Executive Intelligence Review, Volume 45, Number 49, December 7, 2018

- Cover

- Masthead

- EDITORIAL Necessary Perspectives for Victory by Barbara Boyd

- PDF edition Table of Contents — Volume 45, Number 49, December 7, 2018

- ZEPP-LAROUCHE WEBCAST Ukraine Provocations Staged to Cancel Trump-Putin Summit

- LAROUCHE PAC WEBCAST Italy and the United States Join To Fight for Trans-Atlantic Glass-Steagall

- America Is an Idea, Not a Place by Dennis Speed

- A WEDDING ANNIVERSARY: The Sixth Sense by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. (December 29, 2010)

Toward a New

Treaty of Westphalia

Editor-in-Chief and Founder:

Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

Editorial Board: Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. , Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Robert Ingraham, Tony Papert, Gerald Rose, Dennis Small, Jeffrey Steinberg, William Wertz

Co-Editors: Robert Ingraham, Tony Papert

Technology: Marsha Freeman

Transcriptions: Katherine Notley

Ebooks: Richard Burden

Graphics: Alan Yue

Photos: Stuart Lewis

Circulation Manager: Stanley Ezrol

INTELLIGENCE DIRECTORS

Economics: Marcia Merry Baker, Paul Gallagher

History: Anton Chaitkin

Ibero-America: Dennis Small

Russia and Eastern Europe: Rachel Douglas

United States: Debra Freeman

INTERNATIONAL BUREAUS

Bogotá: Miriam Redondo

Berlin: Rainer Apel

Copenhagen: Tom Gillesberg

Lima: Sara Madueño

Melbourne: Robert Barwick

Mexico City: Gerardo Castilleja Chávez

New Delhi: Ramtanu Maitra

Paris: Christine Bierre

Stockholm: Ulf Sandmark

United Nations, N.Y.C.: Leni Rubinstein

Washington, D.C.: William Jones

Wiesbaden: Göran Haglund

ON THE WEB

e-mail: eirns@larouchepub.com

www.larouchepub.com

www.executiveintelligencereview.com

www.larouchepub.com/eiw

Webmaster: John Sigerson

Assistant Webmaster: George Hollis

Editor, Arabic-language edition: Hussein Askary

EIR (ISSN 0273-6314) is published weekly

(50 issues), by EIR News Service, Inc.,

P.O. Box 17390, Washington, D.C. 20041-0390.

(703) 297-8434

European Headquarters: E.I.R. GmbH, Postfach Bahnstrasse 9a, D-65205, Wiesbaden, Germany

Tel: 49-611-73650

Homepage: http://www.eir.de

e-mail: info@eir.de

Director: Georg Neudecker

Montreal, Canada: 514-461-1557

eir@eircanada.ca

Denmark: EIR - Danmark, Sankt Knuds Vej 11, basement left, DK-1903 Frederiksberg, Denmark. Tel.: +45 35 43 60 40, Fax: +45 35 43 87 57. e-mail: eirdk@hotmail.com.

Mexico City: EIR, Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz 242-2

Col. Agricultura C.P. 11360

Delegación M. Hidalgo, México D.F.

Tel. (5525) 5318-2301

eirmexico@gmail.com

Copyright: ©2018 EIR News Service. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission strictly prohibited.

Canada Post Publication Sales Agreement #40683579

Postmaster: Send all address changes to EIR, P.O. Box 17390, Washington, D.C. 20041-0390.

Signed articles in EIR represent the views of the authors, and not necessarily those of the Editorial Board.

EDITORIAL

Necessary Perspectives for Victory

by Barbara Boyd

The following is an edited transcript of the opening remarks delivered by Barbara Boyd on the November 29 LaRouche PAC Fireside Chat.

Let me present you with five summary propositions, and a sixth proposition, which is as a challenge to you personally.

1. We Are at War

Today’s events should make clear to everyone that we are in a war for the future of this nation and for the world as a whole.

On the one side stands the failing British Empire, the empire which, through private fondi and cartelization of the world’s money and raw materials has effectively run the world since August 15, 1971, when the British killed the Bretton Woods system and set loose the modern free-trade, floating currency regime, the casino economy which has massively destroyed the lives of millions of people in its wake. That Empire is now poised for another, possibly final collapse. As Lyndon LaRouche diagnosed it, that monetary empire’s problems are systemic; it cannot reproduce itself at the level required to sustain the human population on this Earth. It can only survive by killing people and dumbing them down to the level of servitude.

---------------------------------------------

Witness the fact that it is now widely reported that life expectancy in the United States has dropped once again—due to suicides and opioid addiction. That is the “indicator” showing that we are still in the old paradigm of this Empire. Throughout the existence of this organization we have fought against this evil; we have fought for the soul of America, which has been, and remains in our lifetime, the only nation which can truly change the whole world for the better. Now we finally have a President who will fight, and who has given us the opportunity for victory by recognizing the primacy and importance of the nation-state as a fundamental organizing principle for humanity. It is true that he needs to better understand LaRouche’s economic policies, but more importantly, he needs, and this moment demands, a population demanding LaRouche’s economic policies.

2. The Trump-Putin Summit

In her webcast today, Helga Zepp-LaRouche emphasized that the planned summit between Trump and Putin was cancelled because of the provocations of the British poodle, Petro Poroshenko, of Ukraine. That is one aspect of why it was cancelled. Ukraine is a centuries-old battleground for British operations against Russia, and British networks there run very, very deep. But the other significant factor was Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his investigation, which is clearly now consciously timing its staged events to interfere with any Trump-Putin engagement on the major issues facing the world. Trump was not ready to cancel his meeting with Putin until the Michael Cohen plea deal came down in the morning, and then, aboard Air Force One en route to Argentina, his snaky national security advisors John Bolton and Mike Pompeo harassed him, both about the substantive Ukraine events themselves and the political optics created by Robert Mueller’s stunt.

Left: Gage Skidmore; right: State Department/Ron Przysucha

Left: John Bolton, National Security Advisor; right: Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State.

---------------------------------------------

Recall that Mueller’s previous stunt of this type was pulled shortly before the planned June 2018 Helsinki Trump-Putin meeting, when Mueller produced his fabricated charges against the Russian GRU for hacking the DNC and John Podesta. Mueller’s stunt there was the opener for rallying the traitorous news media into a firestorm against any Russian-American collaboration.

Otherwise, Mueller’s much touted investigation is nothing but “process crimes,” crimes about lying to investigators—crimes created by the investigation itself. It is the typical way political inquisitions work: First I target you, then I find something you did which no one noticed before, or something you never even knew was a crime. Then I squeeze you to do what Michael Cohen did—lie to reduce your sentence for something I just found out you did.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller

---------------------------------------------

Much of the press is having an orgasm about Cohen’s plea, sounding the death knell yet again for Trump. This is not reality. The documents Mueller used to demonstrate that Cohen was lying to Congress about his Russian real estate deals were documents provided to Mueller by Trump! So there is nothing there. But it is disrupting the entire world at an absolutely critical moment for moving into a new paradigm, the paradigm which is necessary for long term survival.

3. Lyndon LaRouche’s Solution

Lyndon LaRouche put on the table the only solution to the crisis we now face. President Trump must produce a major economic recovery in the United States if his Presidency is to survive, and this must begin in the time between now and 2020. This is not just a political necessity for Trump; it’s necessary for this nation and the world.

They say that cats, miraculously, have nine lives, due to their ability to always land on their feet. Well, the United States would seem to have lived a bit more than that, following the early 1970s, when we ceded our sovereignty to the City of London and Wall Street. But it is a myth that we have landed on our feet. Witness the continuing drop in life expectancy and the fact that the credit bubble which is about to burst will wreak far more havoc than the collapse of 2008. Witness the fate of California, where now hundreds have died in massive fires due to the scientific frauds promulgated by this Empire; and the homeless roam the rich hills of Silicon Valley and Hollywood, as if to imitate a Bruegel painting.

Because of the shattered and devastated nature of our labor force, the only way we are going to get out of this mess is through crash economic recovery efforts directed at massive infrastructure, the same program undertaken by FDR, but on a huge scale, drawing the unemployed and underemployed into the mission of rebuilding this nation—and training them in the process, as if in a wartime mobilization.

The massive credit required to accomplish this—and for the lifting of the economy overall—can only be accomplished in the context of the Four Power Agreement Lyndon LaRouche specified for reordering and revamping the international financial system, arranging for bankruptcy reorganization of worthless debt and arranging for a new fixed exchange-rate system that can negotiate large-scale joint projects for development of the world, as well as the exploration of the frontiers of science, starting with fusion power, large-scale water projects, nuclear powering of the Earth, and near-space exploration. Without the American population being won to this perspective, the Trump Presidency will fail. It will fail because of the treasonous swamp created by the British in Washington, D.C. As we have said throughout the Campaign to Secure the Future, it is the American population, educating itself in the spirit of Ben Franklin’s Committees of Correspondence and acting on that basis, which once again has the task of saving and advancing the human race.

4. Our Strategy

Our strategy in this undertaking is twofold. In my view, we have to target every idiot Senator or Congressman of substance who buckles under to the British and refuses to stop the coup. It is not too early to mobilize for their defeat in the next electoral cycle, but the idea is to slam them now. That is because the radio interference coming from this coup has gotten very loud again, and, as I said before, Mueller is actively interfering with the foreign policy of the United States. Not only that. His investigation now extends to Britain itself, where he has taken information from the rabid Brits about the Russians allegedly buying the Brexit vote, and he will surely factor that into his final report. As I have argued, this is a fight to the finish, either Trump goes down or Mueller and his friends go down; there is no third way.

As significant, in the coming weeks—leading up to our February national conference—we have to educate everyone about productive economies, whether Republican or Democrat, and recruit them to this program, because it is not only a question of the President’s survival, it is a question of national survival.

5. British Propaganda

Now, I want to talk to you a little bit about how the British do things. This is not some spook show or something for you to be “informed” about or to spread like gossip to your neighbor. It is warfare! We can’t get knocked off our game by the rounds of British bullshit being thrown at us every day. It is a fact that they are doing this, but we have to be able to situate this for the members of our population who they seek to turn into victims, the people they would play as fools. The British know that the fundamental battlefront in any war is the human mind, and they are very expert at information warfare, propaganda war aimed at profiling, befuddling, confusing and disorienting whole populations, based on profiles of their emotional reactions. Barack Obama’s friend, Cass Sunstein, recognized the principle when he referred to deliberately creating “cognitive dissonance” in dissident sections of the American population in order to neutralize them.

Last week, a group of hackers called Anonymous, which probably has some roots in Russia, revealed true hacked documents from a group in London called the Integrity Initiative. This is what Helga LaRouche also addressed today in her webcast. The Integrity Initiative operates through British embassies in every European nation and in the United States, to wage propaganda warfare on behalf of the British Foreign Office—its black propaganda campaigns are targeted against Russia and China. It has groups, which it calls “cluster groups,” of academics, politicians, and think tankers in each country, and these groups coordinate with the major media of those countries to run black propaganda operations on behalf of the British government.

The cluster group for the United Kingdom includes such people as Edward Lucas of the Center for European Policy Analysis, Anne Applebaum of the Washington Post, Ben Nimmo of the Atlantic Council, Bill Browder and Vadim Kleiner from Bill Browder’s operations, and not surprisingly, Sir Andrew Wood of Orbis Business Intelligence, Christopher Steele’s company. All of these people have been key figures in the coup against Donald Trump—and, before that, in British intelligence operations against Russia. The U.S. group includes Zbigniew Brzezinski’s son, Ian; Evelyn Farkas, formerly a Russia hawk serving in Obama’s Defense Department; and loads of people associated with Atlantic Council addresses. Recall that it is the Atlantic Council’s Digital Research Lab that houses many “active measures” and cyberwar operations against Russia, including Dmitri Alperovitch, the fabricator of the non-existent DNC hack. It is therefore highly probable that this Initiative was a key instrument in the coup against President Trump from the beginning, in early 2016. The Initiative was founded in 2015, in the context of the British escalation of active measures against Russia in the aftermath of the Ukraine coup. There is a whole cluster of similar operations emanating from NATO’s Strategic Communications Center.

Picture credits: upper left: CC/Matthew W. Hutchins, Harvard Law Record; lower right: World Economic Forum/Benedikt von Loebell; lower left: cc/Chatham House

Clockwise from upper left: Cass Sunstein ,William Browder, Dmitri Alperovitch, Sir Andrew Wood.

---------------------------------------------

Following the Ukraine coup in 2014, after their lies failed to stick about the peaceful forces purportedly acting for freedom in Ukraine, the British mobilized a massive new propaganda apparatus. In fact, the enforcers of the coup in Ukraine were neo-Nazis. Thus was born the Integrity Initiative. The new group was so bold, at least until their cover was blown, that—coming into the United States from British soil—they established a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, and prepared to organize in the states of the United States, starting with a conference in Seattle. Undoubtedly the major targets of this ongoing effort will be the battleground states in the 2020 elections.

While we will be fully exploring the implications of all of this in coming days, it is imperative that everyone realize that what you are reading daily—whether on the right or the so-called left—is all largely a manipulated propaganda barrage. For example, Jerome Corsi of InfoWars, who has lately been much in the news and is also a fool targeted by Mueller, brags proudly that he was trained, personally, by Edward Bernays. (Bernays was a nephew of Sigmund Freud, and a pioneer in the use of propaganda, being known as “the father of public relations.”) If you know your Anglo-American propaganda history, that should present to you a red, red flag. For myself, President Trump’s twitter account and this organization—the LaRouche Political Action Committee—are, respectfully, two among very few places where you can go now for the truth.

We won’t try to spin you, disorient you, or dumb you down. Throughout the world, whole governments look to us now in trying to figure out what must seem to them very strange and alien events occurring in the United States.

6. Your Role

Coming back to our immediate task, to the challenge I mentioned at the beginning: We have to recruit an army—an irregular army—to the immediate campaign task I just laid out. This is already underway, but it has to expand and become much more self-conscious, focused, and directed in its organizing activities. This also means helping us financially—and getting others to—so that we can produce the materials we need. History is calling all of us to the task before us. We will have bad days and good days, as in any war, but I am telling you, it is a task we can now win if we decide to, and if we willfully focus. People in the United States are more politicized than at any time in my lifetime. They simply have to be educated and integrated into the fight, but they are ready to fight. Figure out who else we can recruit to this fight, to leaflet, to contact people, to volunteer over the next days, in whatever capacity you think you or they can help. Call the people you are in contact with at LaRouche PAC and tell them who you know who can join us. Tell them what more you can do to build this irregular army for the fight we now face.

EIR Contents

www.larouchepub.com — Volume 45, Number 49, December 7, 2018

Cover This Week

The Ratification of the Treaty of Münster (Westphalia) by Gerard Terborch, 1648.

---------------------------------------------

TOWARD A NEW TREATY OF WESTPHALIA

2 EDITORIAL

Necessary Perspectives for Victory

by Barbara Boyd

7 ZEPP-LAROUCHE WEBCAST

Ukraine Provocations Staged to Cancel Trump-Putin Summit

15 LAROUCHE PAC WEBCAST

Italy and the United States Join To Fight for Trans-Atlantic Glass-Steagall

23 America Is an Idea, Not a Place

by Dennis Speed

26 A WEDDING ANNIVERSARY:

The Sixth Sense

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

December 29, 2010

EIR will not be producing an issue dated December 28, 2018. The subsequent issue will be dated January 4, 2019. All subscriptions are not by calendar date, but by number of issues.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE WEBCAST

Ukraine Provocations Staged to Cancel Trump-Putin Summit

This is the edited transcript of the Schiller Institute’s New Paradigm Webcast of November 29, 2018. A video of this webcast is available.

Editor’s Note: Shortly after Air Force One took to the air this morning, to carry the President to Buenos Aires for the G20 Summit, he sent a tweet reading: “Based on the fact that the ships and sailors have not been returned to Ukraine from Russia, I have decided it would be best for all parties concerned to cancel my previously scheduled meeting in Argentina with President Vladimir Putin. I look forward to a meaningful Summit again as soon as this situation is resolved.”

Harley Schlanger: Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger from the Schiller Institute and I’d like to welcome you to our weekly webcast with our founder and Chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche. It’s November 29, 2018, and we’re in the midst of a very rapidly developing story. In fact, we just heard a few minutes ago that it looks as though the planned summit between President Trump and President Putin may be cancelled.

Helga, this was obviously the intention of this Ukrainian provocation in the Sea of Azov. What do you know? How has this thing unfolded? It’s clear that the target was to prevent this summit from taking place.

NATO

Gen. (ret.) Harald Kujat, former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee.

---------------------------------------------

Ukraine Provokes Russia, Again

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Well, I think it has all kinds of features, but we always knew that one of the danger points of a possible war was on the one side, Syria, and on the other side, the situation between Ukraine and Russia. I tend to agree with Gen. (ret.) Harald Kujat [Chairman of the NATO Military Committee (2002-2005)] who, in a “Phoenix Runde” TV interview in Germany on November 27, said there needs to be a full investigation of what actually happened before taking sides.

Nevertheless, the whole question of cui bono and the whole situation is that Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has been trying to provoke things for almost the whole year. In March, there was an incident where the Ukrainians captured a Russian fishing boat. Most people know what happened this time—Ukrainian warships approached the Kerch Strait from the side of the Black Sea in the direction of the Sea of Azov, but without announcing themselves, which they are supposed to do. So now, Ukrainian sailors were taken into custody and interrogated. Written instructions were found on them, saying they should absolutely proceed in secrecy and not make their approach known.

So, it really looks like an absolutely staged provocation, and that is exactly what Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said, what Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said. Actually, I think the Lavrov statement was the most interesting, because he said that this was a premeditated provocation conducted by the same forces who want to destroy the Trump Presidency. And I think that that is absolutely on the mark. If you look at such outfits as the Atlantic Council and the neo-con trans-Atlantic network.

Now, this is obviously not the end of the story. How insane this is, can be seen by the fact that the General Secretary of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, immediately said that NATO is without question fully on Ukraine’s side. And with a delay of two or three days, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated yesterday that the biggest problem in this crisis is that the other nations all the time take the side of Ukraine, and that that encourages the Ukrainian government actually to go further and further in its provocation. And then Putin, ironically said, if the Ukrainian government were to propose to eat babies for breakfast, the West would absolutely go along with it.

UK Ministry of Defence

Mark Carleton-Smith, new UK Chief of the General Staff.

---------------------------------------------

We are now, indeed, faced with great danger. There are out-of-control warmongers such as the Atlantic Council and the new British Chief of the General Staff, Gen. Mark Carleton-Smith. Smith said that Russia is a bigger problem than ISIS or al-Qaeda; he did not say that in the context of the Ukraine crisis, but in general. The push for war also comes from outfits such as the “Integrity Initiative,” about which I will elaborate further.

Fortunately, it is clear to many European governments, otherwise, that this has the potential of going completely out of control, so most of them called for de-escalation, appealing to both Russia and Ukraine. One can be sure that this will be a hot issue at the G20 Summit in Buenos Aires, which begins tomorrow.

EIRNS/Christopher Lewis

Natalia Vitrenko, leader of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine.

---------------------------------------------

The situation is extremely, extremely dangerous. Poroshenko, as most people should know by now, declared martial law. He said he wanted it to be for 60 days, but because of the opposition, including from Mrs. Yulia Tymoshenko, he could only get the parliament to agree to 30 days. But our friend, Natalia Vitrenko, the leader of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine, said in a webcast that the danger is that Poroshenko plans to have a dictatorship, and if you have 30 days, after that you simply announce another 30 days. That has been the previous pattern in Ukraine.

So, I think we are really at an extremely dangerous point. What if NATO sent a flotilla of warships into the Black Sea, or even the Sea of Azov? Exactly this has been demanded by Edward Lucas, one of the leading representatives of the Integrity Initiative. Others are demanding that heavy, lethal weapons be supplied to Ukraine—I mean, this is the stuff out of which World War III could easily be triggered.

The latest I have concerning Trump and Putin getting together at the G20 comes from Putin’s Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov, who at some point today said they would briefly greet each other and then maybe meet for one hour on Saturday. Now, one hour, given all the subjects supposed to be discussed—the INF Treaty, Ukraine, Syria, terrorism, and many other issues—is obviously not enough. But Trump said he hopes to have a meaningful summit in Washington, soon. I think that is good, but I can only say, be on absolutely super-high alert, because this Kerch Strait provocation is a very, very dangerous escalation.

Schlanger: Just a couple of other aspects: Putin has pointed out that Poroshenko in the polls is in single digit territory and is running fifth so far, and for him to either postpone the election [in March] or as Natalia Vitrenko said, to establish a dictatorship using martial law, would not be out of the question. But it’s clear, and we have talked about this before, that the intent of the opponents of Trump was to do anything to stop a meeting between Trump and Putin, including the danger of risking a war.

And one of the key elements about this particular provocation is that there have been Ukrainian vessels that have transited the Strait before, but under a 2003 treaty agreement with Russia, they have to be pre-announced, and sometimes they even have Russian pilots captain the ships through the Strait. So, this was a deliberate violation from the side of Ukraine.

Trump tweeted that the reason he’s cancelling is because the Russians were still holding the sailors; he said it’s unfortunate, but he said he looks forward to a meaningful summit in the near future.

The Integrity Initiative

Now, you mentioned the Integrity Initiative. There are a number of these operations out of Britain. Remember, we had earlier the false-flag chemical weapons attacks in Syria, the Skripal affair. This looks like another one of these operations. How does this thing work? How do they get these things organized?

Zepp-LaRouche: This is quite a story and it has not yet broken into the mainstream media. It has been leaked by an organization which calls itself “Anonymous.” It was then published on a website called “Moon of Alabama” in the United States, by Sputnik, and by some Indian newspapers. It is quite an incredible story. The Integrity Initiative is an organization that operates through all the British embassies. They have networks of people through whom they emanate certain anti-Russia propaganda, and they have in each country so-called “cluster groups”—you could say “agents of influence” all of whom are of an absolutely raving, anti-Russian profile.

For example, in the United States, Ian Brzezinski is one of them. He is the son of Zbigniew Brzezinski and a member of the Atlantic Council and numerous other organizations. On November 26, the Atlantic Council put out a collection of statements—I don’t have the authors’ names here now—but all kinds of think tank persons, members of the Atlantic Council, representatives of other think tanks, who all are foaming-at-the-mouth raving.

They are proposing that Russia should be immediately cut off from any financial credits from the West, or even any financial dealings, that the SWIFT agreement [for interbank electronic transactions] be cancelled with Russia; that lethal weapons be sent to Ukraine; that Ukraine and Georgia be accepted as members of NATO immediately; that large flotillas of NATO ships be deployed into the Black Sea—and all kinds of such proposals, that if carried out, would certainly bring a complete showdown between NATO and Russia instantly, with the potential of the whole thing escalating to a real war, because there are certain red lines which Russia will not accept. I think that that is the reason why there have been all these warnings of war coming from Russia in the recent period. [See EIR Daily Alert, Nov. 29.]

This is the way British intelligence operates.

NATO

Gen. Klaus Naumann, former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee.

---------------------------------------------

In Germany, one of the members of the so-called cluster groups, is Klaus Naumann, former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, [and former Chief of Staff of the Bundeswehr], who has even called in the past, if I remember correctly, for a first use of nuclear weapons—he has called for a showdown with Russia in the Arctic, and he is one of these absolutely hardcore neo-cons. That’s the profile.

This is meddling. If you have some organization going into an anti-Russia Cold War-almost-turning-into-a-hot-war propaganda, working through the embassies in each country, I mean, if that is not meddling, I don’t know what is!

kremlin.ru

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

---------------------------------------------

Now, I find it absolutely incredible that the mainstream media have not picked this up at all. However, when Foreign Minister Lavrov was in Paris meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron on Monday this week, he sharply attacked this. However, that has not been picked up by the Western media, either. Most media outlets completely take the side of Poroshenko. They don’t report the two sides objectively, or even ask for an investigation. This reminds me of the kinds of censorship and black propaganda operations typical of wartime behavior. And I think it should cause people to think, because if people are denied access to information to make their own judgment for themselves, it should really ring the alarm bells in the highest way.

I suggest that everybody look closely at this Integrity Initiative. Sputnik interviewed me about it. It really deserves much wider attention. There should be a parliamentary investigation of this group in a every country. Given that there is such hysteria about “Russiagate,” and so-called “Russian meddling,” here we have, once again, a clear-cut case of British meddling. This apparatus may very well be the same one, or in coordination with the forces which committed the coup, or the attempted coup against President Trump, and I find it extremely interesting that Lavrov said that the provocation by Ukraine was done by the same circles which are trying to destroy the Trump Presidency, and that is exactly on the mark.

Schlanger: And that’s what we’ve been covering from the very beginning. Speaking of British operations, there was an article planted in the Guardian by Luke Harding, one of the MI6 mouthpieces, claiming that they now had evidence that [Trump campaign figure] Paul Manafort had gone into the Ecuadorean Embassy [in London], and met with WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange. Manafort and Assange and WikiLeaks vehemently deny this, but it looks as though this was designed at the same time as an escalation against Manafort, to push Trump further into a defensive mode going into the G20 Summit.

What to Expect from the G20 Summit

Now, with the Summit coming up, Helga, it looks like even though there may not be a Trump-Putin meeting, there are many, many other side meetings scheduled, which probably will be the main course, because it doesn’t look like the G20 is going to do much about the global financial crisis.

What are you expecting to come out of this?

Zepp-LaRouche: Over the last several weeks, we in the Schiller Institute have demanded that what must be put on the agenda is a New Bretton Woods credit system, the Four Laws of Lyndon LaRouche—Glass-Steagall, a national bank, a credit system, and a crash program for fusion and space cooperation to increase the productivity of the world economy. I think it is already predetermined that, because of the presence of certain governments [at the G20], this will absolutely not happen, and because of this sabotage, it is also not going to happen between Trump and Putin, or Trump and Xi Jinping.

However, as you said, there will be many interesting meetings: Trump is meeting with Putin briefly, with Xi Jinping, I think with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, with South Korean President Moon Jae-in, with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Then there will be a three-way meeting, with I think Trump, Modi, and Abe—so a lot of interesting developments will come out of it, but it will for sure not be what is needed, given the fact that the financial crash is hanging over the world as a Damocles Sword.

We will continue our mobilization, because unless there is a complete change in international relations, the danger of a repetition, or something even worse than what just happened around Ukraine, is quite possible.

However, we do expect some interesting things to come out. Some Chinese and some Americans expect some kind of a deal between Xi Jinping and Trump. But, let’s see: We will know in a few days.

What Are the Chinese Doing?

Schlanger: The China side is very interesting in this. The same forces behind Russiagate and who are attacking Trump-Putin, are also escalating against China, with a demand for Magnitsky Act sanctions against China; other kinds of crazy charges from people like Sen. Marco Rubio from Florida and Rep. Chris Smith from New Jersey. But it does appear as though the Chinese are shrugging it off and continuing a global mobilization around the Belt and Road Initiative. Helga, this is something that’s quite significant, with Xi just in Spain. Why don’t you update us on what the Chinese are doing?

Zepp-LaRouche: I have said many times that we have to surround Germany, in order to eventually crack open even Germany for cooperation with the Belt and Road Initiative—and that’s exactly what seems to be happening. In the last days, six major events have occurred in Europe, with another one coming up, on cooperation between China and European nations. There was a meeting about major cooperation between an Italian media outfit and the Chinese media, building up networks of media in Italy. Then, naturally, the quite successful state visit of Xi Jinping to Spain, where the discussion focused on turning Spain into in a hub for the Spanish-speaking countries around the world.

On his way back from the G20, Xi Jinping will stop in Portugal, where there has been discussion about building the deep-water seaport of Sines, also to become a hub for not only the Eurasian connection of the Silk Road, but also the Maritime Silk Road. And this picks up on a proposal which we have in our World Land-Bridge report, namely, building the Atlantic route of the Maritime Silk Road, which then will connect Central America, South America with Europe, with Spanish-speaking countries elsewhere.

So, I think this is a major breakthrough. And what I find very exciting, is that the idea of building a tunnel under the Strait of Gibraltar is now fully back in the discussion. There is already a state treaty between Morocco and Spain; a feasibility study has been made, and all that is needed now is basically to start doing it. The idea is to connect the European transport networks through a tunnel at Gibraltar to connect to transport networks in Africa, which also are to be built. Once this tunnel is completed, Europe and Africa will be connected in a much more direct infrastructural way, which I think is very exciting.

The Port of Sines, Portugal. There is discussion of making it into a deep-water port, to enable it to serve as a hub connecting the land and sea routes of the New Silk Road.

---------------------------------------------

Then there was a big event in Lyon, France. The mayor very proudly said that Lyon is the most natural place to build corridors that would connect to the Silk Road. And even in Hamburg, there was a big event, 450 participants, sponsored by the Hamburg Chamber of Commerce and China, where, except for one crazy Greenie who went out of control, everybody else was more or less in favor of cooperation, seeing the tremendous potential. Hamburg would connect to both the Maritime Silk Road and also the overland Silk Road Economic Belt—23 trains from China, traveling the Silk Road, are already arriving ever week.

So, I think this is very good. And what was very beautiful is that Chinese Vice-Premier Liu He, the chief economic advisor to Xi Jinping, made a very optimistic speech on the limitless potential of the New Silk Road. He then told the audience a personal story which I think won the hearts of everybody. During the Cultural Revolution, as a younger man, he had to hide in one of the hutongs; these are the ancient, old alley houses in Beijing. There, in secrecy, he listened to Felix Mendelssohn’s Violin Concerto in E-minor, developed a love for Classical music, and came to know how important Classical music is for society and for humanity.

So, this was really good, and considering all of these developments—there will be another major forum in France at the beginning of December—I think the Silk Road is progressing. And despite the continuous opposition of Brussels, and unfortunately Berlin, I think it is on the march forward. Unless we have World War III, I think the advantages of such a new paradigm will become apparent to everybody, especially since this is one of the major campaigns of the Schiller Institute, and we will not lessen our efforts to win over all of humanity to a New Paradigm.

Schlanger: You mentioned surrounding Germany: Well, Hamburg is the northern beachhead for the New Silk Road for Germany!

EIRNS

The Schiller Institute meets two of its Italian co-thinkers in Washington, D.C., Nov. 29, 2018. Left to right: Italian Undersecretary of Commerce for Economic Development Michele Geraci; Paul Gallagher of the Schiller Institute; Marco Zanni, Italian Independent Member of the European Parliament; and Alicia Cerretani of the Schiller Institute.

---------------------------------------------

Italians in U.S. for Talks with Congress

Now, another very significant development is the presence of two prominent Italian political leaders in Washington, D.C.: Michele Geraci and Marco Zanni, who brought a petition signed by 217 prominent Europeans to the U.S. Congress. More importantly, both came to speak with the members about what’s happening in Europe, what’s happening especially with banking. Have you a report on their visit. Helga?

Zepp-LaRouche: Oh, yes! This is really very, very important. Michele Geraci is the Undersecretary of Commerce for Economic Development, and Marco Zanni is a very prominent Member of the European Parliament (MEP). They met in the Congress, and also met with two Schiller Institute members, Paul Gallagher and Alicia Cerretani. There is a very nice picture of the four of them.

Both Geraci and Zanni are having many meetings. Zanni and Gallagher and Cerretani had altogether 13-15 meetings with congressional offices, with some congressmen and Italian-American Congress members. The Petition is a demand for Glass-Steagall, and an appeal to President Trump to implement Glass-Steagall. The two government parties in Italy—the Five Star Movement and the Lega both have in their party programs, the demand for Glass-Steagall.

I think this is extremely important trans-Atlantic coordination. The Italian government, in the person of Michele Geraci, met with Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Jeffrey Gerrish. So now there is a government-to-government connection. According to Geraci’s website, he has been proposing an EU-U.S. summit to discuss joint development projects in Africa. I don’t know what the response to that was, but I think it’s a wonderful idea, and actually, what we in the Schiller Institute have been proposing for a very long time, and now it’s being proposed on an inter-government level between a pro-Trump government, and a government which is otherwise also pro-China and pro-Russia.

So, I think this is really a major breakthrough, and it is the direct work of the Schiller Institute, because our chairwoman in Italy, Liliana Gorini, was very instrumental in helping to collect the signatures. Today she was interviewed by Radio Gamma 5, an Italian radio network, where she was asked, “Are there important signers among them?” to which she replied: “Yes, seven members of the Italian government, including three ministers and four undersecretaries, as well as members of the Italian Parliament, the European Parliament, and other political figures in Germany, Switzerland, and France, all asking President Trump to keep his election promise to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act in order not only make America great again, but the whole world.”

So, I think this will definitely have an impact, and is an inspiration of what can be done to bypass this trans-Atlantic control which is otherwise trying to suppress normal relations among countries. This is a very good development.

Schlanger: Given the danger that we talked about at the beginning, of a possible outbreak of World War III around the Ukraine crisis, I think we should come back to that. I want to bring up the Schiller Institute’s intervention.

We’ve been insisting that there are three steps that have to be taken. One is to end the coup, to shut down the Mueller investigation which is designed entirely to prevent U.S.-Russian and U.S.-Chinese cooperation. The second step is to work with Russia and China. And third, is to work together with other countries, including India, toward a Four Power agreement for a New Bretton Woods and for LaRouche’s Four Laws. Helga, given what we heard you say at the beginning of our discussion today, that is, the probable cancellation of the Trump-Putin summit in Buenos Aires, what needs to happen now, to get this thing back on track, get the momentum going again towards the New Bretton Woods Four Power agreement?

What to Do About the Coup Against Trump

Zepp-LaRouche: Well, I think the summit will produce some interesting results, and Trump, because this Ukraine situation escalated in this way, or in the context, actually, still wrote a very powerful tweet, which expressed his determination to fight the coup. Because he said that Mueller, who basically (and these are my words) has absolutely been unable to produce any proof for Russia collusion in the almost two-year investigation,— so Trump apparently was quite annoyed by the continuous efforts of Mueller to go after Manafort, Roger Stone, in a fishing expedition, because there is absolutely no evidence. So, Trump wrote in a tweet that Mueller and the crazy Democrats, or the “angry Democrats” have gone rogue, and that all of those people should go to jail, and that there will be heroes and it will not be the Democrats in the end.

So obviously, the declassification of the documents pertaining to Christopher Steele, the role of the British, the manipulation of the FISA Court—all of that should be very much up on the agenda. We in the Schiller Institute have been absolutely in the forefront of pointing out, again and again, that it is not just an American fight between Trump and the neo-liberal establishment, but it is a fight absolutely involving the role of the British secret service, British intelligence, the British government. What we generally call the “British Empire” is alive and kicking—not in the old form, but in the form of control by the City of London and Wall Street. That is the apparatus trying to destroy the Presidency of Donald Trump.

So people should join us to study these matters, because if you don’t, you just easily get caught up in the fake news being spread by the mainstream media, and then you think Trump and Putin and Xi Jinping are all the enemies of mankind and you miss the boat, that it is the combination of these leaders—including some others like Modi and other countries not to be excluded—who are absolutely essential to form the platform for a New Paradigm.

Since the problems will not go away with the G20 summit, the Schiller Institute intends to continue the mobilization. We will continuously produce pedagogical materials, we will have meetings and conferences.

I really ask that you join our effort, that you make sure to spread the existence of this weekly webcast, that you become a member, and that you help us to really show that there is a way out of this crisis. If we get Russia, China, the United States, and other nations to work together—like now, the example of the Italian-U.S. cooperation demonstrates—we could really solve all problems of this world, including poverty, including underdevelopment in all countries, emphatically including the United States, where it is now widely reported internationally that longevity in the United States is going down for the first time in two consecutive years. If there’s any parameter for a failing economy, then it is if the lifespan of people becomes shorter instead of longer.

So, I really urge you: Do not sit on fence. Become active, join the Schiller Institute. Join our movement which is trying to get a new world economic system combined with a new cultural Renaissance. As Liu He said in Hamburg so beautifully about Classical music, that is the kind of spirit which is a foretaste of what the New Paradigm of mankind must be and will be, if we are going to make it as a human species.

Schlanger: To end on a positive note, I want to interject a little story on the Spirit of the New Silk Road. In September, Chairman Kim Jong-un of North Korea, as a “peace gift,” gave two Pungsan dogs to President Moon Jae-in of South Korea. Those two dogs have now produced six puppies. President Moon has expressed his happiness about this, saying that it augurs well for relations between the two nations, the “Singapore Model,” the New Silk Road Spirit.

So, with that, Helga, thank you very much, and we’ll see you next week!

Zepp-LaRouche: I hope so—next week.

LAROUCHE PAC WEBCAST

Italy and the United States Join To Fight for Trans-Atlantic Glass-Steagall

LPACTV

MEP Marco Zanni, interviewed in Washington, D.C. by Matthew Ogden on the LaRouche PAC Webcast, Nov. 30, 2018.

---------------------------------------------

The following are edited excerpts from the LaRouche PAC Webcast of November 30, 2018, which featured an interview on Capitol Hill with Marco Zanni, Member of the European Parliament, who was in Washington for several days of meetings with members of Congress, accompanied by Paul Gallagher, Economics Editor for Executive Intelligence Review. Also interviewed, streamed live from Italy, was Liliana Gorini, Chairwoman of the MoviSol movement there.

Zanni: We are here to discuss two very important topics with members of the Congress:

First, what is happening now in the European Union and in Italy. You viewers may know that in March, Italians elected the first populist government in the [25-year] history of the European Union. There is a sort of a momentum now for a power shift in the European Union. We are going to have a European election in May 2019 that will be very important in showing to the world that the power balance in the European Union is changing.

Traditional parties that supported wrong policies and financial deregulation—that have brought us to collapse and to the increase of financial speculation not only in the United States, but also in the European Union—are shrinking in their consensus in terms of votes. And new parties are rising to show that an alternative way is possible for the common benefit of our economies both in the U.S. and in the European Union.

The second very important issue that I’m going to discuss with your representatives is bank separation. As your viewers may know, in our government program we have a point specifically about bank separation because we think that we need to better regulate our financial markets and our financial institutions in order to create a system that is going to support the real economy and invest in important infrastructure.

Infrastructure investments have dropped to a five-year low in the European Union, not only in Italy, but also in the biggest economy in the European Union—Germany—and also in the United States. We are here to discuss and present our petition. In the last two years, we collected more than 200 signatures from Italian Members of Parliament and also from people who are members of the government and also of ministries, such as Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini.

LPACTV

MEP Zanni holds up the Glass-Steagall graphic used in Italy, for the Webcast viewers. The theme is, “Separate regular banks from the speculative banks to protect savings, deposits, and real investments,” and it refers to the U.S. Glass-Steagall Act of 1933.

LPAC

A LaRouche PAC organizing poster for the Glass-Steagall principle.

---------------------------------------------

U.S.-European Financial Institutions

Are Failing

It is very important to show to our American friends that all our efforts over the last five to six years, after the big financial crisis, to better regulate our financial system, are failing. Today, all the biggest financial institutions, investment banks in the U.S. and in Europe, are still doing what they have done in the past—threatening the stability of our financial system, threatening the real economy, our industry, with a lot of financial bubbles that are going to burst in the future.

Uncontrolled levels of leveraged loans, government loans are now a threat to our economy. Our big financial institutions in Europe such as Deutsche Bank, are stuffed with plenty of what we call Level 2 and Level 3 assets—complex financial instruments with no economic rationale—that are just financial engineering, that are in liquid instruments, and their value is really volatile, threatening the stability of our financial system.

So, we have to act not to build up, as we did in the last five years, instruments to absorb or to cope with the consequences of a financial crisis; but we have to act on the roots to prevent financial crises. And this bank separation, this petition and our program in Italy for bank separation is very important as a first step to guarantee the stability of our financial system, the stability of our banks, and to ensure that our financial system will be in future focussed only on supporting priority investment that can benefit the real economy, our people, our small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), our companies, not only in the European Union but also in the United States.

We are all in the same boat, and it’s very important to cooperate in these matters. This first step taken by the Italian government in proposing this legislation is very important. But, we need Europe and the U.S. to cooperate on this because all financial legislation is drafted and decided at the international level—the G-20, the Basel Committee, the Financial Stability Board. So, it’s very important for me to discuss these important issues with your members of Congress.

White House/Stephanie Chasez

U.S. President Donald Trump welcomes Giuseppe Conte, Prime Minister of the Italian Republic, to the White House, July 30, 2018.

---------------------------------------------

Trump and Conte

We are going to hand out this list of signatures to members of Congress in order to strengthen our relationship and follow up with the discussion and future cooperation on restoring banking separation to make our financial system healthier, and really focus it on common benefits for our peoples and our countries.

The United States is an historic ally of Italy, and we really appreciated President Trump’s welcoming the unknown new Italian Prime Minister, Giuseppe Conte, at the last G-7 meeting this Summer.

The stance of your administration towards our new Italian government is very positive. It’s an opportunity for Italy to function as a bridge between your administration and a Europe that is going to change. No more Merkel, no more Macron, but more parties and political leaders that are really connected to people and to our SMEs and to our territories and nations. That will be very important for strengthening the discussion and the relationship between the U.S. and Europe and Italy.

And most importantly, this cooperation has to be strengthened especially in the financial regulation field, because as I said, it’s very positive that the Italian government has in its program this bank separation, and the Lega Party for many years has supported banking separation, but it’s not enough. Italy alone is not enough; we need more nations, more parties, and more people to be on board this project.

And having strong communication and strong cooperation with the U.S. is fundamental in proposing worldwide or at least trans-Atlantic reform of our financial markets, of our banking system. Because Glass-Steagall, bank separation, in just one nation is not enough; we need international cooperation, trans-Atlantic cooperation, and a gathering of all the developed nations in pushing to reform our banking system to prevent another financial crisis that is coming.

Focus on the Needs of People

As I said, big financial banks and institutions are committing the same mistakes that they did in the past that triggered the big financial crisis [of 2007-2008] that still is negatively impacting our economy. So, it’s very important that President Trump and Prime Minister Conte act to strengthen cooperation in financial regulation issues and that members of the European Parliament, as I am, or members of national parliaments across Europe, come to the U.S. Congress to discuss this very important topic with its members. I’m pretty sure that we are able to deliver, because this is the very important reform that we need in order to make our system healthier and more focussed on the needs of our people.

Ogden: Please tell us more about the broader economic program that you’re campaigning for and why it’s necessary. How is the European Union pushing back?

Zanni: In Italy today, we are living with a clash between our new government’s 2019 draft budget and the European Commission. From my point of view, it’s just a political move by the European Commission to clash with the Italian government that opposes a lot of the policies coming from the EU. For example, the EU is saying that having a 2.4% deficit in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) will make the Italian government default.

That’s not true, it’s fake news; because the Italian macro-economic indicators are very good. Italy has a primary balance surplus of euro 40 billion, so 3% of our GDP. We have an external current account surplus of euro 50 billion; that is 4% of our GDP; so we are perfectly safe. If Japan is doing 4.5% deficit GDP with a debt-to-GDP ratio that is higher than the Italian one, and they are still paying 0.8% interest rates on their sovereign bonds, there’s something wrong in Europe: wrong instruments, wrong protection by the central bank, and wrong economic rules.

We are opposing austerity policies that make governments not invest in infrastructure. The dramatic collapse of the Morandi Bridge in Genoa last August was a sign telling us that we have to act immediately to restore a huge amount of public money to invest in our infrastructure. Banking separation will help our government in doing this, in creating a bank; and we are working on this, especially for southern Italy, which has the biggest gap in infrastructural investment. So, banking separation will help us to create financial institutions, credit institutions that are focussed on financing infrastructure. We need this not just in Italy, but also in Germany.

The ratio of infrastructural investment to GDP dropped alarmingly in the last six years in the European Union countries because of wrong austerity policies. Cutting the budget is not the right way to make an economy grow. Investments are positive components of the GDP, and bring benefits to our people, to our trade inside the European Union, to our connections with emerging economies in the Middle East, in Asia, in Africa.

Public domain/Salvatore1991

The Morandi Bridge in Genoa, Italy, in August 2018, after its collapse. There are no spans in the foreground.

---------------------------------------------

Austerity Always Fails

So, it’s very important to invest in infrastructure in Italy to make our country a hub in the Mediterranean region for trade and interconnection with other countries. The confrontation with the Italian government by the European Union, with its disruptive rules, is wrong.

Over the last ten years, countries in continental Europe have had slower GDP growth compared to other developed countries. We have to act to change our rules, we have to make investments in infrastructure a priority of the European Union, but without using stupid financial engineering as the Commission did in the past with the Juncker Plan that was advertised by the European Commission as a big infrastructure investment plan, shifting just euro 20 billion from the European budget to infrastructure that would have triggered more than euro 300 billion additional investment in just three years. After three years, no one has seen this euro 300 billion investment in infrastructure, because it’s just shifting some pocket money from the EU budget to small infrastructure investments with zero impact on the EU economy.

We need governments to be able to invest heavily in infrastructure, and to have the support also of banks dedicated to finance such infrastructures.

Cooperation with China

Ogden: There is a country that is investing heavily in infrastructure both domestically and internationally, and that country is China, and its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). What do you see as the potential, assuming the kind of reorganization you are talking about of the trans-Atlantic financial system, for an orientation towards working with the emerging New Silk Road? What is the inclination now towards that among Italians, and what do you see as the urgency of that strategic shift?

Zanni: This strategy could have a big impact in fostering economic growth in the European Union, in creating jobs, in fighting unemployment, and it will be very important to cooperate with China. A lot of new countries, including Italy, have joined in the projects of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank; putting some money there. But we need to extend our cooperation with China in this field also to help and to solve the big problem of immigration flows from Africa to the EU that Italy has suffered in the past four or five years. It would be very important to reshape the way in which the EU is investing money in Africa to support the development of African countries and economies.

Looking at the Chinese model, that is more efficient in terms of efficiency of money invested there, in terms of job creation and GDP growth, it would benefit not only the African countries, but also the EU countries in reducing the costs related to the management of uncontrolled immigration flows. And in trading also with countries in Africa that would be richer, and so the demand for EU products from those countries could increase thanks to such investments.

I hope that also in this field there would be a huge change in how the European Union manages money and investment in infrastructure, and its participation in the One Belt, One Road Initiative. Some of the countries in Eastern Europe started to cooperate with China concretely on big infrastructure [projects] connecting Europe to Asia, Europe to the Middle East. But we need more financial resources.

No More Stupid Rules

You say China is delivering this and I’m going to say it is because they have no stupid rules putting pressure on their debt, on their public deficit, or whatever. They are able to invest strongly in the development of infrastructure that will benefit the economy. The Chinese example could benefit also European citizens and European nations in fostering GDP growth, job creation, fighting uncontrolled immigration, and also give African countries the opportunity to reach the level of developed countries.

Ogden: Paul, what do you expect over the next two days with these continued meetings with Congress, and then where do we have to go from here?

Gallagher: We have an awful lot of meetings over the next two days. We’ve already run into both support and opposition, and a combination of both actually from one member. So, I think that this is primarily an opportunity for a very well-informed and leading spokesman for one of the major parties in the Italian government to brief rather uninformed members of the U.S. Congress about this fight going on in Europe, between Italy and the EU, and between Italy and France, and what is involved.

Ogden: Joining us now, streamed live from Italy, is Liliana Gorini. She is the chairwoman of the MoviSol movement, which is the “Movimento Internazionale per i Diritti Civili—Solidarietà” [International Civil Rights Movement—Solidarity]. Liliana has led the effort there on the ground in Italy, along with MEP Marco Zanni and other activists there, to collect these signatures that Marco Zanni delivered to the Congress, calling for an immediate bank separation, and an alliance between Italy and the United States to push this as a trans-Atlantic financial reorganization effort, in order to transform the entire trans-Atlantic financial system in accordance with this new program.

Liliana, can you tell us what you’ve done to collect these signatures, and how you’ve worked with Marco Zanni and others on this program?

Glass-Steagall Petition

Gorini: These efforts actually started two years ago, when President Trump was elected. I wrote a short letter to President Trump which invited him to keep his campaign promise to reinstate Glass-Steagall, saying that this would be the key not only to make America great again, but also to make the whole world—and Italy—great again.

This short letter, in English and Italian, was distributed in the course of these two years by a MoviSol activist, Massimo Richard Kolbe Massaron, whom I want thank from my heart, because he was every weekend busy with this petition, going to political meetings of the Lega, of the Five Star party, of the trade unions, of journalists, and he built the binder you see in front of the pictures with the important signers. He’s right there in the pictures with Matteo Salvini, who is Vice Premier of the Italian government; with [Chamber of Deputies member Giancarlo] Giorgetti, whom I also met, who is supportive of LaRouche and Glass-Steagall. We have among these 217 signers, seven members of the Italian government: three ministers and four undersecretaries.

So, this effort was very useful, because it moved the parties which form the present government to include Glass-Steagall in the government program. Some of them have already established connections with the Trump Administration, because in this precise moment—as I’m sure Marco Zanni said in his interview—Italy is heavily under attack from the European Union, and it finds, instead, support—politically and also economically—from Russia, from China, and from the United States. As your viewers might remember, there was a very good meeting at the White House on July 31 between Prime Minister Conte and President Trump. I heard President Trump calling him “Giuseppe.” They got along very well, because they have the same policy on various issues, including the urgent need to relaunch the real economy and stop the speculation.

Last Friday, Marco Zanni was here with me, Massaron, and a number of our supporters and journalists, at a press conference in Milan to present the 217 signatures and to announce Zanni’s trip to the United States. La Gazeta della Martesana published an article about this meeting. Many of the signers were from there. Many of our supporters these last two years have wondered why Glass-Steagall hasn’t been adopted. Marco made it all very clear that Glass-Steagall is very important for Italy, because of the banking crisis, because of the attacks against our government securities, the BTPs, which have been attacked for political reasons [as they are indexed to the Italian inflation rate]. The European Central Bank and other speculative banks tend to sell them in order to attack the present government.

Stop the Speculative Attacks

So, it is key to stop this speculative wave on our economic system and it is also important to understand that Glass-Steagall cannot be adopted in Italy alone. That’s why an alliance between Italy and the United States, and particularly with the Trump Administration, which has Glass-Steagall in its [Republican] party platform. Of course, some of the Democratic Party leaders like Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Rep. Marcy Kaptur and others, who have promoted the 21st Century Glass-Steagall Act, are important allies in this effort.

If Italy allies with the United States on this issue of a New Bretton Woods, of a new financial system, or, as Lyndon and Helga LaRouche have emphasized very often, a new credit system, production will finally be relaunched, including investments in infrastructure and the Maritime Silk Road, which should be the key for Genoa, for the Morandi Bridge, and for other port cities in Italy. This will be an alliance which changes the situation.

Marco was emphasizing that this is a key moment of change. Helga LaRouche has said very often that two options are now open: the option of a New Paradigm, with Glass-Steagall, the New Bretton Woods, the New Silk Road and cooperation with Russia and China; or a new financial crash, a new financial crisis and systemic crisis, and the threat of war. These are two roads in front of us, and it’s up to us to choose which one we take.

The Organizing Process

Ogden: Tell us about the process that went into collecting the signatures. What was the dialogue with these elected officials and the other VIPs? Who are the 217 signers?

Gorini: It started in the Lombardy Region, two years ago, with the regional councilman, Antonio Saggese. After that, Massaron helped us collect the first 20 or 30 signatures of regional councilmen, simply giving him a place inside the state legislature. And so Massaron, who is not a councilman, just a simple activist, was there, and Antonio Saggese was inviting all the regional councilmen coming by to sign the petition, saying, “this is very important, we have to have Glass-Steagall.”

And it continued in Rome; it continued in Brussels, where Marco Zanni was at the European Parliament—he collected eight signatures of Members of the European Parliament, including Matteo Salvini, who is presently Deputy Prime Minister of Italy. Having Salvini’s signature was a big, important push for the collection, because people started to see there were important signatures, and as you know, when people see big names, they tend to follow suit.

We had Massimo Kolbe Massaron, whom I thank again, because this was “his mission” he said. For these two years, this was what he did from morning to evening. I thanked his wife at this meeting, where I finally met her, because he had little time for his family, for his children and his wife, but it was important to him to get as many signatures as possible.

He was running around to all the political meetings, of the Lega for example, when they had festivals, like this summer they had many festivals which Salvini was attending. Massaron was there; he spoke to all the people, the ministers, he insisted, he bothered, until they finally signed. Even in Switzerland there were conferences on this issue of Glass-Steagall, and there were proposals in the parliament.

EIRNS

MEP Zanni brought to Washington the letter to President Trump, calling on him to reinstate Glass-Steagall, signed by significant Italian figures, including cabinet ministers. Here, leaders of the campaign for signatures (l. to r.), Massimo Kolbe Massaron, Zanni, and Liliana Gorini, Chairwoman of MoviSol.

---------------------------------------------

This is being discussed not only in Italy, but across Europe where we collected a number of signatures, with one from Russia. The rest are members of the Italian Senate and the Chamber of Deputies whom we contacted personally in the course of Massaron’s trips all over Italy. Every time, as someone was signing, he took their picture with his folder with the Glass-Steagall logo. We have many significant pictures, including the one with Marco Zanni last Friday in Milan, with happy smiling people, including members of government, joining us, supporting Glass-Steagall.

Task Force China in Italy

Ogden: We also had the pleasure of interviewing Michele Geraci, who met up with us in Washington. Tell us about who he is, and what he’s been doing to bring Italy on board with the New Silk Road, and what China’s doing with the Belt and Road Initiative.

Gorini: Michele Geraci is presently a member of government. He’s currently the Under-Secretary of State for Economic Development. In the Ministry of Economic Development, he has established Task Force China. Geraci lived for very many years in Shanghai before becoming a member of this government, so he knows China very well, and he also speaks Chinese. Ever since he joined the Italian government, he has been pushing for Italy to join the Belt and Road Initiative. He went to China twice, alone, and then with Vice Premier Luigi Di Maio, co-founder of Task Force China.

In Beijing they signed a Memorandum of Understanding with China to start up investments in Italy, and also discussed cooperation with China in Africa, which they hope will help solve the wave of immigration which has created so many social problems in Italy but also in Europe, because Italy has been left alone to deal with the immigrants. France has closed its borders; Macron is also behaving as a total asshole—which I can say credibly—towards Italy on this issue, by blocking the immigrants who are trying to join their families in France, leaving Italy to face this problem alone. Even Salvini said openly that we need a Marshall Plan to develop Africa, in order to stop this wave of immigration which we cannot deal with.

And there is, actually, also an agreement between Italy and China to realize the Transaqua project to replenish Lake Chad and to create development in that area, which is key also to stopping terrorism.

Lyndon LaRouche’s Philosophical Vision

Ogden: Can you please put into context the importance of the victories that we are winning right now around this fight for a new, international economic order, put this into context with your multi-decade association with Mr. LaRouche and Helga Zepp-LaRouche and their philosophical vision of the world, and this idea of a new international economic order. Just tell us a bit about your history, the history of this fight, and where you see this fight standing right now.

Gorini: I have the honor of having worked with Mr. LaRouche since I was 17—I’m 62 now, so it’s a long time spent working with Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche and it’s been a great pleasure. We work together on various issues, including the issue of Verdi tuning.

Courtesy of Liliana Gorini

Liliana Gorini and Lyndon LaRouche in an undated photo.

---------------------------------------------

But I can remember very well, in 1975, we had a conference in Milan, in which Mr. LaRouche was invited by the Chamber of Commerce, and called for a new International Development Bank. That was the beginning of an effort which led to the Eurasian Land-Bridge, to what we called the Productive Triangle, and many, many concrete projects which we developed with Mr. LaRouche, for the development of Italy, for the development of Africa, for the development of the Middle East—there are plans, the Oasis Plan, for example, which were discussed and presently are on the table of important governments in the Middle East.

But this all started in the 1970s, when Mr. LaRouche and Mrs. LaRouche were talking about the new International Development Bank, and in Italy, he also participated in conferences organized by the Italian Parliament. I remember very well a couple of conferences I organized myself in the 1990s in Rome, before the whole Finance Committee in Rome, in which Mr. LaRouche was talking about the crisis, and the urgent need of a New Bretton Woods—a conference which was also attended by Giulio Tremonti, who then became Economics Minister.

Creative Commons/UK in Italy

Giulio Tremonti in 2009, when he was Italian Economy Minister, at the Pontignano Conference titled, “After the Crash.”

---------------------------------------------

And many of the members of Parliament remember well this intervention of Mr. LaRouche, because at that time, he was the only one who warned of a financial disintegration, and they were responding, “Oh, no, it cannot be so bad. It will not be so bad.” When there was the crisis in 2008, many of these members of Parliament, who are now among the signers of our petition for Glass-Steagall, were reminded of LaRouche’s words, and told me, “he was right, he was completely right. We should have listened to him then.”

Ogden: Liliana, with Marco Zanni’s trip to the United States now completed, with these dozens of meetings that he has held with members of Congress, with all the breakthroughs that are happening on this front, where do we go from here? What are some concluding words that you can share with our American audience in order to continue to carry on this fight, and to secure some very big victories in the very near future?

Gorini: I share Marco Zanni’s view that Italy and the United States should get together, particularly because of the political moment now, with the so-called Trump “populist” government and the so-called “populist” government in Italy—we should get together and adopt LaRouche’s Four Laws, because they are all indications that there are people ready to do so, both in the Trump Administration and in the Italian government. And if we do so, the European Union, with its austerity measures, with its genocidal policy towards Greece and also now towards Italy, will shut up, and will probably disintegrate in the form of the present euro system, and we shall go back to the Europe of the Fatherlands, of De Gasperi and de Gaulle.

This is my wish, and I believe that the meetings Zanni had in Congress are going in this direction. I’m very hopeful.

America Is an Idea, Not a Place

by Dennis Speed

Antonín Dvořák

---------------------------------------------

On December 18, 2018, at Carnegie Hall in New York City, The Foundation for the Revival of Classical Culture will present a concert conceived within the theme, “Antonín Dvořák—‘America is an Idea, Not a Place’.” This concert will celebrate the 125th anniversary of the premiere of original works of Dvořák, including his Symphony No. 9, From the New World, which took place on December 16, 1893 in New York. What follows is an edited version of the program notes, written by Dennis Speed, for the upcoming December 12 concert, presented here with the permission of the Foundation for the Revival of Classical Culture.

For the tones in the voice of the shadow were not the tones of any one being, but of a multitude of beings, and, varying in their cadences from syllable to syllable fell duskly upon our ears in the well-remembered and familiar accents of many thousand departed friends.

—Edgar Poe, “Shadow”

The triumphs of our land in music ... lie in the future ... If we were all made of unmixed English blood, we might have long to wait for them ... Let us hope that our guest tonight [Dvořák] ... may consent to transplantation and may help add the new world of music to the continent which Columbus found.”

—Col. Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Carnegie Hall, Columbus Day, 1892

What is America? Is it a set of states? A territory bounded with borders? A union of people that mutually agree to associate, and to abide by a body of law, a constitution, devised “for the greatest good of the greatest number?” Many, many nations have these things. None of them, therefore, define what America is, as distinct from any place else.

Before Abraham Lincoln, when people spoke of the United States, they said, “the United States are . . .” After Abraham Lincoln’s successful Presidential defense of the Union, and victory against slavery, a new idea of America came into being: “The United States is . . .” Lincoln’s idea of America, Frederick Douglass’ idea of America, was a new America, “a more perfect Union.”

But if America, as the title of tonight’s concert states, “is an idea, not a place,” what is the idea?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.— That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,— That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Why did Lincoln recite passages from the plays of Shakespeare to his war-cabinet? Why is his Gettysburg Address perhaps America’s greatest poem? Lincoln, “dirt poor,” almost entirely self-taught, was profoundly committed to capturing the music of truth and communicating it in the most direct way possible. Lincoln sought to restore the “classical culture” of America’s Declaration of Independence through his defense of the Unit-Idea of the United States. It was, for him, a musical concept.

The mystic chords of memory . . . will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

—Abraham Lincoln,

First Inaugural Address, 1861

According to the Declaration of Independence, America is not a form of self-government—it is a method of self-government. Whenever the form (as for example seen in the racially discriminatory Supreme Court legislation of 1896-1954) becomes destructive of the ends for which the form was ostensibly created, it must be consciously rejected and abolished. That is how self-government improves, and that is how musical composition improves.

That idea of American self-government is identical, in principle, to Classical music’s motivic thorough-compositional method. That is the idea that an underlying unity of action governs the motion of the multiple movements of a symphony, sonata, or string quartet. Motivic thorough-composition was first pioneered by Johann Sebastian Bach in pieces such as his cello suites, and much further developed in pieces such as in his A Musical Offering. With Franz Joseph Haydn’s invention of the string quartet, it was made completely conscious as a compositional principle in his six string quartets, Op. 33, composed in 1781.

W.A. Mozart

---------------------------------------------

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, who arrived in Vienna that same year, was first introduced to the compositions of Bach through the Vienna salon of Baron von Swieten. Mozart responded—both to Bach’s Well-Tempered Clavier and A Musical Offering, and to Haydn’s Motivführung method of writing string quartets, in which all the several movements are bound together by a unit idea of the whole—by composing his Six Quartets Dedicated to Haydn over the period from December 1782 to January 1785. Haydn and Mozart, both violinists, played Mozart’s quartets together. Mozart’s discovery re-situated all of Bach’s immense contribution to music within a new compositional method, which would in turn be advanced to its highest level of perfection in Beethoven’s symphonies, particularly the Fifth and Ninth.

Antonín Dvořák with his family and friends, in New York in 1893. Dvořák is on the right, his wife Anna on the left. Josef Jan Kovařík, his secretary, is seen in the middle in profile.

---------------------------------------------

Antonín Dvořák’s American journey involved nothing less than the application of the idea of motivic thorough-composition to improving the method of American self-government in the arts, by means of what Friedrich Schiller called “aesthetic education.” National schools of composition such as Mozart’s work in the German language with his Die Zauberflöte (The Magic Flute) and Die Entführung aus dem Serail (The Abduction from the Seraglio), Beethoven’s Fidelio, and the work of both Brahms and Dvořák with German folk songs and with Hungarian and Czech themes, were a means to the improvement of the capacity of national populations to think, freeing them from the cognitive slavery of everyday life. This same mission was now to be initiated in the United States.

Carl Van Vechten, courtesy the Van Vechten Trust

Harry Burleigh

---------------------------------------------

Dvořák, coming to America for the first time in 1892 to head the National Conservatory of Music, recognized that in the prosody of the Spirituals, the potential for the development of the richness of their “musical line,” by means of polyphony—not simply their literal themes—would supply the basis for the advancement of music in America. Supplied with the Classical breakthrough in composition which Dvořák called the Durchführung, identical to the Motivführung principle of Haydn through Brahms, the Spirituals would become the seed-crystal for the new school of composition. Dvořák’s student, copyist and musical collaborator, the African-American singer and composer Harry Burleigh, said:

Dvořák used to get tired during the day and I would sing to him after supper. I have been hungry and in my time, I had known how hard it was to overcome discrimination and I knew what a great man Dvořák was in music. . . . I gave him what I knew of Negro songs—no one called them Spirituals—and he wrote some of my tunes (my people’s music) into the New World Symphony which was performed for the first time by the New York Philharmonic on December 15, 1893. I never forgot that first public performance. I suppose it was the first time in the history of music that a Negro’s song had been a major theme in a great symphonic work.

That first public performance was 125 years ago.

Burleigh’s grandfather, Hamilton Waters, was released from slavery in 1832. He was punished with 70 lashes for learning how to read. Waters became a conductor on the Underground Railroad, as did Burleigh’s mother Elizabeth, a college graduate and Classical scholar who spoke French and taught Greek and Latin (and also aided runaway slaves). His grandfather and mother taught Burleigh the Spirituals. Burleigh’s singing-sessions with Dvořák were an oral history of America. The successful fight for freedom that had been concluded less than 30 years before Dvořák’s arrival was embedded in the very tones and timbre of Harry Burleigh’s voice.

Dvořák’s visit to America, and his productivity here, embodies what is great and noble in the character of this country. Tonight’s concert, recognizing the momentous importance of that day, 125 years ago, when Dvořák sat in a box in Carnegie Hall and heard Burleigh’s unique voice sing an American song, points to the secret as to how our nation, forgetful of its own spirit, might regain its capacity for self-government by simply choosing to sing those Spirituals, “as great as any theme from Beethoven,” with Antonín Dvořák once again.

December 29, 2010

A WEDDING ANNIVERSARY:

The Sixth Sense

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

Birds which migrate, seasonally, as to North, or to South, have been struggling, wittingly, or not, to teach us humans an important lesson. The fact is, that there is a Sixth Sense, in the cosmic, electromagnetic domain per se. Birds use it; but, humans probably appeared on this planet later than birds like that. After all, notably, Helga did warn us to respect, and to protect our neighboring birds, as good Franciscans would do. Those birds do, after all, reduce the infestation of our lives with what Helga has classed, generically, as “bugs.”

Creative Commons

Migrating birds have been trying to teach us humans an important lesson! Here, “The Legend of St. Francis, Sermon to the Birds,” by Giotto (1267-1337).

---------------------------------------------

Preface:

It was Percy Bysshe Shelley, most notably, who emphasized the importance of what amounts to, in effect, a “Sixth” human sense, as he did in the concluding paragraph of his A Defence of Poetry.[fn_1] Since migratory birds, in particular, usually regulate their seasonal flights according to an approximately north-south, magnetic-field orientation of those flights, we must confess, at the very least, that electromagnetic radiation plays an important role in our universe, the role of what might be named man’s “sixth sense,” a quality of sense which is evaded by citizens’ heretofore popular emphasis on particular forms of communication.

After all, the migratory birds do use cosmic radiation as an important category of communication. Why not we?

Or, perhaps we do, sometimes, unwittingly?

Admittedly, it has been the counsel during some of the periods of history in some cultures, including some parts of the human population of the United States during some relatively recent times past, to prefer to sleep with their heads (one, preferably, per person) pointing north. It is sufficient, for this moment, that, as a matter of practice, some birds have already taken into account, the broader evidence, that it is cosmic radiation, rather than particularate matter as such, which is the essential basis for the organization of the conditions of life known to us. It is time that more of us pay attention to that fact.

Therefore, let us refer to Shelley’s argument as I referenced it in opening these remarks. He points, in the concluding paragraphs of his A Defence of Poetry, to something which we must presume to be “external” to the so-called “five senses;” it is something which has always had important expressions in mass human behavior, in cosmic radiation’s using a medium which does not coincide with what is customarily associated with “sense perception.” It is, nonetheless, a medium of what is to be properly recognized as a channel of human direct, interpersonal communication-in-fact. Whatever that phenomenon represents, it is, in the last analysis, unique in respect to its contrast to the gist of the manner in which we respond to the notions of the five senses. It does have the specific effects of that type which I have classed in these introductory remarks, as prominent, in effect, in the domain of man’s performing the function of inter-personal human “communication.” The subject of that effect is mentioned by me, here, under the implied heading of “mass effects,” rather than sense-perception in the customary meaning for that latter term.

It is curiously ironical, but not accidental, that that same point concerning such mass effects which was made by Shelley, also turns up as a principle of communication, as being like a sea-borne message carried in a sealed bottle, in Keats’ Ode On a Grecian Urn.

The issue so posed by these, foregoing, remarks of mine, should be readily recognized as touching the theme of my December 15, 2010 “The Global Crisis Now at Hand;”[fn_2] but, the difference is, that, this time, I continue to examine the fallacy of commonplace belief in “sense certainty” from the standpoint of the human mind, as before, but with an emphasis on that notion of “sense” which is qualitatively beyond what I have stated explicitly in my earlier pieces on the subject of the human mind; I now situate the notion of the human mind in respect to its special role as the starting-point for an urgently needed criticism of the popularly employed misconceptions of the practical meaning of sense-perception as such. The question here is, “How might the human mind, as I had defined it, earlier, be treated, now, in terms of the necessary existence of a manifest ‘sixth dimension’ of human sense-perception, the dimension of human forms of ‘cosmic radiation as such?’ ”

Said otherwise: Why does human behavior react to certain ranges of cosmic radiation, as if such experience performed a function supplementing that of ordinary sense-perception? Said otherwise: Why do most people today, nonetheless, not yet recognize this action itself as expressing a mode of individual sense-perception? Take my referenced case of the known role of cosmic radiation in “steering” the seasonal flights of migratory birds, as a point of reference.

Shelley vs. Adam Smith

In respect to Shelley’s thesis as such, there could be no competent view of Shelley and his work which did not proceed with a recognition of Shelley’s rejection of the philosophical standpoint of British Eighteenth Century Liberalism, as that distinction is most prominent in the summary concluding paragraph of the published version of his A Defence of Poetry. Take the cases of Adam Smith and the British Foreign Office’s Jeremy Bentham as illustration of the crucial difference of Shelley’s argument from that of the British (or, should we not prefer “brutish”) outlook which is representative prevalent opinion of Victorian imperial Britain still today. To sum up the nature of the difference, Shelley typifies the same philosophical outlook which our own patriots shared with the English opponents of the New Venetian Party’s legacy of the brutish William of Orange, of Jeremy Bentham’s master Lord Shelburne, and, presently, the worst of a bad lot, that of the circles of H.G. Wells and Bertrand Russell still today.

Literate Britons and Americans, alike, know that the English colonization in North America, as typified by the Plymouth settlement and the Massachusetts Bay Colony while still under the leadership of the Winthrops and the Mathers, typified a faction from within the British Isles and some in the Netherlands, who, like France’s Jean Baptiste Colbert and the authors of the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, typified a current within Europe who recognized, as Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa had done, that the moral intentions of the best of European civilization could not realize those goals under the continuing reign of the succession of the imperialist Habsburg and Sarpian tyrannies which had asserted their adherence to a Roman imperialist tradition embedded in the imperialist Liberalism of the followers of Paolo Sarpi.

When the Habsburg interest had ruined the efforts of such followers of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa’s inspiration of Christopher Columbus for Central and South America, it was chiefly the English colonies in North America which carried the noblest intentions within European culture into the creation of and a development of territories on the Western shore of the Atlantic, as the Massachusetts colony under the leadership of the Winthrops and Mathers, and their follower, Benjamin Franklin, brought forth the noblest passions of European civilization of that time within the North American settlements.

Today, the distinctions between the culture of the American patriotic tradition which I defend, and that of Europe, are essentially the same, in root, as then. We, for example, are based on a credit system, where our cousins in Europe are conditioned to accept a monetarist, rather than a credit system. We are a republic, where our cousins in Europe are still subject to reliance on working from within the intentions of parliamentary systems. Our American experience with the great waves of immigrations from Europe, into the United States has shown us that the European immigrant into the United States, as President Abraham Lincoln foresaw, is, quite naturally, soon, a patriot of the adopted republic.

Sentiments of a related nature existed during the Eighteenth Century and much of the Nineteenth, until the ouster of Bismarck in 1890.

So, despite the effects of the wars of a Napoleon being used as a foolish puppet of London’s and Metternich’s orchestration of the ruinous Napoleonic wars deployed against continental Europe, the legacy of such as Percy Bysshe Shelley reflected the current of cultural intentions shared among circles on both sides of the Atlantic. To understand exceptions such as Shelley, one must look into Germany, where the great mathematician and avowed follower of both Gottfried Leibniz and Johann Sebastian Bach, Abraham Kästner, inspired the collaborators Gotthold Lessing and Moses Mendelssohn.

The disastrous French revolution, despite figures such as Lafayette and “Author of Victory” Lazare Carnot, was the disaster which must be a center for our attention in looking back to the political role and character of Percy Shelley. It was to that legacy, as expressed in both the United States and England during the interval under the last decades of the life of Benjamin Franklin, to which Shelley’s never actually completed A Defence of Poetry looks back, as historian H. Graham Lowry pinpointed the relationship between Gottfried Leibniz and Jonathan Swift during and following the last years of Leibniz’s life.[fn_3]

As I have emphasized, frequently, in the past, as also in dealing with the genius of Shelley here, we must point to a certain difficulty commonly experienced by serious thinkers among young American adults today.

The cultural pessimism which has struck down the thinking young adults of the 25-35 and somewhat later generation, is a pronounced tendency to confine their sense of moral reality to a place between the book-ends of birth and expected death. Whereas, those of my generation, those of the young adults of World War II and slightly later experience, traced the meaning of our lives both to the benefits we inherited from forebears, and might hope to be extended to future generations. The emphasis on the notion of ideas as notable historical forces ranging across generations, has been largely lost as a consequence of the effects of the cultural pessimism which struck down many of those of my own World War II generation under President Truman and beyond. Today’s young Americans, among other nationalities, suffer a specific effect of cultural pessimism, which a Percy Shelley, among others did not share. We have thought in terms of a debt to those who gave our own and some future generation a relatively immortal advantage, and, also, a debt to be honored to those who participated in that which we should aim to make possible.

NASA

“What we usually regard as sense-perceptions,” writes LaRouche, “are shadows cast by the effects of cosmic radiation.” Shown, the aurora borealis: above, viewed from the International Space Station in 2008; below, over Norway in 2006.

Creative Commons/Rafal Konieczny

---------------------------------------------

I. Space-Time & Matter Today

The working hypothesis on which the foregoing, just stated difficulty depends, reflects a belief to the effect that some presumed evidence shows that the so-called “traditional” categories of “space, time, and matter” depend upon two presumptions, presumptions which, in fact, depend upon a false, but popular belief.

The first of those presumptions, is the admittedly popular opinion that sense-perceptions show us the actually efficient form of existence, rather tha being, in fact, equivalent to seen shadows of the past and for the future, cast by unseen realities. The second, closely related presumption, which actually depends upon the first, is the mistaken notion of the existence of space as being ontologically distinct from the notion of matter. That a-prioristic presumption corresponds to the notion of “empty space” as being distinct from what is presumed to be an implicitly particle-like quality of “matter.” Once we have considered the notion of perceived particles as being, shall we say, “merely” the expression of singularities within a cosmic field of space-time, some profoundly interesting, and practically productive ideas come into play.

The first, admittedly provisional correction required at that point, is expressed as a reflection of that essential fallacy typified by the argument of Aristotle on which, in turn, are based the intrinsically ontologically fallacious, arbitrary, mathematical presumptions on which the a-priorisms of Euclidean geometry depend. I state that case as follows.

The fallacious, aprioristic presumption systemically inherent in the dogma of both Aristotle and Euclid, is the notion of the implicit existence of “dead space” in a universe for which it is presumed, as by Aristotle and his follower Euclid, that universal creativity has ceased to exist in either what is considered matter, or what is considered space, alike. That set of erroneous presumptions often associated with Aristotle and Euclid, is the implicit premise for the argument against a true principle of creativity, as made in support of the mistaken belief as presumed by Aristotle, and, also Euclid, just as Aristotle’s fraud was denounced, on precisely this account, by Philo (aka “Judaeus”) of Alexandria.

The relevant modern evidence against the exemplary frauds of Aristotle, is that the known existence of matter in the universe, on which we are vastly better informed than the a-prioristic hoaxster Aristotle, is that the development of successively higher forms of life, is ontologically creative in its recognizable expression as an ordered series of successively higher orders of developments. Contrary to Friedrich Nietzsche, God is not dead: the universe is not dead, but, as Philo denounced Aristotle on precisely this account, the universe, and also the human individual, is, inherently, willfully creative by innate nature, as, notably, the first chapter of Genesis leads one toward that conclusion.

Unfortunately, Genesis 1 is highly suspect among many scientists today. That suspicion is, chiefly, based on the specious, but strongly felt presumption, that Genesis 1 is a religious teaching, and therefore not scientific. Admittedly, during the successive Babylonian and Achaemenid captivities, the captors took nasty, syncretic liberties with the original product of Hebrew doctrine, and there are other, similarly consequent problems there. But, from the standpoint of relevant sort of qualified scientist today, Genesis 1 itself does not share in that latter kind of systemic, syncretically induced defect.[fn_4]

To restate my point respecting the content of Genesis 1, as distinct from the Mesopotamian pagan source’s Adam and Eve myth, the universe is to be treated as inherently creative throughout the expressions of its existence as a universe.[fn_5] Within that process, creativity assumes the expressed form of what is ontologically specific as the higher orders of existence being generated, as in the systemic argument of V.I. Vernadsky. The principle of life within the universe, is an expression of this, that from whatever may be carefully selected as the notion of a relative point of “beginning.”

NASA

This montage illustrates the interaction of solar storms and the Earth’s magnetosphere. The magnetosphere extends 40,000 miles from the Earth’s surface in the sunward direction, and more in other directions.

---------------------------------------------

Take the case of the Solar system as an illustration. Consider some known general facts about this, facts which are of ill repute because their presence is treated as an offense to the sensitive souls of the perennially ignorant.

Our Sun is, and always was, in fact, created as a relatively youthful appendage of our Galaxy. The Solar system is an outgrowth of that Sun, a Sun, which, in turn, generated a higher state of organization within its domain, a higher state such as that which is known as a Solar system. Within that Solar system, the conditions for propagation of life appeared; after a long time, under successively higher orders of complexities, of living processes which made their way upward, toward the appearance of the higher-order species created as mankind. Mankind has, since that point, done much original creating of its own, an accomplishment which is unique to mankind among living species presently known to us, and, hopefully, will be permitted to continue to do so, despite what are, at their best, the wretched deceits of Aristotle, or the like.

Mankind is unique as an expression of a species of existence whose powers of creativity are voluntary, as distinct from the form of actual creativity represented by all other presently known expressions of living species. The point to be emphasized by me here, is that creativity as such, and also voluntary creativity, are to be distinguished from one another as qualitatively distinct categories, as follows.

On the one side, actual creativity is to be treated, contrary to the vulgarity of Aristotle and other reductionists, as a natural characteristic of the universe. The distinction of the human species from known life in general, is that it is voluntary, as specific to humanity, rather than the ostensibly unwitting, but still efficient creativity of the lithosphere and biosphere. The notion of the term “Creator,” is, scientifically, the notion of the necessity of the existence of some principle of action which is equivalent to a voluntary capability as the essential ontological characteristic of the existence of an anti-entropic “universe.” Such a notion as that was employed by Albert Einstein in his praise of the unique perfection specific to Kepler’s expressed, uniquely original discovery of a universal principle of gravitation, a feat accomplished through aid of an implicitly Platonic concept of the practice of “vicarious hypothesis.”

The sketch which I have outlined, thus, in this present chapter thus far, pertains to the necessary existence of the voluntary principle expressed by the existence of the notion of a willful quality of universal creativity when expressed as being associated, specifically, with human individual sense-perception. This notion, nonetheless, encounters certain uncertainties in the mind of the usual reader. It is those uncertainties which I address, with remedies in mind, in stating the premises of this present report.

God and Man

It is necessary that we step aside, if for only a moment, from what has been written here so far, so that we might emphasize a point of crucial importance, a point which has, so to speak, just knocked at our door in response to the point respecting vicarious hypothesis.

It has been the widely taught presumption, that man was generated by the lower forms of life, even as by one of many typical British ideologues to be found among the ranks of Soviet science, that adversary of Academician V.I. Vernadsky known as A.I. Oparin. Although there is no premise for believing that ordering of the appearance of life-forms on Earth, did not proceed from simpler to relatively higher orders of existence of living species, the fact remains that the upward evolution of Earthly life-forms as such, is the reflection of an efficient principle of life per se, as distinct from non-life. The pertinent fact is that the universe itself, insofar as it is known to us presently, is ordered by a universal principle of progress from the relatively more primitive, to higher orders of organization.

That those such as Oparin may argue as they might, is irrelevant in the respect that they, with their crudely, and actually quite arbitrary, a-posteriori presumptions avoid the efficiently conclusive evidence, that the progress to higher forms of life continues to reflect a pre-existing ordering principle of the universe as a whole: i.e., creativity.

On this account, Oparin, as a case in point, was a victim of the same reductionist follies which led to the absurd notion, of the existence of a “second law of thermodynamics,” as by the Nineteenth Century’s Rudolf Clausius et al., in fabricating the notion of what became known as “a Second Law of Thermodynamics.”

That silly, but widely taught academic presumption, relies upon turning science inside out, by failing to recognize that the essential prerequisite for continued existence of a present “level” of physical state, pre-determines that only anti-entropic evolutionary functions can survive as acceptable qualities of ruling states of nature. The evidence misused by Clausius et al. to propose, in effect, a “second law of thermodynamics,” is actually the same notion which Aeschylus identifies as the ban against mankind’s use of “fire” by the son of a concubine Olympia, Zeus. In other words, the arguments of such reductionists as Oparin, depend upon a state of religious adoration of what the ancients of Aeschylus’ time knew as “the oligarchical principle,” a notion which has been commonplace among the Roman Empire and its successors, a succession which is continued as British imperial ideology to the present day, in such expressions as the British monarchy’s fanatical demand for a global practice of genocidal reductions of the human population. The case of the typically British, Marxist ideology of A.I. Oparin, is typical of the axiomatic presumptions on which the pro-genocidal doctrines of the World Wildlife Fund depend.[fn_6]

In the history of the Soviet Union, for example, the most typical of the influences underlying successful scientific practice, was that associated with the Academician V.I. Vernadsky who was the principal author of the Soviet nuclear science programs, among numerous other leading accomplishments. [box: Vernadsky on

Cosmic Radiation]

The late Soviet biologist Alexander I. Oparin (right). The incompetent premise of his theory of the origin of life, is that there is no fundamental difference between living and non-living matter.

---------------------------------------------

So, in the United States today, science is presently as much a victim of, chiefly British, corruption by rotten influences as ever Soviet science suffered from the hands of Oparin. The chief source of the rot in science, throughout the world at large, still today, and much more so than in President Kennedy’s time, is as we witness in the influence of the pro-fascist, pseudo-science of official “environmentalism” presently.

Why Did Aristotle Lie?

At this point in the report, it is of crucial importance for the reader, that I emphasize the fact, that Aristotle’s was not a mistake born of innocent ignorance; Aristotle was lying.

As Aeschylus shows throughout the course of the surviving, known remains of his dramas, the essential doctrine of that center of the same ancient evil met in the work of Aristotle, is what is expressed by the Delphi cult of Apollo-Dionysus, an evil expressed as the notion of a ruling class designated as “the Gods,” or, alternately, “the immortals,” as contrasted to an under-class designated as “mortals.” In specifically European history, the category of those classed as the “immortals” was best known as being typified by the descendant of the concubine Olympia and her offspring, as distinct from “the Titans,” whereas both latter types were treated as distinct from the assumed class of the “mortals.”

The Mediterranean society’s “immortals” were, categorically, the expression of a maritime culture which reigned in Mediterranean-centered (and, later, trans-Atlantic) European maritime cultures, that so since the relative decline of the other system of alleged “immortals” associated with the riparian and related, imperialist cultures centered in Mesopotamia. The combination of the ruling classes “of immortals” and the likeness of that otherwise named, represented what the extended culture centered on the Mediterranean identified as being, in principle, “the oligarchical model” which reigns as a political force with adopted powers of universal law within not only the specific context of European civilization generally, but elsewhere, still today.

European civilization, since those ancient times, has been dominated by the same “oligarchical model” associated with the Delphic cult of Apollo-Dionysus. The role of politics in the corruption of science remains not merely widespread, but pervasive in the political doctrines of nations of the world, still today.

There is no presently apparent remedy for that kind of political corruption of science and its applications, until we concede the fact that the organization of the universe is ordered as from the Creator on down, thence, to what is presently known to us as mankind, with everything else in the universe as known to us thus far, today, as lower in order of existence, in conscious power of creativity, than mankind today.

To restate the point made immediately above, the nature of the universe must be adduced from the sequence of qualitative changes of existence, as from the sequence of the succession of higher forms of life from relatively lower. This also applies to the chemistry of the products of Solar radiation met in the Sun’s planetary system, as related to the higher states of organization of the planetary system, relative to that of the Sun itself.

Reductionists such as A.I. Oparin, commit the error of attributing products of a principle of life to an extension of a continuation of non-life.

Admittedly, the issues posed by Oparin’s stubborn error constitute what many might regard as a wide-ranging, open-ended subject. Those specific kinds of difficulties dissipate when we take the anti-entropic relationship of life to non-life, and, most emphatically, higher-order action such as the effects of human discoveries and employment of the anti-entropic physical effects of advances in scientific creativity relative to man’s role on Earth.

Admittedly, there have been many and also repeated retreats of mankind from a relatively higher organization of society to a lower. However, all of the well-known instances of such patterns in cultures express a willful intention of a dominant stratum of people in society, to prevent the progress of the conditions of life needed for maintaining the majority. Take the case of the frankly pro-genocidal World Wildlife Fund launched by Britain’s Prince Philip and his accomplice Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, in foisting that fund ever more widely throughout the planet today. The scientific fraud represented by the so-called “environmentalist movement” currently, illustrates the point: the suppression of scientific-technological progress, by means which effect an increasingly homicidal, accelerating increase of the rate of entropy, presents conclusive scientific evidence on this point. Throughout the history of empires, intentional genocide effected through suppression of progress has been the principal means by which the few and powerful effect genocide through suppression of progress by the many.

Thus, the oligarchical model, as it may be traced within European cultures to the conspiracy conducted at the Isle of Capri between Octavian and the priests of Mithra, the conspiracy which established the existence of the Roman empire, from Octavian’s time until the British monarchy today, remains the enemy of civilization against which the cause of mankind is obliged to contend, in political life, and in science, to the present day.

Rome & a Maritime Oligarchical Model

Those processes marked out by the period from the fall of the Achaemenid tyranny, to the presently extended, systemic model of European society, have always been the expression of an imperialist model for a maritime-monetarist oligarchical society of the type which came to be known as the oligarchical maritime type of Roman imperial model. This has been a model continued as the evolution of a continuing history of the Roman imperial model from the future Emperor Augustus Caesar’s contractual agreements, reached on the Isle of Capri, between the Octavian (the later Caesar Augustus) and the priesthood of the Cult of Mithra, to the present-day British form of the reign of that same Roman empire-model into its present British incarnation.

This has been the Aristotelean Model, whether so named, or, as also met in its slightly re-costumed, modern, Sarpian guise.

The creation of the maritime model of the Roman empire, was centered in the maritime tradition of the Delphi maritime-imperialist, monetarist, cult, the cult representing the tradition of that Delphi Apollo-Dionysus legacy against which Plato had taken aim. The Macedonian agent and most notorious poisoner of the time of Philip of Macedon, and Philip’s son and enemy Alexander the Great, was the Aristotle who has remained the model for a high priest of Mediterranean-centered expressions of maritime-centered forms of imperialist oligarchical model to the present, brutishly British day of the devotees of the cult of Aristotle. The modern European (Sarpian, Adam Smith) model of the British expression of Romantic maritime imperialism, is, as the notorious Lord Shelburne would demand, the British extension of that same Roman imperial legacy which reigns over Europe itself (and often beyond) today.

Within the bounds of those and kindred points of historical reference, the British imperial system’s underlying notions of an oligarchical system of universal law, are not only those of the Roman empire, but the broader, more ancient base traced from the core found in the oligarchical tradition of the Delphi Apollo-Dionysus cult.

That misanthropic, oligarchical notion of a body of universal, allegedly “natural” law, is centered in the notion that the existence of kings and kingdoms depends upon that consent to the existence of kingdoms from which the imperial monopoly of the principles and authority of law is derived. The modern oligarchical system, is derived, proximately, from that tradition of European imperial law which is typified by Henry Maine’s attempted rationalization of such a code of imperial oligarchical law, as traced by the ideologue Maine, backwards, from Nineteenth-century British imperialism, through Justinian, into notions typified by the roots of the maritime system of the intrinsically imperialist Delphi cult of monetarism.

The principle of empire, such as that of ancient Rome or the modern British monarchy, is, simply said, that to keep people from advancing in their level of intelligence, the mass of the populations must be prevented from progressing “too rapidly” in their conditions of knowledge and of the practice of life, and must refresh that oligarchical commitment, from time to time, by bringing a period of “a new dark age,” from time to time.

The person who was probably the most evil man of my lifetime’s experience, was Britain’s Bertrand Russell. Take the following, typical passage from Russell’s 1952 The Impact of Science upon Society:

“Bad times, you may say, are exceptional, and can be dealt with by exceptional methods. This has been more or less true during the honeymoon period of industrialism, but will not remain true unless the increase of population can be enormously diminished. At present the population of the world is increasing at about 58,000 per diem. War so far, has had no very great effect on this increase, which continued throughout each of the world wars. . . . War . . . has hitherto been disappointing in this respect . . . but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation, survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full. . . . The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of that? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people’s. . . . The present urban and industrial centers will have become derelict, and their inhabitants, if still alive, will have reverted to the peasant hardships of their medieval ancestors. . . . When I first became politically conscious . . . the British Empire seemed eternal, the country was aristocratic, rich, and growing richer. . . . For an old man, with such a background, it is difficult to feel at home in a world of . . . American supremacy.”[fn_7]

It is recommended that that set of quotations be compared with British policy today, as the prescriptions of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) prescribe such schemes for Hitler-like genocide schemes currently in progress under President Barack Obama today.

The Case of Paolo Sarpi

On this account, the modern British imperial law, is traced, on the surface of things, to what has become a slyly alleged adversary of the Aristotelean precedent, the so-called “liberalism” of Paolo Sarpi. Nonetheless, in reality, as such depraved creatures as Bertrand Russell emphasized, British Sarpian liberalism is actually a conveniently concocted, post-Trent, nominally Protestant cult-version of the same Roman tradition of imperialism, by Sarpi: a traditionally Aristotelean, Roman imperialism. Sarpi’s Ockhamite dogmatism is Aristotle crafted for the intended edification of the stupefied modernists.

For example, that effort which is centered in British imperial authorship today, as in the current, British-led effort to dissolve Europe into a British-run core of an intended “one-world” empire, is simply a reflection of a Roman imperialism from which Europe has never successfully departed within its own territory today. The only part of that British scheme for evil which can not work, is the intended survival of the present British system itself, which would, unless prevented, drag the entire planet, including itself, into the most calamitous dark age of all humanity ever known in history so far today.

Nothing illustrates those referenced implications of the influences of both Aristotle and Sarpi more quickly, than the fact that Karl Marx and Marxism were, like what I have already referenced as being the Fabian Society creature Frederick Engels’ agent and British arms-trafficker Alexander Helphand of “permanent warfare, permanent revolution” notoriety. Engels’ Fabian Society protégé Parvus-Helphand was an outgrowth of the same British imperialism which had been freshly designed and created under head of British intelligence Lord Palmerston, as the same “Young Europe” direction which Palmerston’s own Foreign Office had used to create the slaveholder’s doctrine of the Confederacy’s insurrection inside the United States. The latter was a Confederacy run from London by what was to become known as Theodore Roosevelt’s uncle and mentor James D. Bulloch, who had been the chief Confederate spy working against the United States from a base in England.

Thus, often, as in the case of Theodore Roosevelt’s crucial role in bringing the United States to support the British Empire in World War I, the source of the true victim for a tragedy on the stage of real life, is to be found in the credulity of the audience.

Often the wars suffered by the modern world, have been expressions of a Roman imperial tradition of playing the empire’s subjects against one another, lest those subjects acquire a tendency toward independence from the reign of the empire itself. The infamous “Seven Years War” of 1756-1763, and the Napoleonic wars fought within continental Europe under British and Habsburg supervision, are exemplary cases. So were those wars recently fought as elements of an epidemic, since the ouster of Bismarck until the present moment in Afghanistan and elsewhere, or the even wilder prospect of a clinically insane, Israeli-led attack on Iran now.

The childishly concocted denials of such roles of the British Foreign Office, have been the core of the drama concocted for the edification of the credulous specimens, including native North American ones, of our modern times.[fn_8]

“The play’s the thing, to catch the conscience of the king.” Why the king? Simple! For the benefit of that emperor who reigns above the ranks of mere kings. So, the liar Aristotle, even long dead, still practices the imperial art of such deceits as those. I have explained the role of Paolo Sarpi as an heir of Aristotelean practices in such terms.

The Problem with Some Definitions

In my earlier treatments of the subject of sense-perceptions, I had emphasized that sense-perceptions have the quality of shadows cast by reality, rather than being reality themselves. In dealing with cosmic radiation, as distinct from the customary notions whose attributed meaning is literally that of sense-perceptions, matters are turned around. Cosmic radiation is the principle of action which is casting the shadows; what we usually regard as sense-perceptions, are shadows cast by the effects of cosmic radiation. It is not yet the actual meaning of the subject of that communication, but it is the act of communication, rather than the mere form of the shadow of that action.

In the case here, in the matter of the “Sixth Sense,” the human mind is dealing directly with the agency which mere sense-perceptions, such as those of the famous five senses, otherwise reflect as the shadows of the real human identity and its experience.

Consider some of the more readily accessible means of insight into those functions of cosmic radiation which lie within the relatively lower band-widths considered as being (usually) more or less friendly to life generally, and to human exposure more narrowly. Take the case of music, itself an expression of cosmic radiation, as illustration of the subject. Consider two cases of changes for the worse in the broadcast of music, whether as performed within a room, or as broadcast by such means as radio and television broadcasting. What do we know as relevant to what our subject has been in this opening chapter of the report?

II. Rid Us of a Reductionist’s Delusions

Johannes Kepler’s two principal, unique discoveries in respect to the organization of the Solar system, were, first, his discovery of the orbits of Earth and Mars with respect to the Sun (as in his The New Astronomy), and his consequent discovery of the universal principle of gravitation (The Harmonies of the Worlds). Both of these discoveries reflected Filippo Brunelleschi’s discovery and use of the catenary as representing a physical (funicular) curve, in contrast to the incompetent system of Euclid, and corresponding to the discovery of a general principle of physical science by the Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa who remains the founder of modern physical science.

Preceding the discoveries by Kepler, we have the case of the work of Leonardo da Vinci, who, among other things, showed the relationship between the catenary and tractrix, thus presenting the basis for the fundamental contribution to physical science by Gottfried Leibniz and his collaborator Jean Bernouilli. It was Kepler who had pointed out to those who might follow him, the importance of the discovery of the calculus, which was done, uniquely, by Leibniz, and which had inspired contemporaries of Carl F. Gauss in the treatment of Kepler’s second project, the discovery of elliptical functions.

Those achievements set the stage for a next step upwards, the subject of Abelian functions, as adopted and developed by Lejeune Dirichlet and Bernhard Riemann, which was accomplished despite the hoaxster-plagiarist Augustin Cauchy who had fraudulently hidden his possession of that work of Niels Abel, which Cauchy had hidden and maliciously plundered. Riemann’s treatment of Abelian functions is outstanding on this account. It is, thus, the work of Dirichlet and Riemann which is of the most useful relevance in approaches to the following subject.

The Schiller Institute’s campaign for a return to the “Verdi” tuning (C=256) drew support from top Classical singers internationally. Shown below is a concert sponsored by the Institute in Washington in 1994. From left: Rev. James Cokley, George Shirley, Detra Battle, Kehembe (Valerie Eichelberger), William Warfield, and Robert McFerrin. The Institute’s “Music Manual,” now out of print, is available as a CD-ROM (https://store.larouchepub.com/product-p/schdv-2013-1-0-0-std.htm).

EIRNS/Stuart Lewis

---------------------------------------------

From the vantage-point of cosmic radiation, there are three types of relevant cases of bad musical practices to be referenced on the account of our subject in this report. The first, is the substitution of digital media for proper instruments, as this substitution engenders an improper confinement within which musical performances are intended to be heard. The second, is those practices of composition of music and speech which are associated, implicitly, with the standards set by the anti-Classical post-1949 Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), including the use of “elevated pitch” as a substitute for the natural tuning at approximately C=256.[fn_9] The third, is the resort to the extremely loud performance, and chaotic “effects,” as virtually noise, of either of each of the first two referenced types.

Those three types of destructive practices, have the effect of cutting the human mind off from the knowledgeable experience of what is properly defined as creative modes of expressed thinking. That problematic behavior, is typified by the habits associated with the grave error of treating the subject of physical science as a sub-stratum of formal digital mathematics. To define that problem in other words, we must mark the distinction, as in the practice of science, between physical mathematics (the evolving mathematics whose progressive development is derived from, and defined by the discovery of physical principles) and mathematical physics (the mathematics which confines the definition of physical principles to products of mere mathematics).

The natural register shift set in correspondence with the approximately C-256 well-tempered scale, is, itself, an integral part of the real music. Lack of it, when adopted as a policy, rather than as an imperfection of intention, is not pro-creation; it is the moral equivalent of masturbation.

The same principles which are properly demanded as standards for Classical modes of performance of music, also apply to the goals of Classically ironical literacy in the use of the human speaking voice, as in the role of Classical poetry.

The same abuses occurring against decency, in the domain of the speaking voice, assume their most pernicious character when the crafting of a poetic-simulating reading of a text reflects an empty, but apparently canonical form of utterance, without due regard for the specific idea which should be supplying a meaningful sense of content. “Sounding pretty,” is not necessarily elegant in respect to the actual idea-content of the utterance when the prosody lacks correspondence to the expression of a relevant meaningful idea, or, when mere verbiage is used in an attempt to seem being pretty, but without any actually important content in what is expressed, or, is even meaningless jabber uttered as if “prettily.” Sometimes, the simulations of prettiness in speaking, owe more to the spirit involved in the house of prostitution, than any sincere attempt to present meaningful expressions of important Classical ironies.

Science, like great Classical artistic compositions and their performances, is a process of discovering, or, at least, simply uncovering physical principles which wait to be discovered by means of ironies which are beyond the domain of pre-existing physical mathematics, as such achievements are typified by Albert Einstein’s insight into the true, unique quality of genius by Johannes Kepler’s original discovery of the principle of universal gravitation. That quality of “out-sidedness,” as the outsidedness of the virtual hypothesis, is a suitable standard for defining true, scientific creativity.

Creativity, so defined, often requires what may seem to many to be the “jarring effect” of intended irony, wherein the meaning of the intended utterance not infrequently lies. Take the case of what might, very briefly, appear to be a jarring dissonance introduced to a place in the composition of what turns out to have been the point at which the beginning of the resolution of a new idea is brought into play so. All true creativity relies on precisely that kind of device. There are no lullabies in Classical composition, except, rarely, when intended to put audiences to sleep, or, perhaps, merely to appear to threaten to put them to sleep, the better to make them leap to attention through the encounter with a startlingly beautiful idea.

That point is illustrated with some excellence in the celebrated London performance of the Schubert Ninth Symphony under the direction of Wilhelm Furtwängler.[fn_10]

Having now said so much on that account, now be jolted to attention to the idea which is the intention of this present composition as a whole.

This same distinction is otherwise expressed by the role of metaphor and related ambiguities expressed as departures from what are termed “literal definitions of pre-established meanings.” In fact, all true creativity in scientific and other work, is located, inherently, as outside the bounds of pre-established literal meanings. Hence, the well-deserved jokes on the theme of “a grammarian’s funeral.”[fn_11] The standard of what should be viewed as the properly seen as infamous, The New York Times style book, is a case in point.

The simplest illustration of the principle involved in these considerations, is provided by the demonstrable fact, that progress always occurs outside the bounds of presently pre-defined limits of quality of performance. The work on developing research into the deeper and broader implications of the cosmic radiation associated, functionally, with the “sixth sense,” is properly considered as typical of this road to achievement. No great idea was ever imparted by deduction, contrary to the mythical, cocainic character of “Sherlock Holmes;” all meaningful notions are expressed in the singularities of cosmic radiation.

That much said, as a matter of introductions, here so far. Now, situate the work to be done within this report by reviewing what I have presented in earlier reports, as what is presently known about the principles of scientific creativity as such.

“The Astronomer,” by Jan Vermeer, 1668. Creativity, LaRouche writes, “is expressed by the knowledge of physical, or comparable principles which are not implicitly accessible within the bounds of previously known experimental evidence. They belong, in their human origins, to the domain of the Classical artistic imagination.”

---------------------------------------------

Human Creativity Defined

Whereas, we are enabled to measure the effect of actual creativity, there is no mathematical formulation which can define the generation of actual such creativity. For reasons related to a widespread lack of knowledge of what human creativity actually represents, the mere term “creativity” is often adopted to describe effects which have no causal relationship to actual creativity as such.

Creativity is expressed by the knowledge of physical, or comparable principles which are not implicitly accessible within the bounds of previously known experimental evidence. They belong, in their human origins, to the domain of the Classical artistic imagination. The student’s discovery of an already known principle, should be employed as the intended development of the student’s ability to recognize the kinds of mental activity by which the student will, hopefully, come to understand the general nature of such discovery of principles. If that student’s mind is not more or less richly endowed with insight into the principle of original, Classical-artistic imagination, the student were likely to be a failure in treating those aspects of scientific inquiry which correspond to the imagination of such great physical scientists as Brunelleschi, Nicholas of Cusa, Leonardo da Vinci, Johannes Kepler, and Gottfried Leibniz.

So, the method of discovery appropriate for physical science finds its precedent within the experience of Classical artistic irony, as William Empson, for example, sought to clarify this point in his Seven Types of Ambiguity. Here, science owes something essential to the method of irony in Classical artistic composition. There lies the customary difficulty.

That difficulty among students with graduate qualifications in matters of physical science, including the loss of an earlier inclination toward such qualities of insight, is often a notorious effect of graduate students’ studies, as noted by leading specialist in such matters, Professor Lawrence S. Kubie in the 1962 Spring edition of Daedalus.

The schematic outline of the respective several steps through which we must pass in seeking to clarify this difficulty, may be introduced in the following manner.

On the lowest level of such attempts, we have the attempt to define creativity in terms of sense-perceptual effects. On the level of sense-perception, the immediate difficulty is met in the fact that sense-perceptions are not reality; they are best described, as shadows cast by effects which are, in and of themselves, “unseen” by direct human sense-perception.

What we are able to accomplish in this aspect of the matters immediately at hand here, is that we know that sense-perceptions are expressions of effects prompted by something real, but something not known directly from the attempting to read the sense-perceptions.

We progress significantly, if, and when we shift our attention from sense-perceptual effects, to the space-time of cosmic radiation, the domain of the principle of the functions of physical relativity. There, we encounter something which appears to be much closer to our goal than reliance on sense-perception as such; but, what we have reached in this attempt, is those principles which Bernhard Riemann identified as lying beyond our direct knowledge, those effects which lie within the respective domains of the very large and very small.

We might quiet our growing sense of frustration, by emphasizing that cosmic radiation is, like sense-perception itself, a quality of knowledge lodged within the function of the living human brain; but, that then fails, because the brain as such is a subject of sense-perception. However, there is a suggestion of a policy which is a remedy for that; it is that it is the mind, not the brain, which harbors the effect called “mind,” which is proffered to us as a possible location of a solution.

Up to that point, in that succession of hypothesized stages, we have accomplished something which is undoubtedly useful, but is not an actual solution for the conceptual problem posed, in itself.

Try another approach: can the human mind know itself? Or, better said, does actual creativity know itself, and in what fashion? In other words, does the universe know itself as an object of conception? Is it not the fact, that creativity so situated represents a quality of self-measurement of the existence of the universe?

If that, the measure of creativity by creativity, is permitted as a form of solution, the measurement of action by an appropriate conception of action in itself presents us with the idea of a type of solution.

This, however, requires a universe which is intrinsically anti-entropic, at least, if we approach the subject from the standpoint of our relevant, actual present knowledge.

Now, since we have progressed this far in defining a plausible hypothesis, we are obliged to examine the two obvious hypotheses concerning the notion of an anti-entropic universe: Is the universe actually entropic, or anti-entropic?

Considered as a Social Question

The so-called “Second Law of Thermodynamics,” when considered in the light of what we have just considered until now, instructs us that we must now choose between a self-developing, and a self-destroying universe, the latter the fascist (“dionysian”) universe of Friedrich Nietzsche, Werner Sombart, Joseph Schumpeter and their like. Hence, the Delphic notion of Apollo-Dionysus.

“Is ours an expanding, or an entropic universe?”

The question eliminates itself. A universe based on a principle of self-destruction could not have been the universal definition of a universe in principle; or, it was a universe which had been a creative universe, but whose creativity had died before man had come into existence, as Aristotle had implicitly argued. This was taken up by Philo, but had changed in principle insofar as creation is presumed by him to be a true principle, not a “mechanical” design which might be continued or not. In fact, of course, the evidence is, that the universe is self-expanding. Note, that this goes to the point of the third and concluding section of Bernhard Riemann’s habilitation dissertation, the point respecting both the extremely large and extremely small.

To assist the mind’s self-reflections on such subject-matters, consider the relatively very long interval during which life was in a unicellular or comparable state, as contrasted to the relatively short time of the progress from unicellular states to the present, human state. Trace the known aspects of the way the process of successive generations of the state of Earth developed through those successive transformations through which human life on Earth became a permitted state of existence, as now. Human life on Earth became possible because the development of the Earth itself made human life here possible.

Once briefly considered speculations are placed to one side, it is the notion of a self-creative universe which is the proposition which is practically before us. However, even after the prospect of an inherently entropic, hence self-destructive universe is put aside, there is a different question to be considered. Here, the discussion turns our attention to something of known relevance: the issue of Aeschylus’ Prometheus Trilogy. As I have said: this is a social question.

Since no later than the decline of Sumer into, first, a system of what some archeologists have identified as a “feudalistic-like peasantry,” and, later, the state of slavery which spelled Sumer’s doom, the characteristic trend in society has been of the use of some people by some other people as virtually cattle, as virtually herds of cattle-like creatures, to be culled according to the choice of caprices or some special interest of the “farmers,” such as a President Barack Obama, who herd such people considered as a form of cattle, to their slaughter. Such is precisely the policy of the World Wildlife Fund created by Britain’s Prince Philip and the Netherlands’ Prince Bernhard. Sumer failed, but civilization progressed in the end.

Notably, the policy of the World Wildlife Fund did not begin with either Werner Sombart or Joseph Schumpeter. It was already the policy of the fanatical President Theodore Roosevelt, as expressed as the promotion of slavery by Theodore Roosevelt’s uncle and mentor, James D. Bulloch, British agent and spy for the Confederacy. President Theodore Roosevelt then devoted his Presidency to destroying the pre-conditions for development of the planet Earth’s role as a human environment, as the World Wildlife Fund’s Princes Philip and Bernhard did after him. It is nothing other than what was known as “the oligarchical principle” of both the Achaemenid and Babylonian tyrants, and the contracted arrangement between Macedon’s King Philip and the Achaemenid Emperor, and the Babylonian tyranny earlier. All such systems known to history have become systemic failures. So, however, on the contrary, the development of supplies of oxygen by Earth, created the ozone layer on which higher forms of life depend.

Creative Commons/Steven G. Johnson

The biosphere, as Vernadsky showed, has a powerful effect on non-living matter. Shown here are the jellyfish-like, lumniscent creatures known as sea walnuts. Such creatures affect the ocean as a whole, including currents.

---------------------------------------------

There is nothing properly considered mysterious to competent science in identifying the causes for the breakdown-crises of all such systems, such as that of the British empire and its accomplices presently. With our present knowledge of some crucial aspects of relatively earlier periods in which life was expressed chiefly in unicellular forms, there should be no mystery, any longer, of why all social systems based on relatively zero-physical-economic growth of human populations should have converged on an inevitable collapse, as is onrushing, world-wide, at the present time.

As a Physical-Economic Question

The more we learn about our universe, especially from the control over life within the Solar system, or on Earth, the more this domain of Earth represents, for us, a part of the essential shaping by life, or by action by life. Considering only as much of the action of life which pertains to physical-economic functions of societies, there is virtually nothing bearing on the subjects of so-called “raw materials” which is not an effect of the role of life in shaping the essential pre-conditions for the life-cycles of modern economy in this way.

So, most of the so-called mineral resources on whose relative richness and depletion the physical economy of the nations depends, are a reflection of presently finite deposits assembled for our mining activities by life-forms such as ancient bacteria or other minute living creatures from the past. The general result of those limitations, is that the energy-flux density of applied work by economies must rise, per capita and per square kilometer, that even simply to maintain the equivalent of current levels of productivity per capita and per square kilometer. So, presently, without high energy-flux densities such as those achieved through nuclear-fission and thermonuclear fusion, a decent life for the existing levels of population of this planet were not possible. Resorting to relatively lower sources of power, such as windmills and solar collectors, is mass-murderous insanity—indeed a crime against humanity, which is to say, “genocide” against a nation’s own population—for any nation foolish enough to promote such policies.

This factor was made clear in strategic-military terms, over the course of the development of weapons-systems such as those of nuclear fission and fusion, since the U.S. Manhattan Project and similar programs under the guidance of the Russian genius V.I. Vernadsky. The conclusion was reached, that the effects of thermo-nuclear weapons-systems were negative for mankind, whereas the so-called “peaceful uses” of nuclear and thermonuclear power were imperative for the present and future of all humanity.

On this subject, it must be said as being highly relevant to all of humanity today, that the pattern of warfare organized, chiefly, by the British empire, since the ouster of Germany’s Chancellor Bismarck, has been largely inexcusable, whereas most such warfare has been a product of the strategic policies of the present British Empire’s geopolitical reaction against the threat to British maritime supremacy, a threat constituted in the form of technologies coincident with transcontinental railway systems. So-called World War II against the Hitler forces, had become unavoidable, whereas virtually all other major warfare since the 1890, British-directed ouster of Germany’s Chancellor Bismarck, such as the U.S.A.’s folly in Indo-China, was absolutely unjustified from any standard but the British empire’s urgent desire to bring about the destruction of the economy of the U.S.A., an enterprise which could only be accomplished as it was done, through the U.S. Indo-China War over the dead body of U.S. President John F. Kennedy.

Sometimes, I must say, the leading governments of the world have shown themselves to be very much children on this account.

III. The Principle of Principles

For reasons given above, the notion of a universal principle coincides with the process presented in Genesis 1. That is to emphasize, that the writer of Genesis 1 was a human being, who, having considered the idea of God through the powers of imagination of mortal man, saw man, as if through a process of exhaustion, as the idea of mortal man, man as made in the likeness of a Creator, God. That is, in effect, pretty much the same thing which I had presented here earlier. Man’s experience with man’s own creative powers, showed how the universe works from the vantage-point of man’s own greatest achievements, the discovery of a universal physical principle, or, better said, the ability of man to discover a true principle within the individual’s expandable ability to experience the universe.

I am not preaching religion here, but fact.

Thereafter, it is to be considered that those principles which express creativity, define mankind’s options and achievements as to be recognized as the means for mankind’s achievements in the progress of the less imperfect creation of man. Man, now regarding himself, or herself as a product of the likeness of the God whose existence is scientifically necessary, must therefore desire the most, among all desires, that creative improvement of man himself which brings him, or her closer to the willful form of creative progress of the universe.

Consider the theology of immortality of the idea of the existence of souls in that light.

The human individual’s self-conception is therefore ironical, to the following effect.

Since we now know, at least from what I have written in earlier parts of this present report, that man conceived in the image of sense-certainties is only a shadow of reality, there is a certain prescience of immortality of some kind in the real person whose mind recognizes the mortal image provided by sense-perception as being “conditional” in that specific sense. Consider the Christian Apostolic Epistles in that light, as, for example, Paul in I Corinthians 13. It is a notion and mission of mankind which does not seek a static sort of immortality “in the imagination of the flesh,” but, rather, to experience the immortality of the process of creation, to be a truly creative force in the course of the development of the universe: to become an embodiment of human creativity in and for itself, thus being “in the likeness” of the nature of the Creator of the universe.

We, too, are thus creators in the likeness of the principle which defines the meaning of Creator. It is our mission to serve that end, which is our preferred mission in life: to make the universe better, and to make ourselves better in contributing to that mission. For us, that mission is its own reward: a devotion to creativity per se. That is true happiness.

That is what we might say is the proof of the matter. That much said, now consider the nature of the pleasure of being that kind of person; that is not merely a pleasant experience, but it is a necessary experience, that we might be consumed by the enjoying of the doing of our work—not that of sacrificing ourselves to the rewards of pain and punishment, but of fulfilling an endless mission.

Take the case of the Massachusetts Bay Colony under its original Royal Charter of sovereignty. Poor, sick, seaside Salem aside, there was no true sense of guilt-riddenness among such leaders as the Winthrops and Mathers. True, the New Venetian Party of the Dutch and other followers of Paolo Sarpi, was evil, as Venice had been evil under an earlier regime. James II had been a mess, but William of Orange and his followers were monstrously evil. Yet, there is no evil inherent in mankind, but only those who, like mere beasts, violate the creative principle of mankind.

Consider as it was said in England in certain earlier times, the beauty of human life resides in the goodness of dedication to such a mission as that of the fabled Irish monks who followed Isidore of Seville, and in the great works of Charlemagne: those who did the good in service of the cause of remedying the condition of what man has yet to become, as by the inspired Winthrops and Mathers of the original Massachusetts Bay Colony, and their followers among the inspired founders of the Constitution of our Federal Republic. Or, earlier, the Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, who, seeing the evil influence of the Venetian party of his time, projected voyages across great oceans, the inspiration which informed what became the founding of our republic within the Americas.

In European experience, evil is to be defined as the enemy of the good; there is no in-between. I speak of evil as typified by the Delphi cult and by the legacy of that Roman empire which reigns in its most recent incarnation in that trap-door to Hell which is the presently self-doomed British empire.

The good reposes, essentially in the creativity which is expressed by the creativity of the individual human mind. The mission of the individual, the only true happiness, is the realization of the development and fruitfulness of that anti-entropic action which is true, individual creativity of a form cohering with the notion of a Creator.

NASA, http://tiny.cc/mle2x

Cosmic radiation “takes us, as a crucial experiment, outside the conventional notion of sense-perception, and, brings us, in this way, into the domain of the creative imagination.” Shown, a computer animation of the Earth’s plasmasphere. Streams of ionized gas (plasma) flow from the Sun past the Earth’s magnetic field, generating enormous electric currents and ejecting oxygen ions into space. These ions become trapped in the Earth’s magnetic field, encircling the planet with a billion-degree plasma cloud. The “rings of fire” around the poles represent the contribution of these particles to the auroras.

---------------------------------------------

A Summation

That much said, return to the argument with which this report had begun.

If sense-perception presents us with shadows of experience, rather than the cause of those shadows, we can not be content with the notion that the universe we experience is a domain of mere shadows. Nor can we rightly claim that the appropriate morality of the unseen species which the shadow implies, is located within the qualities imputed to the shadowland which is sense-perception. Hence, the ontological outlook which I have developed here, thus far. We must find our true selves, and our mission in being, in the evidence bearing on the nature of that mind which expresses the reality which the mere shadow-world of sense-perception as such does not.

The Apostle Paul’s most famous chapter from Corinthians haunts us on exactly this account. The contemplation of a better choice of shadow, now made experimentally evident, that of cosmic radiation, haunts us. The unavoidable ontological notion of “mind” therefore haunts us. This brings us to something we should have already known, as the concluding paragraph of Shelley’s unfinished manuscript already haunts the mind of insight. The role of cosmic radiation falls short of our goal, but it has two notable virtues. It takes us, as a crucial experiment, outside the conventional notion of sense-perception, and, brings us, in this way, into the same domain of the creative imagination through which the successive efforts of Johannes Kepler and Albert Einstein presented us with a universe which is ontologically finite, but not bounded, and, thus, into a realm of closer proximity to that principle of knowledge which subsumes, rather than merely inhabits, the universe as we, however imperfectly, nonetheless, know it.

[fn_1]. In spite of the low-thoughted envy which would undervalue contemporary merit, our own will be a memorable age in intellectual achievements, and we live among such philosophers and poets as surpass beyond comparison any who have appeared since the last national struggle for civil and religious liberty. The most unfailing herald, companion, and follower of the awakening of a great people to work a beneficial change in opinion or institution, is poetry. At such periods there is an accumulation of the power of communicating and receiving intense and impassioned conceptions respecting man and nature. The person in whom this power resides, may often, as far as regards many portions of their nature, have little apparent correspondence with that spirit of good of which they are the ministers. But even whilst they deny and abjure, they are yet compelled to serve, that power which is seated on the throne of their own soul. It is impossible to read the compositions of the most celebrated writers of the present day without being startled with the electric life which burns within their words. They measure the circumference and sound the depths of human nature with a comprehensive and all penetrating spirit, and they are themselves perhaps the most sincerely astonished at its manifestations; for it is less their spirit than the spirit of the age. Poets are the hierophants of an unapprehended inspiration; the mirrors of the gigantic shadows which futurity casts upon the present; the words which express what they understand not; the trumpets which sing to battle, and feel not what they inspire; the influence which is moved not, but moves. Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world. [As frequently recalled and recited publicly by me, from memory of my personal copy of the Harvard Classics edition of 1909, since 1934.] [back to text for fn_1]

[fn_2]. See EIR Jan. 7, 2011 (www.larouchepub.com/lar/2011/3801global_crisis_at_hand.html) or Lyndon LaRouche PAC (www.larouchepac.com/node/16929). [back to text for fn_2]

[fn_3]. H. Graham Lowry, How the Nation Was Won, Executive Intelligence Review, 1988. [back to text for fn_3]

[fn_4]. Directly contrary to Rudolf Clausius et al., attrition demonstrates that the universe is intrinsically anti-entropic, as is shown, in effect, by the destruction of that which is not creative. See below for more on this. [back to text for fn_4]

[fn_5]. It should be noted, respecting Friedrich Nietzsche’s claim that “God is dead,” that Nietzsche’s argument is essentially that of Aristotle; it is a reflection of the Delphi cult’s presumption that ordinary men and women are members of an inferior species which does not share the presumed elegance of those higher social classes which the Delphic custom identifies as “the immortals.” The Nietzschean concept of “creative destruction,” as represented by the economics dogma of Werner Sombart, Joseph Schumpeter, and their Harvard University and other followers, coincides with the fascist doctrine of Adolf Hitler’s followers. Fascism is to be recognized by its ideas respecting the nature of man, not the mere costume which such as a “Black Shirt” or a “Brown Shirt” wears. The content of the cult of throwbacks to the Roman Empire, which is what fascism represents in political practice, is essentially the belief of the followers of Nietzsche, not the costumes they may choose to wear. The formal introduction of Schumpeter’s doctrine into the office of the Prime Minister of Great Britain was unleashed under Harold Wilson (1964-70, 1974-76), coincident with the launching of the U.S.A.’s war in Indo-China launched once President John F. Kennedy, the opponent of such policies, had been eliminated. [back to text for fn_5]

[fn_6]. Lest some misguided soul imagine that there is some fallacy in my argument against Oparin as being a British folly, the fact is, that the British agent, Alexander Helphand (aka “Parvus”), who had been recruited to the British intelligence service by the then representative of the British Fabian Society, Frederick Engels, served as a leading British arms-trader and associate of the British intelligence service’s “Young Turk” scheme. Marx himself gained his career as an agent of Lord Palmerston’s “zoo,” in which Marx served the office of the British Museum under the political direction of Young Europe’s Giuseppe Mazzini. Marx’s function was that among those handling the traffic in correspondence between the British Foreign Office and figures of the Mazzini-led “Young Europe” organization. Whatever the “Marxist” movements did contrary to British pleasure, the British Empire’s intelligence services usually exerted long-range control, as through such Twentieth-century channels as those of Bertrand Russell and Russell’s dupes of the Laxenberg, Austria-based, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA). Oparin was a typical victim of his control in matters of science by Russell’s circles, including a J.B.S. Haldane whose religious views, as such, differed significantly from the wild-eyed atheism of Russell. [back to text for fn_6]

[fn_7]. Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society, George Allen & Unwin, London 1952. The citations are taken from a book whose intention and principal elements were the product of my assignment to the author at the time I was preparing a 1980 U.S. Presidential campaign, Carol White. I can report now that her work on that Russell himself was satisfactory to me at that time. For my own views on Russell, see my July 1994 “How Bertrand Russell Became an Evil Man,” (republished in the Fall 1994 issue of Fidelio http://www.schillerinstitute.com/fid_91-96/943a_russell_lhl.html). It was later republished, in a Spanish translation by Salvador Lozano, in 1998. [back to text for fn_7]

[fn_8]. In my December 15, 2010 “The Global Crisis Now at Hand,” I had included the topic of that geopolitical crisis of the British imperial system which had been created by the challenge of the U.S.A. initiative in the pioneering of transcontinental railway systems. That has been the crucial issue of every significant warfare on this planet, since 1890 to the present day. What I have written on that and related subjects is implicitly included on background here; the role of the Nero-like U.S. President Barack Obama as a de facto instrument of the British empire against the U.S.A., is to be considered as implicitly intended here. [back to text for fn_8]

[fn_9]. Prior to the close of the 1980s, the great majority of all leading Classical singers openly supported the defense of the natural registration shifts defined by C=256, despite the influence of the Congress for Cultural Freedom. This is still the case among the greatest Classically developed singing voices, and a large portion of Classical musicians generally. Notably, according to expert scientific tests, the greatest of the crafted violins and other instruments of the Classical repertoire, were subject to damage, as in the case of the greatest violins, if stressed by elevated pitches. There were two leading arguments in defense of that Classical standard from Bach through Brahms and beyond. One emphasized the natural register-shifts associated with bel canto singing voices; a second, complementary argument, was that only the physically strongest of trained singing voices could withstand the “wear and tear” done to the singing voices by adaptation to elevated pitches. The bad practices sometimes coincided, tellingly, with the kind of conductor who would direct by aid of stop watches at the podium. [back to text for fn_9]

[fn_10]. Which Bruno Walter failed, utterly, to accomplish in a U.S. performance, during a nearby time. His treatment of the second movement was the worst of it; but, that turned the rest into a disaster. [back to text for fn_10]

[fn_11]. E.g.: “head first.” [back to text for fn_11]

Vernadsky on

Cosmic Radiation

From Soviet biogeochemist and Ac- ademician Vladimir I. Vernadsky, The Biosphere, 1926.

The face of the Earth viewed from celestial space presents a unique ap- pearance, different from all other heavenly bodies. The surface that separates the planet from the cosmic medium is the biosphere, visible principally because of light from the Sun, although it also receives an infinite number of other radiations from space, of which only a small fraction are visible to us. We hardly realize the variety and importance of these rays, which cover a huge range of wavelengths. . . .

A new character is imparted to the planet by this powerful cosmic force. The radiations that pour upon the Earth cause the biosphere to take on properties unknown to lifeless planetary surfaces, and thus transform the face of the Earth. Activated by radiation, the matter of the biosphere collects and redistributes solar energy, and converts it ultimately into free energy capable of doing work on Earth.

The outer layer of the Earth must, therefore, not be considered as a region of matter alone, but also as a region of energy and a source of transformation of the planet. To a great extent, exogenous cosmic forces shape the face of the Earth, and as a result, the biosphere differs historically from other parts of the planet. This biosphere plays an extraordinary planetary role. . . .

We arrive at this conclusion via our understand- ing of the matter of the biosphere—an understanding that had been profoundly modified by contemporary evidence that this matter is the direct manifestation of cosmic forces acting upon the Earth. [back to text]