Subscribe to EIR Online

This article appears in the April 27, 2018 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

December 9, 2013


Science & the Solar System

[Print version of this article]

The subject which I present here, pertains from the start, specifically, to a particular form of abuse against students, one which many educational institutions have continued to practice, throughout the course of my experience, from that of being a student, to, later, as a professional. The commonplace error which I have experienced on both accounts, over the course of that part of my actual lifetime experiences, has been my view of a consideration of the unfortunate effects, which I have often witnessed, not only upon witnessing the commonplace errors, but as the just cause for my response to the usually bad effects of the inherent failures of what passes, in almost any generation, as a standard education.

That error, in both the earlier and later roles of the educational process within our United States which I had experienced, for me, had been based on a false presumption as to the definition of “truth,” as I have experienced that issue in that education which I had confronted, first, as a student, and, later, as a professional in a certain branch of science. In both domains, the quality of performance which I had experienced in both states of affairs, has been, usually, merely conditional at its best, that for reason of a heretofore presently “standardized,” but erroneous popular presumption respecting the appropriate intention of the educational process. The quality of performance, as I had witnessed in either sets of situations, has been marginal at best, and, on balance, has been declining at an accelerating rate, since the murdered post-John F. Kennedy’s 1960s.


The root and outcome of the folly of most practiced education on that account, is to have been properly attributed, chiefly, to the effect of limiting the definition of “truth” to the effects of certain prevalent practices of what has been considered as a customary education, but also the result of a commonly misguided standard for the practice of an “education” rooted in what are actually pathetic presumptions respecting the nature of the human mind. Unfortunately, that standard has thus been, typically, the fallacious presumption which has been, either explicitly, or, otherwise implicitly, that the students are to be graded, more or less, according to the measure of their conformity with prescribed facts of a standard of merely (academically) alleged truth, which is thus a discouraging, even a punishing experience, in one way or another; thus, a legacy of students who actually fail in the subsequent course of life, for reason of their accepting such a prescribed, ostensibly a-priori instruction.

A typical proof of such a currently, increasingly frequent, academically abusive use of the educational system, is to be shown by what the student should have received, instead, which should have been required for the student, for students whose future training must be in the domain of physical science and its branches, but who, instead, had been, typically, inclined to submit to such hoaxes as the folly named Euclidean Geometry, or worse.

The same evil has been widely responsible for the quality of evil which defines the global outreach of the world’s oligarchical system, a practice which has been, generally, efficiently typified by the succession of those imperial Anglo-Dutch oligarchies’ reductionists’ styles. Those and their likeness now, who are still presently operating today under the guidance of such intentions, are still under the same general category of such nakedly imperialistic reductionists as Adam Smith and Jeremy Bentham, no more than two centuries or so later. I am referring to a particular category to be identified as the heritage of those Anglo-Dutch, oligarchical “reductionists” who are best recognized in the history of notoriety, for their having been traced in European history to much earlier origins in such circumstances as the genocide applied against the people of Troy. That is to be recognized as what had been also familiar to that region’s history since such as ancient Rome, through to the presently Anglo-Dutch imperial tyranny which is currently infesting the financial practice of our own United States.

The folly of most modern education, writes LaRouche, is “a commonly misguided standard for the practice of an ‘education’ rooted in what are actually pathetic presumptions respecting the nature of the human mind.” Shown: Goya, Capricho 37, “Might not the pupil know more?” (1797-98).

That history has been an association with a currently avowed commitment to an intended reduction of the current human population, a reduction as from about seven billions persons on this planet recently, to no more than a single billion (as according to the Queen of England) in our immediate future. Its characteristic has been a mode of genocide which, I emphasize again, as having been, typically, perpetrated, earlier, against the population of the ancient city of Troy. It is a tradition which is continued to the present date, still continued in the guise of the particular aspect of the U.S.A.’s “Anglo-Dutch” imperial interest, as it may be known to much of the world, as the pollution which is “Wall Street.”

The evil which that aforesaid moment of history represents, still to the present date, has often been manifest to the relevant observer, essentially, as the expression of an account of history which is identified as of the “oligarchical principle,” a practice of monetarists, or by like parasites, which is, chiefly, widely commonplace as imposed among much of the notable branches of the education of the human species, to the present date. It is a practice of parasitism which has been continued, as under such names as “Wall Street” and London; but is guided, under various titles, throughout much of the history of this planet, still to the present moments.

This following set of the facts reported here, as also others which are often products of the same intention, is what we are obliged to define, once more, as an approach to the presently most crucial issues of actually physical principle, which are posed, for example, by what now includes the threats from such as both asteroids and comets. However, on this occasion, rather than focusing on those particular objects as such, I shall now, here below, stress a view of such subject-matters as those, considered from the essential vantage-point of a critical view of the functions of the human mind as such, as mind is distinct, in its true meaning, from mere sense-perception.

I. Soul & Body: The Enigma

The principles of science which I reference hereinafter, will have been relatively long and large in their making, often even long before they had been represented in print.

At their root, the basis of the principles in which my own discoveries are currently relevant, has earned my displeasure with any chosen literal basis in merely mathematics per se. My essential commitment, as it is still today, has been active contempt for the commonplace practice of the application of reductionist ideologies to living social processes; this includes the category of human behavior in its biological expression as essentially a subject of the human mind (rather than the reductionists’ notion of merely the brain), and, hence, also of what is truly Classical drama in all its relevant aspects of scientific and Classical-artistic expressions.

It was against that background, that I had begun a certain special series of written drafts and published works during the middle to late 1990s; this had led, in turn, but much down the line, to several drafts and published pieces leading into the piece titled as my June 10, 2013 Nicholas of Cusa, Kepler & Shakespeare.[fn_1] It has been against that background that most of my recent discoveries on this account have come forward, subsequently, through to the present time.

My argument here reflects my continued treatments of that same matter of principle.

Despite the achievements of the Renaissance and later scientific advances, such as those in astronomy, “the evidence is, that the obscene cult of sense-certainty, has largely still persisted.” Shown: Johannes Vermeer, “The Astronomer” (ca. 1668).

The Present State of These Affairs

The commonplace presumptions, those which I will have rejected here, below, as having been functionally silly, or worse, are, in one sense, also commonplace practices, often also academic standards, but are, also, a collection of a numerous, essentially incompetent, shallow set of presumptions which have been customarily adopted as established authorities. These are presumptions which continue, more or less, to be spread as among popular and even scientific and related institutions presently, that often done with a great deal of feigned, and sometimes very pompous solemnity.

Such misguided presumptions as those, typify the particular cult-doctrine which demands popular faith in even mere sense-perception as such, which it is demanded must be accepted as even a virtually physical standard of academic fustian, and, also, actually, that of an attempted replacement for an entirely different metric: an honestly, practically principled test of truthful regard for personal integrity.[fn_2] As an example for such popular misbehavior, to which I have already referred here, we should consider the inclusion of such failures by those who insisted, on a similar basis for the customary follies of “popular opinion:” even the medieval opinion that the world is, even still today, not very far from an essentially “Flat Earth” idea of space and society, as that runs according to a large amount of present presumptions concerning society.

After we had considered the work of truly modern scientific geniuses, such as the relevant, most notable, earlier modern geniuses Filippo Brunelleschi and Nicholas of Cusa in the Renaissance, and the work of Cusa’s scientific heir, Johannes Kepler; we mean such as those of the latter pair, Cusa and Kepler, who had laid the foundations of those physical principles of astronomy, on which the development of an actually modern physical science had depended: then, the particular nonsense popular in the earlier Medieval interval, had been since, hopefully, largely discarded among serious thinkers to the present date.

Nonetheless, despite the earlier achievements and later frustrations of the Renaissance, the evidence is, that the obscene cult of sense-certainty, has largely still persisted. Sense-certainty is, indeed, still an ugly cult, as I shall emphasize the notable facts in the following pages. We must show here, why this has been so into present times. Consider the following.

Back to ‘Genesis’?

In fact, it is to be argued here, that, in retrospect, the most important principle presently known to mankind, should be now recognized as being the truly universal principle of the same notion of Creation attributed to the most remarkably exceptional precision of the exhaustively serious first chapter of the book of Genesis. Both the Solar system and the Galaxy, are among the crucial items of what should be considered as related evidence: those notions bearing on the spoor and the concept of creation, are that on which the notions of those entities and their processes depend for their justified respect by the human observer. The particular fact is, that the first Chapter of Genesis is as close to a principle of truth, such as the notion of the existence of a provable notion of “mortal man,” as we might require for our source of a broad notion of certainty at this moment of our considerations here, as I shall show that below.

However, there are, otherwise, what might seem, mistakenly, to some persons to be plausible exceptions to my foregoing statements. Their opinion has been contrary to the evidence of the evolution of, implicitly, all other species, excepting, particularly, the uniqueness of the principles expressed by the voluntary factor in the evolution of the human species, a species which has been an exception to the cases met among all alternative, presently known living species.

Next to the most important feature in this portrait which I have suggested here, there is the manifest evidence of the qualitatively superior quality of the “creative power” (i.e., the actualized noëtic powers of the developed member of the human species). However, it is most important (for the sake of completeness), that only “the quality of the mind-process of the human species,” affords the members of our species the uniquely willful ability to create the effectively higher, self-evolutionary abilities unique to the potentials of the human mind. These are powers associated uniquely with our species, thus reflecting certain unique powers not shared by any other known form of animal life: those powers of the human mind which are not shared by any other kind of living species presently known, by us, to exist.

However, most among the members of the human species, as known from what have been estimated as “earliest” relevant times, are known to the present stocks of persons associated with contemporary historical times; but, even those have developed the manifest qualifications of the human species in respect to what should be regarded as that species’ most significant respects. Sample achievements of relatively higher energy-flux densities, will probably never reach fully the highest levels ultimately accessible to mankind.

In the meanwhile, most humans have been kept in an inferior, more-or-less nearer-to-bestial state of mind than what I am willing to treat as acceptable as a standard for humanity presently; that short-fall has been indicated to have been the effect of a social process of suppression of the role of human creativity, a failure which is to be attributed, essentially, to the long-term domination of the human species by the category of what is to be identified, historically, as the oligarchical system; that has been, and remains, a system signifying those followers of the frankly satanic Zeus (i.e., “the prototype of the oligarchical system”): I mean Zeus-followers who have been the adversaries of the cause of “mankind the fire-bringer,” which latter is another categorical name for Prometheus.

Prometheus committed the sin of loving mankind, giving him fire (science), from which man would learn many arts, and hope (for the future), for which he was to be tortured by Zeus for eternity, as depicted in this ca. 555 B.C. painting on a Laconian kylix (drinking cup).

Since Very Ancient Greece

The immediately preceding references to ancient Greek legends, are, in fact, in no way merely pointing to what were merely legends.

The identification of the Ancient Greeks’ legendary Zeus-versus-Prometheus conflict, like their named echoes, and those of their mutual enemies, such as the Aristotle (and Euclid) who has been the opponent of Plato, are not so much mythical figures, as “meta-historically” actual ones. In particular, the difference between the beast and the human personality, is identified by, and embodied in the role of the human being, whenever man is otherwise to be known in generic history as “The Fire Bringer,” as opposed to the cases of the beast who does not rely upon a mankind-controlled development willingly.[fn_3] Those two contrasted types, bestial versus truly human, may merely appear to represent parallel cases, as with an implied heredity in respect to a relatively unique affinity to either Cain (Zeus), or Abel (Prometheus), respectively. When the latter pair of figures from presumed mythological origins, are examined for the distinctions of the violent beast from the uniquely fire-using human, the consequence of those compared usages is the distinction of the differences of the characteristics of mankind from the (oligarchically) systemically cruel beast.

The comparisons which I have just introduced here, do indeed fit the evil of the oligarchical system, as opposed to the human nobility of man-as-the-fire-bringer. The systemic features of the counterposed types, are systemically defined as respectively adversaries. The image of the mass-murders of the Christians in the Roman arenas (for example), is consistent with the principled characteristics of the thus-counterposed pro-Satanic types.[fn_4]

Mankind as a Spiritual Entity Per Se

Now, juxtapose that just-stated view which I had portrayed above, with the thesis which I have presented in a series of developments of this theme in my already indicated work, published as Nicholas of Cusa, Kepler & Shakespeare of June 10, 2013, and in a subsequent series of amplified treatments since, the latter a case presenting the folly of belief in the type of the standpoint of what is essentially merely sense-perception per se in type.

This brings us to the subject of “the immortals,” the human species at its relatively present best.

As I shall explain the following choice, in due course here: the characteristic feature of the human species, is shown to us in two most crucial pieces of the evidence of revolutionary changes which a capable sort of actually human mind, when free, imposes upon both the human body and its functions. The body wears out; but, the mind, when it actually functions, continues to struggle to perform its adopted mission, even when the mind has lost the means to perpetuate what it would have still possessed, had it not been caught up, so to speak, by an exhaustion of its mental strength and/or will. Thus, often, what the human intention had perpetuated as a continuation of that intention, that even a generation, several generations, or more after the death of the author. The discovery of physical principles, is typical of the ability of the presently deceased to have extended its role as an actively creative force, even in those exceptional cases, when the relevant author of that effort had been deceased for several or more generations. Nicholas of Cusa is an example of this immortal quality of achievement attained beyond the death of the subject person. The dead may thus live on, in effect, if not as living, but as if as angels.

So, were Max Planck and Albert Einstein, like Bernhard Riemann before them, each in their time.

Thus, as I have emphasized immediately above, the human individual’s role in society’s life may be extended, in effect, even generations beyond the time of the person’s actual demise, in such a manner. Indeed, it should be the commitment of any person qualified to seek that outcome: to create effects needed to be bequeathed on behalf of all mankind, even long beyond the actual death of the person’s indivisible biological personality. The Christian Apostle Paul, emphasized that principle, as in the text of his inspiring Chapter 13 of I Corinthians.

The immediately preceding part of this present text, is to be treated as a prescribed validation of the intention which I had so just presented above. Yet, our Solar system does not stand still, nor do the effects of the passing, successive generations permit an actually fixed order of things within our Solar system: including such things which we might demand on behalf of a pre-fixed order of the planet, or a Solar system which we inhabit! The question to be asked, properly restated and answered again, is: does the planet we inhabit, make us, or, should our personal existence extend the purposed mission of planet Earth, or, again, should mankind’s continued existence, as being mankind, shape the re-creation of the implied mission of the part of the universe which we inhabit?

Does the creative mission define its own cause? Or, is it not the developments of the Galaxy and Solar system, respectively, which shape the proper mission of the application of mankind’s voluntary powers, to craft both the development and the prescribed mission of that development, even to within the extent of interplanetary developments among the planetary regions? Does Earth, or even the Solar system, predetermine its own destiny; or, does a higher order of an assigned destiny, define the future’s choice of the shaping of the development of Earth, and also of the Solar system which we inhabit?

The Proper Answer

Consider the crucial hypothetical question:

We humans have repeatedly experienced the challenge of increasing the mean value of the energy-flux density of life lived on our planet Earth. This challenge has been subjected to two typical kinds of responses. Should we not choose to select the opinion, either that the changes in technology are caused by existing pre-disposition, or, that there is what appears to be a natural predisposition located within the already applied means for what we may define as “progress”—that in the specific sense of increased “energy-flux density” typical of the development of the human being?

In different forms of statement on this subject, the effect which we must associate with “increase of energy-flux density.” might suggest to some, that the source of the required negentropy must have been provided by the Sun. However, the processes which we are considering here, are systemically anti-entropic. Also, to be considered, is the fact that the Solar system is regulated in large degree, by the regulatory role of the Solar system within its course in the galaxy.

More significant, is the fact that it is the human factor which mediates the role and limitations upon the manifest limits on entropy on planet Earth. More emphatically, the “steering” of the mediating factor considered, is an effect, chiefly regulated by the effects of decisions crafted by, and according to the development of the human minds, as the present prospect of a thermonuclear-fusion driver which is currently needed in the location of the Pacific region, that in which we are concerned presently, has predetermined the locations of the development of a thermo-nuclear-fusion driver-system which is to be built up.

Who, therefore, determines what, how, and why?

However, that does not complete my argument here.

The added sources of “energy” considered in that case, have been organized by human minds. Without the action of those human minds, there would be no negentropic, nor thermonuclear-fusion action to be reported, or experienced.

The consequence of that view applied to the subject-matter, is that the role of the human mind as such, is the principal, determining consideration. That leads us directly to consideration of the argument I had made for the Solar system’s role more generally. The crux of the matter brings two considerations into focus. First, it is required that the Solar system, for example, be “a willfully intelligent system,” in effect, rather than of a reductionist mode; mankind can supply that ingredient. It follows, that the principle of mind per se is a co-determining consideration which is being expressed in some mode.

The resulting consideration is, therefore, that the oligarchical system must be estimated, intrinsically, as something very close to Satanic, as was the Roman Empire, and like institutions which exhibit such negatives characteristically, and that most prominently, as London and Wall Street had made clear beyond any reasonable doubt.

II. Sense Deception

The unique distinction of the function of the human mind from all other known species, with their respective implications, is of such a nature, that we must neither encourage, nor deny the notion that there is a systemic distinction between the characteristically noëtic functions specific to the human being; even in respect to the qualities of the highest ranking creature of what has existed as merely animal life as such. The essential distinction of the actually human mind, from those of the beasts, is to be located by attention to the fact, that the mind of the human individual, and his, or her society, alike, share a faculty by means of which they are enabled to act cognitively to the combined effect, that the human mind’s innate potential ability is, to generate attempted actions based on the actual fore-knowing of a future, that which is expressed as a higher state of existence which is fairly, called “foreknowledge.”[fn_5]

It is fair to say, if only off-handedly, that this uniquely human quality of actual existence serves as a means through which that human mind had been enabled to employ, and, to generate, and to impose upon itself, a qualitatively higher, ontological state of existing functions than had already existed in the “animal kingdom” otherwise.

However, this aspect of the matter, which is rightly named as foreknowledge, continues to suffer serious impediments, impediments which do not come to the human individual, as it were said, “with spontaneity,” but, which arise chiefly, out from what seems to be a new-born quality of spirit which is to be recognized as unique to the human being. This systemic distinction of the human being is associated with some long-standing effects which must contend against the bestialization inherent in the oligarchical system’s effective relative bestialization of not only the oligarchy itself, but which tends to be a numbing influence on the human species generally, a condition which requires the liberation of what had been the intended human victims of their own tendencies for submission to the influence of bestial follies otherwise specific to the oligarchical tendency.

That much now said, now turn our attention to the crux of what should be fairly considered, at this late date, as “my life’s work.”

Now, Sense and Substance!

The most of those systemic errors of what has been known as associated with devotion to sense-perception per se, is the presumption, that because sense perception is what it pretends to be, as “sense perception:” a relatively great many human beings have fallen, as if prone to the popularized presumption, that sense-perception is simply equal to reality. Certainly, sense-perception does identify what seems to be all possible evidence which might be otherwise considered as “sense-certainty.” Therefore, for a moment, it might be presumed, that, for this reason, the only apparent evidence contrary to human bestialization, falls under the heading of the concept of “the troubled human soul.”

For as long as ordinary citizens might rely on the mental disorder to be known as sense-certainty, a certain refinement of the development of the individual’s mind is needed to reveal, and perhaps cure the terrible mistakes which continue to be made as long as sense-perception is believed to be an underlying primary evidence respecting actually human behavior. The presumptions respecting sense-perception on that account, thus appear as essentially wrong opinions whose correction depends upon a sufficiently refined sense of those subject-matters of physical science which few citizens had taken the time and patience to consider critically.

There is some interesting evidence which should have warned almost anyone to consider some very serious questions leading toward increasing doubt in the belief that sense-perception “almost means” what is foolish mistakenly advertised as “sense certainty.” The evidence of that foolishness of many human individuals, on that fact, is very, very strong, that on the best possible, but often overlooked, experimental grounds of evidence.

Classical works of art are those rooted in “‘the noëtic functions’ of the human mind.” Shown: Thomas Eakins, “The Cello Player” (1896).

III. The Folly of Sense-Perception

This present chapter is supplied to serve for purposes of breaking the ground on which to settle some needed ground-breaking, which must be broken.

We must now shift our focus here, to emphasize additional, specifically human categories, beyond those which I have already referenced here above.

These include specifically human sense-perception; which include (1) sense-perception as such, and the other, (2) the double meaning used to reference an existent principle of a state of life. The source of the often mistaken explanations associated with those two, just stated categories, presents doubts arising from any attempt to classify what those categories are commonly presumed to signify, as a matter of the notion of the precise identity and an existent efficiency of the physically-efficient definition of “life.” That means the actual life of a human species, or that of the active life of the still-living, human individual. A very strong hint respecting the meaning of such subject-matters and their distinctions can be established. However, some ground-work is required respecting what all of this might actually be intended to mean in the practice of society. There is quite a lot to be sorted out on this account.

Against that back-drop, the most important, and also most defining functions of the human mind (and the living human body, too), are those which bear upon the specifically noëtic capacities of those mental functions of the human individual which pertain to the class of the activities pertaining, emphatically, to so-called “Classical artistic” functions. By that, I mean works of art rooted in the distinguishable principles of Classical artistic composition categorically, or, in other words, “the noëtic functions” of the human mind. On that ground of activities, the creative powers of the human mind, including the most significant of the intrinsically “non-linear” practices of truly “Classical” artistic composition, provide the essential basis for competent judgment respecting the actually “physical” expressions of physical-scientific practice.

The subject of the rather large portion of “fall-off in scientific insight” since the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, is typical of the effective symptoms of a “non-Classical,” relatively bestialized practice. That means, specifically, the inherent failures induced by a more or less thorough reliance on the folly of “mathematical” systems. That is typical of the misuse of mathematics as such, as distinguished from a mathematics properly subordinated by a mission-commitment to underlying, “intrinsically non-mathematical” insights.

The emphasis is to be placed, in respect to matters of physical or comparable design of practice, on “non-linear” methods of practice. Accountants per se, are among the very worst choices in any seriously primary practice of applied financial-accounting methods—as the effectively evil habits of Wall Street firms, and related institutions, demonstrate that fact: “Mathematical physics” must, therefore, be, replaced in precedence, by an active notion of the “physical mathematics” which is premised on the methods of such, for purposes of illustration, as a Bernhard Riemann, a Max Planck, and an Albert Einstein, all that in rejection what has been actually the “hack work” of the likeness of a Bertrand Russell and his dupes among the merely mathematical physicists.

In other terms: insight into the principles of mind must be acknowledged as, by far, the indispensably superior authority properly reigning over mere mathematics per se. Accountants are sometimes useful—in their right place; but, as for accountants, their standard of practice has nothing to do with the functions associated with the principle of life, nor of actual principles of human practice, as such. Here, Classical artistic composition reigns supreme not only over mere mathematics, but in all matters with respect to human life as such. The only true science, is that of the expert practice of human insight.

Insight, itself, is exemplified by the effects of the practice of effectively increased degrees of “non-linear” energy-flux density: a physics rooted in its original foundations located in the work of such as Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, Johannes Kepler, and those in that same tradition, as in the notable case of Alexander Hamilton’s characterization of the principles of the American Economy. (I have “teased you, now,” on good grounds respecting what is now to follow.)

The Folly of Arithmetic

As the infamous fraud of Euclid’s argument shows, the attempt to reduce reality to simply arithmetic systems, as in the notorious case of the common-place reductionists, such as Euclid and his co-thinkers, must give way to the essential role of sets of actions which are intrinsically, ontologically creative (i.e., noëtic, “spiritually”) in their specifically physical-space-time functions, rather than simply infinite-series-like, hence “quasi-linear” projections.

The leading evidence which guides us to such conclusions as that, is typified in expression by the systemically anti-reductionist notion of a physical principle of life per se. The conclusive evidence to that effect, becomes clear, when we have considered the relevant distinction of the human life-form from that of lower forms of what is also called “life.”

For example, life is intrinsically a form of action, in and of itself. The special significance of human life, as to be distinguished from lower forms of life, is expressed efficiently by the actually “creative” forms of willful intention specific to the human individual, as shown by the effect of an idea which persists as efficiently as it continued to be an active factor of the author’s intention, several generations, or more, after the biological demise of the creative impulse located in the rather long-deceased human discoverer.

A similar effect is expressed in products of truly Classical artistic composition, and discoveries of valid physical principle, alike.

Hence, the manifest “spill-over” to be recognized in those persons who had effectively forecast actually future events, as I have demonstrated that capability on a significant number of historically notable occasions which have been sprinkled among no less than fifty-odd years of my life to present date. These include a number of datings associated with publicized events which have appeared publicly during the time preceding the specific forecast in question.

Since such forecasts have transpired as they did, and were publicized appropriately on that account, the experiences to which I have referred aggregately here now, indicate that “real lapsed space-time” is not simply linear, but a much more “interesting” phenomenon. It must be said, to similar effect, that the confidence of some scientists in forecasting the realization of a forecast accomplishment, demonstrates that the past and future of the experience of the individual’s human life, can not be competently reduced to a quasi-linear notion of the “relativity” of the composition of physical space-time in our universe.

The creative human personality has been able not only to forecast future developments as if delivered by Biblical prophets, but is enabled, sometimes, at the least, to deal comparably with the past, similarly; that is, the ability to recreate the past: the past which implicitly existed, but had not been recorded.

As for my own forecasting prowess: the first of the particular forecasts to which I would be confident to lay claim, occurred on pre-scheduled arrival with the significant breakdown crisis centered in the great U.S.A. automotive bankruptcy of the late 1950s. From that point on, there were subsequent great “crashes” in the U.S.A., such as that of mid-Summer 1971, and then beyond, including the forecast collapse of the Soviet breakdown-crisis, and that of the U.S.A. over the entire sweep throughout the continued trans-Atlantic breakdown-crisis of the span of the George W. Bush, Jr., and the Obama administrations to the present date.

However, the “design” of such systemic economic failures as those to which I have referred here now, had come upon the world as a forecastable development caused by the policies of the relevant nations and their governments. What is most significant, practically, on this account, is the simpler fact, that some people have been capable of specific forecasts of future crucially important events in history. What is obviously most significant about those events, is that some few nations, and their members, even usually at the highest rank, like the foolish President George W. Bush, Jr., and the far more foolish President Barack Obama, would lead entire nations and more to destruction as the role of George W. Bush, Jr. and Barack Obama have been enabled to demonstrate the foolishness of relevant nations and the majority of their governments, time, and time, and time again.

The Use of Forecasting

I shall conclude this particular report with a rhetorical question as to my here and now:

Why have most nations and their leadership failed, both recklessly and often repeatedly, to respond effectively to the great crises whose onset had been readily forecastable by ordinary means, as the United States and most of Europe, at the least, this time around, once again? I, for example, have presented accurate warnings of major economic and related crises since the middle of the 1960s. Among the most notable examples of this, for the United States, for example, was the great breakdown-crisis of Summer 1971.

In the immediate aftermath of that Summer 1971 breakdown, the generality of the financial-economic spokesmen of the U.S. national system of that time, had frankly admitted that the leading cause for the failure of the financial-business community had been their own systemic error, in denying, even to themselves, that that crisis, which had been visibly oncoming since my widely circulated forecast to that effect in 1968, had been “inevitably” lacking in all the corrective fore-measures which had been actually available in advance.

Were all these leading business circles (of both western and central Europe, the United States, and so on, being simply stupid? That was not the kernel of the problem. My following exposition, will now point you to the actual factors of respectively cause and effect.

The “dominant system of empire throughout the planet today, was originally consolidated as the Seventeenth-Century Dutch imperial system,” known today as the British Empire. Shown: Rembrandt’s “The Syndics of the Drapers’ Guild” (1662) depicts Amsterdam’s merchants of the Dutch East India Company.

IV. The Principle of This Case

The core of the foolishness of the governments of such leading nations as the current Anglo-Dutch Empire-system (which controls under its own dominion, much of the nations of the world) is that it is a modern expression of the same oligarchical principle of all the greatest of the known empires of the planet. The behavior of such imperial oligarchical systems has conformed to the same most essential features of their characteristics for as far back as we possess systemically accurate knowledge of such imperialist entities. The fact of the matter presently, is that the dominant system of empire throughout the planet today, was originally consolidated as the Seventeenth-century Dutch imperial system, which, in turn, became extended to be known as (essentially) the same Dutch empire now also named as the British Empire.

The imperial system known to Europe, Africa, and adjoining regions, had emerged, for us moderns, from shadowy origins, but among the earlier of the typically clear examples of the nature of imperialism, is the well-proven case of the genocide conducted against the population of Troy. Most significant, is the fact of the imperial principle, which has, to the best of our knowledge, never been important as its part of anything other than, in essentials, an empire. The definition rests not upon quantity, but on systemic social-structural characteristics. The U.S.A.’s Wall Street, for example, is an instrument of imperial dictatorship, rather than being anything actually like a government of the U.S. people. Its characteristic is an imperial institution planted upon the United States by the Anglo-Dutch empire.

Since Wall Street’s role as a branch of the Anglo-Dutch empire, rather than an actual agency practicing the role of a sovereign nation-state, Wall Street, which currently operates an imperialist tyranny upon and above the U.S.A. as a nation-state, has the same sort of impulse which Queen Elizabeth II practices with utter shamelessness. The intention of the Queen’s empire, of which Wall Street is merely a subject, is to do as Elizabeth II had openly demanded: the reduction of the human population of the planet, from a declining level of seven billions of persons to one billion for the entire planet to share out, in the relatively immediate future. Those British imperial policies are now in effect, in measures, under, presently, British lackey Barack Obama, going into an accelerating rate of openly-declared genocide against the great majority of the U.S.A.’s own citizenry—a copy of Adolf Hitler’s T-4 program of genocide, as I warned U.S. citizens publicly during Obama’s first year in office.

That much said on that subject, what is my remedy for this criminal state of our nation’s affairs?

What should have already been the indicated remedy for this presently evil state of affairs? Let us waste no time on lesser matters.

The elimination of the Wall Street system’s wicked practices is the foremost requirement for the defense of our U.S. republic. The purpose of our nation’s chief enemy, Wall Street, is precisely to conduct a financial looting process whose primary intention is to eliminate the majority of the U.S.A.’s current population. Only citizens, including presently elected ones, who are de facto lackeys of the mass-murderers, will tolerate Wall Street’s continued tyranny within the United States. Hitler was a piker compared to Wall Street. No other interpretation will ever be accepted in the annals of actual history.

The Interest of the Nations

There should be no general policy among nations at this time, except the unity of existing sovereign nation-states, freed from financial oligarchism like that of the Anglo-Dutch tyranny, and intended to advance the conditions of life of nations and their people, according to a relatively urgent, future standard goal of global development of systems of thermonuclear fusion. The goal must take into account the urgency of bringing the immediate region of the Solar system, within the range of the region marked off by Earth and Mars, including the fields of asteroids, under control to obtain the needed security and development of that specific region, and to foster a human awareness of the dignity of its role in participation in necessary accomplishments to those ends in that spirit of achievements.

The systemic elimination of the oligarchical tyranny, is, then, simply an obvious imperative.

[fn_1]. EIR, June 21, 2013 or LaRouchePAC.

[fn_2]. This means the rejection of such frauds as faith in sense-perception as such, as I shall clarify that in progress, at a later point here.

[fn_3]. I.e., the case of man-controlled animal.

[fn_4]. The distinction between the two types is systemic, not particular.

[fn_5]. I.e., “foreknowledge” is a relatively commonplace capability of the most advanced quality of development of human individuals, as I have successfully “prophesied” on what has added up to have been a significant number of noted occasions.