Subscribe to EIR Online
This article appears in the August 7, 2009 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

The Fall of the House of Windsor

Lyndon LaRouche gave this webcast address , transcribed below, in Northern Virginia, on Aug. 1, 2009. The webcast was hosted by LaRouche's national spokeswoman Debra Freeman. Video and audio of the entire webcast is archived here. A transcript of the dialogue with LaRouche which followed LaRouche's opening statement, is available here. A PDF version of the address and dialogue which followed, is available here.

The crisis point from which to reference the present U.S. and world situation, is the period from the 2nd of October through about the 10th or 12th of October of this year. As of that time, the already, totally hopelessly bankrupt United States will have crashed entirely, politically, and will be in a process of disintegration—unless that process has started earlier. And it could start very early, in this present month of August.

For example: To understand the politics of the situation, you have about 30%, or more, of the entire population, that is, the labor force, that is unemployed. One-third of that group, about one-third, is actually receiving compensation for unemployment, or is about to receive it, technically. The other two-thirds are not. This amount is increasing at a rate, monthly, of up to 800,000, a million people, or more. This is the way it's going. The only reason the unemployment rate tends to decrease, is because the number of employed people is decreasing. By the end of August, this will be a catastrophe.

This is now the beginning of a riotous period, as the members of Congress—or the dis-members of Congress—become dismembered and go back to their home states, where they are going to be hiding from the citizens there, who are about to lynch them.

Wall Street and the rest of the world is completely in a world of unreality. The President is clinically insane—I can say that's not an exaggeration, that's a matter of fact. This guy is not in the real world. And he's not good, he's evil. There's no question that his policies on health care are absolutely identical to those of Adolf Hitler, beginning officially September of 1939: a policy which Hitler had intended earlier, as he had said, but he didn't dare introduce it, until the war had started, because he believed that only under wartime conditions could he get by with a stunt like that.

So, we're dealing with a President, who is committed deliberately to a policy of genocide! And if you look at the way Hitler's policy of genocide proceeded, from September, especially from Oct. 1, of that year, until the end, till the end of him, you see that the Obama and his friends in London—because he's run from London, not the from United States; he's run by the British monarchy, not by the voters of the United States—are moving exactly in that direction. If you don't stop Obama's health-care policy now, you will not have a United States. You will have something worse than Hitler produced, because it will be on a global scale, not limited to some part of the planet.

So therefore, we have to change these things, and change them now.

Catastrophe Is Increasing

But! As of October 2nd-10th, approximately, this system is finished. The states are bankrupt! The rate of unemployment is increasing! Catastrophe is increasing! There will never be a recovery of the present world monetary system! There will never be a recovery of the economy, under the present financial system! It is impossible. We're finished! Unless we change.

Now, I first announced this problem, that we had turned into a breakdown crisis of the United States' economy, on the 25th of July 2007. Three days later, that began—with what liars call the "subprime crisis." What actually happened was the beginning of a general breakdown crisis of the international financial-monetary system.

And the crack came at the weakest point in the whole system, which was the subprime region. Now the subprime region was simply a region, where they had extended real estate debt, as a way of trying to prop up this system temporarily. And therefore, they went into the so-called subprime area, where people were overindebted, and could never pay these things, simply as a way of trying to build up credibility for credit to maintain what was called Wall Street, and the international system of that type. Three days after I said this was going to happen, it happened. And it's happened all the way through, to the present time. This system, this entire financial system, is finished.

Now, what they did was worse: I prescribed at that point, measures of national bankruptcy reorganization, of a Roosevelt type. If those things had been adopted, then—and there was a big popularity for some of this in the United States in that period—many local citizenries voted for my proposal, on a Homeowners and Bank Protection Act. It was killed. There were leading Senators and others; there were leading governors and others, who were for this! But it was killed. It was killed in the Congress; it was killed from the White House: They went for bailout!

As a result of the bailout, and the continuation of that bailout policy, and the looting of our banks, which was done by these people—instead of protecting the banks, instead of protecting the homeowners, they looted them! They looted the economy. They destroyed the economy!

We have one-third, approximately, of our labor force in jeopardy. One-third of that one-third is now receiving unemployment compensation or similar compensation. Two-thirds are not! Now, what happens to people, if they don't get some succor over the coming months, the coming two months, August and September? How are they going to live, if they have absolutely no income? This is a growing part of the population, in this condition. What do you think is going to happen to those members of Congress, when they get back to their districts now? After the closing of the session of the House of Representatives and the closing of the Senate? What are the citizens doing to them now?

The citizens out there are ready to lynch the members of Congress—including members of Congress, who for a long time they have supported, again and again, in terms in office! And these once-popular, once-unchallengeable members of Congress, are now about to be lynched by their closest constituents back home. Why? Because you have people who have no means to live! Because of this Obama Administration! This Obaminable Administration. Call him Barry Obaminable. This is our situation.

Our People Are Starving

So now, people realize, that as of October 2nd to 10th or 12th, approximately, the entire system is coming down. This system is so rotten, it can never be saved in its present form. The present international monetary system, can not be saved, also. Because, if the United States collapses, as it is now scheduled to collapse—totally!—by the beginning of October, probably earlier; probably in August.

Because, you know, those people out there, who were starving, who have no income, who are increasing in great numbers, entire families, whole communities collapsing, state budgets collapsing: The state can't perform functions, police forces laying off, everything else laid off, because the states are bankrupt. This process is going on now! Led by that crazy Nazi, who is the governor of California. His father was a Nazi, and I guess he inherited this honestly, huh?

His father, Schwarzenegger's father—remember: His father was a policeman in a certain district of Austria. And on the day of the famous Anschluss, when Austria was absorbed by Germany, he did his duty and joined the Nazi Party. Now, he was not part of the SS. But he was part of an Austrian section of the German Nazi police force. And he was part of the group that went into places like Ukraine, and shall we say, "did a cleanup job on undesirables," in the process of administering his police duties in the occupation of the Ukraine district.

And this is what trained this animal, this circus animal, which became the governor of California. And this circus animal became a protégé of George Shultz, the man who brought fascism to Chile! Trained in the University of Chicago, by the Chicago School, who were a bunch of fascists, who have some control, through their environmental influence, over the circumstances of the Obama Administration. It all comes home.

What is this creep doing in California? He's a monster! He's a fascist monster! He's more disgusting than his father was—he's as evil as his father, but he's more disgusting. That's his only achievement.

You have situations, in state after state, where governors are going to go out of office, who are decent people, who are going to go out of office, because they didn't support me. If they had rallied behind me, as they were disposed to do, despite the pressure from certain quarters, including Pelosi, then we would have gotten through. If we had gone through with what I proposed, during the period between late July and September 2007, we would be out of the woods, now! If we'd gone through bankruptcy reorganization, saved our regular, commercial banks, written off all this worthless paper—just written it off! But what did we do? These idiots! These putterers! These evil—!

What they did, is they created trillions of dollars of debt! Over $20 trillion of debt, which is sitting on the back of the United States, entirely artificial! As a bailout, which is one of the greatest swindles ever pulled in the history of mankind!

Now, the only way we're going to get out of this mess, is go back to what I proposed back then, in July, and through September of 2007: I was right, and they were wrong! That's it! That's the name of survival.

Unfortunately, in the meantime, they brought in these tens of trillions of dollars of new debt, of worthless debt. They looted the banking system, they destroyed many of our banks; they've looted the economy. So the U.S. system, in its present form, in its previous organization and present form, can not survive. There's no way, that this system can survive.

However, the nation can survive. The present monetary-financial system can not survive! But our nation can survive: And that's the choice we have to make. Are we going to serve Wall Street and London, or are we going to serve the defense of the United States and humanity?

Now, the way we can do that, is the way that would be readily understood by Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

A Bit of Personal History

And let me just go back to a bit of my personal history in this thing, to get some perspective on it. Go back to what was, in the United States, the 13th of April of 1945: I was sitting in a camp, in Kanchrapara, outside of Calcutta, where U.S. units were being parked, for the moment, on the way to my assignment in northern Burma, in Myitkyina. At that point, the war was going through a new phase—Hitler was on the way out, the whole thing was about to be finished, and we were going into the phase of the war with Japan, to clean up the war with Japan.

And in this connection, I was one of the people who was going into this area in northern Burma, Myitkyina—what had been the largest city in the northern part of Burma, and had been the head of the railroad. But it was pretty much demolished by some of the fighting that went on. It was one of the frontiers of the war against Japan in Southeast Asia.

From there, we had two bases. We were flying the Hump. We were also working with our ally, Ho Chi Minh, who was then the leader of the freedom movement in Indo-China. We were working with people in Thailand, who were nominally behaving nicely with the Japanese, but actually had a different persuasion. We were running, from the Hump, the support of China against Japan, and we were this kind of pivotal point on the frontier of this war to clean up the war with Japan, which was nicely fixed up, by, actually, Douglas MacArthur.

Douglas MacArthur was the guy who really won the war in the Pacific—and the Navy did an excellent job, or some of the people in the Navy did an excellent job, too. But, by a policy, MacArthur's policy won that war. And it won it: There was no need to bomb Hiroshima or Nagasaki. There was never any reason for bombing those cities, with nuclear weapons. None! Japan was in a hopeless situation, because of the MacArthur strategy. What MacArthur would do, together with the Navy, once the Navy got its role in place, in the Pacific—the Japanese troops had been scattered all over islands, of the Pacific regions. They weren't going any place! They couldn't! They didn't have the means of transportation to go any place! Only idiots wanted to invade these islands, and clean up the Japanese forces on these islands.

In a case like that, you don't want to go to war, with these guys—leave them alone! Let them sit on those islands! They're not going any place! Don't waste troops going in there, to try to kill them. Leave them alone! That was MacArthur's policy.

Some guys in Washington, and the British, had a different policy. Churchill also had a different policy. But MacArthur didn't like Churchill; neither did Roosevelt. We knew he was no good.

So, MacArthur's policy was not island-hopping. MacArthur's was strategic: To use the growing superiority of the U.S. military force, and its economy.

And we had created an economy, of such power—albeit, reflected in our military operations—an economy of such power as the world had never seen! And we had created this great power, which was still a great power on the 12th of April 1945, under the leadership of Franklin Roosevelt, who took us from bankruptcy, to become the greatest economic power the world had ever known! And we had intended to use that power, in the postwar period, under Roosevelt—the greatest economic power the world had ever known!—to convert our military-productive capacity into a civilian economic development capacity: To liberate the nations of the planet! To end all kinds of imperialism and colonialism! And to engage the United States and its potentiality, which we had developed under wartime conditions, especially, and to use that to make a world free of empire, a world, as Roosevelt had intended of a United Nations: a world composed only of sovereign nation-states, engaged in mutual interest.

The Day That Roosevelt Died

And I was there, sitting in Kanchrapara. I was in India, so therefore it was late in the day, when we first received the news, that President Franklin Roosevelt had died. And that afternoon, after the news came through, a group of soldiers came up to me and said, "Some of us would like to meet with you tonight, to discuss something. Can we?" And I said, "Okay." And we designated a place where we would meet. I had an inkling of what the discussion was, naturally, given the circumstances. And so, we had a meeting. And what they said to me—they assembled, in a sense, and there I was standing, and they said—"Well, what we want to talk to you about, is, since Roosevelt's died, what's going to happen to us?"

Remember, this is a moment, where we knew that the war in Europe was about over. We understood that we were going into the clean-up of the war against Japan. And therefore, we were anxious. Because these soldiers, of, largely, my generation, knew what Roosevelt had accomplished; and knew that Roosevelt had accomplished these things, under great opposition, from his opposition inside the United States, and under British influence. All of us, especially those who were in India then, or later—or in Asia, then—hated the British: Because, we saw imperialism. We saw British imperialism, nose to nose! We knew that this was the enemy of the United States. We knew it was evil and cruel. And we were worried. Because without Roosevelt, who hated the British, could the United States survive?

And I said, "I'm not sure. I can tell you this"—and my words, I recall, from what I answered them—I said: "What I know is, we have been under the leadership of a great man. And now, the leadership has passed to a very little man. And I'm worried, for us!" And they shared that view.

And my opinion on that occasion was fully justified, by what has followed, from that time to the present.

Truman was a bastard. A British puppet.

What happened?

We were determined, at that time, we all shared, implicitly—at least most of us shared, those who were engaged in war—the outlook of Franklin Roosevelt. We wanted a world, cast in the image of the American Revolution. We wanted a world of freeing people from colonialism. We wanted a world of buildup of nation-states and economies, to eliminate the kind of desperation and depredations we saw in Asia! When conditions we saw in Asia, were for us, almost unbelievable, as Americans, coming from inside the United States. We couldn't believe that this was acceptable! We were disgusted by it! We had great power: Let's get rid of it! Let's get rid of the British Empire!

But Truman? What did he do? We had worked, as people who were working, in connection with where I was, in Myitkyina, working with Ho Chi Minh. We had freed Indo-China from the Japanese occupation, and from French occupation. We had put the Japanese troops into prison camps—disarmed. What happened with Truman? Ho Chi Minh had led the freedom of Indo-China, with the cooperation of the United States, against the British, and against the Japanese occupation. Under Truman, we reversed everything of that sort in Roosevelt's policies, immediately. Went back to imperialism!

We caused the liberation, by the British, of the Japanese soldiers from their prison camps in Indo-China; the British gave them back their weapons, and told them to reoccupy the country! With the result, of course, we had this little war in Indo-China, that we were stuck in, during the 1960s and early 1970s—against whom? Against our ally of the Roosevelt period, Ho Chi Minh, for the sake of the British.

What happened then? There had been a liberation in the former Dutch East Indies. Liberation from the Japanese. The British and the Dutch conducted a war with U.S. support, against Indonesia. And throughout the entire world, wherever we, in the United States, had been dedicated to the freedom of former colonial victims, we, under Truman, went with the British: Against the policy which had made us the greatest power on this planet!

An Unnecessary Recession

What did we do to ourselves? We had intended to take this great power, this great economic power, which we had created, and developed under anticipation of war and wartime conditions—we destroyed it! We shut it down! Instead of using our military factories, and so forth, and converting them back, for civilian production, and for the development of the economies of the world, with the technologies that these formerly oppressed people required, we shut it down. We put ourselves into an unnecessary recession, and we became a running dog of the British Empire.

That changed, somewhat, under Dwight Eisenhower. But under Truman, we were betrayed! We went through police-state conditions, to try to get the Roosevelt out of us. That's what happened.

Under Eisenhower, we were disgusted with Truman—Truman was told to quit: "You bum, we don't like you. Get the hell outta here!" And we got in Eisenhower. Well, Eisenhower would have been a good President, in 1947, but after all these conditions, he inherited a government to which he was elected, which included people who were still of this British bent.

We had Kennedy. I don't know how good Jack Kennedy was, or how bad he was. I know, that what he did as President, in a number of cases, was crucially important for the United States, and he did attempt to restore our economic policy to what it had been under Roosevelt. He ran on that ticket, with the support of Eleanor Roosevelt, heavy support from her. And he was praised. And then, when he resisted—not only the Wall Street gang, which wanted to kill him—but when he resisted the British demand, that we go into a war in Indo-China: Kennedy had consulted, at length, with former Gen. Douglas MacArthur, who was still an acting general, though ready for retirement; and MacArthur advised him, and Kennedy agreed, "The United States will not engage in a land war in Asia!" That was the policy, that was Kennedy's policy.

Well, a very simple thing—Kill him! And they did! Not Oswald! It was three guys crossing the border with rifles, who were expert assassins. They killed him, got away from the grassy knoll, went back across the border into Mexico, and resumed their role in the same operation which had been deployed in many attempts to assassinate Charles de Gaulle, in France. This was the anti-Gaullist, fascist movement.

At that point, the minute the President was dead, President Johnson came in. Johnson, as he said later, was terrified. He thought that the same three rifles which had taken down John Kennedy, were about to take him down, if he resisted, as Kennedy had, the idea of plunging the United States into war in Indo-China, and similar kinds of wars.

Since that time, because of Johnson's fear that he would be assassinated if he didn't go along with these guys, we have gone consistently down, down, down, down, down.

And, since the middle of the 1960s, approximately, but most conspicuously, since 1968, since the decision made by Johnson as of March 1, 1968, the U.S. system, as defined by Roosevelt, was shot down. And since about 1966, there has been a consistent collapse, per capita and per square kilometer, of the physical economy of the United States, and of the mean condition of welfare of the typical citizen of the United States. We have now been looted and wrecked.

We were looted under Nixon—don't kid yourself—Nixon was a Nazi! He may not have had a swastika around his arm, but he had every other credential of that type. He was evil: He was determined to establish a fascist government inside the United States! That was his intention. He tried! He didn't succeed, but he tried. We still had enough resistance in the Congress and elsewhere to be an embarrassment to him. And, at that time, we still had some human Democrats, who had enough power to stop it.

But then came in the Democratic administration: Poor Jimmy Carter, who didn't know what he was doing! He thought Mr. David Rockefeller was a great man, who was giving him these $3 million to run a campaign. He was a sucker all the way through, as I think he's admitted, later on in life, on reflection. His administration was the most disgusting one since Truman. But later, he's showed that his human qualities have come forth, and he's often done good things. So you have to give the man his right, in that. He became a good man—he probably had the potential all along, he just didn't realize it, didn't understand what was going on.

You had a complication with Ronald Reagan.

Now, I did some things in this period, and don't kid yourself: I was never an obscure figure in these operations, at least not since about 1971, since a debate I had in Queens College, with [Abba Lerner,] the leading Keynesian economist in the world, where I exposed him as a fascist. And he admitted it! I didn't just expose him; I forced him into a position where he admitted it, where he said: "If the Social Democrats of Germany had accepted the policy of Hjalmar Schacht, Hitler would not have been necessary." This was a liberal, a Keynesian liberal, the leading Keynesian in the world at the time.

So, when we took this on, and some other things I did—and I did a lot of things, all good things, against bad people. And the bad people did not appreciate how good the good things were, that I had done!

So, I was involved in international affairs, almost like a spook. I was never an agent of the government, in any sense, other than being a citizen, who worked with people in his government, and also prompted people in his government, to try to do some good things, as changes in U.S. policy. I had considerable success, in launching an effort for a negotiation with the Soviet Union. And it could have worked. And we induced President Ronald Reagan to support it. It was my policy, my design.

'Working Out the Details' for Mars Colonization

I also have done things in terms of the space program. I am still an advocate of the space program, and trying to push it beyond what some people would like to see it pushed to. And you will see more of that, if I'm around, in the coming period: We are going to go to Mars. But we have to work out the details of how to get there. We can now send pieces of junk up there, workable junk, useful junk, and so forth, but for transporting people for a period of 200 days on a flight to Mars, you have to say, what about gravity and electromagnetic field? Because we have a nice gravitational system on the planet, and that kind of field, and one would hope that we would find a way to get our people there, safely. So the problem is getting our people there safely.

So, I've done a lot of these things, and I have been much hated, and much victimized for it. And the word was, "Get him out of here!" And they really tried to do that to me. But they didn't succeed: I'm still here. I'm going on nigh, as of September, I will be 87 years of age. I'm still in fairly good shape. I'm not in as good shape as I once was—but I can still get a lick or two in, here or there, and I can still take a little leading role in trying to save our country, and the world, from the affliction that this present Presidency has now bestowed upon us.

So, in this process, my role has been a serious one, contrary to some of the press. As a matter of fact, I think the White House is paying close attention to what I'm saying right now—if they stick to their plans, and their programs.

So, we're in that kind of situation, where we had a great system, the American System. It's the best in the world, as a matter of fact. I mean, it's not just bragging about the United States: This is the fact! The American System, as defined by our Constitution, and by the leadership of our greatest Presidents, is the model for the entire planet. Not to copy us, but the model as a pivot, a linchpin, by which we can bring together many nations, to solve the problems of the world. We only have to do one thing, now, because of what has been done to the financial system. This system is hopelessly bankrupt: We are never going to pay, one way or the other, we are never going to pay $20-odd trillion of debt, which we've incorporated among us, as a result of George W. Bush and this Obama. We're never going to pay it! We can't! We couldn't! Can never be done.

So, all you guys out there, thinking you got a piece of action in the $20 trillion against the United States—Hey! Got the laugh on you: We don't have the money, therefore, you can't collect it.

A Safe Place for Civilization

But we also can not operate under the kind of system we're operating under now. What do we have to do? Well, that's where the goodness in our system comes in: Our Constitution actually came into being in two basic levels, but three steps. First of all, go back to our history: Who are we, as a nation? What are we? Well, I have an ancestor, who came over on the Mayflower, so I'm going to pull rank on that one. (Just to remind this President who was born here.) And who has our spirit in his veins—which this President clearly does not.

That, we came here, not as refugees from Europe. Yes, we brought many people here, who came as refugees, who came as the poor, escaping from terrible conditions in Europe, to a place of refuge, which we offered. But this country was not founded by people fleeing from Europe. This country was founded by Europeans. It was founded by Europeans, as typified by the Mayflower, as typified by the Massachusetts Bay Colony, typified by Pennsylvania, typified by some things in Virginia, and so forth. These were people who came to the United States—why? Because of a famous priest, Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa.

And Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, who was actually the founder of modern European science, and the crafter of the concept of the modern nation-state, in his Concordantia Catholica, and in his De Docta Ignorantia on science; he, toward the end of his life, recognized that the degeneration which had occurred in Europe, meant that European civilization was not a safe place for civilization. That the old oligarchical relics were still predominant. And therefore, his proposal was, that people in Europe go across the oceans to other continents, and establish connections on other continents, with which to bring the best of European culture, which we wished to defend against European occupation—bring it to these other parts of the planet, and there, to build up, in concert with people we would find across the waters, to build up a civilization, which would in turn, contribute to the rescue of a corrupted Europe from its own sins.

Shortly after the death of Nicholas of Cusa, we had a young man, called Christopher Columbus. And Christopher Columbus was a Genoese, who was a very good sea captain, who worked in the Portuguese interests in exploring the Atlantic Ocean, who was quite familiar with the peculiarities of the Atlantic Ocean, as a navigator. And he, in Portugal, ran into the papers of Nicholas of Cusa, with a friend of Cusa's there, who was actually one of the trustees of Cusa's estate, and he became familiar with this concept of moving across the Atlantic Ocean, across to the continent on the other side—which they knew was there; there was no mystery about that to them—and to establish a bulwark of civilization, across the water, bringing the best of European civilization across the water, to here! And, thus, to have a development of the best of European culture, free of the oligarchical corruption prevailing among European nations.

There were many attempts in this direction, some from Spain, and so forth, to follow Columbus's intention. And that was his personal intention; from about 1480 A.D., it was his intention. He finally got the money to make the trip in 1492, but his intention was, from 1480, when he had correspondence with a lot of people in Europe, on planning this voyage.

So, because of the influence of the Habsburgs, on the Spanish and Portuguese colonization of South and Central America, the intention of Cusa was not fully realized in those parts of the world, although there are fragments of that and important influences of that type, in South and Central America. It's only inside this nation, the United States, that we achieved the establishment of a form of nation-state, which met the requirements, that Cusa had intended. The first part, where this development became secured, was in the settlement in Plymouth, the Mayflower settlement. That was followed by the Massachusetts Bay Colony.

The Founders: 'Stalwart Intellectuals'

Now, these people were not refugees from Europe! These were stalwart intellects, capable people, who left Europe to found a place of refuge for culture. And they built up, in these two colonizations—in the Massachusetts Bay Colony and the Mayflower colony—they built up a mini-state, which, up until about 1688, maintained that tradition, in that direction, under people such as the Winthrops and their associates. This was suppressed, then, by the British, in the struggles of 1688-89. But then! It was shifted, with the youth of Benjamin Franklin, shifted into the area of Pennsylvania: the same intention, because of the corruption which the British had brought into the Massachusetts Bay Colony. This continued.

And then, you have a German, a great scientist, and one of the founders of the Renaissance in Europe, of the 18th Century, Abraham Kästner, whose circles, then, made contact with Benjamin Franklin and company, in what became the United States. As a result of this, this Leibniz influence, reflected explicitly in the Declaration of Independence, and also, in the Constitution: The idea of how to organize a nation-state, was established, beginning with the paper by Benjamin Franklin, on paper currency.

So, then, in 1763, the British Empire had begun, through a treaty organized by a war. And the British East India Company was already an international empire; the British monarchy was a different case. Later, the British monarchy became totally integrated with the empire, but at that point, Lord Shelburne and company dominated. So, in February 1763, the Treaty of Paris, in which Shelburne and company dictated the terms of a creation of a new empire, the empire of the British East India Company, is a breaking point. The result of this, the radiation of the first policies emanating from British East India Company back into the Americas, caused a break in the leading circles in what became the United States, toward a break with the British Empire. That became the struggle. And there was a division, from that point on, between the traitors, the scum, in the United States, such as some of the Boston crowd, the East India Company crowd, and those who were for the cause of freedom, because of this.

Our Constitution was based on that.

Now, we have the Declaration of Independence, which was created under the influence of Franklin, but actually under the influence also of, indirectly, Cusa. And also the blessings of Abraham Kästner and so forth. So we had the beginnings of this society.

Then we had an American Revolution, which actually came out of 1763, to the creation of a nation-state. We were very careful about it; we went through all kinds of tricks and handsprings, and so forth, to try to get a compromise with the British on this thing. Or to buy time, one of the two. So, we established a Declaration of Independence, based on the central principle of Gottfried Leibniz! One of the greatest scientists of his time! Or the influence of him, at that time.

Now, we had a Revolutionary War. We were winning it, winning the war against Britain, partly because we got some nice allies, to help us out on this, the cause of freedom. But then, we found out, that the banks of the separate colonies, which were now becoming states, under the Declaration of Independence, were bankrupt. So, this resulted in a great evolution, which shaped the United States, as a nation-state power, from that beginning to the present time, about 1781: Where a young genius, Alexander Hamilton, recognized that, since we had to protect these banks, our banks which were bankrupt, whose only problem was that they had suffered, carrying the burdens of the war of liberation, the war of the American Revolution. So, he recognized that we needed a Federal Constitution, a Federal authority, as opposed to the authority of a collection of associated states, themselves.

So, he conceived the idea of a National Bank. It was on the basis of understanding this, which forced the question of the creation of a U.S. Constitution. So, the Constitutional Convention was to create the nation-state institution, which could deal with this particular problem, and related problems.

A Nation-State; a Credit System

So we were already a nation, by the Declaration of Independence. But we had to become an efficient nation-state.

So what we had, first, we had a system based on the idea of national creditnot a monetary system!a credit system! Under which no currency is legal, except that created, by the government of the United States, or through its treaty agreements to that effect, with other nations. In other words, we sought trade, we sought treaty agreements based on this conception: that a currency should not be uttered, or not be allowed to exist, unless it is based on the will of a sovereign state, to create that system of credit as debt. It's the ability of the nation-state to go into debt, and to go through bankruptcy reorganization of debt, in order to establish the sovereign authority of a people over its own currency and credit. That is a credit system.

The opposing system, of empire, which we've known in Mediterranean and Atlantic civilization, since the Peloponnesian War, has been monetarism! We had Asian monetarism before that! Monetarism! The idea that a private interest, such as the Cult of Delphi, could create a monetary power, for loans, for loan-sharking. And to control the world's financial affairs and economic affairs, through a method of loan-sharking, called monetarism. And the United States was created, to free us, and protect us, from the disease of filth, called monetarism; and to base ourselves on a credit system. Which was also Franklin Roosevelt's intention, for the postwar period.

So, we've been destroyed, by usury. We have turned out, particularly with the act of treason called the Federal Reserve System Act: an act of treason!!

How was it accomplished? Very simply. We had a President called William McKinley. We had him assassinated by an imported assassin. The assassination was arranged through New York City, through the Teddy Roosevelt side of things; one of the safehouses in New York City housed the assassin, who was sent to kill President McKinley. They killed President McKinley! And guess what? Teddy Roosevelt became President!

And Teddy Roosevelt's family were the circles which sponsored this assassin's coming into the United States—and now, he becomes President! Oh, my!

Teddy Roosevelt is what? Well, his uncle [James Bullock] was the head of the Confederate intelligence service, operating from Britain, during the Civil War. Not a man of sterling patriotic inclinations.

Then you had a follower—with some Taft intervention—with Woodrow Wilson. Now, Woodrow Wilson was also a sterling character, of the good Ol' South. As a matter of fact, his family was the leading family behind the organization and defense of the Ku Klux Klan. And, not only was he that, but while he was President of the United States—from the White House itself! (Which had been named the "White House," by Teddy Roosevelt; it was called the Executive Mansion up until that time) Woodrow Wilson organized the revival of the Ku Klux Klan from inside the White House, while he was President! And the Ku Klux Klan, under the Wilson influence was bigger than the Ku Klux Klan, before! And in my youth, in the 1920s, the 1930s, the Ku Klux Klan was a big number, in this United States, and it has a great effect upon what happens in certain states in the United States, still to this day.

Now, what you had, was, you had Teddy Roosevelt, who was a stinking traitor, and you had Woodrow Wilson, who was stinking Nazi-type traitor—also, a little bit of quirk that way, at the same time—but these two guys connived to initiate the process, and complete the process of creating the so-called Federal Reserve System, the Federal Reserve Act, under which, now, you had the introduction of a monetarist system into the United States' domestic and international affairs.

National Bankruptcy: Not a Shameful Thing

Now, as a result of our enslavement, to this Federal Reserve Act, and its implication, we were looted and driven into bankruptcy by unconstitutional acts, including this swindle, this debt, of over $20 trillion now sitting on our back, as a result of bailouts of various types, which have been conducted since September of 2007—rather than the proposal which I made, in 2007. If what I had proposed be adopted, in 2007, as many influential people, governors and others, in this nation, had intended to support my proposal—if that had been done, we would be out of the woods, today.

We are not out of the woods, as you may know.

And therefore, we've come to the point, we have to go through national bankruptcy. Now, national bankruptcy is not a shameful thing. Some swindler, with two Presidents who were sort of some kind of scum, George W. Bush, Jr., and now, Barack Obama, have engaged in a swindle on behalf of foreign enemies of the United States—such as the British Empire, the British monarchy—against the United States. This was helped by Larry Summers, with his repeal of Glass-Steagall, his role in that. We were swindled! Contrary to the intent of our Constitution! Laws were passed which were unlawful, by our Constitution.

We have to put this thing into bankruptcy reorganization. A very simple thing to do—I know how to do it. Don't worry about all the legal details, it's very simple. Give me powers for just a very short period of time—I can fix this thing very easily: You have a meeting. And you have a bunch of people who are sane patriots, at this meeting. We take all this financial stuff, floating out there, claims against this, claims against that: We're now going to put the United States through a bankruptcy reorganization, modeled on what our decisions were in this connection earlier in our history. We're going to bankruptcy.

Now, we're going to take Glass-Steagall—whether Larry Summers likes it or not—after all, he's clinically insane, so why can't we just ignore what he has proposed? All right. Despite Larry Summers and his treason, we take all these claims against the United States, financial claims against the United States. We put them on the table. Then, we take, over here, Glass-Steagall, the Glass-Steagall model, and we say, "Here's a bank. Let's go to the banks first—commercial banks, or what used to be commercial banks. Okay, let's look at what's in this bank. Is this asset valid by these standards? Yes? Okay, it goes there. Is it not? Okay, we put it in the trash can."

And we go through that, case by case, in the same way that Roosevelt, in a much milder problem, did with the Bank Holiday. We want to save the commercial banks: That's where people's savings, legitimate savings are located. That's where the credit, that's indicated that they require, locally, for business practices and similar kinds of things, for loans, for mortgages, and so forth. We want to clean this up. We want to reorganize the mortgages. And come out, quickly, with a set of salvageable banks—private banks under the national system.

We then will take all this trash, these claims, based on financial derivatives and other kinds of schemes: "Sorry, buddy! You gambled. This is gambling debts—you lost the gamble. We just lost the gamble for you! To relieve you of this great burden, on your conscience."

And now, you have a United States.

Now, what do you do? Now, you got rid of this $20-odd trillion of waste paper, as claims against the United States. What do you do? We go into debt! Now, that we've cleaned up the bad debt, now we can have some honest debt.

Four Powers and a New Credit System

What do we do? Well, then I go to our friends in Russia; I go to our friends in China; I go to our friends in India—who, if Russia and China go along, they'll go along, too. We say, "Well, we're the big nations in the world. We have a lot of small nations out there; they're good nations, but they don't have power. We have power. Therefore, we nations that represent this power, and this commitment, are going to band together, to launch a new world financial system, a new credit system. No longer any monetary system—money doesn't count! You bring your money in, we check it for validity. If it doesn't conform to a standard of a credit system, we cancel it. "Sorry, buddy. I don't know whether you want to put that on your wall—go ahead and do it. Just don't try to negotiate it!"

So therefore, these four powers, which then attract all the other nations which wish to survive, initiate an agreement, which is a pilot agreement, to establish a new world credit system, to entirely replace the hopelessly bankrupt, existing world monetary system! In other words, the only legitimate currency in the world, will be that uttered by the authority of the state, as credit, as debt of the state. We will then cooperate, to develop a scheme, for the development of the world physical economy.

Let's take the case of China as a concrete case. China was induced to make a mistake. It wasn't entirely a mistake, but it turned out to be a mistake, when somebody pulled the clause at the bottom of the page. China was induced to work at lower prices, than would be required in Europe and the United States, in producing product for the world market. Now, this meant that China had a spurt of growth, as long as this market existed. But! When the world market for Chinese goods collapsed, the Chinese were stuck. Because suddenly, their industries had lost their markets.

So China's income collapsed, as a result of the collapse of these markets, like the U.S. market, and so forth. Like the collapse of the auto industry in the United States, was not a boon to China! Because it was part of the collapse of the United States as a market for Chinese goods.

So therefore, China is suffering. Well, what China requires, as Russia does in a different sense, and India in a completely different sense—what it requires, is long-term credit for investment in building up basic economic infrastructure, to make the economies more powerful economies. To do, essentially, what Franklin Roosevelt did in the 1930s and during the World War II period: In other words, you use national, long-term credit, investing in technological progress, and getting from autos on the street into railroads, for example. Things like that: These kinds of things which increase the physical productivity per capita and per square kilometer of the nation. But this always requires new sources of power, better sources of power, large-scale capital improvements, these kinds of things—like the TVA! Like the things that Roosevelt did, to build up the structure of the economy, through the infrastructure sector.

We don't have many industries left in the United States. They've been destroyed! How are we going to build these industries up? Well, we have people who used to work in the auto industry. The auto industry has been shut down, essentially, except for the Japanese department of it. And even there, it's suffering. So we've lost the industries!

But the auto industry was never an auto industry. The auto industry, as we looked at it, in terms of World War II, was essentially a machine-tool business. We produced airplanes! We produced locks and dams. We produced railway systems. We produced all kinds of things, with the skills, based in the Great Lakes area, in the industrial and agricultural base of the Great Lakes area. We built it up.

Now, these swine have destroyed it all! We still have the locations; we still have the people in the Great Lakes area; we still have people with skills. We don't have an auto industry—we destroyed that. But these communities are capable of doing other things, besides making automobiles. They can make large-scale railway systems; they can make power systems, or elements of power systems; they can rebuild our river systems, our locks and dams. And all of this will contribute to the good! We're not asking people to accept handouts. We're giving them work! Or we'll give them handouts when they need it, to get them through. But the essential thing, we want to give them productive work! Where they can build things that have permanent value for the United States, not just waste our money! And so, we have to get in that direction.

Our Government Is the Best in the World

But, we're in deep trouble.

And the basic problem here, is, we've got a President who is no good. The man has made it very clear. A man who will bring in, and insist, above all, on doing the same thing to the American people, that Adolf Hitler did in Germany, with his genocide policies, is no good. This man has got to be tamed.

Now, we've got to do something about him—put him in a cage, or put him in a political cage, or else find a reason to get him out. There are a lot of good people in this Administration, overall. Very useful, very competent people. So it's not the whole damned government that's bad! It's this part, that has to be dealt with: This legacy of the Bushes, has to be dealt with. We're going to put him under supervision, put him under control. And there are various ways we can do it. We're going to do in the way which is least troublesome. No bloodshed, least troublesome—quietly: "Hey, buddy, come with us, quietly, please." That's the way it has to be done.

Because, we have, in the government—because our government, our Federal government, is a very vast apparatus. It's much bigger than you think it is. It involves many people who are not officially in government. It involves people who cooperate around the Executive branch of government, including people in the legislature and other institutions, who actually form a vibrating, vibrant organization of government. Ours is the best in the world, when it functions. And this system of government is the best in the world, when it functions.

So, we have the State Department—not in bad shape. We have other divisions of government, not in such bad shape. If they are given the opportunity, to function in a normal way, as our Executive branch is supposed to function, traditionally, and if we take this problem before us, and consider a couple of fairly simple measures, we can get out of this nicely.

Just imagine: an Obama and his team of Nazis—and they are Nazis! Ezekiel Emanuel—he's a Nazi! He's said so! He admitted it! He said in detail, what he's proposed! It's a Nazi operation! Who gets killed, who gets health care, who lives, who dies! It's a Nazi system. It's the same thing that was introduced by Hitler, in the beginning of the war, and which was translated a few years later, into the mass-killing system, which we called genocide! We're on the road to genocide, unless we stop this Administration's policy!

And the reason you're getting a reaction, out there, from the citizens, a reaction to the returning Representatives who committed the atrocities they have in Washington—is just exactly that! They have betrayed humanity! Not just the law, and dedication to the United States, they have betrayed the principle of humanity! When they connive at genocide, in the name of medical reform, that's Hitler stuff!

And the person, the President, or anybody who proposes that, belongs in the same category as the Hitler stuff did at the Nuremberg trials: Ezekiel and Rahm Emanuel are the same thing, as a guy standing on trial in the court in Germany, at the end of the war, for crimes against humanity. They are the same thing! We tried those guys, after the war, after the horror. We've got to stop these guys, before the horror! And everything this Obama Administration has represented, in its leading efforts, in this period, since its inauguration, to the present day, is a horror-show, which should eliminated, by a conscience-stricken process of government, now.

These policies are not terrible enough—you know what you're going to get? Yes! The great crisis technically comes in the beginning of October, when the fiscal year ends, and you have to sort out the paper, legally, and you can't hide all the lies, all this time. But that's not when it's going to happen: Because the suffering caused by this breakdown is hitting millions of people, our citizens, now. Those who are shut off from all succor. States, 30-40 states, are breaking down, as a result of this. People are going to starve to death under conditions of the present trend, unless we change it.

We're not going to wait until October!

We Have To Stop Being Sheep!

Now, there are two ways we can do this: We can do this peacefully, or we can get into a kind of crisis and chaos, which leads to blood in the streets, which also creates the threat of a dictatorship, somebody trying to impose a dictatorship. So, we have to deal with this problem now. We have to send Obama into adult supervision, now. We have to take the whole crowd around him, including all the Brothers Emanuel, Orszag, that lunatic Larry Summers, that gutless wonder Geithner, and that foolish fellow sitting on top of the Federal Reserve System—and just throw 'em out. Throw 'em out! Get 'em out, chase 'em away! Scat! Scat!!

And, we don't have a problem then. You have the President under supervision—under adult supervision. You have the normal institutions of government, responding in a normal way. You have the members of the Congress, terrified, after the lynching they're about to be threatened with, when they get back to their home bases.

We don't really have much of a problem. We have to recognize what our assets and our options are, and exercise them. And we have to stop being sheep. Don't whimper because somebody's threatening you: They're going to kill you. What can they threaten you with? They're threatening to torture you. What can they threaten you with? What's the danger? If you consent, they're going to torture you! They're going to kill you! I mean, you got kids: If you're too young, you're on the bottom of the list, they're going to kill you. If you're too old, they're going to kill you. If you look sick, they're going to kill you.

No, this is impossible: This Nazi-like administration, under President Obama has to be cleaned up! Not overthrown, cleaned up! And it's going to take a mobilization of citizens and honest political figures, to decide they're not going to compromise with Obama. They're going to say, "Obama, you work for us! Or else! You don't work for the British, you work for us!"

An Updated Triple Curve

To get at some of the technical questions here: Let's take on this, just a minute for now, this Triple Curve, which I've used as a pedagogical device since about the beginning of 1996. And I suppose we can play that up—I'll discuss some of these other technical matters in that place. All right, here's what it is. I'll describe it, and he's going to play it again, several times (Figures 1, 2, and 3).

It explains itself, and this will be on the website [] in many ways, again and again. The point is, you have three basic parameters you have to look at, in order to understand how our economy is functioning. The lower curve, the one that's descending—these are all in terms of per-capita rates—we have been descending in terms of the employment in productive labor, such as agriculture, infrastructure, basic physical production, over this period, per capita. And the percentile of the total throughput of the economy, has been declining in these terms. We've also had an increase in the monetary aggregates and the financial aggregates.

Now, what's happened is, we're building up a monetary debt, built at a skyrocketing rate, relative to a declining, actual physical output in production. Which you can see in any community. How many factories are there? How many farms are there? How many farmers are there? What's the level of productivity? What is it, is it backward, or is it progressive? Is it technological progress? What's the effect of the loss of the automobile industry, in this physical output relationship?

Now, but at the same time, we've had essentially, since 1966, we've had a skyrocketing increase, under the influence of the Vietnam War economy, a skyrocketing increase in the amount of monetary obligation. We've also had an increase in the financial aggregates.

Now, what has happened, is, we have moved to a period in which these values—as you'll see, the financial aggregates have begun to fall. This decline in financial aggregates, which has occurred just recently, in this last period, is the onset of the breakdown crisis.

So, we are dealing with this kind of situation, not what you're reading in the newspapers. This is what I presented, also back in 2007, in defining the problem which we face now. Either we fix this problem, as I described it, or we don't make it as a nation.

The Empire of Monetarism

This comes to another big problem: Since the Peloponnesian Wars, European and extended civilization, has been ruled by monetary systems: That is, we've been ruled by money, by powers which are largely private powers, which control money. We have the Cult of Delphi, for example, and the Cult of Delphi was actually an instrument of monetarism, which became significant in this form, after the defeat of the Persian attempts to take over the Mediterranean area. Which led into what became orchestrated as the Peloponnesian War. And since that time, with the gradual rise of the Rome Empire, then the shift from the Roman Empire, to the Byzantine Empire. Then, about a thousand years ago, a little more, the breakdown of the Byzantine Empire as a power, and the rise of Venice, the Venetian monetary system as the controlling power—monetarism—Europe has been ruled by an empire.

Now, the empire is called the British Empire, but it's not actually the British Empire. If you see how stupid and fat the British people are, you just know that's not the empire, because they've got a poor diet, probably a disgusting sex life; whatever, I don't want to discuss that, but—. It's not the British people; it's not the British population. It's the system. It's the monetary system!

Now idiots keep talking about "empires," like you have one country that has an empire, because it rules over other countries. That's not what an empire is. It never was an empire. People who don't know their history, and don't know their science, don't understand, make that mistake. An empire is based—all empires, especially those which have existed since the Peloponnesian War, have always been based on monetary systems. They have been based on international systems. The Roman Empire was an international system. It was not the rule of the Mediterranean by Rome. The Roman Empire was created on the Isle of Capri, by a meeting, between the representatives of three empires: This was the Middle East, this was Rome, and Egypt.

And since the death of Alexander the Great, this whole region had been split among three basic forces—each rather imperial, that is, dominating various little national-type groups in their own area, and quarreling with each other, and the whole was organized around religious issues and so forth. So, the time came, where the putative heir of Julius Caesar, meeting on the Isle of Capri, with a religious cult, made an agreement to get rid of Antony and Cleopatra, which was a rather expensive process, a bloody one; and to establish a common empire, by agreement among the oligarchical interests of these three regions. And it was called the Roman Empire. The agreement was, to make the capital in Rome.

But if you look at the history of the thing, it was never the Italian people, that were ruling; it was an empire. And an empire, under the law which defines an empire, historically, the empire is a law-giver over nations. In other words, it is not a nation, governing other nations. It is an international agency, over all nations. Which has a capital in some place, and the capital changes. And since the decline of the Byzantine Empire, and the rise of Venice, all empires, based in Europe, or European civilization, have been centered in the monetary center of Venice! So, Venice is actually the capital of the empire, not London. London has been chosen, as the Roman Empire was chosen, as an arrangement. And that's what we're up against.

What the power is, is international money!

Whom Did We Bail Out?

Look, now: Here we are! Go back to 2007, where I made this proposal, for reform. I said, we propose a reform, on the basis of the authority of the Constitution of the United States. That would have worked. Anybody who's intelligent, who understands the system, would have known, that what I proposed then, would have worked. We would not be in this mess today!

But, who the hell came up with this other idea? Of getting the United States into debt, for obligations it didn't owe?! In order to bail out London, to bail out the international monetary system! At the expense of the United States! To loot the United States and its Treasury, for the benefit of an international monetary cartel! What about "bail out"! Whom, did we bail out? Did we bail out our industries? Did we save the auto industry, or put it into equivalent form, something else besides autos? Did we save the American farmer? Did we save the infrastructure, of the cities of the United States and the states? Whom did we bail out?

We bailed out the London bankers and their New York extension. We don't owe them anything. We just happen to have a government that says that.

This is our nation. And the law of bankruptcy of our nation is our authority. If I were President, I would end this thing right now. And I'm sure, I could get the support of the great majority of American citizens, very quickly, simply by making clear what I intend to do: Put the whole thing in bankruptcy. You guys are going to live. We're not going to kill you—like Obama's doing. We're not cutting you off from health care, we're not trying to accelerate your death, we're not trying to get you to kill yourself. You're going to live. You're going to be employed. We're going to rebuild our industries. We going to cancel this filthy debt! Which we never really owed in the first place. Only some crooked traitors, or traitorous kinds of people, gave us this kind of debt—it's not real. We don't owe it. We're going to go back to a credit system.

And we're going to get some power. How are we going to get power? We're going to have Russia as a partner. And Russia needs a credit system, desperately, to solve its problems. But Russia can do a lot of things for us. Russia has vast mineral resources, in Siberia and related areas. These mineral resources are required, for the development of nations, because the Russians are very good at this; they're sitting on top of territory that has rich mineral resources.

We have below, to the south of that, we have China, and other countries, which have a shortage of these mineral resources. Therefore, the development of Russia, its building up as a power, for power of science and development, is necessary, for Europe, for Russia itself, for China, and so forth. Japan's possibility of existing, depends upon this success of China and Russia. China requires cooperation with us and Russia. We require cooperation with China.

For example, what about the debt of the United States to China, the dollar debt? The unpaid debt to China? What happens to the world if the unpaid debt to China is written off, because the United States dollar collapses? What happens to the world, then, if China collapses? China goes into a crisis, under those conditions, what happens? India is destroyed, not so much by an economic crisis, but by the chaos engendered throughout the world, where the spillover from what you're seeing in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and so forth, now spreads into there, and causes chaos there.

So what we simply do, is, we take these four great nations, we use these four great nations as a pivot. Japan will jump in immediately. South Korea will jump in immediately, other nations will jump in immediately. But we have to get the four big nations to cooperate on an agreement, and the others will gather, and we'll have an enlarged agreement.

We then create a new international system, entirely a credit system, consistent with the design of the credit system built into the U.S. Constitution. All monetarism is cancelled! The only honor, is the honorable debt, which can be converted to a debt in a credit system. And the world will operate under an international credit system based on cooperation, on a fixed-exchange-rate system, among credit systems of nations of the world. We will, then, generate, in the range of 1.5-2% basic long-term loans, among nations, based on credit systems. These loans will be directed, largely, to the driver of technological progress in basic economic infrastructure.

Looking 50 Years Ahead: We're Going to Mars

Let me shift this: What do you do, when you want to develop a society? Do you build from the bottom up? Not really. Animals build from the bottom up, like beavers. And beavers are good for beavers—but I'm not a beaver. I don't do this underwater thing, too well. I get cold, you know?

Anyway, what we do, is we simply take, and go to a space program. Why? Because, if you want to accomplish something, in progress, you have to mobilize yourself, by going to a higher platform than you're standing on, now. Go beyond—go in the imagination, beyond what you think you should be doing now, and go to a higher level. Because, remember: Progress is building something for the future. So, to build for the future, you have to define the future. You have to define your destination. Building for the future, you're talking about generations, generally, at least two generations. You're talking about 50 years ahead.

So, look at the horizon, where do we want to be 50 years from now? In terms of technology, in terms of effects for humanity? People can understand 50 years, it's a short time. Some people live 50 years; even these days, it's a short time. So, look 50 years ahead.

Well, I say, 50 years ahead, we're going to be on Mars. And we define where we are today, by defining the objectives we have to fulfill to get to Mars, 50 years from now. Because this means—for example, technology. You can send junk to Mars; you can send equipment to Mars; you can send robots to Mars. But, can you send people? Because, in going there—we're talking about 200 days or so forth, that order of magnitude of travel—you're going to put somebody out in zero gravity, or nearly zero gravity, for the better part of a year? You think you're going to get living people at the other end, at the other depot that you're going toward? No. So you have to think about a gravitational magnetic-field environment. You have to create an artificial environment of gravitation.

Now when you take a person inside a spacecraft, at a constant rate of acceleration/deceleration, and you are trying to move them from one planet to another, or the outskirts of one planet to the outskirts of another, you have to have a magnetic field, and you have to have a gravitational field. You are now in a phase which Einstein defined as relativity. When you are riding in a craft which is doing that, you are in a relativistic environment, not in the ordinary kind of environment, because they've got constant acceleration, constant deceleration. Now, to send people safely to Mars, you've got to think in those terms.

Now, what I've said does not solve all the problems. We have people, left over from 40 years ago, who are thinking in this direction, and even some people who were still thinking in that direction in the early 1980s, as I was, and before. Now, 40 years later, a younger generation has no knowledge of this, or virtually no knowledge of this, and yet, this younger generation, people who are now in their 20s and 30s, young 30s, are the people who are going to have to decide on this, because they are the adult generation which is going to decide on this thing.

We, therefore, as a nation, and a people, and among nations, have to see this objective that we are going to reach within 50 years, now. We're going to then think about the technologies that will get us there, and we're going to think about the technologies that we are going to need when we arrive!

So, our job is to adopt arrangements like that. That means that we've got to abandon environmentalism, which is a form of insanity. It's a killer; it's mass murder. If you don't develop the economy, do not develop technology, you're not going to be able to sustain the population. If you can't sustain the population, you're going to kill them, aren't you?

So therefore, you always have to go to the newer technologies which are needed to enable you to provide the conditions of life required. In general, the way we measure this scientifically is what is called energy-flux-density. That is, take how many calories, for example, of power, or watts of power, are you transmitting, per cross-sectional unit of one centimeter, per second? That's your measure.

Now, as we diminish the natural resources of the planet in concentration, we have not diminished the natural resources of the planet; we've diminished the concentration. Because we take the richest resources and we use them up first, because they're the most advantageous to use. But the ocean is full of the minerals. The greatest concentration of minerals on this planet, available to mankind, is in the oceans! But it's not very economical to try to gather all this stuff from these oceans—not now. So we have to increase our energy-flux-density, where we can increase the productive power of mankind, so that the individual is more powerful now than before, and this is the basis for improving productivity.

Go Ahead, with Optimism!

So, we have to move ahead, think about technologies, think about the technology of the future, develop a population that can deal with these technologies, and go ahead, with optimism.

In the old days, a grandfather would take his grandson out to a project which he had participated in building. And he would say to this grandson: "I built this for you to use." The sense of immortality which is the sense of morality in human beings, which is absent in the animals, is always like that.

Why are you living? For what you get out of life? What is it you get out of life? Are you living for what you are going to embody in your grandchildren, their descendants, and the future of the nation? Do you take pride in devoting your life to some purpose which future generations will enjoy? Do you have a sense of participation in the future, of an earned participation in the future, because you are contributing to its existence?

That's what we are. That's what we are as American people, when we are normally ourselves. That's what we used to be like, before these recent developments. We used to think about what we were contributing to our grandchildren. We used to be joyous about seeing our grandchildren, and seeing that we had contributed something to make life better for them than it had been for us. We look back at previous generations in our country, and we think of people who were able to do that, of the great advances in humanity.

And the worst problem of this President is: He has no morality. He has no commitment to people and their descendants. He has no commitment to the future of humanity.

All great people, like people in warfare, have been willing to surrender their lives for the sake of the benefit of coming generations, when they thought that was necessary. They did not think of losing something because they lost their life. Yes, losing their life is losing their life. But they did think morally of losing something, because they had sacrificed their lives for the sake of coming generations.

Most parents, in former times, sacrificed much of their lives for the sake of their children and grandchildren. And they rejoiced in what they saw in the result, when they were old. And they thought of people, of their own ancestors, who had died. And they thought generously of them, because they recognized what they had given to them, and desired to be as good in the eyes of their descendants, as they saw their predecessors, in their own eyes. It is this sense of immortality, that despite we die in the flesh, we must be immortal in the spirit. And the spirit must decide what our duty is, not the flesh. We maintain the flesh, so the spirit may function. And we organize society based on great principles, which go to that point.

We have a junk heap. If we don't do something soon, this country is going to go to chaos. It may end up in a bloody dictatorship. It may end up in a planetary dark age. The way we are going, all those evils are things we now deserve for our negligence.

We have to take this President, and straighten him out. We have to get him to fire everybody associated with his health-care policies. Dump them out of that Administration now. Dump every policy of that type out of the Administration now. Purge it of evil! And turn the responsibility for the Administration over to those institutions of government which include those members of Congress who have developed a better sense of shame than they have shown so far. And by those members of government now, who are in power, who will freely and happily change the policies of this government in the direction needed.

And, as long as I am here, I am going to help them do it.

Dialogue with LaRouche, which followed.

Back to top