Executive Intelligence Review, Volume 46, Number 36, September 13, 2019

- Cover

- Masthead

- EDITORIAL One Generation Hence by Tony Papert

- PDF edition Table of Contents — Volume 46, Number 36, September 13, 2019

- I. What is True National Sovereignty?

- Time to Nationalize the Federal Reserve by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. (1991)

- MOVISOL STATEMENT Italy’s New Austerity Government Imposed by European Union Can’t Last

- Putin: Asian and Western Powers Must Take on World Leadership Together by Richard A. Black

- This Department of Energy Seeks Nuclear Progress, Can Support Moon-Mars Mission by Paul Gallagher

- II. China: America’s Natural Ally

- BEHIND THE VILIFICATION OF CHINA The Desperate Campaign to Derail LaRouche’s New Bretton Woods by Harley Schlanger and Barbara Boyd

- Hong Kong Riots: Color Revolution Targetting All of China by Mike Billington

- FOR THE 2019 UNGA ‘Sustainable Development’ Must Be Redefined as ‘Sustained Development’! The Belt & Road and the Apollo Program: Sources of Inspiration by Hussein Askary and Jason Ross

- III. Cultural Warfare

- UNDERLINGS FOR EMPIRE Psychedelics, Climate Change & How the British Wage War by Robert Ingraham

The Coming Economic Revolution

Founder: Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. (1922–2019)

Editor-in-Chief: Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Co-Editors: Marcia Merry Baker, Paul Gallagher, Robert Ingraham, Tony Papert

Managing Editor: Stephanie Ezrol

Editorial Staff: David Cherry, Charles Notley

Technology: Marsha Freeman

Transcriptions: Katherine Notley

Ebooks: Richard Burden

Graphics: Alan Yue

Photos: Stuart Lewis

Circulation Manager: Stanley Ezrol

INTELLIGENCE DIRECTORS

Asia: Michael Billington

Economics: Marcia Merry Baker, Paul Gallagher

History: Anton Chaitkin

Ibero-America: Dennis Small

United States: Debra Freeman

INTERNATIONAL BUREAUS

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.: Richard Black, 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.

(571) 293-0935

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: ©2019 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

One Generation Hence

by Tony Papert

Sept. 8—In memory of the great scientist and statesman Lyndon LaRouche, who would have turned 97 years of age today, let us begin to approach the question of the future role of today’s youth in world renewal over the coming quarter-century, in which mankind will master controlled fusion energy and begin the first human settlements beyond Earth, among other noble achievements.

Let us examine the case of U.S. youth from this standpoint, by going back to the population and labor-force bar graphs with which LaRouche frequently began his one-semester political economy course during the 1970s. If we project that the U.S. population will rise to 400 million by 2050, we might assume that about one-quarter will be under age 16, leaving a working-age population, in that sense, of about 300 million.

Applying a labor-force participation rate of, say, 63%, yields a labor-force of about 190 million.

LaRouche has said that the proportion of the labor force engaged in R&D must rise above 5%, or in this case for 2050, attain and surpass 9.5 million men and women. Although there may be no present-day statistics for ready comparison (because of some current, over-broad definitions of R&D), it is clear that a scientific and engineering workforce of that size, wrestling with the problems of fusion energy, space travel, and optical biophysics and medicine, would mean a total revolution in science and society.

LaRouche never ceased to write about the education required for creative scientists. Now at last his ideas will be applied on the appropriate enormous scale.

The same total revolution may be seen perhaps more clearly in the “productive operatives” category of total employment, including operatives in manufacturing, mining, transportation, utilities, construction and agriculture. Roughly speaking, this is the blue-collar workforce. LaRouche has said this category must comprise 50% of the workforce, or, in this case for 2050, some 95 million men and women. Today the U.S. has at most 20 million, after the long downslide beginning with the death of Franklin Roosevelt. Instead, the great majority of the U.S. workforce is overhead—and most of it unnecessary overhead.

For 2050, this will be an enormous shift from unnecessary sales and clerical employment, including the all-devouring “FIRE,” or finance, insurance and real estate. Add in the shift, not just from unemployment, but also from underemployment, in which the worker’s skills are unused or barely used.

But additionally, recall that neither this huge change-over into R&D, nor the numerically much greater shift from unproductive into productive employment, will take place at the level of today’s 2019 economy. They will occur in an economy which is taking off into the exploration of space and the mastery of fusion power and optical biophysics, as LaRouche has specified. Millions of Americans, including today’s youth and their elders and juniors, will have to master new knowledge at a rate probably never seen in history, including areas of knowledge for which we may still lack names today. Not only the scientists and engineers, but the blue-collar workers as well.

The Magnitude of Some Poorly Understood Problems

Now you begin to see the magnitude of some of the little-understood problems to be faced. The U.S. will need the equivalent of Roosevelt’s Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) camps to teach those, especially youth, who may today be unemployable. In the ’30s, the CCC camps had to help them overcome malnourishment and attendant ill-health, along with illiteracy and other problems. Today we must add the massive problems of drug use, asocial internet addiction and other mental-cultural illnesses. Our approach will necessarily be different, even if the problem is related. But that is only a mere beginning.

Tens of millions will have to be assimilated into a blue-collar workforce that is already routinely using “3D printing,” as it speeds far beyond that level. Some have studied the relation between two-year colleges oriented in this direction, and vocational training. President Donald Trump has asked the help of the German government to bring the German apprenticeship programs to the United States, as have the leaders of many nations.

At the public-school level, the U.S.’s abysmal, totally algebraicized, so-called education (a consumer fraud), must be replaced by a combination of “hard sciences,” properly approached, with the classics.

Here, the robotics clubs which today’s NASA has found to be a fertile field for recruitment of youth, and the “fab labs” (fabrication labs) which offer youth the opportunity to use the most modern machine-tools as they qualify themselves, point towards the freedom to solve problems in a fresh, original way, rather than the deadly preoccupation with pre-standardized, cut-and-paste methodologies which help make U.S. public schools such a disaster area.

In this connection, remember those heroes of the American space program who made repeated and far-reaching contributions even though they had no advanced degree—no credentials. NASA’s great designer Max Faget, who designed the Mercury spacecraft and much of the Gemini and Apollo—and much else—with only a Bachelor of Science degree from Louisiana State University. And Max Faget’s top assistant for decades, Caldwell C. (“CC”) Johnson, who grew up in the Tidewater of Virginia. His model airplanes so impressed the engineers at NASA’s predecessor agency in Langley, that they hired him out of high school and never came to regret it.

Astronautix.com records that, “When the time came to design the Mercury and Apollo spacecraft, Caldwell [Johnson] was an indispensable part of the team that established the designs that were dictated to the contractors and flew in space. It was Caldwell who established the basic layout of America’s spacecraft, and Caldwell who came up with the rounded mold line of the Apollo capsule, so that it would easily fair into whatever diameter cylindrical service module was ever settled on.”

This is a line that goes back to those stellar geniuses the Wright brothers, and forward to Lyndon LaRouche. Heroes for youth, and deservedly so, who light their path into the future.

Discussions with Brian Lantz and Richard Freeman contributed to this article.

EIR Contents

www.larouchepub.com — Volume 46, Number 36, September 13, 2019

Cover This Week

CC/Kevin Jarrett

Students at a Robotics Club in Northfield, NJ. Robotics clubs serve as a major avenue of recruitment to NASA.

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

THE COMING ECONOMIC REVOLUTION

2 EDITORIAL

One Generation Hence

by Tony Papert

I. WHAT IS TRUE NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY?

5 Time to Nationalize the Federal Reserve

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

7 MOVISOL STATEMENT

Italy’s New Austerity Government Imposed by European Union Can’t Last

9 Putin: Asian and Western Powers Must Take on World Leadership Together

by Richard A. Black

13 This Department of Energy Seeks Nuclear Progress, Can Support Moon-Mars Mission

by Paul Gallagher

II. CHINA: AMERICA’S NATURAL ALLY

16 BEHIND THE VILIFICATION OF CHINA

The Desperate Campaign to Derail LaRouche’s New Bretton Woods

by Harley Schlanger and Barbara Boyd

21 Hong Kong Riots:

Color Revolution Targetting All of China

by Mike Billington

27 FOR THE 2019 UNGA

‘Sustainable Development’ Must Be Redefined as ‘Sustained Development’!

by Hussein Askary and Jason Ross

III. CULTURAL WARFARE

44 UNDERLINGS FOR EMPIRE

Psychedelics, Climate Change & How the British Wage War

by Robert Ingraham

CORRECTION: In the article, “Roosevelt’s Bold Creation of the Anti-Entropic Bretton Woods System,” by Richard Freeman, in the September 6, 2019 EIR, a paragraph from Franklin Roosevelt’s July 1928 article, “Our Foreign Policy: A Democratic View,” was inadvertently omitted on page 25. Page 25 has now been corrected in the online version, and the missing paragraph reinserted as follows:

Roosevelt called for the abandonment of the use of U.S. Marines in Central America and he contends:

“The time has come when we must accept … many new principles of a higher law, a newer and better standard of international relations. We are exceedingly jealous of our own sovereignty and it is only right that we should respect a similar feeling among other nations. The peoples of the other Republics of this Western world are just as patriotic, just as proud of their sovereignty. Many of these nations are large, wealthy, and highly civilized. The peace, the security, the integrity, the independence of every one of the American Republics is of interest to all the others, not just the United States alone.” (emphasis added)

The Jan. 27, 1989 Jailing of Lyndon LaRouche

Defined an Era, Which Now Must End

Watch The LaRouche Case video

Watch the LaRouche Memorial video

Sign the Petition to Exonerate LaRouche

at lpac.co/exonerate

I. What is True National Sovereignty?

Time to Nationalize the Federal Reserve

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

First Bank of the United States (1797-1811), Philadelphia, PA.

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

The following is edited from a message sent by Mr. LaRouche on December 8, 1991 to a Schiller Institute conference in Arlington, Virginia, and remarks he made in a presidential campaign statement of December 13, 1991.

A few leading political figures in the Democratic Party, including, of course, Governor Mario Cuomo of New York State, have picked up on my suggestion that a recovery package for the United States requires a return to the Kennedy-style investment tax credit program.

However, on the fundamental issues, no visible Democratic competitor of mine for the presidential nomination, nor any Republican, so far seems to grasp the reality of our situation. Yes, it’s good that people do go as far as understanding that we need a Kennedy-style investment tax credit program; but that is not going to solve the problem by itself. That is a very important add-on to what’s needed.

I wish to emphasize, that people who suggest that we can cut this, cut that, cut this, cut out welfare, cut salaries, cut out business, cut out programs, cut off hospital care: These people are dangerous idiots. That will not work; that will only make the collapse worse.

They Have to Bite the Bullet. We need a United States Bank operating on the basis of state-created credit. Unless that policy is followed, nothing is going to work; it’s all a waste of time. Niki Tsongas and the rest of them won’t face up to the fact that what we need to do is scrap the Federal Reserve System in its present form in the most expedient way without disruption.

And there’s only one way to do that: under emergency provisions, the fact that we have an economic depression, nationalize the Federal Reserve System, make it a body no longer in violation of the Constitution. Make it a National Bank as Alexander Hamilton, George Washington’s Secretary of the Treasury, defined a National Bank, or as Nicholas Biddle of Philadelphia, back in the early 19th century, also founded a National Bank, the Second Bank of the United States.

We must put out hundreds of billions of dollars of low-cost credit for federal, state, and local basic economic infrastructure, and for physical goods producing high-tech industry, manufacturing, machine tool shops, and so forth. Without that, there is no recovery.

Over the period especially since 1970, which was a turning point in rates of replacement of worn-out infrastructure, the United States has physically been going downhill. Traditionally and in fact, the wealth of the United States has depended upon technological progress in agriculture, infrastructure, and manufacturing—or industry generally. That technological progress has been the engine of our growth, and as we turned away from that policy, toward a policy of so-called administration and services, the U.S. economy’s collapsed down hill.

For a while, because we inflated figures, the overvaluation of the income of banking or finance generally, administration and services, caused us to think for a while that this was a new form of prosperity.

About 1982, the United States reached a low point, the last chance to really bail out our banking system. Forces opposed to me in and around the Reagan administration at that time, including George H.W. Bush, Henry Kissinger, and Walter Wriston over at Citicorp, won out; they beat me. They forestalled a monetary reorganization of the international debt including the U.S. debt situation. As a result of that, and as a result of the great speculative bubble which they used to try to keep up the appearance of prosperity over the latter part of the ’60s, by 1987, the Reagan administration false recovery bubble had popped, and in the fall of 1989, we began the process of an accelerated downslide.

We are now in the process of a disintegrating financial and monetary system; it is not exploding, like an exploding volcano, but it is disintegrating in the way a Hawaiian volcano, for example, disgorges its remorseless mudslide day after day, week after week. Every day we wake up, our financial and monetary system has shrunk; a new airline has crashed; a new industry has crashed; four or five banks have crashed; and more and more people are unemployed, or, to put it the way the government puts it, fewer and fewer people in the U.S. are employed.

Now, we also come to some hard choices in the matter of recovery. If I were President, with the support of a majority of the American people, and therefore of the Congress, I guarantee you a genuine recovery, which would make the Franklin Roosevelt recovery modest by comparison:

• First, under the emergency powers of government and Article I of the Constitution, pertaining to the monopoly of the U.S. government in emitting legal tender, we will nationalize the Federal Reserve System. The Federal Reserve System will stand there, the people will be there, the branches will be there, the relationship to the national banks will be there, but it will be nationalized. It will no longer, therefore, emit new Federal Reserve notes as currency.

• We will continue to circulate existing Federal Reserve notes until we call them in for replacement. But the only new currency issued, will be Treasury bills, currency issued according to law, according to Article I of the Constitution, an article that has never been repealed! The Congress will pass a bill authorizing the Executive branch, the Treasury, to emit certain denominations and quantities of legal tender for specific uses. This new currency, will be deposited with the Federal Reserve System, now nationalized.

• The nationalized Federal Reserve System will loan these new dollars, on two lending tracks: very low interest rates for long-term loans, with construction progress payment-type arrangements. These loans will be for basic economic infrastructure, by federal agencies and subsidiaries, by state and local agencies and subsidiaries. The objective is to employ, immediately, as fast as possible, with this credit, in water projects, in power generation and distribution, in transportation, in urban infrastructure, including building hospital and clinic facilities, schools, etc., 3 million people from the highest skill layer of the now-unemployed labor force.

• We will spend about $300 billion a year for these projects: about the size of our defense budget. Out of this, for a rule of thumb, about $100 billion will go as value added, in the projects themselves. About $200 billion will come as purchases from private-sector firms supplying these government projects, totaling about $300 billion, a ballpark figure of what is needed.

• We will also have tax reform. We will increase the taxes on capital gains somewhat, but we will decrease taxes on useful investments by a Kennedy-style investment tax credit program. People who invest their savings in useful things, infrastructure, and so forth, will get a tax credit for that investment, which will be a tax benefit, whereas if someone goes out and spends money on something useless, they’ll pay the full rate of tax. But those who invest in something useful—invest for the purpose of their old age—in something productive, solid, not junk bonds, then they should get an investment tax credit.

• The results will be to create employment for another 3 million, a total increase in employment of over 6 million people. This means the Treasury will receive more than the initial $300 billion a year spent, through increase in the tax-revenue base of the federal, state, and local governments. This means we get back toward balancing the budget, because we’re increasing the tax revenue base without increasing the tax rates.

We’ll use the fiscal power of government, the monetary power of government, to get the economy moving. It will work, on condition that this economy, as we try to rebuild it, has foreign markets. Those foreign markets depend upon the expansion in other parts of the world, upon the Eurasian Triangle development plan.

MOVISOL STATEMENT

Italy’s New Austerity Government Imposed by European Union Can’t Last

Liliana Gorini, Chairwoman of MoviSol, LaRouche’s movement in Italy, issued the following statement on September 4, titled “A Government Imposed by the EU to Prevent Elections and Impose a Harsh Austerity Budget on Italy.”

Govt. of Italy

Giuseppe Conte, Prime Minister of Italy.

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

The European Union (EU) has succeeded, under Italy’s Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, in imposing a new government on Italy, supported by the Democratic Party (PD), the Five Star Party (M5S) and the left party Liberi e Uguali, in order to prevent elections and ensure a “blood and tears” austerity regime, which Italian voters had clearly voted against in the European elections in May. For the fourth time in six years, the Democratic Party has entered the government without being elected! Many wonder how this crisis erupted, and how Lega Party head, and former Vice Premier Matteo Salvini made it possible.

quirinale.it

Matteo Salvini, Lega Party leader.

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

In reality, the government crisis was decided in May, before Matteo Salvini formally initiated it on August 8 with the Five Star Party and the Democratic Party vote in the European Parliament in favor of the new European Commission President-elect Ursula von der Leyen, which created an alternative majority in that body, and was consolidated when von der Leyen and Conte met in Rome on Aug. 2. Not accidentally, this coalition against nature was labeled in Italy the “Ursula majority,” and the government program agreed to between the PD and M5S—in particular the so-called “Green New Deal”—is a copy of the program announced by von der Leyen right after her election. Speculators and billionaires such as George Soros are pushing this program in a futile attempt to save the collapsing financial system by creating yet another speculative bubble—after the derivatives one—of the so-called “climate bonds.”

Glass-Steagall, National Banking,

New Silk Road

The 26 points of the new “red-yellow” (PD-M5S) coalition are a reflection of this speculative bubble on behalf of “climate.” It’s no coincidence that Point 9 of the 10 points which former M5S Deputy Prime Minister Luigi Di Maio had said were “indispensable” after his meeting with President of the Republic Sergio Mattarella at the Quirinale Palace on August 28, referring to banking separation (Glass-Steagall), has mysteriously disappeared from the program agreed upon with the PD only seven days later, to be replaced with vague statements of “safeguarding savings.”

The PD has always been the party of banks and speculators, and up until a few weeks ago that’s how the Five Star Party referred to it. Ever since former PD Prime Minister Matteo Renzi and Germany’s Prime Minister Angela Merkel met in Florence in January 2015, Renzi and his men on the Finance Committee have systematically sabotaged all the many motions for Glass-Steagall which have been introduced in the Italian Parliament.

Let’s not forget that banking separation, together with national banking, were both in the coalition government contract between the Lega Party and the Five Star Party—which government the EU has now destroyed—and that under that Lega-M5S coalition government, Italy was the first G7 country to join the Belt and Road Initiative last March 23 by signing a Memorandum of Understanding with China, a decision that drove the European Union to distraction, as the EU has always opposed cooperation with China on infrastructure projects in Europe and Africa.

These three points—banking separation, national banking, and the New Silk Road—have been advocated with determination by the LaRouche movement and MoviSol over the last ten years, as Schiller Institute President Helga Zepp-LaRouche emphasized at the “Italy on the New Silk Road” conference co-sponsored by MoviSol and the Lombardy Region in Milan last March 13, two weeks before the signing of the MOU between Italy and China. That conference was also addressed by Michele Geraci, Undersecretary of State in the Ministry of Economic Development and the main architect of the policy of cooperation between Italy and China.

The fact that the new Conte government was created in order to take orders from Brussels, is also demonstrated by the new list of ministers.

Left: Raul Mee/CC by 2.0; right: Francesco Ammendola/Office of the President of Italy

Left: Roberto Gualtieri, new Italian Economics Minister; right: Luigi Di Maio, Italy’s new Minister of Foreign Affairs.

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

EU-Approved Ministers

Roberto Gualtieri (PD) is now Economics Minister. Christine Lagarde, the new European Central Bank President has openly praised Gaultieri as “an excellent choice,” and he has always been very much appreciated by the EU bureaucracy. As Lega Party Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Marco Zanni stated on September 4 that Gualtieri is among the authors of the fiscal compact and bail-in, which implies compulsory seizure of funds from bank accounts in order to save speculators.

Luigi Di Maio (M5S), now Foreign Minister, will have to learn the correct name of Chinese President Xi Jinping (whom he called “Ping” during a visit to China), since China will continue to play a key role in the world economy, no matter what Brussels thinks.

The only good news is that Danilo Toninelli (M5S), who had opposed the Turin-Lyon high-speed rail tunnel and all major infrastructure projects, will no longer be Infrastructure Minister.

Too Bad to Last

A government born only out of the desire to prevent elections, in full knowledge that the PD and M5S would lose badly were elections ever to take place, will not last very long, particularly because of the contradictions between the two main parties making up that coalition. The Lega has already announced it will be a tough opposition. It still controls two main committees—the Budget Committee in the Chamber of Deputies and the Finance Committee in the Senate—so it can block government action or at least make things difficult for the PD-M5S coalition.

One last consideration regarding the exuberance of the “markets” after the announcement of the deal between the PD and the M5S: If governments are made for the EU and “the markets,” instead of by and for the citizenry of a country, what’s the point of having ministers, upon assuming office, swear “to be faithful to the Republic and to loyally observe its Constitution” at the Quirinale Palace? It would be more honest to form such governments directly in Brussels and have the ministers swear on an over-the-counter derivative contract or a climate bond.

Putin: Asian and Western Powers Must Take on World Leadership Together

by Richard A. Black

Kremlin.ru

President Putin addresses the plenary session of the Eastern Economic Forum on September 5, 2019.

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

Richard A. Black is the Schiller Institute representative at the United Nations in New York.

Sept. 7—From September 4 to 6, the fifth Eastern Economic Forum (EEF) was held in Vladivostok, Russia. This is an annual event, sponsored by the Russian government to encourage economic investment in Russia’s Far East (the Far Eastern Federal District). At this year’s event, attended by more than 6,000 international delegates, Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered a speech with broad strategic implications. Speaking on a panel of five heads of state, Putin directly raised the necessity for the world’s major powers—India and China most emphatically included—to act to constitute a new leadership body to deal with world development and challenges.

President Putin was explicit on Russia’s willingness to participate in such a collaborative effort for global economic development. In response to a moderator’s question about the possibility of Russia returning to the G7 (which currently excludes Russia, China, and India), as U.S. President Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Abe Shinzo have proposed, Putin stated:

We are open. If our partners want to visit, we will be happy to see them. It was not us who postponed it; it was our partners. If they want to restore the G8, let them do it. But I think everyone understands, today, and President Macron recently said publicly that the Western hegemony is ending. I cannot imagine any effective international organization without India or China.

Russia’s Far East: Then and Now

The development of the Russian Far Eastern Federal District has presented historical problems for Russia, even before the Bolshevik Revolution. Its remoteness and extreme climate have stymied most efforts at settlement and development for decades. Today, with a population of only 6 million, it is one of the most sparsely settled regions on Earth. Housing, health care, jobs, and education all are woefully inadequate. There was not even a highway connecting the region to the rest of Russia until the M58 was completed in 2010. Over the last 20 years, the population has continued to decline.

In his speech, President Putin was explicit that this dynamic must be reversed, that the region must be developed, and that all economic targets must be met. In that regard, Putin focused on the role of Russia’s space program and the potential for projects involving international partners in space exploration as key to the region’s future.

Kremlin.ru

Vladimir Putin at Russia’s Vostochny Space Launch Center in 2016.

Kremlin.ru

President Putin (second from left) had meetings on space launch infrastructure at Vostochny Space Launch Center in 2019.

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

Putin discussed the role of the Vostochny Space Launch Center, the famous military and civilian aircraft plant in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, and the Zvezda shipyards. He remarked that both France and Italy are already major investors in the civil aircraft division of Sukhoi aircraft production based in Komsomolsk-on-Amur. The newly built Vostochny Space Launch Center is being developed to replace the Baikonur Cosmodrome, now in the territory of Kazakhstan. Regarding international investment and collaboration in developing that Vostochny Space Launch Center, Putin said, in a panel discussion:

We securely conceal what we are still supposed to keep under wraps. At the same time, there is every opportunity for modern and cost-effective co-production arrangements.

The Space Launch Center is not a military space launch center. We’re now deciding who should build its next stages. To be honest, this space launch center should primarily handle civilian launches. Therefore we don’t believe that we can work there together only with foreign partners, but we are interested in this, and we will certainly involve them in this cooperation.

Russia and India implement joint space exploration projects, we work actively on these programs with the People’s Republic of China; in principle, we maintain good cooperation with the European Space Agency, and hope that this process will continue to develop, and we also cooperate with the United States. There are plans to launch many of them from the Vostochny Space Launch Center. Therefore, I don’t see any single direction that might be off limits to our foreign partners. On the contrary, we are interested in attracting them; this also concerns the Zvezda facility that you mentioned.

Prime Minister Modi and I visited Zvezda only yesterday. The facility will build modern large-capacity ships for operations on the continental shelf, in the Arctic zone and for carrying liquefied natural gas, petroleum products and other consignments. The Prime Minister and I had a discussion yesterday, and we will search for opportunities for joint work. Quite possibly, individual vessels will be partially built in Russia. Such international co-production arrangements are flourishing all over the world. Russia will build parts of vessels, and Indian shipyards will complete them.

Our famous leading company, Rosneft, that owns a major refinery in India, has recently bought a controlling stake in it. And its area of responsibility includes a major Indian port. Therefore we have many interdependent areas of cooperation. There are no closed subjects; on the contrary, we are interested in attracting our partners.

Press Information Bureau of India

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi addressing the plenary session of the Eastern Economic Forum at Vladivostok, Russia, September 5, 2019. To his left: Prime Minister Abe Shinzo, President Vladimir Putin.

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

India: This Year’s Honored Guest

In addition to President Putin, the other leaders on the panel were President Battulga of Mongolia and Prime Ministers Narendra Modi of India, Abe Shinzo of Japan, and Mahathir bin Mohamad of Malaysia. This year’s honored guest at the Forum was Prime Minister Modi, who spent two active days in and near the city, visiting the immense Zvezda ship-building complex, and addressing the Forum’s plenary session. He stressed, in his address, India’s long historic friendship with Russia. As part of India’s “Act Far East” policy, he announced that India will provide a $1 billion line of credit to develop Russia’s Far East, a region twice the size of India.

Highlighting the new leading role of Asia in the 21st century, Modi pointed out that three quarters of Russia’s territory is in Asia. Russia’s vast Far East greatly needs population growth and immigration, for which it will require vast major infrastructure development. Amidst the current hysteria in the West, with the elites of the City of London and Wall Street promoting policies to halt industrial development and vastly reduce population numbers, Russia’s Far East, in fact, cries out for people, for energy, and for development. Some 50 agreements were signed between Russia and India, worth about $5 billion, in the fields of energy, mining, timber, education, and health.

Other important delegations participating in the EEF were from China, North Korea, and Italy. The large Chinese delegation of businessmen was led by State Council Vice-Premier Hu Chunhua, who emphasized the great potential for agricultural cooperation, especially in the field of soybean and soy oil exports to China, saying, “I would like to note that we have a big market, while Russia has significant production capacity. Therefore our cooperation is highly promising.” Hu visited soy fields and processing plants 98 miles north of Vladivostok.

EAEU Leadership To Meet in October

The initiatives for Eurasian economic development, elaborated by Putin, Modi, and others at Vladivostok, will be carried further at the upcoming October 1-2 meeting of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), which will meet in Armenia. Putin and the other heads of state are expected to take part in the sessions in Yerevan, which will include a summit of the Supreme Economic Council of the EAEU. The member states of the Eurasian Economic Union are the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic and the Russian Federation. At many points over the last two years, Putin has stressed support for the collaboration among the EAEU, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and the China-designed Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) for the best possible security and development of the “economic space” of the continent.

Of note at the upcoming Yerevan meeting is the EAEU Supreme Economic Council Summit, during which a vote on the nomination of Russian Academician Sergei Glazyev to lead the Macro-Economics and Integration Section will take place. Glazyev, who has served in many high-level positions in Moscow—most recently as Advisor to President Putin since 2012—is known for being a strong advocate of massive, directed national credits into the productive and big infrastructure sectors. He has also proposed severe restrictions on financial speculation, and for wresting control of the Russian Central Bank from the IMF-dictated policies of the Alexei Kudrin grouping in the Kremlin.

It is yet to be seen whether the shift of Glazyev from his post as Advisor to President Putin to the executive body of the EAEU will give him an enhanced position to advance “the accelerated economic growth goals set by the President of Russia,” as he characterized his mission, at a conference of Chinese and Russian economists, last year.

Press Information Bureau of India

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Russian President Vladimir Putin at Vladivostok, September 4, 2019.

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

Developing the ‘Economic Space’

In recent speeches, President Putin has stressed in various ways the concept of nation-to-nation collaboration in developing the shared, vast “economic space” of Eurasia. The Siberian and Far Eastern areas are a world-class challenge for development, given the set of circumstances there, including the harsh northern climate, lack of infrastructure, and dramatic scarcity of people. But with its rich resources and strategic location, the prospects of development are exciting. Russia’s Arctic coastline borders the Northern Sea Route, where commercial shipping, and liquified natural gas shipments in particular, are already underway.

Developing this region was laid out extensively in the 2014 EIR Special Report, The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge, which highlights the transportation, power, and infrastructure requirements. This is indicated in the map of rail routes—existing and proposed—based on a Russian Railways 2007 perspective, titled, “Strategy to 2030.” Over the past five years, certain key links and connections have been initiated. For example, by the end of this year, there will be the opening of the new rail and highway bridge across the Amur (Heilongjiang) River, connecting northeast China directly to Russia by rail, and for the first time, by superhighway.

This is the kind of connectivity awaiting development in many key areas, including the frontier of connecting Russia directly to the Americas, via a Bering Strait tunnel. The proposed Siberian rail line would proceed, from the Baikal-Amur mainline north through Yakutsk, on to Uelen, the small, easternmost coastal village in Chukotka. Once through the tunnel, the connection would proceed through Alaska and Canada, to the Lower 48 States and southward. On the U.S. side, the connecting rail line also remains to be built. This Asia-America Land-Bridge connection through the Bering Strait has long been proposed, including in recent times by former Alaska Governor Walter Hickel and statesman Lyndon LaRouche, both of whom presented papers on this to Russian conferences on international rail connectivity in 2007.

Connectivity for the vast Siberian gas deposits is under active development. The “Power of Siberia” gas pipeline, largely built, links the Yakutia fields with Primorsky Krai and various points in Russia, and as of 2017, into China. This connection to China is planned to go active by the end of this year. Another connection to China, the Altai Pipeline, has been considered, though not pursued, which would convey gas some 2,800 km from Western Siberia into Northwestern China.

In addition to hydrocarbons, the Far East is rich in timber, mineral resources, and even agricultural potential. For example, the genetics of soybeans have been improved to the degree that the crop can be successfully grown in far higher latitudes than ever before. This is happening in the Far Eastern Federal District, with Chinese, Japanese, and other investment, and can be dramatically increased.

The obvious constraint in all of these activities and plans is the lack of directed funding. In recent times, this has been directly related to the aversive environment of a U.S. and European foreign policy of sanctions against Russia. Commercial and institutional investment and involvement of any kind in projects and ventures—agriculture, transportation, manufacturing, and social services—are all absolutely deterred by the likelihood of being interrupted or even thwarted altogether, because of sanctions against some person or party associated with the deal.

Seen in this context, President Putin’s explicit talk of the necessity of the major powers collaborating to provide world leadership points the way to lifting the constraints and moving on to a new era of development.

—richardblack1776@gmail.com

This Department of Energy

Seeks Nuclear Progress,

Can Support Moon-Mars Mission

by Paul Gallagher

Photo courtesy of Southern Nuclear Company

Left to right: Southern Nuclear Company VP Joe Klecha, NRC Chairman Kristine Svinicki, and NRC Senior Resident Inspector Brian Kemker at the Vogtle Units 3 and 4 under construction in Burke County, Georgia.

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

Sept. 9—Following the National Space Council’s discussion, at its Aug. 22 meeting, of the importance of nuclear power and propulsion for the Moon-to-Mars mission, the Department of Energy (DOE) on Aug. 28 released an outline of the ways in which it is supporting advanced nuclear reactors, fuels and concepts. The Trump Administration’s support has enabled construction of the first nuclear plant in more than three decades (Vogtle Units 3 and 4 in Georgia) to begin; but even more importantly, it is actively supporting 70 projects with some 50 private firms for new, small and micro nuclear designs, and related fuels. These are among the potential science and technology “drivers” for a revolution in economic productivity that will be led by crash programs in fusion energy and space exploration.

Nuclear power is that rare thing for which Sen. Elizabeth Warren and her fellow Democratic candidates don’t “have a plan”; but the DoE under Secretary Rick Perry describes itself as “all in” on nuclear progress. Deputy Secretary Dan Brouillette and Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy Dr. Rita Barawal both have long experience in nuclear power. The DoE’s involvement in three development areas seems particularly important.

Small Reactors, Fuels, Fusion Materials

Together with the Idaho National Laboratory (Dr. Baranwal was one of its directors), the Department of Energy has assisted in finally launching real testing, and soon, production of a small modular reactor (SMR) that will be a critical element of future civilian nuclear power worldwide, although it has not been produced yet anywhere. The 60-megawatt light-water reactor SMR design of Oregon-based NuScale Corporation, the NuScale Power Module, had passed, as of Sept. 1, the Acceptance Review phase and the Safety Evaluation Report phase of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission—a first for an SMR design-with only two open items remaining for the final review in 2020. The reactor modules are factory-built. Now begins the process of building and installing up to 12 modules (720 megawatts power in total) at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). As they are installed during the mid-2020s, their power will be bought by a number of Idaho cooperative utilities, with one module used by INL itself.

This means that a commercially feasible contract is in place for a new, inherently safe nuclear plant design which can go anywhere in the world, serving limited electricity grids as they expand, serving power to a special institution like INL, greatly shortening the time from the start of fabrication to the first power connection, and producing working power in isolated regions—perhaps on the Moon?

All of the advanced reactor designs being pursued throughout the nuclear industry require the development of advanced nuclear fuels. DoE is supporting, with about $170 million thus far, the industry-wide push to develop what are called TRISO fuels—tri-structural isotropic particle fuel. These nuclear fuels are virtually indestructible, do not melt down under any conceivable reactor condition, and are easy to handle and load. Each seed-sized TRISO particle is made up of a uranium, carbon, and oxygen fuel kernel. The kernel is encapsulated in three layers of carbon and ceramic-based materials, which prevent the release of radioactive fission products. These TRISO particles can be fabricated into cylindrical pellets or billiard ball-sized spheres called “pebbles” for use in reactors cooled, not by water, but by gas. This will allow the reactors to operate even more efficiently and safely at significantly higher temperatures, and to be used for applications such as water desalination and hydrogen fuel production.

Designs for such “pebble-bed” reactors, sometimes called “fourth generation nuclear,” were developed decades ago, first in Germany. The TRISO fuels now bring such reactors closer to realization.

The uranium for such advanced fuels must be what is called high-assay, low-enriched uranium. DoE says the nuclear industry will need 600 metric tonnes of it by 2030 and is assisting the development of 16 advanced centrifuges to demonstrate the fuel production, according to its Aug. 28 statement.

In a third related area, DoE is in the early stage of building a Versatile Test Reactor for testing materials and instrumentation for advanced or Generation IV reactors. This test reactor uses high-energy neutrons to test and speed up development of these materials and instruments.

Withstanding fluxes of high-energy neutrons is a critical question for magnetic confinement fusion power reactors, at least until such damaging fluxes can be effectively eliminated in fusion reactions based on the use helium-3 for fuel, which is vanishingly rare on Earth, but plentiful in the surface layer of the Moon. The Energy Department and the White House have, since early 2017, considered fusion power reactors as a necessary development in the field of advanced nuclear reactor designs. Congress passed legislation, at the urging of the DoE—with White House support—that enabled the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to conduct its reviews of new reactor designs more quickly, and that explicitly included reviews of fusion power reactor designs.

Power for Project Artemis

The development of SMRs during the same decade of the 2020s in which the Project Artemis Moon-to-Mars mission will be expanding, brings up the clear need, recognized in the space community, to use small reactors as the source of working power for the development of a human lunar settlement. The Energy Department brought the Transient Reactor Test Facility on line at INL in 2017. According to the DoE’s Aug. 28 statement, “The facility will also perform important tests for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) as it develops nuclear fuel for space exploration, including next-generation nuclear thermal propulsion.”

The 60-megawatt NuScale Power Module, and other SMRs which may soon follow, still weigh more than could possibly be transported to, or landed on the Moon, in the coming decade. The Energy Department says that it is working with the Defense Department “to demonstrate and deploy ‘microreactors’ as early as 2023.” These will be small enough to transport in a truck. They obviously will also be able to support isolated facilities, from military bases to hospitals, and otherwise to power “microgrids” for certain locations which, at least temporarily, will only host limited-scale productive activity and housing. These microreactors will be produced in factories as modules that can work together as the demand for electric power in the limited grid grows. This well describes the use of nuclear power as an essential prerequisite for developing the first human settlement on the Moon. Consider powering more than 2,000 living units on the Moon with a power source that sits in a truck. Contrast that to the solar farm in Kings Park, New York, which powers 1,000 homes but consumes 27 acres.

Otherwise, $125 million has recently been authorized for Fiscal Year 2020 for DoE and NASA to work on the development of truly miniaturized nuclear-thermal propulsion reactors that will propel rockets in space flight. This prospect was discussed at the Space Council meeting Aug. 22 by a representative of BWX Technologies, who estimated that nuclear-propelled rockets could make the trip from the Moon to Mars—when Mars is closest to the Earth—in three-four months.

However, for travel to Mars, fusion power for propulsion is absolutely necessary. The trip to Mars would then be a matter of days or a week or so, enabling the travelers to travel safely and arrive in good strength and health.

The Trump White House promoted legislation that passed in early 2017 and had an equal focus on fusion reactor designs, but did not request or assign funding, concentrating only on faster and better testing and approval of designs by the DoE’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission. In recent weeks, state elected officials in Louisiana and New Jersey have called for expanded Federal investment to achieve a fusion breakthrough. Louisiana State Sen. Conrad Appel called on Aug. 23 for a Federal crash fusion power program like President Kennedy’s Apollo Project.

New Jersey is a significant center for fusion experimentation by private firms—the U.S. public fusion program has shrunk almost to insignificance. There, State Sen. Joseph Pennacchio on Sept. 9 introduced a package of five bills to expand New Jersey’s support for these private fusion experiments, including establishing a New Jersey Fusion Technology Industry Commission, and a sixth bill that memorializes Congress to increase fusion funding, citing South Korea, China and other nations which are currently doing much more and producing experimental breakthroughs.

Buy 'Global Warming Scare' Is Population Reduction, Not Science from the EIR store

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

II. China: America’s Natural Ally

BEHIND THE VILIFICATION OF CHINA

The Desperate Campaign to Derail LaRouche’s New Bretton Woods

by Harley Schlanger and Barbara Boyd

CasonVids/youtube

President Trump meets with Chinese President Xi Jinping at Mar-a-Lago in 2017.

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

Sept. 6—In recent discussions, Schiller Institute founder and President Helga Zepp-LaRouche has emphasized that there is not a single economic problem which could not be solved by U.S.-China cooperation. She noted that the personal relationship between Presidents Trump and Xi, forged during an initial summit in Mar-a-Lago, Florida in April 2017, and deepened during Trump’s visit to Beijing in November 2017, offered hope that the United States might engage in a collaborative relationship with China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which could even include Chinese participation in modernizing America’s rapidly deteriorating infrastructure.

Trump’s assertion of his great respect for Xi, and friendship with him, raised the prospect that such collaboration was indeed possible. This prospect was strengthened by the positive role China played, in working with Trump, to bring North Korea’s President Kim Jong-Un to fruitful negotiations with President Trump, resulting in a dramatic decrease in tension—created by Kim’s nuclear weapons program—and the promise of a better future for North Korea, through its participation in the New Silk Road.

This potential carried over into the initial talks between negotiators for the United States and China, who began work on a trade deal between the world’s two largest economic powers, talks which have since proceeded through a turbulent series of ups and downs into the present exchange of retaliatory tariffs. A new round of talks is scheduled to begin in Washington in early October, with both sides expressing optimism.

LaRouche’s Plan Will Resolve Trade War

The so-called “trade war” is taking place within the fixed parameters of the present economic architecture of the modern-day British Empire centered in the City of London and its offshore black money empire, and all of the tensions inherent in these talks stem from working within the confines of that architecture.

As Lyndon LaRouche repeatedly emphasized, the only way to reverse the deindustrialization of the United States and establish human living conditions for the world’s populations is to replace the present globalist monetarist regime with a New Bretton Woods monetary system, based on fixed exchange rates, with credit cooperatively extended by agreements between sovereign nation states for joint projects in advanced infrastructure and city-building, the development of fusion power, and exploration of space and other frontiers of human knowledge.

LaRouche stipulated that Russia, China, India, and the United States have the economic potential to survive the inevitable collapse of the present system, and an economic mobilization of these countries now, toward mutually agreed upon goals for development, would be readily joined by other nations in a happy revolution which would end the evil system of Empire once and for all. China’s Belt and Road is precisely the type of project LaRouche envisioned, and its continuing existence and expansion has sent the Queen’s imperial forces into a complete froth.

President Vladimir Putin of Russia has indicated repeatedly that he understands the tensions inherent in the present system and trade negotiations. He has noted that Russia and China have done relatively well under the rubric of globalization and the World Trade Organization, while the United States was deindustrialized and devastated as its manufacturing was shipped to China and other developing nations in pursuit of the lowest wages possible.

As President Trump has often said, China did not initiate the mass transfer of American industrial jobs; they simply took advantage of a situation presented to them. What the President has failed to mention, but surely knows, is that this policy was authored by the idiots in an increasingly inbred American and British financial elite on Wall Street and centered in the City of London’s offshore empire. Anyone saying otherwise needs a quick geography and history lesson—a reality shower which actually wakes them up.

Similarly, as various Chinese scholars have emphasized, a trip to the former U.S. industrial heartland—now transformed into a desert of abandoned plants, main streets, and opiate dens, with the occasional Walmart serving as a commercial center—is required to understand the President’s passion to “make America great again” and the dangerous populist currents and war danger that can result from this promise not being fulfilled.

Trump’s friendship with Xi, his attacks on globalization and defense of the nation state, and his resolution to bring modern manufacturing and space exploration back to the United States have been attacked relentlessly by a bipartisan group in the United States, a group owned by Wall Street and London financiers. These are, in reality, the same forces that led and are leading the Russiagate coup against President Trump.

Urs Jaudas, WEF/swiss-image

Former UK Prime Minister David Cameron.

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

Neocon War Against a Prosperous Future

Now, they are seeking to blow up the potential U.S.-China relationship by making China the new enemy, attempting to repeat the British-engineered division of the world following World War II into two hostile Empires, the Soviet bloc and the Western-oriented nations. While the British seek to make the United States China’s main antagonist, they are also seeking to subvert China itself by granting it access to the financial machinations of the City of London and insisting that such access depends upon the Belt and Road being subjected to Green policies. Former British Prime Minister David Cameron was the public face of this campaign. Cameron noted, in the wake of the 2008 financial collapse, that the City would completely reorient its operations toward East Asia and China, in particular, and become China’s “very best friend” in the world.

As the result of these machinations, the City of London dominates the world’s offshore renminbi trading transactions, accounting for 37% of the total as of April 2019. The London and Shanghai stock exchanges have just merged. As idiots in the United States demand that Chinese scholars studying and contributing to scientific advancement in U.S. institutions be investigated and expelled and cooperative channels be shut down, British universities are throwing open their doors and actively seeking recruits to the modern British imperial monetarist worldview.

This war against a potential prosperous future for humanity involves—as the former UK Ambassador to Washington, Sir Kim Darroch, instructed in his hacked and published emails—“flooding the zone” around the President with British stratagems and British henchmen. In the context of the trade war, this involves free traders falsely presenting themselves as national security hawks intent on maintaining “U.S. hegemony.”

Congressional Anti-China Consensus

As the election approaches, the Democratic China hawks—Senators Charles Schumer, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders—are ready to pounce on any deal with China made by the President and condemn it as political weakness.

Left to right: CC/Michael Vadon; voachinese.com/Li Yihua; White House

Left to right: Steve Bannon, former Trump advisor; Michael Pillsbury; Vice President Mike Pence.

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

To Trump’s right, former advisor Steve Bannon has declared himself the guardian of Trump’s base and declared war on any China deal that he views as weak, along with dozens of other crazy and discredited neocons now grouped, with Bannon, in the “Committee on the Present Danger: China.” Bannon famously sold the President down the river at a key point in the coup against him. Bannon collaborated, from the White House, with British author Michael Wolff in the fake news product, Siege: Trump Under Fire, and then claimed publicly that the Trump organization was a “criminal enterprise,” after the President fired him. Ever since, he has been trying to worm his way back into Trump circles. Along with Bannon, the Hudson Institute’s Michael Pillsbury and China hawks like Bill Gertz have been given maximum play on Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News, in order to box in the President.

Washington’s bipartisan anti-China consensus has, for years, been centered in and around the Congress. Any disagreements are confined to how best to control and subvert the emergent Chinese state using the age-old tools of geopolitics. The two chief Congressional fonts for anti-China poison are the Congressional Taiwan Caucus and the Congressional Executive Committee on China. A second front exists within the vast and bloated U.S. intelligence and military bureaucracy which needs an “enemy” to justify the billions of dollars pumped into it every year. Finally, there are the neanderthal neo-liberal and neo-conservative think tanks and ideologues, the people responsible for this nation’s endless wars, who have not had a new or reasonable idea for decades.

It is not accidental that two of the China hawks within the Trump Administration, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Vice President Mike Pence, are Congressional products of the anti-China fervor, as well as products of the bizarre British-originated apocalyptic death cult known as Christian Zionism. National Security Advisor John Bolton, said to be increasingly on the outs with the President, is a product of the neo-conservative think tanks in the United States who authored the disastrous Iraq War and is a devoted anglophile.

The Taiwan Caucus is the second largest bipartisan grouping in Congress, second only to the lobby associated with the state of Israel in membership and political power. It includes 139 members. Taiwan spends officially (not including payments not required to be reported under the Foreign Agents Registration Act) somewhere in the range of $3-4 million per year on its Washington lobbying operations, three times what China spends, and employs lobbying shops associated with Bob Dole, Dick Gebhardt, Tom Daschle, and Don Nickles—all major Washington power players—in its anti-China operations in the Congress. That caucus is now actively supporting independence for Taiwan.

Left to right: Public Domain/ Ron Przysucha/; Gage Skidmore; Public domain

Left to right: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo; Senator Marco Rubio; Sir Richard Dearlove, head of the British Secret Intelligence Service, 1999-2004.

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

The second major anti-China font in the Congress is the Congressional Executive Committee on China (CECC) chaired by Republican Sen. Marco Rubio and Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern. This is a congressionally mandated Chinese human rights and “democratization” monitor, established in 2000, in the wake of the “liberalization” of U.S.-China relationships which allowed China to have most favored nation status and to join the World Trade Organization.

The CECC interfaces with the National Endowment for Democracy in championing such hybrid warfare operations as the Falun Gong, the Tibetan independence movement, Uighur independence in Xinjiang, and Hong Kong independence. It has produced infamous and destructive legislation, such as that sponsored by former Virginia Congressman Frank Wolf, which outlawed U.S. and Chinese collaboration in space exploration. Again, demonstrating the British hand, Frank Wolf’s actions were undertaken at the behest of British Baroness Caroline Cox and her “movement,” Christian Solidarity International. Now, Marco Rubio and other idiots in this group have launched campaigns to shut down all student and scientific exchanges with China and are seeking to revive a McCarthyite hysteria in order to prevent the President from reaching an accommodation with Xi as the 2020 election approaches.

U.S. Falls Behind in Advanced Technology

The U.S. military, in conjunction with this Congressional lobby and the intelligence community, authored a 2018 National Defense Authorization Act arguing that China was a major competitor of the United States and a revisionist power in the world that would require millions of dollars to confront. The White House had very little to do with concocting this mandate. The bellicose and insane arguments used to justify it, however, do have an underlying rationale. The present deindustrialization of the United States has created major national security vulnerabilities.

The U.S. is behind in 5G and more advanced communications technologies, creating major vulnerabilities in its defense capabilities.

It is also behind in the new missile and flight technologies recently on display in Russia. A review of U.S. supply chains for its military reveals the United States to be wholly dependent on foreign nations for its defense capabilities. Obviously, the solution to this is the full-scale reindustrialization of the United States, not threats and tantrums directed at China, or self-righteous claims that China’s stole everything from the U.S. Such self-consoling delusions will never result in the full-scale mobilization necessary to revive the U.S. economy, and preserving the present “service” and casino economy is exactly the reason why such lies are pumped out and promulgated.

Henry Jackson Society’s China Bashing

The adversaries of America’s true national interest, located in the City of London, are working hand-in-hand with anti-China forces in the U.S. Typical of this is the Henry Jackson Society (HJS), a London-based geopolitical think tank. It is led by Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of the British Secret Intelligence Service, a key instigator of the coup against President Trump, and the mentor and advisor of the British agent Christopher Steele in his full-spectrum information warfare operations against President Trump.

The HJS has published numerous papers and reports warning of the “China threat.” These include an April 2, 2019 report, “Infrastructure, Ideas and Strategy in the Indo-Pacific.” This report includes a chapter on China’s “global ambitions with the BRI and the Maritime Silk Road,” calling for the British to develop “alternative models to the BRI.”

On May 16, 2019, the Jackson Society released “Huawei Technologies Links to Chinese State Securities Services,” which critiques the argument that Huawei is not a security threat; it carries an introduction by Sir Richard Dearlove himself.

Demonstrating the actual authorship of recent color revolution hybrid war against China, HJS issued “Hong Kong: The Steady Erosion of Freedom” on June 10, 2019, and “How Britain Should Respond to Chinese Threats,” on July 18, 2019. The latter calls for punitive sanctions—to combat China’s alleged use of “Uighur concentration camps” against Muslim dissidents, and “crack downs in Hong Kong.” One of the authors of both of these reports is Dr. John Hemmings, an Adjunct Fellow at the U.S. Center for Strategic and International Studies, as well as a member of several leading British think tanks, including HJS. According to his CV, he “regularly briefs senior military officials from the U.S. Department of Defense.”

While Rubio and Bannon Attack the BRI

Bannon and Rubio focus on the BRI and the “Made in China 2025” plan, a plan promoting China’s advanced technology sectors, as proof of China’s “hegemonic intentions.”

In a highly-publicized intervention, in a February 13, 2018 hearing on the “Worldwide Threat Assessment” held by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Rubio accused China of “carrying out a well-orchestrated, well-executed, very patient long-term strategy to replace the United States as the most powerful and influential nation on Earth.” In addition to his broadsides during Congressional hearings, when he introduced the Countering the Chinese Government and Communist Party’s Political Influence Operations Act, he published an op-ed in the Washington Post that day, asserting that “an increasingly aggressive Beijing poses a direct threat to U.S. national interests and to the nation’s most deeply held values.” He also released a report, “Made in China 2025 and the Future of American Industry,” which attacks China for “blatant industrial espionage and coercion—actions that threaten our economic framework and our national prosperity.”

Bannon is more clever, in some respects, playing to stupidity induced by populism among the President’s key support base. He acknowledges that Wall Street and the City of London are responsible for the mass extinction of U.S. manufacturing and other U.S. physical-economic capabilities, but claims this is because China “bought them off.” “What China was able to do,” he argues, in an August 23, 2019 interview, “in coordination with elites in the West, was deindustrialize the industrial democracies of the West.” He states that western financial centers—particularly London, New York and Frankfurt—have “covered for China’s imperial policy.” He went so far as to argue that China’s activities in Africa—where its companies are engaged in many crucial infrastructural, industrial and agricultural development projects, and its role has been embraced by many African leaders—“are modeled on the British East India Company’s” colonial policies.

While Bannon is correct in identifying London and Wall Street as forces deindustrializing the West, such statements blaming China ignore the fact that the deindustrialization began after the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963, with the launching of the anti-science, anti-human Zero Growth movement, which was initiated and funded by leading financial institutions and British think tanks—long before China became an economic power.

The key moment in this process of western decline was the August 15, 1971 decision by President Nixon to begin to decouple the dollar from a gold reserve status, ending the era of fixed exchange rates that had allowed for global industrial development. That act opened the door for the casino economy of today, through banking deregulation and the “financialization” of the economy, in which credit flows in the west were diverted from investment in manufacturing and research and development, into increasingly wild speculation. This was furthered by “free trade” agreements, in which globalized corporate cartels and financial institutions acted to undermine national sovereignty.

It is these “market reforms,” not China’s advance, that are solely responsible for the decline of the so-called Western economies.

Hong Kong Riots: Color Revolution Targetting All of China

by Mike Billington

Studio Incendo

Left: Joshua Wong; right: Hong Kong protests, August 25, 2019.

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

Sept. 8—Although most American and western European journalists and politicians reporting on the crisis in Hong Kong for the past three months almost always referred to “peaceful demonstrations for democracy,” any observer, even one restricted to that TV coverage, could not miss the fact that there are daily attacks on police and police stations with rocks and Molotov cocktails; fires being set across the city; the shutdown of one of the largest international airports for several days; the brutal beating of a mainland reporter and a “suspected police agent” by the “peaceful demonstrators”; and the violent break-in and trashing of the Legislative Council Building by masked, black-clad activists.

One hears open support for these violent and destructive riots, and their leaders, by leading politicians and institutions in the United States and the UK, presented proudly on Western news programs as if this were support for “democracy.” For example, Julie Eadeh, a political counselor at the U.S. Consulate General in Hong Kong, was photographed meeting with leaders of the demonstrations in a public place on August 8. As one China Daily journalist said, “It would be hard to imagine the U.S. reaction if a Chinese diplomat were meeting leaders of Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter, or Never Trump protesters.”

The most infamous of the regime-change institutions in the U.S., the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), reports openly on its website that it has invested $1.7 million over the past three years in funding and training youth, lawyers, trade unionists, and others in methods of “civil disobedience” in defense of “democracy,” always adding the word “peaceful” and “non-violent” to maintain a cover, although no one with a brain does not recognize how absurd this is.

CC

Carl Gershman, President of the National Endowment for Democracy, at a leadership awards ceremony.

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

More important, the NED also acknowledges that it has invested $29 million over the same three years in China as a whole—much of it for Tibetan and Uighur separatist movements. It is China as a whole which is the target of the “color revolution” being orchestrated in the Hong Kong riots. Recall that the head of the NED since its inception in 1983, Carl Gershman, explained its establishment as follows:

It would be terrible for democratic groups around the world to be seen as subsidized by the CIA. We saw that in the 60s, and that’s why it has been discontinued. We have not had the capability of doing this, and that’s why the Endowment was created.

The current riots are phase two of a process which began in 2014 with mass demonstrations demanding direct election of the Chief Executive of Hong Kong. This was called Occupy Central, also known as the “Umbrella Revolution.” It was led by a 17-year-old student, Joshua Wong, who immediately became the darling of the NED, George Soros and the Western press and political gurus. Netflix made an hour-long documentary called “Joshua: Teenager vs. Superpower,” which would make a propogandist for Stalin or Mao or Hitler blush. Wong is a key leader in the current phase as well, and was one of the leaders met by the U.S. Consulate official.

EIR Exposed the British Hand

EIR exposed the U.S./British hand behind the 2014 Occupy Central operation which shut down large sections of central Hong Kong for two months as thousands of people camped out in the main streets. The irony of the “democracy and human rights” advocates proclaiming their concern for the “rule of law” was blatant in that movement, which demanded that the population be allowed to choose the candidates for the election of Hong Kong’s Chief Executive. (Of course, under British rule before the 1997 turnover to Chinese sovereignty, the people of Hong Kong had absolutely no say whatsoever in the choice of their Governor, who was always British and was always appointed in London.)

However, under the Basic Law, agreed to by China and the UK to be the governing law in Hong Kong for fifty years under the “One Country, Two Systems” concept, election of the Chief Executive was to be “by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee” (emphasis added). In other words, the demand for open selection of the candidates was explicitly against the rule of law!

CC/Pruneau

Christopher Patten, the last Governor of colonial Hong Kong.

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

The last Governor of colonial Hong Kong, Christopher Patten, intervened in the 2014 illegal shutdown of the center of Hong Kong by demanding that the UK directly step in on behalf of the lawless mob. Writing in the Financial Times on Sept. 4, 2004, Patten claimed that—

the UK has a continuing moral and political obligation to ensure that China respects its commitments to guarantee Hong Kong’s way of life [!] for 50 years from 1997.

In the current phase of the attempted color revolution, this subservience to the British Empire was explicitly adopted by some of the most radical and lawless rioters. On July 1, a gang of protesters broke into the Legislative Council building by breaking down the glass doors and windows, tore up the official copy of the Basic Law (showing their “respect for the rule of law”!), defaced the portraits of former presidents of the legislature, spray-painted the walls with their slogans—but most revealing: they hung up the British Colonial flag!

The Hong Kong Independence Party, which has been banned for openly calling for Hong Kong to secede from China, waves American flags and sings the American National Anthem on the streets during the riots.

Jimmy Lai

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

Jimmy Lai and the Neocons

While Joshua Wong’s networks run much of the street operations on behalf of the NED and other foreign sponsors, the NED has also long supported the Democratic Party of Hong Kong, founded by Martin Lee, which campaigns for human rights and democratic reform, but within the system. He and others in his party have held seats in the legislature.

But the most direct Hong Kong sponsor of both the 2014 and 2019 phases of the attempted color revolution is Jimmy Lai. Lai made his fortune as founder and CEO of the Giordano international clothing chain, based in Hong Kong; and the Next Digital media group. He has pumped millions of dollars (both his own and, possibly, laundered covert funds from intelligence operatives) into the street operation of the color revolution. He holds court on the streets during the riots, while his paper Apple Daily became the voice of the rioters. Western media treat him like a saint.

In 2014, the South China Morning Post revealed that Lai and his aide-de-camp Mark Simon (an American from Falls Church, Virginia, who earlier had worked at the Pentagon and did an internship at the CIA), met for five hours on a yacht in Hong Kong Harbor with Paul Wolfowitz, planning the cooperation between the neoconservatives in the U.S. and the on-the-ground operations in Hong Kong. Wolfowitz was the architect of the Iraq War on behalf of British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and President George H.W. Bush—the war President Trump properly describes as the greatest mistake in the history of American foreign policy.

Note that 2014 was also the year that the Obama Administration, together with the NED, the neocons and the Soros organizations sponsored neo-Nazi organizations in Ukraine in the violent overthrow of the elected government, which has been used to launch the anti-Russia hysteria of the past five years. This was also the era of President Obama’s “pivot to Asia,” deploying enhanced U.S. military forces in a ring around China and Russia’s Far East.

This year, Jimmy Lai has been far more open and assertive about his role as an asset of the British and their neoconservative movement in the United States. In August Lai travelled to Washington to hold highly publicized meetings with the neocon set within the Trump Administration—National Security Advisor John Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Vice President Mike Pence—as well as Senators Marco Rubio and Tom Cotton, two sponsors of a bipartisan bill before the Congress—the “Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act”—which would force the State Department to “assure” that Hong Kong’s “autonomy” from Beijing is being honored, or sanctions would be applied.

President Trump has flatly refused to fall for the color revolution bait in Hong Kong. In August, he was asked by reporters what he would do if Beijing took action in Hong Kong. “Hong Kong is a part of China,” he said, truthfully—a fact totally ignored by most of the western pundits. “They’ll have to deal with that themselves,” he added. Asked specifically about Xi Jinping’s approach, Trump responded: “I think President Xi of China has acted responsibly, very responsibly. I hope that President Xi will do the right thing—but it has been going on a long time.”

On Aug. 6, Jimmy Lai was interviewed by Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business News, where he made very clear that the target of the color revolution ongoing in Hong Kong is not ultimately about Hong Kong alone, but about China as a whole, and bringing down Xi Jinping in particular. Lai started with his normal lie that “democratic Hong Kong” is threatened by the encroachment of Beijing, which is destroying the “rule of law.” Then he let it all out—Xi Jinping is the source of the problem, he said, but Xi will not realize his supposed dream of being “dictator for life”:

He brought all the power to himself . . . but that means he brought all the accountability to himself, and now he is in big trouble. The economy is in big trouble. His own party’s power struggle is very severe. A lot of people lost their jobs. Young graduates can’t find jobs.

Lai continued his rant, referring in particular to China’s use of facial recognition technology:

Xi Jinping is the most absolutist dictatorship in all of human history. They know everything you do. If you do something wrong, they won’t allow you to open a bank account, or buy an airplane ticket. . . . People have never had such suppression. The resistance is now suppressed, but if the economy goes down, this emotion can explode. A big problem for China.

The interview was begun by Bartiromo by announcing the downgrade of Hong Kong by Fitch Ratings, the London-New York economic-hitman operation, part of the imperial color revolution team in the City of London and Wall Street. Fitch downgraded Hong Kong’s credit rating on Sept. 6 from AA+ to AA, with a negative outlook. The New York Times gloated:

The move will make it more expensive for Hong Kong and many companies closely tied to its fortunes to borrow money. But more broadly, the downgrade signals the growing belief within the financial world that the barriers between Hong Kong and mainland China are weakening, a development that could threaten the city’s longtime status as a global financial hub.

In other words, simply because Hong Kong is now part of China, and will integrate over time, means its credit rating must be cut. Fitch itself says essentially the same thing: “The gradual rise in Hong Kong’s economic, financial, and socio-political linkages with the mainland implies its continued integration into China’s national governance system, which will present greater institutional and regulatory challenges over time.”

CC/Studio Incendo

Fires set during Hong Kong riots, August 25, 2019.

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

This should not be read as analysis, but as policy from Wall Street and the City of London. The intent is to use the destabilization of Hong Kong to destabilize China as a whole. The Chinese government has in fact remained almost entirely out of the crisis in Hong Kong, leaving it to the government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) to resolve. However, they have deployed Armed Police forces across the border in Shenzhen and made one-minute videos of two separate large-scale exercises in riot control, making sure the videos were widely distributed within Hong Kong. If the HKSAR is unable to contain the lawlessness, the Basic Law provides for Beijing to intervene without ending the One Nation-Two Systems structure.

An intervention by the mainland police, is, in fact, precisely what the neocons desire, with the hope to create a “bloody shirt” to stir the emotions against China, as happened in the 1989 Tiananmen Square crisis. Professor Lawrence Lau, an economist and former Vice-Chancellor of the Chinese University of Hong Kong (and former Stanford University professor), made a passionate appeal in an op-ed in the South China Morning Post on Aug. 9 for the “immediate restoration of law and order” in what he described as the “worst crisis ever faced by Hong Kong.” Most importantly, he warns that the failure of “One Country-Two Systems” in Hong Kong would be a message to Taiwan to move for independence, which China has consistently declared as a red line which would be prevented militarily if necessary. American supporters of Abraham Lincoln in the U.S. Civil War can hardly object to that position.

McCarthyite Witch Hunt

Against Chinese in America

This attempted color revolution against China is taking place in the context of the most rabid McCarthyite campaign in America since McCarthy himself, this time explicitly against Chinese and Chinese Americans, especially students, scholars and scientists. FBI director Christopher Wray has instructed every university and scientific institution in the country to consider every person of Chinese descent to be a suspect for trying to steal US “secrets,” and possible subversion. Already dozens of long-standing Chinese scientists working in US cancer research labs have been thrown out of their position, with thousands more targeted, although universities have begun to fight back (see “Universities Speak Out Against Dark-Ages Witch Hunt,” by Brian Lantz here.)

At the same time, the Belt and Road Initiative, taking the economic miracle in China to the developing nations of the world, is under massive attack, claiming it is a front for Chinese “imperialism.”

Zepp-LaRouche: Live the ‘New Paradigm’

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, the founder and Chairwoman of the Schiller Institute, addressed the Hong Kong crisis in a discussion this week with the members of the institute:

This is a classic color revolution. Hong Kong should never have been the British Crown Colony. This was theft. This was the theft after the Opium Wars, and this was a blatant, illegal robbery of something which rightfully has belonged to China for millennia. So, they occupied this area for 150 years, and made Hong Kong famous for drugs, for prostitution, for all these things. And naturally, when you start to say that the laws of the mainland should apply to Hong Kong in terms of prosecution of criminals, naturally there are some liberal people who oppose that. And maybe there are mixed in some other reasons, maybe there are some economic hardships, and so forth.

CC/Mstyslav Chernov

Violent confrontations were part of the color revolution in Kiev, Ukraine, February, 2014.

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

That all in a certain sense is irrelevant, because once you have a color revolution, you have, first, a little demonstration about some issue, . . . and then you mix in some provocations, which clearly were there from the very beginning. Then this is being picked up by the international media, and so that is the script of Gene Sharp. This is what happened many times in the color revolutions elsewhere. This is exactly what happened in the Maidan in Ukraine. And then you have the NED admission that they spent $1.7 million to train these people. Then you have the American flag, which can only be out of the cookbook of Gene Sharp. . . . The idea is regime change, and it goes along with what happened in the campaign against Xinjiang, weapons to Taiwan, the provocations in the South China Sea, the Huawei campaign, which has everything to do with the issues raised by Edward Snowden. . . . It is the British chess game, the big chess game for Eurasia. . . .

And then comes China and says, “We want to share our experience, how we overcame poverty in the last 40 years, for 800 million people, with the aim to eradicate poverty by 2020, and we want to share that model with all of the countries of the world. We invite countries from the Third World to participate in our space programs—Bolivia, Ecuador, many others.” Now, this is completely, 100% opposite of everything the British have tried to do in containing development, to keep the dark-skinned races controlled- so it’s not such a mystery why all of this is happening.

It’s really a question of the Malthusian, murderous outlook. Just look at the quotes from Malthus—let as many children die as possible; do not find solutions for disease, because diseases are very welcome to keep the population down. It’s pretty clear.

And China is just doing something which is in cohesion with Chinese history for the last 5,000 years, for especially the 2,500 years of Confucian influence. They want to build a harmonious world. The majority of what they say, they mean: That they want to have a win-win cooperation, and a shared community for the one future of humanity—I think that that is what they want!

Now, if you turn China into an enemy, you will get an enemy, there’s no question about it! China is not going to lie down and give up. I mean, their statements have become much harsher, with the trade war. They said we will not capitulate, and the wording has become much harder. But the German proverb, “As you yell into the woods, the echo comes back”—you have a classical case: You can start World War III with anybody if you start to list the negative points and make accusations and so forth; you can turn the most peaceful person into an enemy.

And that method is what we have to oppose! Because, when the Schiller Institute was founded 35 years ago, I said this kind of foreign policy has to stop, and you have to concentrate on the best traditions of the other! You have to emphasize whatever Classical period, whatever universal contribution to world history, that is what you have to emphasize. And if you do that, and vice versa, you can create a New Paradigm, because you start to emphasize the beauty of the other, the reason of the other, the contribution of the other, and you create a completely different dynamic. And if all of this is focused on scientific principles, in science and art, then you have a basis of actually accomplishing a New Paradigm.

“New Paradigm” simply means what Lyndon LaRouche was talking about, “the Age of Reason lies in the stars.” Krafft Ehricke called it the “extraterrestrial imperative.” That human beings stop behaving like four-year-old boys kicking each other in the knee.

That is not the condition of mankind. The condition of mankind is to relate to each other like Einstein and Planck, like Schiller and Humboldt, and emphasizing and loving the creative contribution of the other. And if you do that, you develop friendship, you develop trust, you develop options for the future! It’s a completely different way of thinking, and that different way of thinking has been lost to a very large extent, because people—they’re not thinking from a standpoint of where mankind can be if we get out of this present condition, which is—just think, if the kind of education of universal education for every child, if that would be applied, the chance that you would have criminals would become less and less, because, as Nikolaus of Cusa said: Sin is not a self-subsisting evil. Sin and evil are the lack of development. . . .

So, I think it’s very clear that we have to really—I’ve said it many times—but the New Paradigm has to be present in your own mind. You have to think, how should mankind be—and live it!

FOR THE 2019 UNGA

‘Sustainable Development’ Must Be Redefined as ‘Sustained Development’!

The Belt & Road and the Apollo Program: Sources of Inspiration

by Hussein Askary and Jason Ross

The writers are the authors of the Schiller Institute Special Report, Extending the New Silk Road to West Asia and Africa, November 2017. Both are long-time members of the International Schiller Institute founded in 1984 by the German thinker Helga Zepp-LaRouche.

Aug. 29—In just a few days, world leaders will gather in New York for the 74th UN General Assembly, whose theme this year is “Sustainable Development.” The gathering is expected to attract developing nations’ leaders who are eager to see the implementation of the prioritized UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG2030). The priority goals are the eradication of poverty (Goal 1), eradication of hunger (Goal 2), providing good healthcare (3), quality education (4), clean water (6), available and affordable energy (7), economic growth (8), and infrastructure and industrialization (9). Despite the very real urgency of achieving these goals, the U.S., the EU, and the UN bureaucracy itself will likely place the greatest emphasis on Climate Action (Goal 13)!

Wealthy doomsday prophets from Western countries will be descending on the UN building in New York, flying in planes, sailing on yachts, or crawling on the ground to preach the prophecy of the “end of the world” through sudden extremes in Earth’s climate—caused, they say, by continued economic growth and industrial development. They are joining a growing group of powerful financial and banking interests in the Western world who intend to enrich themselves through what they call “green growth” and “green finance.” The intention is to stop real economic growth and technological and scientific progress on a global scale, to “save the planet.”

In the meantime, the aspirations of poor countries and developing nations will have to take a back seat, because, they are telling us, there are more urgent matters than eliminating poverty and hunger, providing healthcare, education, and clean water and electricity to billions of people.

During the colonial period, the people of colonized nations were told that they were inferior beings, for whom poverty was the natural condition. In the post-colonial period, they were told that their poverty was the natural result of having corrupt leaders. Today, developing nations are told they are poor because the greedy, greedy industrial world caused climate change, and that they should never, ever attempt to emulate the industrial world. Instead, they will get “climate-change mitigation” aid and handouts. Following this outlook would make poverty permanent (sustained) for generations.

NASA

Wealthy doomsday prophets promote low-tech solar cookers for African families.

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

The continued drumbeat for ending economic development is not new, but it has reached a hysterical level, threatening both industrialized and developing nations. The vague discussion of “sustainable development” is partly to blame. The authors of this article are inclined to believe that there is a fundamental contradiction and discrepancy between how this term is propagated in the West and how it is perceived in China and other developing nations. In China and other developing countries, it is read: “sustainable development” (with emphasis on “development”), while in the West, the emphasis lies on “sustainable.”

Main Premise: Limited Resources!

The term “sustainable development” was formally codified by the United Nations through the 1987 Brundtland Report.[fn_1] It is usually associated with promoting the use of so-called “renewable” sources of energy, such as solar and wind power, and is generally concerned with alleged adverse impacts of human activity on the environment. The referenced report states that “sustainable development” is defined as sufficient development to cover the “basic needs” of poor societies, i.e., the bare minimum to ensure survival, as well as extending to all nations and peoples the opportunity to fulfill their aspirations for better living standards.

However, the report states that many people in modern societies “live beyond the world’s ecological means, for instance in our patterns of energy use,” and warns that “sustainable development requires the promotion of values that encourage consumption standards that are within the bounds of the ecologically possible and to which all can reasonably aspire.” How are these bounds determined? The report concedes that “the accumulation of knowledge and the development of technology can enhance the carrying capacity of the resource base. But ultimate limits there are, and sustainability requires that long before these are reached, the world must ensure equitable access to the constrained resource and reorient technological efforts to relieve the pressure.” But are there truly ultimate limits for irreplaceable resources? Are the limits fixed by nature, or are they determined by our discoveries and inventions?

The notion of limited natural resources and the so-called “carrying capacity” of the ecological system are not applicable to human society, since it is the level of scientific and technological progress which defines the range of “resources,” rather than an a priori “natural” limit. Therefore, adopting the “sustainable development” goals determined by such notions as are presented in the Brundtland Report poses a great obstacle to eliminating poverty, and providing higher living standards and quality of life for all individuals and nations. What is needed is either a new definition of these notions, or the adoption of completely different concepts.

China has proven that the way out of poverty and onto the path of progress is through fast-track “industrialization” and large-scale development projects, including mega-projects, using the full range of natural and human (including scientific and technological) resources. For example, all useful sources of energy, such as coal, oil, gas, hydropower, and nuclear power, must be used. While it is imperative that the sources of power with a greater energy-flux density, like nuclear fission and fusion, should replace the less dense sources, it is neither reasonable nor moral to ask poor nations to avoid the sources of power that enabled the United States, Europe, Japan and others to become modern industrial societies. The speed of power expansion required necessitates the use and construction of hydrocarbon power sources, while the needed nuclear industrial base is developed and scientific advances for fusion are made.

Left photo: GEOSOL

The energy generated by solar and wind is estimated to be at most one-third of their official capacity. Considering both their cost and their likely capacity factors, the (intermittent) electricity produced by these projects will cost several times more than coal or large hydro.

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

China’s economic miracle is based on implementing sound policies that seem to be the opposite of those demanded by such international institutions as the World Bank, the IMF, international environmental organizations, and financial consulting corporations and think tanks. China has followed a policy which was, ironically, the policy that made the U.S. the greatest economic power on Earth by the end of the 1940s, and made a ruined Germany the second greatest industrial power in the post-World War II world.

China’s is a dirigist policy of centralized, state-financed development of infrastructure and industry through national credit for long-term development, by using the latest technological and scientific innovations and developing new ones.

This discrepancy—between the proven successful methods of development, both current and historical (as in the industrialization of the United States and Germany, for example) on the one hand, and what is now being promoted by international institutions on the other—must be addressed and eliminated. The new paradigm of development spearheaded by China and the BRICS nations is a key element in this process.

It is therefore necessary to state in clear terms, here, in this context, that the definition of the term “sustainable development” should mean the ability to maintain a process of providing ever higher levels of productivity and standards of living, both physically and culturally, to whole societies through scientific creativity and technological innovation. “Sustainable development” should not be used to mean the adaptation by society to an ever-shrinking base of fixed resources, because there is no such thing as limited resources! What puts a limit to growth is the lack of cultural, scientific and technological progress.

China: The Epitome of a Developing Nation

Between 1981 and 2018, China lifted 800 million of its citizens out of poverty—as attested by such institutions as the World Bank—by investing in urban and rural infrastructure projects, by completing mega-projects in transportation, water, and power, and by building an industrial and scientific capacity unparalleled in world history. The only close approximation of such rapid industrialization in world history is the U.S. New Deal of the 1930s and 1940s and the mobilization for World War II, both under President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

FDR Library

President Franklin Roosevelt at the dedication of the Boulder Dam on September 30, 1935.

CC BY 2.0

The Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze River, China, in 2009.

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

China’s unparalleled achievement can be replicated, in its outline, by all developing nations, although with different dimensions and characteristics. Over the past forty years, China has built more water management projects than the United States had done in a hundred years. Another metric that emphasizes the immense magnitude of the undertaking is the fact that China used more cement in the three years 2011-2013, than did the United States during the entire 20th century! The Chinese 20,000 km high-speed railway network has already surpassed the combined networks of the Western European nations. China has 37 operating nuclear power plants (70% of which were built in the past decade alone), and a further 20 plants are under construction.

Enter the Belt and Road Initiative

The announcement of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) by Chinese President Xi Jinping in late 2013[fn_2]—a breakthrough for the New Silk Road policy adopted by China since 1996—transformed China’s development policy into a global strategy, an all-inclusive initiative for all nations, without exception, to join and to shape. The BRI hinges on the construction of infrastructure mega-projects whose scale has not been seen in the world since the 1930s U.S. New Deal, the post-World War II reconstruction of Germany, and the U.S. space program of the 1960s.

The BRI is based on the solid foundation of China’s own economic miracle in the past few decades, and is backed by the entirety of the massive financial, technological, and human resources base, and political power of China. It has evolved from a national Chinese project of economic development and industrialization into a massive intercontinental initiative for connectivity and economic cooperation, an initiative that more than 120 nations have joined so far. The BRI is already becoming the biggest economic undertaking in the history of mankind. The developing sector nations, many of which enjoy massive geographical advantages and human and natural resources, are poised to reap major benefits from this global initiative.

The fact that China is sharing its amazing experience of industrialization and development of the past three decades with the rest of the world is a key element of its success.

Belt and Road Institute in Sweden (BRIX)

The six corridors of the Economic Belt of the New Silk Road (A-E,G) and the Maritime Silk Road (F) which were announced by President Xi in 2013. The other global transcontinental corridors were envisioned by the Schiller Institute as early as 1992.

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

Through the BRI, China is offering the rest of the world its know-how, experience, and technology, backed by a US $3 trillion financial capability. This is a great opportunity for West Asia and Africa to realize the dreams of the post-World War II independence era—dreams that have unfortunately been sabotaged for decades. The dramatic deficit in infrastructure both nationally and inter-regionally in West Asia and Africa can, ironically, be considered in this new light as a great opportunity. Although many other industrial nations in Europe, Asia and the Americas have technological and labor capabilities similar to those of China, they lack the vision and political will to apply these capabilities and to finance their use.

Since West Asia and Africa are such strategically important areas for both East and West, it is, therefore, a perfect place for bringing the capabilities of the nations of the world into one concrete project of peaceful cooperation and development.

Encouraging signs have simultaneously emerged from African nations that have realized the importance of joining and benefitting from the new paradigm of development based on industrialization and large-scale infrastructure projects. Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria, and Kenya, for example, have all designed impressive national development plans that are being implemented in rapid steps. But even here, China’s role is decisive.

Port of Gwadar in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).

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

Transformational Power of CPEC

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)—the most compact and well-defined BRI project—is revolutionizing Pakistan, a nation which until a couple of years ago was an indebted and broken nation, economically. Now, Pakistan is bustling with optimism and its economy is being transformed by all the power, water, transport, and logistics projects being undertaken at breathtaking speed under the CPEC. The industrial base of Pakistan, mostly shut down in the past few years due to lack of electricity, is poised to re-emerge now. Pakistan’s port of Gwadar is characteristic. Gwadar is transitioning from being an isolated and abandoned fishing village to a world-class maritime transport and logistics hub. China’s investments in Pakistan are reaching US $60-70 billion from the original planned $45 billion.

Before the CPEC projects began to come to fruition, Pakistan was a good example of a nation whose economic development was stymied by the lack of electricity, which lack prevented the needed growth to escape the actual debt trap related to a lack of development. As a result of its large trade deficit, Pakistan’s growing foreign debt reached $95 billion in 2017. It has been running a yearly trade deficit of over $23 billion for the past few years. Pakistan’s main export items are raw materials and staple foodstuffs, and its main manufactured export is textiles. Staple food and raw materials suffer from price oscillations, whereas the textile sector’s competitiveness is crippled by the unreliable and inadequate energy supply. And it is precisely the crucial energy and transport sectors that are the main focus of Chinese investments in the CPEC.

Pakistan’s energy imports have contributed significantly to its trade imbalance and indebtedness. Over the fiscal year 2017-2018, imports stood at $60.86 billion, 2.6 times the $23.22 billion of exports, resulting in a historically high trade deficit of $37.64 billion. Nearly a quarter of Pakistan’s imports were energy (oil and gas), amounting to $14.43 billion.[fn_3] These energy imports constitute nearly half of the annual deficit! On August 3, 2018, the Pakistan Express Tribune reported that the British Standard Chartered Bank was to extend a $200 million commercial loan (at 4.2% interest rate) to Pakistan to finance liquefied national gas imports. The bank is one of Pakistan’s largest lenders, with $1.1 billion in loans in 2016-2017 alone. This is how a nation walks into a debt trap.

Before the full completion of CPEC power projects, Pakistan’s total installed electrical capacity was 22.9 gigawatts (GW) in 2015, with the average demand being 19 GW.

Installed capacities, broken down by production type, were as follows: 1. hydrocarbons (thermal) 14.7 GW, comprising 64% of installed capacity; 2. hydropower 7.1 GW (31%); 3. nuclear 0.7 GW (3%); and 4. wind, solar, and biogas 0.4 GW (2%).[fn_4]

Considered in terms of actual electricity production per annum, the figures are as follows: 1. hydrocarbons (thermal) 58.5 terawatt-hours (TWh), comprising 60% of electricity production; 2. hydro 32.9 TWh (34%); 3. nuclear 5.0 TWh (5%); and 4. wind, solar, and biogas 0.8 TWh (0.8%).

In the decade before the CPEC, Pakistan’s annual electricity consumption lingered in the range of 70-80 GWh, approximately 50 watts (or 440 kWh per year) per capita. With the completion of a portion of the CPEC power projects, the nation’s electricity consumption rose to 100 GWh in 2018, bringing the per capita average up to 500 kWh. This growth is good, but the figure is still far too low, and tens of millions of Pakistan’s 200 million population do not yet have access to grid electricity.

The CPEC energy projects will play a significant role in extending access to electricity in Pakistan.[fn_5] The projects can eliminate the energy deficit and prepare the economy for a further surge in industrial activity. The breakdown of the investments that are completed, under construction, and in negotiation is as follows: coal plants: 8,580 MW; hydropower: 2,700 MW; other thermal plants (natural gas): 825 MW; solar power plants: 900 MW; and wind farms: 350 MW.[fn_6] The expected total new electricity generating capacity is 13,355 MW (13.355 GW). The total cost of all of these power generation projects (including facilities for the mining of coal and electricity transmission lines) is estimated to be $23-30 billion, which is approximately the cost of two years’ imports of oil and gas, and less than the annual trade deficit.

Clean Coal is Life-Saving

To tell Pakistan today to stop the coal power plants amounts to telling its people to commit collective suicide.

Pakistan was never enabled, or allowed, by its Western “friends”—who needed the country to fight the Soviet army in Afghanistan throughout the 1980s and the Taliban since 2001—to fully develop its clean and “carbon-free” nuclear power. This is poised to change, since China and Russia are fully capable of assisting in building nuclear power plants. The choice of coal power at this moment is due to the fact that Pakistan has the raw material in abundance, because it takes a relatively short time (18-24 months) to construct a modern coal power plant, and because the necessary skills, equipment, and planning to produce them in large numbers currently exist. The construction of a nuclear power plant is complicated in its physical requirements and takes time.

PAEC

The Chinese-supplied unit 4 pressurized water reactor at Chashma is Pakistan’s fifth nuclear power plant.

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

While coal may not be an ideal choice over the long term (30-40 years), the only reasonable alternative is nuclear power, for which the necessary construction capabilities must be geared up worldwide. For the Pakistani nation and economy to reach the platform of being able to build or participate in building its own nuclear power plants, its economy needs to be revived and developed now.

The attempt to supply the energy needs of Pakistan—or nearly any nation, for that matter—by so-called “green” or “renewable” technologies for electricity production, would be an exercise in extortionately expensive futility.[fn_7]

Chinese President Xi’s Philosophy of Development: ‘Make the Cake Bigger!’

By carefully reading the speeches and writings of Chinese President Xi Jinping without ideological prejudice, we conclude that what Xi means by “sustainable development” is not what politicians and economists in the West mean by that term.

In his speech to the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC)on October 18, 2017, Xi thoroughly describes the goals of development set out by him and the party, and clearly explains his understanding of the “Scientific Outlook on Development.” According to him, this is one of the five guiding principles of the Communist Party of China (besides Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory, the Theory of the Three Represents). In point four of his speech, “Adopting a New Vision of Development,” Xi said: “Development is the underpinning and the key for solving our country’s problems.” He emphasized, “We must pursue a model of sustainable development featuring increased production, higher living standards, and healthy ecosystems.”

Xi Jinping, President of the People’s Republic of China.

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

Rather than focusing on “limited resources” and how to divide them, Xi often uses the metaphor of “rather than fighting over a small cake, make the cake bigger” when urging his party comrades to think outside the box. Most indoctrinated so-called experts in the Western world would see this today as a contradiction of terms, because they believe that increased production and raising the living standards cause ecological problems and will inevitably hit the wall of limited resources.

Even more provocative to Western observers are Xi’s repeated calls for the industrialization of Africa. In his speech at the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) in Johannesburg, South Africa in December 2015, Xi said:

Industrialization is an inevitable path to a country’s economic success. Within a short span of several decades, China has accomplished what took developed countries hundreds of years to accomplish and put in place a complete industrial system with an enormous production capacity. . . .

It is entirely possible for Africa, as the world’s most promising region in terms of development potential, to bring into play its advantages and achieve great success. . . . The achievement of inclusive and sustainable development in Africa hinges on industrialization, which holds the key to creating jobs, eradicating poverty and improving people’s living standards.

President Xi did not say this as a provocation to the West, but because he truly holds this view, which is completely in sync with China’s own fantastic feat of development in the past three decades.

The most transparent and scientific definition of “sustainable development” according to Xi is given in a speech titled, “A Deeper Understanding of the New Development Concepts,” which he delivered on January 18, 2016 at a study session for implementation of the Fifth Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee. The term “coordinated development,” he says, has acquired new features. In the usual Chinese philosophical manner that is not fearful of contradictions that lead to solutions, he stated:

Coordinated development is the unity of balanced development and imbalanced development. The process from balance to imbalance and then to rebalance is the basic law of development. Balance is relative while imbalance is absolute. Emphasizing coordinated development is not pursuing equalitarianism, but giving more importance to equal opportunities and balanced resource allocation.

Xi continued:

Coordinated development is the unity of weakness and potential in development. China is in a stage of transition from a middle-income country to a high-income country. According to international experience, this is a stage of concentrated conflicts of interest, in which imbalanced development and various weaknesses are inevitable. To pursue coordinated development, we should identify and improve our weaknesses, so as to tap development potential and sustain growth momentum.[fn_8]

No State of Equilibrium: Breaking the Boundary Conditions

In this speech and other speeches on the concepts of development, Xi has emphasized that the way to overcome such contradictions is to pursue scientific and technological creativity and innovation. It is very clear that Xi realizes that there is no such thing as a “state of equilibrium,” but rather there is a process of progress and sustained growth, although he emphasizes that the goal is growth that is qualitative, rather than merely quantitative.

People in the West hear every day that modern civilization has hit the wall, that the limits to growth and technological development have been reached, that Earth’s carrying capacity has met its limit, and that the solution is to slow down, roll back industrialization and reduce the world population, because we cannot sustain growth indefinitely.

The proponents of zero growth have always based their theories on a fictitious “state of equilibrium” in nature between limited natural resources and the biological needs of all species, humans included, on this one and only planet! Life itself, the biosphere and the human species have proven that there is no such a static state of equilibrium, but that there is a process of progress and development. But that process of development usually bumps into certain boundary conditions, because a previous key “natural resource” is depleted. However, creative and revolutionary technological leaps break that boundary condition and bring life to a new and more intensive platform of progress. In other words, when a society hits a wall, it has to build a ladder and climb the wall to come to the new, but higher platform of economic development. That ladder is scientific and technological progress.

Human Creativity: the Greatest—and Infinite—Natural Resource

In a discussion of the role of science as a driver for the development of any nation, President Xi stated in a speech delivered to the Fifth Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee on October 29, 2015,

Innovative development focuses on the drivers of growth. Our ability to innovate is inadequate. Our science and technology is not fully developed, and is unable to to create momentum to support economic and social development. This is the Achilles heel for such a big economy as China.[fn_9]

Concerning the primacy of human creativity to so-called natural resources, Xi stressed:

So we must consider innovation as the primary driving force of growth and the core in this whole undertaking, and human resources as the primary source to support development. We should promote innovation in theory, systems, science and technology, and culture, and make innovation the dominant theme in the work of the Party, and government, and everyday activity in society.[fn_10]

Elaborating on the impact of scientific progress since the Renaissance on the industrial development of Europe and later the United States, Xi informed his Party comrades:

In the 16th century, human society entered an unprecedented period of active innovation. Achievements in scientific innovation over the past five centuries have exceeded the sum total of several previous millennia. . . . Each and every scientific and industrial revolution has profoundly changed the outlook and pattern of world development. . . . Since the second Industrial Revolution, the U.S. has maintained global hegemony because it has always been the leader and the largest beneficiary of scientific and industrial progress.[fn_11]

Xi is not expressing frustration and envy over the fantastic past progress of Europe and the United States, but is urging his people to learn from those successes. As Confucius said in the Analects: “He who learns but does not think is lost. However, he who thinks but does not learn is in great danger.”

President Xi’s thoughts are clearly in harmony with those presented by American economist Lyndon LaRouche, who has defined and treated economics in a scientific manner in the same way physics is treated. LaRouche, the pioneer of Physical Economics, defined the process of progress of society as the building of new economic platforms.

The LaRouche View of Economics: Successive Economic Platforms!

Following his service in World War II, economist and statesman Lyndon LaRouche tackled a problem central to understanding economic growth: the seeming impossibility of representing the incommensurable value of scientific revolutions. To give an example of the difficulty involved, consider the initial development of steam power.

This new technology transformed the power of coal, which had been used as a source of heat, into a source of motion, making it tremendously more valuable than it had been. The ability to separate the process of production both from the muscle power of people and beasts, and from a reliance on such local peculiarities as the availability of wind or flowing water, transformed the economic geography completely. The power of an individual worker increased by an order of magnitude. Goods that previously were created by hand by artisans and were consequently available only to the wealthy, could now be produced efficiently in larger numbers, making them available to a broader population. How can these varied benefits—in changing resources, increasing productivity, and altering the importance of geography—be understood?

EIRNS

This chart of human population over historical time reflects the unique characteristic of human life among all life known to us. Our species continually breaks the limits to its growth, by developing new knowledge that opens up new resources and increases the productive powers of labor.

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

LaRouche begins his theory with a consideration of the most important metric of human economy, the potential population density that can be achieved by a given society’s cultural and scientific development, adjusted for the conditions of geography (including man-made improvements to that geography). This metric, potential relative population density, gives a rough understanding of the economic power brought to bear by a civilization. True economic value exists in those processes and developments that act to increase this metric.

As an additional metric, LaRouche insists that the intensity of power applied by a society—at the point of production as well as more broadly considered per capita and per land area—must increase with economic growth. This metric, energy-flux density, involves both the quantitative increase in power available, and also its qualitative nature, as expressed in its intensity. For example, a laser uses a greater density of energy than does a metal cutting device, yet it may be able to cut a metal part using less total energy. This is a reflection of the greater energy-flux density embodied in the laser. A similar example is the total use of energy in an economy compared to the use of electricity, a more concentrated form of energy.

In addition to the concepts of potential relative population density and energy-flux density, add another: the concept of the economic platform as a superior concept to that of infrastructure.

Mankind Creates

As we progress, we rely increasingly on an improved environment. Rather than walking on paths made by herds of animals or floating on natural rivers, we use roads, rail lines, subways, sidewalks. We increasingly work in illuminated buildings and travel in enclosed vehicles, safe from the ravages of weather, rather than working and traveling unprotected, outdoors. The substrate upon which we depend, this built environment, is often considered as an accumulation of elements of “infrastructure.” LaRouche takes a fresh approach to this concept, as in a 2010 paper:

We should then recognize that the development of basic economic infrastructure had always been a needed creation of what is required as a “habitable” development of a “synthetic,” rather than a presumably “natural” environment, for the enhancement, or even the possibility of human life and practice at some time in the existence of our human species. . . .

Man as a creator in the likeness of the great Creator, is expressed by humanity’s creation of the “artificial environments” we sometimes call “infrastructure,” on which both the progress, and even the merely continued existence of civilized society depends.[fn_12]

Lyndon LaRouche (1922-2019) speaking at a live webcast in 2010.

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

LaRouche reconceptualizes the history of human development from the standpoint of a succession of economic platforms. The earliest human civilizations were limited in their movements on land and on the oceans and rivers. And water transportation itself required the technologies of shipbuilding and navigation. The sky itself served as an infrastructure platform, its stars providing a means of finding one’s way. The construction of new rivers, in the form of navigable canals, marked the next great stage of human advancement, providing a new platform upon which to develop. The land itself changed in value, as areas that were previously quite distant from settlements on the coasts and rivers were brought within their reach, including through supplementary road networks.

newsinpic.com

Flor de la Mar, a 16th century Portuguese carrack.

Carleton Watkins

A trestle being built for the Central Pacific Railroad in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, 1877.

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

The railroads—rivers of steel—were the next great platform, utilizing the scientific knowledge of metallurgy and of the steam engine to transform our relationship to the land, and to space and time themselves. Distances that were traversable only in weeks could now be crossed in days. Connectivity grew and the economic potential of land increased by the availability of rail transport.

The next great platforms upon which human civilization will be based, will rely on new technologies of greater energy-flux density.

With the realization of nuclear fusion, building on the gains already achieved through the control of nuclear fission, our relationship to travel and to resources will be fundamentally altered. Processing of ores, which today require the use of coke produced from coal for their chemical transformation, could be achieved in a much simpler way. The value of high-level concentrations of mineral deposits will decrease, as lower concentrations will become economically viable. Our relationship to water—a precious resource required in great quantities—will take on a new form as we use nuclear fusion to desalinate water from the world’s plentiful seas. Our power over space will grow exponentially as nuclear-powered rockets propel us quickly through the Solar system, and propel asteroids that might strike the Earth into safer orbits!

NASA

European Space Agency astronaut Samantha Cristoforetti taking photographs while aboard the International Space Station.

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

In all of this analysis, money itself plays a secondary, although important role. Money, being a scalar value, cannot be used to assign a value to the steam engine, to the development of railroads, to the 1960s Apollo mission to the Moon, or to the coming breakthrough of nuclear fusion. In each of these cases, the potential population density of the human race is increased, processes of higher energy-flux density are used or unlocked, and a greater platform of created environment, upon which other activities can unfold, is born.

LaRouche has consistently urged the creation of economic and political systems that cohere with the laws of physical economics. This means national and international credit systems under which long-term credit can be provided for projects that increase the physical productivity of the nation or society, including in the many circumstances that such investments would not be financially profitable to a private investor. Instead of suffering under economic “laws” that have no universal validity, the financial system itself must be subjected to the creative will of man, and brought into coherence with the long-term goals of the species.

Key in upgrading our potential is the conquest of space, that great domain lying always over our heads, beckoning us to look up and to think big! From space, there is only one Earth, populated by a single human race. From space, the overwhelming potential of that beautiful, creative species becomes manifest. It is for this reason that many of the greatest space visionaries and engineers have developed profound reflections on the human race itself. The German-American Krafft Ehricke is one such example.

EIRNS/Stuart Lewis

Space scientist Krafft Ehricke in New York City, 1981.

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

A Species Not Earth-Bound

Space visionary Ehricke, whose scientific contributions made the Apollo Program possible, strongly disputed the “limits to growth” philosophy, and his arguments in opposition to it were informed by his deep involvement in science and technology. In a 1984 speech, Ehricke said:

If you have a no-growth philosophy and if you regress into the Middle Ages, then you create an environment in which that, what you are asking the human being to do—namely to live with less and being very modest . . . and not to grow—is impossible, because a dog-eat-dog fight is bound to break out under those conditions. We’ve come too far. We have to go on. Life shows us that technological advances are the road to go. But based on those technological advances, must come the advances of the species and the advances of our civilization.[fn_13]

Ehricke argued that in the process of evolution on Earth, organic matter faced this crisis and overcame it:

Earth was like a gigantic flower, which soaked up solar energy and also utilized other energy to establish basic organic compounds, and amino acids. And when life began to stir here, there lived, of those fossil assets, Haldane’s famous ‘soup that ate itself up,’ or something similar to that, and of course, eventually the resources ran out. And the first great crisis of life on this planet occurred, because they were living off previously generated organic substances . . . It was then, that we saw for the first time, two things: That what seemed to be an absolute limit to growth, was no limit to growth. It was a hindrance, that had to be overcome, and was overcome by technological advances—incredible technological advances, namely photosynthesis.

CC/Kristian Peters

Plant cells with visible chloroplasts (from a moss, Plagiomnium affine).

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

The “first industrial revolution” is how Ehricke termed this advance whereby organic matter found in outer space a new, extraterrestrial resource—solar radiation—for its continued development and survival.

Ehricke called for the human species to do the same, by going to outer space to explore and tap the unlimited resources that the Solar system and the universe offer us: “This goes far beyond that. . . . Information metabolism transcends planetary limitations, and is the metabolism on which life moves now over into space itself.”

Krafft Ehricke summarized his philosophy of astronautics in three laws, formulated in 1957:

First Law: Nobody and nothing under the natural laws of this universe impose any limitations on man except man himself.

Second Law: Not only the Earth, but the entire Solar system, and as much of the universe as he can reach under the laws of nature, are man’s rightful field of activity.

Third Law: By expanding through the Universe, man fulfills his destiny as an element of life, endowed with the power of reason and the wisdom of the moral law within himself.[fn_14]

NASA/Neil Armstrong

Astronaut Buzz Aldrin on the surface of the Moon during the Apollo 11 mission, July 20, 1969.

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

In a stark contrast to the mantra frequently repeated respecting environmental concerns that “there is no planet B,” the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the July 20, 1969 Moon landing by the U.S. Apollo 11 mission (Neil Armstrong, Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin and Michael Collins), has spread a new wave of optimism across the world, because it is such groundbreaking achievements that remind people of their true mission in life, on Earth and the universe—the mission to be creative, to discover and explore new frontiers of knowledge, science and technology, while at the same time resolving myriad issues and conflicts that stem from the pessimistic and cynical view that the nature of humans is egoism and the characteristic of nations is to undermine each other and fight over purported “limited resources.”

Christopher Sloan

Artist’s rendering of Kepleropolis, a city on Mars in 2059.

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

“A community of shared future for mankind,” the concept pronounced by Chinese President Xi Jinping at the UN General Assembly in September 2015, should no longer be Earth-bound, but rather extend everywhere that human civilization reaches in the Solar system and the universe beyond. The fruits of space exploration by any nation should be celebrated and shared by all nations. This idea is shared by the best of the U.S. and European astronauts and space scientists. When Armstrong set foot on the surface of the Moon, he said this was “one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind.” He did not proclaim it a “giant leap for the U.S.,” but for all mankind, because he understood the full implications the achievement.

In a recent intervention at a George Washington University event titled, “One Giant Leap: Space Diplomacy, Past, Present, and Future,” Buzz Aldrin called for the creation of an “international space alliance” in which the U.S. would cooperate with the space programs of China, Russia, Europe, Japan and India. He correctly argued that colonizing the Moon and making it a launchpad for manned missions to Mars cannot be achieved efficiently by one nation. In addition to the technical necessity, cooperation is also a means to achieve global peace, and to advance scientific and technological cooperation which should eventually include every nation in the world.

Harrison (“Jack”) Schmitt, one of the astronauts on Apollo 17, which made the last human landing on the Moon, and who is perhaps the most insightful spokesman for the space program, told the Daily Telegraph that “Moon and Mars settlement is extremely important for the dispersal of the human species throughout the Solar System, and possibly beyond.”[fn_15] Schmitt envisioned the “100th anniversary of Apollo,” saying that at that time “there will be settlements on the Moon, people living there permanently, producing the resources of the Moon. . . . Settlements on the Moon are going to be a piece of cake.”

NASA/Goddard/ASU

The far side of Earth’s Moon.

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

The Moon’s status as a launchpad to further space dreams arises from its physical characteristics. The lunar regolith (soil) harbors unique resources, its small mass allows for easy takeoffs, and its proximity to the Earth makes it a convenient location.

One of the Moon’s unique resources is related to power. The best designs for nuclear fusion power require nuclear reactions without neutrons (uncharged particles that cannot be controlled by electromagnetic fields), and the ideal fuel for these reactions is helium-3. This special isotope of helium is almost non-existent on Earth, but is constantly emitted by the Sun. Because the Moon lacks a magnetic field (or an atmosphere), this fuel source flung generously by the Sun is caught in the lunar soil, where millions of tons exist today. This helium isotope, the best fuel for nuclear fusion power, can serve humanity both in space and on Earth, to meet the needs of all nations for probably hundreds of years to come.

NASA

An artist’s rendering of the industrialization of the Moon.

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

There are several other benefits of Moon industrialization. Water on the Moon can be broken down into hydrogen and oxygen, which can be used as fuel for rockets. Metals can be mined to set up local manufacturing on the Moon. This manufacturing will benefit from the Moon’s small size. As a result of the weaker gravitational force on the Moon, less than one-tenth as much power is required to lift a payload from the surface of the Moon to Earth orbit, as would be required to bring the same payload from the surface of the Earth to Earth orbit. And since the Moon is relatively close by, the journey time is not long.

Schmitt emphasizes these benefits of lunar development:

Not only will that assist a Mars mission, but helium-3 is an ideal fuel for electric power generation because it creates no radioactive waste and demands for electrical power are not going to decrease; civilization depends on it [electrical power], and this is one of the major potential and long-term sources.

The Moon’s debris layer provides the opportunity to produce water, hydrogen and oxygen as fuels. It also it’s very fertile, so if you want to produce food, that’s achievable. Settlements on the Moon are going to be a piece of cake.

The industrialization of the Moon could become the joint development project of the world. Not only does it open the frontiers of space, but it also breaks the pessimistic and unscientific ideology of limited resources. One of the important objectives of the Chinese lunar mission is to gather helium-3 that is uniquely abundant on the surface of the Moon.

NASA

Artist’s rendering of an ascent vehicle separating from a descent vehicle and departing the lunar surface.

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

Conclusion

Lyndon LaRouche has been famous for his promotion both of nuclear fusion and of a fully developed Moon-Mars program, which would serve for decades as a driver of new scientific and technological breakthroughs. His 1988 campaign for U.S. President included a thirty-minute video, The Woman on Mars, which detailed his program to the general audience of American voters and thinkers worldwide.

In a presentation he gave in 2010, LaRouche put forward the motivations for humanity to reach into the heavens:[fn_16]

Therefore, we have to go to Mars, not because we want to get there, but we don’t want to fail to get there!. . . We’re going to a new conception of basic economic infrastructure, which started with the space pioneers in the 1920s, and into the United States. We began to realize that mankind needs a new dimension, beyond railroads, beyond old water systems, needs a new dimension for the expression of humanity in the Solar System.

This is not just for “getting there.” This is for giving man a mission, a natural mission for mankind, on which we will base the culture which increases mankind’s options, and also the security of humanity. That is, by developing ourselves, instead of sitting on one planet and depleting that planet and doing nothing else, and becoming fat and lazy—instead of that, let’s take on a mission!

Let’s look ahead 75 years, three generations. And let’s take what we have now, with these—we’ve got young people under 25 who are in a disastrous state of education in life. They’re going no place, unless we do something for them. We’re going to have to give them a mission, and an opportunity, which inspires them, so that their children will not be so damned stupid. And therefore, by three successive generations of development. . . . I’m satisfied that we could develop the scientific and technological capabilities, in three successive generations—all the time, bringing our people up to a higher level of productivity—to make up for what we’ve lost, and to go beyond that. . . .

We know we have to develop the Moon, which is accessible to us, readily, with technology already developed by us. We know we can develop an industry on the Moon, because you don’t want to take off from Earth, and lug a lot of things up from Earth; there’s just too much effort involved. Go to the Moon, take your technology to the Moon, develop industries on the Moon: You can build the spacecraft and other things you need to go to Mars!

The lunar regolith (soil) includes many of the basic elements required for industrial production of rocket components and fuel. It even contains a special isotope of helium, helium-3, which can serve as an ideal fuel for nuclear fusion, surpassing anything economically available on Earth. And once components are built on the Moon, they can be easily brought to Earth orbit. In fact, bringing payloads from the surface of the Moon to Earth orbit uses less than 10% of the energy required to bring them from the surface of Earth to Earth orbit! LaRouche continued:

Why do we go to Mars? Because it’s the nature of man to do so: The nature of man is expressed by the fact that we are not a fixed species, with fixed behavior. We’re a species that must develop, as mankind has developed, despite all the setbacks. Mankind has greatly improved, since our first evidence of what mankind was on this planet. Improved through technology, through intellectual development, stimulated by technology; by improvements in culture, especially Classical culture.

And the purpose of man, is to find his place in the universe.

Don’t worry about what the destination is. We’ve got to find our place in the universe: We must develop! Mankind is creative. Mankind must create! Mankind must develop!

And if we do that—the space program, as we would develop it—my estimate is, that it will take three generations to develop the capability to actually put human beings safely on Mars. To solve the problem of gravitation in interplanetary flight and that sort of thing. We can do it! We don’t have a population which is trained, yet, to undertake that mission. But we have a population, which is ready to be uplifted from despair, now, and plan that the grandchildren of people today, of young people today—the grandchildren of young people today will solve that problem! And it should be our mission to dedicate the United States, in particular, and the planet as a whole to that mission, to give mankind a sense and a determination of a future which should belong to mankind.

Mankind was put in this universe for some purpose. We’re not always too sure what that purpose is. But we’re sure of one thing about that purpose: It requires, as history has shown us, the development of the intellectual powers of mankind, the intellectual powers of man’s progress. The future, if it means anything to have children and grandchildren, is to ensure that the children and grandchildren have made an upwards step, beyond what’s impossible now. And to do as we’ve done before, from our past experience, in making the kind of progress, the changes in behavior, and progress, and increase in the power of mankind, to solve great problems, problems of disease, all kinds of problems.

CCTV

Taikonaut Wang Yaping, on board the Shenzhou-X spacecraft, presents a space science class to students, including children from migrant workers’ families, and from Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan, gathered at the High School Affiliated with Renmin University in Beijing. Sixty million students and teachers across China followed the lecture live in their own classrooms.

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

Three Generations Hence

What is the greatest focus for this human mission? LaRouche answers:

Therefore, we have to put a name on it, and the name we put on it for the short term, is the Mars Mission. And we say, that within three generations, we’ll take this wretched nation, this poor, broken-down, ruined, betrayed nation, and, in cooperation with other nations on this planet, we will develop a technology and the people capable of carrying it, which will, step by step, bring man to his true dignity, to recognize the place of man in the universe. Not to what we’re going to do in the universe, ultimately, but to know we’re there!

And we need that.

You know, people talk about immortality and so forth—what’s it mean? Just another person being produced, to replace the one that died? No. Immortality is the certain understanding, that you are living today, because you are doing something, which is going to lead to the development of man’s power in the future. Your immortality lies in your grandchildren, and your great-grandchildren beyond that. Your immortality, your purpose of your life, is what comes out of it! That you’re a permanent part of the universe! Because, by developing within the universe, you’ve demonstrated that you’re not just a drop on the planet: You are part of the universe, forever!

And that should motivate you.

It is from this greatest of mission-orientations that we can draw inspiration for developing the necessary platforms of economic development to enable people from all nations of the world to live lives allowing us to meaningfully aspire to contribute something of enduring value to all of human history.

The endless pursuit of that goal is a process of development that is, truthfully, the most sustainable.

Hussein Askary, Iraqi-Swedish citizen, founding board member of the Belt and Road Institute in Sweden (BRIX). hussein.askary@brixsweden.com, www.brixsweden.com

Jason Ross, American citizen, Editor-in-Chief of 21st Century Science and Technology magazine.

jason@21stcenturysciencetech.com, www.21sci-tech.com

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

[fn_1]. Former Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland headed the UN-appointed World Commission on Environment and Development, which released the report “Our Common Future,” also known as the Brundtland Report, in 1987: http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm [back to text for fn_1]

[fn_2]. President Xi Jinping announced the creation of the “Economic Belt of the Silk Road” in a speech in the Nazarbayev University in Astana, Kazakhstan in September 2013. The Belt is a land-based economic corridor extending from eastern China to western Europe and engaging 69 nations in its path. One month later he announced, from Jakarta, Indonesia, the intention to launch the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road together with other nations. This includes building numerous ports on the sea lanes of the Pacific and Indian Oceans and the Mediterranean. The two projects complement each other and together make up the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI): http://english.gov.cn/beltAndRoad/ [back to text for fn_2]

[fn_3]. “Pakistan’s Trade Deficit Stands at $30.19B,” Salman Siddiqui, Express Tribune, Aug. 14, 2018: https://tribune.com.pk/story/1780174/2-pakistans-trade-deficit-stands-3-19b/ [back to text for fn_3]

[fn_4]. Figures from Pakistan’s National Electric Power Regulatory Authority, “State of Industry Report 2015,” available at https://nepra.org.pk/Publications/State%20of%20Industry%20Reports/State%20of%20Industry%20Report%202015.pdf [back to text for fn_4]

[fn_5]. For detailed description of the energy projects involved in the CPEC, consult the project’s official website: http://cpec.gov.pk/energy [back to text for fn_5]

[fn_6]. Since the expected capacity factor of solar and wind would be no greater than 30%, the energy generated by these systems should be estimated as being at most one-third of their official capacity. These projects, by dint of the low intensity of their power sources, are also expensive. Considering both their cost and their likely capacity factors, the (intermittent) electricity produced by these projects will cost several times more than coal or large hydro. [back to text for fn_6]

[fn_7]. There is a temporary exception of those few nations capable, by virtue of their geography, of utilizing large hydro plants and geothermal energy. Iceland is currently such an example, although future development will require energy beyond what can be supplied by these means. [back to text for fn_7]

[fn_8]. Xi Jinping, The Governance of China, Vol. II, pp. 226-227. Emphasis added. [back to text for fn_8]

[fn_9]. The Governance of China, Vol. II, p. 217. Speech titled, “Guide Development with New Concepts.” [back to text for fn_9]

[fn_10]. Ibid. Emphasis added. [back to text for fn_10]

[fn_11]. Ibid. [back to text for fn_11]

[fn_12]. Lyndon LaRouche, “What Your Accountant Never Understood: The Secret Economy,” Executive Intelligence Review, May 28, 2010: https://larouchepub.com/lar/2010/3721secret_economy.html [back to text for fn_12]

[fn_13]. “Lunar Industrialization and Settlement—Birth of Polyglobal Civilization,” presented at the October 1984 Conference of the National Academy of Sciences, on “Lunar Bases and Space Activities of the 21st Century.” [back to text for fn_13]

[fn_14]. Cited in Marsha Freeman, How We Got to the Moon: The Story of the German Space Pioneers, Washington, D.C., 21st Century Science Associates, 1993, p. 297. [back to text for fn_14]

[fn_15]. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2019/07/21/mining-moon-could-help-save-humanity-says-last-apollo-astronaut/ [back to text for fn_15]

[fn_16]. Lyndon LaRouche, “Change Is a’Comin’ ” Executive Intelligence Review, July 16, 2010: https://larouchepub.com/lar/2010/webcasts/3727jun26_opener.html [back to text for fn_16]

III. Cultural Warfare

UNDERLINGS FOR EMPIRE

Psychedelics, Climate Change & How the British Wage War

by Robert Ingraham

Right photo: CC/Steve Eason

Gail Bradbrook (L) and Roger Hallam (R) cofounded Extinction Rebellion, the UK originated group that has led disruptive actions across England and is now moving into the rest of Europe and the United States. She credits psychedelic drugs as her inspiration.

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

Sept. 7—In May of 2019, the city of Denver, Colorado legalized the personal possession and use of so-called Magic Mushrooms, the fungi which contain the hallucinogenic agent psilocybin. Several weeks later the city of Oakland, California did likewise. It is worth noting that both of these actions took place within states that had previously legalized the possession and use of marijuana. “Decriminalize Nature,” the organization responsible for the Oakland vote, announced on July 16 that efforts are now underway by the zombie-soldiers of the pro-drug lobby to introduce legislation in more than 100 additional cities and states to legalize psilocybin and other hallucinogenic drugs. The Denver group, named the Society for Psychedelic Outreach, Reform, and Education (SPORE), has announced a similar organizing agenda, including a federal lobbying strategy.

Then, on August 16, 2019, came the pronouncement from Gail Bradbrook, the co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, extolling the virtues of hallucinogenic drugs and crediting her personal use of them with having opened her eyes to the necessity for imposing a global regime of depopulation, deindustrialization and genocide. In her own words, she states:

There was a moment during my Iboga[fn_1] experience where I lay down and a voice that felt very external to me said “Gail, you create your own reality.” It spoke three times. It sounds so simple but right there and then I thought “OK then, I’ll be happy.” That was the essence of my entire experience, after which I could literally feel my brain being rewired. When I got home I ended a marriage and separated my family. . . . When I arrived back to the UK I was introduced to Roger Hallam and together we began to create the movement that would become Extinction Rebellion.

The link between Dope, Inc. and the climate change fanatics is so direct and so pervasive that any attempt to debate the “merits” of the claims made by Extinction Rebellion, FridaysforFuture and similar outfits is absurd on the face of it. We are dealing with people who have had their cognitive reasoning severely impaired, if not destroyed. Bradbrook and her ilk are the Living Dead expendables of the British oligarchy—the lab rats who proclaim, “We have been liberated.” Their job is to recruit others—particularly among the young—to a crusade against human civilization. As part of this, the drive to popularize, legitimize and legalize the use of hallucinogenic drugs is now being drastically geared up. This is not something on the fringe that “we don’t have to worry about.” This is the 21st century version of Dope, Inc.

* * * *

The British Empire at its height in India. That empire is still very much alive.

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

What follows is a story of days gone by. It is not, however, a “trip down memory lane.” Its nature is more of the form of a long nightmare, an imposed suffocating reality of dark-age irrationalism. Parts of it are so macabre that it might provoke even unintentional laughter. But it all happened. It starts at the beginning of the last century, skips to the post-World War II years, and then reaches its destination in 1967, in San Francisco’s Summer of Love. It is a long narrative—and one in which all of us have been the victims. Victims, however, can choose not to be victims. They can define the principles they hold most dear; and they can devise a war-winning strategy to create a new pro-human future. Today, this is up to us.

For the last 50 years, we have been on the losing end of a war. In one sense the battle has been breathtaking in scope, but at the same time the crucial issue of contention is very simple: What is Human Nature, and what Principles shall govern Human Society? Most people don’t give much serious thought to such matters, but the British oligarchy does. For them, this is a primary concern; it is, in fact, the battleground they have always understood to be most critical.

I. The Empire’s Dilemma

In 1901 Herbert George (H.G.) Wells defined what he perceived as the greatest existential threat facing the British Empire. That year Wells authored and published a non-fiction book titled Anticipations of the Reaction of Mechanical and Scientific Progress Upon Human Life. A brief quote from that work gives the gist of Wells’ concern:

From the very dawn of history until the first beginnings of mechanism in the eighteenth century, the simple scheme of orders was the universal organization of all but savage humanity, and the chief substance of history until these later years has been in essence the perpetual endeavor of specific social systems of this type to attain in every region the locally suitable permanent form, in face of those two inveterate enemies of human stability, innovation, and that secular increase in population that security permits.

Now almost suddenly the circling has ceased, and we find ourselves breaking away. Correlated with the sudden development of mechanical forces that first began to be socially perceptible in the middle eighteenth century, has been the appearance of great masses of population, having quite novel functions and relations in the social body, and together with this appearance such a suppression, curtailment, and modification of the older classes, as to point to an entire disintegration of that system. The facies of the social fabric has changed, and—as I hope to make clear—is still changing. . . .

If the great material developments of the nineteenth century had been final, if they had, indeed, constituted merely a revolution and not an absolute release from the fixed conditions about which human affairs circled, we might even now be settling accounts with our Merovingians as the socialists desire. But these developments were not final, and one sees no hint as yet of any coming finality. Invention runs free and our state is under its dominion. The novel is continually struggling to establish itself at the relative or absolute expense of the old. The statesman’s conception of social organization is no longer stability but growth. And so long as material progress continues, this tribute must continue to be paid.

Wells understood that the British Empire, as it had existed under Queen Victoria and into the Edwardian Era, could not continue in its present form. Scientific progress, the growth in population and the cognitive uplifting of the population was shattering the old order. Wells hated the United States, but for him the greatest threat was not geopolitical, i.e., that the growing economic and scientific power of an America or a Germany would threaten the British Empire. Rather, what Wells addressed as the primary threat was the way in which the unleashing of science and creativity had affected the population, how it threatened the most basic cultural underpinnings of oligarchical rule.

It is useful, in this regard, to point out that in 1900, between 30 and 40 percent of the British population were “in service” to the British aristocracy, including the upstairs/downstairs phenomenon where servants greatly outnumbered their masters, but also including groundskeepers, agricultural laborers, and other participants in a modern parody of feudalism, where one is “born into” one’s station. This is the system—including identical methods imposed in India and other British colonies—that Wells identifies as the oligarchical, “universal organization.”

Of course, Wells speaks only half-truths and outright lies. Nowhere does he name the principles motivating the American Revolution and the profound advances in human productivity made possible by the economic initiatives of Alexander Hamilton and Abraham Lincoln. Nor does he identify the 15th century Renaissance as the impetus for this advance in human civilization. On these matters he is silent, but his intended audience among the upper echelons of the British elite were only too aware of where the threat came from.

Wells—The Underling

In dealing with an individual such as Wells, or in a somewhat different way with Bertrand Russell, it is important not to overemphasize their stature or role. They were malleable underlings to imperial masters. Wells should be viewed as akin to Rudyard Kipling’s Gunga Din, or the classic British valet, a “gentleman’s gentleman,” whose loyalty to the British class system is more fierce than his master’s. Despite his membership in the Coefficients Club, where he rubbed shoulders with Halford John Mackinder, Alfred Milner, Bertrand Russell and Sir Edward Grey, Wells was always a mere useful tool, never an equal to his oligarchical patrons.

As Lyndon LaRouche once put it:

H.G. Wells has notable importance for our understanding the strategic, political, economic, and moral crisis now enveloping this planet. An unlikely candidate for fame and influence? He was, admittedly, like fellow Fabian tribesman George Bernard Shaw, essentially a shallow poseur, in the literal sense of the Latin derivation of “vanity”: a miserable, invidious, misanthropic wretch, a picaresque eternal lout of immense vanity, of a personal character to be compared, and that not too favorably, with the popular image of a “mafia boss.” He was, in short, exactly the sort of lackey the British oligarchy would employ and cultivate to do a particularly nasty bit of thuggery. . . .

What moves a [Bertrand] Russell, is not the desire to exploit, as much as it is to have the status of an exploiter. What moves a Wells, or a Henry A. Kissinger, is, similarly, the passion to be a lackey, rather than live in a world where lackeys do not enjoy the privileges accompanying patronage by an oligarchy. There is, as the cases of the public sexual advocacies of both Russell and Wells attest, something Freudian, or similarly debased, in the proximate motivations of these despicable types of Englishman—and others like them. Indeed, the entirety of empiricism’s history, is a history of degraded eroticism. Not merely strange sexual appetites, although those abounded; but, erotic in the more inclusive sense of placing the sense-perceptual experience of intense pleasure-pain at the highest rank of motivating passion. . . .

Russell’s expressions of hatred against the United States, like his mass-homicidal threats against darker-skinned “more prolific races,” are already beyond the bounds of toleration; the man was a conscienceless beast. Yet, even Russell’s anti-American rants do not approach the virulence and pervasiveness of Wells’ expressed hatred against everything American. Only a low-life lackey could muster such public displays of obsessive hatred against his master’s opponent as Wells does.[fn_2]

Library and Archives Canada

H.G. Wells

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

Wells’ father worked as a domestic gardener, a shopkeeper and professional cricketer; his mother as a domestic servant (in service). In his autobiography Wells describes the misery and poverty of his youth. Then, at the age of 18, while studying at the Normal School of Science, he was noticed by Thomas Henry Huxley, himself a commoner who had risen to such lofty posts as the President of the British Royal Society and member of the King’s Privy Council.

Huxley would become Wells’ lifelong patron, and it was via Huxley (“Darwin’s bulldog”) that Wells adopted a passionate devotion to Malthusianism, which continued through the entirety of his career. Wells’ writings drip with contempt for the “multitude” of humanity, particularly the darker-skinned races.

Imperial Intentions

Wells’ outlook is vividly presented in Chapter 9: “The Faith, Morals, and Public Policy of the New Republic,” of his Anticipations.

This present time is essentially the opening phase of a period of ethical reconstruction, a reconstruction of which the New Republic will possess the matured result. Throughout the nineteenth century there has been such a shattering and recasting of fundamental ideas, of the preliminaries to ethical propositions, as the world has never seen before.

The first chapter in the history of this intellectual development, its definite and formal opening, coincides with the opening of the nineteenth century and the publication of Malthus’s Essay on Population. Malthus is one of those cardinal figures in intellectual history who state definitely for all time, things apparent enough after their formulation, but never effectively conceded before. He brought clearly and emphatically into the sphere of discussion a vitally important issue that had always been shirked and tabooed heretofore, the fundamental fact that the main mass of the business of human life centres about reproduction. . . .

Probably no more shattering book than the Essay on Population has ever been, or ever will be, written. It was aimed at the facile Liberalism of the Deists and Atheists of the eighteenth century; it made as clear as daylight that all forms of social reconstruction, all dreams of earthly golden ages must be either futile or insincere or both, until the problems of human increase were manfully faced. . . .

It has become apparent that whole masses of human population are, as a whole, inferior in their claim upon the future, to other masses, that they cannot be given opportunities or trusted with power as the superior peoples are trusted, that their characteristic weaknesses are contagious and detrimental in the civilizing fabric, and that their range of incapacity tempts and demoralizes the strong. To give them equality is to sink to their level, to protect and cherish them is to be swamped in their fecundity. . . .

Now there has come a new view of man’s place in the scheme of time and space, a new illumination . . . with the new light there has come the time for new methods; the time of lanterns, the time of deductions from arbitrary first principles is over. The act of faith is no longer to follow your lantern, but to put it down. We can see about us, and by the landscape we must go.

Much of what Wells presents in Anticipations would be repeated four years later in his A Modern Utopia, but it is in that latter work where Wells insists on the futility of top-down control of the population and examines the preferred method of “self-regulation,” i.e., voluntary enslavement to oligarchical axioms.

Defining the New Battleground

The cultural transformation proposed by Wells was not simply an assault on the “the way” people think but on the very nature of human thought and the human identity itself. This is a war to control human culture, and this has defined the battleground for more than 100 years. In this regard, the role of Bertrand Russell and his collaborators is also of vital importance. Much of that story is beyond the scope of this present article, but it is critical to note that after World War II, in the concerted drive to spread the use of hallucinogenic drugs by British Intelligence, we find a convergence of the Russell-spawned “cybernetics” and “information theory” crowd with oligarchical pro-drug elements of the British psychiatric establishment, united in a drive to eliminate creativity from human culture.

The role of the psychiatric profession in this assault on human reason was key to the intended transformation. With the takeover of the London Tavistock Clinic in 1932 by John Rawlings Rees, and continuing through World War II, dozens of mental butchers were in the vanguard of insisting that human beings are driven entirely by irrational passions and bestial impulses. The Socratic method of hypothesis and lawful creative reason as the basis for human thought was discarded—a taboo subject. Paralleling this onslaught came the claim by Norbert Wiener and others among the cybernetics crowd that the human mind is essentially a logical machine and that all thought and emotion can be reduced to linear electrical and chemical interactions in the brain. These were not contradictory arguments but only two sides of the same coin—human reason does not exist.

II. War on America

With the death of Franklin Roosevelt, the immediate task facing the British oligarchy was to reverse the FDR paradigm of anti-colonial peace and economic development, while simultaneously launching initiatives to undermine the optimism which characterized the American population. What became the cold war, together with the McCarthyite witch-hunts initiated that process, and it was within the context of the brutal shocks of the cold war that the first LSD experiments were begun.

Much has been said and written about the CIA’s role in this, including operations Artichoke and MK-ULTRA, but those who fixate on a “CIA conspiracy” miss the point. There are hundreds of web sites devoted to the CIA and drugs, all basically saying that the CIA’s MK-ULTRA was a cold war program aimed against the Soviet Union. Probably many CIA officials at the time also believed this, but that is not what was really going on. The CIA personnel were simply underlings, working—knowingly or not—for a higher, more perverse power. From the beginning this was a “Made in Britain” operation. By 1945 Franklin Roosevelt was dead, and the Truman administration was slavishly pro-British. This was the beginning of the “Special Relationship,” and with the creation of the NATO alliance and “Five Eyes” intelligence integration, the United States was drawn into an intimate intelligence and military partnership with the British Empire.

To understand the LSD operation you must cast your view higher up the oligarchical ladder than the late-to-the-party CIA. Look to those who had a greater appreciation of Grand Strategy and a truly bestial view of human nature. Look to the families who have ruled an Empire for centuries and have perfected methods of how to control populations. Look to the Empire that had waged two drug wars against China and imposed marijuana on huge sections of India. Look to H.G. Wells prescriptions of how to control and manipulate human culture.

Dr. Louis Jolyon (Jolly) West

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

The first usage of LSD in America occurred in 1949 at the Boston Psychopathic Hospital. That batch of LSD had been brought over from Switzerland by Dr. Otto Kauders, an Austrian psychiatrist who later became a leading figure with the American Mental Health Foundation. Following that incident—and very rapidly—a combination of military and intelligence agencies, psychiatric facilities, and Anglophile families within the U.S. establishment launched a massive LSD drugging campaign. Hundreds of thousands of doses of LSD were purchased from the Swiss pharmaceutical firm Sandoz, where the drug had been invented in 1943. Huge grants were forthcoming to teams of doctors at Boston Psychopathic, Mt. Sinai Hospital and Columbia University in New York, the University of Rochester, the University of Illinois Medical School, the notorious National Institute of Mental Health-sponsored Addiction Research Center in Lexington, Kentucky, Louis Jolyon West’s group at the University of Oklahoma and many other locations.

This was a massive, almost instantaneous, onslaught, and it continued into the 1960s. By 1965, hundreds of universities, laboratories, prisons, clinics, safe-houses and military bases had administered LSD, either voluntarily or involuntarily, to hundreds of thousands of American citizens.

Almost all of the funding for this came from the CIA, the U.S. Army and other military intelligence agencies, a large portion of which was secretly laundered through the Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation. The Macy Foundation’s chief LSD executive, Harold Abramson, was a psychiatric researcher at Columbia University, and it was Abramson who gave LSD for the first time to British anthropologist Gregory Bateson, the husband of Margaret Mead. Bateson then became MK-ULTRA’s agent at the Palo Alto, California, Veterans’ facility where, beginning in the late 1950s, he ran the program to conduct LSD experiments on dozens of individuals, including Beat poet Alan Ginsburg and future psychedelic author Ken Kesey.

Today, there is a myth that the LSD spooks of the 1950s never expected or desired the use of the drug among the general population. Essentially, what is asserted is that LSD “escaped from the laboratory.” The acid-heads of the 1960s have their own version of this myth. In 1980, John Lennon said, “We must always remember to thank the CIA. They invented LSD to control people, and what they did was give us freedom.” Such is what massive drug consumption does to an individual’s cognitive functioning. In reality, the early LSD experiments were always intended as the precursor to the mass drugging of the population.

Robert Gordon Wesson (1898-1986), a vice-president at J.P Morgan & Co, pictured above, ran aggressive public relations for the Morgan bank and popularized the use of hallucinogenic drugs starting in 1957 in Life magazine.

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

A classic example of how this worked is the case of Robert Gordon Wasson, a Vice-President of J.P. Morgan and Co., the Morgan bank. In 1956 Wasson and his wife took an extended trip to Mexico to study the use of psilocybin by indigenous villagers in primitive locations. The Wassons not only studied the drug rituals, they partook of the drug themselves. Upon Wasson’s return to the U.S., Life magazine,—then the most popular family magazine in America—in its May 13, 1957 issue published a glowing feature article on Wasson’s trip and drug-taking, titled “Seeking the Magic Mushroom.” Overnight, tens of millions of high-school and college-age Americans were made aware of this exotic new “high.” Both the publisher of Life Henry Luce and his wife Clare Boothe Luce were avid cold warriors, counting among their close friends CIA Director Allen Dulles. They were also both habitual users of LSD and supported many of the key researchers in the field. It later was revealed that Wasson’s entire Mexican trip was funded by the CIA.

The British Mother

In 1948, one year prior to the arrival of LSD in America, Britain’s National Association for Mental Health gathered world psychiatric and psychological leaders together at an International Congress on Mental Health at Britain’s Ministry of Health in London. Out of this meeting the World Federation for Mental Health was founded. A major sponsor of the event was the Bank of England’s Montagu Norman. His wife Lady Norman was named to the executive board. Lady Norman personally chose as president of the World Federation the head of the London Tavistock Institute, Brig. Gen. Dr. John Rawlings Rees.

At roughly the same time, a New York agent of Montagu Norman, Clarence G. Michalis, was made chairman of the board of the Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation. That foundation, in turn, would finance much of the subsequent mass drugging that the World Federation and Tavistock would prescribe for the United States. The Macy Foundation’s chief medical officer, Dr. Frank Fremont-Smith, would become the co-director of the World Federation with John Rawlings Rees.

During those same post-War years, both UNESCO and the World Health Organization (WHO) were created under United Nations auspices. The first Director-General of WHO was Brock Chisholm, a Canadian who had been trained as a psychiatrist at the Tavistock Psychiatric Clinic in London. The first Director of UNESCO was Julian Huxley, brother of Aldous. Julian also served as President of the British Eugenics Society, and in 1961 he would join with Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld of the Netherlands and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, to found the World Wildlife Fund, the first mass-based environmentalist group. During the 1950s, UNESCO and WHO would both work closely with the Tavistock Institute and the World Federation for Mental Health to carry out psychological warfare against the American population.

Left: John Rawlings Rees; right: Donald Ewen Cameron

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

Snapshots From the Edge

Let us consider a few of the individuals who made this all happen. To conserve space, this is a short list, and dozens of others could be named. One thing that jumps out is the role of British psychiatrists, almost all with connections to the London Tavistock Institute. These were the earliest LSD experimenters, and they recruited many others in the psychiatric profession, including in America. Bear in mind that all of the individuals and their programs were operated, funded, and under the supervision of an apparatus which included the Tavistock Institute, the World Federation for Mental Health, the CIA and the Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation. Almost all of these individuals used LSD themselves.

Ronald Sandison—a British psychiatrist, Sandison was one of the first to use LSD in his practice. In 1952 he was given 100 vials of LSD by its discoverer Albert Hoffmann in Switzerland. He began immediately giving it to patients at Powick Hospital in Worcester, England, eventually building an LSD clinic. His work became the model for many who followed.

Dr. Ewen Cameron—a psychiatrist trained at the Royal Mental Hospital in Glasgow who became President of both the American Psychiatric Association and the Canadian Psychiatric Association. He founded the Canadian branch of his friend John R. Rees’ World Federation for Mental Health. In the 1950s he conducted extensive LSD testing at Allan Memorial Hospital in Montreal. Cameron’s methods were extremely brutal, involving dosing patients with LSD and then administering electric shock, violent interrogations and even psychosurgery. His closest advisor in this project was the British psychiatrist William Walters Sargant, who had pioneered in the development of many of these barbaric techniques.

Dr. Humphrey Osmond—a British psychiatrist, originally based at the National Hospital, Queens Square, London. It was there he began experimenting with mescaline. He later moved to Canada. It was Osmond who first gave mescaline to Aldous Huxley in 1953.

Dr. Gregory Bateson—a UK Cambridge University-trained anthropologist, and friend of Aldous Huxley from the 1920s. Bateson was deeply involved in both the LSD and Cybernetics sides of the anti-cognitive British warfare. He also worked closely with Dr. James Alexander Hamilton, the MK-ULTRA supervisor of operations in California. Bateson ran the Palo Alto Veterans Administration Hospital LSD experiments from 1950 through 1962.

Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution

Gregory Bateson (R) with Rudolph Arnheim.

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

Dr. Robert Felix—a psychiatrist who became the first Director of the National Institute of Mental Health in 1949, Felix also served as the President of the American Psychiatric Association. His notoriety stems from his Directorship of the drug addiction center at the Federal Medical Center in Lexington, Kentucky. This facility was part of the U.S. prison system where thousands of inmates were subjected to LSD treatment, in ways not very dissimilar from Cameron’s program in Montreal. It is useful to note that the drug addict and mentally ill author William S. Burroughs was a patient at this facility.

Smithsonian Institution Archives

Robert Hanna Felix

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

Dr. Sidney Cohen—a psychiatrist who was the editor of the Journal of Psychopharmacology and was Clinical Professor of Medicine at UCLA. He administered LSD to Gerald (Henry FitzGerald) Heard, the individual who is credited with introducing Aldous Huxley to mysticism and eastern religions. Cohen and Heard began working as a team, together administering LSD to dozens of Hollywood actors, as well as to Bill Wilson, the founder of Alcoholics Anonymous, who then attempted (unsuccessfully) to incorporate LSD into the A.A. program.

Aldous Huxley—an individual whose role as the “guru of hallucinogens” is greatly exaggerated, Huxley was a pathetic creature who turned himself into a human guinea pig and then embraced his own self-inflicted moral and mental prison.

Aldous, together with his brother Julian, were both taught privately by H.G. Wells while they were at Oxford University, and they imbibed Well’s warnings of the need for a cultural transformation to defeat the threat of science and human progress. Julian Huxley followed his grandfather Thomas’ path into Eugenics and Malthusianism. The near blind Aldous was always weaker, always less confident than his brother. Unlike Wells who devised scenarios for an oligarchical-controlled Utopia, Aldous yearned to live in such a Utopia.

Aldous was always closer to Bertrand Russell than H.G. Wells. After World War I, he became associated with the Bloomsbury Group and considered among his friends Bertrand Russell, John Maynard Keynes, D.H. Lawrence, Lytton Stratchy, T.S. Eliot, Virginia Woolf, and others. Among other pursuits, this collection was notorious for sexual promiscuity and partner swapping.

In 1953, Aldous was given mescaline by Humphrey Osmond, and the next year he authored his paean to hallucinogenic drugs Doors of Perception. Aldous, in turn, gave mescaline to the aforementioned Gregory Bateson, as well as to Alan Watts, the Zen Buddhist fanatic who founded Pacifica Radio. In the fall of 1960 Aldous became a visiting professor at Harvard University. There, accompanied by Osmond and Watts, he created a study group and recruited Timothy Leary and Richard Alpert to begin their LSD project.

The Cybernetic Connection

In 1942, the same Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation that would soon be up to its eyeballs in the MK-ULTRA mass drugging of the U.S. population, sponsored a by-invitation-only conference called the “Cerebral Inhibition Meeting.” This event would then initiate the ongoing Macy Cybernetics Conferences which would continue to convene annually until 1960. The organizer of the 1942 event (which was dubbed the “Man-Machine Project”) was Frank Fremont-Smith. Between 1946 and 1953 Fremont-Smith worked as Medical Director in the Macy Foundation, and he was also president of British General Rees’s World Federation of Mental Health. In 1959 Fremont-Smith, as head of the Macy Foundation, was the organizer of the first ever conference on LSD.

Norbert Weiner

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

Among the select participants at the 1942 meeting were Gregory Bateson; his wife at the time, Margaret Mead; Arturo Rosenblueth (a close collaborator of Norbert Wiener); and Fremont-Smith himself. At the later annual Macy’s Conferences, Norbert Wiener would often attend. One of the more influential members was Claude Shannon, a champion of information theory. All of this was aimed at putting forth a mechanistic schema of the human mind, the denial of lawful cognitive functioning, and the rejection of the notion of a creative human identity.

Introducing the Shift in Cultural Paradigm

• 1961—Timothy Leary begins his (MK-ULTRA financed) Harvard LSD experiments. That same year the World Wildlife Fund is founded by Julian Huxley and Princes Philip and Bernhard.

• 1962—Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring is published. Named a Book-of-the-Month Club selection and heavily promoted by the New York Times and the New Yorker magazine, this sparks a small but growing environmentalist movement.

• 1964—Robert Hutchins’ Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions releases the “Triple Revolution” thesis, which states that human society is moving into a cybernetics revolution, and that the massive expansion of productive employment that had occurred under the (recently murdered) President Kennedy will soon come to an end.

• 1965—The Tavistock Institute affiliated Robert N. Rapoport authored the “Rapoport Report,” calling for a de-emphasis on science education, a reduction in the number of graduates with Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees in Science and the gradual phasing out of teaching the Western Classics.

• 1966—Ken Kesey’s LSD “Trips Festival” takes place in San Francisco.

• 1967—The San Francisco Human Be-In, with Leary, Alpert, acid rock bands, followed by the Summer of Love with more than 100,000 participants.

• 1968—Paul Ehrlich publishes his Malthusian book, The Population Bomb, calling for the mass elimination of billions of human beings.

EIRNS/Stuart Lewis

Paul Ehrlich speaking for the UN Population Fund in 1992.

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

• 1969—400,000 youth gather at Woodstock, New York.

• 1970—The first Earth Day is celebrated, initiating a mass-based movement “in defense of the Earth.”

• 1972—The The Limits to Growth is published by the oligarchical Club of Rome, stating that all resources are finite and thus, continued human development is doomed. Also, in 1972, Henry Kissinger issues “National Security Study Memorandum 200,” calling for world-wide population reduction. That same year the last Apollo mission to Moon takes place, thus ending the mission that had been initiated by President Kennedy.

• 1974—John D. Rockefeller, Margaret Mead and others gather at the Bucharest UN Conference on World Population, calling for global genocide. In the United States High Times magazine is founded to lead the drive for drug legalization, and the Changing Images of Man is published by the Stanford Research Institute Center for the Study of Social Policy, proclaiming that the image of man and all of society must be changed from a belief in scientific and industrial progress to spiritualism.

This is the backdrop—a decade-and-a-half oligarchical drive to impose drugs, Malthusianism and de-population—within which all of the events of the 1960s played out. This was all-out cultural war. The question for the British was: “Can the spirit of the population be broken? Can people be won over to support, or at least tolerate, the complete abandonment of the human commitment to scientific progress? Can they be induced to forsake a self-identity located in invention, discovery and creative activity?”

III. The San Francisco Laboratory

How do you turn a population mad? How do you turn it against its own deeply-ingrained cultural values? It can’t be done with a simple snap of one’s fingers. It requires a sustained effort. One of the things that was discovered by Ewen Cameron and Robert Felix was that you could not completely break down an individual’s personality until you had administered daily doses of LSD for at least 60 to 80 days. So you have to create the conditions to do that on a larger scale. You create an extraordinarily heightened susceptibility to change. You offer rewards, particularly in the arena of sexual gratification. But you also need to provoke fear, insecurity, and to expose the subjects to powerful shocks. H.G. Wells would have no problem understanding this methodology.

We present here the story of one such experiment that took place in a laboratory without walls. Today, some might question the relevance of rehashing this seemingly dated material. Yet, understanding what was done at that time—and how it was done—gives important insights into the battle in progress today.

Much of a derogatory nature has been said about the “baby-boomer” generation, but it is important to remember that the baby-boomers were the children of the World War II generation. Their fathers and mothers had grown to maturity under Franklin Roosevelt, and had fought a war to defeat Fascism. The boomers themselves had passed from adolescence to young adulthood during the years of the Civil Rights Movement and the Kennedy space program. The seeds of cultural optimism were built-into the boomer generation. Granted, this tendency was weakened and corrupted by the events of the Truman and Eisenhower years—the McCarthyism, the conformity, and the escape to the pleasure-oriented suburbs—but it was still there, buried in the identity of that generation.

The experiment was to see if this cultural link could be broken, if optimism in a more productive future could be completely eradicated. In San Francisco, in the 1960s, a test population was gathered. Massive quantities of drugs were introduced. Great emotional and psychological shocks were delivered—and a great change took place.

The Drugs Arrive

San Francisco was the first city in the U.S. where the distribution of LSD to large numbers of the general public began. It started in a brothel. In 1955 the CIA’s Sidney Gottlieb deployed an individual named George Hunter White to San Francisco to initiate “LSD testing.” White proceeded to rent a safe house and employed a string of prostitutes to work out of it. In an operation, incredibly named “Midnight Climax,” the prostitutes would place LSD into the alcoholic drinks of the Johns. Hundreds were dosed in this way. Within a few years, White began to deploy his subordinates to begin drugging the general public. His agents would go to bars, nightclubs, sporting events, restaurants, tourist locations and slip LSD into food and drinks, or find other creative ways of dosing as many people as possible. White’s activities continued to 1963, by which time thousands of individuals had been given LSD.

George Hunter White

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

Unlike the hundreds of LSD experiments elsewhere, which usually took place in clinics or hospitals, White’s operation bore no resemblance to a medical experiment. There was no clinical follow-up and the names of the victims were not even known. The idea was simply to drug as many people as possible.

By the late 1950s Gregory Bateson’s LSD work was in full swing at Palo Alto Veterans Affairs Hospital near Stanford University, and by the early 1960s several of his alumni, including Ken Kesey, were spreading LSD to tens of thousands more. The January 1966 “Trips Festival” at Fisherman’s Wharf established San Francisco as the hub of the new drug culture.

Then there is the case of Dr. Louis “Jolly” West. In the 1950s West was the head of the University of Oklahoma’s Dept. of Psychiatry. There, through the MK-ULTRA program, he ran one of the earliest and most extensive LSD programs. In 1966 West moved to the Haight-Ashbury district in San Francisco. Still working for MK-ULTRA, he ran a house where he continued to distribute LSD to as many individuals as possible, all the while reporting back to his superiors on the success of his “experiment.” West called this the “Haight-Ashbury Project.” Later, he would move on to become the Chairman of UCLA’s Department of Psychiatry and Director of the UCLA Neuropsychiatric Institute. In 1976, West resurfaced as a defense consultant in the Patty Hearst trial.

MK-ULTRA stringers were all over Haight-Ashbury during the Summer of Love, many working for West. A case in point is the Haight-Ashbury Free Medical Clinic. Established in 1967 by Dr. David Smith, the clinic contained an office staffed and run by Dr. West. Smith and West worked together to study the effects of long-term LSD use and the cultural changes it was producing, such as group marriage and spiritualistic practices. West would often supply LSD to the patients. One of their subjects was Charles Manson, who had been ordered by his parole officer to regularly attend the clinic. The fact that the clinic was a front for an intelligence operation was so blatant that even the drug-addicted head of the Diggers, Emmett Grogan, stated that “the patients were treated as ‘research subjects’ and the facility was used to support whatever medical innovations were new and appropriate to the agency.”

Leary and Hitchcock

In 1960, inspired by Life magazine’s coverage of R. Gordon Wasson’s psychedelic experiences, Timothy Leary traveled to Cuernavaca, Mexico and consumed psilocybin mushrooms for the first time. In the fall of that same year, Aldous Huxley, together with his drug supplier, MK-ULTRA’s Humphrey Osmond, met with Leary at Harvard and convinced him to launch what would become the Harvard Psilocybin Project. This Harvard Project, which, by 1961, included the use of LSD, lasted for three years.

In 1963, Leary was picked up by the CIA-connected Mellon family. Mellon heir Peggy Hitchcock, who had been a participant in Leary’s Harvard LSD trips, introduced Leary to her brother Billy. (Peggy would later marry Walter Bowart, the founder of the East Village Other in New York, the first major pro-LSD “underground newspaper” in the United States). Billy Mellon Hitchcock was a high-level broker at Lehman Brothers investment banking firm, and deeply connected to the intelligence community. Earlier, he had played a mysterious role in the British “Profumo affair.” He also handled the investments for the Meyer Lansky syndicate that ran the Fiduciary Trust Company (Nassau, Grand Bahamas), and was associated with the CIA front Castle Bank in the Bahamas. In addition he was a key player in lining up the initial funding for the intelligence and organized crime front Resorts International. In 1963, Hitchcock purchased a mansion in Millbrook, New York to house Leary, and this became the headquarters for their expanded LSD project.

Richard Helms, who then headed the CIA’s MK-ULTRA project was a sometimes guest at Millbrook, as were others with spook credentials. The intelligence community connection was out in the open. Additionally, hundreds of artists, journalists, academics, musicians and others made the pilgrimage and participated in LSD trips. Perhaps most important, it was at Millbrook that the apparatus for producing massive quantities of LSD was put in place, a necessary pre-requisite for the mass drugging of millions of Americans coast-to-coast.

Creative Commons/Roy Kerwood

John Lennon and Yoko Ono with Timothy Leary, cutting a song in 1968.

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

Where Did All the LSD Come From?

Prior to 1965 almost all of the LSD in the United States was supplied by the Sandoz corporation in Switzerland. The vast bulk—millions of doses—were purchased by the CIA and other intelligence agencies, and this, together with LSD manufactured for the CIA by Eli Lilly, was the LSD that was supplied to the hundreds of MK-ULTRA projects throughout the country. Then, in October, 1966 California made the sale and possession of LSD illegal, and in 1967 the U.S. government banned LSD and other hallucinogenic drugs nation-wide. Sandoz stopped all shipments of LSD to the United States.

If the LSD project were to continue, where was the needed supply of drugs to come from?

The answer was hatched at Millbrook, where two of Leary’s LSD trippers, Nicholas Sand and Tim Scully, were recruited by Billy Hitchcock to create LSD labs. Another recipient of Hitchcock’s money was Owsley Stanley III, who manufactured most of the LSD used in Ken Kesey’s “Acid Tests.” Hitchcock provided the funds for Stanley and Scully to establish an LSD lab in Point Richmond, California. Then in 1967 Nick Sand and Scully established an LSD lab in Windsor, California (just north of San Francisco), where they produced 3.6 million hits of LSD, which they dubbed “Orange Sunshine.” These operations were responsible for producing all of the LSD which flooded San Francisco in the Summer of Love and afterward. Orange Sunshine, reportedly, was also the drug of choice of the Manson Family.

The money for all of these operations came from Hitchcock.

Out of all of this emerged an organization named the Brotherhood of Eternal Love. It was created when an individual named John Griggs visited Leary and Hitchcock at Millbrook and participated in the LSD tripping. Griggs returned to California and created the Brotherhood in Laguna Beach. By 1967 the Brotherhood had become the largest traffickers of LSD, not just in California, but nation-wide. Scully and Sand were the suppliers of the LSD and Billy Hitchcock provided the funding. In 1967, Timothy Leary moved to Laguna Beach, and lived with the Brotherhood until January 21, 1970, when he was sentenced to ten years in prison for drug offenses.

From 1967 to 1972 the Brotherhood was the largest LSD drug cartel in the United States. It is estimated that at least 7 million young Americans took LSD during those years, almost all of which came from the Brotherhood. It was also deeply connected to U.S. intelligence agencies. In 1969 the Brotherhood was taken over by a very shady character named Ronald Stark. It was under Stark’s reign that the Brotherhood was transformed into an international drug-running operation, supplying LSD and other drugs in Europe, Asia and elsewhere. In 1979, after being indicted on drug charges in Bologna, Italy, Stark was able to have all charges dismissed when he presented the judge with evidence that he was a CIA agent.

The most bizarre episode in the short-lived history of the Brotherhood came in 1970, when they actually paid $25,000 to members of the Weathermen to break Timothy Leary out of prison. Leary was spirited away to a safe house in San Francisco where he met with Bernardine Dohrn, and a joint communiqué was issued hailing the revolutionary act. He was then smuggled out of the country to join Eldridge Cleaver in Algeria.

Inside the Rat’s Maze

Consider what was carried out in San Francisco during 1965-1968. Consider the intended effect. By the 1960s, R.D. Laing and others at London’s Tavistock Institute were proclaiming that “no criteria for sanity actually exists,” and that psychedelic drugs could be used to remake an individual’s concept of what is sane. The idea in San Francisco was to create an environment where traditional notions of sanity would no longer exist, to create an artificial reality where no outside influences could intervene.

To give a sense of this, consider the Haight-Ashbury district geographically. It is a very small area, yet in that restricted zone, the following existed:

Janis Joplin at 635 Ashbury St.

Country Joe and the Fish at 638 Ashbury St.

The Grateful Dead lived at 710 Ashbury St.

The Hell’s Angels at 719 Ashbury St.

The Jefferson Airplane were just across the Panhandle at 2400 Fulton St.

Charles Manson lived at 636 Cole St.

The Satanic Process Church of the Final Judgement, with which Manson was associated, was only two blocks away at 407 Cole St.

The Free Medical Clinic, where the CIA’s Jolly West operated, was at the corner of Haight and Clayton.

West’s crash-pad, where he deployed a team of underlings to dispense LSD was only a few blocks away.

The Psychedelic Shop was at 1535 Haight St.

The San Francisco Oracle newspaper was a block-and-a-half away at 1371 Haight St.

The Diggers Free Bakery was at 1350 Waller St., one block off Haight St.

The Avalon Ballroom, the Family Dog and the Fillmore West Auditorium launched psychedelic rock concerts with music and light shows that were deliberately designed to create a dissociative mental state. The Diggers and the S.F. Mime Troop filled the streets with absurdist theater and outlandish parades. The onetime burlesque queen Magnolia Thunderpussy sold erotic desserts at her 1398 Haight St. café. Spiritualism, meditation, so-called eastern-religions and other forms of “mind-expansion” were advertised on every street corner. For four years the neighborhood was drenched in Billy Mellon Hitchcock’s LSD.

This was all packed into a tiny neighborhood; it was concentrated, incessant, and it didn’t stop. The experiment was pushed to the breaking point to see if a radical transformation could be accomplished.

Fear and Shocks

Corrupt psychiatrists have devoted careers to investigate brainwashing techniques and how to manipulate and mold personalities. For San Francisco, first came the carrot: drugs, sex, and a new set of values—essentially an entire new identity; then came the stick: the inducement of shocks and fear, such that the personality is weakened and susceptible to suggestion. This use of weaponized terror was already underway—nation-wide—long before the Summer of Love. It began with the Cuban Missile Crisis and the assassination of John F. Kennedy, followed by the 1964-1967 inner city riots, and culminating with the assassinations of Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr in 1968. Throughout all of this, the drumbeat of the seemingly never-ending war in Vietnam rolled on and on, and every evening the TV networks were kind enough to broadcast color images of that carnage into the living rooms of every American family.

In San Francisco, the psychological torture was taken to a much more intense level. First came the Zodiac killings where 37 people were randomly killed from 1966 to 1971. Then, before the 1970s were over, there occurred the Zebra killings, the bombings by the New World Liberation Front, the Symbionese Liberation Army, the People’s Temple, two assassination attempts against the President of the United States, the assassination of a Bay Area U.S. Congressman, and the assassination of the Mayor of San Francisco.

The story of the Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA) is so bizarre that it makes no sense unless one considers the intention to spread chaos. Created in 1971-1972 at the California Medical Facility at Vacaville (part of the California State Prison system, where widespread LSD experiments had been carried out), by a Berkeley linguistics professor with deep ties to the CIA, the SLA went on to carry out assassinations, bombings and bank robberies before most of its surviving members were captured 1975. With the kidnapping of Patty Hearst in February 1974, followed by the chaotic free distribution of food which the SLA forced the Hearst family to carry out, through Patty Hearst’s conversion to “Tania” and the Hibernia Bank robbery, San Franciscans could not escape the daily dramatics. They were jerked around on a daily basis, not knowing what to believe about what was going on.

The Zebra Murders took place between October 1973 and April 1974. Apparently, a group of disaffected Black Muslims took it into their heads to “kill whitey,” and over the course of 6 months they randomly murdered 23 people and injured many more, including the shooting of the future Mayor, Art Agnos. The city was gripped by panic; the mayor ordered the police to stop and frisk all “suspicious” black people, and in early 1974 the SLA issued a communiqué praising the revolutionary actions of their black brothers. Think of the Son of Sam murder spree and then multiply the fear and panic about ten times. That was the effect of the Zebra killings.

Between 1973 and 1978 the New World Liberation Front (NWLF) carried out more than 70 bombings in the San Francisco Bay Area. Politicians, electric power stations, oil companies and other diverse targets were bombed. In San Francisco, the homes of San Francisco Mayor Dianne Feinstein, former Mayor Joseph Alioto, Supervisor Quentin Kopp and Supervisor John Barbagelata were all bombed. Shortly after the kidnapping of Patty Hearst, the Hearst Castle at San Simeon was bombed. The Sheraton Palace Hotel in San Francisco was bombed. In 1983, a single individual was arrested for several of the bombings. The failure to identify any additional NWLF members, however, and the curious nature of the NWLF’s targets, raises the possibility that it was an intelligence operation all along, aimed at provoking terror.

In 1975, Jim Jones moved his People’s Temple from Mendocino County to 1859 Geary Blvd. in San Francisco, next door to the building that had housed the Zebra killers. Within months he was hosting a congregation of 5,000 people. Jones’ background in Indianapolis, Indiana and Ukiah, California is very shady and there are many indications that he was receiving political protection from high sources very early on. In San Francisco, Dianne Feinstein, Willie Brown, Harvey Milk, and Gov. Jerry Brown all visited the Temple. Angela Davis became a big supporter, as was Huey Newton and Congressman John Burton. There are reports that several SLA members attended services at the Temple (before moving to Los Angeles, the SLA hid out at 1827 Golden Gate Ave., only 2 to 3 blocks from the Temple). First Lady Rosalyn Carter met with Jones, as did Walter Mondale. When City Supervisor John Barbegelata spoke out against Jones, his home was bombed by the NWLF. In 1975 Jones organized massive vote fraud to elect George Moscone mayor, and this was repeated on a even a bigger scale in 1977. Moscone appointed Jones the chairman of the city’s Housing Commission (the largest landlord in the city). The November, 1978 Jonestown Massacre was a moral and psychic body blow to San Francisco inhabitants. Of the 918 who died, the majority were from San Francisco, and the next largest number came from Oakland. Then, only nine days later, Jones’ patron Mayor George Moscone, together with Supervisor Harvey Milk, the leading gay-rights activist in the city, were assassinated.

In the midst of this decade of chaos, there were also two assassination attempts against President Gerald Ford. On September 5, 1975, two weeks before Patricia Hearst was finally captured by the police, Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme attempted to shoot Ford in Sacramento. Fromme was a former North Beach stripper who was recruited by Church of Satan head Anton LaVey to perform nude in Satanic rituals. Through LaVey she met Charlie Manson and moved in with him during the Summer of Love at 636 Cole St. in Haight Ashbury. She later reported that she took LSD more than 300 times while with Manson in San Francisco. Seventeen days later, on Sept. 22, Sara Jane Moore shot at and attempted to kill Ford in front of the St. Francis Hotel, in Union Square, San Francisco. Moore was a known FBI informant. She was also a great admirer of the Symbionese Liberation Army and served as a volunteer in the SLA/Hearst food give-away program.

In 13 short years, from 1965 to 1978, the culture, the people and the morality of San Francisco were profoundly—almost unbelievably—transformed. Prior to 1964, for more than 50 years, the city usually had a Republican mayor, and the Democratic Party was dominated by Italian and Irish political machines tied to the conservative Roman Catholic Church. In the 2016 Presidential election, Donald Trump received 9 percent of the vote in San Francisco. In over half the city precincts he received 2 to 3 percent. No other major American city even comes close to those figures.

Out of all of this, the new culture was spread across the nation. By the time of Woodstock in 1969, hallucinogenic drugs and the drug culture were pervasive Atlantic to Pacific—as was intended all along. This process was also greatly enhanced by the demoralization brought on by the decade long war in Vietnam. According to U.S. Army figures, of the 2.6 million soldiers who served “in country” in Vietnam over half had smoked marijuana, 32 percent, more than 800,000, had used psychedelics and another 28 percent had used heroin or other opiates. Their misery would then contribute to the downturn of the nation.

IV. This Time: Let Us Win This Fight

For those who still consider all of this material to be “past history,” or who dismiss the question of hallucinogenic drugs as a peripheral issue, consider that according to a recent report by the National Institute of Drug Abuse, 25 percent of people from 18 to 26 years of age nation-wide have experimented with hallucinogens. That is a substantially higher percentage than what existed in 1968. Consider also that 11 states have already fully legalized marijuana and 33 states permit the “medical” use of marijuana, the latter fully coherent with the current onslaught to redefine hallucinogens as entheogens—medicinal substances which contain natural healing powers. The fact that this is a ludicrous argument is irrelevant. Marijuana has no medical use, yet it is called a medicine, a “natural herb.”

As for today’s American youth, they are in a very fragile and weakened condition. From their parents and grandparents they have inherited the amorality of the 1960s and 1970s, but none of the values and optimism of the World War II veterans. Today’s culture is atomized, existential and unmoored. Young people desperately want to discover a purpose for their existence. That is the nature of what it means to be young, and it is a great thing. But in our current environment youth are barraged with the message that their mission—that which will give their lives meaning—is to “Save the Earth,” that the human species itself is the enemy.

The Resurrection of Psychedelics

After LSD was classified as a Schedule I drug by the U.S. government in 1971, most clinical research into the “therapeutic” use of hallucinogens ceased. In our now drug-tolerant environment these efforts have been revived, led once again by the British and the psychiatric community, with big dollars backing this effort.

The 5th International Conference on Psychedelic Consciousness, held at the University of Greenwich in London in August of this year, presented a bevy of speakers calling for a mass expansion of the use of hallucinogens. One was Gail Bradbrook, the founder of Extinction Rebellion. Another was Amanda Feilding, Countess of Wemyss and March and founder and director of the Beckley Foundation. The leading scientific advisor to the Beckley Foundation for many years was the psychiatrist Ronald Sandison, already mentioned in this report. Between 1952 and 1964 Sandison treated thousands of patients with LSD. Also speaking at this year’s conference was Edmond J. Safra, Chairman in Neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College, London. (It should be noted that among the 100 individuals who founded Extinction Rebellion, more than 30 are either psychiatrists or psychologists.)

In tandem with this conference, the British journal Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology published an article extolling the “spiritual” benefits of hallucinogens and calling for their use in treating patients suffering from depression.

In the United States, according to a report recently aired by the CBS affiliate in San Francisco, “a new generation of doctors and patients is exploring psychedelics as a therapeutic agent for a range of medical conditions and psychological traumas, including cancer patients and military troops suffering from [post-traumatic stress syndrome] PTSD.” This broadcast also stated that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has now approved numerous pilot projects, including at UCLA, the NYU Langone Medical Center, Johns Hopkins University and many other locations, to study the use of psychedelics on patients with life-threatening conditions. The Johns Hopkins researchers have called upon the FDA to reclassify psilocybin from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule IV drug, making it a conventional prescription drug.

There is an avalanche of such propaganda now spewing forth. On Aug. 24, 2018, Scientific American ran an article titled, “Could Psychedelics Lead to Improved Antidepressant or Antianxiety Therapies?” The Jan. 31, 2019 issue of Forbes contained the piece, “Scientists Rethink Psychedelics as Attitudes Change Toward Formerly Illicit Drugs.”

The drive for acceptance and full legalization is in full swing.

The Shamans Speak

For the oligarchy, this so-called medical debate about hallucinogens is just a smokescreen. Their intention, as it has always been, is to change the culture, to change the Image of Man.

In the 1960s, Timothy Leary and his crowd proclaimed the mystical and “spiritual” properties of hallucinogens. Today, this approach has been revived, but it has been refined, so as to tie hallucinogens to a deep reverence for Mother Nature. “Entheogens” are heralded as “nature’s medicine,” with healing powers that will aid us in living in harmony with the Earth. For a generation that has been pre-conditioned to believe that everything “organic” is good, this strikes a resonant chord.

The term “Entheogen” was coined in 1979 by a group of ethnobotanists, including Carl A.P. Ruck, Richard Evans Schultes and R. Gordon Wasson (of “Seeking the Magic Mushroom” fame). The idea was to redefine hallucinogens from being a recreational drug to one of spiritual and sacred use, one with a deep connection to nature.

Essentially—as can be seen in the case of Gail Bradbrook—“Saving the Earth” has become superseded by the desire to “become one with nature.” Listen again to the words of Bradbrook:

There is widespread denial of the fact that we as humans are not at the top of a pyramid where we get to dictate the terms, we are part of a web of life. Even if we are able to find ways to survive on a severely depleted planet using technology, geo-engineering, vat grown food and artificially created oxygen, who will decide who gets access to these life-support systems? How many wars will be waged to decide where the resources go?

And—at the bottom of it all—how many of us will survive the heartbreak of witnessing the loss of so much biodiversity. Do we really want to live in a world without the wild beauty of nature?

And then there is Decriminalize Nature, the group responsible for the legalization of psilocybin in Oakland, CA. On their website, they declare as their Purpose Statement: “to decriminalize entheogenic plants, restore our root connection to nature, and improve human health and well-being,” and they go on to say, “It is time to end the war on entheogenic plants and fungi. Support the inalienable human right to develop our own relationship with nature.”

Ludicrous to most of us? Laughable? Perhaps. But for 16- to 26-year-olds, there is a lure, there is an attraction—an opportunity to make a difference, to “do something that will change the world,” to find some moral lifeboat that will make one’s life meaningful. In an environment where prospects seem dim and the culture seems ugly and meaningless, many will be tempted to walk through this door, held open for them by the British witch-doctors.

Wells Redux: Oligarchy’s Current Dilemma

Ladies and gentlemen, I am firmly of the view that the next 18 months will decide our ability to keep climate change to survivable levels and to restore nature to the equilibrium we need for our survival.

—Prince Charles, to a reception for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Conference at Clarence House, London, July 10, 2019

Julia Hawkins

Extinction Rebellion is now leading “climate protests” under the patronage of green billionaires, the direct descendants of the oligarchical bankers who began wielding their psychedelic weapons against the United States in the 1950s and 1960s.

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

We are now at a moment where the British Empire has been forced to go “all-in,” to salvage their dying system. Beginning with the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 21), they have declared war against the human species. They are determined to force through a global Malthusian agenda, and they are determined to do it now. The World Health Organization, which was created in 1948 by psychiatrists from the Tavistock Institute, earlier this year proclaimed Climate Change as the No. 1 world health threat.

The Bank of England and other British-allied financial circles are also demanding a “green agenda” in world banking and finance, a scenario where national sovereignty will be surrendered over banking and currency matters, and a ban on investments in advanced science and industry will be imposed, forcing nations into a devolutionary spiral of austerity, reductions of energy use and depopulation.

Most of the powerful pressure to impose this genocidal agenda will come top down, from the European Union, from the United Nations and from the City of London and Wall Street financial interests—with expected massive support from the establishment news media. Cowardly elected officials will also undoubtedly fall in line.

However—and this is a big however—to impose such an insane anti-human agenda, will require at least a modicum of popular support—bodies in the street demanding “Action Now!” The oligarchy requires a constituency which will demand, or at least tolerate, such suicidal policies. This leads us to the arena of cultural war, and this brings us back to how this article began.

The incessant pro-green barrage now underway actually signifies that Britain’s oligarchs are nervous, they are unsure that people, particularly in the United States, have been brought to the point of “drinking the Kool-Aid.” They are right to be nervous. The excitement which is spreading among growing numbers of youth about the Artemis Project and related efforts to spread human civilization into space is indicative of the oligarchy’s current dilemma.

The fight against this green insanity is ours to win. Pessimism among our ranks is just an excuse for cowardice. We understand the beauty, the power and the hope of the human species, and this is what we must convey—boldly and uncompromisingly—to today’s young people. Youth desire a future; let us show them the magnificence of what is possible. The British oligarchy wishes to engage in a cultural war? Fine. They have nothing to offer but a view of mankind as a pitiable wretch. We have the heritage of what human civilization has accomplished and what it is destined to accomplish in the future. We have the power of the human mind to create beauty and to transform the universe. This is, in fact, an unequal battle. Many wars against empire and oligarchy have been lost because they were fought at the wrong level.

The high ground belongs to us. Let us fight accordingly.

[fn_1]. A rainforest shrub which produces psychedelic effects when ingested. [back to text for fn_1]

[fn_2]. Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., “The Wells of Doom,” EIR, Vol. 24, No. 51, Dec. 19, 1997. https://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1997/eirv24n51-19971219/eirv24n51-19971219_012-the_wells_of_doom-lar.pdf. [back to text for fn_2]