Path to Survival:
The British Empire!
Lyndon LaRouche's weekly webcast March 28 was hosted by LaRouche PAC's Matthew Ogden and Cody Jones. The first question, read by Ogden, came from an institutional source in Washington.
Q: Given the U.S.-Russia deteriorating relations because of the Crimea situation, there are nuanced and subtle indications by Russia, of a possibility to stabilize relations between the United States and Russia. For example, in a recent telephone conversation between Defense Secretary Hagel and Russian Defense Minister Shoigu, it was communicated that the Russians have no intention of any further action in Ukraine, unless there is a major provocation from the Western side. In addition, the Russians have indicated that they still see some value in the continuation of the G-8 process. What do you recommend to both sides, as a starting-point to move in the direction of stabilizing relations between Russia and the United States?
Lyndon LaRouche: Well, there's no possibility of stabilizing relations between Russia and Obama. That will never happen. The only way the stabilization would ever occur, is the fact that Obama would be thrown out of office; and there's more than adequate justification for doing precisely that, on almost any given day, any second of any given day, in fact.
So therefore, Russia is not playing any games whatsoever. They have a very simple policy: They're not going to walk into a trap, they're not going to be provoked, they will not accept that; they will make their own judgment of what they should do, and they're not going to start any world war. It's that simple.
So, don't worry about how we have to negotiate between Russia and the United States. First of all, there's nothing to negotiate, as long as this President remains President. He's just an evil nuisance.
The problem is of this nature, and you have to repeat it, because all of the questions we get, usually are wrong. They're irrelevant.
Obama is a menace to civilization. Period. But he's only a stooge; he is not the author of anything. The author of everything that's evil, is the British Queen. She is the empress of most of the total of this planet. She's not just the Queen of England; she's the Queen of the British Empire. And as you recall, back during the period of the Copenhagen discussions, she went out with a statement saying what her policy was: that she is an empress. She's not a queen of a kingdom, she's an empress. She controls virtually all of Africa, directly or indirectly. She controls Saudi Arabia, and all these Islamic terrorist groups are all the same thing; they're part of the British operation.
So, what we have is the British Empire! The Empire has to be shut down, and Obama is nothing but an instrument of the British Empire, just as Dirty Dick Cheney was on his watch—and he's still out there being Dirty Dick—something like a Horatio Alger story, you know, Dirty Dick.
But that's the situation. What we have is a real problem, as well as these artificial problems.
The Cancellation of Glass-Steagall
First of all, the British Empire is now faced with the consequences, together with New York, that is, Wall Street—they are faced with the fact that they themselves—since they got rid of Glass-Steagall, they've operated with a certain intention. It's the British Empire's intention. The intention was to reduce the human population from the vicinity estimated to be about 7 billion people, to less than 1. That is the war issue. That is the killer issue. That is the only specific issue that really means anything. Everything else is subsidiary.
Look, we've almost starved to death whole parts of our own population of the United States. Why? Because of the cancellation of Glass-Steagall. Who did it? The British Empire and its Wall Street adjuncts. That's the issue. The intention was to reduce the human population along the Zeus lines, which are the lines of the Roman Empire, which did the same thing: reduce the population, use mass-murder methods, and so forth—the same thing that the British are doing now, and that Obama is doing—now.
Obama is essentially like a Nero figure. He's less intelligent than Nero. Of course, I don't think he sings, for example, but that's probably a plus.
So, that's the situation. What we're on the verge of, is a global thermonuclear war. Now, if you know you have an enemy which is determined to launch a thermonuclear war on the basis of causing an extinction of the majority of the population of this planet in short order; if you know that, you don't bother provoking the beast. You simply lay your plans of how you're going to try to deal with this, in your understanding of what the forces are on the planet.
For example, in Western Europe, essentially, Germany is no longer an asset of the British Empire on this issue. You have similar kinds of things. But, France is being broken, other parts of Europe are being broken. Spain and Portugal are being destroyed. And so, Europe as such is already being destroyed, and it's under these conditions that it will be destroyed. And has a certain kind of interest in the East, because Germany has a very important role in the economy of Central Europe, and it has a very close relationship to Russia in many respects. It's not simply that they have some kind of deal, some kind of agreement in terms of allies or something. It's simply as a matter of practice, they have vital common interests, as nations. It's not because they're marrying each other; it's because they have vital common interests, particularly commercial interests and related kinds of interests, security interests.
So, what we're dealing with, we have one problem, and every American who's got any brains should recognize it. Our problem is the Queen of England—that's our number one problem. Our number two problem, is what Obama represents, but what he represents is Wall Street.
Now we're at a point in fact, where certain things are inevitable. Wall Street is doomed. Wall Street is finished, in its present form. There's nothing you can do to save Wall Street. It's all going down.
Now, the issue is: How will Wall Street go down? Wall Street has two ways to go down. One is to take a nosedive—I mean, just get to a 70-story building, and jump. That's one way to settle the issue; and some people will do that; we know the record on that sort of thing.
So Wall Street is finished, as such. The British Empire controls Wall Street entirely. They're using it. The British Empire is absolutely determined to achieve the objectives of Queen Elizabeth II, the British Imperial Queen now. And therefore, we know that's the fact. There's no way you're going to change that by argument, or by negotiation. No point to that. What you have to do, is defeat it.
From Bail-Out to Bail-In
Now, the reason for the intensity of the war threat, is the bail-in process, which was started around the end of last year and the beginning of this year, where they went from bail-out to bail-in. Bail-in is a self-accelerating form of collapse of the entire financial markets.
Now, the British Empire's position is, if they get by with a war, and crash the planet, they don't care about lost money. But if the rest of the planet is surviving, and they go bankrupt, they're finished. So, the question is: Who's going to finish who off? Is the British Empire going to finish off the United States, as well as other parts of the world, or is the United States going to be sane enough to bankrupt the British Empire?
Now, every patriot who's got a brain in his head that's functioning, knows that what we want to do, the best thing that could happen to us, is we should drive the British Empire bankrupt, and Wall Street, together. Because then, from my standpoint—and I know this thing better than most people do—Glass-Steagall; but Glass-Steagall is not enough. Glass-Steagall will bankrupt Wall Street. Fine! I don't care what else happens to Wall Street banks. We don't need them! We in the United States do not need the Wall Street banks. Now, we may get some of them on our back, but what will happen, they will go through bankruptcy.
Because the second thing, which is what I demand we do—I demand it not because I'm personally demanding it, but I'm demanding it because it's absolutely essential. What we have to do, is we have to go back to Alexander Hamilton and the original design of our Constitution. If we do that, then what happens is, we'll close down all these kinds of operations. We won't close down all the banks. What we will do, is put them through bankruptcy reorganization. We will look at what's in there that has some merit to it, you know, salvage it. And what we will do then, is we will have the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, following the design of Alexander Hamilton, and also that of some Presidents who had a similar design—Franklin Roosevelt had a similar design.
So, what we'll do, is we will say, "Henceforth, all banking in the United States will be authorized, federally, through the Treasury Department." In other words, the Treasury will be the guarantor of the management of banking systems. They can be private banking systems, but they must have an authorization to do business, which is based on the Treasury Department. On that basis, we can take some of these banks, which are worthless on Wall Street now, but maybe they have something in there we want to save. So, therefore, we see something that we want to save, we'll say "Cancel that crap; we're not supporting you. If you've got something in there that's worth saving, as a banking-deposit operation, we're going to help you, as long as you conform to rules."
Under those conditions, if I were President now—and I will not be President, that's obvious—but if I were in the position of advising the people who will be the Presidency, what I would propose is those two measures. First of all, Glass-Steagall. That saves the United States. Secondly, in order to save the economy of the United States, we have to go to a banking system which runs its authorization through the Treasury Department.
Now, this will be correspondent to what happened with Abraham Lincoln, in installing greenbacks. Greenbacks were a system of credit, authorized by the Federal government, through the Treasury Department. And this is what enabled the United States to defeat the British Empire, when the British Empire, through its Confederacy tools, was on the verge of destroying the United States. So, by Lincoln's action in going to the U.S. Treasury, saying these other banks were fake, and then giving greenback credits to legitimate institutions, we saved the United States.
And therefore, it's those two economic policies, two aspects of it, which are essential at this point. Without those two measures, there is no secure method for us, of saving the world economy. It can go into a chaotic crash. In other words, you have to have something to bring some order into this process. And we have to follow, therefore—since we are the United States—we have to follow our Constitution (which most of our Presidents have not done, haven't bothered to do). We follow our Constitution, and it works. It worked before, it worked with an attempt by Franklin Roosevelt, it worked with Abraham Lincoln, it worked with others earlier, the same kind of idea, especially with John Quincy Adams, who was a genius in this matter.
So, that's what we do. That is the only solution to this aspect of the crisis. We say to the world, "We are the United States. We have some swindlers from Britain, who have come in and taken over our institutions, by bribery, by corruption, by British corruption. We are now canceling that game. We're now going back to our Constitution. And our law is based on our Constitution, not the British Empire."
The problem is, what we've done, is we've degraded our citizens. For the most part, they're crawling on the ground, begging for bits and pieces. Members of the Congress—Senate and House of Representatives—are crawling on the ground, licking the dirt for Wall Street and London.
And the problem is a moral default in our system. The cowardice which took over the United States, especially since the end of Glass-Steagall, has demoralized the people of the United States, where there are 75% or so of our citizens, who hate Obama, and quite justly so. But they're so beaten down, they won't fight. They will be enraged, they'll curse, but they won't speak out. You have members of the Congress who are cringing on the floor, licking the rugs in the aisles; they won't fight, won't fight, gutless wonders. And they turn into evil fellows.
People who are defeated become crooks, because they can't make an honest living, so they steal a little bit, they cheat, they lie—like some of the bills that were passed in the Senate, in the House, recently. This was demoralization! This is disgusting! This was practically treason. But they did it. Why? Because they were scared. Some were scared of Wall Street, because their elections depend on Wall Street contributions to the candidates for election! They're not exactly stalwart citizens. Most members of the Senate and House of Representatives are not stalwart citizens. They may have, somewhere, in some part of their anatomy, something left in them which is still a patriot. But before being a patriot, they're cowards first, and patriots maybe.
The Long Reach of the British Empire
Matthew Ogden: Well, I want to follow up with what you said about the British Empire. As people know, President Obama is in Saudi Arabia today, meeting with King Abdullah, to reassure him of Obama's commitment to the U.S.-Saudi relationship. In the context of this meeting, Administration officials announced that Obama is considering a decision to allow portable missile launchers to be provided to the rebels in Syria, and that the Saudis could play a direct role in providing these weapons. These so-called MANPADs would give the rebels the capability of shooting down planes, including commercial airliners. This decision would make a dramatic escalation in U.S. support for the rebels in Syria, which had, up to this point, been limited to only small weapons and so-called humanitarian aid.
Now, at the same time that Obama is in Saudi Arabia, there's growing pressure inside the United States to force Obama to declassify the infamous 28 pages of the Congressional 9/11 Joint Inquiry Report, which reportedly detailed direct Saudi support for the 9/11 hijackers. The fact that this evidence continues to be covered up, at the highest level, means that the terror apparatus is still in place, and is continuing to run new 9/11-type irregular warfare operations, such as that, that you've asserted, we are seeing in the case of the Malaysian Airlines Flight MH370, and all of this with the complicity of those who are perpetuating this coverup and protecting this apparatus.
Now, I would like to bring a graphic onto the screen (Figure 1). Last week, and earlier this evening, you made the point that the Saudis are by no means an independent actor. The Saudi Kingdom is merely a subsidiary of the British Empire, and the Saudi operation has to be seen as merely an arm of British imperial policy. We see this connection between the BAE and Saudi Arabia, with Prince Bandar's oil-for-guns agreement that he used for decades to supply clandestine terror operations around the globe. We also see the Saudi support for the Chechens against Russia, and the Uighurs against China.
Now earlier this week, you commissioned this map to be made, which shows the true extent of the power of the British Empire. The different shadings here represent different categories of imperial control: black signifies current flashpoints for war, the dark red shows territories that are under direct British control, the lighter red is the NATO military alliance, and the lightest shading of red marks those countries whose sovereignty is severely compromised, by either London's Dope, Inc. narco-terror apparatus, including the Saudi-funded Islamic extremism; or the Wall Street/City of London speculative banking system. And as you can see, this leaves a very small handful of countries which have any sovereignty left, and those countries right now are the ones being targeted for thermonuclear blackmail, or annihilation.
So, following up on the opening statements that you made about the flawed belief that underlies axiomatically almost every question about global strategy that you get—how do we correct the flawed idea of strategy, to realize that the true enemy of mankind is this British imperial system?
Impeachment of an Unfit President
LaRouche: Well, the situation is such that, under our Constitution, the Congress, which in this matter has a final authority—that is, when the Executive Branch comes under a President who is unfit for office, then the proceeding is to put that President and those who are complicit in his actions, to bring them into a process of impeachment. This impeachment means either great penalties to a continued incumbent Presidency—that is, he can no longer operate except within limited boundaries; or he is totally bereft of his power as a President; or he is not only bereft of that power, and is thrown out of office, but is actually continuing criminal activity for which he's punished and goes to prison, probably, and probably for a very long time. In a case like Obama, when you think of the crimes that Obama has committed as President, and then add that to what Cheney did as the acting President, the Vice President—and Cheney's very good at vice—from my experience—.
So therefore, that's where we stand. So the question is, where do we find the guts among the members of Congress who are now responsible, since we know this President is no good: He's violated the Constitution, there's no reason for him to remain in office? And he certainly would be qualified to be suspended from office, or suspended in part—that is, put under management. But these things are not occurring.
So therefore, the time has come that to save the United States, and to save the peace of the world, it is essential to put this President under impeachment. And it's also essential that the impeachment be processed fully. And that's essentially the reality we're facing now. The question is, who will get the guts, in the Congress, to do what is their moral responsibility to the nation? You don't have the right to be a gutless wonder, under the U.S. Constitution. You are supposed to represent the people of the United States, in whole, or in part, otherwise. You are responsible morally to the citizens who you nominally represent. And if you can't do that job, you should be thrown out of office, and impeached for lack of doing your duty.
We have to, because the only way, considering the gutlessness to which our citizenry has been—I mean, you've got 75% at least of the U.S. citizenry that hates Obama. Why is Obama still in power? Because they have been reduced to almost sheep—they will not fight! They will hate, they will complain, but they won't do anything to help themselves, because they've been so much crushed, especially since the Cheney Administration.
And on the question of this, what did Cheney do? Cheney was the guy who put through the ban on revealing the essence of what happened on 9/11. The world as a whole knows, what happened on 9/11. Officially, the United States government says you can't talk about it. Which means this is a fraud in principle. It's a fraud in which you have two people who are guilty. The first, is Dirty Dick Cheney, because he's the one who was the engineer of this thing. You know, George Bush, Jr. was just a silly little jerk; he didn't do much of anything, good or bad. Dick Cheney—Dirty Dick Cheney—was a skunk who did most of the crimes, and who authored the crimes which were continued under Obama. And Dirty Dick Cheney is the guy you've got to really hold to account.
Now on the other side, the world as a whole knows that 9/11 was a job done by the British Empire, largely through the instrumentality of the British Empire's puppet, Saudi Arabia. We have also the fact, that since the beginning of the two Chechen wars on the borders of Russia, that the entire planet has been persecuted by a series of wars spread from the two Chechen wars, spread throughout, largely, the Muslim world. The Muslim world as a whole, which is part of the British Empire—and it's over a billion people in the Muslim world.
So therefore, if we're going to have peace on this planet, if we're going to have safe living on this planet, considering all the other things from nearby space that could be threats, and are threats, therefore, we have to take this action.
And no one can stand up, and hold their head high, who hasn't got the guts, and willingness, to do exactly what I'm saying must be done. We already know who did 9/11. We know that it was done, under the Cheney Administration's protection—not poor dopey Bush—but Cheney is responsible for 9/11! Because he was the one that covered up the authorship. And it was not much of a coverup, it was just a Federal order and called a law: You can't tell the truth about 9/11. But we know what 9/11 was.
We know that the British financed, together with the Saudis, 9/11. We know that the Saudis did 9/11. We know that it was the Ambassador to the United States of Saudi Arabia [Prince Bandar], who directed and coordinated that operation against our people. And practically everybody in the Congress who's got any sentimental feelings at all knows who did it, except they don't want to be caught saying they know who did it.
And Obama today is fully backing that Cheney operation. Therefore, he's impeachable on that account alone. Because he is the one that's blocking the truth about a murderous attack, a virtual act of war, against the people of the United States, and these two clowns, called Presidents, are guilty of betraying the United States! They are traitors, in fact, to the United States, traitors who work on behalf of a foreign power called the British Empire.
And I dare anyone to try to tell me that ain't true.
We Need People Who Will Defend the Flag
Cody Jones: This week, we've seen a number of statements that confirm exactly what you've been saying about what the policy of the Empire is, in terms of the financial system, which is a policy of bail-in, which is now replacing the hyperinflation policy of bailout which they had previously. This was revealed by the warnings from Standard & Poor's to most of the European banks, about their adoption of what's known as the "Single Resolution Mechanism," which is a unification of all of Europe under one bail-in policy, to implement the kind of things that we saw imposed on Cyprus, where the depositors and bondholders of the bank—they were the ones who were forced to take the haircut, so to speak, to bail out the big, "too-big-to-fail" banks.
Then you also had this study put out by the New York Federal Reserve, again calling for bail-in as the solution to whatever types of problems people might be recognizing, in a paper titled, "Why Bail-In? And How!"
So it's very clear that this is the policy, currently, of the Empire: Go for bail-in; save the too-big-to-fail banks at any cost. And that it's this crisis in the financial system which is then also driving the acceleration towards war.
Now, in your first answer, you made it very clear, exactly what the prescription is for this: Glass-Steagall, a move towards a Hamiltonian credit system, etc., so that's clear and it should be reasonable and understandable to any thinking person.
So I guess the question then becomes, given the clarity of what the solution should and could be: What, one, is blocking the Congress from taking the appropriate actions? And then, for the average citizen, what can they do, and where do they turn to find optimism in what otherwise seems like a very desperate and dire situation?
LaRouche: Well, you have to understand that most of our citizens have been reduced to cowardice; worse than that, they've been reduced to stupidity. If you look at the educational processes which our current generation of underage students are in, even some of our professors, I suppose, too, that they just simply are gutless wonders, who have no real understanding of anything.
Look, if you've got children out there who don't know what their sex is, who don't know what money is, who don't know anything about anything—these are the victims! Our obligation is not go out there and say, "You're at fault, Mr. Stupid Person." We know why you were stupid, because of the school you attended, of what your teachers taught you! Teachers who have increasingly more criminal qualities than they do educational.
We actually have no competent education system to speak of, except in very rare and spotty, and diminishing places in the United States.
So the point is, we have destroyed the citizens' intellectual capability to make reasonable judgments. And this has been done through the promotion of the drug trafficking, which came in big, since the beginning of the 1960s, and became a torrent in the second half of the 1960s. People don't know what sex or what species they are, practically, as a result of these processes. They have no skills. In fact, we have almost no industries left in the United States! There are none left. You say they get paid? Now we find out, with the recent laws, which are pushed through by Obama, they don't get paid either! They're just told to starve.
When a government says, "You are going to starve," they're saying, "We're going to kill you. The law demands that we kill you by slow torture of starvation; we destroy your families, we take away your houses, which Wall Street stole from you!" You send them out to get diseases and to die! And they call this "democracy"?
No. The problem is, in a time like this, you need people who will defend the flag, of which I am one: Defend the flag, defend our Constitution. Our Constitution is being violated, it's being treated with disgust, contempt. And therefore, those of us who still have the brains to understand what this is all about, have a compelling responsibility to act on behalf of our fellow citizens whose ability to think clearly about these matters has been damaged. We have to be loyal to those who came before us, and those who are bound to come after us. While we have the ability to think clearly, to know the facts, to know the evidence, we have the responsibility as citizens, to act in concert with others who agree with this, to save our nation and save our Constitution, which is being spit upon, by Dirty Dick Cheney and by Obama. But all under the command of a woman, a virtual Sataness, Queen Elizabeth II.
She really is the second; the first one [Queen Elizabeth I] was in Shakespeare's time. This one is more evil. The first one was very bad tempered and killed people; she [Elizabeth II] is very bad tempered, very bad tempered, and she kills people, en masse.
And so therefore, we have to defend the United States against the British Empire, which is our essential enemy and always has been since we were a republic; the British Empire, today, is still the enemy of the United States. That's one flag, the Union Jerk, which we don't salute!
And you have to understand things in those ways. We are the people. When our President is a crook, when many in the Congress are stinking cowards, and won't do anything to defend our people; members of Congress who lie by the votes they make, because they want Wall Street money for their election campaigns. Corruption of the worst type!
Therefore, we have to stand up and we have to fight to save our republic. And we have to do this for humanity, because if we, as the United States, go down, they go down, the rest go down. Therefore, we must defend our nation not only for our own nation's sake, but for others and for the future of humanity. Therefore, those of us who can speak, must speak, and act, insofar as we're able to act.
A New Promethean Age for Mankind
Ogden: The people of Europe, this week, got to witness a very stark contrast, between Obama on the one hand, who is on tour to promote the Empire's agenda for a direct confrontation with Eurasia and Russia; and Xi Jinping, on the other hand, who is also in Europe, but for the opposite purpose: for promoting the New Silk Road and the peaceful integration of all the countries of Eurasia.
Xi wrote an article that was published yesterday in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, where he emphasized the importance of the Chinese-German partnership, making the point that these two countries embody the best of their respective civilizations and geographically represent the two crucial nodes between which a real Eurasian integration could take place.
He said, "The numerous ancient scholars and philosophers, profound philosophical thinking, rich and colorful literature and art that our two countries have been proud to have are an inexhaustible source of wisdom for our two countries to learn from, draw upon and share in our exchanges and cooperation.
"The China-Germany cooperation is also a process in which our two economic miracle creators work hand in hand and make progress together.... [O]ur two economies are highly complementary and promise a vast space for cooperation." And then he said, "Closer cooperation between China, a country that is committed to the path of peaceful development, and Germany would go a long way toward forming a multi-polar world," and what he called a world of "peace, stability, and prosperity."
Now, I think this theme of a partnership between China and Germany is one that your wife, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, would agree with wholeheartedly [see International, this issue]. In fact, many of the points that President Xi made reflect some of the themes that Helga emphasized during her recent trip to China, in which she had numerous very high-level meetings and was interviewed by a large number of leading Chinese press. For example, in an interview published in the Beijing Review, called "The Silk Road to Prosperity."
Zepp-LaRouche said, "There is a general recognition in the world that the New Silk Road is only the beginning of a much larger integration of the world economy. We are very happy about this initiative, because it will be the beginning of a complete new epoch of civilization.... We need to change the paradigm quickly and abandon the idea of solving problems through war, and stop thinking in terms of geopolitics. We must focus on the common aims of mankind or we all may not exist."
Xi echoed this vision of what he called "a new epoch for mankind," in a speech that he gave yesterday in Paris to UNESCO. And I think he described it in a really beautiful way, both what you've been stressing, Lyn, about the end of war, but also the future of a community of respectively sovereign but mutually cooperating nation-states. He said, "Throughout the centuries, people have yearned for lasting peace, but war has haunted mankind at every step of his progress. As we speak, many children on this planet are subjected to the horror of armed conflicts. We must do our utmost to keep war as far away as possible from mankind, so that children around the world can grow up happily under the sunshine of peace....
"As long as the idea of peace can strike deep roots and the sail of peace can be hoisted in the hearts and minds of people all over the world, a strong defense will be built to prevent and stop war....
"Civilizations have become richer and more colorful with exchanges and mutual learning. Such exchanges and mutual learning form an important drive for human progress and global peace and development.... Every civilization is unique.... All are crystallizations of mankind's hard work and wisdom.... We need to encourage different civilizations to respect one another and live together in harmony, while promoting exchanges and mutual learning as a bridge of friendship among peoples, a driving force behind human progress, and a strong bond for world peace."
So, my question for you is, as we face the imminent collapse of the British trans-Atlantic financial system, how do you see the possibility of replacing that with this lasting peace based on a shared human culture of a post-Zeusian, post-empire world? How do you envision a new, Promethean age for mankind?
They Destroy a People by Making Them Stupid
LaRouche: Ah! Precisely. Well, the first thing you have to do is, all these things which are said in these remarks already, as part of the question, they are, in a sense, self-evident. They're self-evident to people of good will, essentially. But, they do not solve the problem.
The problem is in the beginning of the year 1900, in Paris, a meeting on the subject, of, really accounting was what it was, but in terms of this sense of things, in terms of arithmetic, what happened is, in 1900, the system of education which had been increasingly taken over, since 1900 in Paris, where this crazy idea was put into place, is the problem. Because if you want to destroy a people, you can do that by simple oppression. The easier way is to make them stupid. And you have the problem, we have made our own citizens in the United States, since the Presidency of our last decent, real President, since that time, we have been increasingly made stupid, in science and everything else.
This piece of stupidity in 1900 in Paris was followed up by Bertrand Russell, and Bertrand Russell destroyed the ability of the human mind to think, as human! Now, we still had a few people who were qualified as scientists, but their qualifications became relatively diminished. There are very few capable scientists, in either Europe or the United States today, who are actually capable of performing a science-driver program. Why?
Because they are absolutely impotent, they're intellectually impotent! The green policy, the fact that the green policy could exist, means that people have gone back to becoming animals! They're no longer human. A green policy is a denial of the difference of human beings, from animals. The green people are intrinsically a form of animals, official animals, they are not truly human in their thinking.
Now, if you have the green policy, there's no hope for humanity anyway. That's the British policy. And this was all done under British influence. In the 1890s, before the year 1900 in Paris, you had two of the greatest scientists in all history, who were leading science. Two of the greatest—Max Planck and Albert Einstein. And what there was, was a direct reversal, which was global—it has been global ever since—a decline in the intellectual capability of the members of the human species. Now, you still have people who were scientists, who in their most private, and their most secret thinking, will still recall things that were science. Some of them still have scientific capabilities.
But look what Obama did to it: Obama destroyed science! Cheney ruined science! Obama destroyed it. Under Obama, people have lost the essential difference of creativity which exists for the human individual; they don't have it any more! Or they're so scared, they don't use it any more. And this is where the problem really lies.
So therefore, if we're going to solve these problems, which our Chinese friend does, which Helga's been working on, on the Silk Road, for decades! She's actually a hero in China on the basis of her pioneering on the Silk Road project. So the problem here is, there are no simple treaty agreements; there has to be a substantive agreement. The substantive agreement means that science must come back to become science.
Now, for example: Mathematics is not science. Mathematics is not scientific, it has no scientific content as such. Numbers have no content for human beings. Human beings are a noetic species, a creative species. No animal is! I am a human being, not a green animal! The greenies are essentially evil, because they turn themselves, as human bodies and human minds, they turn themselves into mere animals. They no longer have judgment, they no longer have competent opinions. They should all be in a mental asylum, until they're cured of these diseases; they shouldn't be running anything. They shouldn't be voting. They shouldn't be making policies. They're not mentally responsible! They're not capable of mental responsibility.
The human species is a creative species: It's by the will of the human individual, not the brain, but through the mind, and the mind is essentially a social product of the evolution of man from ape, or something like an ape.
So the difference is, do you have this quality which distinguishes man from the ape? Otherwise, you shouldn't vote. We don't let two-year-old children vote, do we? We don't let five-year-olds, do we? Not ten-year-olds? That may happen to us.
The ability to do any good—and the principle is, as our friends in the Massachusetts Bay Colony knew, to do good! That's what it's all about.
So therefore, it's not sufficient to have these mottos, and to say we're going to have peace and good will and equity and so forth. It's not enough.
For example, as we've been discussing in the Basement [Science Team], repeatedly, recently, the Sun has gone into a protracted quiet period. Henceforth, from now until, we don't know how many decades to come, the entire Western part of the United States, from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean, is going to cease to be a food-growing area. Heretofore, the major source of food in the United States for the people of the United States, has been in that territory, of food-growing and related things. We no longer have that capability!
So therefore, the green people are the enemies of humanity, they're the enemies of the people of the United States in particular: Fracking is a crime against humanity, which was imposed through the aid of Cheney, was imposed on the United States. So we've lost our food production; we've turned food into gasoline, into fuel, not food; mass murder against our people is going on under the Cheney legacy and continued by Obama.
And we call ourselves competent, to vote in the Congress on law?! These wretches, who don't have the brains to know which door to go out of? Because they're cowards!
And you go back to 1900 in Paris, the Hilbert doctrine: Eliminate science and replace it with mathematics. And everything in all modern science says that mathematics is not science! Numbers are not science.
Then we have music which is not music any more. Junk! We have theater which is not theater; it's junk! It's like a whorehouse performance. There is no longer a culture of the United States! There's fragments of a culture, left over from what has been in the past.
And therefore, if we want to solve these problems, we have to understand that the human species has a very specific quality which no other species has: It's called a noetic quality, the ability of mankind to create new states in the universe, by the will of the human mind. If you violate that and reject that, mankind is going to be extinct, and there's no sign of anything to replace mankind that we know about in the universe so far.
So the idea of merely saying, we're going to promise these good things, and be nice to each other, is not going to solve anything. It's simply: You're going to have a slow death, with mutual admiration, but it's still slow death.
What we need to do is fulfill mankind. Mankind has the power of creativity. The individual human being has a natural ability to create new states in the universe, where such states never existed before! And it's only through that power of creativity, of the human mind, that the human mind becomes human. Otherwise, you're just monkeys, and monkeys are not good at running political systems: You should see the rhesus monkeys in the zoo. They are not things you want around.
So therefore, the issue is: Are we going to be able to sustain the inherent mission of the human species? And the human species is unique in the power to make discoveries, essentially in the form of chemistry: We go to increasingly higher energy-flux density, per capita, and per unit of action. That is the only thing that enables the human species to exist. Therefore, if you're going to do something for the world, you'd better get on your high horse, on thermonuclear fusion, and more advanced expressions of thermonuclear fusion which involve the use of lunar helium-3, to enrich this thing. We can do this on Earth! By bringing the helium-3 from the Moon, down to Earth, and incorporating it into a thermonuclear fusion program. That's the only way we're ever going to meet that challenge.
Now, there are people in China, for example, who do know this. They're specializing in this, they've made efforts in explorations on the Moon, in one of their journeys up there, which pertain to exactly this. So the future of mankind depends upon the development of a scientific technology, which is thermonuclear fusion, in various advanced forms. Without that, during the period of the quiet time of the Sun, in which the world is going to get drier and drier and drier, especially our United States, we have to have thermonuclear fusion.
China is on the track of saying, we're going to do that. Russia is oriented in the same direction. India's oriented in the same direction. So the question is, are we going to use the weapons of progress, of creative progress, on behalf of a world which no longer has war in it? You may have police actions to keep people from going totally in a cruel way, but we don't want war, we don't need war!
War, in general, is something which must be eliminated from this planet, because any major war, planetwide, is a thermonuclear war. And a thermonuclear war today, is an extinction of humanity war.
So therefore, we must have peace among nations, based on the cultural characteristics of a nation. Because the people can only function efficiently, if they have a language, and knowledge that goes with it, which enables them to be productive. Therefore, we must not disturb that, we must enhance that. We must increase their mutual capabilities. Then, what the Chinese President was saying, yes, that can be there, but this must be included. We can't take a cheap shot and ignore this.
The fundamental issue of mankind is that mankind is not an animal: Mankind is a noetic species, which is capable of voluntarily increasing his creative powers. And which no longer relies on mathematics. Mathematics is the sign of death of the human species; it has certain uses, but it has no scientific use. Other things have scientific use.
Mathematics Kills Human Creativity
Jones: Okay, for the final question: You've already addressed much of what will come up in this, but I think maybe there's another side, that you could even elaborate further.
There's a very disturbing report that came out this week, about what's happening in the New York City schools, where they've experienced ten suicides in just the last seven weeks. And I think this really expresses that the youth now have a "no future" orientation. And in fact, this "no future" identity, has been accelerating since the assassination of John Kennedy. And it's been accelerating, really, under a doctrine imposed by the likes of Bertrand Russell, which is the idea to deny the existence of the human mind, and to try to reduce the human being down to the level of just a logical machine, a mathematical machine.
Now, we've discussed that Gödel intervened into this [see Science, this issue], to give a negative proof against what Russell was attempting to demonstrate, to show that, in fact, there are inherent contradictions in this idea of trying to demonstrate that the mind is nothing more than a logical system. But it was only a negative proof.
What is required now, is a positive affirmation of exactly what the nature of the human mind is. And we've got to get young people to again come to know and realize what that positive identity is. It's one thing to tell someone you're not a monkey, but then, the question is, well, if I'm not a monkey, what am I? So in that context, what role must culture play in this, and what do you prescribe as the kind of pathway, which we should be initiating, in order to revive and awaken this real human potential?
LaRouche: Okay. We've got a very clear case—it's not all inclusive, but it's significant, in the sense that it does demonstrate the point: Now, what happened was, in 1900, exactly that year, with what actually was taken over by Bertrand Russell, the attempt to find a mathematical solution, for this problem, was a fallacy. But what was done in defense against this thing was merely negative.
What I've insisted upon, and what I still insist upon is that we have to have a positive understanding, of what human creativity is. The 1890s: Now, this was a very crucial decade. First of all, it followed the expulsion of Bismarck from the Chancellery, and Bismarck had been the only Chancellor, the means in Europe, who prevented general warfare throughout Europe at that time. That is, he managed to plan, with his diplomatic work, to prevent the British Empire from starting a global war.
So when they removed Bismarck, and they had a new appointee by the British Empire to replace him, a new representative government, then the whole thing went into a period of warfare, from that moment, beginning with the assassination of the President of France [Sadi Carnot]; and some other things that happened, and a whole series of wars leading directly into 1914. So actually, World War I began with the ouster of Bismarck from the Chancellery; that's history. We've been in such a process of warfare, ever since that time that Bismarck was kicked out of the Chancellery. There have been "resting periods," so-called, but they were resting periods to start a new war.
World War I and World War II were part of the same thing, and we're now on the verge of World War III, which is extinction warfare.
So therefore, you have to say, "What's wrong?" The very idea that you can use a mathematical system to define a higher technology is a fraud. All successful growth in technology and applied technology is based on human activity, not mathematics. Now, they will quantify the parts they put together, but the action which causes the improvement is not mathematical. You can measure mathematics, in terms of quantities that you're bringing together to use to create an effect. But the solution does not lie there, it lies in chemistry per se.
Now, foremost: What is creativity? What species of life has a voluntary, direct capability for creating a higher state of existence of the human species? There's only one species that can do that voluntarily: the human mind's species. Mathematics will never enable you to discover anything, except a crack in the floor. So that's what the issue is.
Now, let's take a case: I just recently started the first of several reports on the principle of creativity and how physical science is defined. And what I'm saying there is absolutely correct. Because the model case for this, which I used, which is the most relevant one, is Brunelleschi; he was the man who eliminated lines—straight lines don't exist for Brunelleschi. And he was one of the greatest architects that ever existed. He created a chapel [the Pazzi Chapel]: If you go into the chapel, as I had done with my wife on a number of occasions, the whole chapel resonates, musically, to your presence. It's just a brick structure!
So, he was the one who broke apart all conceptions of straight lines, and similar kinds of things, derivatives of straight lines, numerical structures. He was the foundation of all modern science.
Then Cusa came along, Nicholas of Cusa, the greatest intellect of the entire period of the Renaissance, and he went to the other thing, the maximum principle. Now, the maximum principle was solved by Kepler, because Kepler discovered the Solar System: Nobody else ever discovered the Solar System, except Johannes Kepler—no one!
So you had these three propositions: Brunelleschi—the absolute minimum. Everything has to be based on the absolute minimum. Then you had to go the maximum, the largest, from the very large [Cusa]. And then you had Kepler, and Kepler created all competent modern science with that discovery, by completing that.
We had the same thing happen after Gauss. Gauss never used mathematics per se, for any of his theoretical discoveries. He would tell them, "Well, here's what I did." He wouldn't tell them how he did it, he would just describe how it was done. And he had a student, Bernhard Riemann, one of the greatest scientific geniuses of the entire 19th Century. And Riemann opened the case for the discoveries by Max Planck. Max Planck discovered the infinitesimal, the principle of science in the infinitesimal, in a new form; and then, Einstein took, again, the same base, the maximum. That was their science. And that's how this thing works.
So you have to get out of this idea of mathematics. Because if you say science is mathematics, you're a nut! Because science has never existed, that is, as a deliberate process, except in this way, except through the human mind: No other creature than the human mind has ever made a discovery of principle that was valid.
The problem is, that in the schools today, and increasingly since the influence of the 1900 period, there has been an accelerating degeneration of the mental life of people in respect to science. In putting things together, yes, great things have been done. Some people with great genius have done these things, but they don't get much credit for having done it. They're the ones who made the discovery—they don't get much of the credit. There are not many Einsteins around, but it's the Einsteins, and that type, and Plancks, Riemanns, and people like that, who create human creativity on the modern scale today. Without them, we don't get creativity, we get Hell.
So the important thing is, never treat human beings as animals. Human beings are creative, intrinsically creative, and they don't use numbers to make discoveries. They will count things, but they're just objects. The process of creativity doesn't just count things.
And therefore, what we need is, we need to return to an actual physical scientific program, which starts with the child, at the age of three, four, and five, starts down that path of creativity, in which adults used to train their children. If they were wise, they would teach the children how to play games! And the child's learning how to play games would give the child a sense of an ordering, which was not just mathematical. And if we went further and further, then we could go higher on the scale.
But the idea that mathematics, and statistics—accountants! Accountants are more of a curse! Accountants really didn't exist! We didn't need them then! They were just an embarrassment, a corporate embarrassment. What we need is a scientific basis for progress, for the increase of the productive powers of labor, just like always, higher machines, more productive machines, new technologies on a higher level; the ability of mankind to have an increased standard of living, by virtue of having higher levels of technological progress. That's what we must be. That's being human.
Unfortunately, what's going on in schools today, like these suicides in New York City—why is a student committing suicide? Why are these students committing suicide? Because life is meaningless to them. And no child likes to be held back in grades, and if they're going back to school, after school, in the horror situation of the New York City school system—and it's not the teachers as such. There have been good teachers—they're being thrown out as rapidly as possible now.
But the educational process of inspiring students to be able to make discoveries, with their own minds, and teachers who—of course, my experience in schools was terrible! Because they kept telling you, "You have to listen to your teachers." Now, I found soon in life that I was much smarter than my teachers, so I didn't believe in them, and I was lucky in that way. I didn't believe in the teachers. I believed that I had to discover myself, with my own mind, what the principle was.
And so, I hated Euclidean geometry, which is a piece of crap, a piece of nonsense! People are teaching people still today, Euclidean geometry! It has no reality in the real world! Most of the things that you're taught by mathematical processes are crap! They don't have any reality to creativity.
But you're taught that your qualification of being advanced in the school system, of promotion in life after graduating from school, of going to higher levels of employment, and payment—all of these things are rituals which have nothing to do, with creativity, and in fact, become rituals which tend to destroy creativity! Because the slug, the stupid slug, who goes by a rulebook, has a better chance of getting the appointment, than the guy who actually is creative.