This article appears in the July 20, 2018 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
January 9, 2010
The Question Before Us
What are to be recommended for consideration as perspectives for what is (a) a truly, urgently needed four-power initiative on behalf of a mission-oriented process of transformation of the world’s economic systems, (b) away from the presently ruinous effects of submission to an implicitly financially imperialist, global monetarist system, a virtual “new Tower of Babel,” and,(c) toward an urgently needed, fixed-exchange-rate credit system of (d) mutually beneficial, global cooperation among peoples organized as a community of respectively sovereign nation-states.
This presumes the indispensable, included, practical measure of the included, (e) immediate application of the precedent provided as the principle of the Glass-Steagall reform which was introduced to the U.S.A. under U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt.
Which also means, once more, (f) the eradication of intrinsically pro-imperialist, monetary systems, by their replacement by (g) a system of sovereign national credit-systems configured in the formation of a long-term, fixed-exchange rate array of national credit-systems.
Since most of the nominal monetary-financial assets abroad presently, are loaded with an implicitly hyper-inflationary accumulation of increasingly worthless “paper,” an immediate change from a monetary system, to a fixed-exchange-rate credit system, is the only presently available hope for avoiding the plunge of the planet as a whole into a prolonged new dark age.
What is written on the current state of the British empire, is admittedly harsh, but must be stated as a truthful representation, without fear of any actual exaggeration respecting the current policies of practice of the present British Royal House. I have been careful, not to overlook the natural, national rights of the people of the United Kingdom, with whom I, after all, share a certain ancient ancestry.
On the Subject of a Four Great-Powers Initiative
The planet considered as a whole, is now hovering at the virtual brink of a world-wide, new dark age, which, if present trends in policy are permitted to continue, will become a condition comparable to, but far worse than that which Europe experienced during what is called the Fourteenth-century “New Dark Age.”
The root of that threat has been the same British Empire which had organized every general catastrophe on this planet since the onset of that so-called “Seven Years War” of 1756-1763, a British Empire which, for example, had brought Adolf Hitler to power in Germany in 1933, but which had turned, in desperation, to the U.S.A. for help against its own former German puppet, Hitler, but only after the attacks leading to the Fall of France and the consequent threat to the British overseas empire itself. Churchill’s Britain then pled for succor from the United States.
Then, once President Franklin Roosevelt had died, Britain turned around again, to relaunch what had been its long-ranging intention to bring down the United States, and to proceed toward Britain’s aim of establishing a neo-Malthusian form of a single world empire, a virtual “New Tower of Babel,” which is the core of that monarchy’s immediate, present, wicked perspective.
The U.S.A. administration of President Barack Obama, a figure whose policies are cast in the likeness of a caricature of those of Britain’s former Prime Minister Tony Blair, is serving, thus far, as the British puppet employed in the effort to bring down the U.S.A. by means of the Devil’s own sort of virtual treason unloosed from within the current administration, an effort, nominally led by President Barack Obama, which, if successful, would clear the way to mopping-up Britain’s other chief obstacles on this planet, such as Russia, China, and India, as if one at a time.
Thus, the present circumstances of global crisis, demand that we now, quickly address the subject of certain specific evils which had been brought upon Europe through a reorganization of the affairs of the planet which occurred two decades ago, a reorganization pursued through the overreaching bit of common action taken in the matter of London’s prescribed conditions for the reunification, then, of what had been London’s already traditional enemy, Germany, since Chancellor Bismarck’s U.S.-modeled economic reforms.
These were the conditions set by a trio of Britain’s Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, by France’s President Mitterrand, and, the assent to their actions by then U.S. President George H.W. Bush. Since that time, that action launched by those three, at that point in history, has become increasingly ruinous in its implications for both the present and the future of not only Europe, but, now, for the peoples of the planet as a whole.
That wicked policy which was initiated under British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and was done in concert with France’s pro-British President of that time, François Mitterrand, and also with a complicit U.S. President George H.W. Bush, cleared the way for the broadly applied, deliberate destruction of the economy of not only what had become imperial Britain’s traditional European target, Germany, that since the great economic reform under U.S. friend Chancellor Bismarck. This was a ruin intended for the systemically savage, “pacification, through brutality, of the weakened victim;” it embodied a program of economic destruction including virtually the entire region of the former Soviet Union and the Comecon, with the intended ruin of Germany, as of the nations of both the former Comecon and Russia. Such are the methods of triumphant predators, such as the British monarchy now, predators who sow, thus, the seeds of prolonged wars and kindred sorts of terrible convulsions.
The development of the so-called “Euro,” a system which was set into motion by the initiative of those three powers of the 1989-1990 developments, Britain, France, and the 1989-1993 U.S.A. under President George H.W. Bush, has since resonated, in effects, to the point, that since the close of July 2007, the set of nations now included in the relevant Lisbon Treaty’s crushing of the national sovereignties of the relevant victim-nations of continental Europe, has temporarily eliminated essential elements of national sovereignties from what had been, until then, the respectively sovereign states of western and central continental Europe.
What has been done to western and central Europe, under that reign by the monetarist oligarchy of London, is what is also intended, by London, to be done to the United States of America and every other nation of Europe, and of Asia, the extended Pacific-Indian oceans’ regions, Africa, and the entirety of the Americas, too. “Divide and conquer,” is the method of the British Foreign Office, operating now, under Queen Elizabeth II, through what is called “the British Commonwealth.” She has attempted the use of that Commonwealth as a first line of imperial monetarist power, as this was to be seen in the evils expressed by the role of the Queen in the matter of the relevant efforts within the “Copenhagen summit.”
The attack on the sovereignty of the U.S.A. now, through the current role of that virtual British royal puppet, U.S. President Obama, is typical of the effort, as since the evil done by Obama confederate and former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, to reduce the planet as a whole to the ruined likeness of an imperial form of a new Tower of Babel.
It must be presently recognized as the leading issue of the most recent course of history, that the consent, by some nations, to the vicious impoverishment of some other nations, unleashes the threat of the ultimate impoverishment and ruin of all nations. We are morally obliged to act to remove the relevant present threat to this planet.
Thus, the mass-murderous partnership between the British monarchy and President Obama, which is intended to reduce the world’s population, rapidly, from nearly 7 billions persons, to less than 2, is an evil scheme, long associated with British Royal Consort Prince Philip, who is allied with the President Obama who is now operating in a manner suggestive of treason, behind the back of the people of the U.S.A., a policy of Prince Philip which represents the greatest evil loosed upon this planet today.
Meanwhile, since the time when the U.S. economy was plunged into a presently accelerating, global breakdown-crisis, since the close of July 2007, the greatest rate of increase of a presently suffocating mass of essentially fictitious financial capital, has overtaken the United States, while, with the advent of this present Year 2010, the U.S. Obama government has taken new measures which, if tolerated, will tend to throw the U.S.A. itself into an onrushing general breakdown-crisis of a quality whose consequence would be the already threatened plunge of the world economy as a whole, as by a planet-wide chain-reaction, into a condition akin to that experienced by Europe as its Fourteenth-Century “New Dark Age.”
I must affirm afresh, at this point, that, whereas, it might have appeared to some misguided nations, that they had benefitted from some relatively exceptional degree of useful economic growth during some part of the recent period, as all nations and peoples inhabit the same planet, to such an effect that all nations, to one degree or another, whether directly, or indirectly, have become, ultimately, the common victims of the global threat of a new, post-1989 form of what is practically a British imperial tyranny, called “globalization,” over the planet and its peoples considered as a whole.
So, I must affirm the point, that the effects of the process of globalization, effects with the characteristics of a deep-going global “new malthusianism,” which were set into motion in the terms dictated to Germany two decades ago, by the concerted action of Thatcher, Mitterrand, and Bush, are, presently, the source of the threat of a presently early arrival at the entry of the planet as a whole into a prolonged, global new dark age of all humanity. This is an effect which, if allowed to continue, even during the immediate months ahead, would soon unleash what the present British monarchy, and its accomplice, President Barack Obama, have explicitly intended to become the worst holocaust suffered by all humanity in the known, detailed political-economic history of mankind.
In such a process, the smaller and weaker nations, outside the category of presently great powers, would be simply crushed through means of the effects of globalization on such vulnerabilities as their increasing lack of truly sovereign control over the essential portion of the food supplies of their populations as wholes. Therefore those willing nations which represent aggregate great power, must unite to act in defense of the smaller and weaker nations, for the defense and promotion of the common good.
The broader effect of this intended set of developments, featured the pestilences known as “globalization,” and a “unitary Presidency,” as part of the wrecking of the U.S. economy itself, especially under the Presidencies of George W. Bush, Jr., and, now, that of a Barack Obama who has already been seen, with good reason, as enjoying the most rapid, and presently accelerating, and richly deserved rate of successful gain of unpopularity of any U.S. President of recent history.
The principal correlative of the British imperial policy and influence to this effect, has been the continuing intention, as I have already noted, as being expressed by the hateful role of the British Consort Prince Philip, to reduce the world’s population from a presently estimable level of about 6.7 billions, to less than 2 billions. The recently failed Copenhagen “summit,” which, ironically, inaugurated what has been described in such terms as “the worst winter cold wave in an estimated span of a hundred years,” featured commitments in the direction of that outcome. Now, despite that failure of the present British monarchy’s evil attempt on that occasion, those who are to be regarded by some as the children of Satan, remain disposed to “try again,” as early and often, and as widespread as possible.
Those foregoing, selected, crucial facts, respecting the developments of the recent two decades of this planet’s history, also have a crucially relevant preceding, 1945-1989 interval of history. That is to speak of the wrong turn made, by what was then the greatest power on this planet at that time, the U.S.A. under U.S. President Harry S Truman.
That was not only a bad turn in U.S. policy; it proved to have been a wrong turn in world history, made under the influence, over Truman, of Britain’s Prime Minister Winston Churchill and of economist John Maynard Keynes. It was an onslaught of moral corruption launched, on April 13, 1945, on the occasion of the day after the death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt whose cause President Harry S Truman promptly betrayed.
The Consequences So Far
In effect, the United States under President Harry S Truman, acted in concert with British imperial interests typified by the role of Prime Minister Winston Churchill, a concert which restored colonialist rule immediately in many parts of the world at that time, and thus unleashed a process of corrosion or outright reversal of the U.S. policy-commitments which had been adopted under President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
This was a corrosion, launched by Britain through setting the nuclear powers of that time against one anothers’ throats, a corrosion which has led, over a half-century, with some detours here and there, toward the presently threatened plunge of the entire planet into a chain-reaction like collapse of the planet, a plunge to the present verge of a presently onrushing, planet-wide New Dark Age comparable to, but worse than that of the late Fourteenth Century Europe.
There is no proper mystery concerning the identity of the relevant interests which launched what became that post-April 12, 1945 reversal of U.S. policy under President Harry S Truman.
Over the longer term since the beginning of the so-called “Seven Years War,” the power of those British imperialist interests, has tended to increase, despite some most notable intervening periods of set-backs. So matters have stood since the immediate aftermath of that February 1763 Peace of Paris, a time when the British East India Company, led by figures such as Lord Shelburne, established that Company itself as, essentially, a privately owned empire, and, in 1782, launched the British Foreign Office as its instrument of attempted imperialist mismanagement of the planet as a whole, as it has been from that time, to the present day.
A broad summary of the relevant history since those times, is required at this point, such that the relevant discussion would treat the span of these developments since the British crushing of the rights of the Massachusetts of the Winthrops and Mathers, and since the subsequent death of England’s Queen Anne, as a lawful historical process, a process, rather than a mere chronicle of several selected choices from among recent history’s events.
It was on or about the exact date of the February 1763 Paris treaty, and the accompanying end of the so-called “French and Indian Wars,” that the social forces of the North American English-speaking population of the United States of America were, and remain divided, to the present day, between, on the one side, those in the tradition of predecessors who repelled the tyrannical and predatory measures of the British East India Company, and that opposing part of the population which is customarily identified with “Wall Street” as with the American traitors of Wall Street and kindred pedigrees, traitors such as the British Foreign Office’s and Jeremy Bentham’s personal asset Aaron Burr, the founder of the Bank of Manhattan.
Since that time, American and British English-speaking wit has referred to the conflicts between the United States and the British empire, still today, as a people divided by the ability to quarrel through the greater efficiency afforded by the use of a common language. So, over the relevant passage of time, since February 1763, within both the United Kingdom and the U.S. Republic, there have been both imperialist and anti-imperialist currents in opposition to one another. The following considerations are indispensable for our purposes here.
Foremost, it must be emphasized that the British empire is not essentially a rule by what British usage identifies as the United Kingdom’s “subjects,” but, like all European empires which have existed since the aftermath of the Peloponnesian Wars, the British Empire has been, still today, a global, imperial tyranny organized as a system of money, a monetary system, a form of imperial tyranny best recognized when it is seen as expressed in its most naked form as a doctrine of “free trade” which has been imposed upon nations other than Britain, or as the castration of the fatherhoods of continental Europe, as through the subjugation of certain once-proud sovereigns of continental Europe as victims of what is termed “The Euro” and the so-called “Lisbon Treaty.”
Traitors, or fools sympathetic to the British empire, as found among the opposition to the U.S.A.’s constitutional system, are the keystone of Britannia’s grand scheme for early onset of British imperial, virtually one-world rule over the entire planet, now.
History as a Process
Looking back in time, the distinct form of European imperialism against which we must act today, emerged during the course and aftermath of the Peloponnesian Wars, as a form of rule based on the special quality of a maritime empire which was based on that common principle of monetarism, which has been the actual characteristic of European imperialism, since the Peloponnesian War, up to the present time: after duly noting such exceptions as the reign of Charlemagne, and, later, the temporary role, through the time of the reign of France’s Louis XI, of that great principle of the Fifteenth-century Council of Florence put forward by Nicholas of Cusa.
The distilled essence of European imperialism, British imperialism most notably, has been the intent to establish and maintain an enforced, predatory doctrine of “free trade,” especially on other peoples’ nations, with the imperialists’ strong opposition, at most times, to the practice of any form of what is called “protectionism,” as such tyranny of “free trade” is to be recognized in the presently, British-led attacks on the stability of the economy of China, from both London and London’s fellow-travellers in Washington.
The typical expression of British imperialism today, is the transfer of production of goods from nations with the world’s leading technological advantages, to labor-intensive production transferred to cheap-labor markets, as had been done in the British imperialist operations against occupied India in Shelburne’s, Bentham’s, and Palmerston’s time, then, and against China, today.
The typical method of British imperialism, is a practice which echoes the Roman Empire, a practice of organizing warfare and revolutions among targeted nations, as to be recognized in the manner in which the British empire’s then-young Foreign Office orchestrated the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars. These developments are to be recognized, as echoes of the method used to establish the British Empire, as, initially, an empire of the British East India Company, at the 1763 Peace of Paris. We must see this again, in the launching of so-called “World War I” and in London’s orchestration of the rise of the Adolf Hitler regime through such channels as the offices of the Bank of England and, also, the formation of the Basel, Switzerland Bank for International Settlements.
It is to be seen again, in the way in which Britain adjusted its course, when it had been confronted with the aftermath of what German forces and the pro-fascist French government of the time had carefully pre-arranged as the Wehrmacht defeat of the physically superior military forces of France, in 1940, which took a much dismayed, formerly Hitler-oriented Britain by surprise. Britain then turned to a United States which it had earlier hoped to ruin.
What I have just written here are, admittedly, harsh truths for many in the world today, but they are the truths which, unless accepted, outline the threat of doom which must be clearly foreseen now, if a global dark age of all humanity is to be avoided during the immediate months ahead.
I. The Productive Powers of Labor
The principal source of the weakness which the nations of Europe, Asia, and the Americas have shown in modern times, until now, has been their susceptibility to the popularized, but mistaken notion, that monetary values are the measure of relative present and future wealth of nations. For precisely such reasons, nearly all notable would-be economic forecasters have failed, repeatedly, during recent decades. For that reason, my own repeated successes as a forecaster have been relatively unique.
To understand how economic processes actually function, we must downgrade the value placed upon the practice of financial forecasting, that we might adopt the advantages of the preferable course provided for the understanding of the real, which is to say physical, economy, as this is preference is facilitated by relying upon Academician V.I. Vernadsky’s functional subdivision of known creation among the scientifically principled categories of Lithosphere, Biosphere, and Noösphere.
This is the standpoint of what I have defined as a science of physical economy, in opposition to the intrinsically incompetent notion of a monetarist economy.
As I have done on this account, we must proceed together from the standpoint of the great Bernhard Riemann’s discovery of principle, as that discovery, presented in his 1854 habilitation dissertation, provided the essential, revolutionary foundations, made in the footsteps of Gottfried Leibniz, for the principal set of accomplishments of Academician V.I. Vernadsky and Albert Einstein.
Viewing matters in that context, all known forms of existence known to us from consideration of the known universe, up to the present time, express that notion of universal, specifically anti-entropic creativity which the late Albert Einstein identified in his assessment of the great uniquely original discoveries of gravitation by Johannes Kepler, as expressing a universe which is “finite but unbounded” in principle.
This notion is of crucial importance for establishing shared recognition of the principle of progress on which rescue of a presently imperilled planet might be accomplished.
So, following the great principle set forth by Bernhard Riemann, the Lithosphere and Biosphere, are characterized by an inherent, anti-entropic creativity, but only mankind, in our species’ character as the expression of the Noösphere, expresses a consciously willful creativity.
So, whereas inanimate and living processes of plant and animal life are distinguished by Einstein’s principle of a finite-but-unbounded creativity, only the human individual expresses creativity and its effects as a consciously willful quality of process, as is implicitly typical of the first Chapter of the Christian Genesis. This distinction is expressed by the growth of human populations through the benefits of combined scientific and related cultural progress, a willful characteristic of mankind which is not expressed by any other known form of existing living species.
Nations must cease their tendency to maintain the habit of living only in the past. Unlike the beasts, men and women are creative beings from that future which they must bring into existence, as the future colonization of our Moon and of the planet Mars suggests today.
The increase of the human species, is, thus, bounded by mankind’s willful ability and disposition to create the improvements of the environment on which the sustaining, and the improvement of the condition of the human population depends. The present urgency of accelerated reliance on the development and proliferation of nuclear-fission and thermonuclear-fusion sources of power, together with the duty of exploring our Solar system—and the universe beyond—exemplifies the present requirement for meeting what are the presently foreseeable of the essential existential needs, and proper aims of all mankind.
Among such as the empires of the past, the ordinary people have been largely treated as cattle might be treated, as bounded to a fixed order of what is sometimes described as “zero technological growth.” The human species, which the great Academician Vernadsky showed to be essentially a creature of the Noösphere, not the Biosphere, expresses its humanity as a servant of the bringing into being of the future, leaving the silly notion of men and women as like the apes, more and more behind.
That distinction of mankind from other forms of life, compels us to take into account the fact that, whereas, mankind, thus far, has relied upon the favorable concentrations of the stock of the preferred elements of the Periodic Table left behind, as in use of the remains of dead plants and animals from the past content of the Lithosphere and Biosphere: The relative depletion of the relatively richest such deposits, requires an increase in the applicable energy-flux-density employed as the means to offset the relative depletion of the richer concentrations of deposits left behind from the past of the Lithosphere and Biosphere.
This requirement is satisfied, most essentially, by the development of the creative powers of the individual human mind experienced in the relevant language-cultures of respectively sovereign nations. Such is the root of the role of sovereign nation-state cultures, a role which separates civilized society from the Biblical horrors of a legendary Tower of Babel. It is the cooperation among such sovereigns, to the effect of fulfilling the just common aims of mankind, as mankind, not as beasts, which is the only tolerable form of composition of the family of nations.
Thus, the common great folly of what is to be called the imperialism of all monetary systems which employ reliance on the use of money as a reigning standard of value, when that notion of relative value is substituted for the appropriate, contrary standard of the increase of the science-driven, Classical-culture-driven productive powers of labor. It is advances in a science- and Classical-culture-driven form of increase of the relative, physical capital-intensity of development of basic economic infrastructure, and in production of means of existence, which provides the only truly scientific measure of economic performance of nations, and of the planet as a whole.
Such is to be taken as the proper meaning of the expression: “the common aims of mankind.”
Man must not seek to live as a parasite upon the given state of our planet. We must earn the right to our existence, which must be accomplished through those improvements in the planet on which the proper existence of any sustainable scale of our populations depends. It must be noted that the archeological distinction of man from beasts is man’s successful use of the principle of “fire.”
The maintenance and improvement of the human condition has required the shift to forms of “fire” of increasing energy-flux density, such that only such means as nuclear fission and, prospectively, thermonuclear fusion, meet mankind’s requirements for both the present and the immediately foreseeable generations of mankind. To reject those imperatives is to degrade mankind to the perilous conditions of mere beasts.
Thus, for the foreseeable future of human existence during the remainder of this presently young century, the emphasis is presently on the succession of nuclear fission and thermonuclear fusion, as the precondition for human existence within a range reaching, apparently, today, to the future through which man may reach to a foreseeable future place in the orbit of Mars, a goal which could not be achieved by living human beings without thermonuclear fusion, as by helium-3 isotope as fuel, as the source of the impulse needed.
That perspective is implicitly expressed at this time as the perspective of the leading nations of Asia, and also the Americas, nations whose opportunities for the future are presently bounded, chiefly, implicitly, by leading emphasis upon the regions of the Arctic, and the Pacific and Indian oceans.
To bring about, and maintain such a humanist perspective for all mankind, it is indispensable that our implicit commitment must be to what is regarded as the spiritual aspect of human life which distinguishes man’s creativity from the ways of the beast, while taking into account our responsibility for the care of those forms of life expressed by plants and beasts.
Such are the essential expressions of the notion of “the common aims of mankind.”
II. Capital Investment Cycles
There are two principal kinds of categorical distinctions for the role of capital-investment cycles in national and world economy. It were convenient to name the available distinctions as being either physical or spiritual.
Under “physical” we consider two general types: basic economic physical infrastructure, and physical capital employed by mankind as means of production.
Under “spiritual,” we should place artistic creativity, including both great Classical art-forms and, also, those acts of scientific discoveries of universal physical principles.
Viewed from the vantage-point of modern European culture, the meaning of the category of “physical” is relatively more obvious, but it is, as to be indicated here below, only deceptively obvious. The category of “spiritual” is typified by what is entirely lacking in the systemically bestial outlook encountered among the behaviorists of both the current U.S. Obama administration, and British Fabian and like ideologues generally.
The relevant, errant, widespread reductionist presumption of empiricists has been the wrong-headed, if nonetheless widespread notion, that physical science is rooted in mathematics as such, as the errant case of the Euclidean tradition illustrates the folly of attempts to substitute a-prioristic forms of sense-perceptual assumptions respecting sensory effects, for physical principles. Creativity pertains to new discoveries of physical principle, a process of discovery which bounds the domains within which a competent mathematics may roam, but only under appropriate physical conditions, as Bernhard Riemann emphasized, with delicious irony, in the concluding single sentence of his Earth-shaking 1854 habilitation dissertation.
So, discovery of physically efficient principles occurs as Albert Einstein identified this, in the instances of Johannes Kepler’s uniquely original discovery of the principle of the planetary orbit, and the subsequent, uniquely original discovery of the general principle of gravitation (contrary to the Isaac Newton hoax), as in Kepler’s The Harmony of the Worlds, or in the discovery of the principle of least action by Pierre de Fermat, or the great discovery of Bernhard Riemann in his 1854 habilitation dissertation, or the fundamental Seventeenth and early Eighteenth centuries’ contributions of Gottfried Leibniz.
A comparable case of the principle of human creativity, is the development of the concept of well-tempered counterpoint by Johann Sebastian Bach. The concluding paragraph of Percy Bysshe Shelley’s A Defence of Poetry, is a highly relevant sort of comparable case, as it is also an extension of Gottfried Leibniz’s discovery of the principle of physical dynamics into the rightful domain of Classical artistic composition.
In brief, man is not the subject of mathematics; rather, competent application of mathematics is a subject of that principle of the human creativity which governs physical scientific progress, but whose natural habitat is Classical musical counterpoint and poetry, the domain of the ironically creative powers of a Leibniz, a Riemann, a Vernadsky, and an Einstein, powers which distinguish the human mind from the domain of the beasts.
The connection of what is identified as the relationship of the spiritual power of Classical expressions of individual human creativity, to successes in progress in economic processes, points to a factor of practically adducible, personal immortality in the legacies of great scientific minds and Classical poets alike.
That is to emphasize that whereas there is no evidence of physical immortality of a living human being as such, the creative works of great individual minds typify the meaning of human individual immortality, the powerful, implicitly immortal imprint of discoveries of principle, as in Classical science and poetry. Since those discoveries of principles live on as still efficiently acting within the culture long after the author is deceased, their approximate immortality of those discoveries as efficiently acting ideas, is often an efficient cause within the development of society, long into the future, even permanently part of mankind in what is sometimes identified as “a simultaneity of eternity.”
So, we may say that the virtue of immortality lies in the efficient expression of a discovery of a principled conception, such as an efficiently acting principle of physical science, a principle which remains efficiently active, and is still changing the state of the world, long after the author is deceased, as, for example, for the ancient Archytas and Plato, or the Classical Aeschylus.
Thus, the essential form of human morality within history, is expressed by the individual’s devotion to the accomplishment of discovery and development of ideas whose effect reaches, efficiently, far beyond the boundaries of the discoverer’s mortal existence. Thus, truly creative human individuals who have died, live on efficiently in the future progress of society, in the future of humanity, as through both discoverers of scientific principle, or, in the fashion of John Keats’ Ode on a Grecian Urn.
The essential, shall we say “constitutional” principle of a good society, is the devotion to the improvement of the future of mankind. This point is expressed by such forms as, “What can you expect to achieve as a contribution to mankind, between now and the time of your passing from life in society?” “What can you, while still living, give as a still efficient form of action, to the future of mankind?” It is only people so inspired, who love future mankind so much, that they can be really trusted with spiritual guidance of the role assigned to government for the future of mankind.
The Human Mind
Today, not only do the benefits of modern society’s cultural development permit an increase of the number of years a typical individual may reach, not only is the functional power of the individual increased and made more enduring; it is shown that the powers of the mind may be even increased in certain crucial respects, as reflections which amount to an improvement in society’s knowledge of principle, as by those considered very old.
The view, such as that of the British behaviorists in the tradition of Adam Smith’s Theory of the Moral Sentiments, degrades human beings to the same status as those beasts who are slaughtered when their continued existence is deemed to be inconvenient, as for the war-time Nazi regime in Germany, or the authors of the death-care policies of Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair, or in the worse than prospective, Hitlerian, current health-care doctrines of a U.S. Obama administration.
For such people as those latter, especially those with official authority in society, the rights of the human individual can not be distinguished systemically from that of farm animals or wild game, as Smith makes that implied point systemically, in that location, and as the neo-malthusian policies of the present British Royal House and of the U.S. Obama administration represent an inhuman spirit of evil today.
The behaviorists, like the President Obama who echoes the image of the personal character of the mass-murderous reign of the Roman Emperor Nero, reject provable principles of specifically human practice by mere statistical inferences, thus bringing a society fallen into the likeness of their prey, into precisely the kind of bestiality for which the war-time Hitler regime became notorious, but, this time, with Britain’s Prince Philip and Tony Blair, or President Obama, they spread a degree of evil on an intended, global scale far beyond that of the Hitler regime at the worst of its actual practice.
With persons sharing such bestialized views as those associated with that part of the Obama administration or the British monarchy presently in power, the fate of mankind as a whole must be considered as in immediate jeopardy. Without the mustering of a superior power from among nations, the planet as a whole could not be secured against the relative immediacy of the most monstrous action against humanity which has been known to mankind thus far.
Whereas, the recurrence of such global threats, presently, which echo the precedent of the war-time Hitler regime, requires preventive actions now, the recurrence of such threats could not be prevented without the institutionalization of a self-conception, by mankind, of the beauty of mankind’s efficiently conceived options for society’s better future.
Morality is to be found by each generation in its mission-oriented devotion to some form of betterment for mankind within the full span of a generation’s future life-time, and beyond that. Without that, morality is merely a convention without efficient substance, and therefore as easily cast aside as by Hitler earlier, or the British monarchy and its U.S. fellow-travelers such as those of the behaviorists of the Obama administration of today.
III. The Space in Which To Live
Now, let us consider a crucially important principle of future government on this planet: the nature of actual human creativity.
The presently immediate boundaries of mankind’s future habitation during the remainder of this yet young century, are identified as comprising the space marked out presently by the planet Earth, Earth’s Moon, and Mars. When we consider this development as a process of enlarging mankind’s habitat, as we must do so presently, the language of “physical space-time” takes on a different meaning than has been customary, even among many relevant scientists up to this time. It refers, now, to living and breeding in broader realms than merely within the range of physical-space-time of this marked-out region within the Solar system.
In relevant discussions of policy as developed since the Germany space-pioneers of the 1920s, and, again, as in the Soviet Union, western Europe, and the U.S.A. during the post-1945 decades, the emphasis has lain on the use of development of industries on Earth’s Moon for creating the means for human travel between Earth’s orbiting Moon and an orbiting base above Mars.
During the post-World War II years, Wernher von Braun evoked the image of Christopher Columbus’ use of a flotilla of craft for reaching Mars from Earth. Since that time, additional difficulties have become clear. Essentially three hundred days, or more, of transit from our orbiting Moon to the lunar orbit of Mars, have forced serious attention to the problems of lack of a suitable gravitational field for the security of the interplanetary travelers, in addition to the problems posed for human beings on our Moon, and, also, on the surface of Mars.
If we examine the history of physical science since the work of such followers of Carl F. Gauss and Bernhard Riemann, in their time, and consider the progress in related matters of science up through the success of the U.S.A. organization of a Moon landing, we are encouraged to use the pre-1815 Ecole Polytechnique of such as Gaspard Monge, Lazare Carnot, and Alexander von Humboldt and his famous protégé Lejeune Dirichlet, as mapping-points for assessment of the rates of fundamental progress, or, in the alternative, also certain disgusting incompetencies introduced into physical science since the early years of the Nineteenth Century. We think of the birth of an interval of three coming generations, born during this century, since the present time, of which two will have had a considerable possibility to have come, freshly, to an age-level of scientific or Classical artistic maturity.
In adopting such a working perspective, we are confronted, at least implicitly so, with the following, relevant, great moral issue.
The behaviorists, including the existentialists, who have tended to dominate the policy-shaping of the nations of Europe and the Americas, more and more, during the successive post-1945 generations of trans-Atlantic cultures, have been an intrinsically immoral body in their influence on society and history generally.
It has been the systematic destruction of those creative powers of the human mind which are associated with both Classical artistic composition and physical-scientific creativity, which has been the leading correlative of both the artistic and scientific-economic decadence of society since the death of U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt, a decadence most clearly identified with the influence of the kind of depravity associated with that justly infamous Bertrand Russell who proposed a preventive nuclear attack upon the Soviet Union, an attack intended to bring about that imposition of world government, which remains the intent of the current British monarchy today.
On this account, the following exposition is required. I proceed, thus, as follows.
The Subject of Human Nature
Physically, the preconditions for the continued existence of civilized society, require a rate of progress expressed as advances in the productive powers of labor, per capita and per square kilometer, advances which offset, and must overcome the lawful tendency for depletion of the richest concentrations of those resources on which the maintenance of an existing quantity and quality of human life in society depends. The law is: progress, or begin to die.
That indispensable progress is expressed, not exclusively, but typically, in both advances in what is Classical artistic and language culture, and in the increase of the net productive powers of labor through effects of physical-scientific advances.
That notion of the necessity of human progress, confronts mankind with the necessity of progress as the highway to the future existence of a society’s culture. We must, therefore, learn from past experience, but must not limit ourselves to lessons from past experience. Civilized mankind is a maker of a future which had not been achieved through earlier habits.
So, Albert Einstein, writing on the subject of the uniquely original discovery of a principle of universal gravitation by Johannes Kepler, thus defined the universe expressed by Kepler’s uniquely original discovery, as finite, but not bounded. It is a universe which does not exist in mere time; but, rather, time exists only within physical space-time. The Riemannian metric of physical space-time, is the transformation of human existence to a higher order of being, through the realization of the equivalent of valid discoveries of universal physical space-time.
Thus, society exists within the bounds of the realization of those discoveries which create a state of existence which had not existed earlier: thus, expressing a principle of universal anti-entropy. Wisdom lies not in the experience of the past, but in the creation of the future, better condition which had not existed in the past. Finite, but not bounded.
This view of the matter is the basis for true morality. We must learn what happened in the past; but, that is not the source of the future. Take the following illustration of what I have just outlined in the immediately preceding paragraphs.
Is truth the knowledge of experience one has learned from the past? Or, is truth nothing different than choosing the changes in practice which are the experience of the necessarily chosen new principles which are the means for meeting the new challenge which must be our response to the demands of the oncoming future? Truth is the passage from the uncompleted past, the finite, into the yet to be experienced future, that which is not bounded.
What, child, are you going to accomplish which supplies those qualitative changes in practice which the success of the future demands? We must learn from the past, that which the past, the finite, has to offer; but, the knowledge of the past is soon worthless, until we have committed ourselves to something new, to the unbounded, the revolution in ideas of practice, which is our necessary choice of access to the necessary future. In this respect, nothing which is truthful, is true, but necessary change to new ways in the future now before us.
For the purpose of practice of society now, we must measure our obligatory performance in terms of a span of two or more generations required as the change of society from a present state of development, to a necessarily future state of development.
In the present, still young century, the indicator of that necessary and possible progress, which we must adopt as our intended future development, touches the matter of facilitating successful human travel, from Earth-orbit, to Mars-orbit, and safe return, an objective which could be attained within reliance upon thermonuclear fusion modalities. One must live, now, to create the future. That, and nothing different, is morality: the principle of the unbounded.
That, as I have just described it, is necessarily a true goal for mankind within the range of the new century we have recently entered. However, while that goal is a true one, its most important aspect is that it, as I have said, defines a specific, convenient example of a universal moral principle for society. Morality is not the lesson of past experience; morality is a dedication to the changes which are the necessary advances to a required change of state which we must bring about in the future we bequeath to our progeny.
One child asks another: “What are you going to have become, when you have grown up?”
In other words: we live in an anti-entropic universal process of anti-entropic change of universal principle. That is the essence of human morality. We are moral only if we do what our grandparents, and parents, did not achieve in the matter of increasing the power of mankind in the universe, qualitatively, per capita and per unit of physical-space-time measure.
It is useful to look at the past history of European civilization’s progress in physical science from the time of Jeanne d’Arc, and, a bit later, Filippo Brunelleschi and Nicholas of Cusa, or from Kepler, Fermat, and Leibniz, and from the Ecole Polytechnique near the beginning of the Nineteenth Century, or from Bernhard Riemann’s 1854 habilitation dissertation forward. What must be the chosen destiny of each of the two generations yet to come to full maturity from their birth in the decades of that portion of the remainder of the present century which we entered in the immediately preceding decade? We are, therefore, morally, what we have chosen to be the better future in which our descendants shall dwell.
Such are the terms within which we must define the foreseeable goals of the remainder of this present, still young century before us. That is the relevant definition of political morality among sovereign nations and their peoples today. We must be creators in the image of the Creator. That is a true political morality within and among nations now.
Such are the needed common aims of all mankind. That is the only true morality. That is the only truth.
IV. The Coming of the Railroads
To move forward into the time of the future, society must move forward in space.
Today, the young citizens of the United States are often more ignorant of essentials than their grandparents’ generation. How is that proven? Simply ask: what happened to the railroads?
The functional concept of the railroad-system, as a system, was clearly established in intention by the work done by then U.S. Secretary of State John Quincy Adams’ defining the policy of establishing the United States as a transcontinental nation, from the Canadian northern border to the Mexican border, at the south, and overland from the Atlantic coast to the Pacific.
To understand this in the way this must become understood in the world today, look always at the future in terms of the change which breaks out of those limits which had reigned in the past.
So, earlier, what became Mediterranean culture, as distinct from the imperial systems of West Asia, was a maritime culture. Roads were a useful but marginal supplement to maritime development. Later, Charlemagne advanced civilization by developing a system of inland waterways, from the Pyrenees northerly and eastward. Later, came the shift from the bounds of the Mediterranean and Black Sea into the Atlantic, with the decline of Byzantium and the Norman Conquest. Then, in the later years of Nicholas of Cusa, came Cusa’s imperative for reaching from the Mediterranean across the oceans to the continents on the opposite coasts, the imperative which led to the European settlements in the Americas.
Later, came the trans-continental railway system of the United States, and the resulting shift from within the bounds of the Atlantic and Indian Ocean, through reaching the Pacific coasts of Asia, from the place where the westward coast of the Trans-American railways met the Pacific coast. Then, came the advent of the unification of the railway with those related transcontinental systems uniting Eurasia, the Americas, and Africa into a unified global system. Next, will come the links to the Moon and then Mars.
All of this is unified and subsumed by the increase of the energy-flux density of the leading sources of power which are employed according to that great principle which distinguishes man from the beasts. That principle is the use of forms of fire-power, from simple burning of fuels, to the higher reaches of energy-flux-density associated with nuclear-fission, and then thermonuclear fusion and beyond, as the increasingly mighty source of power on which progress depends.
In that process of transformation of our planet, and into pathways beyond, the power of mankind is increased as a benefit, in physical cost per unit of human action per capita and per square kilometer of territory, as this is fairly measured in terms of what it is convenient to identify as “energy-flux density.”
So, the highway from the Earth to the Moon, was built with aid of the technologies of an age of nuclear fission, and so shall we come to establish the virtual pavement through Solar space, from Moon to Mars, the latter a goal which defines the future state of this presently still-young century, through that highway through space defined by thermonuclear fusion, and then beyond.
Why the Railways Were Ruined
The existence of reliable highway systems, was not a mistake; but, tearing down transcontinental railway systems out of preference for highway travel and relatively shorter-term, costly air-transport systems, was a great, and fully intentional setback for mankind.
In the meantime, the most important weakness in railway systems was the failure to develop advances in high-speed transport, failures which are being remedied in some still limited degree by present generations now of high-speed rail and, more significantly, magnetic-levitation systems.
The shift away from railway systems came about through the effects of the British empire’s commitment to an attempted destruction of the United States, a commitment which had emerged from the defeat of London’s efforts to destroy the United States, through the efforts of the British Empire’s Lord Palmerston, in the attempted ruin of China and the use of such British Foreign Office devices as the revolt of London’s treasonously inclined puppet, the Confederacy. This British reaction was expressed, most notably, in the hysterical reaction of the British monarchy to the development of intercontinental Eurasian railway systems which were developed according to the precedent of the model of the U.S. transcontinental railway system, as this was led in Eurasia by the work of Russia’s D.I. Mendeleyev and by Germany’s Chancellor Bismarck.
So, we must recall an evil British empire’s success in bringing about the ouster of Bismarck as part of the British empire’s preparation for what were to become known as Britain’s launching of what were to be become World Wars I and II. This included, prominently, Prince Albert Edward’s enlisting Japan into attacks on China and Russia which were continued from 1895 through 1945, by such continuing means as Britain’s enlisting Japan, during the early 1920s, for a plan for a joint British attack on the naval forces and bases of the United States, and by putting the Bank of England’s choice, Adolf Hitler, into power in Germany, as also the crucial part which had been played during King Edward VII’s heyday, by the assassinations of France’s President Sadi Carnot, and U.S. President William McKinley.
So, that tradition which was continued by the British asset and U.S. President Harry S Truman, typified the changes in U.S. policy which had been associated earlier with the same Wall Street extension of the British empire which had backed Adolf Hitler’s rise to power in Germany, and which launched the great conflict called World War II.
The post-1945 threat of nuclear warfare, that of 1945-1989, initially on Winston Churchill’s behalf, dominated the world’s affairs, from the time of Bertrand Russell’s 1946, public launching of the policy of an intended, “preventive” nuclear attack on the Soviet Union, on the mistaken presumption that the Soviet Union would not be capable of timely development of nuclear weapons by itself. This direction in trans-Atlantic schemes has been associated, to the present day, with the combination of Britain and Wall Street finance, as continued through the destruction of the sovereignty of the nation-states of continental Europe through the post-1989 initiatives of Britain’s asset and Charles de Gaulle-hating French President François Mitterrand, Margaret Thatcher, and the son of Averell Harriman’s Prescott Bush.
These observations on the most relevant of the nearly past two centuries’ history of development and ruin of continental mass-transportation systems, are indispensable here, to warn against the short-term thinking, and consequent follies of the strategic thinking of most governments over the course of the time from London’s sponsorship, as in Bentham successor Palmerston’s time, and later, of the attempted destruction of the economic systems of continental Europe and beyond.
To understand the grand scale on which history actually unfolds, we must free leaders of nations from the typically deluded, relatively short-term, “who hit whom” mentality which had led what should have been great nations and cultures to engage in the follies through which sovereign nations destroy themselves in prolonged military and related conflicts modeled on Britain’s orchestration of the ruin of continental Europe through repeated copying of the chronic stupidity known as the recurrence of the mutual ruin of continental Europe through the long wars in, chiefly, Eurasia. These are the wars on which the rise of the British empire has based its power in the world, to the present day, as we have just recently experienced this again, in Her Britannic Majesty’s attempted imperial destruction of civilization itself, through the so-called Copenhagen conference.
Such are the precedents for the abominable role of a pro-treasonous, pro-genocidal policy-making under a follower of Britain’s, lying, evil follower of the World War II health-care followers of Adolf Hitler, such as former Prime Minister Tony Blair, and Blair’s follower in such pro-genocidal policies as President Barack Obama up to the present time.
We must, in particular, reach the happier state of mind, in which we act on the premise of understanding the essential difference between the necessity of respectively sovereign nation-states and the common, global interest which should, at the same time, unite the sovereign nations of the planet around policy-objectives worthy of the title, “the common aims of mankind.”
The great transportation and other physical systems, and the sharing of advances in science and technology, typify the means by which the aims of the nations of mankind are united, at the same moment that their cooperation is rooted in the principle of separation by reliance of each upon the indispensable instrument of national cultural sovereignty.
Thus far in history, the attempt to effect a system of nation-states which, while perfectly sovereign, are united by a common, subsuming objective for all nations, has been a net failure. We should recognize this from the examples of the war which Britain waged against the people of North America even before the 1776-1782 warfare for freedom, and in the subsequent schemes of Palmerston against the U.S. republic. Such were the British imperial impulses which caused two so-called “world wars” which were each organized by the initiatives of the British empire, and by the prolonged, so-called “Cold War,” and by Britain’s ruin of the sovereign nations of continental Europe since 1989, to the present date, as by Queen Elizabeth II’s continuing attempts at destruction of the United States of America at the present instant.
All nations do have an adducible common interest in the general welfare of humanity, if we have the wisdom to recognize that fact. That common interest is expressed by the role of national sovereignty in bringing each people up to their highest potential for self-development of a national culture, and of the cooperation to that end shared among those national cultures. Regrettably, the effort has been limited, more often, to minimize the intensity of conflict, rather than growing together, separately, but fraternally, through the development of our understanding of the common cause which unites us in great enterprises such as the present prospect for the development of nearby space.
As the great Aeschylus has warned us, still today, as in his Prometheus Trilogy, it is the fight against prohibition of the use of “fire,” such as the fiery power of nuclear fission, which distinguishes the morality of the human species from the bestiality of systems of slavery and serfdom, and which pits humanity against forms of society which impose upon societies that tendency for backwardness and irrationalism which has been the most significant common factor in man’s oppression of fellow-man, and in rendering men and women stupefied through aid of such wicked opposition to the advancement, as through forms of fire, of each and all people’s power to exist.
Today, the lever by which we may be able to effect a unification of respective sovereigns in common concern, and common means, is the evolution of the modes of power and transportation needed to unite mankind’s nations on this planet to common ends, and in common efforts in space beyond.
What Went Wrong in America?
Leading circles from among nations around the world, should consider a curious fact.
That fact is, that under the influence of a President Theodore Roosevelt, a cousin in flesh, but not spirit, of the later President Franklin D. Roosevelt, a pro-malthusian policy was advanced, as through the role of Theodore Roosevelt in the United States. This was done to the intended effect, that virtually no significant progress was allowed in the development of the land-area of a vast region from a point to the west of the Mississippi River and the western mountain ranges of California. This was the effect of Theodore Roosevelt’s adaptation of the Malthusian dogma to the Wall Street-centered, policy-shaping repertoires in the United States. This fact should not be received as surprising news, since, after all, Theodore Roosevelt’s uncle, who trained him, had been the London-based chief of the Confederacy’s intelligence services during the course of the famous U.S. Civil War which Britain had orchestrated against the existence of the United States.
This same, recurring pattern of British imperialism, still today, is also highly relevant, both as a crucial fact of modern history since the 1756-1763 “Seven Years War” in Europe, and as expressive of the way which what became known as World War I was brought into being.
Prior to the related facts of the ouster of Germany’s Chancellor Bismarck, who was an intellectual ally of the United States, and of the assassination of France’s President Sadi Carnot, Bismarck and the United States had been of a converging opinion respecting the wickedness of the Prince of Wales later known as Edward VII. Moreover, the great German economic reforms under Bismarck, had been premised on the successes of the United States’ policies, and the leading circles of the U.S.A. such as Henry C. Carey. Carey and Germany’s Bismarck circles shared much sense of a common mission for mankind, which both had shared in common with the leading circles of Russia at that time.
In fact, Bismarck, for as long as he remained Chancellor, was the block which prevented the Prince of Wales from launching a war between Germany and Russia, a war organized by Britain through the manipulation of a stupid Habsburg Kaiser intent on fomenting a religious war in the Balkans, a war whose principal intent, was the intent of Britain’s Prince Albert Edward to pit Russia and Germany against one another, that for the purpose, as Bismarck himself described British intent, to ruin the continent of Europe once more, with a new version of the 1756-1763 “Seven Years War.”
As long as Bismarck remained Chancellor of Germany, and as long as President William McKinley remained U.S. President, Prince Albert Edward’s intention to ruin continental Europe with a “world war,” was blocked.
There were chiefly three factors employed in Prince Albert Edward’s pre-launching of what was to become known as ‘World War I.” First, the assassination of France’s President Sadi Carnot. Second, Prince Albert Edward’s seducing Japan into commitment to a war against both China and Russia which would continue from 1895 to August 1945, and the later, 1920s commitment of Japan to an attack on the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor which was planned by agreement between London and Japan. Third, that assassination of U.S. President William McKinley, which brought the nephew of a British-owned U.S. traitor, Theodore Roosevelt, into the Presidency, thus switching the U.S.A. away from friendship with Bismarck’s Germany, as under McKinley, to the side of the British Empire.
The special case of Japan’s remaining an ally of Britain against both China and Russia, must be summarily clarified at this point.
That case must be considered in light of the fact that Britain had been allied with Japan against Russia, since approximately 1895, until the British fleet was put at risk of being taken over by Hitler. The defeat of France impelled Winston Churchill to play his part in the role of switching to the side of the U.S.A. out of fear that control over Europe by Hitler would lead quickly to the destruction of the British empire itself. That was an empire which Britain could not continue to defend by an alliance with France, once France itself had been conquered by Germany.
Japan could not make a comparable switch away from an alliance, especially since Japan’s new situation had already led it into combining a “Go South” element with its existing commitments to destruction of the U.S.A. as well as China and Russia. Japan stayed, uncomfortably, with Hitler, all of which, on Japan’s part, was a legacy of what had been, until the fall of France, the British alliance with Japan, against Britain’s former Pearl Harbor target of the 1920s, the U.S.A., in addition to the original Japan alliance against China and Russia.
In all of this, of course, Wall Street was always both, chiefly, an asset, but also an ally of the British empire, as Wall Street is a British asset, rather than a loyal representative of the U.S.A., as has been the case since the February 1763 Peace of Paris, as the case of the 1925 court-martial of U.S. General Mitchell also shows. That is key to the implicitly treasonous, presently continuing “bail-out” policy of U.S. Representative Barney Frank, and also of U.S. President Barack Obama throughout the 2007-2010 interval to the present date.
Such was also my own personal experience, in Burma (Myanmar) and India during 1945-1946, which virtually all alert U.S. military personnel in the region experienced on the ground during that same period of time.
The U.S. Railroads
The U.S. railway system had continued to play a leading, if waning role in U.S. economic development until about 1924-1926, but was revived from threatened ruin by the Presidency of Franklin Roosevelt. The U.S. railway system played a leading logistical role in the mobilization for the U.S.A. role in World War II, and in the development of the U.S. economy, and the war-mobilization, under President Franklin Roosevelt.
However, the ongoing development of the U.S. national-defense highway system took hold during the middle through late 1950s, as signalled by the Wall Street-steered, ill-fated outcome of the negotiations between the Pennsylvania and New York Central railway systems, and the automobile was used as the bait to induce the U.S. population to participate in a long-term process of the destruction of its own national economy.
The last gasp of an attempt to return the U.S. economy to sane policy overall, collapsed with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
The relevant trend toward recurring new wars in the image of the Seven Years War, as during what has been now more than a century of a trend in world history had actually begun with that 1890 ouster of Chancellor Bismarck, which opened the doors for what was to become World War I. Prior to the 1890s generally, and the assassination of U.S. President McKinley in particular, there had been a deep friendship among the United States, Germany, and Russia, in opposition to British imperialism, a tradition traced back to Catherine the Great’s role in leading that League of Armed Neutrality which made the establishment of the United States possible, a friendship with Russia which had also played a crucial role in assisting U.S. defense against the British Empire’s controlling hand in deploying the Confederacy as a puppet of London.
Indeed, truth be told, it was the British Empire itself which was actually responsible for the organizing of what became World Wars I and II, and much other evil, betwixt and between. It was a treasonous impulse within the United States, an impulse rooted in the British East India Company’s control of what became traitor Aaron Burr’s Wall Street, since the February 1763 Peace of Paris, which has been the crucial factor in all of the great folly and wickedness displayed by leading political forces, the so-called “Wall Street gang,” since that time.
It is the same thing to be witnessed in the roles of President George W. Bush, Jr., and President Barack Obama’s (and Representative Barney Frank’s) incumbency thus far. All known history is not a series of discrete events, but, rather, an evolving, dynamic process, reaching far back to times before an actual history of mankind has been known.
Therefore, the only competent remedies for the evils which mankind in general has suffered to our present knowledge of history thus far, are those actions which have been shaped intentionally by insight into the means for gaining willful control over the continuing process of history since ancient times unknown, to the present day, rather than debating the issue of which badger slaughtered the creatures in the henhouse last night.
It is breaking the traditional habit of warfare in history, and also in pre-history, which must be the choice of means for escaping the looming onrush of the new, global dark age of all humanity which the currently dominant trends in world affairs threaten to bring upon the entire planet such a very short time, now, ahead. Tradition now threatens the doom of all nations and peoples; if that tradition can not be willfully broken now, by the exceptional means which I present here now, it must then be said that a prolonged great new dark age already grips the entirety of our planet now. Time for changing that trend is now being rapidly exhausted.
That needed change can be made successfully now, if the appropriate forces can be assembled to that end, now.
Unless the common action of an initiating four great powers, as by one, can be launched now by the concerted leading action of the U.S.A., Russia, China, and India, there is no hope in sight for avoiding a prolonged and vast planetary new dark age, now.
The key to the measures which are required for such a noble outcome, are centered on a new form of organization among the sovereign nations of the planet through three leading perspectives. The unification of a planetary system of sovereign nation-states around the common aims of a planetary mass-transit system, a drive to the generalization of the power of nuclear fission and thermonuclear fusion, and the preparations for bringing the organization of the nearby Solar space of Johannes Kepler’s Earth, Moon, and Mars, and the Riemannian foundations of the fruitful genius of Academician V.I. Vernadsky and Albert Einstein into play as the leading ideas shaping the presently continuing history of that set of planets, now. Break the mold of slavery to ancient habits, to liberate that great power which is presently locked captive, within.
How National Territory Is Organized
Let us, for the sake of this moment’s discussion, treat all forms of ground-based mass transit as a single topic. Now, consider the way in which modes of transportation of both passengers and freight affect the quality of the organization of nationwide and wider territories.
From this standpoint, the post-World War II organization of U.S. territory according to the implications of economy of movement and of production, has been a physical-economic disaster, that on several premises.
The optimal organization of the distribution and local efficiency of the sundry principal qualities of communities, such as urban-residential, urban-commercial, urban-industrial, rural-industrial, rural-agricultural, rural-forestation, major watershed, and reserve territories, have become an economic catastrophe.
For example, density of frequent commuter movements, per capita, should be within a quarter to a half-hour each way, with aid of low-cost-to-passenger, dense, modern commuter systems to produce such an effect. In the greater surrounding region Washington, D.C. region, extending to West Virginia, of high-density commuter activity, for example, commuting time daily ranges up to four hours per day, with soaring fees, large fuel expenses, and an incurred lapsed time which destroys family life.
During the post-1945 interval, especially since the mid-1950s, there has been an accelerating concentration of employment in excessively overgrown urban and suburban regions, while vast expanses of formerly populated regions of agriculture and industry have been abandoned.
In part, these deleterious effects have been by-products of increasing the dependency of commuter life, and related transportation, upon the personal automobile, and even the willful destruction of highly efficient previously existing mass-transport systems. What is also notable about this trend has been the great increase in net cost to society incurred by these shifts.
At the same time, the reliance on the individual automobile for commuting within burgeoning urban and suburban localities, has greatly increased both the paid-out and indirect costs of transportation, relative to the lower costs of modern commuter systems: The increase of direct costs, relative to municipalities of reasonably-sized organization, around low-incurred-cost mass-transit systems, plus the heavy burden of lost “family time” also incurred in this way.
Another, increasingly significant factor, during recent decades since the 1950s in the U.S.A., for example, has been the effect of loss of reliable railway systems for passenger traffic on the characteristics of the air-transport systems. The costs, and lost-time factor in medium-distance passenger air transport, must be compared with high-speed mass rail and comparable ground-transport, as serving as links among urban centers. Overall, the failure to utilize the total territory of the United States efficiently, has had ruinous combined effects, in terms of costs incurred by a wrong choice of modalities in transportation-related factors of both urban and rural life.
High-speed ground-based transport, as by rail or magnetic-levitation systems, is both the optimal policy, and the modality which is optimal for both the people and the productive economy. The over-emphasis on dependency on the private automobile, instead of rail and comparable modes, has been insane, as very costly, in its sundry varieties of effects.
V. The Souls of the People
Mesopotamia has given the world what I regard here as examples of the great disasters which the tendency toward oligarchical cultures has brought, repeatedly, upon mankind. I refer, in the first instance, to the induced decadence which led to the fall of Sumer, and the ruin of the once great Baghdad Caliphate, and, in between, the consequence of the combined effects of the Peloponnesian War and the replacement of the progressive culture typified by Archytas and Plato, as distinguished from the accelerated decadence of a drift into an oligarchical decadence which had been associated with Aristotle and his followers.
I also refer to the so-called “oligarchical model” associated with the negotiations between King Philip of Macedon and the Achaemenids.
View those several examples from ancient and medieval history from the standpoint of a similar kind of cultural degeneration which has struck the U.S.A. and Europe from the hands of Truman and Churchill, and in other places, despite what had once been the defeat of the evil Hitler regime in Europe.
I refer to presently continuing, morbid, moral and intellectual disasters, such as the recent pestilences known, variously, as the European Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), and the related case of the existentialist movement associated with those so-called “Frankfurt School” existentialists associated with the sometime lovers, Hannah Arendt and the sometime Nazi Martin Heidegger. The point concerning those matters which is of special relevance for this report, is the fact that such intellectual viruses as those have a strong tendency for destruction of the creative potential of the persons drawn into submission to such traditions.
The term “Classical art-forms,” when employed in a meaningful way, makes reference to the fact that it is chiefly in Classical artistic compositions, as in the tradition of the Classical school of Eighteenth-century Europe of Johann Sebastian Bach, Wolfgang Mozart, Ludwig Beethoven, and that of Abraham Kästner and such of his associates as Gotthold Lessing and Moses Mendelssohn, and of their follower Friedrich Schiller, or the Classical school in physical science of such followers of Filippo Brunelleschi, Nicholas of Cusa, and such explicit followers of Cusa in science as Leonardo da Vinci, Johannes Kepler, Pierre de Fermat, Gottfried Leibniz, Carl F. Gauss, Lejeune Dirichlet, Bernhard Riemann, and such followers of Riemann as Academician V.I. Vernadsky, and Albert Einstein.
The Classical school is otherwise fairly identified as the disciplined expression of the creative powers of the imagination, as in Johannes Kepler’s uniquely original discovery of gravitation, the powers on which all valid discoveries in matters of physical science, and art, depend.
With the post-World War I rise in the influence of the depraved, post-positivist, radical reductionist Bertrand Russell and such among Russell’s more notorious devotees, such as an angered David Hilbert’s rejects, Professor Norbert Wiener and John von Neumann, the creative aspect of science was diminished as the representatives of the older generation, born before, or slightly after so-called World War I, died out, or were simply, frequently passed over, as was even Albert Einstein to a large degree, since the heyday of the Fifth Solvay Conference of 1927, onwards.
The existentialist depravity is fairly treated as an echo of the factor of corruption which struck down Classical Greece’s role as a political power during the Peloponnesian War. The rise of Aristotle’s influence, and that of the radically reductionist apriorism of his follower Euclid, is typical of the problem.
Admittedly, there has been scientific and related progress even among the ranks of reductionists such as some positivists, as in the cases of Karl Weierstrass, his follower Georg Cantor, and David Hilbert, or Hermann Minkowski. This occurs despite the streak of a-priorism traced from Euclid, that to the degree that their work represented an attempted reform of, rather than the needed break with the Euclidean hoax of a-priorism.
Define true creativity, in both science and in Classical artistic composition, as being the domain of the Classical-artistic modes of the imagination.
This subject pertains to those problems of sense-certainty which arise in ways typified by Johannes Kepler’s unique discovery of the general Solar principle of gravitation, as presented in his The Harmony of the Worlds. The method presented by Kepler there, uses the asymmetrical motions of respectively visual and harmonic expressions of effects of universal gravitation, to define his uniquely original discovery of the general principle of gravitation for the Solar system.
Kepler’s rejection of the foolish, reductionist method of sense-certainty, freed science, by use of the scientific method of contradiction among the experience of the senses, as by Nicholas of Cusa’s De Docta Ignorantia, and the use of the physical principle of the catenary, by Filippo Brunelleschi for the crafting of the cupola of Florence’s Santa Maria del Fiore. It is not the senses which “know,” but, rather, the reading of sense-perceptions by means of the creative powers unique to the human mind; it is the man, not his mere footprints, which is the subject of true scientific, and Classical artistic knowledge.
Einstein’s appreciation of Kepler’s discovery produced the famous notion of a finite, but not bounded universe, otherwise known as an anti-entropic, Riemannian universe.
The lesson to be emphasized in addressing the role of human creativity in the advancement of human life on, and beyond the present bounds of our planet, is typified by the recent century’s experience with such transcendental phenomena as nuclear fission and thermonuclear fusion. As the legendary forces of attrition push us away from reliance on what had been considered as competent economic policy, to higher orders of economic science-drivers, we require what should be regarded as that famous principle, that what has passed is attrition, and what must be, is the higher energy-flux densities which are only typified for us today by the notions of nuclear fission and thermonuclear fusion.
On this account, while the trans-Atlantic economies presently regress, chiefly, from fading twilight, toward scientific darkness, the nations of Asia such as China and India, have recognized the essential role of those leaps in progress which must be brought into practice, to overcome the errors inherent in the presumption that each national culture must simply copy the steps made by those cultures gripped by their own adoption of that legacy of decline which has recently come to dominate trans-Atlantic culture. This was the decline which has been oncoming since the decline from the level represented by the leading role of President Franklin Roosevelt during the course of preparing for, and conducting the defeat of the Nazi menace prior to and during what has been referred to as “World War II.”
It is the creative powers which distinguish the essential nature of the human beings from that of the beasts, the powers native to the human creative-artistic imagination, the powers on which we must depend for bringing about those seemingly astonishing leaps upward in the human condition throughout the planet, and beyond, on which the escape from the presently menacing collapse into decadence, into which the old Trans-Atlantic order has fallen—we may hope, only temporarily.
Without a shift of outlook, from merely past experience, to the needed discovery of a future, beyond the reach of the past civilization, as a planetary system’s phenomenon, we were already doomed to a prolonged, planet-wide dark age of all humanity. It is the challenge of the horrid poverty still met en masse in Asia and Africa today, which should become the source of stimulus which will bestir the rescue our planet from a presently, otherwise, inevitable slide into the abyss.
[fn_1]. It should be evident, that, under Lord Shelburne’s leading role in the 1782 establishing of the original British Foreign Office as the key political instrument of the imperialist British East India Company at that time, and that Foreign Office’s role in the orchestration of the induced self-inflicted ruin of the French monarchy over the course of the 1782-1789 interval. [back to text for fn_1]
[fn_2]. For example, until the change which occurred beginning the 1970s, studies showed that the cost of mass-transit within the metropolitan New York City region was less if no fares were collected. Free public rapid-transit was, in physical principle, less costly to the combined passengers and public providers of the municipality providing this service, than a fare-based system. Turnstile society is, inherently, generally, a poorer performer for the economy as a whole, than a free-per-event mode. [back to text for fn_2]
[fn_4]. The modern conception of non-Euclidean physical curvature is appropriately traced to such examples as Brunelleschi’s use of the catenary as a physical principle, as for the crafting of the cupola of Florence’s Santa Maria del Fiore, and Nicholas of Cusa’s rejection of Archimedes’ notion of the quadrature of the circle. See also Carl F. Gauss’ warning against the notions of a “non-Euclidean” geometry of the misguided type associated with Lobatchevsky and Jonas Bolyai. [back to text for fn_4]