets; you got a problem there. They will say, "Look, we don't want to hurt anybody, but look, we have a certain standard of living. I gotta take care of my family. We got to take care of ourselves. We got to protect our interests. And look, we got to cut things, we have to have some austerity, right? Well, we really can not accept austerity for us. We've got to cut health care." That's what Obama is saying! To cut health care for the population in general, especially for the poorest; cut Social Security. That's what he's saying, under these influences. Is that moral?

Well, the Boomers, essentially, will say, "Well, I know, we don't like that. That's not nice. We would prefer that didn't happen. But, you know, we've got to do it. And sometimes, you have to go through suffering."

Yeah, but whose suffering? Yours, or theirs? The majority of the population, you want them to suffer? You've miseducated them, you've spread disease, you spread conditions of disease among them. You've done all these things, you had these two Presidencies under Bush—who wasn't even a bush, he was a twig. Look what was done under him, this creature! This guy—sometimes you wonder if he qualified for monkey status. His behavior was such.

No: We have a moral responsibility, not only to ourselves, but to future generations to maintain the continuity of progress of the condition of life for human beings; and to protect human beings throughout the planet. And to protect human beings throughout the planet, with the assistance of protecting ourselves as a nation, protecting our culture and its development. That's the moral obligation. That's the meaning of the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution. And any President who violates that, ignores that, is not fit to be President. He should be impeached! Or induced to quit.

"Hey, you know, come on, why don't you just retire? It hasn't worked out too well. This marriage, this honeymoon is over! Look, you're the wrong species, this honeymoon is over. It didn't work out the way we intended. Our intention was sincere, but look, you're a different species than us, you have different species values than ours."

The True Meaning of Morality

So, the point is, when people say that I'm too critical of Obama: I'm not too critical of Obama. I'm wondering if I'm critical enough. One former President thinks I was probably slow on the uptake on this one; I should have acted sooner and harsher. I think he's right. But my responsibility is not to act beyond the authority of what I know to be true. And I've acted as soon as I realized a certain condition existed, and it was true. And then I responded. Other people criticized me—look, I'm qualified to be President, and they're not. That's why I'm in trouble, often. When somebody discovered I was qualified to be the President, they said, "Get rid of him! Get him outta here! We're happy with the chimpanzee we have in there."

So that's our problem. Our problem is, we lack a real sense of the practical meaning of the term "morality," as it applies to politics, and the application of physical science and economy. We come up with these "formulas," these lying, degenerate formulas. We are impressed and intimidated by what is prevalent opinion; we're intimidated by the press; we're intimidated by the mass media; we're intimidated by adversary opinion. We destroy ourselves by that. That's our problem. And that's where we stand.

We can save this nation, we can save civilization. The power to do that exists in our hands, if enough of us are willing to do that. We don't have to do any bad things to anyone! That's not necessary. We simply have to say: Put this system into bankruptcy; go back to the U.S. Constitution, its principles, which are unique; go back to our history on the planet, what our history, our true destiny, our true role is, assert that on behalf of all humanity! Not just for us. What we have to do has to be done for all humanity. For all cultures on this planet, because we're all one people. We have different cultures, and that's important to protect. Because it's only through the culture that the creative potential of the individual is given its affirmation and development.

So therefore, we have to love all people, as if they were our own. But we have to recognize that their history is different, their cultural history is different. And therefore, we have to take that into account. We take that into account, through respecting national sovereignty. We take that into account through adopting the principle of Westphalia, that every people must put forward the interest of all other people, first, and then, their own interest will be taken care of. We have to have a society composed of sovereign nation-states, and sovereign peoples, and sovereign cultures. But these sovereign cultures must work together, to common ends, the common aims of humanity. And this is something that this President of the United States has yet to learn.

I think, however, that if we rid him of the behavioral economists, and rid him of Larry Summers, that those two remedial steps will cause him to tend to be confined in his behavior, to his association with his immediate peers in the cabinet, and in other institutions of the Federal government, and with some influence from the parties. In that case, I think he will be a manageable President. But he needs some management, because he doesn't know half the things he has to know, and he's making wild, arrogant judgments, on the basis of projects, where he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. He's just babbling nonsense—he has no idea what he's talking about. He has no conception, often, of what the meaning is of the words that are coming out of his mouth. But he admires those words so much, for their own sake, that he doesn't seem to care about what they presumably mean.

Anyway, so we've got a lot of questions coming in here, and we can get at them.

Subscribe to EIW