Subscribe to EIR Online
This article appears in the October 27, 2006 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

Liberalism As Anti-Liberalism

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

October 17, 2006

Citizens! Your Honors! Let us recall Shakespeare's Lady Macbeth. The Liberally fascist-in-fact, Sister Lynne Cheney, is the relevant, veritably modern Lady Macbeth who virtually picked her husband out of a trash bin, is today's more appropriate example of a particular form of the evil which that pair represents, in menacing civilization globally today. It is therefore notable, that she plays that role as of a type actually much closer to the tragic figure of the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, than Lefebvre's implicit defense of the post-Hitler prototype of fascism might suggest to the unwitting.[1]

Lynne Cheney herself, who is otherwise identified as the author of her novel, Sisters, is a product of the type of patronage provided by the circles of sometime Bertrand Russell accomplice Robert M. Hutchins at Chicago University. There, she fell into the cultural sewer of Hutchins' special protégé, the Carl Schmitt-created, fascist ideologue and hoaxster, Professor Leo Strauss.[2] There, she came to devote her permitted pretensions at scholarship to the worthless example of one of the more degenerate intellectual parasites from British literary circles of his time, Matthew Arnold. Nonetheless, despite her lack of serious scholarship, she, like Shakespeare's notorious character Lady Macbeth, has achieved a certain special kind of academic notoriety, chiefly through her picking that boorish human failure, her husband, from a rubbish-bin of history. She has made that three-penny villain, her spouse, into the image of a very wicked Golem, all this in her own attempted role as a modern Lady Macbeth.

The point to be stressed, is that both Sister Cheney and her husband are fascists in practice, in the worst possible implications of that term. Not only that, but they are just as much as, or even, perhaps, more fascists than that misguided Archbishop Lefebvre, who permitted himself to be used by a present continuation of Hitler's fascist movement. In that role assigned to him, Lefebvre became a figure in that continued movement's deployment into the Americas, largely from Licio Gelli's Italy and Franco's Spain.

In the related case of the relics of Nazism coddled by Allen Dulles's James Jesus Angleton, this conduiting of many among Lefebvre's implicit allies, was assisted at the direction of creatures such as the Buckley clan, which launched Joe Lieberman as a U.S. Senator, at the direction of the creatures which brought the Nazi-linked regime of Pinochet to power in Chile, the latter with the assistance of witting accomplices such as George P. Shultz, Henry Kissinger, and Felix Rohatyn. From those relevant points of far-right-wing reference, the issue posed by a duped Lefebvre comes back to current role of Lynne and Dick Cheney. As the popular witticism goes: often, what goes around, comes around.

The specific issue at the center of the Archbishop Lefebvre's own tragic error, was Lefebvre's evasion of the most crucial among the factual political issues of Vatican II, the evidence that the crime of the Adolf Hitler regime against the Jews of Europe, was not only a direct and consistent outgrowth of the persecution of the Jews of Spain by the Hitler-like Tomás de Torquemada, but of the wave of religious warfare throughout Europe, which Torquemada's Inquisition sparked, over the interval 1492-1648, as by the butchering Norman crusaders of Venice's medieval heydays.

No matter how the would-be defenders of Archbishop Lefebvre might protest, he and his name have been used as a rallying-cry for murderous anti-Semitism and fascism throughout much of the world still today. This includes the variety of fascism otherwise typified by the circles of the rabidly pseudo-intellectual, tasteless devotee of the pathetic Matthew Arnold, Lynne Cheney. Hers is a tastelessness otherwise typified by the spectacle of that brutish oaf of husband which she sports, perhaps as a dog on nightly chains, at the D.C. Naval Observatory. In her soul, it is clear, she, like Lady Macbeth, is just as guiltily brutish as that slaughterer of innocent birds and others, her bloody, murderous spouse.

As in competent physical science generally, the discovery that certain selected varieties of apparently dissimilar attributes are representative of the same species, obliges serious thinkers today to recognize the common specific identity, and also other affinities, between Lynne Cheney and the portion of the fascist movement organized under the guidon of the unfortunate, late Archbishop Lefebvre.

Sister Cheney has not yet, apparently, reached the point in the crossroads of her infamous career, at which she aims to turn targetted university professors into lampshades; but that, too, lies somewhere ahead, along that road she is already travelling, if she continues to travel in her present direction. Hers is a pathway, today, leading toward her clearly manifest intention, as in ACTA and other of her operations, to effect the early introduction of a dictatorship with certain Hitlerian predicates, inside the U.S.A. and elsewhere. Similarly, whatever her intention, she is like Archbishop Lefebvre, who may not have wished to be associated with the Pinochet-linked Operation Condor, but he played his not insignificant part in the promotion of such events. Her intentions express her defective character and its implied fate: unless she were to undergo an unlikely systemic change.

As much as the two varieties, she and Lefebvre, may differ in secondary features, as did the mythical pairing of selected cases of largely fictional Greeks and Romans which was done by the Delphi cult's scurrilous high priest, Plutarch: Lefebvre and Cheney are ultimately of the same fascist political species.

The Fascist Model

On this account, the specific quality of relevant historical connections shared among Torquemada, Anglo-Dutch Liberalism, and Hitler are clear.

In the attempt to defeat and crush the American Constitutional republic, the perpetrators, Britain's Anglo-Dutch Liberals, were led by Lord Shelburne, who utilized the Martinist freemasonry of Count Joseph de Maistre, to orchestrate the prevention of the formation, by Lafayette et al., of a French constitutional monarchy modelled upon the the U.S. republic's system.[3] Shelburne was like his agent Jeremy Bentham, and like Bentham's protégé and successor, the Lord Palmerston who was the principal, actual patron of an unwitting Karl Marx. Palmerston, the creator of the U.S. Civil War of 1861-1865, used such assets of his as the Martinists and the virtual Hitler known as Mexico's Emperor Maximilian, to orchestrate destablizations of rivals in Europe and beyond. Such cases of the British use of the Martinists, under Shelburne and Bentham directly, include the affair of the Queen's Necklace, and the deployment of Philippe Egalité and Jacques Necker to play key roles in preparing and conducting the Paris events of July 14, 1789.

It was Martinist leader Count Joseph de Maistre of Savoy, who literally programmed a flunky of the Robespierre tyranny, Captain of Artillery Napoleon Bonaparte, to become Emperor of France and the ruin of continental Europe, that according to a model which de Maistre himself based explicitly on the most monstrous characteristics of Tomás de Torquemada. It was that same model, that of Napoleon and his wars, crafted by de Maistre, which was used as a model for the selection and crafting of the special kind of personality of Adolf Hitler.

The model on which these and consequent developments were premised, was crafted on behalf of defeating the threat which the American System represented for the continuation of Lord Shelburne's conception of a "new Roman" sort of British Empire. The Napoleonic wars, for example, served the British "geopolitical" cause as that so-called Seven Years' War which had cleared the way for the British East India Company's imperial triumph in the February 1763 Peace of Paris. The same "geopolitical" motive was behind the organization of what became known as World War I, as designed under the leadership of Britain's imperial Prince Edward Albert, and was also the underlying concern in the original Franco-British plan for putting Adolf Hitler into power, and sending Germany to the mutual ruin of central and eastern Europe in an intended assault on Soviet Russia. It was the same Liberal intent which is plunging the greatest fools of today's world into the conduct of a form of neo-Venetian, nation-state-free, global empire, called "globalization" today.

The root of these fools' designs was not so much the older model of the Roman and Byzantine empires, but, much more, a derivative of those: the medieval ultramontane system of partnership between Venice's financier-oligarchy and the bestial, crusading Norman chivalry; a system of imperial rule exerted by a Venetian, or Anglo-Dutch Liberal financier oligarchy, a "bankers' imperialism." The Torquemada from which the followers of the misguided Archbishop Lefebvre adopted their present-day, fascist heritage, was the expression of an attempted revival of the medieval, ultramontane system, the system which had crashed in the New Dark Age of the middle-to-late Fourteenth Century. The anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim ideologies of extended modern European civilization under post-President Lyndon Johnson decades today, are a resurrection of the same brutish ideologies of the Crusades, the religious warfare of 1492-1648, and that of the U.S. lackeys, such as Harvard-trained Henry A. Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Samuel P. Huntington, and of the British Arab Bureau intelligence's Bernard Lewis today.

Thus, the two feudal roots of modern fascism converged into a common effort: the testy alliance of financier-oligarchy tyranny, on the one side, and the imperial crusaders' tradition, on the other; both united by a common synarchy modelled on the alliance of France's Banque Worms with the Nazi regime.

In other words, these horrid developments of today are echoes of the struggle of lackey Gibbon's Lord Shelburne et al., to establish a permanent, Anglo-Dutch Liberal successor to the Roman Empire, one based on world rule by a financier oligarchy reigning from above. Here lie the common ideological roots of fascism shared among such differing varieties of the same, decadent species which Lynne Cheney shares with the avowed devotees of the late Archbishop Lefebvre.

For that wicked purpose, warfare and other horrid means are employed; but, essentially, as Lynne Cheney's evil role within ACTA attests, the weapon is, at the same time, also cultural warfare against any professors or other persons who are capable of actually thinking, and might have the courage to do so.

1. The Necessity of Repeating Oneself

All competent science and statecraft oblige the serious thinker to seem to repeat himself, or herself, even "early and often," at least, according to the opinion of shallow thinkers.[4] In competent science, what must always be repeated, in any relevant context, is an invocation of a universal principle, a principle which must, by its nature, pervade the universe. What must also, otherwise, often be repeated, are points of evidence which must be invoked to locate included elements of proof of the role of some universal principle; this must be done to expose the subject at hand as belonging to a specific kind of lawful interpretation of a relevant situation: as the subject of the commonly underlying feature of Romanticism in Lynne Cheney and Lefebvre presents such a situation.

Nonetheless, there are certain people, who, like the attorneys for defense of felons of so-called organized crime, when called before a judge, will insist, "Your honor, there are no conspiracies in history." The pleading, in each case, is made either by a liar, or a pitiable dimwit, or a person who partakes of the attributes of both.

Occasionally, or perhaps more often, that same kind of lie which has been famously employed for purposes of attempted criminal defense, is employed, as I have been eyewitness to this, in concerted actions by members of a lying conspiracy shared by prosecutors and judges, even certain instances of this among Federal prosecutors and judges, as, to my knowledge, in the orbit of the activities of the accomplices of the right-wing arch-conspirator John Train.

Notably, that sort of pathetic babbling against which I am complaining here, was concocted in aid of the case of those leading accomplices of the Nazi criminal machine which brought certain hidebound friends and cronies of fascism together with both their witting and unwitting accomplices. Typical of such fully witting cronies is the cited case of Allen Dulles and his chief lackey James Jesus Angleton, who, together, led in protecting and promoting the use of some of the most culpable Nazi perpetrators employed, during the post-war period.

"Statistically," one might say, this was done in apparent revenge for what President Franklin Roosevelt had done to some of Allen Dulles' former friends among such leading fascists of Europe. That pattern is merely typified, in the instance of Dulles and his lackey Angleton, by the cases of the now recently deceased Prince Borghese, rescued from a waiting death-sentence, by Angleton personally, and by Angleton's role in promoting the circles of the Salo Republic's presently active Nazi veteran Licio Gelli long after Angleton's death, a Gelli who is playing the old game of power as under the P-2 lodge of Monte Carlo's past, still today.

However, the point being made here is not intended merely to lambaste the contemptible practitioners of such actually widespread, fully witting conspiratorial frenzies. The point of principle is, that, as I taught my students decades ago, you could not have had a ten-cent cup of nightly coffee served in even a cheap Manhattan diner, without a measurably global conspiracy among all the elements of action which are expressed in the presence of that hot, steaming cup at that location at that time.

Conspiracies already existed before man's known presence; they existed among the screaming masses of rhesus monkeys and among the South African baboons gathering baobab nuts. Animal conspiracies of that sort, are one thing; conspiracies among the lower forms of human life, such as Allen Dulles' circles, are another matter. Archbishop Lefebvre and Lynne Cheney are, in common, subjects of such another matter.

So, to come now directly to the core of the point at issue, I proceed here hence as follows.

What, After All, Is Christianity?

The translation of Archbishop Lefebvre's book, which I hold here in my hand as I write, is fairly described as the work of a Sophist, so infatuated with his own opportunistic rhetoric, that he loses all sight of the subject, Christianity, which he purports to address. Epistemologically, he babbles.

The essential premise of religious belief among Christians, as also Jews and Muslims, most notably, is the ontological distinction of the human personal individuality from the lower forms of life. This distinction is ontological; it pertains to a quality of the member of the human species which humanity shares only with the continuously active Creator of the existing and still developing universe. The Christian Apostles John and Paul, who were literate in the Classical Greek science of Plato, presented this conception of man's affinity to the Creator in language of what remains, to the present day, as, epistemologically, the relatively greatest scientific precision known to the world at large. This view was shared, implicitly, by the Philo of Alexandria who was the friend of the Apostle Peter, the Peter who was murdered by the Roman Emperor, and criminal, Nero.

The relevant proponents of the erring view, as shared among some notable Christian and Jewish scholars, have either argued for the sophistry that, if God and his work were perfect, then the Creation of the universe in a state antecedent to the existence of man is perfect, so perfect that God himself could not change the universe from that perfected state. From this, pro-satanists, such as Friedrich Nietzsche, have put forward the sophistry, "God is dead," to which some livelier wits have replied, "God says: Nietzsche is dead."

On the contrary account, Classical Greek thinkers such as Heracleitus and Plato, had already shown that the universe is not composed of a fixed Creation, but that Creation is ontologically, as modern science has demonstrated, a continuing process of qualitative state of functional existence progressing to transuranic and otherwise higher levels, a process which it is man's endowed and intended nature to promote. This quality in man, expresses the distinction of man both from ape and from the adopted self-image, adopted in practice, by degenerated versions of the human type, such as Mrs. Lynne Cheney.

For our purposes here, the relevant opposition to Christianity, in particular, is typified by the character of the Satan-like figure, the Olympian Zeus, as portrayed by the poet Aeschylus' Prometheus Bound. In that drama, Zeus' prescription of torture for the Prometheus charged with the crime of permitting human beings to know the principle of the use of "fire," or, implicitly, therefore, "nuclear-fission power" today, we have the image of the denial to man, by Satan, of that specific quality of creativity which distinguishes man from beast, and which casts the human individual and human species in the living image of the Creator.

On the account of this issue, all persons are sacred to Christianity, because they share the essential nature of the Creator, a nature which instructs them to devote their mortal lives to participating in the living Creator's work of contributing to the more perfect development of the universe we inhabit. This dedication expresses the motivating quality of love for mankind, as emphasized in the Apostle Paul's I Corinthians 13, as in the work of Cardinal Mazarin et al. in crafting that 1648 Treaty of Westphalia on which all proper law of and among the actually civilized form of sovereign nations of Europe, and beyond, depends today.

To this end, we are rightly obliged to devote our individual's self-development and mission in mortal life, to certain ends, aims, and obligations, which are coherent with that special distinction of the human personality from the individuality of the beasts.

With the Apostolic Christians, such as John and Paul, most emphatically, the duty of the Christian is to impart this sense of mortal man's immortal mission, and a corresponding love for all mankind, to all mankind. What you do for others, on this account, is your proper mission, as that of the likeness of a missionary, in your mortal life. It is not sufficient to help others; it is necessary to inspire them to find the immortal place in which their having lived will resonate in affirming the enduring meaning of having lived of themselves, in their forebears, and in the benefit of those to live after us.

However, the banning of the knowledgeable discovery of the principled use of fire, such as nuclear-fission power, to mankind, by the Satanic Olympian Zeus and his modern imitators, degrades man's imposed self-image to that of just another beast, to the state of human cattle of today's reigning financier oligarchies. That radically reductionist dogma of the Delphic tradition of the Olympian Zeus, has served as the doctrine of law upon which the so-called oligarchical tradition has been premised, according to the image of Babylon which the Apostle John signified in describing the existence of the Roman Empire of the Caesars as "the Whore of Babylon."

That policy of the satanic Olympian Zeus, is to hold the great majority of the human population in the condition of a human parody of tamed, or hunted cattle, cattle who defend the stupidity imposed upon them by their captors, as "the way of life" which those victims are disposed to defend, even somewhat ferociously. That, in brief, is the oligarchical principle, as its repeated appearance stretches from ancient Babylon through Sparta, Rome, Byzantium, medieval ultramontanism, and Anglo-Dutch Liberal echoes of medieval ultramontanisum of the avowedly globalizing, modern crusader against Islam today.

There, in the oligarchical doctrine of that Olympian Zeus, lie the aberrant affinities, the characteristic Sophistries of the late Archbishop Lefebvre and his devotees. In place of man in the likeness of the personality of the living Creator, Lefebvre's loyalties are to the cause of the oligarchical principle of the Olympian Zeus, the cause of those errant souls who have attempted to adorn the social order of the imperial Roman pagan Pantheon with the attire of bishops, this according to the ordering for the same model of the Roman pagan Pantheon worshipped by lackey Gibbon and his British East India Company master, Lord Shelburne.

Measure the words of the confused Archbishop Lefebvre, as in the book I hold before me now, on this account. Contrast his words to the beauty of the soul expressed by the John XXIII whom he reviled, as he did Paul VI and, most emphatically, the widely beloved John Paul II.

This, as just stated, is admittedly, in one important respect, an affair of the Catholic Church; but, it is also a matter which lies elsewhere, as in my hands as I write here today. It is a mission prescribed implicitly in the De Pace Fidei of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, a mission prescribed as a law of modern civilized nations, by the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia. It is the principle reflected in the fundamental statements of principle of constitutional law, in the prescription of Leibniz's anti-Voltairean "the pursuit of happiness" in the U.S. Declaration of Independence, as the statement of the intent which must underlie all law, in the Preamble of the Federal Constitution of the U.S.A.

As Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa argued by the dialogue of De Pace Fidei, this is the law of ecumenicism among nations and peoples which is implicitly obligatory for all Christians, and toward all of the people of different faiths throughout the world.

That defines the core of the issue which separates the implicitly referenced doctrines of the Cheneys and Lefebvre from the world-outlook and conduct of decent human beings today.

2. Lynne Cheney and 'The Whore of Babylon'

From where, in what distant time, did that ugly phenomenon, represented, today, by Lynne Cheney's fascist ACTA operation, originate"? What, therefore, are the "genetic" characteristics of the ugly species she represents today?

To make clear the principled nature of both the historically rooted affinities of the malicious Cheneys and the aberrant Archbishop Lefebvre, a summary of the highlights of Roman imperial history must be supplied and considered, covering the interval from the close of the Second Punic War, through to the drive, today, to uproot and eradicate the existence of the institution of the sovereign nation-state republic, including that of the United States today. This is the present form of drive for a single, planet-wide empire of a ruling financier-oligarchical cabal, called "globalization": a modern "Whore of Babylon."

The Apostle John used that term, "The Whore of Babylon," with historical precision.

It did not begin with the founding of the Roman Empire, but it is useful to point to the benchmark, that what became the Roman Empire itself was launched, on the Isle of Capri, by agreement struck there between Octavian, the future Caesar Augustus, and the priests of the cult of Mithra. This agreement shifted the balance of contending forces of the Mediterranean region, slightly, but decisively, in favor of Augustus, and against Anthony and Cleopatra.

From the aftermath of the Roman victory in both the Second Punic War and the crushing of Archimedes' Syracuse, the pervasive issue of life throughout the Mediterranean and adjoining regions, was whether a new empire, based on the heritage of the Babylonian and Spartan traditions of oligarchical society, would be formed under the leadership of Rome, of the Ptolemies, or the Middle East's Mithra cult. Octavian's pact with the priests of the cult of Mithra proved decisive. Although the cult of Mithra was still banned from the city of Rome until a later time, it was the pact with Mithra, struck on the Isle of Capri under Caesar Augustus and, most emphatically, Tiberius, which was associated with the reign of the early Caesars. Thus, whereas Jesus Christ was born, in peril, under the reign of Caesar Augustus, He was judicially murdered, crucified, by order of the putative son-in-law, Pontius Pilate, of the Emperor Tiberius then sitting in his seat in Capri.

That Capri, like certain other personal, hereditary properties of the Roman Emperor, remained in those hands for about a half-millennium, until the Byzantine Emperor transferred those places to religious bodies constituted under the rule of the Emperor Constantine's successors.

Such is the useful, and proper meaning of the term "The Whore of Babylon," to identify the tradition which the formation of the Roman Empire represented, then, and in the form of its present "genetic" offspring, the Anglo-Dutch Liberal system of so-called "globalization" today.

From that time on, as put into full practice under the Emperor Nero, the mass murder of Christians and, in Palestine and elsewhere, Jews, was the characteristic of the Roman Empire's reign as a form of tyranny under a system of oligarchical society, into the reign of that monstrous butcher, the Emperor Diocletian, who divided the Roman Empire in the attempt to save it, and whose circles reluctantly ceased the mass-butchery of Christians, that on the grounds that the practice of persistent mass-murder had not fulfilled its intended, evil purpose.

Here, in these developments, we discover the root of the form of fascist theology associated with the image of Archbishop Lefebvre, still today. That root is the oligarchical principle which the Russian novelist Dostoevsky portrays as the satanic hatred of Christianity expressed by the oligarchical Grand Inquisitor in the likeness of Tomás de Torquemada. In the book open before me, Archbishop Lefebvre, again and again, affirms that oligarchical devotion we would otherwise associate with the stilettos of old Venice.

That Old Whore Today

Some call her Ge, or Gaia. Her chief place of residence is identified as Delphi, the maritime center of those People of the Sea who became known to modern times as, chiefly, the Greeks, and known to Plato and others as the seat of Satan whence the streams of Sophistry flowed to bring once Great Athens to self-destruction in Pericles' unleashing of the Peloponnesian War.

From here, the ships sailed to the mouth of the Tiber, to plant a religious cult within the land of those Etruscans whose language was systematically exterminated, in an infamous act of cultural genocide. This was done by a cult which parodied the mythology of Delphi itself. This was the seed which, nourished by Delphi, became, in time, imperial Rome.

The Adam and Eve story, which the Babylonians and their followers, the captors of the Israelites at the pertinent time, inserted into what had been the original Mosaic text of Genesis, was also known to the cult of Delphi as the story of Adam, Eve (Gaia) and the serpent-god known to the Greeks as Python. Hence, the cult of the Delphic Pythian cult of the Delphic Apollo, whose priests, including the notorious Plutarch, gathered at what was attributed to be the gravesite of Python; gathered at the place where the lunatic woman, Pythia, was occupied with babbling meaningless nonsense, when she was not pulling balls out from the urn standing beside the place at which she was seated in service to the mumbo-jumbo of that day's occasion.

The New Testament I understand, and Moses of Egypt is a hero; but, what was done to the legacy of Israel by its captors, presents us with sundry elements, some of which I know to be of a certain unpleasant origin, and others on which I render no judgment. Christianity I know, and ecumenicism, such as that of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, is my policy.

From that ancient gravesite, there is a certain meaningful, essentially direct connection to the Mont Pelerin Society's putative Satanic divinity, Bernard Mandeville, who, equipped with the balls of the Pythian priestess Pythia, defined the fate of men and women as determined by the freedom, as by the casting of dice, to do evil individually. He argued that, so, that by some miraculous casting of the balls by the curious, and thoroughly corrupt croupiers of a great casino under the floorboards of reality, the fate of men and women is miraculously assigned, and, in the end, the evil done by individuals to that purpose, must produce, miraculously, the good which society as a whole might enjoy.

So, religion is much degraded by such fellows and their tricks, to the form of gambling with dice thrown in a dirty back alley, to the accompaniment of holy prayers such as "Baby needs shoes!"

The same curious sort of ancient Greek oligarchical lunacy, inspired the doctrine of laissez-faire of the decadent, and thoroughly corrupt French oligarchist, Dr. François Quesnay.

Lord Shelburne's lackey, the plagiarist Adam Smith, copied his dogma of "free trade" directly from the concept of laissez-faire concocted by Quesnay, and also cribbed by Smith from the writings of the follower of Quesnay, A. R. J. Turgot, who did so much, like Jacques Necker, to bankrupt what had been, physically, the most wealthy, most productive national economy of that time, France.[5] Mandeville had already carried that same, common line of argument, from which modern monetarist dogma is derived, to a Delphic extreme, of treating economic value as something determined miraculously by a mysterious, potent, and capricious agency, an agency operating implicitly from under the floorboards of reality.

The point to be emphasized here, is the curious coincidence between forms of popular lunacy such as "the magic of the marketplace," and the banning of knowledge of principles of the universe by the Delphic Olympian Zeus presented in Aeschylus' Prometheus Bound. In the world of the modern subject of rule by the Anglo-Dutch Liberal system of economy and government, the overwhelming majority of the population is subject to management by mechanisms which lie, so to speak, under the floorboards of experience and knowledge, mechanisms apparently embodying the capricious powers of mysterious agencies existing beyond the knowledge, or control of ordinary human beings, an opinion by such dupes which is also, in itself, a lie.

Under those conditions, as long as you permit them to be continued, the power of the will of society to shape its destiny, is confined to the attributed power of government by a ruling class, a class of the form of oligarchy implicit in the doctrine of the Delphic cult. Relative to that ruling stratum, the mass of ordinary people are cattle, denied, as by the Olympian Zeus, the right of access to the natural principles which govern the rules of cause and effect. What is called "globalization" today, is the present expression of the oligarchical model, so defined. What is called "globalization" today, is the imperialist elimination of the existence of national sovereignty, is therefore treason against our United States, and is, ultimately a brutish system of slavery or serfdom.

If you are typical of our citizens today, you, today, are permitted to make certain decisions, but you are not sovereign. There are knowable principles which could guide you to intelligent and successful decisions; but the so-called powers that be, including the present U.S. Bush Administration, will not permit you to know those principles, and, therefore, your freedom to make decisions in such matters is incompetent to guide most among you to intelligent decisions about our national economy and its policies. You are virtually so clueless that your intelligent power to make efficient forms of intelligent decisions in such matters, virtually does not exist; for all but a few among you, who presently understand what I am saying, your so-called economic freedom, is virtually an empty sack, which will do you no good in practice.

Hence, all but a few among you are not permitted to know the principles which govern the laws of physical cause and physical effect, which govern the consequences of the decisions which you are, in a certain degree, permitted to make. You are told, by the press and most of your teachers, university professors, and elected political officials, for example, that the principles of "free trade" define the proper system for promoting the prosperity of nations and their peoples, which is a lie. You are told, as the lying Mandeville and Adam Smith have taught, that the percussive interaction of prices on the billiard-table-like field of trade in buying and selling, laissez-faire, "free trade," determines an increasing approximation of true relative value in the economy at large: an absurdity. If you are foolish enough to believe the doctrine of the virtually pro-Satanic Mont Pelerin Society, you will have earned, thus, the suffering, and earned the contempt you bring upon yourself.

Thus, for example, millions of mass-media-stupefied adult Americans believe the lie, that when the stock market is rising today, the economy is on the road to a successful future. The problem is, that the rise of indexes is the effect of an intellectual fraud, by your government and other agencies; whereas, the physical conditions of life of the lower eighty percentile or more of the population, like the market value of residential real estate, are collapsing at an accelerating rate throughout most of the U.S.A., the United Kingdom, Spain, and so forth, and the rate of collapse in many of what have been deemed the most thriving residential communities is the highest rate of acceleration of collapse of prices of such properties, and of net household physical income and employment throughout.

You are—our nation is—the virtual slave of a rapidly emerging one-world empire. It is an empire based on the model of the form of imperialism associated with the Middle Ages of Europe, when a rampaging, crusading Norman chivalry, deployed under the direction of Venice's imperial financier-oligarchy, dominated Europe and its nearby regions. That empire is the modern incarnation of the Whore of Babylon called ancient imperial Rome. Lynne Cheney, as a phenomenon, is a present-day expression of service to what the Apostle identified as that "Whore of Babylon."

A Whore's Family Tree

The specifically European concept of the oligarchical principle as a system, dates, in explicit knowledge to that effect, from about the time of Plato. The letters of Plato, as they bear on the evil role of the Delphi Apollo cult, are of particular relevance on this account.

Follow me here, as I summarize the features of the process from: first, B.C. 212, the close of the Second Punic War, through the division of the Empire between East and West, from the abdication of Diocletian and the accession of Constantine (A.D. 305-323); second, the so-called medieval period, from the birth of medieval Europe under the partnership of the Crusaders and Venice's financier-oligarchy established about A.D. 1066, until the A.D. 1345 collapse of the Lombard banking house of Bardi and the coincident explosion of the Black Death. The latter was a pandemic nourished to a state of unprecedented fury by the conditions created by the spread of wars financed by the Lombard bankers, a condition comparable to the onrushing effects of the spread of U.S. President George W. Bush, Jr.'s spread of warfare and related conditions in an increasing region of Southwest Asia.

The temporary collapse of power of Venice's financier oligarchy during and following the Fourteenth Century "New Dark Age," was used as the opportunity for the work of the great ecumenical Council of Florence, and the founding of the first modern commonwealth form of sovereign nation-states, in Louis XI's France and Henry VII's England. However, the resurgence of the Venetian financier-oligarchy's power, with the Fall of Constantinople and the role of the Spanish Inquisition in launching the religious warfare of 1492-1648, created the opening for emergence of the Venetian tool, the Dutch India Company of the Sixteenth Century, and the establishment of the British East India Company's monarchical imperial power over the interval from the tyranny of William of Orange in the British Isles, through the establishing of the British East India Company as a virtual empire with the February 1763 Peace of Paris.

However, to understand the process which this involved, return attention to the aftermath of the Peloponnesian War, to examine those relevant characteristics of the emergence and fall of the Roman Empire which have continued to reassert themselves in history since then, to the presently erupting world crisis.

The original conception of such an empire as those in Europe, dating from approximately the time of the Peloponnesian War, is associated with the attempt of the Persian Empire to negotiate the establishment of a two-part, virtually world empire, one based on the oligarchical principle, with the Macedon of King Philip and his heir Alexander the Great. The matter came to the point of a great battle, and a truce, during which this proposal was proffered by the Persian and rejected by Alexander the Great. The death, probably by poisoning, of Alexander the Great, left the inherently unstable Ptolemaic system in its wake. With the rise of the military power of Rome, with the conclusion of the Second Punic War and the subjugation of Syracuse, Rome was on a perilous road toward imperial power, a road dominated by the combination of civil wars in Italy itself, and a complementary struggle for the domination of the Mediterranean by a single imperial power premised on the oligarchical principle.

The Roman Empire, once established under Caesar Octavian Augustus, was a long-term failure from the start. Like the foolish U.S.A. of the 1971-2006 interval to date, Rome ruined the productive farmers on which Rome had depended earlier, and replaced them with a system of looting foreign nations, instituting, thus, a growing slave-system diverted by bread and circuses, inside Italy itself. This is what has been repeated with the U.S.A., without interruption of that process, over the interval from President Richard Nixon's collapsing of President Franklin Roosevelt's Bretton Woods system, to the present instant. Like a Rome in accelerating moral and social decay along the highway to empire, we have transformed our U.S.A., under these Presidencies, at varying rates of destruction, but persistently, up to the present day. The net rate of physical self-destruction of the internal U.S. economy itself has been accelerating even as we relied increasingly on imported consumption for which, increasingly, we did not actually pay.

As Rome became a parasite, so did the modern U.S. since 1971. As our parasitical needs increased in this way, we became increasingly predatory, demanding that foreign nations work to supply our needs, at falling real prices paid, if and when payment was delivered. In this process, the Anglo-Dutch Liberal system, of which we have been emphatically a part, and that increasingly over the 1971-2006 interval, we have lowered the net per capita physical income, per capita and per square kilometer, of the world at large: as the Roman Empire did, from its surge to imperial power, through its physical collapse, and that of the Byzantine and ultramontane systems, respectively.

This turn away from the legacy of President Franklin Roosevelt reached a downturn, from the point of the crucial 1971-1981 developments such as destroying the Bretton Woods system, terminating the maintenance and other needed replenishment of already existing, essential basic economic infrastructure, in the destruction of the magnificent system of agriculture set into motion under President Franklin Roosevelt, the virtual halting of net physical scientific progress, and destruction of education in various ways, the ruin of the health-care system from New York City's Big MAC financiers' swindle onward.

We are now virtually completing a destruction of our nation comparable to the ruinous effects of the changes in policy in Italy which began to be unleashed as a virtual avalanche with the close of the Second Punic War.

Since that time, excepting a few bright periods, such as the great ecumenical Council of Florence, the discoveries of Kepler and his followers, the colonization in North America, the founding of the U.S. republic, and the victory, led by President Lincoln, over the attempt of Palmerston's Anglo-Dutch Liberal system to crush us, we have been dominated by a long-ranging trend of moral decay associated with the imperial overreach of the Anglo-Dutch Liberal, neo-Venetian form of imperial system.

We have now reached a point of virtual collapse of civilization, in which foolish people among us, even in positions of relatively great influence, propose that the extinction of our sovereign republic is to be embraced as the blessed fruit of the destruction of our republic, a republic to be blessed by being gobbled up by a form of Anglo-Dutch Liberal, global imperialism, called "globalization."

This is the drama of destruction, echoing the third panel of Hieronymous Bosch's "The Garden of Delights," the entry of a world, led by creatures such as Sister Cheney, into a state of pure Hell on this planet for more than a generation to come. So, the Whore of Babylon, which the Apostle John knew as Rome, has returned to our doorstep, with Sister Cheney curtseying at the gate of the Executive Mansion when Satan, rather than the unavailable Adolf Hitler, enters.

3. Lefebvre and Clerical Paganism

To bring the essence of Archbishop Lefebvre's rant into focus, it were most useful to compare his referenced complaint against John XXIII with what I have emphasized, earlier here, as the hateful implications of the Olympian Zeus' role were presented by the great Aeschylus. Consider the degree to which the poor, misguided Lefebvre spoke, as with a passion like that of the drunken driver who authors the calamity. wittingly or not, speaking with the voice of an actor playing the part of surrogate for that Satanic Zeus presented by Aeschylus' drama.

Since the Council of Nicaea, two most crucial issues have been posed on the subject of the definition of the Christian churches as instruments of Christian belief and practice. On the one side, the concept of Filioque; second, the primary continuing issue of the toleration of Christianity by the governing institutions of the imperial oligarchical system has been, most emphatically, the implications of the Emperor's preemption of the asserted right to appoint the bishops of the Christian Church. This second issue is expressed in a particularly vicious form in the issue of the so-called "Donation of Constantine," a simply fraudulent, insidious doctrine of Constantine himself, which was used to attempt to degrade bishops from agents of the Christian mission, to agents, again, of the imperial oligarchical system, and, thus, implicitly, subjects of the imperial institution of the pagan Roman Pantheon.

To speak as plainly as the implications of this latter issue demands, now as then, the question so posed is, does submission to the imperial authority on this specific point, signify that the Christian Church were being degraded, by the Emperor, to reliance on its membership in a pagan imperial Pantheon?

This issue is otherwise expressed as the principle of separation of Church from State. It is the underlying issue posed by the impassioned errors of Lefebvre.

What Archbishop Lefebvre did with the line of Sophistry pervading the text to which my present report refers, was to assert an implicitly paganist doctrine, a doctrine derived from the presumption that churches are instruments for political control, control exerted through the assistance of an actual or implied imperial Pantheon, as the crimes against man and God, called Crusades and bloodied Inquisitions, express this awful corruption. This Sophistry appears, among modern nominally Christian denominations today, as the Integrist dogma, the doctrine which is most prominently associated with the fascist-synarchist currents infiltrating the churches, and with fascist varieties of terrorist or pro-terrorist groupings which often cloak their obscene beliefs and practices with, for example, the name of Christianity, as Archbishop Lefebvre's awful error has attempted to promote that error

Under Constantine, this tyrannical imposition of corruption was imposed by imperial usurpation. Under the medieval Church, it was imposed by the instrument of the Venetian financier oligarchy's instrument of simony.

This doctrine, as expressed through certain varieties of channels, is the key to the presently soaring danger, that the United States itself is in an advanced phase of the process of being forcibly transformed into a fascist, Nazi-like state, by a virtual act of treason, by its toleration of the current Bush-Cheney Administration.

The relevant, specifically Hitler-like fascist policy, is expressed in an exemplary way, in the anti-constitutional practice of so-called "signing statements," statements uttered by a President whose manifest illiteracy on virtually any and every subject, has became the great shame of the United States before the eyes and ears of the civilized nations of the world. This legal doctrine, which is associated with the Nazi Crown Jurist Carl Schmitt, resurrected by the current, Chicago-centered set of pro-fascist so-called "neo-conservatives," is a modernized expression of the same issue of law posed by the fraudulent "Donation of Constantine," and by the insulting demands by the Emperor Constantine upon the representatives at Nicaea. From the standpoint of natural law on this point, the current President of the U.S.A. is as much a clearly impeachable fascist, on the account of principle of statecraft, as Adolf Hitler.

On this account, the juxtaposition of Mrs. Lynne Cheney and what Archbishop Lefebvre have represented, shows us a Janus-like monster: two faces of the same evil.

What Need Be Affirmed

For anyone whose comprehension of theology is in accord with the knowledgeable state of mind of the Apostles John and Paul, for example, the vulnerability of Christian intellectual development is the susceptibility which the relevant ignorance of populations, including elements of the most highly educated strata, in the domain of what is called epistemology. Thus, what the competently literate mind reads in such sources as the Gospel of John and the Epistles of Paul, exists on a different plane of comprehension than the know-nothing-like assumption that isolated passages from text, read in translation from the original language, can be readily understood for agreement from what passes for "simple common sense."

The capacity to produce an offspring, as by copulation, does not carry the guarantee that the relevant parents have any systematic comprehension of that which lies, as human, rather than animal potential, within that newborn creature. The notorious problem of sexual problems among the clergy should remind us of the often poor connection between mind and the means of procreation among the congregation. Nor, looking at the matter on a higher level than that, the sensed intimation of immortality is not, in itself, comprehension of the nature of the Creator, nor of the human individual's certain likeness to that Creator.

So, it may, and must be said, that the Apostles John and Paul, for example, were much closer to comprehension of the meaning of what they knew and wrote, than someone who lacks that profound comprehension of the work of Plato which equipped such Apostles with the needed means to grasp even the barest ontological elements of kinship of the Creator to the human individual personality, a kinship as, for example, the great modern genius Johannes Kepler grasped this, or the practicing Jew and genius Albert Einstein, as Philo of Alexandria and Moses Mendelssohn before him.

The characteristic distinction of the human species and its individual member, the distinction of man from beast, is the expression of those powers which equip the human individual to discover a provable universal physical principle, as the work of the Pythagoreans and Plato exemplifies this power for humanity as a whole, and as the discoveries of Cusa follower Johannes Kepler are the foundation of all competent currents in modern physical science and related technology.

The power of the human species, thus, to accumulate discoveries of universal principles over the course of successive generations, is the physical-scientific basis for the absolute distinction of man from beast. It is the organization of the social process to foster the production of such new human individuals, and to promote the development of those specific powers of discovery which are absent from among the beasts, which expresses an efficient kind of immortality of the human individual, and of the human species.

This power of creativity, as the work of Kepler is among the most effective approaches to showing what scientific creativity should be understood to signify, is the essential feature of likeness of the human individual soul and the Creator of the universe. It is the expression of the development and other fostering of this power of creativity, in the individual member of society, and in the cultural practice of that society, which presents us man in the image of his Creator. It is the work, expressed by the kind of creativity which Kepler's uniquely original discovery of the principle of gravitation, and of the harmonic organization of the Solar System, which presents us with the image of the personal immortality which endures when the animal-like body has been destroyed.

The recognition of this divine potential within the newborn human individual, this recognition of man as imago viva Dei, is the essence of theology, and of morality.

On the contrary side, the notion that man's obedience to a oligarchical system is morality, is a pro-Satanic alternative to the love of mankind and of the Creator which is the only acceptable basis for morality, as Cardinal Mazarin, the former peace negotiator of the Papacy, led in bringing about the Peace of Westphalia to end the satanic orgy of butchery unleashed by the Inquisition of Tomás de Torquemada.

In reading the English translation of Lefebvre's cited work, I hear words, words, words, but no conception of the actuality of Christianity. It is all Sophistry!

Lynne Cheney may not wish the murder of Jews she happens to like, or wishes to tolerate, but that is not really an indicative difference of principle between what she represents, and what the errant Archbishop Lefebvre of the fascist, and usually anti-Semitic, nominally Catholic right represented. They are differing varieties of the same wicked species, she perhaps the worst of the two. Both are shared in common by the legacy of the Satanic Olympian Zeus and the related legacy of the Pythian Delphi cult of Apollo. They are different varieties of the same species, but of the same species nonetheless. Both dwell in the concluding panel of the celebrated "The Garden of Earthly Delights" triptych of Hieronymus Bosch.

[1] Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, They Have Uncrowned Him: From Liberalism to Apostasy, The Conciliar Tragedy Rev. Fr. Gregory Post SSPX (Kansas City, Mo.: The Angelus Press, 1988)

[2] Leo Strauss's career began as a protégé of the Nazi Crown Jurist Carl Schmitt, who was both the crafter of the legal dogma under which dictatorial powers were awarded to Adolf Hitler, and also the inspiration of the fascist Federalist Society now polluting the ranks of the current post of the U.S. Supreme Court. Lynne Cheney's activities in the public domain are representative of the same fascist outlook typical of Trotskyists and others currently associated with the "neo-conservative" outlook.

[3] The cases of France's Louis XI and his admirer, England's Henry VII, illustrate the reasons for the debate, in the run-up to the U.S. Federal Constitution, over the choice between a constitutional Presidency and a Presidential monarchy. The same theme is reflected as an issue for historians, in the role of Bailly in the matter of the "Tennis Court" oath. Louis XI was, in effect, an ideal President of France, functioning in the guise of a monarchical head of state of the new form of society arising from of the great ecumenical Council of Florence, a commonwealth. However, the institution of modern monarchy has been otherwise the nasty failure to which so-called World War I attests most notably. Ours was the right choice, despite the bought-and-paid-for, shabby products which representatives of foreign financier interests have sometimes dumped, as now, into the entryway of the U.S. Executive Mansion.

[4] As even a certain, not notably intellectual, former Democratic Presidential candidate, Walter Mondale, once said.

[5] From the standpoint of the history of ideas, the most significant publication by Adam Smith was not his famous anti-American polemic, known popularly as his 1776 The Wealth of Nations, but an earlier work, his 1759 The Theory of Moral Sentiments, a work which states, systematically, the results of Smith's delving into the combined works of the English pro-slavery advocate John Locke, and David Hume.

Back to top