SCIENCE VS. MATHEMATICS
From LaRouche, Basement, Forecasting, Empire
Life beyond sense-perception:
SCIENCE VS. MATHEMATICS
by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
April 14, 2011
I have often been sent questions respecting certain matters of physical science which define the relevant, indicated topic in terms of what is fairly identified in conventional terms of reference, as mathematical“sense-certainty.” For as long as the suggested dialogue remains within the confines of emphasis on formal mathematical reference, the discussion can often proceed within the familiar bounds of a discussion, as within the implied, specifically mathematical terms of reference posed by the legendary “typical questioner.” In the case of more serious qualities of discussions, that convention is no longer a profitable one; a shift to a Riemannian framework of reference is required. Then, what is usually considered as a customary mathematical situation no longer applies. Therefore, for the latter cases, a strictly Riemannian standpoint is to be applied, as in a manner typified by Bernhard Riemann’s own 1854 habilitation dissertation and the related parts of the arguments of Carl F. Gauss and Lejeune Dirichlet.
Since August-September 2010, the leading aspects of the work conducted in “the basement” project, have been deliberately shifted, globally, ever farther away from the ontologically paradoxical domain of a merely imagined quality of a physical space-time of “space, time, and matter,” to the premises of an intrinsically noëtic system of universal cosmic radiation. This shift from those earlier premises, from particles in space and time, to the notion of a universal cosmic radiation, has now greatly improved the quality of productivity of the team.
This shift has reflected the effect of the implicitly obligatory standpoint of Academician V.I. Vernadsky’s developed conception of the partition of physical cosmic space-time. The shift induced by Vernadsky’s discoveries is toward a conception which could not have been brought efficiently into existence without locating it within the domain of the specifically Riemannian principles of an intrinsically anti-entropic, cosmic universality.
Thus, it has been noted recently among those associates of mine, that we live actually, within a universe which we sense as surrounding our galaxy, a universe in which we find ourselves to appear to be imprisoned in the embrace of a pervasive red-shift. This apparent effect of this shift in outlook, is an ironical experience which is often the result of the widespread, but wrongheaded presumption that, either, the notion associated with the term physical-space-time has been defined by an implicitly, previously fixed framework of mathematical-physical-time reference, or, even, in the worst case of ostensibly scientific opinion, a universally entropic one. Yet, the contrary evidence, that which is to be premised on the study of the history of life-forms whose development is to be defined within the embrace of our galaxy, has demonstrated that our universe itself is intrinsically anti-entropic throughout.
The subject of the apparently recurring 62 millions-year galactic cycle bearing on the history of the conditions of earthly life-forms, as in the case of the catastrophe of the great “lizards,” is a prominent, but also increasingly ironical sort of exemplary feature of that line of the discussion.
The essential distinction between the two states of mind, lies in that between the outlook which places a primary emphasis on sense-perception, and that which regards the experience of mere sense-perception from the higher standpoint, not that of mere sense-experience, but, of the view of sense-perception which is subsumed by the notion of mind as such itself.
As I have said, frequently, on this specific account, we must contrast the false standpoint which regards reality as located within the bounds of the sense-perception, a wrongheaded view limited to the footprints left by sensory experience, rather than locating actual existence in terms of the evidence of reality whose existence must be located ontologically in the invisible object which has caused the footprints to be left behind. The latter being the standpoint of the human mind, rather than the view which adopts sense-perception as the primary location of the attributable ontological expression of functional reality.
The former, wrong-headed, reductionist outlook, had been one which had adopted the implied view of the imagined existence of universal space as being, either, ontologically, a constant “background” of all sensed experience, or a decaying space-time background which is being, in some fashion, “used up” (i.e., “entropically”) by the “wear and tear” of experience.
Contrary to the popular, wrong-headed outlook, the “red shift” experience, as such evidence of experience has been noted by one among our “basement associates,”1I.e., Ben Deniston. points in the direction of a universe which is progressing to higher (“anti-entropic”) ontological states, leaving the eternally laggard and decadent behind.
My view expressed here, the latter one, must be recognized as located ontologically in the expressed standpoint of Bernhard Riemann, as by, implicitly, Nicholas of Cusa, Johannes Kepler, and Gottfried Leibniz before Riemann, and, implicitly, Plato still earlier.
The Two Opposing Views
The distinction between the noëtic standpoint of Cusa, and his like through Riemann and Vernadsky, and the opposing, entropic outlook of such advocates of the oligarchical principle as Aristotle and empiricist Paolo Sarpi, is expressed, for known human cultures, as the coincidence of the attachment to the specifically oligarchical social principle which is shared among the tradition of those evil, anti-humanistic bastards of the common cult of alleged, or simply accepted notion of universal entropy, bastards as such cases as the Olympian Zeus, Aristotle, King Philip of Macedon, the Achaemenids, and the legacy of the succession of four Roman empires, the legacy from that of ancient Rome through the time of the British imperial system of global monetarism today.
The latter, defective outlook, is expressed in its notably depraved form, by the so-called “green movement” spawned by agencies such as the pro-genocidal World Wildlife Fund (WWF) of Britain’s Prince Philip and his sundry “lickies and lackeys” of today, as by such abominations as the pro-genocidal doctrines of a current British lackey, President Barack Obama. The same, pro-Satanic depravity, is met in the 1950 launching of the nominally European Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), which has served as the post-World War II flagship of sorts for the mass-murderous depravity expressed by the so-called “Greenie” pestilence of today, as by the British-controlled puppet known as President Barack Obama.
We must recognize the fact, that what I have lambasted in a certain fashion as the inherent depravity of the practice of a “Green movement,” is nothing other than the same thing as the practice of the system of oligarchism which Aeschylus identified in the worship of the evil Olympian Zeus, a worship which has been the essence of, among other oligarchical forms of cultures, that to which much of Mediterranean monetarist imperialism as can be traced, as in the better known antiquity of Mediterranean cultures from the roots of the Roman empires, as from Octavian’s Capri, to present-day imperial London under the heirs of the consummately evil William of Orange.
It is only when we review the history of European cultures from the vantage-point of mind considered as the primary expression of existence, rather than the mere shadow-world of sense-perception, that the essential considerations underlying the presently perilous situation of mankind globally today, are brought competently to the surface of today’s realities.
Mankind, most notably that of the willful characteristics of society in the trans-Atlantic region, is now poised immediately at the brink of a threatened global catastrophe for all mankind, as that fact must recognized as being nothing other than a matter of certain biological and related facts currently, the fact that mankind as a species is now approaching an awesome sort of recurrence of a 62 millions-year galactic cycle which, perhaps, our species might not survive—unless we might be enabled, now, to quickly change our ways in relevant respects. The required list of changes would include such indispensable actions as, despite all the damage that J.P. Morgan’s Alan Greenspan and his Gramm-Leach-Bliley scheme could do, an immediate, full restoration of U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt’s Glass-Steagall law. That restoration would not be a sufficient cure for our present situation; but, it would be an indispensable first step toward bringing on the more likely possibility of our species’ survival.
Imagine a desolate specter of some former planet Earth, from which all trace of the former existence of human life had been turning to dust, or worse. That prospect, including the prospect posed by a range of relevant scientific knowledge of the declining level of Earth magnetism, is probably a closer threat than you might imagine, unless we are enabled to change our world’s ways in the proper direction to offset such a risk, and that soon.
In presenting the preceding statements, I have not exaggerated in the slightest degree. The crucial turn is to be made very soon, and by a leading action to be launched from the United States itself, that almost immediately. The current rates of acceleration into the nearby domain of global hyperinflation, especially, immediately, in the trans-Atlantic sector, have set the relevant, early deadline for reversal of the presently prevalent policies of practice during the next several months, perhaps less, accordingly, unless we in our U.S.A. act to set the pattern which enables the trans-Atlantic community to break free from the homicidal drug of Queen Elizabeth II’s presently reigning European economic-suicide recipe called “the Euro.”
To restate the crucial point presented thus far, the world has presently entered a time corresponding to the not exactly mythical “Twilight of the (evil) Gods.” There is nothing actually mythical about any actual part of that present threat. Witness the fact, that there have been four successive Roman Empires; the present fourth of these, the present British-centered monetarist form of imperial system, is now in the beginning of its own death-throes, death-throes expressed most visibly in an ominous, rapidly accelerating, presently global hyper-inflationary spiral of growing cultural pessimism’s despair.
There is a potential remedy for this problem itself, but not for the British empire; that empire which, like the legendary Samson, will not willingly die alone, and, like the four Roman empires since Octavian on Capri; the principle of empire will demand: “No one shall triumph over our deceased imperial body; if we go down, we will take all of you, like the Emperor Nero and his family house, down with us.” British lackey, and U.S. President Barack Obama, is presently lurching inside his own Nero-like fantasy, in the direction of the effects of his morbidly compulsive intent for all of us on this planet today.2In my webcast of April 11, 2009, I set forth the essential features of President Obama’s personality and intentions. All of those who have sought to reject my assessment of the essential features of that President’s personal character and policies have now been exposed as horribly mistaken. Unfortunately, the teaching of a truthful and efficient conception of history had been long removed from our educational systems. Everything I said on April 11, 2009, has been now more than fully confirmed, two years later, even to the finest point of detail. It should now be conceded, “Case closed.”
The Practical Steps To Be Taken
That much said now to set the stage for the subject thus placed immediately at hand, here thus far: the challenge placed before all who would be competent leaders of our society out of the presently deepening pit of despair, that Glass-Steagall must be immediately re-enacted, or, else, the United States, and many other nations, are presently doomed to a catastrophe, that during the course of the present year.
Only the virtual nullification of tens of trillions of nominal, “play-money dollars”-worth of what have been, intrinsically, fraudulent monetarist assets, would halt the presently accelerating process of that disintegration of the United States as an actual nation which has been continued, that which had been done at a generally accelerating rate, since August 2007. This has been the growing menace for humanity under the presidencies of Presidents George W. Bush, Jr., and under Barack Obama thereafter. Only a sudden shift from a monetarist system, back to our Federal Constitution’s specification of a credit system, as was done under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, could allow the United States to continue to have an assured existence as a nation during the remainder of the present calendar year.
Only through the transfer of the nominal debts which are of the character of the debts of a merchant-banking system, moved out of the accounts of a credit-system-based commercial banking system, could the general collapse of the U.S. economy led by Alan Greenspan’s stooges, Bush and Obama, be halted. Without that return to a constitutional U.S. credit-system, out of a British imperialist monetarist system, the continued existence of our presently imperilled U.S.A. were not possible for the immediate future now before us.
The reason that separation of a credit-system from a monetarist-system must occur, is that the two categories are not interchangeable. Credit, as defined by the implications of the Preamble of the U.S. Federal Constitution, which replaced the failed monetary systems of the separate states, by a Federal system of constitutional credit, has no principled coincidence with the functions of a monetarist system. Whoever, at whatever level, does not recognize that functional distinction, is not actually competent to judge these matters; and, the failure to recognize that distinction among authorities of relevant rank, can be worse than merely disastrous for our republic’s existence.
Admittedly, the shift back to that credit system built into the foundations of our Federal Constitution, would trigger the general bankruptcy of the present, monstrously diseased world monetarist systems. So what! Drink the waters of sweet relief! This would occur through the replacing of the disease called monetary systems, replaced by a credit system operating among respectively sovereign nation-states, preferably a fixed-exchange-rate system. However, that which will be lost to the serried, polluted ranks of merchant banking, must be recognized as the diseased organ which imperils the life of the patient, and the imperative for that surgical action which is to be praised throughout most of humanity, praised as a blessing delivered for the sake of the security of the nations and their people generally.
That much said in the matter of introduction of the subject at hand, we now proceed to the content of the matter to be treated here.
I. EXPERIENCING MAN’S ACTUAL MIND
The essence of the intellectual, and also spiritual challenge which must be made conscious, has been only rarely achieved today, compared to a time three or more generations ago. The essential quality to be regained, is that which partakes of the categorical nature of the distinction of the developed expression of the powers of the human mind from the imparted effects which are specific to those who employ the speaking voice suited for presenting notions specific to the domain of mere sense-perception. Hence, the importance of the specific qualities of the Classical singing voice set at an expression very close to C=256.
Take the case of Johann Sebastian Bach, for example. Does one hear the set of his preludes and fugues as notes on a keyboard, or as a chorus of voices sung in counterpoint? Carry the same notion to the nearest cousin of Classical musical counterpoint, that set in agreement with a well-tempered scale with voice-registration and its register shifts at C=256. Now, carry that over into the expressed distinction of identity of the voices represented in a Bach fugue, each from one another, such that they might be heard speaking to one another, rather than like a cheerfully meaningless mutual sort of merely formal, or even meaningless consonance.
Having taken that point into consideration, now apply it to the manner in which persons today are overheard speaking, either in a dialogue, or as if in a dialogue. Are we producing music, or merely pleasantly seasoned, but otherwise empty minestrone?
Such distinctions are not limited to Classical artistic expressions as such; the state of mind to be expressed by what a Bach well-tempered standard represents, is a model of the way in which to deliver and receive meaningful expressions of ideas “respecting man and nature.”
The effect of the loss of Classical artistic modalities in thinking and communication, is to have produced something akin to “dead men talking.” Therefore, learn to place your mind in the Classical artistic domain of counterpoint which I have just now summarized, instead of trying to communicate in bursts of either digital coding, or the music of brutish reductionists’ babble.
The distinctions which I will be emphasizing, repeatedly, but in varying ways, in the remainder of this present report, are implicitly those which I have just suggested to you in opening this present chapter, now, thus far.
With those several preceding paragraphs in mind now, go directly from the close of the opening two paragraphs of Bernhard Riemann’s 1854 habilitation dissertation, to the concluding, third section. Contrast the view of today’s, unfortunately, still prevalent belief in a mere five senses, to the broader array of images required by Section III of that dissertation.3“Anwendung auf den Raum” (“Application to Space”). During, and since the work of Riemann, the number of functionally identifiable senses has been greatly increased, as he had forecast there, by the development of instruments which have the effect of functioning as independent senses, thus supplementing the repertoire of the merely nominal five. This development has occurred in the manner of adding new specific types of measurements of physical effects which may be demonstrated as existing outside the direct detection by the allegedly “original five.”
Riemann’s 1854 habilitation dissertation must be recognized as having been a principal landmark in the history of science. Since that work was originally published, a competent science could never again presuppose honorable claims to being an actually physical science if practiced according to the notions of what are merely sense-perceptions as such, nor still be considered as expressions of a truly sane mind.
Modern science is, in important part, as if a reborn reflection upon the achievements which had been associated with those among the Pythagoreans and their followers, such as Plato and his followers through Eratosthenes. The vitality of those ancient foundations of modern science, was revived in the development of modern science by circles associated with such Renaissance figures as Filippo Brunelleschi, Nicholas of Cusa, and by such avowed followers of Cusa such as Leonardo da Vinci and Johannes Kepler, and, thence, also Gottfried Leibniz, all of whom employed the creative powers of their minds for mental compositions expressed in that form of expression of Classical-artistic counterpoint.
With those words of caution said, it must be emphasized, that the Fifteenth Century “Golden Renaissance” had risen during an interval of history between the collapse of the medieval Europe of the Third Roman Empire, during the Fourteenth-century “New Dark Age,” and later efforts of science’s oligarchical adversaries to bring on a Fourth Roman Empire, an attempt which was extended from the time of the fall of Constantinople, through the wake of 1492-1648 religious warfare. So, the accession of the New Venetian Party of William of Orange, expressed a Satanic-like ugliness of the process of the Phoenix-like rebirth of the modern, Fourth Roman Empire, the birth of that British Empire which, presently, still dominates the planet as a whole at this moment, but must be compelled to cease doing so.
The reigns of true empires which are monetarist systems in their character, such as the Phoenix-like series of four successive qualities of Roman empires, are almost never consistently synchronous with the social and scientific developments which the reigns of empires overlap. Empires rise, decline, and collapse, at the same time their predecessors are hurrying to collapse in turn, as they, in their turn, are decaying in a compelling impulse of preparation for the arrival of those powers which might be coming to supersede them.
Throughout the recurring ebb and flow of such historical processes, what has remained constant, is a certain specific potentiality for goodness which distinguishes the human species from all other known creatures. That is the distinction whose embodied effect is the unique quality of the potentially noëtic mental powers of the human mind. The empire seeks to crush mankind into the state of animal-like perpetual sameness, as today’s so-called “environmentalists” express the inherent evil of bestialization lately named “creative destruction.” In the meantime, see the contrast to the Promethean man who works to burst the bonds of oligarchical tyrannies, by unleashing the formerly captive intellect of the oppressed by means of the flourishing of a new renaissance of human creativity, as the winning of the freedom of our U.S. constitutional republic from the evils of the British empire, illustrates the point.
This desired pattern of upward developments and declines, has occurred in a form which Riemann’s own practice emphasizes in the opening two paragraphs, and the concluding section of his dissertation.
He begins in the manner in which the customary presumption of the conventional five notions of senses had sought to be bounded, as by friction, within limits, as the fraudulent concoction of the “Second Law of Thermodynamics” had attempted to do through the continuing succession of processes within which science has repeatedly superseded itself. In the conclusion of Riemann’s dissertation, the renaissance which serves to liberate the oppressed is presented as to be effected by aid of forms of instrumentation which form an initial listing of those newly created instruments which provide us access to the outer and innermost limits of earlier scientific practices of sense-perception. Such discoveries as the latter, are the instruments which provide us the breakthroughs by which humanity gains access to breaking into man’s actions in the regions of what had been, before then, both the very small and the very large, regions which had been situated as out of reach of scientific practice in earlier times.
Similarly, by the same rule presented by Riemann there, mankind’s science has repeatedly added to the known specific varieties of qualities of extended physical space, including the discoveries of experimentally validated categories represented as physically distinct qualities. These latter types include those existing among the members of the expanding roster of qualities of known types of extended physical space-time. Academician V.I. Vernadsky’s extension of non-living, plant and animal, and human cognitive categories of extended physical space-time, is combined in effect as a single, crucial case. The inter-relations defined in the manner developed for this purpose by Vernadsky, et al., are typical of the matter of principle involved.
There is a well-ordered definition of these higher qualities of the ostensible supplements for sense-perception, which has been provided for us by the emergence of the recognition that space, time, and matter, as themselves, lack the quality of intention desired for what was hoped to be “the solidly independent verities,” a faulty intention which was formerly associated with the misinformed habit of treating space, time, and matter as respectively independent qualities of experience. For effective science today, there is now only “space-time-matter,” rather than a set of discrete divisions among the three usually referenced categories, Such advances are typified by the example presented by the evidence of the astonishing parametric characteristics of the function of the Crab Nebula, as shockingly new, recent evidence from the most recent years, attests.
Sarpi: A New Satan Enters
So, it goes, in the actually successful examples from the history of the emergence of modern European science under the influences of such as Dante Alighieri’s discoveries and those of his Fifteenth-century followers. These followers include Filippo Brunelleschi, Nicholas of Cusa, and Cusa’s principal, explicitly avowed scientific followers, such as Leonardo da Vinci and Johannes Kepler. These exemplars have presented us with evidence of the crucial significance of Kepler’s uniquely original discovery of the principled characteristics of the Solar orbits of Mars and Earth, as Kepler did through the use of a “vicarious hypothesis,” as in Kepler’s uniquely original, more crucial discovery of the principle of universal gravitation.
The particular significance of the content of the process of generating that latter discovery, is that the definition of a universal principle of gravitation required the contrast of two, respectively independent qualities of measures, that of both sight and of the harmonics of hearing, for locating the principle of gravitation outside either of those two attributed sensory metrics. The role of the system of natural musical harmonics pivoted on the natural register-shifts of the properly developed human singing voice in a durable singing voice’s range of about C=256, was a crucial feature of any deep insight into the implications of Kepler’s discovery in astrophysics.
The particular significance of Kepler’s precedent for treating our immediate topic in this report, is what Albert Einstein recognized as Kepler’s implicit discovery of a universe which is, as Einstein specified, always finite, but never bounded.
There is a significant correlative of this line of argument, in what has been the consistent incompetence of statistical forecasting in economics, and also in the similar follies of many persons psychologically conditioned into a relatively numbed state of reliance on the inherently incompetent, merely nominalist, statistical-mathematical methods widely used as “cheap shot,” allegedly “standard” forms of substitutes for the traditionally, standard experimental methods of competent modes of scientific investigations.4For example, there is no competence in the use of statistical methods as doctrinal pretexts for separating earthquakes and volcanos into mutually exclusive categories, functionally. Similarly, virtually all statistical economic forecasts are consistently, and scandalously incompetent charlatanism. As the presently pervasively bankrupt trans-Atlantic system of economic doctrine of practice demonstrates, there never was, nor is, a correlation in principle between monetary values and the actual ordering of physical-productive practices. To the extent that the economic policies of nations have been competent, they achieved this only by violating every imaginable rule of mere statistical-economic forecasting, as I have done repeatedly, with exemplary success during a span from Summer 1956 to the present most recent date of my forecasting. What most often connects two points within an economy, is a more or less catastrophic interval of purgative bankruptcies.
While financial prices do have their effects in political economic processes, there is no actually physical science in what usually accepted as “mathematical economics.”
At this point, we must make time for a crucially important interlude here, a reflection on the subject of the origins and role of the still reigning British Empire: “the Fourth Rome.”
Since the fall of what is called, presently, “ancient Greece,” in the Peloponnesian War, and the later death of Alexander the Great, the potentialities of the Mediterranean maritime cultures were bent on the systemic moral depravity of that monetarist system known as the original Roman Empire. The causes and effects of that aspect of Mediterranean and later European history, are to be classed under the heading of what was known to the ancients of those and somewhat earlier times as “the oligarchical principle.”
Among the so-called ancient Greeks, this oligarchical system was embodied in the reign of those classed as “gods,” the reigning oligarchy, over the remainder, those captives known as the mere “mortals.” Such are also the evil would-be “gods” of Wall Street and London today.
The earlier phase of the imperial system based on this notion of a maritime culture of a system of master and slave, was typified by the role of the infamous advisor to King Philip of Macedon, Aristotle. Aristotle was, most notably, a skilled specialist and researcher in the homicidal political art of poisoning. With the collapse of the third Roman Empire in a so-called “New Dark Age,” a fourth Roman empire emerged from the rubble of the 1492-1648 period of religious warfare. That was the new incarnation of a Roman empire based on the Sarpian principle of “The New Venetian Party” of William of Orange, as the kernel of what was soon to become the still existing, present British Empire.
The history of this origin and rise of what was to become that British empire, is of the following crucial significance for the competent understanding of the global crisis-conditions facing modern civilization presently. The following aspects of the matter are now added as follows, to clarify the way in which crucial developments bearing on contemporary policy-shaping of the trans-Atlantic region inherited their importance for today.
The Satanic Evil of Henry VIII
The beginning of that process of evil is to be traced from a certain moment in the life of King Henry VIII, as to be traced from the advent of that already indicated, high-ranking official of the Venetian system, Francesco Zorzi, an impassioned foe of the influence of the Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa.
Zorzi chose to disguise his identity as an official of Venice, through affecting the disguise of employment in London as, for a certain time, the key Venetian controller of England’s Henry VIII. Zorzi acted in concert with other members of the same Venetian circle operating under the direction of the infamous Venetian Ten, members of a circle including such Venetian agents as Cardinal Pole and Thomas Cromwell.
It was, as I have already emphasized above, the takeover of Henry VIII, in an operation centered around the King’s fiddle-footed impulse to seek a divorce from his Habsburg wife, which transformed the early stages of post-1492 religious warfare into the worst horrors within the entire span of the 1492-1648 interval of the resulting Catholic-Protestant warfare preceding the Peace of Westphalia.
The crucial consequence of this affair of Henry VIII and his marriages, is the switch of Henry’s allegiance, from the Papacy to the English adoption of the Protestant cause. The role in this alignment of the English House with the Protestant faction within the 1492-1648 interval, is the process which established the British monarchy as pivot of the Fourth Roman Empire, and of the Venetian-controlled monetarist-imperialist system which has dominated modern Europe since the period of Zorzi’s key role in the Venetian intervention into that process, which would, in historical fact, establish the future role of the British monarchy as the pivot of the reigning world imperial system up to the present date of last report received on that account.
The realization of this destiny embedded in Henry VIII’s loins, proved to have been the crucial subsequent strategic development coming out of the 1618 to 1648 phase of continued religious warfare, which was the 1688 arrival of the New Venetian Party’s William of Orange, to take over the British Isles from the decadent Stuarts. These British Isles were thus selected to become the intended command post for the new maritime empire which would become, through the curse of the so-called “Seven Years War,” the fourth Roman Empire, as that exists still, to the present day.
The rather silly, popular mis-description of that actual British Empire under the heirs of William of Orange, seeks to confuse the reality of the matter by limiting the dupe’s view of empire as that of a mere colonialist power, rather than a modern, British imperialist expression of the same principle as the three earlier models of the Roman Empire. The British Empire, like the three phases of the Roman monetarist empire which preceded it, secured its essential quality, as, later, Rosa Luxemburg clearly understood the principle of imperialism embedded within the continued existence of modern Britain, as the doomed destiny of a monetarist system of imperial control inherited from Caesar Augustus’ scheming on the Isle of Capri, a control exerted through the mechanisms which have been the primary form of existence of the British empire, a system of intrinsically usurious international loans.
That form of that empire, as it has continued to evolve in that same morally putrid direction under Queen Elizabeth II, has been a political imperial force lately distinguished by its post-1971 control over a supranational system of monetarism coordinated through the British Commonwealth, the so-called Inter-Alpha Group of banking organization. The chief target for the destruction of the United States has been flagrantly displayed since 1971, as a systematic process of induced self-destruction of the United States through aid of the follies of those incumbent U.S. Presidencies which have been submissive to London-defined global policies, as merely illustrated by such typical cases as the disgusting U.S. support for the British colonialist Malvinas War and the related British imperialist scheme of its asset J.P. Morgan for the destruction of the U.S. Glass-Steagall Law by the 1999 act of sodomy expressed as Gramm-Leach-Bliley.
Enter Paolo Sarpi and the birth of the British empire.
Some Relevant History of the Case
The specific distinction of modern British imperialism from the earlier three forms of Romanticism, is a feature which had emerged around the Anglo-Dutch developments during the course of the 1492-1648 religious warfare. The notable phase of that turn was situated in the role of Paolo Sarpi’s exploitation of the follies of the Council of Trent. The difference emerged in the following leading aspects. Whereas Sarpi adhered to the underlying assumptions of the Aristotelean systems, he recognized, as the Habsburg-led Catholic party of that time did not, that the scientific revolution launched by the great ecumenical Council of Florence, as, most notably, the scientific and related work of Nicholas of Cusa’s founding of modern science, had evoked deep-going cultural changes in European culture which could not be entirely reversed.
In fact, it was the Protestant factions, as in France, England, the Netherlands, and Germany, which came under the influence of the forms introduced by Paolo Sarpi which would emerge as the victor by the close of the Sixteenth Century.
So, in the rise of France’s great fool Louis XIV, despite the opposition to that folly by the great minister and successor to Cardinal Mazarin, Jean-Baptiste Colbert, the foolish Louis XIV allowed himself to be trapped by the folly of the 1685 Revocation of the Edict of Nantes.
With that revocation of Nantes, the rise of Sarpi’s party in Europe was secured as a part of the rise of the power of William of Orange’s faction through a key role of the hoaxes of Descartes’ faction, as Descartes’ role was represented by the Abbe Antonio Conti who was assigned to serve as the creator of the black magic hoaxster Isaac Newton, and, thus as leading adversary of Gottfried Leibniz and Leibniz’s influence during the course of the first half of the 18th Century.
This turn into France’s depravity came with the ominous death of Cardinal Mazarin and the betrayal of the Edict of Nantes under the foolishly ambitious Louis XIV. Louis XIV’s folly prepared the way, through perpetual warfare, for that later Seven Years War and the 1763 Treaty of Paris which would establish the British empire as the Fourth Roman Empire, from that time to the present date. As Germany’s greatest Chancellor, Bismarck, had foreseen the British empire’s motive in what was to become two “world wars” and more, that “Seven Years War” which had actually first secured the British monarchy’s position as an emergent world empire, has been the policy which has shaped most of the worst of those strategically tragic events which have ruined the world since the virtual “loss of the horseshoe nail” which began the selection of the British Empire by Venice’s use of the pathological personality embedded in Henry VIII.
II. SCIENCE AND THE SOUL OF MAN
Consider the case of a key figure in the effort to shape the outcome of the world of the Sixteenth Century, the case of the founder of competent forms of modern European strategy, Niccolo Machiavelli. Here, on this occasion, science, as defined by the exemplary Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, had deeply touched the soul of man.
Machiavelli, who must be understood as born five years after the death of Nicholas of Cusa, and twelve years prior to his crucially significant acquaintance with Leonardo da Vinci, had been a significant, and, intellectually, the ablest figure in the government of the Republic of Florence, until the crushing of that Republic by the military victory of the grown-decadent Medici family’s household over the Republic. Notably, the literary product of Machiavelli’s life-span (1469-1527) must be compared today with the reign of that great foe during those events shaped in large degree by the influence of the circulation of Machiavelli’s writings of that time throughout and beyond the span of the intrinsically evil monarchy of England’s Henry VIII (d. 1547). For reason of that success, Machiavelli, the leading, and most influential genius in military and related strategy of that century, was hated, hated because the work of his superior mind was so greatly feared in England, as in certain other centers of power, during, and beyond the space and time of the principal events of the mid-Sixteenth-century Europe.
Since that time, the study of the work of Machiavelli was employed to present the foundations of modern strategy in the leading programs of training of military and related intelligence professionals in the very definition of the name of “modern strategy.” It was for that same reason, that Machiavelli had become so much hated and feared in Britain, largely still to the present date. At the least, this has been the case up to the point of the 1989 collapse of the Soviet system under the most unfortunate, and hence widely despised as an ostensibly treacherous figure, Mikhail Gorbachov: the so-to-speak “Tricky Dick” of the Soviet Union’s history until the present date.
Nonetheless, amid all the relevant, usually muddled chatter about the subject of Machiavelli, both in generally published observations, and as a founder of modern strategy, I must say, that from the standpoint of my own experience in the field of intelligence respecting economic and related strategy, very few presumed specialists, even today, have actually grasped the actual principle underlying the root of the effectiveness in what has proven to have been the force of his writings.
Respecting what I have written here on the subject of strategy in this chapter thus far, there is no mere accident responsible for the commonplace foolishness of most peoples and governments in the matters of the results of gambling in finance, public policy, and warfare, of attributing the alleged genius to what passes in an often duped public opinion’s zeal for admiring alleged “success.” “Success,” for many, especially the election of a worse than silly choice for President, or a somewhat kindred event in Europe, is the image of the brass-ring in a “merry-go-round,” something gained, but rarely actually earned. Few cases expose that sort of popular delusion as thoroughly as the celebrated figure of Machiavelli. Actually, the lesson is rarely seen to have been actually learned, that success and failure exist not in the momentarily attained trophy seized, nor in the eating, but, in frequent cases of remembered French and other elections, in the kind of belly-ache which the putatively victorious party has gained for itself.
As President Charles de Gaulle might have agreed, in one sense of ironies, or another.
Competent strategy, when designed for actual benefit of mankind, rather than the winning of some silly, or worse sort of mere game of sport, lies in the deserved immortality of the enterprises served by those who served the needed benefits of mankind. Contrast the victory of the Adolf Hitler, who had been chosen for his place in the history of power by both the Bank of England and such Wall Street enterprises as the Wall Street Brown Brothers Harriman represented by the same Prescott Bush who was to have fathered two generations of worse than useless U. S. Presidents George H.W. and George W. Bush. True achievement is to be located in the benefits expressed as advances in the general welfare of mankind considered as a whole.
The actual content of the higher object of strategy, as Machiavelli’s genius is centered on this feature of his published writings, is the advancement of mankind. That can mean the same intention expressed by Aeschylus in admiration of the character of Prometheus’ service to the cause of all mankind. “Where is thy victory!?” Where is death’s sting?!
Such is the essence of the genius expressed by the work, and the influence of the work of Niccolo Machiavelli which has been his contribution to human understanding of the proper choice of purpose which must underlie all notions of strategy.
Sarpi and Russell’s “The New Aristotle”
As a certain British diplomat candidly remarked in a message to me on the subject of Bertrand Russell, Russell is fairly described as the most evil public figure of the Twentieth Century. What better could be said of the Russell who, in September 1946, prescribed immediate plans for the launching of a pre-emptive nuclear destruction of the Soviet Union, as if a deceased Adolf Hitler’s intentions against the Soviet Union were to be continued, Winston Churchill style?
At that time, Russell and Company had presumed that the United States and Britain would have secured a relevant arsenal of nuclear weapons before the Soviet Union had developed a comparable arsenal. In fact, the Soviet Union had not only acquired some use of the designs of the Anglo-Americans, but, through the influence of the great genius of Academician V.I. Vernadsky in educating the Soviet scientists in its own independent quality of nuclear-weapons capability, the Soviet Union was ahead of the Anglo-Americans in relevant aspects of deployable potential.
For some failed intellects in Anglo-American circles, Russell appeared to have abandoned “preventive nuclear warfare,” for the sake of a desire for peace. Of such ironies intelligent opinion says, the snake has not abandoned his venom, but, simply, changed the tactics selected for an even more monstrous expression of the same goal, this time for thermonuclear pre-emption, instead of air-dropped nuclear-fission bombs. Thus, we had Russell’s shift to what amounted, in effect, to the intention of threatening a thermonuclear Armageddon, instead of the earlier scheme for unprovoked nuclear weapons bombardments. That for some silly people, such as Russell’s silly dupes, is a means for avoiding war.
Those who actually understood the peculiar twist of evil which might be met among Russell’s cronies in the cult of systems analysis, as I did over the course of the 1960s and beyond, would not be fooled. They would not be fooled by the schemes associated with the Russell-steered grounding of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA). The kind of peace depending upon the adoption of vast schemes for human extinction, such as those of Russell’s intention, can not be ultimately distinguished, in any essential way, from the mass-genocide which is the avowed policy of the devotees of British consort Prince Philip’s proposal for mass-extinctions advanced under the title of the “vast population reductions” of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Nuclear, or thermonuclear extinction, or the schemes for genocide premised on “environmentalist” hoaxes, as both were stoutly proposed by Bertrand Russell, as in the genocidal doctrines promulgated by the Barack Obama Administration now, as in the policies of Adolf Hitler earlier, are all the same policy, if and when policy is considered in the light of the results of its practice, in the end.
Consider the similar case of the effort to ban nuclear power, especially when that proposed policy is combined with the fraud of pretending the reduction of “carbon emissions” is anything but another trick for promoting genocide through that expression of mass-homicidal, biological warfare against the size of human populations, schemes for “population reductions” far beyond anything ever attempted the Adolf Hitler regime—but not Hitler’s backers in the Bank of England and, also, in such U.S. Wall Street locations backing Hitler’s rise to power in Germany, such as Brown Brothers Harriman’s Prescott Bush, who was the father and grandfather, respectively, of two rather silly, subsequent Presidents of the United States who did not like me very much, to say the least.
Turn attention back to the case of Paolo Sarpi to find the deeper meaning of all that I have introduced into this present chapter, thus far. Focus on the crucially relevant implications of the humanist policies of both the founder of modern science, Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, and the patriot Niccolo Machiavelli. Start with the matter of the relevance of the case of Cusa to the case of Machiavelli’s influence as a strategist.
Precursors of Cusa’s Revolution
The actual birth of modern society had been begun, implicitly, by the role of Charlemagne’s “geopolitical” revolutionary shift of the region associated with such parts of today’s Europe as today’s territory of France and Germany, and some adjoining areas.
There are two most critical elements of background chiefly to be considered.
The first is located in a certain evolution of the Christian church best known today for the role of St. Augustine, and the movement of the leading centers of the Augustinian confession, via such as Isidore of Seville, and, then, later, into the fabled “Irish monks,” and, thence the honest efforts to civilize England’s Saxons, and, beyond that, the ecumenical expressions of the policies and practices of Charlemagne who formed an alliance against a decadent Byzantium with such leaders of the Arab Renaissance as Caliph Haroun al-Raschid. This pattern formed the arrangement through which the common cause against a degenerating Byzantine form of the Second Roman Empire, as typified by the cooperation between Charlemagne and Haroun al-Raschid, threatened to bring about the destruction of the Roman empire, and to create the basis for a truly civilized form of progress in the region of a Mediterranean bounded by Europe, west Asia (including ancient Iran), and North Africa.
Secondly, not only did Charlemagne establish the first serious pioneering in the development of the essential physical conceptions of a modern nation-state economy; but, the crucially revolutionary element of physical practice within that, was what is fairly identified as Charlemagne’s geopolitical revolution against the maritime form of imperial tyrannies represented by all principal expressions of what had been the original Roman Empire of Caesar Augustus:
the maritime form of social-class basis of oligarchism on which the fabled legacy of the social class of the Olympian, anti-Promethean Zeus has been premised, to the present day.
The central structural feature of Charlemagne’s geopolitical revolution, was the creation of a network-system of rivers and canals of the type which would, later, be the form of structure of rivers and canal-building expressed by the development of the thrusts for trans-continental railway systems of North America and continental Europe. The power expressed by such trans-continental inland developments lay in both the giant advances in the physical-economic productivity of the relevant inland regions, and the creation of a potential strategic system which outflanked, by land, the end of the virtual physical-economic power of maritime tyranny of the original Roman Empire and its successors. This was the same issue, during the period of Charlemagne’s reign, which the spread of the U.S. achievement of the world’s first trans-continental railway system represented as the threat of the doom of the British empire, which London recognized in the American-prompted economic revolution based on transcontinental railway-building in Germany and Russia, set off in the immediate wake of the 1876 Philadelphia Centennial celebration.
Thus, the British royal family’s 1890 ouster of Germany’s Chancellor Bismarck, was correctly recognized by Bismarck as a “new Seven Years War” which was actually launched with the treaty, between the British Prince of Wales and Japan’s Mikado, for aggressive warfare against China, Korea, and Russia. Later, in the post-World War I early 1920s, that Britain-Japan alliance adopted the U.S. Naval base in Hawaii as a target for total destruction, as the case of the court-martial of U.S. General Billy Mitchell attests to the treasonous elements in even certain parts of the U.S. military.
For the British empire, still today, the geopolitical war against the United States, Germany, Russia, and China, is still fully ongoing geopolitical policy still today. The assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy, done to eliminate President Kennedy’s stubborn blocking of a U.S. war in Indo-China, was repeated, in the assassination of a Robert Kennedy whose nomination and election as a new U.S. President would have been virtually assured, but for the fact that Robert Kennedy, too, was assassinated in what the British geopolitical interest would have considered as a “timely fashion.”
Some Europeans, and others, still to this day, can not bring themselves to face the elementary fact of actual history, that the British empire, was always, since the reign of William of Orange, even, implicitly, the time of the mission of Venice’s virtual chief of intelligence for the Council of Ten, carrying out the role implicitly assigned to the British monarchy by the skein of consequences leading from the matter of the divorce of the homicidal lunatic known as Henry VIII.
The related folly among the leaders of the nations of Europe, and also most of our recent cases of often blustering, but almost always weak-brained U.S. Presidents, such as 25th Amendment, Section 4 candidate for peremptory retirement Barack Obama, is their stubborn folly of failing to recognize that the system of Europe, from the time of the founding of the original Roman Empire to the British Empire of Queen Elizabeth II today, is not an expression of a national strategic interest, but a global, imperial one. The relevant power lies not in what nations believe; it lies, instead, in the manner in which silly mere monarchs and the like refuse to recognize the elementary fact of European history in the large, that the Roman Empire was, and remains an empire, with an imperial, monetarist reflex as its perceived imperial interest, still today. Even when Queen Elizabeth II insisted on this point of British imperial interest “within the Commonwealth,” as in her address occurring in the context of the vote on the failed Danish referendum.
The power of the empire depends upon the ability of the monarch of the empire to preoccupy the loyal member nations of the empire with the customary practice of killing one another, that at a rate, and in sufficient numbers, to weaken the relevant members of the empire sufficiently to keep the contending parties tied to the imperial apron-strings. This is what was done to the United States by means of that assassination of President John F. Kennedy which was used to destroy the sovereignty of the United States by luring it into the lunacy of a decade of that futile carnage in Indo-China against which General Douglas MacArthur had warned a President Kennedy who was solidly committed to preventing the folly of sending the U.S. into the ruinous adventure in Indo-China.
When we consider the background of the strategic effects of the assassination of a President Kennedy who refused to allow the wasting of the existence of the U.S.A. in a needless, wasting, geopolitical war in Indo-China (as the Soviet Union enjoyed a kindred folly in Afghanistan, then as now), we should be able to understand the implications of the threat which Charlemagne’s “geopolitical” revolution introduced to a Europe of the successive Roman empires.
For the Roman imperialists, the issue in all cases was principally twofold. The first issue was the mere fact of any land-based “geopolitical” threat to the power of the succession of Roman empires. The second, was the fact that the victory of the opponents of the imperial systems, would eliminate the existence of supranational forms of oligarchism on this planet, probably forever. This is precisely the issue as expressed in explicit terms by the British form of the catastrophic process of internal decay of the number, the minds, the morals, the bodies, and the territories of the global British empire of today.
What we have considered in this chapter until now, has been, as noted in passing, the turmoil associated with the millennium-and-a-half from the founding of the Roman Empire until the great ecumenical Council of Florence: the period of almost the entirety of a European-centered culture’s history during the period preceding the life of Jeanne d’Arc and that great ecumenical Council of Florence which was chiefly the beginning of modern European civilization. Modern European civilization has been, in all essential respects, an ambiguous reaction, for, and also against, to the fact of the central impact of the great ecumenical Council and of its most exemplary historical figure, the Nicholas of Cusa who has been not only responsible for most of the great cultural revolutions in economy, art and science introduced by modern Europe. For the rest, the question to be asked, is “What do you have yet to discover?”
To situate the role of Cusa’s founding of modern physical science, economy, and Classical artistic composition, through aid of such exemplary followers as France’s Louis XI, Leonardo da Vinci, Raphael Sanzio, Johannes Kepler, and Gottfried Leibniz, we must include the follower named Christopher Columbus. Columbus’ own role in the discovery of the Americas is ironical in several ways.
First, Columbus’s discovery of the finiteness and form of the Earth was based on a discovery based on a policy of Nicholas of Cusa. This policy depended to a large degree on the work of the ancient scientist, and leader in maritime researches, Eratosthenes’ measurement of the Earth’s size. The estimates provided to veteran Atlantic mariner Columbus by the associates of the then already deceased Nicholas of Cusa, were successful in bringing the work of discovery to a certain level of accomplishment, but the fact that the Spanish and Portuguese operations in the Americas were under the overlordship of the Habsburg dynasty, ruined much of the effect of the discoveries. So, the actual intention of Cusa was postponed until the combination of the colonization of a territory of New England in the Americas by the combined actions of the Mayflower party and the founding and original development of the Massachusetts Bay Colony under the leadership of the Winthrops and Mathers.5The French colonization of Canada, effected under the conditions provided by the part of Jean-Baptiste Colbert, suffered, as did the Massachusetts colonization, by the advent of the influence of the New Venetian Party’s William of Orange. In France, the death of Cardinal Mazarin and the accession of Louis XIV did much, that over the strong objections of Colbert, by the defective Louis XIV himself in entangling France in the lure of the Netherlands-based New Venetian Party and the related influence of both of the prominent charlatans Rene Descartes and Abbe Antonio Conti.
Thus, Columbus succeeded as an explorer, but his accomplishment was transformed into failure by that Habsburg influence over the Iberian Peninsula which was otherwise expressed by the 1492 mass expulsion of Jews from the Spain which had been the most significant of the areas of the surviving relations among Charlemagne’s France, Haroun al-Raschid, and that religious peace among Christians, Islam and Jews in the Peninsula which had been a heritage from the time of the life of Charlemagne and Haroun al-Raschid.6The expulsion of the Jews was an atrocity in and of itself; but, far worse was the murderous state of relations among sundry confessions which that expulsion of the Jews signalled, and also promoted. That development signaled the full-throated outburst of the Inquisition, a development which was used to turn all of western and central Europe into the hell-hole of mass-murderous bigotry which was the chief tool of bloody tyranny which provided the conditions for that period of religious warfare throughout Europe of 1492-1648.
That reign of religious warfare was chiefly the product of a Venice-led determination to destroy the work of the great ecumenical Council of Florence, and the attempted suppression of the eruption of modern science centered in the heritage of the labors of Nicholas of Cusa.
Yet, that period of religious-rooted wars as if among ferocious beasts, rather than peoples, was required to destroy a modern Europe sufficiently, both economically and morally, to bring on the establishment of the monetarist system specific to today’s British Empire. That established a system which is, essentially, the Fourth in a series of Roman Empires since that created on the Isle of Capri between the future Caesar Augustus and the priests of the cult of Mithra. The essence of that evil, can be reduced to a single working sort of religious notion, the belief in monetarism—“the gospel according to lucre,” not Luke.
Yet, science was not entirely destroyed in this madness which reigned, as if almost absolutely in respect to extent, during the 1492-1648 interval. In fact, the recent developments in science since, implicitly, the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, and that in both the Americas and Europe, have brought civilization itself to the present prospect of an immediate and pervasive new dark age of mankind, comparable to, and similar, but potentially deeper than, and more prolonged than that of Europe’s Fourteenth-century “New Dark Age.” “Green” has become the color of a putrid mass of rotting, dead human flesh.
III. IS THERE A CHANCE FOR MAN?
Turn our attention back to the implications of the role of Niccolo Machiavelli. Why did both the British monarchy and the Habsburg faction not merely hate, but dread Machiavelli so fiercely as they, at least the relatively sentient ones, have generally continued to do up to the present time?
There are, chiefly, two standpoints of reference for identifying the role of Machiavelli in modern European history. For both views of the matter, the needed answer for the questions provoked by the stubbornness of his achievements, lies in a consideration of the proper, but, nonetheless, ironical set of meanings of the concept of “the flank” in warfare. Does the successful flanking force often seem, to those who had been its intended victims, to be a dark force, as if like the fabled Erinyes, striking suddenly out of darkness, whose very presence, although in relatively limited numbers, sometimes throws its targets into a state of hapless confusion, as in the famous case of the role of Frederick the Great’s hand at Leuthen?
Take the exemplary case of France’s Louis XI, who, ultimately, virtually bankrupted the greater force of his adversaries, as if by luring them with bribes into the trap which became their state of despair. In the end, it must have seemed to Louis’ opponents: “How did such men as ourselves seem to lose their underwear without any of them willfully removing his shirt, trousers, and boots?”
The answer, in this case, is, of course, “human creativity,” or should we not torture the wicked by saying, “the spirit of Promethean fire”?
In Louis’ case, the price of peace was more than repaid by that increase of productivity of the French population, by avoiding not merely certain great costs of warfare, but using the seemingly costly peace for the relatively far richer harvest which that same peace made possible. Louis’ brutish Norman and kindred adversaries stole, but did this, repeatedly, by increasing the relative amount of French national income to French bribes of its enemies, available to be stolen by them less, and less, and less, as was done by the policy of Henry VII, who chose Louis as his model, in his deployment against the evil Richard III. Louis XIV was no worse than the silly, sick fool and dummy which U.S. President Barack Obama has shown himself to be. So, in the course of the warfare under Habsburg leadership, from 1492 to the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, the man who knows only how to rape and steal by brutish means, as in the case of the British puppet Barack Obama presently, lacks, thus, the ability to generate those science-driven gains in intensity of relative energy-flux density through which the power of peace would permit the means of creativity to flourish.
So, the martyred Jeanne d’Arc, whom the wildly perjured English party baked alive into her death, inspired the process leading into the triumph of martyrdom in the subsequent great ecumenical Council of Florence. It is there that you may discover a recognition of the source of the fear which had awed and horrified the powerful forces mustered as the foes of Machiavelli up to the present day; there you find the root of the dread of the power of the Peace of Westphalia among my own, and also your personal enemies today.
Is that not precisely the lesson which neither U.S. President George W. Bush, Jr. nor Barack Obama was ever able to demonstrate? Both of them, and their accomplices, have acted precisely as did the man who ate the goose which had been producing the golden eggs, as that man might have cried out: “That was the liberation of my freedom to choose!”
In saying that, I have exaggerated nothing. I cite the exemplary case of that properly infamous scamp known as the Adam Smith who, like the figure of Charles Dickens’ “Artful Dodger,” ran dirty errands for that Old Fagin properly known as the modern New Venetian Party puppet Lord Shelburne! What should be written of the wretchedness of such sometimes powerful ogres as the model of a British imperial monarchy which, in the end, must go down like the Emperor Nero, or like the figures which Dante Alighieri portrayed in the Inferno? Have there not been moments when we are afforded the opportunity of a glimpse into the curiously awesome power which even the hated name of Machiavelli came to represent to the forces of evil, even by a shudder or two, when that subject-matter arises in the course of certain conversations among the dwindling ranks of the literate, still today?
There is a power, like that to which Percy Bysshe Shelley alluded so passionately in the closing paragraph of his draft of his A Defence of Poetry. That exhibition of power presented by Shelley’s piece, had awed me in the early years of my adult manhood, and I had never since then lost a relevant sense of awe of Shelley’s grip on the power of prescience he exhibited on the occasion of his writing those lines, a sense of him which has gripped me over the course of the subsequent decades.
It is the same power which is implicit for the adequately witting in the argument of Bernhard Riemann’s 1854 habilitation dissertation. Today, I have come to know it, not perfectly, but intimately, and rather well. Today, I have sufficient evidence at hand to know that there is nothing which can not be made to become scientifically knowable respecting the deep principle of the universe whose presence the shadowy apparition unleashed in Shelley’s concluding paragraph bestirs among the witting.
The hand of metaphor, as expressed in all great Classical compositions, including that of Classical modes in statecraft and science since even earlier than Aeschylus and Plato, is not a fairy story. The opposition to Plato has been, chiefly, blind faith in the experience of a sense-certainty which is that great debilitating lie which has destroyed many nations, and, especially great empires, until now.
I must emphasize the fact, for your attention here, in the following way.
The Thesis at Hand
It is as I have taught, especially in respect to my role as a remarkably successful economist within the range of the class of matters to which I attend. I have taught that the greatest common folly among the putative economists and the national regimes which they actually, or merely pretend to serve, is their pathetic appearance of placing faith in the statistical doctrines of sense-certainty, that done most notably in respect to the functions of forecasting. I have rarely known of an alleged economic forecaster of some actual prominence, who was not pathetically wrong in his, or her pretensions. On this account, such persons are to be condemned either for their affection for “sense-certainty,” or, worse, by some impassioned faith expressed in their pretending to ride in pompous triumph upon a dead horse which had never actually lived, a dead horse called statistics.7Worse than that would be the “Cambridge systems analysis” of the associates and dupes of Cambridge’s Bertrand Russell, such as those associated with the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA).
Consider the actually profound issue of a matter of scientific fact which customarily befuddles both the customarily common set of those who are to be classed as self-duped contributors and duped readers of what passes for the editorial pages of such as The New York Times. Theirs has been, and continues to be a delusion centered in the experience of some mixture of portions of variously actual, or merely feigned sense-certainty. The thematic point which this argument of mine implicitly subsumes, as since the opening of this present report, is my well-informed insistence on the fact of the specific essence of popular folly, among the presently learned and unwashed alike: a folly which is their obsessive attachment to the notions of sense-certainty. Even in their lies, which are often premised upon faith in that hoax of the so-called “true believers,” which is even a merely pretended faith in the presumption of the magical powers of sense-certainty.
The truth of the matter is to be seen in the invisible foot which has left its pattern of footprints across a muddied field. If you are among the truly witting, must you not weep in pity for those who believe that it is the footprints which created the foot? They express their outrage: “I do not believe in an unseen foot,” and, therefore, footprints prove only that statistics show that only footprints actually exist; they argue that, “therefore, an unseen foot could not actually exist!”
They do not believe in the actual duplication of the cube by Plato’s friend Archytas. They believe in the delusion of the squaring of the circle which had reigned in most relevant quarters until Brunelleschi’s physical-experimental demonstration of the ontologically physical reality of the physical principle of the catenary. They believe, solidly, in the existence of mystically emptied portions of physical space. They do not believe in the physically proven principle of Kepler’s uniquely original discovery of gravitation. Their lurid superstitions reach as far as denying the existence of crucial-experimentally demonstrated universal physical principles, in favor of mere statistics; they believe in the magical powers of “statistics” over even the universe as a whole. One might suspect that some more knowledgeable of the gypsy tea-leaf readers might have spent a profitable night or two in laughing at the pregnant irony implanted in even the mere name of “broker.”
On the Subject of Human Creativity
First of all, the so-called “Second Law of Thermodynamics” was never anything better than an outright lie. Among the most relevant, and also convincing pieces of evidence to this effect, has been the known record of the order of succession of known living species on the surface of planet Earth itself, a body of evidence implicitly covering many millions of years of the attributable origins and development of living processes on Earth.
The expert scientific evidence assembled by my associates has been, that the principle of life itself has used its own nature to transform the accessible depths and upper regions above the surface of the Earth itself in a pattern which transforms the conditions on the Earth in such a fashion that higher forms of organization of living species and their interactions are the characteristic of the history of life on our planet.
I may report that it has become a settled scientific fact among unblemished scientific opinion, as the work of discoveries by Academician V.I. Vernadsky has demonstrated his richly insightful genius as a follower of Bernhard Riemann in these matters, that, whereas all known forms of existence are expressions, in principle, of anti-entropic ruling principles of existence, the power of willful creativity on this account has been unique, in our experience to date, to the special nature of the human individual.
All forms of life are, in principle, anti-entropic in their subsuming, essential quality of principled ordering; but, only mankind, the human individual, is known presently to us as manifesting the potential of voluntarily generated higher forms of physically efficient knowledge of an endless principle of willfully ordered anti-entropy by the action of the individual human mind.
This fact, points our attention directly to both the role of Nicholas of Cusa in the progress made possible for modern society, and in the influence of Cusa’s principle on the role performed by Niccolo Machiavelli on behalf of the effort expended for the establishing of that higher republican order of political society which both the cause of the original Republic of Florence, and of his own role expressed in his principal writings have advocated.
The essential feature to be adduced from those writings of his, has been the mobilization of the creative powers of labor of the human individual and within society on which depend man’s powers to increase the willfully creative intellectual capacity which happens to coincide in nature and intention with the effective increase of the power of mankind to fulfill such instructions as that informed view of specifically human behavior bearing upon the assigned destiny of mankind which is set forth within the opening chapter of Genesis.
With the work of the exiled Machiavelli, the power incorporated in the principled basis for that injunction became both a principled obligation of mankind, and also a definition of the principle of action by, and within society, through which the end and means of the truly constitutional principle specific to human existence are united as if by the fingers of a common fist. In other words, the means and purpose of warfare must be united in an at least imperfect realization of this intent: as General Douglas MacArthur expressed this in his advice to President John F. Kennedy on avoiding all extended possibilities of land wars in Asia.
There were those who enjoyed the opportunity for that war, which would have been impossible without the assassinations of both President John F. Kennedy and his prospectively electable brother Robert later. It was by the unleashing of that war, for which the assassinations of the two brothers were crucial, that the United States was induced to destroy itself, step by step, as has been done, up to the present moment when the very continued existence of decent human life on this planet is in presently immediate doubt, for as long as the poor sick President Barack Obama remains in that office.
The issue is the indispensable role of the properly universal physical principle of human creativity, expressed originally in great works of Classical artistic composition, and, as a result, the flourishing of great advances in the science-driven increasing of the applied energy-flux density of society, per capita and per square kilometer, is rendered possible. Without that Classical cultural and scientific progress, human society as we have known it until now, were doomed to an early extinction, hopefully a temporary such distinction.
With that much said, you should now consider yourself informed respecting the truth about Niccolo Machiavelli.
1I.e., Ben Deniston.
2In my webcast of April 11, 2009, I set forth the essential features of President Obama’s personality and intentions. All of those who have sought to reject my assessment of the essential features of that President’s personal character and policies have now been exposed as horribly mistaken. Unfortunately, the teaching of a truthful and efficient conception of history had been long removed from our educational systems. Everything I said on April 11, 2009, has been now more than fully confirmed, two years later, even to the finest point of detail. It should now be conceded, “Case closed.”
3“Anwendung auf den Raum” (“Application to Space”).
4For example, there is no competence in the use of statistical methods as doctrinal pretexts for separating earthquakes and volcanos into mutually exclusive categories, functionally. Similarly, virtually all statistical economic forecasts are consistently, and scandalously incompetent charlatanism. As the presently pervasively bankrupt trans-Atlantic system of economic doctrine of practice demonstrates, there never was, nor is, a correlation in principle between monetary values and the actual ordering of physical-productive practices. To the extent that the economic policies of nations have been competent, they achieved this only by violating every imaginable rule of mere statistical-economic forecasting, as I have done repeatedly, with exemplary success during a span from Summer 1956 to the present most recent date of my forecasting. What most often connects two points within an economy, is a more or less catastrophic interval of purgative bankruptcies.
5The French colonization of Canada, effected under the conditions provided by the part of Jean-Baptiste Colbert, suffered, as did the Massachusetts colonization, by the advent of the influence of the New Venetian Party’s William of Orange. In France, the death of Cardinal Mazarin and the accession of Louis XIV did much, that over the strong objections of Colbert, by the defective Louis XIV himself in entangling France in the lure of the Netherlands-based New Venetian Party and the related influence of both of the prominent charlatans Rene Descartes and Abbe Antonio Conti.
6The expulsion of the Jews was an atrocity in and of itself; but, far worse was the murderous state of relations among sundry confessions which that expulsion of the Jews signalled, and also promoted.
7Worse than that would be the “Cambridge systems analysis” of the associates and dupes of Cambridge’s Bertrand Russell, such as those associated with the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA).
* Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version
* Send to friendSend to friend
Playing the Great End-Game
April 13th, 2011 • 7:59 PM •
LPAC’s National Campaign
April 10th, 2011 • 11:58 PM •
A U.S. National Strategy
April 6th, 2011 • 12:06 AM •
How to Make Sense
April 2nd, 2011 • 11:12 AM •
Up From The Ruin Which The Roman Empires Have Made Of This World
March 28th, 2011 • 10:32 AM •
April 19th, 2011 • 1:00 PM
Q4 – The British Empire & Africa
April 19th, 2011 • 1:00 PM
Q5 – British Influence in Russia
April 19th, 2011 • 1:00 PM
Q7 – The Scientific Basis of Hamilton’s Credit System
April 19th, 2011 • 1:00 PM
One Precursor Isn’t Enough: An Interview with Professor Biagi
April 18th, 2011 • 1:32 PM