|This article appears in the September 20, 2013 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
'THE DEVIL'S TAIL IS TWISTED'
Now Return to the Future!
by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
September 1, 2013
On Sunday, September 1st, during Labor Day weekend, our National Caucus of Labor Committees (NCLC) had sought a hopeful, if still uncertain outcome, for what had been our nation's political affairs. Nonetheless, the Barack Obama administration, for its part, like Wall Street, had continued to ruin the means available for the means required for the very existence of the people of our nation.
The facts to be taken into account here, will now reflect the inclusion of those trends in the subject-matter which my associates and I had presented as our customary, weekly webcast, this time for Friday, August 30. A substantial part of the content of that now past Friday's report, whatever its consequences will turn out to have been otherwise, will now have been added to the core of the original message presented here. What I now present, here, below, is what I will have considered to have been the presently essential elements of relevance to have been brought into the audience's consideration. The most of those points of my opening argument, now presented here, will take up the resumption of what I had published in my June 10, 2013 "Nicholas of Cusa, Kepler & Shakespeare."
Essentially, the Twentieth-Century history of the United States had been dominated, either directly, or by implication, by the effects since the time of the September 14, 1901 assassination of President William McKinley. President McKinley's assassination had been a killing which placed a shameless British asset, the then Vice-President Theodore Roosevelt, into the position of President. Thence, from Theodore Roosevelt, and through to Herbert Hoover, the Presidency of the United States had been chiefly dominated, in net effect, by British imperialist agents and their U.S. accomplices among us.
Then, for a little more than three terms in office by a truly great President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, our United States had regained its greatness once morebut, only for a certain time of less than four full terms in office completed. Then, as I had reported on this matter, this had come to me as that news of President Franklin Roosevelt's death which had reached me in India's Kanchrapara, where I was being then stationed for a time, still in wartime, before being sent, still in active duty into northern Burma.
The news of the President's death had then spread quickly at Kanchrapara, where some of my fellow soldiers had requested that I meet with them during the dusk of that day. I had promptly agreed to the meeting itself with little more than a mere nod; but, there was no need among us, at that time, to state the reason we had agreed to meet, at dusk later, in this fashion. I had then, some years later, described what I had then proposed as the mission for the brief meeting held there, as during later references to this made on a several occasions sprinkled among passing years, as I will add a report of certain deeper considerations in this matter, here and now.
Between the time of my earlier "state-side" service duties based in war-time Texas, and my arrival in Bombay by way of a Pacific-based, reformed and armed luxury liner, the Admiral Benson, my sense of myself had changed. Thus, when some of us met at dusk that evening at Kanchrapara, there had been no need, by me, or by the others, to explain our exact reason for that meeting.
Thus, with the news of the death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, for those among our circle gathered that evening in Kanchrapara, the sense of our meeting was akin to that which had been expressed by director of the Office of Strategic Services (O.S.S.), William Donovan, a fairly short time earlier, who, when walking down the hallway from President Franklin Roosevelt's White House Office, said, softly, but ominously, to his O.S.S. associate: "It's over." (Pause.) "It's all over." When I, later, came on the continuing scene after that President's death, the U.S. Presidency had just been delivered into the hands of Franklin Roosevelt's adversaries, and was now, largely, under the control of Winston Churchill and the British imperial monarchy. Then the true patriots among us then gathered in Kanchrapara knew, implicitly, that that was the fact of the matter before them. Inside official Washington, D.C., it was already known that President Franklin D. Roosevelt had been hovering at the brink of death.
With the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, the U.S. presidency was turned back to the treasonously inclined wrecking operation then unloosed under the truly disgusting, but also murderous President, Harry S Truman and the Wall Street gang. The horrible change, which seemed to have come from virtually the moment of President Roosevelt's death, soon demonstrated that every achievement which President Franklin D. Roosevelt had made, up to the promotion of Truman to Vice-President, was suddenly turned around for us, as, virtually, since the same evening when we had met, then in India, on the occasion of Franklin Roosevelt's death. I have a still vivid memory of my experience of that evening in India's Kanchrapara, when I had responded, most briefly, to the expressed concerns which I had shared with the group of fellow-soldiers gathered during that meeting at dusk.
At that stage of my very modest wartime military service, I, for one, had very little need to explain essentially relevant facts from those times.
Contrary to the wickedness of President Harry S Truman which had first been clear to me from the start of his role as U.S. Vice-President, then, there should be also no doubt of the excellent intentions of the contrasting figure of General MacArthur during related times, which continued up through the end of MacArthur's active service in office, and, otherwise beyond that time to the time of his own death shortly after that of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy; this was, despite what I, on good grounds, can identify, still today, as the treasonously crafted demand by the scurrilous Harry S Truman's toying with the prospect for a nuclear war which had then been threatened openly under the direction of Britain's Winston Churchill and Bertrand Russell, in the Summer of 1946: and for years beyond, even still today.
The time has now come, thus, for us to dispense, forever, with the silly notion that popular votes should be taken as being sufficient grounds for estimating the truth of the matter, as if as depending upon a mere outcome of the casting of votes. The change from President Franklin Roosevelt to President Truman, had an effect of a sensing of something smelling like treason. I pointed my own warning quietly, in that same direction during my brief evening meeting in Kanchrapara. My later, post-war, overseas experiences, as in the massive upheaval in post-war Calcutta, had already defined my post-World War II outlook: the same outlook on those developments which I have had excellent reason to maintain, up to the present day.
All of us, young, as much as old, should have considered such matters solemnly, as President George Washington had then warned in his time of leaving office, still as if today, in his outgoing statements, which he had delivered to the electorate at the close of his own term in office.
When we consider the frequency of scurrilous performances in office by most of those among our Presidents who had proven themselves, now with selections like President Harry Truman in office, what should we have now long considered a matter of grave concern much overdue? In the truthful history of our republic, far fewer of our elected Presidents had been actually proven fit for that office, than having secured it by the mere sham of a virtually bought-and-paid-for election effected by means of the votes cast by the too many of the all-too-credulous.
Two Contrary Legacies
For a relevant demonstration of that fact, consider the wicked influence exerted on elected Presidents of our United States, as by such as the most flagrantly homicidal British agent, the American traitor, Aaron Burr and his legacy: a Burr whose antics had been all too often condoned by Thomas Jefferson and also by too many other Presidents during their times. Such had been the ill-gotten record of the Presidency during the interval since that under the shamelessly treasonous Theodore Roosevelt, through the time of Ku Klux Klan fanatic Woodrow Wilson, through Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover, and, later, also Truman and, as by what had been set into motion by the some-time Adolf Hitler-funder Prescott Bush, as by the Presidential "Bush League" memberships which followed that, and, now, Barack Obama. Some urgent questions need to be considered more carefully than had been done in recent decades. Are we to be fairly described as citizens, to have become accomplices of our own destruction by means of a crooked scheme of virtual electoral roulette, a game played more against our republic, than supplying reasonable choices?
Do not jump to careless comment respecting my intentions being expressed here. The senior John Adams and Jefferson, in that succession, had set into motion, whether exactly intentionally, or not, the crooked schemes of cheap political opportunism which had ruined the great achievements set by the most notable collaboration between President George Washington and his Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton. The key is to be seen in the malicious collusion with a series of opportunists associated with the same enemy agent and murderer Aaron Burr, the same Burr whose influence had shaped much of the foolishness of the Presidency during the interval from Jefferson through Madison. This had been done, in spite of the wonderful achievements of the same James Monroe and John Quincy Adams, who had been among our nation's greatest statesmen for all those times, so to be considered still to the present date. It was that pair of true heroes of mankind, who had been pitted then against the British monarchy's agent and professional assassin, Aaron Burr; but, that Burr had survived to craft the monstrous treason conducted by Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, and their later pre-Civil War successors in obscenity.
Generally, it were fairly conceded, that many among the chosen Presidents of our United States, have been fairly considered as the skunks and traitors who left behind them a string of follies bequeathed by all too many of those Presidents, Presidents who had served implicitly as fools, or worse, in office, fools who had been engendered, to a varying degree, by the string of Presidents from the elder John Adams through Madison, Presidents who prefer opportunities, or sometimes worse, who, too often, had set the pattern which was continued through to the present time. In effect, there have been only a few truly great Presidents, but relatively many who were fools, or simply shallow-minded opportunists, when not being implicitly worse.
Bismarck's Crucial Role in History
To achieve a necessary degree of understanding for the fuller sweep of the succession of the Presidency, as since great Presidents such as Monroe and John Quincy Adams, it is indispensable that we mark a deeply underlying distinction in the course of our modern world affairs, affairs which had been defined in fact by the 1890 (British) ouster of Germany's Chancellor Bismarck; this ouster had set the stage, promptly, for what was to become known, in succession, as "two-plus World Wars," and the presently continued spread, through the present time, of the slaughter made possible by the morally premature death of President Franklin Roosevelt.
It were not more than fair, to report that there has been an actually unbroken process of warfare from the ouster of Bismarck to the present incumbency of a foul President Barack Obama. All of this set of horrors can be clearly traced from the initiative of the Dutch imperialists who, in over-running the institutions of the so-called British Isles, became known as "the British Empire," and who have been the virtually uninterrupted authors of every great evil from which any generality of mankind has suffered to the present date.
To summarize the statement which I have presented, as taken from stated origins to present ends, the crisis of humanity, since the time of the process of crushing what became known as the "Golden Renaissance" of the Fifteenth Century, has been the outcome of those masses of civil war throughout Europe and beyond, which led into the success of the Dutch-built horrors in their conflict with the Spanish empire. The suppression of the Massachusetts Bay development by the brutal Dutch imperialists, had been turned rapidly into what was popularly mis-named as a "British empire," an empire-in-fact which had been rooted in what was never anything but the Dutch imperialism which had virtually gobbled-up the Irish, Scottish, and English and Welsh, and many citizens of the United Statesespecially the Wall Street gang. That bloody "Dutch Treat" has been the horrid legacy of the world to the present date, the hoax of the so-called "British empire" of today.
However, as true as what I have just summarized continues to be, there had been an earlier and deeper root of what had been the pre-Renaissance achievements of modern history, a root in the outcome of the infamous "dark age" of the Venetians, et al., a root which is fairly traced back to such as the implications of what were the essentially undeniable horrors of the siege of Troy. Although there is only a poor representation of what the case of Troy implies, the fact of the essentials of that case is that civilization, as whatever it might have been earlier, has long enjoyed a triumph of the so-called "oligarchical principle" which the clearly defined aspect of the record of the siege and butchery of Troy bespeaks, whenever that development had begun a generality of imperial tyrannies within the range of the Mediterranean or beyond. Call that "the oligarchical principle."
Our republic was given a great heritage at its birth; it deserves nothing less than that continued honor, presently. Let us now, therefore, state that case here.
Columbus & the Great Renaissance
Christopher Columbus had, ultimately, inherited a great legacy through his devotion to his acquired heritage supplied to him as a heritage of the Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa who had died during devoted service to that great mission which he had adopted, in a matter of fact, for all mankind. Cusa's adopted mission on this account, was, specifically, his intention to warn the people of Europe to cross a great ocean, seeking a destiny on the other side, a destiny which would provide an opportunity for mankind's escape from the evil destiny which had been as if a permanent fixture left behind, left behind by such monstrosities as the Roman Empire and its subsequent attempted likenesses. The good which flowed from the already deceased Cusa's legacy of devotion, was the consequence of that which had made possible those successful colonizations of the Americas which had also saved Europe from being successfully plunged into an utter hell-hole as bad in effects as the deep dark age of the religious warfare and related crimes which had threatened our United States from the evils which so often ruled Europe, but had also spoiled our own U.S. Government much of the time, and menaces the planet's nations presently.
Thus, the masterful Bismarck had learned an essential lesson from the legacy of U.S. President Abraham Lincoln (as Lincoln had learned directly from the former U.S. Presidency of the magnificent John Quincy Adams). That Bismarck, so informed, had created a state of a constantly tautened peace within and beyond a turbulent continental Europe: a Bismarck whose influence had crafted a carefully maintained peace among the powers of continental Europe, a peace which had lasted for just about as long as Bismarck had remained Chancellor. Virtually, the moment Bismarck had been ejected from his office of Chancellor by nothing but by the British empire, as that ouster was consolidated in effect by the subsequent early assassination of the President of France; the world since has been ruined by a perpetual state of world-wide, hot-and-cold surges of warfare, excepting intervals of preparation for new great wars, such as those crafted in the name of the wildly evil liar and a virtual assassin, Britain's Tony Blair, recently.
However, back to the roots of a modern Europe: the crucial victory which the mission of Nicholas of Cusa had prompted, from across the ocean, and into the Americas, has been continued as hard-fought. The most crucial of those early victories had been in the Massachusetts colony, which, unfortunately, had been crushed by the imperial Dutch predators; but, our young nation was given rebirth, this in the rebuilding of the same intention which had been introduced by the Massachusetts Bay Colony, a feat which was accomplished afresh by the true heirs of the suppressed Massachusetts Bay settlement, as by such geniuses as Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, and Alexander Hamilton. This feat had been centered, to a large degree, in the resuscitation of what had been the original intention of the Massachusetts colony of the Winthrops and Mathers, a resuscitation which was gained with the founding of the Federal Constitution of the United States under the leading direction of President George Washington and the greatest economist of the world at that time, the true designer of the economy of the United States: again, Alexander Hamilton.
Our still young, and beleaguered republic had, nonetheless, provided the margin of influence on Europe which, great difficulties taken into account, had actually saved Europe, through Europe's own influence on the creation of our United States. This could not have happened but for that struggle, as it was expressed in the specific outcome of what had been Nicholas of Cusa's explicit intention, and had been expressed, in turn, inclusively in the colonization led by the adopted advocate for a deceased Cusa's cause, Captain Christopher Columbus. Without the backing for Columbus supplied by the associates of Nicholas of Cusa, there would have been no United States, and without the United States, Europe would have slid, then, into the great horror which the current British ("Anglo-Dutch") imperial crown seeks to bring upon the world at this time. Europe generally faced a very ugly prospect in those times, one now ominously comparable to the presently onrushing destruction of European civilization: the evil wave of destruction which we must now defeat.
That is a true story, as far as it corresponds to the facts of a true account from the past; what remains of something missing, is not the past, but the lack of insight into the actual future, the future which I shall now bring to your attention here, below.
The Future: What Is It?
What I have written in the preceding sections of this report, has reflected a limited, if otherwise, as in-a-no-way-untruthful description of something which, while true by what are merely ordinary classroom and related standards, has left out, this far, that part of the truth which unveils the essentially deeper, and, therefore, actually far more truthful meaning of the essential, essentially unique, and essentially true, but rarely understood nature of mankind. In other words, we should require: the cognizable conception of an actually knowable aspect of the future. The chief source of the errors which I attack for needed corrections in these chapters of the report as a whole, has been the large margin of error borne as popular confidence in mere sense-perception as such, with no patience left over for considering a crucially important access to an actually foreknowable future.
The profound mistake which most people, including those who are leading figures in society most often make, concerns the outcome of what has been delivered to us as an experience of a knowable existence of an experience taken not from the records of the past, but, from the future. That latter choice is, in matter of fact, the only way in which human beings could actually know, explicitly, as an actual experience of the future.
Thus, the result of that, is that the majority of our living persons now, because of the habituated ignorance in this matter of most of our nations' populations now, implicitly classify actual human beings as appearing to be, by cultivated and thus adopted habits, as merely a variety of what they define as an animal species. Those sharing that opinion which I have pointed out here as an incompetent confidence in the still currently resumed, mistaken outlook on history, are thereby condemned on the account of either simple ignorance of the facts, or some luridly arbitrary fantasies adopted from ignorance. They have lacked the existence of a true conscience, the lack of the ability to foresee what is right, from what is wrong in principle.
For what passes for ordinary circumstances, reliance on sense-perception, while never actually truthful, is otherwise not unfairly used for what might be classed as "ordinary day-to-day rule-of-thumb experiences" of a class of persons which permits no inroads into the domain of actual knowledge of a future. For example, it has been considered traditional to measure observations of relations among the solar system in terms identified as observations of the category of sense-perception, rather than measuring human experiences on Earth by standards set in fact by the Solar system, or by still higher qualitative orders of experience, combined with experiencing actual knowledge of the future.
The particularly most significant point to be made and emphasized for the purposes of this present reshaping of the present discussion, is the inherent defects in human sense-perception as such, those being defects which had been recognized by Johannes Kepler's strict meaning respecting the proper intention of his use of vicarious hypothesis. The "nearest" simile for "vicarious hypothesis" is the concept of metaphor, if and when it seems to touch upon the category of the then still young-adult William Empson's use of its meaning, as this might be considered for literary interpretation, as verging, in possibly intended effect, upon Kepler's term for it, and, thus, perhaps Empson's own attempt to match the conception, as, at least, as I had purchased, read, and carefully considered Empson's Seven Types of Ambiguity at the time when that reprint was first republished. The comparison I make on this account runs close to Shakespeare's strict use of "Chorus" in his King Henry V.
Shakespeare's actually intended use of the concept of "metaphor," as in the case of Shakespeare's character of "Chorus," is both suited, and intended, to serve the audience as the substance of that reality, as spoken by the part of "Chorus," in that specific Shakespeare drama, rather than by the mere mouths of the players seen by the audience as the stage actors in their identities, as if they were mere shadows played by the actors on stage. So, Shakespeare assigns the role of true reality to "Chorus," rather than what were better recognized as the ghostly assigned images performed by players substituting for the characters represented on his dramatic stage. Here, Shakespeare as dramatist, presents irony in an expression of its true genius, by degrading belief in mere sense-perceptions, properly, as being merely the shadows cast, as if magically, by the image of an actually unseen stage of reality. What else did the term for Shakespeare's "Chorus" ever mean for a memory of the traditional Greek Chorus? How else could it have been, that the able directors and players on stage, had deserved to convince the witting audience, that anything about the performance on stage had partaken of a really intended, and also an efficiently worthy effect?
The Practical Implications
Those observations of mine here, are to be considered as typifying the terms with which we must wrestle on this present stage, and which I now present to you in what I have come to consider as the true distinction, not of life from death, but of an effect of life which is to have been achieved as presenting the truest expression of a certain expression of human immortality within an apparently endless universe.
We must assign ourselves to a mission of enduring benefits for those lives whose presence shall have supplied an endless quality of "us," now and past alike, as our being a benefit which must be delivered for the service of past, present, and future alike. How was the future created, and, therefore, how could it have become actually known? Such are the terms within which I situate my address to you here, at this present point in my report.
To set the proper choice of stage for what must be now presented here, consider the terror represented by the asteroids as an proper example.
Were we to fail to launch an effort within the relative meaning of "nearby Solar space," the estimable effect would be some relatively early extinction of the planet Earth's habitation or of Earth itself. The minimal reply to that specific challenge, would be impossible to effect without a relatively early assurance of mankind's ability to wield relevant and efficient expressions of thermonuclear fusion within the ranges of roving asteroids such as those among the nearby parts of the Solar system. Hence, the prevalent opinion of the British empire's so-called "green" policy of its empire and its accomplices, should be recognized as obviously a leading contribution to the current Queen's threatened virtualor, even actual extinction of the human species.
This, however, is not specific to the British empire, even in its currently extended imperial role as the dominant, most murderously inclined power on this planet. To sum up that point as briefly as might be warranted: the evil which is inherently the policy of population-control, leads directly toward a situation in which the extinction of the human species were a probable outcome. This is not merely to point out that the British empire and its policy of "population control" for the planet, is the mark of a failed species which is not really fit to survive in the first place. It is the population-control policies of the current Anglo-Dutch, nearly-world empire (and its precedents), which are the truly inherent destiny of that imperial abomination; it is the policies of that body which is the true evil, such as that of "Wall Street" now, which currently threaten the continuation of the human species in its proper role.
Yet, the evidence exists, that with the prospect which I have enjoyed in supporting, the successful result of that policy is now to become known by the only policy of practice which could afford a reasonable expectation of a future survival of the human species. The reading of such implications, is that the future prospect for a practicable possibility of a defense of human life on Earth, or within the relatively nearby parts of the Solar system, requires, presently, nothing less than a thermonuclear transformation of the productive powers of labor on this planet, and beyond.
The obstacle is, that the present form of the doctrines of imperial government of the Anglo-Dutch imperial system, is such that that system should be terminated, in its existence as a form of imperial system, because that imperial system could not survive any system which would satisfy the practical requirements of continued existence of institutions such as the imperialism of the Anglo-Dutch imperial system itself: a system which I argue can be shown to lead presently toward the thermonuclear extinction of the population of the system dominated by the present state of the Anglo-Dutch system, and of any attempted likeness. That is, for this moment, a now relatively early outcome, even, potentially, an immediately thermonuclear outcome.
I shall return to that just-stated point later, here, when our attention is to be turned to the implications of thermonuclear warfare.
What About 'Conditioning'
It is evident that, through some not entirely clarified means, the human population had come, for a long time since, into a state of society characterized by intrinsically oligarchical modes of shaping the character of infants and children to such effect, that the greater part of the human population were conditioned to be virtual slaves, while the opposite, smaller part, the oligarchical part, were treated as virtually a different (e.g., higher ranking) species. The practice of slavery maintained for a long time inside the United States itself, is to be included in this study. The complementary feature of the practice of slavery and its like practices, is deliberate genocide against those placed in the so-indicated under-class.
For example, such an attempt had been launched under the U.S. President Harry S Truman, which had represented an attempt to use the creation of the so-called "anti-Communist" class as a division of social classes tantamount, in effects, to serfdom. This obscene practice under the Truman administration, had been significantly attenuated under the influence of President Eisenhower, and more so under President John F. Kennedy, and the influence of his soon-to-be-politically-martyred brother Robert.
Over the course of the so-called "Vietnam War," a new direction displaced the old: the runaway cult of drug-addictions, the lunacy of mass drug-addictions and like behaviorisms. The efforts in these deplorable directions were shaped largely by the British empire, and have now become the policy of practice of mass-murders of entire populations under the present population policies of the guidance of the Anglo-Dutch empire: a true expression of the perversions of the followers of the savagely perverted, and ever-cranky Bertrand Russell, and Russell's nasty rival in perversity, H.G. Wells.
It is therefore appropriate to use the comparison of those two, latter cases referenced here, as having some bearing on the way in the population of the northern trans-Atlantic region had been rapidly turned into degeneration throughout relatively very large regions. This is to be compared with the case of the virtually thoroughly completed genocide launched and completed against the population of Troy. The rapidity of such systematic changes in human cultures to which large populations have succumbed, presents us with unavoidable insights into cases of virtual mass-insanity of large masses of both slaves and other varieties of systemically subjected populations.
There is nothing to be compared with such perversions of the course of human cultures as those. The case of the so-called rise and fall of the Roman Empire, is a prime example of mass-degradations of entire cultures over prolonged successions of generations. The technical term for this as a form of mass-behavior of perverted populations, is named "imperialism," signifying, above all else, presently, the Anglo-Dutch world empire. Under such systems, almost everything about any human culture, is largely rotted out, as a form of culture, under such conditioning.
It is, I think, obligatory, to examine the matter which lies before me at this point, and to do so by treating the exemplary case of the inherent degeneracy of imperial systems. My intention here, is not to complain, but to diagnose with cures in sight. Let us restate my immediately presented complaint against both imperialism and other oligarchisms, from a positive standpoint. Let us, therefore, examine the point of difference between mankind's natural condition, and the inherent degeneracy of both cannibalism and the related practice of imperialism.
That means that we must return the subject for discussion, to the essential distinction of man from not only beasts, but also from "man-beasts" such as emperors. Empires, including the present British-Dutch world-empire, are the reign of humans turned into beasts over mankind, in, or without standard costumes. This brings us in-close to a true reality of the human species' existence. We must, therefore, now enter the true world of human reality.
The Human Mind in Action
There exist two apparently alternate meanings for the distinction of the human species from what are to be classified, conditionally, as human animals. I have made that specific point, customarily, by the illustration of a contrast between two types of ancient mammal specimens which had been located by relevant specialists in a southernly location of Africa. The one type used fire; the other does not. Admittedly, animals do exhibit the ability to innovate, with assistance from the experience of learning, insofar as they are enabled to recognize the essential content of such a communication. Humans use fire voluntarily; we also base our practiced notion of the concept of fire, according to a succession (if not aborted) of successively higher rankings according to a fair approximation of the categories of chemistry as ordered in increase of associated energy-flux density, but, also, even into the realm of chemistries beyond any of those which had been customary prior to the discoveries of such as Max Planck and Albert Einstein (most relevantly). (E.g., the roots of thermonuclear fusion and matter-antimatter).
Thus, we say, commonly, that "man uses fire." Animals do not do so on their own inspiration. The concept of a general notion of energy-flux-density, designates a fundamental principle which, as such, underlies the characteristic distinctions of the human species. It is expressed, in practice, as the essentially voluntary human increase of the levels of energy-flux-density at mankind's practical disposal. The fitness of the human species to continue to exist, depends upon the willful actions which mankind is enabled to control with implicitly ceaselessly increasing effectiveness. Thus, insofar as we know presently, an increase of the efficient energy-flux-density of willful human practice, is the properly wished distinction of the human species from all other presently known species.
There is no presently knowable upper limit to the potential for the rise of the human species to levels of control within our environments. That mental ability of the human species is the essential purpose of our species' existence.
Also notably, the increased power of mankind's progress as a species in the universe, does not require any other development of biological principle than that potentially available to all types of human personalities. In that sense, the process of the development of the human mind, is not biologically defined by the notion of the brain per se; rather: by the increase in the power of the human species to exist. The brain does not create us; we create its increased power, if we are willing and enabled, to change the practical effect of what the progress of powers of mind do to change the conditions of existence of our species to an upward oriented, absolutely distinct effect. Considering those limits which are implicit in the discoveries of thermonuclear fusion and matter-antimatter principles, there is, for us, as a species, no known upper limit of what we, as a species, are enabled to discover and thus to employ. Mathematics does not build the mind; the mind creates, and, thus, often justifies its ridicule of both mathematics and mathematicians alike.
The relevant argument to be stated at this point, here, is that the shift of the chemistry and of the biology of the human mind, as set by such hoaxsters as Bertrand Russell and his cult, does not correspond to merely mathematics as such when used as a practice of physical science per se.
So, we sometimes hear the suggestion that electronic "brains" exist as a surrogate for human minds, when, perhaps, the attempt to represent the mere electronics in that way, results in a net loss of what can be proven to be actually increased human cognitive powers. Much which is claimed to be electronic science, may turn out to have been a sexual fantasy about toys manufactured by the associates of the chronic and vicious hoaxster, Bertrand Russell and the radically reductionist generally.
The issue is, therefore: what is life per se? Secondly: what is the principled difference of the principle of human life, from that of animal life categorically? The fact of the matter is as Cusa, Kepler, and others have shown in their proven accomplishments respecting the actually human cognitive powers, a consideration which may be demonstrated against the measurable increase of actual qualities of the accessible power of mankind over the nearby parts of our universe.
The Characteristics of the Human Mind
The specific quality of the human mind, that in what might be fairly described as its most characteristic distinction, is that mind's aptitude for knowledge of developments in the future. Unfortunately, the prevalent practice of society presently discourages attention to the most characteristic distinction of the specifically human mind. Unfortunately, again, this is shown in the most dramatic way, by the fact that the natural potential of the functions of that mind lies in the human mind's natural disposition to experience knowledge of the future. In an actually well-ordered society, that practice would be relatively widespread; unfortunately, even praised schools and universities presently tend to reject that fact; indeed, the element of "drill and grill" in schools, including universities, has the effect of virtually "butchering" that naturally-given ability of the mentally active students. It is the factor of obedience to what is taught, or otherwise "conditioned" by a defective quality of life-styles, which, in various ways, tends to reduce the process of education more to obedience-training, rather than the fostering of the noëtic potentials native to the actually free human individual.
The notable cause for failure in education, on that account, is "repeat after me," in one mode or some other. The key term for the name of "action," as William Shakespeare came to understand "the name of action," lies in the fostering, not of the adaptation to the "alleged" right action, but the creating of the preconditions of temptations to discover in the mind of the child in school, the errors in the opinions which had been adopted by older generations. From my vantage-point in experience with the processes of human history, society generally is disposed, all too often, to prevent the valid forms of discovery of truth of principles by the use of sundry modes of "cribs," to seek "the right answer," rather than the actual truth. Some of us, as I had often done, will defend their mind by resisting modes of education which often induce the students to reject the "other student" who resists submission to the "answer" doctrinally imposed on the students, rather than undertake the more relevant effort to discover the truth independently, instead of the practice of a talking-down to "officially pre-accepted dogma."
The most efficient approach to resisting that kind "brain-washing" by the "repeat-after-me" quality of preconditioning of the young and old alike, is the emphasis on the discovery of why some otherwise normal students, for example, are more or less rabidly disposed to rush quickly into the alleged succulence of pre-digested, even often mob-like conformity with the dictated script or its likenesses, in effect.
The conformist tendency which I have just identified, above, attacks, specifically, the uniquely natural human capacity to see into the future in a systemic sense of such inquiry. That capacity is the natural ability of what can be identified as "the free human mind in its natural cultural habitat," to see into the actual future. All great discoverers in science and related motives have a potential ability to discover the meaning of "knowing the future." I happen to know that fact, because most of my achievements in the course of life, as an economist in particular, have depended absolutely on my expression and nature of that specific quality of ability. The compelling force of experiencing the future, is, for such persons, a truly leading motive from within, a motive which is more compelling, specifically, than any memory otherwise.
The effected difference in habits of one person and another, is the most important capacity of an actually worthy leader in society. The fact is, that foresight into the actual future, is a natural potential of the human individual. Some poor folk will assert: "You can not know the future." On the contrary, some actually can; others have a proximate sense of "an act of discovery;" were individuals attached to "popular ways of thinking," they will fail, and will react to failure, to hate those who drift from whatever they have been conditioned to swallow as "popular" or "practical."
What I had described, immediately above, is not a "naturally" developed condition. Fortunately, the realities of actual history of mankind represent the effects of a division of society, generally, into what might be described as the difference between "masters and slaves." That, essentially, goes to the actual meaning of Nicholas of Cusa's exceptionally brilliant powers of intellectual development, as we can adduce that from examining the faulty arguments of the leading opponents of Cusa among the ranks of certain types among some of the Catholic clergy and others of that century and beyond. They lacked a devotion to the outcome for mankind in man's future role in the life of mankind, and far beyond that, a devotion which does not accept becoming a completed act of extinction, by means of placing even oneself, as others, too, as seeing their personal future in their own death. On that specific account, Cusa succeeded, despite the fact that he had died some few years before an inspired Christopher Columbus had made his brilliant discovery, based on Columbus' discovery of his own personal achievement, an achievement found by crossing a great ocean, precisely as Cusa had prescribed. Both triumphed through the fulfillment of their respective missions.
The important of set of points which I have just presented in this chapter so far, is the distinction of the purpose between the person who thinks of death as his permanent outcome in the universe, and the one who relies on the continuing reach of a person's mission in existence, as being that person's responsibility to the purpose of the fulfillment of an indefinitely extended mission to be performed within this universe, however that may occur, whenever, or wherever.
The issue is not that of a mere attitude; it is a commitment to the ultimate outcome of a personal human life. It is that outcome, which must be served, which must become a mission for an indefinitely extended outcome within the future of our society and as far as our universe is extended. That outlook is what might be termed "the outcome" of our mission, the sense of an obligation to steer the future of mankind into a safe arrival of missions served as if "down the line" of all generations. Living thus becomes steering the universe to what means the necessary certainty of it all: the mission of creating the necessary future.
To Conclude, for Now
What I have argued here, presents us with several specific propositions. However, there is one mission which must be performed, that the additional other missions might prosper. It is to free mankind from what I have warned against, here, this far. It is the fact that mankind, when engaged in true mental health, has an efficient familiarity, as adults, with the recognition of the existence of a knowable future. In short, the developed ability to sense and know the future in some significant degree. The case of Nicholas of Cusa, as identified here, provides a model for not only foreseeing future developments, or, at the least, the ability to read the map which guides us to that destination.
On the other side of that matter: the fact, that many people from many places, are in some degree, mistreating the future, because they think that they can not know its existence; that is perhaps among the worst of what follows when the people of the world do not regard the actual future as that which must be defended, by the living, most of all.
This issue, which I have just identified in the short, preceding paragraph, should reflect the fact that the practice of warfare and related antics has now reached the point in fact, that any significant presence of the kinds of warfare which, for example, President Obama and the British-Dutch imperialists, have sought to launch as warfare in these present times, is itself the greatest crime which any person could condone under present conditions when thermonuclear destruction is the price of your own nation's great folly. Mankind must now replace old habits by new visions. Among the most useful of those visions will be the use of the means of positive thermonuclear fusion as the keystone of performance for the leading circles among all mankind.
We shall not place man's footprints on nearby planets and relevant such. We have not yet taken nearby planets, or asteroids, with suitable concerns and missions to match. Rather, since there is no prospective future for mankind without measures for defense of our vicinity within the Solar system, and the accompanying development of useful missions in service of mankind's future during the generations ahead, including the urgent need of developing means of defense of Earth itself against menacing asteroids, also comets, and the like impedimenta within the neighborhood.
However, to realize such objectives, we must motivate our fellow-populations to an understanding of the need to supply our nations and their persons with means which will enable us to cope with the new definitions of dangers which now menace us as the populations of so many among the nations under today's oncoming conditions. Without insight into the meaning of the future for mankind, and for mankind in our Solar setting, we would have betrayed everyone, and beyond.
Therefore, in conclusion, the cultivation of the development of the means which the immediately preceding remarks here reference, must be supported by the general recognition of the two following points.
First, mankind has reached the state of affairs in which the ignorant folly among nations and their governments, presently threatens mankind with a self-inflicted extermination of mankind. The necessary motivation needed for mustering the essential defense, depends upon a broader recognition of the fact that the future can be efficiently foreknown, and the time in which to avoid extermination can be made feasible.
Second, we must "rip up," so-to-speak, indifference to the knowable fact, that mankind can acquire the means to foresee the future in a broader set of terms than those experiencing such capabilities now. Remember: under present, relatively immediate conditions, the threat of exterminations of mankind, or even a total extermination must be recognized as serious threats not to be tolerated. Nations? Yes. Sovereign nations? Yes. Foreknowledge of the future developed? Absolutely. Without installing the latter, the rest may be a disaster.
 In fact, the dominant influence in U.S. banking, from virtually the beginning of the United States, had been British-controlled banking operating in locations in New York City and the Boston areas. By the time of Presidents Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren, that administration and the New York and Boston banks had been, predominantly, under direct British control. They, including the relevant U.S. Presidents, were largely owned, directly or indirectly, by those banking institutions controlled from London, until the Administration of President Abraham Lincoln. But, Britain's control over U.S. banking has persisted, largely through Wall Street-centered agencies, to the present, now more than ever before.
 In fact, the British interest and related influences had deliberately delayed the assembly of the needed forces for breakthroughs into France until it were almost certain that the growing illness of President Franklin Roosevelt could have permitted the postponement of victory in Europe to the term of a later President. The result of that had been a catastrophe from which our republic had never recovered, to the present day.
 The widespread cult of Euclidean geometry is a relatively elementary example of the fraudulent qualities of the mis-practices of the merely mathematicians. This matter of the fraud of Euclidean geometry came up among such Nineteenth Century sources as the correspondence of Carl F. Gauss, his friend, Farkas Bolyai, and Farkas' son, the mathematician Janos, also implicit in the work of Bernhard Riemann, and also of Max Planck and Albert Einstein. The most obscene of the notable contrary views, is that of the school of the shameless swindler, liar, and generalized degenerate, Bertrand Russell. Notably, differences respecting these indicated subjects are to be traced, chiefly, to the oligarchical political currents such as those related to the ideology otherwise specific to the inherently evil tradition of the Roman empire.
 It should be noted that that difference exposes the difference which Cusa's devotion expressed in his dedication to establishing a society from across the ocean waters, to establish a quality of society whose goal on this account, was consistent with the urgency of doing exactly what Cusa had done as a truly great Christian theologian: to rescue mankind as the leading founders of the United States had done according to a purpose coincident with Cusa's intention.