A CURIOUS NOTE:
A Good Heart, But Bad HistoryBy Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
April 25, 2009
The Moscow Times of April 24, 2009 includes a piece, "Anti-Nazi Bill Targets Ukraine, Baltic States," which author Natalya Krainova summarizes as, "would make the rehabilitation of Nazism a crime which could result in Moscow cutting diplomatic ties with other former Soviet republics." The article's argument may appear to be plausible, but absolutely misses the essential fact of the matter. Before speculating on the subject of Nazism, it is always the time to ask, "How and why did the British monarchy, first, create both Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler as British-sponsored dictators, and, later, turn against Hitler, but only when the Wehrmacht was overrunning France?"
The same strategic motive for British imperial policy then, is now the motive for Britain's current aim to destroy the U.S.A., Germany, Russia, and China, and maintain a policy of genocide against Africa, today. Why the dumping of Germany's Chancellor Bismarck, in 1890, which made possible Britain's launching of what became known as a first "World War," and also, why the related matter of British policy, still today, of the British monarchy's launching of the 1895-1945 warfare of Japan against China, this time in the form of the pro-genocidal dogmas of Prince Philip's World Wildlife Fund? See why Natalya Krainova had posed the wrong questions.
To correct the essential error in the Moscow Times report by Natalya Krainova, begin with attention to the British empire's steering of the continuing pattern of warfare since Prince Edward Albert's role in the 1890 ousting of Germany's Chancellor Bismarck and the Prince's 1894 success in inducing the Emperor of Japan to unleash the war against China which was continued, in effect, until the Summer of 1945. The policy of the British empire then, is expressed presently with the same malice, as the "environmentalist" program, that of global genocide, of Prince Philip's neo-malthusian World Wildlife Fund today.
This pattern of that drive toward that system of British world-empire which London has aimed since the decades leading into so-called "World War I," was crafted by means including that assassination of France's President (Marie François) Sadi Carnot (the grandson of that great Lazare Carnot known as "the author of victory") which was followed by the Prince of Wales' seduction of the Mikado into what became a decades-long, 1895-1945 alliance against both China and Russia. It is a conflict which has been continued in sundry kaleidoscopic forms until the strategic crisis associated with the present role of British drug-running, since the 1790s, such as the role of Nazi-trained British agent George Soros, in controlling the relevant chunks of Afghanistan and Mexico, among many other nations of our planet, today.
The British crown still runs the international drug-traffic of the world at large today, as it has since the 1790s, now with the notably prominent assistance, today, of British agent George Soros. This drug-trafficking remains a crucial component of British imperial interests and power at the present moment. All of these and other principal elements of Britain's role as the only actual world empire of today, are to be recognized as being the essential associated attributes of a form of world imperial power centered in a global form of a Venetian monetary interest which, in its sundry phases of metagenesis, has been a leading imperial power within Europe and beyond since the interval between the decline of Byzantium and the Norman conquest of A.D. 1066. Following the decline of the power of the Habsburg family's imperialists, and rise of the followers of Paolo Sarpi during Europe's Seventeenth Century, the 1763 Peace of Paris established the maritime power of the Anglo-Dutch East India Company, and its Victorian successor as the world's leading imperial power.
Since that time, although there have been what were, in past times, self-avowed, essentially land-based "empires" on the continent of Eurasia and in Brazil, the only truly global empire in the Roman tradition has been that British, maritime-based, monetarist system which emerged from that February 1763 Peace of Paris concluding the so-called "Seven Years War," a British empire which is, in fact, the only empire still existing today.
Since February 1763, even after the reign of Queen Victoria and her successors had taken over the British East India Company's operations, that Empire has continued to operate, as it rules presently over Southwest Asia on the basis of today's Sykes-Picot expression (e.g., religious and related warfare) of the original British imperialist Lord Shelburne's adopted model for world rule traced, by him, to the legacy of the Roman Emperor Julian the Apostate (A.D. 361-363). Just so, it was for a certain time, the British empire's principal asset-in-fact, the Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte, whose actions worked to the same strategic effect as London's earlier orchestration of the Seven Years War, making the British empire of 1815 supreme in Europe and beyond. That continued so until the time of both U.S. President Abraham Lincoln's victory over the British puppets at Appomattox, and the subsequent crushing of Britain's Habsburg puppet Maximilian in Mexico.
Since 1890, most emphatically, the ultimate destruction of the United States has been never been far from the menu on the British imperial table, as being the principal long-term, imperial goal of the global financier empire centered politically in the United Kingdom. The betrayals of the U.S.A. from within, on this account, have been lodged, historically, in the British East India Company's agents, as typified by the long tradition traced from the cases of Judge Lowell and the treason of British agent Aaron Burr: a train of spill-overs in the U.S.A. by financier circles tied to that heritage. Since the British success expressed by the September 1901 assassination of the loyal U.S. President William McKinley, the relevant, most notable complicity in implicit betrayal of the republic, has been typified, still today, by the rotten, rabidly anglophile Presidents such as, most notably, Theodore Roosevelt, Ku-Klux-Klan backer Woodrow Wilson, Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, Harry Truman, Jimmy Carter, Richard Nixon, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush, Jr. The implicitly treasonous U.S. submission to the British imperial frauds of the pseudo-scientific schemes of "globalization" and "global warming," are the relevant cases in policy-shaping currently.
One leading source of confusion on that matter, still today, is the widespread, childish notion, that the name "British Empire" connotes the misleading notion of a reign of the mere subjects of the current form of the rule by that "United Kingdom" of Ireland, Scotland, England, and Wales over some vast transoceanic territory. The childish assumption, that the British people themselves are the actual rulers, expresses the error of mistaking an empire's present choice of residence by a presently incumbent emperor, or empress, for the actual power which the empire exerts, dynamically, over nations and peoples spread through a large part, or even the entirety of the planet. In fact, the present British empire, now fairly termed, since the oil-price hoax of 1973, an "Anglo-Dutch-Saudi" empire of the Sykes-Picot system, is a global monetary-financier empire, to which the U.S. dollar-system became subordinated during the course of the 1968-1981 interval, under the delinquent U.S. Presidencies of those U.S. fiscal years.
Our Enemy, Britain
Since 1865, after three successive failures of the British East India Company's attempts to destroy the U.S. republic by direct military interventions (such as those of 1776-1782, 1812-1815, and 1861-1865), the example of the failures on this account by both the Foreign Office's Jeremy Bentham and his appointed successor, Lord Palmerston, led the British monarchy to relying upon concentration on a combination of treasonous roles by Wall Street for the launching of so-called "World Wars" centered on the Eurasian continent and its colonies. This could not have happened as it did, but for the four crucial strategic factors: 1.) the ouster of Bismarck in 1890, 2.) the assassination of President Sadi Carnot in 1894, 3.) the British launching of the Mikado into wars against both China (1895) and Russia, and, 4.) the assassination of U.S. President William McKinley in 1901. A similar outcome might have been arranged by different factors than those; but, that is the real history of the origin of that general warfare from that time to the threat of even nuclear warfare embedded in British imperial schemes, still today, as affirmed by the proposal published by the British Empire's Bertrand Russell in September 1946.
Such were "World Wars I and II," and the "Cold War" launched by Winston Churchill, Bertrand Russell, Margaret Thatcher, and, then, Tony Blair. These were wars focused on the pivotal strategic implications of the Eurasian continent and of that continent's assets in Africa, Asia, and Ibero-America.
In other words, since 1876, the British Imperial strategy against the enemy it fears the most, the United States, has been "geopolitical." As Germany's Chancellor Bismarck stated, after his ouster on orders of Britain's Prince of Wales Edward Albert, the British empire's strategy was the application of the method of the earlier Seven Years War which the Anglo-Dutch heirs of Paolo Sarpi had introduced in his lifetime, to a new, post 1865-77 situation, in which the threat inherent in transcontinental railway systems had superseded maritime power technologically and as a strategic threat.
To the present day, it has been the intended destruction of the science-driven technological progress of the bellwether U.S.A., which has remained the most fundamental, long-term motive in both British imperial policy overall, and among those U.S. public figures, such as the implicitly treasonous and lying former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore, which have allied themselves with our nation's avowed enemy, Prince Philip's neo-fascist World Wildlife Fund, today.
Thus, there is a very specific, specifically imperial motive underlying the British empire's continuing, post-1876 "geopolitical" strategy against Britain's choice of its current principal strategic adversary, the continued existence of the U.S.A.
Today, one must ask oneself: "Why is this so?" The answer to that question is to be adduced from such truly Classical examples as Aeschylus' Prometheus Bound.
It must be essentially recognized, as a fact of paleontology, that the crucial archeological test of the distinction between the active presence of the human species and some ape-like type of creature, is the evidence of the use of campfires at that relevant archeological site. No ape makes fire. Then, one must ask oneself, why did the legendary Zeus of Aeschylus' Prometheus Bound, ban human use of fire? Nuclear fission, or, virtually any form of relative high energy-flux density, as by today's evil World Wildlife Fund, for example?
Aeschylus was pointing to the very essence of the actual forms of ancient imperialism: the banning of the use of technological progress by any of what have been deemed the "lower social classes," or "inferior people," of humanity as a whole. In European culture, this characteristic of actual imperialist or kindred forms of social oppression, is associated with the Delphic legacy of the Apollo-Dionysos cult, as by the modern, existentialist (e.g., fascist) prototype of both Friedrich Nietzsche and the fascists of the Mussolini and Hitler types, and by the followers of such as the sometime Nazi Martin Heidegger, and his friends Theodor Adorno and Hannah Arendt. All among those existentialist cults are nothing other than modern expressions of the ancient Delphic cult of Dionysos, modern cults which are either fascist, or shade into the irrationalism intrinsic to fascism and existentialism generally.
In the European cultural history of recent centuries, as in ancient and medieval history, these explicitly irrationalist cults, such as those of Nietzsche, Heidegger, Adorno, and Arendt, are always variants of what is called "fascism" otherwise. The essence of the "message" is the adoration of the hysterically irrational for its own sake. The anti-scientific cults of "environmentalism" and "globalization" are clinical forms of this form of violence-prone irrationalism.
Think back to cases such as the Roman Emperor Diocletian, in which the code was that the member of the lower social classes must follow the standards of practice of his father. As Shelburne's adoption of Gibbon's "Julian the Apostate" formulation indicates, the rule of an emperor over mere kings depends upon the use of maliciously crafted religious and cultural passions to divide an empire's subject population against itself, which, as in the Middle East or Southwest Asia today, prompts peoples to abandon their common interest in service to the pleasure of killing one another. It has always been pantheons, such as those of both the cult of Delphi and the Roman Empire, crafted according to that intention for a reign of divide and rule, which have been the most essential mechanism by means of which empires reign over the fools who are duped, into such violations, as by celebrated lies of that purely evil former Prime Minister Tony Blair, of the De Pace Fidei of Nicholas of Cusa, and the 1648 Peace of Westphalia crafted by the initiative of France's Cardinal Mazarin. It is in the reign of great empires crafted in the spirit of the Tower of Babel, as in "globalization" today, that fools enjoy the unity found, as in Southwest Asia today, in killing one another, that to the advantage of the imperial power seated in London.
'Are You Really a Monkey's Uncle?'
As we should have been warned by the great Classical Tragedian Aeschylus, as in his Prometheus Bound, all known systems of imperial tyranny have depended upon a commitment Olympian Zeus expressed as the ban on human knowledge of "fire," such as the use of nuclear-fission power today.
In all practiced expressions of that ban by various societies, the discovery of actual universal physical principles is banned from the knowledge and practice permitted to the lower classes of the subjects of imperial, or would-be imperial and related forms of tyrannies. The British Empire today is a case in point. So are those in the U.S.A. itself which are "admirers" of the British Empire. Such is the root of the hatred expressed against Johannes Kepler, Gottfried Leibniz, Bernhard Riemann, and nuclear power by the lackeys of British Liberalism in American universities and other dupes of the British Empire today.
Today's ruling empire, the British Empire which is the leading adversary of the patriotic tradition which is represented by the U.S.A.'s President Franklin Roosevelt still today, expresses that imperialist view most nakedly in the explicitly genocidal economic and social policies of Britain's Prince Consort, Prince Philip, through his pro-genocidal World Wildlife Fund. His policy, in the true tradition of what Aeschylus' portrayed as the Olympian Zeus of Prometheus Bound, is his stated commitment, echoing the consummately evil Bertrand Russell, to reduce the world's population by such means as promotion of epidemic disease, from, presently, over 6.5 billions persons to less than two.
That is, for example, the entire basis for the spread of the lying propaganda behind the underlying fraudulent pro-genocidal proposal for "cap and trade."
The argument of Prince Philip and his depraved lackey, former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore, means forcing the reduction of the world's population to a "cap" of two billions, stupefied individuals from a presently estimated 6.7 billions by precisely those frankly Satanic methods expressed as "globalization" and "cap and trade."
Nor, relevant to the case of Russia, is there in any intention on the part of Prince Philip and his accomplices to allow the continued existence of any presently existing sovereign nation on this planet. "Globalization" means nothing other than a single world-empire, in which the world empire thus established will enforce a cap of two billions individuals on the living, chiefly brutishly stupefied population never in excess of two billions persons, even less than the equivalent of the 1.4 billions of China today.
The Olympian Zeus of Aeschylus' Prometheus Bound would agree with such British (or, should we rather say, "brutish") objectives.
 The great French scientist, Lazare Carnot, was otherwise celebrated as the commanding French general honored by his government as "The Author of Victory," and later nominee for President of a post-1815 France. He then left the France which had fallen under the reign of the British-appointed Bourbon king, to live most of the remaining few years of his life in Magdeburg, Germany, where he bore his general officer's rank, then, also as a Prussian officer and long-standing Ecole Polytechnique associate of Alexander von Humboldt. Under the reign of his grandson, the President of France, Carnot's mortal remains were transported with great honors, with the highest German and French military honors, from Magdeburg, to its place in the Paris tomb of the immortals. The assassination of Lazare Carnot's grandson, the President of France, in 1894, was combined with the 1890 ouster of Germany's Chancellor Bismarck and the launching, by Britain's Prince Edward Albert of Japan's 1895-1945 wars against China, Russia, and the U.S.A., policies which remain the keystone of Britain's still-continuing warfare against the U.S.-created geopolitical threat to the tyranny of the British Empire still today.
 That some leading Russian spokesmen have described the U.S.A. of today as an empire, is not only incompetence in matters of strategic intelligence, but has deadly implications for the continued existence of Russia itself, unless corrected.
 The "Thirty Years War (1618-1648)."
 The date 1876 signifies the combined effects of the combined U.S. transcontinental railway system and related impacts of the 1876 Philadelphia Centennial. For London, the spread of the policy of trans-continental railway systems throughout Eurasia, and the specific influence of U.S. economic successes in shaping the policies among governments of Eurasia was a potentially fatal blow against the continued existence of the global maritime power of the Anglo-Dutch Liberal system's existence. All strategic conflicts which have arisen since that time have been aimed, first, at destroying the influence of the American System of political-economy in Eurasia, Africa, and Ibero-America, and, ultimately, as now, inside the U.S.A. itself. Apart from the U.S.A. itself, the principal targets chosen for destruction by the British Empire, still today, are Germany and Russia.
 The systemic difference between pro-labor socialist movements and the fascists, as fascism was expressed among the accomplices of 68er Mark Rudd, or the neo-malthusian cults of today, is exemplary here. The traditional socialist movements of the Nineteenth and early Twentieth centuries were promoters of reason in the form of a search for the benefits of physical-scientific progress, and increase of the means of improvement of the productive powers of labor, as in industry and agriculture. The existentialists, on the contrary, have been the hysterical adversaries of any presentation of such scientifically and culturally progressive goals. For example, I can attest first-hand, that the followers of Mark Rudd were a fascist movement based on wildly radical existentialist methods and guidelines of behavior.
 The lunatic proposal for "a single world currency," is such a lunatic design crafted in the spirit of the Tower of Babel. Nothing could be a more efficient means for achieving the shared intention of both Britain's Prince Philip and his depraved lackey, former Vice-President Al Gore, of reducing the world's population levels quickly from over 6.5 billions persons, to a level of less than two billions, than the measures of "globalization" afoot among foolish leaders of nations today. (Gore should give up his grandiose, and disgusting intentions, and their dimensions, and lose weight, instead.)