Executive Intelligence Review, Volume 47, Number 19, May 8, 2020

- Cover

- Masthead

- EDITORIAL To Overcome Our Civilizational Crisis, We Must Improve the Character of Our People

- PDF edition Table of Contents www.larouchepub.com — Volume 47, Number 19, May 8, 2020

- I. All the Trees May Fall

- Will John Durham Finally Indict John Brennan? And, Will That Avert a New War? by Barbara Boyd

- II. A Return to Physical Economy Schiller Institute Conference on the Internet April 25-26, 2020 Mankind’s Existence Now Depends on the Establishment of a New Paradigm!

- Schiller Institute Conference April 25-26, 2020: Mankind’s Existence Now Depends on the Establishment of a New Paradigm! PANEL 4: The Science of Physical Economy

- Dennis Small LaRouche’s Legacy: Foundation of The Modern Science of Physical Economy

- Yang Yan Franco-Chinese Cooperation in Africa

- Daisuke Kotegawa Failure to Address Cause of 2008 Financial Collapse Caused Public Health Collapse

- Six U.S. Farm Leaders Feed the Future: Eating is a Moral Right

- The Question of the British Empire

- Conference Program

- III. The Principles Which Define Life

- Remarks on Gurwitsch’s Method by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. (1987)

Honor VE Day:

Stop the British Coup

and Drive for World War

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,

Bahnstrasse 4, 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: ©2020 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

To Overcome Our Civilizational Crisis,

We Must Improve the Character of Our People

This is an edited excerpt from the transcript of the Schiller Institute’s April 30, 2020 interview with Helga Zepp-LaRouche, by Harley Schlanger. A video of the full webcast is available. Subheads and embedded links have been added.

Harley Schlanger: Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger from the Schiller Institute. Welcome to our webcast with our founder and President Helga Zepp-LaRouche. Today is April 30, 2020, and we’re in the midst of a continued unfolding of a deepening economic crisis, which may have been triggered by the coronavirus, but has a much longer-standing cause, going back to forty years of neo-liberal policy.

A Growing Food Crisis

The most recent development is the emergence of, not only a worldwide food crisis, but also the danger of shortages in the United States due to plant closures in the meat-packing industry. Helga, this brings to mind some warnings that your husband made many years ago about the attacks on the family farm and the cartelization of food production. The President has now stepped in—what do you think is going to happen?

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: President Trump invoked the National Defense Production Act to save these meat-packing firms. Now this is an aspect of the corona crisis, but it is also an aspect of the breakdown of the neo-liberal system. What happened was that in some facilities of the largest meat-packing firms, some people got infected with the coronavirus. Actually 20 workers and 2 inspectors have died.

These places are now closed down, creating a serious bottleneck, so that some of the hog producing farmers have been forced to—it’s a terrible word to even use in this context—to euthanize their hogs. You may have seen pictures of piles of dead pigs which are being disposed of. In a certain sense, this is a crime—almost a crime against humanity—at a point when millions of people are suffering from malnutrition in Africa and other places. So I think it’s good that Trump stepped in, but that will not solve the problem.

Some of the agricultural leaders in the United States who attended our online Schiller Institute conference over the weekend made the point that Trump’s action only saves the largest meat-packing plants that are part of the problem. If you had a decentralized system with many meat-packing firms all over the country, you could never be hit in such a way, threatening the entire food supply. So while these farm leaders agree that this immediate action is necessary, they know that a transformation and change of the whole system must occur.

This is one sign that shows how insane it is to have “just-in-time” production, not enough storage capacity, and no facilities to process critical food supplies, when combined with an increasing starvation crisis around the world. This was created by the neo-liberal economic system, and this is what it has led us to.

Call for a World Health System

The Schiller Institute has produced a draft program that we call the “ ‘Apollo Mission’ for a World Health System,” which discusses the practical steps for establishing a world health system, a decent health system in every country on this planet.

We are now in the process of producing a similar paper for protection of the world food supply, to put agriculture in all countries of the world on a decent footing. So you should expect that. You should help us in this mobilization, because if the farmers go bankrupt—and many of them are on the absolute verge of bankruptcy—then this will hit every family, every person, and many people will not make it. We already now see that the food banks for the poor don’t have enough food.

This mobilization is an integral part of our effort to intervene in this crisis with the whole package designed by my late husband, Lyndon LaRouche—A New Bretton Woods, the Four Laws, but it also has sub-features, such as the protection of food production in the world. So you should help us distribute this new paper the moment it’s posted on our website.

Schlanger: While this is happening in the United States, a similar thing is happening to farmers all over Europe, who before the coronavirus hit were out in the streets demonstrating. The cartels bring food cheaply from poorer countries, underpricing European farmers. The “just-in-time” system, the neo-liberal system, affects not just food, but almost every aspect of production.

Zepp-LaRouche: Yes, it does. The only solution for the farm sector is to go to parity pricing. The idea of cartelization and cheap production is all wrong: cheaper, cheaper, cheaper—where the farmers aren’t getting even the price they need for their production, much less a decent (but not exorbitant) income to reinvest in their farms. That can only be covered by a parity price, not by subsidies. So we really need to go to a standard in farming that provides the food supply for the whole world in a safe way.

Neo-Con China-Bashing for War Escalates

Schlanger: We’re seeing a continued escalation of the anti-China rhetoric coming from the same, usual suspects: From the Henry Jackson Society, which represents the City of London in Britain, but also from a crew of neo-cons on the American side of the Atlantic. What can you tell us about the British role in this, and then we can look at some of the specifics in terms of the United States?

Zepp-LaRouche: Right now the anti-China hysteria is escalating to a very, very dangerous form, and one can only say that if you paint a country with such black colors, and you spread unrestrained lies, that has only one purpose: preparing an enemy image for the possibility of war, and that is what is at stake here. So people should not be foolish and repeat what has originated with MI5, with MI6, and with the high-level UK official, Tobias Ellwood, formerly the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence, who is currently the chair of the House of Commons Defence Select Committee. He came out on April 26 with an unbelievable statement in the Mail on Sunday, asserting that now is the time to go for a head-on confrontation with China, because they are taking over, that only Great Britain can do it, and that now is the time to do exactly that.

Those sentiments unfortunately are being echoed by a lot of people in the United States who, on the one hand, are trying to deflect from the fact that China did a very decent job in fighting the coronavirus and also seems to be to managing the economic consequences much better than the West, by carrying out the successful lockdown of Wuhan, and then reopening China’s economy, which is getting going again; but on the other hand, blaming China for everything that went wrong, instead of admitting their own mistakes and correcting them. They really are on a rampage against China.

The top of it is really is an April 17 strategy memorandum distributed by the National Republican Senatorial Committee that blames China for the coronavirus crisis and instructs Republican candidates who are running for seats not to defend Trump, but instead orient their campaigns entirely against China.

Geopolitical Thinking Leads to War

This is really very bad. The same thing is occurring on the Democratic Party side: Joe Biden is blaming Trump for being “too soft” on China. Trump put out a statement attacking the GOP memo, but unfortunately not so much because of what it says about China, but for its advice not to defend Trump. Trump is being bombarded by this anti-China propaganda. He’s not quite as bad as some, such as Sen. Lindsey Graham, who basically says that we will make the Chinese pay.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is the top hawk, but Trump himself is already making rhetoric that is not being received well in China, as evidenced by statements from China that the collaboration between the United States and China is of utmost importance. That sentiment was expressed by China’s Consul General in New York, Ambassador Huang Ping, who addressed our Schiller Institute conference on April 25. But naturally, when you have this kind of barrage coming from the United States, articles are appearing in Chinese papers saying that Pompeo is right now a direct threat to world peace.

So this is extremely dangerous, as I said, and it also takes insane forms. People are losing their marbles, like for example, Congressman Tom Cotton, who said there should not be a single Chinese student allowed in the United States to study science, because all they do is steal the secrets and bring them back to China and use them for weapons against the United States! This is just raving nonsense. And this, rather than sending U.S. students to China to cooperate, and to learn something. The Chinese in the meantime have quite on their own developed expertise in some areas where they are becoming, or already are, world leaders.

So this geopolitical thinking is really extremely dangerous! It is exactly the stuff of which world wars were made. We in the Schiller Institute are doing everything possible to overcome that and say that we need a different paradigm, a new paradigm of cooperation among the major countries. That is really what absolutely should be clear to everybody: This anti-China bashing is just a continuation of the Russia-bashing! What else was three years of Russiagate but a big “nothingburger”? Now, it’s China, and it comes from exactly the same sources: The people who are the war party and the people who are doing the coup attempt against Trump.

China-Bashing Targets Trump

Schlanger: I would like you to comment on something that was said to me by a leading Republican: that the anti-China hysteria is actually targetting Trump, because of what Trump represented when he was a candidate; and the targetting is also intended to confuse his base. To what extent do you think that is working? It seems to me that there are a lot of people who are falling for it right now.

Zepp-LaRouche: That was the reason, or one of the major reasons, why this coup attempt against Trump started, to begin with: In 2016, Trump clearly stated that he wanted to rectify U.S. relations with Russia, and at the beginning of his Presidency, he changed from his earlier anti-China campaign rhetoric of 2016, had some very important meetings with President Xi Jinping, and came out of them very positive on China, its history, and his friendship with President Xi Jinping.

The British and Anglo-American geopolitical faction that wants to run the world as a unipolar dictatorship—these people who thought that the end of history had arrived when the Soviet Union collapsed—

they hated that. A lot of what is happening now is really the effort to decouple the United States from China, which would be an economic catastrophe for both, but it is the war party which is targetting that relationship between the United States and China.

Schlanger: Thanks for joining us today Helga, and I’ll see you again next week.

Zepp-LaRouche: I hope so; next week!

EIR Contents

www.larouchepub.com — Volume 47, Number 19, May 8, 2020

Cover This Week

Gage Skidmore

New revelations in the Michael Flynn legal case have the potential to stem the rising attacks against China and explode the continuing coup effort against President Trump.

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

HONOR VE DAY: STOP THE BRITISH COUP AND DRIVE FOR WORLD WAR

2 EDITORIAL

To Overcome Our Civilizational Crisis, We Must Improve the Character of Our People

by Helga Zepp-LaRouche

I. ALL THE TREES MAY FALL

6 Will John Durham Finally Indict John Brennan and, Will That Avert a New War?

by Barbara Boyd

II. A RETURN TO PHYSICAL ECONOMY

Schiller Institute Conference on the Internet

April 25-26, 2020

MANKIND’S EXISTENCE NOW DEPENDS ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEW PARADIGM

PANEL 4

22 Introduction to Conference Panel 4

24 LaRouche’s Legacy: Foundation of the Modern Science of Physical Economy

by Dennis Small

31 Franco-Chinese Cooperation in Africa

by Yang Yan

32 Failure to Address Cause of 2008 Financial Collapse Caused Public Health Collapse

by Daisuke Kotegawa

33 Feed the Future: Eating is a Moral Right

by Six U.S. Farm Leaders

40 Panelists in Dialogue

The Question of the British Empire

43 The Full Conference Program, April 25-26, “Mankind’s Existence Now Depends on the Establishment of a New Paradigm”

III. THE PRINCIPLES WHICH DEFINE LIFE

45 Remarks on Gurwitsch’s Method

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

March 15, 1987

International Online Schiller Institute Conference

April 25-26, 2020

Mankind’s Existence Now Depends on the Establishment of a New Paradigm!

Visit the Schiller Institute web page for

all of the conference videos and supporting material.

ADVERTISEMENT

I. All the Trees May Fall

Will John Durham Finally Indict John Brennan?

And, Will That Avert a New War?

by Barbara Boyd

USAF/Jonathan Lovelady

Gen. Michael Flynn, then Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and John Brennan, then CIA Director (seated, to Flynn’s right), testifying at a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, January 29, 2014.

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

May 1—An all-out battle has been raging just beneath the surface in Washington, D.C., and now its first fruits are coming to the surface in the case of General Michael Flynn. The battle is about whether those officials who conducted and continue to conduct outrageously illegal actions against candidate, and now President, Donald Trump, and the citizens of the world, present and future, will finally be brought to account. Just as pressing is the question of whether such an accounting will mean much if COVID-19 isn’t defeated and economic stability and real economic growth don’t begin to occur.

The President faces two imperatives that will determine whether or not he wins the 2020 election. He has to conquer or substantially mitigate the virus. More daunting, he also has to restart an economy from dead stop. No one, other than the late Lyndon LaRouche, has really thought through such a proposition.

As LaRouche explained as far back as 1980, the idea is to expand the productivity of the economy fast enough to absorb the vast sums which have just been spent on simple survival. This can’t happen by a simple return to where we were before. It requires the types of leaps in productivity which can only come from massive, directed investment in infrastructure, basic research and development, and frontier projects, like fusion power and the space program, while starving the purely predatory holdings of Wall Street and the City of London.

The President is talking about a gigantic program to reindustrialize the United States and large-scale infrastructure together with bringing vital supply chains back from China and other offshore locations, something which will require a great deal of finesse and, most certainly cannot happen under conditions of warlike tensions between the world’s two largest economies. His biggest enemy in this quest is not the Chinese Communist Party. It is the globalist elites, the people actually responsible for gutting the United States who are now out to sabotage any real economic rebalancing and development of the world.

Bringing the virus under control will be a matter of science. And there are huge collaborations going on among the scientists of the world right now to make the new discoveries which will rein in this plague, including vital direct collaborations between U.S. and Chinese scientists, unmediated by the likes of Bill and Melinda Gates.

Much is unknown, and, creativity—a delicate ability to think and reason about the paradoxes of nature, producing new ideas as a result—does not flourish when fear and rage govern the psyche. Think about that the next time you hear the ravers on Fox News who continually indict the Chinese for what Wall Street and the City of London did to our economy, or the next time you side with the liberal and left ravers who have added “incompetent response” to a force of nature, to their ugly hate campaign against the President.

The Obama Administration and other British elite wannabies, like Mike Bloomberg, demolished this nation’s defenses against the virus. Trump had to go to war against the virus and attempt to rebuild the public health sector at the same time. See the article, “Mike Bloomberg’s Destruction of New York’s Virus Defenses,” in the April 10, 2020 issue of EIR.

The April Events

With that political context in mind, let’s look at the recent, apparently discrete “events” of the past days, concerning the 2015-2020 Russiagate jihad against Donald Trump.

On April 15, four footnotes in DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’ December 19, 2019 report on FBI misconduct with respect to the President were declassified and released to Senators Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson. Although normally intelligent, both Senators used the FBI’s ignorant alarm about British agent Christopher Steele’s relationships with Russian oligarchs, expressed in the declassified footnotes, to proclaim that actual Russian interference in the 2016 election was now finally found and proved. Voila! The British intelligence services that ran and/or significantly influenced the ongoing operation against the President are off the hook according to the Senators’ grossly incompetent reasoning and its repetition throughout the Republican blogosphere. Russiagate is alive!

FBI

Andrew McCabe, then FBI Director: “Without Steele, no FISA.”

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

This was followed by the Senate Judiciary Committee release, on April 16, of new documentation of FBI and DOJ misconduct in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants pertaining to Carter Page. This came as the result of the FISA Court finally waking up to the gross deception the FBI and DOJ practiced in procuring those warrants, especially with respect to British agent Christopher Steele. Steele’s dopey and completely fake dossier was the central justification for the Page FISA warrants and much of the Russiagate hoax against Donald Trump. As former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe summarized it to Congress, “without Steele, no FISA.”

Additionally, the FBI and DOJ withheld completely exculpatory information concerning Trump campaign volunteer George Papadopoulos, who repeatedly told MI6 and CIA asset Stefan Halper that there was no Trump-Russia collusion to swing the election. Such a conspiracy, Papadopoulos told Halper, would be treason. Yet, it was a phony second-hand hearsay report of what Papadopoulos allegedly said to the former Australian Ambassador to London, Alexander Downer, himself deeply tied to British intelligence, which the FBI says justified the opening of the entire FBI Crossfire Hurricane investigation of the Trump Campaign.

Among the declassified documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee is a July 12, 2018 letter from DOJ National Security head John Demers, seconded by the FBI, presumably in the form of Director Christopher Wray, lying their butts off about the validity of the FISA applications. These lies were totally exposed by the findings of DOJ Inspector General Horowitz’ report. The FISA court has taken notice of the absolute disparity between the “cover your ass” lies sent to them by Demers and the FBI and Inspector Horowitz’ contrary findings.

The DOJ has now completely disavowed two of the four Page FISA applications and the FISA Court is seeking sequestration of all evidence gathered as the result all of those warrants—an effort which could dramatically impact the legal legitimacy of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s font of evidence in his indictments.

Then, on April 21, 2020, the “unanimous” Senate Intelligence Committee produced a report pronouncing that all that was done against Trump in 2016 was straight and true and that the Russians really did intervene in the 2016 elections in Trump’s favor. As we shall show, below, the only meaning which should be taken from this is that every single Senator on this Committee, Republican and Democrat, is corrupt beyond any redemption. They were witting instruments of the coup, particularly Senator Mark Warner, and have been so from the start.

Left: U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Connecticut; right: DoJ

Left: John H. Durham; right: William Barr, U.S. Attorney General.

CIA

John Brennan, Director of the CIA from 2013 to 2017.

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

The Bombshell

Preceding all of these “events” and actually shaping them, was the bombshell interview given by Attorney General William Barr on April 10 to Fox News’ Laura Ingraham. Barr called Russiagate, “one of the greatest travesties in American history.” What happened to President Trump, Barr told Ingraham, was an investigation “without any basis.”

They started this investigation of his campaign. And even more concerning, actually, is what happened after the campaign. A whole pattern of events while he was president ... to sabotage the presidency ... or at least have the effect of sabotaging the presidency.... And if people broke the law and we can establish that with evidence, they will be prosecuted.

Note, carefully, the Attorney General’s focus. Prosecutor John Durham has expanded his investigation beyond the events of 2016 into the machinations that led to the appointment of Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller in May of 2017. He is reported to be hiring additional staff.

Joseph diGenova, former U.S. Attorney for Washington D.C., has given multiple interviews highlighting Barr’s statements. Based on his sources, diGenova says, John Durham, the prosecutor appointed by Barr to investigate Russiagate’s spies and investigators, has Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan firmly in his cross-hairs. Durham has empaneled a grand jury which is hearing evidence and preparing indictments, charging a criminal conspiracy to violate Donald Trump’s civil rights. diGenova continues to emphasize the operations of the British government as essential to the coup against the President.

Attorney General Barr recognizes that the federal court just down the street from the Justice Department, the District of Columbia District Court, is enemy territory, having been captured through the habitation of Robert Mueller’s corrupt legal assassins during that probe and as the result of the general “Resist” mindset of its judges. This is where the crimes against Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, and Michael Flynn went down and where General Flynn’s attorney, Sidney Powell, continues to expose the raw injustice done to Michael Flynn.

To accomplish actual justice for Michael Flynn, the 33-year U.S. military veteran, Attorney General Barr sent Flynn’s files out to the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri, Jeffrey Jensen, for an independent review of any potential undisclosed exculpatory evidence, bypassing the present Washington D.C. prosecutors. In a filing on April 24, Sidney Powell revealed one of the findings of the independent review, an agreement with Flynn’s former attorneys to keep the non-prosecution agreement concerning Flynn’s son secret so that any future cross-examination and impeachment of Flynn as a government witness would be blinded. This is a straightforward violation of the exculpatory evidence rules enunciated by the Supreme Court in Giglio v. United States.

Entrapment

Other documents released on April 29 document the prep sessions conducted by the top levels of the FBI as they schemed to walk General Flynn into a perjury trap. Troubled by these prep sessions, one of the schemers, reported to be then FBI counterintelligence chief Bill Priestap, tellingly wrote, “What is our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” Rather than being troubled by the pure injustice being worked here, Priestap appears to be motivated by “protecting the institution” of the FBI, should the schemers get caught. If the White House figures out the FBI’s game, Priestap writes, “it will be furious.” Not playing games will “protect the institution.”

CC/MaynardClark

Sally Yates, then U.S. Deputy Attorney General, testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, May 6, 2019.

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

Priestap’s notes refer to two possible investigative routes for the interview: getting Flynn to admit to a violation of the Logan Act or setting him up in a perjury trap. It is difficult to believe that senior levels of the FBI actually believed that the centuries old Logan Act, used in one indictment in the 19th century and generally held to be unconstitutional, could be credibly resurrected and used to prosecute the incoming National Security Adviser to the President of the United States without someone suggesting brain transplants for this idea’s proponents. Yet, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates argued exactly this bizarre theory to White House Counsel when visiting the White House, after Flynn’s January 24, 2017 FBI interview, to procure his firing.

Finally, on April 30, we learned that the FBI Washington field office, the on-the-ground investigators in the Flynn investigation, were closing the case in January of 2017 because they found no credible evidence that Flynn had any illicit relationship to the Russians. We also know from the Horowitz Report that in January of 2017, the FBI was being told by Christopher Steele’s primary source that the dirty dossier at the center of Russiagate was absolute bunk, a made-up British intelligence hoax. Nonetheless, Peter Strzok, acting on orders from the “7th floor,” namely, Comey and McCabe, said “stop,” keep it open. We know from the Page/Stzok email correspondence that “Potus,” namely Barack Obama, had been read in on everything they were doing.

The reasons for Flynn’s targeting are what is most disturbing here. The FBI had FISA intercepts of calls between the Russian Ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, and Flynn at the end of December of 2016, apparently discussing Obama’s expulsion of Russian diplomats and new sanctions Obama had placed on Russia, all based on the entirely bogus claim that Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election on behalf of Donald Trump. The actions Obama took included placing a cyberweapon inside Russian infrastructure. According to the consensus news reporting, Flynn counseled the Russians not to “overreact,” to wait until the new Administration reviewed the matter. The classified transcript was obviously flagged by Obama’s intelligence crew, furious that such a conversation had ever taken place. Yet, the conversation between Flynn and Kislyak, if accurately reported, may have saved the world from a face to face Russian/American nuclear confrontation.

Obama

Barack Obama absolutely despised Michael Flynn for calling out and exposing the fact that Obama armed ISIS and Al-Qaeda in Syria in order to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad. As far back as 2014, MI6’s Sir Richard Dearlove and CIA/MI6 asset Stefan Halper, key players in the coup against Donald Trump, outrageously smeared Michael Flynn as a compromised Russian asset. They lied that Flynn had fallen for a KGB honey trap when he engaged in a short discussion about Russian intelligence history with a Russian historian, Svetlana Lokhova at Dearlove’s Cambridge Security Initiative. They hated the fact that Flynn thought Russia and the United States could cooperate in defeating the very terrorists Obama and his British masters were arming.

Obama forced Flynn out as Defense Intelligence Agency Director in 2014, fired him, and warned Donald Trump, after the election, not to hire him. Trump made Flynn National Security Advisor, knowing that the intelligence community was rotten. Flynn knew where the skeletons were in the closets, and his charge was to reorganize and right the ship.

Moreover, as opposed to most of the Trump team, Flynn knew the world of intelligence and how to access it. He was bound to find out everything about the 2015-2016 CIA/FBI illegalities against Donald Trump. He had to be gotten out of the way even if the desperate pretext was a centuries old unconstitutional statute. As the result of the FBI interrogation of Flynn at the White House, the follow-up visit by Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates screeching about the Logan Act, and accompanying orchestrated press hysteria, Flynn resigned from the Trump Administration. The reason provided to the media was that Flynn had lied to Vice President Mike Pence about his conversations with Ambassador Kislyak.

We already knew from previous disclosures that Flynn’s new attorney Sidney Powell had forced from a kicking and screaming DOJ and FBI, that Deputy Director Andrew McCabe practiced and rehearsed calling Flynn to set up an interview about what Flynn said to Kislyak. Relax, you don’t need an attorney, McCabe told Flynn. He indicated it was an informal visit. Both agents who went to see Flynn at the White House were instructed to make the interview jovial and relaxed, not to alert Flynn to any danger.

White House/Pete Souza

President Obama, announcing James Comey (right), as his nominee to succeed Robert Mueller (left) as FBI Director, June 21, 2013.

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

We already knew, according to Jim Comey’s snide and obnoxious performance before a fawning Resist audience at New York’s 92nd Street Y on December 9, 2018, that he sent the agents in without following normal procedures for an FBI investigative team entering the White House. Comey, congratulating himself on his sly cleverness, said he thought he could take advantage of the “chaos” of the incoming Trump Administration. He was doing something he would not “have gotten away with” in the Bush or Obama administrations. That line got Comey appreciative chortles from the fawning audience at the 92nd Street Y. Flynn, Comey reiterated, had no idea why his agents were coming.

Comey and Other Lowlifes

We also already knew that FBI agents Joe Pientka and Peter Strzok returned from their White House interview of Flynn saying that they did not think Flynn was lying. Per their instructions, they did not advise him of his right to an attorney, they did not advise him he was in legal jeopardy, they did not provide the warning normally used by FBI agents that telling a lie or being less than forthcoming in the interview could result in a prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 1001, they did not show him the transcript of the intercepts. All of these things are standard procedures for the FBI under our Constitution. They are protections provided to even the most violent criminals.

We also knew the original FBI 302 of the interview, the report normally written immediately after such an interview occurs, has gone missing—disappeared—is nowhere to be found. Instead, there were various versions of the 302 which had been “edited” by such as Lisa Page.

FBI

James Comey, as FBI Director in 2016.

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

In pursuit of an initial major scalp, Robert Mueller went after Flynn full Torquemada. He threatened him with an indictment under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. He threatened to put Flynn’s son in jail for years. Mounting legal fees from Flynn’s white shoe D.C. law firm, Covington and Burling, bankrupted Flynn and forced him to sell his house to pay legal fees. To save his son, Flynn pled to making a false statement in his interview with the FBI at the White House.

More is coming, according to Flynn’s attorney, Sidney Powell. In a coup run largely by arrogant lawyers, who are sure that they are protected, there is a paper trail. Powell is now asking Judge Emmett Sullivan to exonerate Flynn based on outrageous government misconduct. Flynn is also seeking to withdraw his guilty plea. The strong public reaction and revulsion about what has been disclosed, as documents roll in from St. Louis, resulted in Judge Sullivan throwing a snit fit on Thursday, ordering that no more documents be disclosed on the public court docket until the entire trove of declassified documents arrives from St. Louis. The Flynn fix is getting away from them in the court of public opinion.

Press reports also indicate that John Durham is investigating the DOJ leak of classified intercepts of Kislyak’s conversations with Mike Flynn to long-time CIA scribe David Ignatius of the Washington Post, a felony and a critical overt act in the conspiracy to set up and destroy General Michael Flynn. Ignatius’ column, on January 12, set off a storm of media stories about Trump, Russia, and, of all things, the Logan Act.

If what Joseph diGenova’s sources tell him is true, and there is every indication that it is, all the trees in the forest could fall here, including those literally owned by the bankers, lawyers, and spies who surround the Queen. Among the casualties would be the Obama-Biden “legacy” and the massive international private spy apparatus presently engaged in overthrowing Donald Trump and fomenting a new confrontation with China.

Who is Christopher Steele?

Most Americans know that Christopher Steele is the “former” head of MI6’s Russia Desk who wrote the pornographic and salacious dossier—now proved beyond all reasonable doubt to be completely fake—about Donald Trump and Russia.

Steele’s “dossier” was paid for and circulated by the Clinton Campaign and the Democratic National Committee, using the Perkins Coie law firm and its lawyers Marc Elias and Michael Sussman, as very active cutouts. The initial goal of what was a British directed full-spectrum information warfare operation conducted against a presidential campaign, was to smear Donald J. Trump as a Manchurian candidate answerable to Vladimir Putin, in order to hand a landslide electoral victory to Hillary Clinton.

The fakery of Steele’s dossier was absurdly apparent on its face. It alleges that Putin offered Carter Page—an eccentric volunteer to Trump’s campaign who had previously testified for the United States government against a real Russian espionage ring in the United States—a 20% share in Russia’s main energy company in return for advocating the lifting of sanctions. It claims that Putin had put a top-secret dossier concerning Hillary Clinton exclusively into the hands of the Russian government’s public press spokesman. It features Trump lawyer and would be New York taxi medallion king, Michael Cohen, somehow directing sophisticated hackers in Prague where he flew to meet them. In fact, Cohen had never been in Prague and appears to be about as ignorant as most boomers on the subject of computers.

Here is Matt Taibbi, writing in the November 8, 2019 issue of Rolling Stone, whose eagle eye for comic absurdity is his rightful claim to fame, concerning Steele’s dirty dossier:

Steele’s most boffo-sensational charge was Russians having a tape of Trump getting off to prostitutes peeing on a Moscow hotel bed once slept in by Barack and Michelle Obama. This, he said, “enabled” the Russians to blackmail Trump “if they so wished.” However, per Steele, Putin chose instead to offer a “regular flow” of “lucrative” real estate deals that Trump for “some unknown reason” kept declining, even though Steele simultaneously reported Trump was “exploring the real estate sector in Petersburg as well as Moscow.”

More “sophisticated,” if emotionally blocked, former intelligence analysts also immediately debunked Steele’s dossier as a fake, incapable of passing any smell test. They pointed out that believing the dossier required believing that the U.S. and the British had some 32 assets deep within the Russian government whom they were willing to expose through Christopher Steele. The claim of 32 assets and a willingness to roll up any asset close to Putin provoked belly laughs in these circles. Lee Smith in The Federalist makes a compelling case that nothing in the Steele report has any factual or real Russian basis; it is simply all fake and completely made up, using Russian and Ukrainian language sources about actual public events and then embellishing them.

Domusrulez

Sir Richard Dearlove, head of MI6, the British Secret Intelligence Service, 1996-2004.

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

A Corrupt and Complicit Intelligence Community

In short, the only reason why any intelligent person would swallow this nonsense is because important or very rich people told them to swallow it and they, the allegedly intelligent swallowers, had, a very long time ago, been bought and had obediently been swallowing similar crap for years.

Steele’s preposterous “dossier,” the equally fake claim that Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and John Podesta, and that Russia, through a clickbait internet marketing firm’s low budget Facebook ad campaign, swung the 2016 election to Donald Trump, nonetheless, became the foundational propaganda elements for the hate campaign, ongoing for three years now, against Donald Trump.

As our readers know, the WikiLeaks DNC documents have been demonstrated to be the product of a leak, not an internet hack, by the forensic investigations of former NSA technical director Bill Binney and the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

Similarly, Robert Mueller’s indictment of Concord Management and Concord Consulting was dismissed by the DOJ, just days before trial, on March 16, 2020. Mueller had charged Concord with the ridiculously small-bore clickbait internet marketing campaign conducted by the Russian Internet Research Agency. As Aaron Maté and others have amply demonstrated, this campaign could have had little or no impact on the election, despite the massive effort by the Senate Intelligence Committee and Robert Mueller to gigantically inflate its significance.

To the surprise of Mueller’s prosecutors, Concord had showed up to defend itself in U.S. court. The Justice Department’s face-saving press release dismissing the case claimed that trial would result in the Russians being able to “weaponize” information produced in discovery concerning U.S. intelligence methods. If you know the real story, you might ask, what intelligence methods? Reading and following the British tabloid press? Bellicose claims that the Internet Research Agency was some nefarious Russian psychological warfare weapon capable of massively swaying public opinion had been featured in the British press and MI6 narratives for years, well prior to their being imported into the Russiagate narrative.

One part of the story of the crimes flowing from Christopher Steele and his British sponsors can be told by focusing on the revelations contained in DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’ December 2019 report, the recently declassified documents which emerged in its wake, and other documents which have resulted from Freedom of Information Act litigation. Damning as this part of the story is, however, it is only a small aspect of the British assault and does not explain why John Brennan has emerged as a significant target of John Durham or why two U.S. Senators who should know better would mistake the Russians, the target, for the actual perpetrators, the British.

Christopher Steele has been an FBI informant since October of 2013 in counterintelligence operations targeting Russia. Steele’s U.S. business partner since 2010 has been Fusion GPS, a Washington, D.C. opposition research and intelligence quango run by former reporters for the Wall Street Journal Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch with rich connections to the Obama White House, the DOJ, and other intelligence entities, and to a long line of journalists who make their money as scribes for intelligence leaks from the intelligence community.

For example, Neil King, Jr., who works for Fusion is married to Shailagh Murray, Barack Obama’s senior policy advisor. Murray had previously worked for years for Joe Biden. Nellie Ohr, who worked for Fusion GPS on the Trump operation, and is a former analyst for the CIA with clearances, is married to Bruce Ohr, who, at the time these operations took place, was the fourth most powerful person at the DOJ.

Most of the key participants in the early phases of the coup had worked on Russian organized crime for decades—not to clean it up but to utilize it as a blackmail and smear mechanism against Vladimir Putin. A big part of this trade was the recruitment of Russian oligarchs to British, NATO, and U.S. intelligence operations. It is noteworthy that Glenn Simpson, then a reporter for the Wall Street Journal, wrote his first smear on Paul Manafort as a Russian agent way back in 2007. Paul Manafort’s relations with Ukraine’s Party of the Regions represented a new and unpredictable player on the field. He had to be smeared, tailed, and eliminated.

By all accounts, Fusion was formally hired by the DNC and Clinton in late March 2016. The Trump/Russia narrative began to flow through the press that month, right after the hiring. During the summer of 2016, the press was fed stories about Trump volunteer Carter Page coming right out of Steele’s dirty dossier. At the same time, the DNC’s Ukrainian nationalist, Alexandra Chalupa, was working with Ukrainian and private intelligence operatives, Yahoo’s Michael Isikoff, and the same group of mainstream media Christopher Steele was briefing to smear Trump Campaign manager Paul Manafort as a Russian operative. Steele has testified that his initial brief was also to target and destroy Manafort.

courtesy

Alexandra Chalupa

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

Both Alexandra Chalupa and Christopher Steele had been key operatives in the U.S./British 2014 coup in Ukraine, with Steele consulting frequently with the U.S. case officer for that fascist coup, Victoria Nuland, at the State Department. Chalupa and her sister, Andrea Chalupa, worked with Ukrainian fascist organizations in the United States, U.S. and British intelligence, and Ukrainian fascists in Ukraine on social media and cyberoperations supporting the coup. In 2016, she made multiple trips to the Obama White House, meeting with the Trump impeachment “whistleblower,” an aide to Joe Biden. Biden himself became Ukraine’s modern-day viceroy after the coup.

In June 2016, Steele handed a version of his dossier to his long-time FBI handler, Michael Gaeta, who was then working at the U.S. Embassy in Rome. That meeting was brokered by Victoria Nuland. In June and July, Steele traveled to Washington and met with Bruce Ohr, Glenn Simpson, Michael Sussman of Perkins Coie, and a bevy of Clinton-controlled journalists to whom he shopped his dossier. Sussman was the former head of the DOJ’s cybercrime unit and still maintained multiple contacts with the DOJ. That’s how the incestuous revolving door in the Washington swamp works.

Setting the Stage

In August, in a staged “emergency” briefing during the summer recess, John Brennan shopped Steele’s dossier about Trump and Russia to the Gang of Eight members of Congress—those allowed to receive top secret intelligence briefings. Brennan has testified that he received a handoff of documents from the highest levels of British intelligence, hand delivered to him and then hand delivered by Brennan, in turn, to the Obama White House. Senator Harry Reid then began pressing the FBI as to whether it was investigating Trump’s links to Russia, publicizing his letter of concern to the Bureau, and adding to the Trump/Russia legend.

In September and October, Steele traveled to Washington again, this time holding meetings and briefings at the State Department and with the same salon of journalists from CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the New Yorker, Michael Isikoff from Yahoo and David Corn from Mother Jones. Both Isikoff and Corn published stories in October based on Steele’s briefings, stories which were widely amplified by the Clinton Campaign. By now, different versions of his dossier had been planted with the CIA, the FBI, other intelligence agencies, the Congress, and the White House. Other than Isikoff and Corn, however, Steele’s dodgy dossier was judged just too smelly and dodgy as a whole for even the rabid mainstream media to publish in full.

Not so, Jim Comey’s Crossfire Hurricane team at the FBI and Obama’s Justice Department. In October of 2016, the FBI used Steele’s dirty dossier as the substance of its probable cause showing for a FISA surveillance warrant on former Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page. They used Steele’s standing as the former head of MI6’s Russia desk and as a reliable FBI partner in spy games with Russia to sell his crap. The FBI fired Steele cosmetically in November after his activities with journalists had become just too publicly obvious and after he disclosed his relationship to the FBI to his media salon. But they immediately set up a back channel to Steele through Bruce Ohr to continue the relationship. Steele reported his “findings” to Ohr, who, in turn, reported them to the FBI.

In its four applications to spy on Carter Page, which continued through the summer of 2017, the FBI didn’t tell the Court that it knew that Steele was collaborating with journalists to smear Trump and it only obliquely referenced, in a footnote, the political auspices of Steele’s opposition research. The FBI never told the court that Steele’s work was being paid for by Hillary Clinton and the DNC. These, as we shall see, were only the more minor deceptions here.

Under FISA’s two-hop provisions, the Page FISA surveillance created an open microphone into Donald Trump’s campaign, the transition, and the first months of the Administration. Under FISA, surveillance is allowed on the surveillance target, anyone the target communicates with, and anyone that second person communicates with.

Left: UN/Paulo Filgueiras; right: Wikipedia Commons

Left: Alexander Downer, British/Australian intelligence asset; right: Stefan Halper, FBI informant.

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

The Senate Judiciary Committee release makes clear that the FBI withheld exculpatory information from Papadopoulos which undermined the Trump/Russia collusion claim at the center of the Carter Page FISA application. Papadopoulos, whose encounters with British/Australian intelligence asset Alexander Downer were used to justify the opening of Crossfire Hurricane, repeatedly told Stefan Halper, the FBI/CIA/MI6 informant seeking to entrap him, that the Trump Campaign was not involved with the Russians in any way and that the collaboration between Trump and Russia, thrown out to him as bait by Halper, would amount to “treason.”

The Unexpected, Trump Wins

Following Trump’s completely unanticipated November 2016 victory over Clinton, Steele and his highly placed British intelligence partners, Sir Andrew Wood and Sir Richard Dearlove, leaked his dirty dossier to Senator John McCain and McCain’s associate, long time State Department and National Endowment for Democracy anti-Putin ideologue David Kramer. Kramer in turn, leaked it to a whole new round of journalists including Buzzfeed’s Ken Bensinger.

In a pre-staged scheme, Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and FBI Director James Comey used Buzzfeed’s possession of the dossier both to confront Trump with its salacious contents (Comey calling this his “J. Edgar Hoover moment”) and to greenlight the publication of its filthy, fake allegations to the world just ahead of the new President’s inauguration. They claimed to the President that they were giving him a heads up about something about to be published. By tipping off Buzzfeed to the fact that the President had been briefed, they gave Buzzfeed a public interest “news hook” for publishing Steele’s pornographic spy drama.

At the same time, Steele’s fake dosser made it, in abbreviated and classified form, into the intelligence community’s infamous January 2017 “assessment” that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 election in support of Donald Trump. Christopher Steele’s smelly dirty trick sits right in the middle of this much cited “assessment” by the vaunted U.S. intelligence community. Since it became patently obvious that the dossier was an MI6 hoax, the FBI and CIA have been accusing each other of being responsible for putting Steele’s crap in the ICA, rather than admitting that they were duped by the Brits, Brennan, and Comey and that they are idiots whose incompetence and cowardice constitute a significant U.S. security vulnerability.

John McCain, the compliant war monger responsible for the Buzzfeed leak, used Steele’s bogus claims to assert that Russia’s intervention into the 2016 election constituted an “act of war” justifying military mobilization of NATO and economic warfare measures. And, British toady Barack Obama acted on this, expelling Russian diplomats and instituted new sanctions, including, by all reports, installing a cyberweapon in Russian infrastructure.

DOJ Inspector General Horowitz found that, in addition to lying to the FISA Court about who was paying for the British dirty trick in the U.S., the FBI knew that Carter Page was a long-term asset of the CIA who had been reporting all of his contacts with the Russians to the agency. FBI Agent Kevin Kleinsmith went so far as to forge the CIA report to the FBI about Page’s CIA pedigree in order to create a fake FBI record saying the CIA didn’t have a relationship to Page. Kleinsmith has been referred by Horowitz for criminal prosecution.

LBJ Library/Jay Godwin

James Clapper, Obama’s Director of National Intelligence.

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

Steele’s Source Says, There’s No There, There

The FBI also didn’t tell the FISA Court that it knew that Steele had appeared at the State Department for an arranged briefing of many officials in October of 2016, and that State Department official Katherine Kavalec told the FBI that Steele told her he had an election deadline for widespread publicity of his dossier and was absolutely desperate to achieve it. Kavalec also told the FBI that one of Steele’s essential conspiracy theories, that the Trump Campaign and Russians were working a scheme out of the Russian consulate in Miami, was flat out false. There is no Russian consulate in Miami. Both Steele’s statements to Bruce Ohr, that he would do anything to defeat Donald Trump, and his statement to Kavalec about impacting the election, were never reported to the FISA court.

Most startling of all, by January of 2017, the FBI had also interviewed Steele’s primary source, who told them that he had no sub-sources as Steele had claimed, just friends with whom he discussed politics and world events, and that what he told Steele was barroom gossip and hearsay stories compiled over drinks. Steele’s source said that he did not know that Steele would use what he told Steele in intelligence reports, and that Steele vastly exaggerated what he told him. In short, the main source told the FBI, that Steele’s dossier was a pile of smoking crap, way back in the early months of 2017, before Robert Mueller was appointed to reinvent and legitimize the Trump/Russia myth using methods of legal terrorism.

The FBI had also been told that the Pee Tape was an outright fabrication by its putative author, Sergei Millian, who is Person 1 in the Horowitz report. There is an ongoing controversy about whether Millian was a low-level Russian asset, or a part of the MI6/CIA/FBI complex of informants deployed against Trump.

The now-declassified footnotes touted by Senators Grassley and Johnson do not say that Christopher Steele’s dossier is provably Russian disinformation, as they claim. All the footnotes say is that the FBI was concerned because Steele was reaching out to Russian oligarchs in 2015 and was a potential target for Russian disinformation. But, as we will show in greater detail below, reaching out to Russian oligarchs and using them to play the Great Game is Steele’s business. In fact, he publicizes that fact. Steele’s bogus claims about Michael Cohen’s trip to Prague were also identified, in the same FBI document, as possible Russian disinformation, probably to divert from the fact that Steele’s claims were so outrageously false.

Instagram/realdonaldtrump

George Papadopoulos (fourth to Trump’s right), in a meeting with the Trump Campaign’s Foreign Policy Team, March 13, 2016.

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

The same footnotes also state that Person 1, Sergei Millian, the guy responsible for Steele’s pee tape claims, is suspected of being involved with Russian intelligence, and may have infiltrated Steele’s network. This is something of a problem since we now know that it’s really not likely that Steele had any “network,” at least not the one he claimed in his Trump investigations. Millian pursued a relationship with George Papadopoulos, beginning in the summer of 2016, in which he offered Papadopoulos various business opportunities financed by “rich Russians not under sanctions,” but, seemingly, only if Papadopoulos was going to go to work in the Trump Administration. This sounds much more, in context, like a CIA/FBI/MI6 low level entrapment operation than a sophisticated Russian cultivation.

'Resist' Emerges Full Born

Following the President’s inauguration, George Soros, Tom Steyer, Pierre Omidyar, and a host of other Silicon Valley billionaires got together to fund Steele’s further activities. They threw millions into “The Democracy Integrity Project” (TDIP) and “Advance Democracy Inc.” (ADI), both led by Senator Diane Feinstein’s former chief of staff at the Senate Intelligence Committee, Daniel Jones. According to Jones, Clinton campaign manager John Podesta directed donors to Jones, and TDIP was up and running as of January of 2017. ADI came along in 2018 when Senator Chuck Grassley began asking questions about TDIP. Jones’ group served as a hub throughout the ensuing operations against the President, feeding daily fake news bulletins out to CNN, the Washington Post, the New York Times, ProPublica, McClatchy, and PBS, among others, and, also to Jones’ former employer, the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee.

Now let’s talk about the Senate Intelligence Committee and its April 21 Russiagate whitewash.

Following Trump’s election, Obama and friends scrambled to use their surveillance powers under Executive Order 12333 to suck up everything they could in order to scandalize the incoming administration. Obama had created broad dissemination of classified NSA intercepts throughout the vast private-contractor and multi-agency intelligence community in an Executive Order signed on January 3, 2017, making leaks extremely difficult to trace. Most of the vacuum cleaner operation, inadvertently disclosed by former defense official Evelyn Farkas in a March 2017 interview with MSNBC, landed at the Senate Intelligence Committee.

To emphasize, by at least January of 2017, Michael Horowitz states, the FBI and the coup plotters already knew the Steele reports, the backbone of this entire legal atrocity, were a complete fake. Now, the President was sitting in the White House, with all the powers of discovery that a President has to find out exactly who and what was attacking him.

Trump allies like Congressman Devin Nunes, had already started asking hard questions about what happened in 2016. This is why James Comey set out on his months long quest to frame the President up on an obstruction of justice charge—the top echelon of the Justice Department and FBI having given its playbook a trial run in the frame-up and elimination of Michael Flynn. This game only ended when the President fired Comey in May of 2017 and the putschists answered by orchestrating the appointment of Robert Mueller.

Mueller perfected his terroristic prosecutorial chops in the 1984-1988 prosecution of Lyndon LaRouche, and the cover-up conducted on behalf of the murderers of September 11, 2001. His sole real charge as Special Counsel was to cover up and legitimize all that had just occurred, while terrorizing any potential institutional supporters of the Presidency, threatening anyone who might support Trump with the prospect of bankruptcy by legal fee and years in prison.

C-SPAN

Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), Vice-Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

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

Mark Warner’s Perfidies

Senator Mark Warner, the Vice-Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, played an especially active role in the orchestration of the coup. In mid-February of 2017, D.C. Attorney Adam Waldman was representing Christopher Steele, Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. This highly conflicted representation bears much further investigation.

Assange was negotiating to mitigate the damage from WikiLeaks fortuitous possession of all of the CIA’s main hacking tools and offering to provide definitive evidence that the Russian government did not hack the DNC or John Podesta, in exchange for his freedom. According to the detailed reporting of John Solomon, Senator Warner and James Comey deliberately blew up the Assange negotiations despite substantial pushback from David Laufman, the DOJ’s counterintelligence chief, who viewed a deal as essential to the national security of the United States.

When the negotiations collapsed, the Justice Department moved immediately to silence Assange, beginning its espionage investigation right then, in 2017. The idea is to kill him at London’s Belmarsh prison where he is housed now, or later upon extradition if he is sent to the U.S. Assange knows that the Russians did not hack the DNC and he knows how WikiLeaks got the DNC and Podesta documents and can prove what he knows.

In March of 2017, it was also Senator Mark Warner who asked for a copy of the classified Carter Page FISA warrant, which was sent to him and then promptly leaked by the Senate Intelligence Committee security chief James Wolfe, to Ali Watkins of the New York Times and others, resulting in a series of sensational new news stories forever crippling Carter Page and continuing the legend of Russian control of President Trump.

Wolfe was caught and indicted. But, instead of being outraged by Wolfe’s felonious leak of classified information, the Senate Intelligence Committee lined up to support him in a sweetheart plea deal worked out by then U.S. Attorney Jessie Lieu and the “Resist” forces presently occupying the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Imagine if that prosecution had gone forward and Wolfe began to talk about what actually happened, something his attorneys threatened before the DOJ caved and U.S. Senators formed a chorus singing Wolfe’s praises.

Finally, the Senate Intelligence Committee’s Russiagate whitewash had, as a key contributor, Popily Inc., the Austin, Texas company better known as New Knowledge. Daniel Jones’ ADI and TDIP paid $485,000 in 2018 to New Knowledge, along with $747,608 to a British firm controlled by Christopher Steele, and $2,010,317 to Bean LLC, the shell company that controls Fusion GPS, according to documents reviewed by the Daily Caller. New Knowledge was famously implicated in running a false flag operation against Roy Moore in the 2018 Alabama Senate race. The company imitated a Russian botnet to imply that Moore was controlled by the Russians.

Now, the Deeper Christopher Steele Story

Shortly after Trump’s election, Steele and his British sponsors began erasing their trail. In a recent deposition given in a libel suit against Steele in Britain by the owners of Russia’s Alfa Bank, Steele testified that he obliterated all his notes and recordings with his primary source way back in December of 2016.

At the same time, British intelligence was delivering an “assessment” to the incoming Trump Administration indicating that Steele was an unreliable agent who had gone rogue. The head of Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) spy agency, Robert Hannigan, who was deeply involved in the British effort to defeat Trump, suddenly and unexpectedly announced his retirement in January of 2017. MI6 provided the FBI’s Bill Priestap with a derogatory assessment of Steele in the early months of 2017, on condition that Priestap not share it or attribute it.

GCHQ © Crown Copyright 2016

Robert Hannigan, Director of Britain’s GCHQ spy agency until January 2017.

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

In short, Steele was being set up as the designated fall guy for the British operation against Trump at the same time that he was being handsomely rewarded for assuming this role through the largesse of the Daniel Jones/Democratic Party operatives in the United States and various British benefactors.

We have been probing Steele’s role in British intelligence and the British role in the coup against Trump ever since Steele’s dirty, flaky dossier first emerged in public view. See, for example, the roundup in my article, “The British Come Out of the Shadows,” published in EIR, January 18, 2019. Here is a short summary of our findings in their strategic context.

The British Russiagate Attack:

Background and Synopsis

In or around 2006, when Steele still headed the Russia desk at MI6, the British launched a covert effort to unseat Putin in Russia itself. The British services, which run NATO, together with the CIA, had collaborated since Putin was first elected in 2000 in a series of color revolutions in the former East Bloc beginning with Georgia in 2003, followed by Ukraine in 2004, and then Kyrgyzstan in 2005. The infrastructure for these revolts mainly involved funds from the National Endowment for Democracy, the British Foreign Office, the State Department, George Soros’ Open Society operations, the Smith-Richardson Foundation, and similar intelligence quangos.

The opening event in this new phase of the anti-Putin crusade was the staged assassination of Alexander Litvinenko. Steele was the case officer for this Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) defector who worked for exiled billionaire Russian oligarch Boris Berezovsky, a bitter Putin foe. Litvinenko was poisoned with radioactive polonium in 2006 and broadcast a death bed statement, blasted worldwide, blaming Putin for his murder.

Litvinenko’s death bed movie was produced by former Soros employee Andrew Goldfarb, the British PR firm Bell Pottinger (notorious for its fake Al-Qaeda films in the public relations lead-up to the Iraq war), and Christopher Steele. Litvinenko and Berezovsky coined the legend that Putin ran a mafia state when, in fact, Berezovsky himself was deeply involved in Russian organized crime. Litvinenko’s father insists that it was Berezovsky who killed his son.

Otherwise, Steele’s two mentors at MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove and Sir John Scarlett, were found to be deeply involved in the intelligence hoaxes concerning Saddam Hussein’s “weapons of mass destruction” by British investigators. It is to be recalled that David Kelly—the key whistleblower who caused the investigations into Tony Blair’s “sexed up” Iraq dossiers produced by Dearlove and Scarlett and sold to the Bush Administration—ended up dead in what many saw as a retaliatory murder. Steele formally left MI6 when Scarlett resigned in 2009, the same year his first wife died.

Steele founded his private intelligence service, Orbis, in 2009, forming a business relationship almost immediately with Fusion GPS in the United States. Among the specializations listed at one time on Orbis’ website were “creating public opinion groundswells” and “delivering targeted political campaigns.” An equally important British state propaganda arm was set up in 2009, the Institute for Statecraft of NATO information warfare wacko Chris Donnelly, with which Steele’s operation is deeply intertwined.

Steele himself described his business model as providing intelligence services to warring Russian oligarchs, famous for suing each other in British courts while parking their ill-gotten gains with the City of London and other British offshore havens. This, of course, is an ideal gambit for both gathering intelligence and running operations against the Russian state, where the government exists in uneasy tension with the privateer oligarchs who looted the state following the fall of the Soviet Union.

Left: cc/Mariusz Kubik; right : Gage Skidmore

Left: Victoria Nuland; right: Joseph Biden

A Right Sector torchlight parade in Kiev, Ukraine, January 1, 2014.

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

Back to Obama

Meanwhile, back in the United States in 2009, Barack Obama’s infowar guru, Cass Sunstein, was exploring how to create “cognitive dissonance” based on the theories of the mind of British philosophical oligarch Karl Popper, in order to stamp out the “conspiracy theories” which emerged in the wake of the 2008 financial collapse. Sunstein is the husband of Obama’s crazed UN Ambassador, Samantha Power, the 2016-2017 serial unmasker of classified intercepts of Trump supporters and other opponents of Hillary Clinton. Sunstein proposed aggressive profiling and intervention into internet chat rooms in order to control the public narrative and silence potential opponents by “infiltrating” their minds. The conspiracy theories, he said, must be targeted and “neutralized”?—accounts questioning the accepted narratives concerning the murder of 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001 and truthful accounts about who benefited in the financial bailout of Wall Street and the City of London in 2008-2009.

The NATO/British/Obama infowar project was first tested under warfare conditions in the Ukraine coup of 2014. The upshot of that coup was to install a U.S./British client state on Russia’s border whose security apparatus was controlled by neo-Nazis who waged a genocidal war of ethnic cleansing against the ethnic Russians living in Ukraine’s south and east.

Joe Biden served as the American viceroy for Ukraine, following the coup, assisted by the cast of characters who all appeared to testify against the President in his impeachment, including the so-called whistleblower who worked both with Biden and with Alexandra Chalupa. As previously noted, Christopher Steele was a major operative in this coup, providing over 400 intelligence memos supporting the coup to Victoria Nuland and her State Department putschists.

This convergence of Alexandra Chalupa and Christopher Steele is worthy of much further investigation. Journalist George Eliason, writing from Ukraine, continues to insist that the Ukrainian state anti-Russian security hacking group, Shaltai Boltai (working with Chalupa, CrowdStrike, and Atlantic Council operative Dimitri Alperovitz) was responsible for the hoax attributing the DNC and Podesta “hacks” to the Russians, along with a host of similar cyber operations in 2016.

Eliason says the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) are right about the DNC WikiLeaks documents being a leak, rather than a hack. But, he says the rest of the cyber-operations attributed to the Russians in 2016 were Ukrainian, not Russian. He says there was a Ukraine server involved in this, as noted by President Trump in his now famous conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. That server was destroyed by former Ukrainian President and U.S./British asset Petro Poroshenko when he left office in 2019.

Congress’ Anglophilic Useful Fools

The fact that both houses of Congress allowed the Ukrainian atrocity—the installation of a neo-Nazi government committed to genocide against half of its own citizenry—to be called the “revolution of dignity” throughout the impeachment proceedings against President Trump was, perhaps, the biggest signal of just how outright fraudulent and corrupt the whole impeachment, made-for-TV spectacle, actually was.

Out of the Ukraine coup, and a perceived Western failure to sell the beauty of neo-Nazis killing citizens of their own nation, a whole new series of institutions was born to conduct offensive information warfare against Russia, or anyone else viewed as a threat to “the rules-based international order.” NATO’s Strategic Communications Centre went into full-bore operation. The British created the 77th Military Brigade to disrupt and infiltrate internet sites throughout Europe. The Information Warfare Initiative was launched out of the Center for European Policy Analysis in the U.S. And the British military launched the Integrity Initiative in conjunction with the Institute for Statecraft.

Under the journalist “cluster” concept of the Integrity Initiative, major journalists in the U.S., Britain, and Europe were recruited to write propaganda as dictated by NATO and the British Foreign Office. President Obama’s 2016 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) created a similar anti-Russia propaganda font stateside, the Global Engagement Center, in the U.S. State Department. It coordinated with the British Integrity Initiative, NATO StratCom, the Center for Naval Analysis, the Center for European Policy Analysis, and the Atlantic Council. Thus, an apparatus was created just like Operation Mockingbird, the collaboration of intelligence agencies, compromised politicians, and the national news media that employed over 400 journalists to shape and direct public opinion during the Cold War.

This is the media apparatus the President faces. It is not outraged liberals or people sincerely presenting political viewpoints. It is a propaganda, censorship, and brainwashing machine.

Meanwhile, outside the shadow world of spy vs. spy, the populations of the United States and Britain were in angry revolt against the Obama Administration and the British establishment which continued to support the neo-liberal globalist institutions behind the financial collapse of 2008. There was never any recovery from that collapse. Instead the elites claimed that industrial production, high-paying jobs, and a viable middle class could never again occur in the advanced sector. They counseled that everyone should learn to write code, ride their bicycles, and embrace the necessary economic devolution now necessary to save the world from climate change. That, in fact, was the message of the Clinton/Obama 2016 campaign.

Challenging the Decadent Globalists

In June of 2015, Donald Trump announced that he was running for President of the United States on an “America First” platform, favoring nation states over the current globalist world order. A similar revolt was underway in Britain—Brexit. In 2016, both Trump and Brexit triumphed, to the shock of the entire global elite.

On October 1, 2015, Joseph Dunford became Barack Obama’s Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, succeeding Martin Dempsey. Dempsey had successfully pushed back on many of Obama’s more insane war policies. Dunford, by his own account, immediately began to draft the new defense strategy for the United States, citing Russia and China as “revisionist” great power competitors who had to be confronted by the United States in a “whole of nation” effort. Dunford’s “strategy” enshrined Obama’s “Asia Pivot,” focusing on geopolitically isolating China. While in implementation from the day Dunford took office, this operation was finally completed in then Defense Secretary James Mattis’ release of the new National Defense Strategy in January of 2018.

Trillions of dollars are associated with the National Defense Strategy. Huge chunks of cash are emitted at each step of its journey to implementation through funding by the Congress. This is how Washington’s elites and spooks make their money. War is, really, their all-consuming industry.

Christopher Steele told Jane Mayer of the New Yorker that shortly before he began his assignment targeting Donald Trump in April of 2016, he had completed a study called “Operation Charlemagne” profiling how Russia was attempting to destroy the European Union and NATO and profiling Russian influences in the Brexit movement. In the minds of Steele, Dearlove, Scarlett, Dearlove’s kindergarten at the Henry Jackson Society, Pablo Miller, Bill Browder, their friends at Hakluyt (the British spook retirement home also involved in the operation to take out Trump), Luke Harding, Ed Lucas, and the other intelligence community scribes at the Integrity Initiative, NATO and the Atlantic Council, the profound dissent tapped into by Trump and the Brexit movement represented an existential threat to their entire existence.

According to John Brennan’s account to the Congress, as confirmed by the British paper, The Guardian, of April 13, 2017, the British began framing the narrative about Trump and Russia way back in 2015. The Guardian bragged about this, back in the time when they thought that Trump could literally be driven from office via a color revolution inside the United States. They said that GCHQ had been gathering information about Trump and Russia, assisted by the Netherlands, in late 2015. Brennan testified that the British were feeding information about Trump and Russia to the CIA and demanding action, saying that if it did not take place, the “special relationship” was over.

In March and April of 2016, NSA Director Mike Rogers blew the whistle on illegal surveillance taking place through the NSA. Rogers had discovered that the FBI was allowing access to classified NSA intercepts by three FBI private contractors in contravention of the law. He shutdown large aspects of this illegal NSA surveillance and notified the FISA court. That, many believe, necessitated the resort to Christopher Steele by Obama and his co-conspirators in their campaign to eliminate Donald Trump and other Clinton opponents. This is when Steele was hired and, it appears, absolutely illegal surveillance of the American presidential campaign was outsourced to GCHQ, NATO, the CIA, and, in all probability, rogue Ukrainian hacking groups.

As the result of Rogers’ whistleblowing, James Clapper and John Brennan attempted, throughout 2016, to get Rogers fired. It has been widely reported that Rogers is now cooperating with John Durham.

White House/Pete Souza

Obama dines with his nominee for Director of the CIA, February 2010.

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

The British Imperial Wish

Brennan and Barack Obama complied, of course, with British wishes, turning loose the entire infowar and surveillance apparatus on Trump, illegally—at first from the CIA, GCHQ, and NATO, and then through the Justice Department and the FBI. A “fusion cell” of CIA and FBI operatives was set up at CIA headquarters in the spring of 2016 targeted at Trump, a blatant violation of the laws which prevent the CIA from spying domestically.

According to Christopher Steele’s testimony in his recent deposition in Alfa Bank’s defamation suit, the State Department, including Victoria Nuland and Strobe Talbott, along with Hillary Clinton personally and Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice, were fully “read in” on his operation. Left out of Steele’s account, deliberately, is what the British were bragging about in 2017 and what is obvious, by omission, otherwise. This British operation against Donald Trump had to be approved by the President of the United States. And the normal channel for facilitating this type of intelligence operation on foreign soil is the CIA Director, John Brennan. He was, by all accounts, Barack Obama’s most trusted advisor. It was Brennan who delivered the baseball card formatted target profiles to Barack Obama for his afternoon “kill” sessions, targeting lethal drone strikes on people Brennan deemed terrorists. So, when it is leaked that John Brennan is the guy in John Durham’s sites, think about the apparatus we have just described and the possibility that the entire thing could now be pulled down, exposed, and all of the fine strategic consequences of that.

And, just to provide an ending here, on November 4, 2019, The Guardian published a report saying that the Conservative Party and specifically Prime Minister Boris Johnson had been nefariously cultivated by the Russians for the last five years according to Britain’s all-powerful Intelligence and Security Committee. That is, going back to the emergence of the strong Brexit movement, Britain’s escape from the European Union, which Boris Johnson is now executing. The source of this report by the highest levels of the British intelligence establishment? One Christopher Steele, the very guy the Brits told the Trump Administration was a discredited rogue operative.

II. A Return to Physical Economy

Schiller Institute Conference on the Internet

April 25-26, 2020

Mankind’s Existence Now Depends on the Establishment of a New Paradigm!

PANEL 4

The Science of Physical Economy

We present here a summary of the concluding panel of the two-day Schiller Institute conference of April 25-26, followed by three of its major presentations (edited transcripts); an intense dialogue about the British Imperial system from the discussion period; and the program of the full conference with a complete list of all the presentations and speakers.

The first panel was published in full in our May 1 issue. Subsequent issues of EIR will cover the second and third panels. Visit the Schiller Institute web page for all of the conference videos and supporting material.

The scope of this panel, addressing Lyndon LaRouche’s science of physical economy, was indicated by its 16 speakers and extended questions and discussion. The panel “made a tour of the horizon from the standpoint of LaRouche’s four economic laws,” as moderator Dennis Speed concluded, with seven presentations by current and former heads of American farm organizations; several speakers and authors from African countries who have been active politically in Africa; China’s chief of mission in Paris; the American commercial banker who pushed through the adoption by the Republican Party of Glass-Steagall as part of its 2016 Presidential platform; one of America’s best-known advocates for public banking; Mario Roberto Morales, a prominent author and professor from the University of Guatemala; and Schiller Institute leaders Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Dennis Small, Ramasimong Phillip Tsokolibane of South Africa, and Sébastien Périmony of France.

Schiller Institute

Sébastien Périmony

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

Five presentations on the urgent economic development of Africa followed the conference keynote by Dennis Small, with potential relative population-density an implicit subject. Sébastien Périmony discussed the establishment in the past 20 years of nine national space agencies in Africa and an African Space Agency as crucial to the development potential of the continent, with satellites guiding agricultural improvement, facilitating rural education, tracking terrorists and locust swarms, mapping disease outbreaks, and proving the vast possibilities of great infrastructure projects, such as Transaqua to refill Lake Chad. “Nothing is more local than space,” Périmony said, pointing out that the Space and Science Society centered in Ethiopia has more than 10,000 members.

Schiller Institute

Cédric Mbeng Mezui

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

Cédric Mbeng Mezui, founder of Gabon’s FinanceAfrika think-tank, stressed Alexander Hamilton’s principles for development of national credit, domestic demand and supply chains, and industrialization. (He is the author of books including Unlocking the Potential of Africa—Ideas by Alexander Hamilton.) Former board chairman of the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation, Dr. Kelvin Kemm, urged all those watching to “think of the whole world during this conference.”

Schiller Institute

Dr. Kelvin Kemm

Schiller Institute

Ramasimong Tsokolibane

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

Ramasimong Tsokolibane returned to the initial concept raised by Dennis Small. “If Africa realized its full potential, it would become an economic powerhouse,” he said. “But its potential relative population-density is low. Despite FDR, British imperialism has kept Africa underdeveloped and enslaved to the City of London and Wall Street.”

In fact, several speakers emphasized that Africa’s huge size and vast arable land, with 1.3 billion Africans on a continent large enough to fit nations and regions that have nearly 4 billion people (China, India, the United States, European Union, and others), means that its potential relative population-density, as LaRouche has defined it, remains low. It is suppressing Africans’ actual population-density, and is threatening now—as Small had warned—to fall so low as to cause massive numbers of unnecessary deaths. Thus the immediate “people first” building of the healthcare system, and economic development more broadly, are a matter life or death for millions. Tsokolibane emphasized Zepp-LaRouche’s proposed “global health security system” funded by a new International Development Bank.

Six American farm leaders, introduced by Schiller Institute agricultural expert and organizer Bob Baker, described how “independent agriculture in America is beyond crisis at this point; it is in a calamity.”

Schiller Institute

Jack Lynch

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

In the final sub-panel, Jack Lynch, formerly head of First Midwest Bank of Illinois, described his activities pushing the restoration of Glass-Steagall into the Republican Presidential platform in 2016 as based on the impetus of Lyndon LaRouche’s forecasts of economic collapses since 1999, after Glass-Steagall was “gutted.” “We’re on the brink” of another financial collapse, he said, especially given the immense derivatives portfolios of the largest Wall Street banks.

Schiller Institute

Ellen Brown

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

Ellen Brown, President of the Public Banking Institute, presented examples from American history of direct government issuance of credit, from the Pennsylvania colony’s public bank started in 1730 (and shut down in 1751 by a British Crown order prohibiting American currency issuance) to Lincoln’s Greenback policy. She noted that Lyndon LaRouche had proposed direct Treasury currency issues 40 years ago. (EIR recently republished LaRouche’s 1981 paper on this subject).

Schiller Institute

Prof. Mario Roberto Morales

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

They were joined by Professor Morales, who presented a unique window of understanding from Central and South America.

Schiller Institute

Dr. Joycelyn Elders

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

As this fourth and final panel concluded, Dennis Small announced the scheduling of an international youth call with Helga Zepp-LaRouche on May 9, and the urgency of the ongoing mobilization to organize another of the many waves of youth movements Lyndon LaRouche had catalyzed over decades. A video message of greetings from Dr. Joycelyn Elders, former Surgeon General of the United States directly addressed the Covid-19 crisis and particularly the young people from all over the world participating in the conference. Zepp-LaRouche urged all who were listening: “We haven’t heard another solution to this crisis than the four-power approach we are advancing. Go into a full mobilization on this proposal.”

Dennis Small

LaRouche’s Legacy: Foundation of The Modern Science of Physical Economy

Schiller Institute

Dennis Small

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

April 26—I think people are already aware that this has turned into an international conference without really any precedent, even in our movement, which is used to making precedents. Besides the direct participation in the English language, as has been mentioned a number of times, we’ve had at the high point, close to 600 people linked to this video conference in foreign languages including German, Italian, French, Spanish, and Chinese. We have on this occasion really quite an international presence. I think also very notable and significant is the fact that many of the participants are young adults, which is, of course, our intention in the entire organization of this conference.

You’ve gotten a bit of a taste of that in the presentations up until now. And you probably had an inkling, coming into this conference, that we are currently in the throes of the worst crisis Mankind has ever faced, or at least the worst in the last 600 years. Hopefully, by now you also have a sense that there is a way out, and that the living legacy of Lyndon LaRouche—in other words, his full exoneration—is critical to that endeavor.

The Greatest Crisis, the Way Out

That is our topic today; because this is, arguably, the greatest crisis humanity has ever faced. It is a civilizational breakdown crisis, with strategic, scientific, cultural and economic dimensions. On the financial front, we are being asphyxiated by a two quadrillion dollar speculative bubble that is sucking all the oxygen out of the room. And our nations and most political leaders stand motionless—like a deer frozen in headlights—as we careen towards a monumental economic train wreck.

The pace of events of the coronavirus pandemic is no less dizzying. In the first three weeks of April, the number of people worldwide infected with COVID-19 has risen from 1 million to 2.7 million, as of April 23rd, and I know the numbers are significantly higher today as we speak—April 26th. And everything indicates this vastly undercounts the true number of infected, especially in less-developed countries. In the United States, the total number of deaths rose from 5,100 on April 1, to over 48,000 three weeks later; and again, the numbers today are up. The world death total soared from 47,000 to 185,000 in that period, and again, is higher today.

With the international financial system already plunging over the precipice—well before the pandemic struck—U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin threw gasoline on the fire by announcing on March 29 the largest financial bailout package in history: $4 trillion to be channeled through the Federal Reserve to bail out the hopelessly bankrupt trans-Atlantic banking system—all of it, both in the U.S. and Europe! And all of it backstopped by the U.S. Treasury, i.e., by American taxpayers … again.

FIGURE 1

Quantitative Easing Federal Reserve Balance Sheet 2008-2020

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

Quantitative Easing: Huge Yet Worthless

You’ve heard of the Quantitative Easing (QE) scam that began during the 2008 crisis, and which on March 4th of this year stood at $4.2 trillion of funny money that the Fed had issued; by April 15 it had skyrocketed to $6.4 trillion—a 50% increase in just 6 weeks. Here’s what it looks like on the Fed’s own website: I did this screen grab, because it speaks volumes. Figure 1 shows you that it’s happened with the Fed; but it’s not just the Fed.

FIGURE 2

Global Quantitative Easing 2007-2020

(trillions of dollars, cumulative amount)

Source: EIRNS

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

In Figure 2, you will see that the European Central Bank (ECB), the Bank of Japan, the Bank of England, and the Swiss National Bank are all in on the speculative orgy. The cumulative world total of QE stood at some $17 trillion at the beginning of this year. Then the flood gates were opened, and by the end of the first quarter of 2020 the total had soared past $20 trillion (which is indicated by the vertical broken line). Were this to continue at this rate, by the end of 2020 we’d be looking at some $30 trillion in QE. But that of course, won’t happen. Why?

FIGURE 3

LaRouche’s Typical Collapse Function

Source: EIRNS

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

Take a look at Figure 3, LaRouche’s Typical Collapse Function. This kind of accelerating, damn-the-torpedoes hyperinflation of the asset bubble, while the physical economy around us is plunging into the abyss, is a formula for a financial thermonuclear explosion. While all of this was going on in the realm of the casino economy, U.S. unemployment soared by nearly 27 million in the last five weeks. We now have a real unemployment rate in the 25% to 30% range—higher than the 1930s Great Depression. And, as we will be hearing shortly, food production in the United States is on life support—or it would be, if they could find an available ventilator.

There are parts of the United States which are already facing Third World conditions—our prisons, our nursing homes, many of our inner cities with their tens of thousands of homeless. And of course, the Third World is also facing Third World conditions.

FIGURE 4

Parameters of Underdevelopment

Source: World Bank

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

Consider the situation of Africa, in terms of a couple of parameters of underdevelopment of the physical economy. Figure 4 shows 41% of Africans in sub-Saharan Africa endure extreme poverty, defined by the World Bank as income of less than $1.90 per day. But that dollar figure translates into some deadly physical-economic parameters: 55% lack electricity; 55% of all urban dwellers live in slums. In Haiti, 80% of its 11 million people live in extreme poverty. And now, on top of all that, the coronavirus pandemic and the global financial blow-out are beginning to hit these countries.

FIGURE 5

Agência Brasil

A scene in a Brazilian favela.

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

Look at Figure 5, a street scene in a favela in Brazil. Wash your hands frequently?! Keep a social separation of 6 feet?! You’ve got to be kidding. In Haiti, it is forecast that some 800,000 people could die from the coronavirus pandemic, out of a population of 11 million. That is 7% of the population!

How Did All This Come to Pass?

It is hard to wrap your mind around such developments. It is even harder to wrap your emotions around them. How did it come to this? If only we had known beforehand, so we could have taken steps to prevent it from ever happening....

Listen to an excerpt from Lyndon LaRouche’s 1997 Labor Day speech:

Lyndon LaRouche [begin video]: I would hope, and I think there are grounds for hope, that in the years to come, you may look upon this day as one of the most important in your life. We are at this moment already in the middle of the worst crisis which European civilization has faced in 600 years since the great banking collapse which is associated with the term New Dark Ages during the Fourteenth Century. That was a time in which the entire banking system collapsed. It was then called the Lombard banking system.

It was a time in which there had been, over a century before, since the death of Frederick II Hohenstaufen, who had been the leader of Europe, a process of degeneration of European civilization from the level it had achieved earlier. So that by the middle of the Fourteenth Century, with a long process of decay, and then the collapse of the banking system, the number of parishes and the population of Europe had fallen by one half, through famine, epidemics, and insanity, including religious insanity.

Today we’re in a comparable situation, but much worse. Today the crisis is not limited to European civilization. Today it is worldwide. Today already, Africa is being destroyed by a mass murder run by the largest power on this planet, the British Empire.

The British Empire exists.

Before the end of this century, every major part of the present international financial and monetary system will be gone, including the entire International Monetary Fund system, and the present form of the Federal Reserve System here in the United States. They are doomed. They are gone.

There are other things of which I’ll speak.

Under these conditions, unless we can replace the present IMF system, which is bankrupt and doomed, in the way you would leave the Titanic when it begins to sink; unless we get the passengers, the nations and the people, off this system before it sinks, this civilization globally is doomed to what we see developing in Africa, what is going on in the disintegration of Colombia, under the patronage of the British drug queen, Queen Elizabeth II, and her local drug-pusher, Samper Pisano.

The United States, too: this nation can be torn apart and destroyed in a very short period of time. I’m talking about months. Imagine the day in which every bank is bankrupt, in which the U.S. dollar’s convertibility is in question. A day in which the savings have been wiped out because the banks that contain them don’t exist. A day in which all the mutual funds are long dead, and nobody can recover any money out of mutual funds. A day in which the New York Stock Exchange has dropped well below 1,000 from its present 8,000 vicinity, maybe to nearly zero. And the local bank, with the savings in it, is gone—closed. Not put through bankruptcy, just closed. In which there’s no credit, there’s no movement of food—or very little. There’s no movement of services.

EIRNS

Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., keynoting the Schiller Institute’s Labor Day Conference in Reston, Virginia, August 30, 1997.

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

There Is a Solution to the World-Wide Collapse!

What happens, then, to the United States, as it is now happening in Africa, and as it’s spreading throughout Central and South America, and in parts of Asia? When people don’t eat, when sanitary conditions break down, when violence and desperation break out, what happens? The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse ...

And that is the breakdown of the whole system. That’s the day the Titanic of world economy goes under the water—unless we do something about it.

Now, I know what to do about it. What we need to do, is very simple. Anyone who’s a good lawyer knows what you have to do. When the bank goes bankrupt, what do you do? You have the government put it in bankruptcy. You reorganize it.

What do you do when an entire banking system, like the U.S. banking system and credit system go bankrupt? You have the government, the federal government, together with the states, put the whole system into bankruptcy reorganization ...

We’ve done things like this before, under wartime or similar emergency conditions. And we’re going to have to do it again. Because if you don’t rescue the country and the people, what have you got?

We’re coming to the time that we don’t give a damn about the banks. We don’t care about the stock market. We don’t care about the major creditors. Because we have to care about the people first. [end video]

What did LaRouche mean when he wrote “People First!”? Economic science is not financial or monetary—which is why economists with degrees from Harvard, or Chicago or Yale were best quarantined, along with the Wall Street bankers whose criminal looting policies they justify with their writings, lectures, and advice to victim governments.

Economic Science is Physical Economy

Economic science is physical economy. Physical economy studies the way Man uses his unique, distinguishing species characteristic—which is willful creativity—to change the physical universe around him through scientific discovery of universal physical principles, and attendant technological advances, which lead to increases in his potential relative population-density—a concept original to Lyndon LaRouche, and at the heart of his fundamental contribution to Leibniz’s science of physical economy. This non-linear metric, potential relative population-density, corresponds to the power of society to maintain a rising total population, with rising longevity, a rising standard of living, and with augmented access to classical culture, such that the rate of future scientific discovery and technological advance can outpace the growth of population per se. Simple, right?

This depends on the ability to produce improved market baskets of consumer goods, production goods, and infrastructure, on a per capita and per square kilometer basis. If these fall, then society will predictably devolve, to the point where the potential relative population-density drops below the actual total population—as has happened globally over the last 50 years, with the disastrous consequences we are witnessing with the coronavirus pandemic today.

What we are seeing today is a rerun of what happened in the 14th Century explosion of the Black Death, which wiped out about half the population of Europe at the time. When the potential relative population-density plunges below the level of the actual population, and is not reversed quickly, then the only real question is, which of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse will ride first. Today, it is a global pandemic.

Potential Relative Population-Density

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

However, the problem we are facing is actually somewhat more complex. It is not simply a matter of total potential relative population-density dropping below total population. As Lyndon LaRouche posed the issue back in 1985:

Society is an integral part of the biosphere, both the biosphere as a whole, and regionally.... Rather than viewing a deep fall of the potential relative population-density, as merely a fall in the relative value for the society as such; let us examine this as a fall in the relative level of the biosphere including that society.... [T]his must tend to be adjusted, by increasing the role of relatively lower forms of life … [which] “consume” human and other higher-level forms of life as “fuel” for their own proliferation.... In that variant, human and animal pandemics, and sylvatics, must tend to resurge, and evolve, under certain kinds of “shock” to the biosphere caused by extreme concentration of fall of population-potential.

Or to put it differently, we are only as strong as the weakest among us. Which is why it is both scientifically incompetent, as well as morally corrupt, to brush aside the plight of Africa, or Haiti, or Guatemala, or of the 40 million Americans who live in poverty—many of them in hunger as well.

The Noösphere and Man’s Proper Relationship to the Biosphere

What then, is Man’s proper relationship to the biosphere? It is certainly not what the Malthusian greenies argue. The great Russian biogeochemist Vladimir Vernadsky (who we heard about in an earlier panel) showed in the middle of the 20th Century that, whereas the characteristic of time in the inanimate domain (the non-living domain) can be reversible (e.g., going from water to ice and back again); and whereas the characteristic of time in the biosphere, or living processes, is irreversible (you cannot un-die a living process which has gone dead, nor incidentally, can life be created out of non-life); so much for the inanimate and the biosphere domains.

But in the case of the noösphere, the domain of the exercise of man’s willful creativity, real physical space-time is fundamentally different than these other two. Lyndon LaRouche rigorously proved that Man characteristically lives in the future, by using his creativity to place the present on the proper trajectory to achieve that intended future. LaRouche referred to this as time-reversed causality. That is the essence of political organizing. That is why you are here today—you may be surprised to learn!

It is also why Lyndon LaRouche throughout his life organized one youth movement after another. It is not only because of the proven fact that the best way to educate a President is by building a youth movement. More fundamentally, it is because we each find our true selves, the better angels of our nature, when we locate our own identity in the youth who shall forge that future. Want to see a hardened criminal, even a drug-runner, become truly human—even if only briefly? Talk to him about his 4-year-old son or daughter. I’ve seen it.

If we are to be rigorous, we should say that Man truly lives only in the future—in fact, in the future even after his own death. That is the confusing, often disturbing, bittersweet irony of Man’s existence: that we are both mortal and immortal at once. That is the bittersweet living legacy of the deceased Lyndon LaRouche; and it is why Helga Zepp-LaRouche launched the initiative of the LaRouche Legacy Foundation to prepare a full, digitized archive of Lyndon LaRouche’s prolific intellectual output, and especially to publish the Collected Works of Lyndon LaRouche—of which we are proud to release Volume I at this conference, as you have already seen and been informed. We should view this as part of our relentless demand that Lyndon LaRouche, the man and his ideas, must be fully and immediately exonerated.

Programmatic Requirements to Get Back on Track

Lyndon LaRouche repeatedly identified the programmatic requirements to get the world back on track to the proper future, including in his famous 2014 Four New Laws, which specified four, interrelated steps to be taken at once:

1. Implement Glass-Steagall, or banking separation between productive and speculative banking, in the U.S. and internationally. This would bury the City of London and Wall Street, as they say, “Where the sun don’t shine.”

2. Replace the bankrupt speculative financial system with a Hamiltonian credit system, including a return to the principles of a National Bank such as that established by our First Treasury Secretary, Alexander Hamilton.

3. Use this Federal credit-system to “generate high-productivity trends in improvements of employment, with the intention to increase the physical-economic productivity and standard of living of the persons and households of the United States.” Reestablish a fixed-parity international system based on agreements among such credit systems of sovereign nations, to launch global infrastructure projects that benefit all the nations—in other words, transform the New Silk Road into a full-fledged World Land-Bridge.

4. Re-ignite the fire of willful creative discovery and scientific breakthroughs, especially in the areas of fusion power, space exploration and colonization, and optical biophysics.

Just consider what such an approach would signify, if the United States, China, Russia, and India, in particular, cooperated to lead the rest of the concert of nations forward into such a future. As the Schiller Institute’s draft proposal, “LaRouche’s ‘Apollo Mission’ to Defeat the Global Pandemic,” insists:

The world must join forces as a single humanity to stop the impending mass-death in Africa, in particular, as the coronavirus spreads. Brigades of engineers, medics, and other skilled personnel from scores of nations must be mobilized, deployed and coordinated under the United Nations and African Union, and with full respect for the sovereignty of all nations. Building health and sanitation infrastructure, assisting in supplying necessary medical and protective equipment, and assisting with administration of health systems are among the urgent jobs at hand.”

That is also how to re-awaken and re-tool the collapsed industrial economies of the United States, Europe and elsewhere. Let’s get back to work, human work!

LaRouche on the Practical Steps to Recovery

But rather than elaborate on the practical steps of how each of LaRouche’s Four Laws can and must be implemented, I would prefer to leave you instead with the way Lyn himself addressed this matter:

LaRouche [video]: What do you require, in terms of investment in infrastructure? In terms of—like Washington, D.C. What kind of a sewer system do you require? What kind of power availability do you require? What kind of potable water system do you require? What do you require in terms of security to your neighborhood? All of these kinds of things—schools, and so forth.

You require that. Provided by society, provided by government, chiefly. But you require it, as part of your income. What’s happened to our water systems? What’s happened to our health systems?

And you require industry. You require technology, to improve the society, to conquer the new problems we run into, as we run society. You have to have an investment in industry. You have to have competent management that makes the thing work. You have to have improvement in product design. You have to have processes by which technology is advanced. These form market baskets, which we can measure in terms of labor force, average member of labor force, average household, per person and per square kilometer....

This is sometimes called the energy of the system, of the economic system. What’s the input you must supply to the population, to maintain the system in good functioning order, into the future, the next generation?

All right, that’s been going down....

You see that the preservation of individual life, and to extend it so that we may enjoy the blessings of great individuals for a longer period of time, is rather important and feasible.

But, in general, nonetheless, we’re all going to die. And that poses the question of what are we if we’re all going to die? What does life mean if we’re all going to die? Isn’t that the question that government has to face, in real statecraft, in real law? Isn’t that the question? Do we provide for the individual the opportunity for a meaningful life, a life which can be so lived, that it implicitly answers the question, what is the meaning of that travel, that transit from birth to death?

This can only be answered in the realm of ideas. It’s not possible for any animal, in that way. Because if we are the bearers of great ideas, of truthful ideas, which we transmit to other generations; if we are custodians of the trust which is placed in us, the trust of humanity, while we are alive, if we are good custodians; if we solve problems when we must solve them, because we’re there to do it; if we contribute to the stock of ideas that make humanity better, can not government say, without being accused of bringing in religion, can not government say that the responsibility of government, is to give to each person the opportunity to realize themselves, as creatures made in the image of God, within the universality and simultaneity of eternity?

The Purpose of Government

That should be the purpose of government. That, I believe, is the spirit of agapē. And that is what we must do. And we must find the connection between the practical, which I’ve just summarily indicated, which is the measures we must take, and realize that the obstacle is not the measures, because these measures are quite feasible, and they’re based on many precedents which we can call upon, with respect to implementation.

The problem is, the need for the will, the commitment, the passion, to make the change. And the great challenge before us here in the room today, and many others like us, is to become like a virus, to infect humanity with optimism, and with the means to find the will to bring about the change. And if we can do that, and you have benefitted, in any degree, from either what I’ve said today, or the repercussions of it in the time ahead, then I hope this may have been the most important day in your life.

Thank you. [end video]

Thank you; and thank you, Lyn.

Yang Yan

Franco-Chinese Cooperation in Africa

Schiller Institute

Yang Yan

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

Ms. Yang Yan is the Political Counselor of the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in Paris. She delivered these remarks during Panel 4 of the Schiller Institute’s April 25-26 teleconference.

April 26—Before I begin, I would first like to thank the Schiller Institute for inviting me to this video conference. It is a great pleasure to be able to participate, and I intend to benefit from this great opportunity to discuss Sino-French cooperation in the African market with you.

In June 2015, the Chinese and French governments published a “joint declaration on cooperation for the development of third markets,” for the first time evoking the concept of cooperation in third markets. It is not only a major initiative in Sino-French relations, but also a great innovation in the model of international cooperation. The main thing is to effectively combine China’s superior production capacity, and France’s advanced technologies to development needs in developing countries. This helps Chinese and French companies to complement each other and jointly promote the growth of industries, infrastructure, and the well-being of the population of developing countries to obtain the effect that “one plus one plus one is greater than three.”

Cooperation in the third market is of particular significance for African countries, which have immense demands for development. Rich in natural and human resources, Africa has a keen desire to translate those potential assets into development in a concrete way, and to move forward on the path towards industrialization, urbanization, and modernization.

In order to achieve this goal, considerable investment in infrastructure, training for women and men, and support for technology, production capacity, and finance is required. This cannot be done by Africa alone, nor with the help of a single party from outside. On the other hand, within the framework of cooperation in third markets, China and France can, highlighting their respective advantages and taking into account African demand for development, cooperate in the fields of infrastructures, energy, transport, agriculture, health, etc. This is of benefit to Chinese and French companies, but it also benefits the economic and social development of Africa.

In recent years, under the impetus of the Chinese and French heads of state, cooperation in this third market has developed at an accelerated rate. In the Chinese government’s 2019 work report, there is talk of expanding cooperation in third markets. Guided by this policy, Chinese companies have an increased desire to move in this direction. Currently, the Chinese and French parties have signed onto a list of the third series of demonstration projects of cooperation in third markets and have created a cooperation fund for third markets.

This cooperation has yielded concrete achievements. The China-Africa Development Fund has worked with the French group Bolloré to put a container terminal into operation at the Nigerian Tincan port, bringing container throughput to 500,000 TEU (20-foot equivalents), creating more than 600 local jobs and making an accumulated contribution of more than $100 million. The Republic of Congo’s National Route 1 project, which is the subject of joint investments by China and France, has been launched. This project, which links Brazzaville to Pointe-Noire, reduces the journey from 7 days to 6 hours. In addition to these infrastructure projects, China and France have collaborated on projects for the well-being of the African people, including treatment of wastewater in Senegal.

The Sino-French partnership in third markets serves as a good example for other developed countries. As of June 2019, China has signed third-market cooperation documents with 14 countries including France, Japan, Italy, and the United Kingdom. The Chinese Silk Road Fund and the European Investment Bank have created a market fund in this area. Cooperation in third markets is indeed an important activity within the framework of the “New Silk Road” initiative.

Principles of Cooperation

To make Sino-French cooperation successful in the African market, we must stick to the following principles:

First, let’s stick to the principle of joint consultation, joint construction and sharing, and to the principle of benefitting the third party. Africa is the main ground for this partnership. In order to guarantee the success of such cooperation, it is imperative to fully respect the will of African countries in promoting these projects, thus ensuring that the projects are in compliance with the development objectives of these countries. You also have to raise the level of “localization” so that the investment will benefit their economy, employment, and the well-being of the local populations. Pursuing self-interest while taking into account the concerns of partners is the only way to make the cooperation of the three parties successful.

Second, let’s enhance the central role of business through government assistance. Having companies as a major player, this partnership must be market-oriented and fully respect commercial principles and international conventions. The government, on its side, must play its coordinating role and employ policy measures that encourage and support businesses in order to motivate them to pursue this cooperation.

Third, let’s keep a spirit of openness, inclusiveness, and value cooperation that benefits everyone. Sino-French cooperation in the African market must be open to other countries, including African countries, and to regional and international organizations, to contribute together to the development of Africa.

Daisuke Kotegawa

Failure to Address Cause of 2008 Financial Collapse Caused Public Health Collapse

Schiller Institute

Daisuke Kotegawa

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

Daisuke Kotegawa is a Research Director at the Canon Institute. He was formerly an official of Japan’s Ministry of Finance and Executive Director for Japan at the IMF during the 2008 crisis.

April 26—The tragedy regarding COVID-19, especially in Italy and Spain, originated from the policy failure after the 2008 Lehman shock in Western countries. In order to enhance the economy and save the investment banks after the shock, central banks supplied excess liquidity to the market, but they failed to stimulate the economy due to the lack of real demand. Accordingly, there was a huge amount of excess liquidity in the market.

The investment banks, mainly British and American, and the hedge funds supported by them, attacked European countries which reported deficits in their budgets, such as Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Italy, for the purpose of gaining high returns within a short period of time, to escape from the risk of insolvency.

Such attacks triggered the EU policy of physical austerity centering on, among other things, reducing the costs of healthcare, which resulted in cutting the number of beds. What occurred, was the rescue of bankers who gambled in the market at the expense of the healthcare system for the general public.

The world has been ruled and destabilized by gamblers in investment banks, in particular after the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated investment banks from commercial banks, was completely abolished in 1999 by then U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers. Investment bankers privatized profits, nationalized loss, and socialized risks.

Please note that it is essential that government protects the deposits of honest depositors in commercial banks. There is no need to protect gamblers in investment banks, but if investment banks are legally connected with commercial banks in one group, government cannot abandon investment banks. The commercial banking system must be protected, therefore investment bankers must be legally pursued for their irregular activities and expelled from the financial industry.

At the time of the Asian crisis in the late 1990s, the bankers and government bureaucrats responsible for the breakdown were criminally prosecuted. This has brought a healthy banking system in Asia. It was not the case in the United States and Europe: There, taxpayers became victims. Tax money was used to rescue bankers and big corporations like GM, while workers were fired, and under the ongoing coronavirus crisis, workers are suffering because of that degraded healthcare system, which is the result of the austerity policy.

Six U.S. Farm Leaders

Feed the Future: Eating is a Moral Right

Schiller Institute

Robert Baker

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

April 26—Six U.S. farm leaders and the Schiller Institute’s Agriculture Coordinator, Robert Baker, address the agricultural crisis in the context of cartelization, COVID-19, and world hunger, as part of Panel 4 of the Schiller Institute’s April 25-26 teleconference.

Robert Baker: The world now faces the biggest food crisis in history. That includes the United States. Where were we six months ago? In Europe, thousands of farmers had their tractors side-by-side in the streets of Berlin, Paris, Madrid; and month after month, they blocked up the cities of Europe and hundreds of miles of highways.

In the United States last year, hundreds of farmers left their ranches and fields and went out to mass meetings in the farm belt. Why? The financial-economic system had gotten so bad, they were demonstrating for the simple right to produce food. It was the same in other parts of the world, where people from South Africa, South America, to the Middle East, were also in the streets. They couldn’t afford to eat! In Africa, almost half of that huge continent has to rely on food imports, when, with the right technology, Africans could feed the entire world.

We already knew that we needed a new system. Then, bang! The new virus hit. Now, we absolutely are going to replace this evil, Wall Street, City of London system of speculation that has crashed, with a new productive system.

Farmers have a special role to play in this because they have authority as food producers. Food is a moral right. I’m very proud of this team of six agricultural leaders with me here today who are standing up for this. They stand with the farmers all over the world, but also are joining with cities that need food. In the wake of the crisis, we are assisting in the rebirth of a system of sovereign nations, each with its own self-sufficient food supply, so that no international bank or corporate monopoly will ever loot the food producers and working people again. This is a real harmony of interests, like Abraham Lincoln’s economic advisor Henry Carey called for.

You will hear from across the United States: the Midwest—from Indiana, Missouri, and Kansas, in the Mississippi River Basin; from the High Plains—Montana and Colorado; and from California. I myself am from Iowa, where most all of my family raise corn, soybeans, cattle, and hogs. In each of the following messages, you will hear different implied principles you must act on, like fair pricing, no more playing off one nation against another, no more mega food cartels, and no more ripping off everybody at the grocery store. We have to take action. The worldwide hunger pandemic is a real danger along with the coronavirus pandemic.

First, emergency action. Let’s intervene to save all agricultural capacity everywhere. Save the herds, the flocks, the crops, the farms, and the farm families on the land. Institute income supports if we have to, parity pricing, and no foreclosures on farms or agricultural businesses, and more. Plus, get the food where it has to be. Commission and dedicate the tonnage of basic grains to the 36 countries completely dependent on outside supplies. Pre-stage it. Use the world food program proposal for humanitarian hubs, and make it work.

Second, over the longer term, start on the full measures for farm and factory production in every nation. No more out-sourcing food by the Empire crowd. That means collaboration; that’s why we’re here today. It means everyone shall eat, and this is the future. This is why the Classical culture discussed in the previous panel is especially important as an aspect of returning culture to agriculture.

On-the-Ground Reports

We now turn to the farm leader reports. Up first is Joe Maxwell.

Courtesy of Joe Maxwell

Joe Maxwell

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

Joe Maxwell: I want to thank the Schiller Institute for allowing me to be here today, and I’m going to thank all of you all for joining us. I’m Joe Maxwell, co-founder of the Family Farm Action Alliance. I’m a fourth-generation family farmer in the United States. My farm is in the state of Missouri, about 100 miles west of the Mississippi River.

Today, we’re all under a threat, a threat brought on by a pandemic—COVID-19. That threat is to our health, our families’ health, and our neighbor’s health around the world. It is also a threat to our economy, to our way of life. Men and women around the world have been laid off. Farmers and ranchers no longer have a market. Consumers are being price-gouged at the grocery store. It is a threat to our way of life. That threat comes as much from the pandemic as it does from the monopolies that control the market and control our economy.

Over the last 30 or 40 years, the world has allowed, our governments have allowed a handful of corporations to control our food and our agriculture. They’ve done so in the name of efficiency. Many of us cried out about the flawed system they were building, the weaknesses in that system. We seldom were heard.

The threat brought on today in our economy is because our governments have allowed these global giants to exist. As an example: JBS, the world’s largest meat producer, just posted a 322% increase in revenues last quarter over a year ago in the same time period. While family farmers and ranchers and small businessmen and -women are going bankrupt around the world, they are pocketing an increase to the level of 322%. As a former lieutenant governor of Missouri, I can tell you, we can have whatever kind of economy we want, but we have to have the policies to support it. This economy that has been captured by large monopolies is because our governments have allowed it to happen.

If there’s any good that can come of a pandemic of the scale we’re seeing around the world, it should be that we all join together with one voice, farmers and ranchers joining with labor, labor joining with farmers and ranchers, small businessmen and -women standing up with farmers, standing up for the workers in the plants. Standing together, lifting one voice, and demanding a paradigm shift; a shift in our economy. Stripping it from the hands of corporate giants like JBS, and putting it back in our hands. This economy belongs to the people, and we have a right to demand change, if any good can come of a pandemic.

Courtesy of Bill Bullard

Bill Bullard

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

Bill Bullard: Hello, I’m Bill Bullard, CEO of R-CALF USA, the largest producer-only trade association that exclusively represents United States cattle farmers and ranchers. The United States cattle industry is the largest segment of American agriculture, generating about $67 billion annually from the sale of cattle and calves. Because it’s the largest, and because cattle producers are widely dispersed among all 50 states, our live cattle industry is arguably the most important cornerstone for all of rural America.

The Cattle Industry is Shrinking

However, our cattle industry is shrinking, and shrinking fast. In less than half a lifetime, we’ve lost over half a million cattle producers. Four of every ten cattle producers in business in 1980 are gone today. Our cattle herd size has shrunk by 15%, reducing the size of our mother cow herd by more than 5 million animals. We’ve lost 75% of our independently owned cattle feeding businesses. This contraction of our industry’s live cattle supply chain coincides with a massive consolidation and concentration that has occurred within our industry’s marketing structure. One-fourth of our nation’s local and regional livestock auction yards have disappeared, and a number of beef packing plants have declined to the point where just four large companies control the slaughter of about 85% of the 25 million or so fed cattle that America harvests each year.

Our live cattle supply chain is also contracting because of failed trade policies. For the past 25 years, those policies have facilitated the importation of cheaper, undifferentiated beef and cattle without affording the United States cattle farmers and ranchers to distinguish for the consumer their domestically produced beef from cattle from those cheaper imports. It was only for a brief moment in history that U.S. cattle producers were afforded by national legislation a mandatory Country Of Origin Label (COOL) on beef products, which, for that brief moment, allowed them to compete in their own market.

Our United States cattle industry is the only livestock sector left in America that still has the critical mass of competitive marketing channels remaining from which to begin rebuilding a robustly competitive industry. Our hog, poultry, and sheep industries have been skeletonized to the point where, because they are now comprised of so few participants, they will have to be rebuilt from scratch. The skeletonization I speak of, of course, is vertical integration; and that kills competition. The U.S. pork and poultry industries are now controlled from egg to plate, or birth to plate, by multinational meat packing conglomerates.

Our live cattle industry is the multinational meat packers’ last frontier to conquer. But we won’t let them conquer our industry. We’re fighting back on many fronts. In our Congress, we are seeking reforms to rebuild our broken markets by prohibiting meat packer conduct and practices that have created a fundamental imbalance in the marketplace between cattle producers and packers. In our Executive Branch, we are seeking reforms to trade policies that now disadvantage cattle producers and favor multinational corporations. In our Judicial Branch, we are seeking enforcement of existing anti-trust laws, in an historic class-action lawsuit against the “Big Four” largest beef packers—Tyson Foods, JBS, Cargill, and National Beef--alleging that they have unlawfully colluded to depress producer prices while inflating their own margins and profits.

R-CALF USA will continue fighting for America’s cattle farmers and ranchers until we win.

Courtesy of Tyler Dupy

Tyler Dupy

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

Tyler Dupy, CEO and Executive Director, Kansas Cattlemen’s Association:

My name is Tyler Dupy, and I’d like to thank you for inviting me to address you today. It’s inspiring to see how a little ingenuity and hard work can bring so many great minds together, virtually, during this COVID-19 pandemic.

A Widening Divide

There’s a divide between consumers and food production, and it’s widening at this time. As corporate food production grows to a scale never imagined, independent agriculture is shrinking. Nutrition has become a byproduct of food, where television programming dedicates 24-hour networks to the entertainment of watching someone prepare a full meal without any reference to where the food is actually grown, or how it’s actually harvested. Agriculture is the true face of food and fiber, and must engage the consumer with food facts, not fiction.

Independent agriculture is beyond crisis at this point. We are in the midst of a calamity of unprecedented proportions. Cattle ranchers and farmers face adversity on a daily basis; but what we face on a non-weather front are legislative and regulatory policies promoting corporate interests so greedy that the decks are stacked against us. Agriculturists find it not difficult, but nearly impossible, to find access to financing. In most sectors, the food production and chemical companies control the inputs and financial resources. Federal regulations make traditional banking a near impossibility.

When it comes to marketing our commodities, the speculative nature of the futures markets causes ripples throughout the industry. Traders in Chicago and New York fill their pockets to the brim, while the producers walk away completely empty-handed. We must take calculated steps today to prevent the further contraction of the farming countryside and the ultimate vertical integration of food production model. Soon corporate America will control all food and food production. We’re on track for a real-world Hunger Games mentality, where food is the reward for oppressor compliance.

Courtesy of Frank Endres

Frank Endres

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

Frank Endres, Board Director, National Farmers Organization:

Thank you for the opportunity, and I would also like thank Helga LaRouche and also the Schiller Institute for giving us the time to give our views. A little bit about myself—we farm along with my two sons on our ranch here in the west side of the Sacramento Valley in northern California. We raise cattle and grain on our farm and ranch here.

Growing Concern Over Basic Food Security

There’s a lot of concern now in the news about our food security, brought about because of the COVID-19 pandemic that we’re having. So, I’d like to talk a little bit about the food security issue.

Today one of the things that’s leading to the concerns about our food security is the loss of farmland. Over 5,000 acres a day are being converted from food production to shopping malls, schools, parking lots, and housing, etc. A new additional threat is the large acreages of prime farmland being sought after for solar panels. This is leading to a threat to our loss of farmland now.

An aging farm population: Farmers under the age of 35 constitute only 5% of the farm population, while at the other end of the spectrum, those at age 65 and over, comprise over 65%.

Another threat, and probably the biggest threat now to our food security, is low commodity prices. The way the farm income is figured, allows a huge theft to occur on our nation’s farms and ranches. This is happening because the price the farmers are receiving today is compared to the price he received a year ago, two years ago, five years ago. This has nothing to do with it. The price the farmer or anybody else receives, has to be compared to everything that he has to buy to operate his business today. In addition to that, he also has to have an additional allowance for living expenses.

That is what parity is all about. In terms of the producer’s purchasing power or parity, average farm prices today, at 30% of parity, are lower than during the Great Depression in 1933, when farm prices then were at 64% of parity.

Farmers and ranchers today have lost over 70% of their purchasing power. The only way to make up for this loss is to borrow more and more. This has led to a suicide rate now among farmers that is exceeding the rate of the 1980s.

At least once in a person’s lifetime, a person really needs a doctor, a lawyer, a clergyman. But three times a day, a person needs a farmer who is a food producer. With that, I’d like to conclude and say that is also true in many nations around the world, that there is a threat to their food security also, and this needs to be corrected.

Courtesy of James Benham

James Benham

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

James Benham: My name is James Benham. I’m the state president of the Indiana Farmers Union. I also sit on the national board of the National Farmers Union. I’m a farmer; I raise corn and soybeans. I’ve raised tobacco in the past, and when that became not politically correct, we all got out of that business.

I want to talk a little bit about the problem we’re having with agriculture today, and I’m going to probably refer more to what’s going on in the United States than other countries, but I’ll try to do my best to include the world as best as possible. I also want to thank the Schiller Institute and Helga LaRouche for inviting me to participate here today. They do a great job for everyone, and we need to support them any way we can.

Coronavirus and the Wall Street Virus

I want to talk a little bit about two viruses that we’ve got.

Obviously the one we’re all dealing with right now is the coronavirus, which is devastating to the world; it has really cost billions and trillions of dollars around the world in lost jobs and revenue and opportunities.

We also have a Wall Street virus, and it’s ongoing; it’s every day. It was there yesterday; it’ll still be there tomorrow; they just continue to bleed us by their speculation and how they feel about the markets. The farmers have no control over the price—it goes up and down like a yo-yo. The supply and demand theory we used to have under that speculator issue is gone with the wind. It’s all about dollars and cents and how they best see that fits into it. So, I guess you get down at this point here to Glass-Steagall—we’ve been fighting for that for a while. We need to bust Wall Street monopoly banks and get that process back to where farmers understand what to borrow and how to borrow money, and get the money into the hands of the people who need to have it.

And over the long term, how are we going to fit the needs of the people around the world? That brings us to, what do our people need to eat? What are we looking to produce for them? The biggest problem I see is, we have a responsibility across the U.S. and Africa and elsewhere, we got the opportunity to have food on a regular basis, and to keep us from having food shortages. You know, it gets brought right now back to the coronavirus here in the States.

This crisis is an opportunity for us to look at long-term food and agriculture systems solutions. That includes looking to price-fixing, which we have, and other abuses by the market power of the meat packing industry, as well as to bring in the supply of milk in line with demand. It’s no secret that the shortages that we incurred is because we’ve closed down half of our food system. The other half is that our grocery stores, where folks buy their local needs for the week, cannot compete now. That “just-in-time” program that we’ve all become accustomed to doesn’t fit our needs today.

On the other hand, we don’t have enough farmers to service the required amount of products; nor do we have the processing facilities to meet the demand in each crisis. We have one or two plants here in the United States that have had a coronavirus issue. They shut those processing plants down for a month. Well, that’s created a big shortage. And the demand for beef is going up. So, farmers are suffering through no cause of their own, and they have nowhere to go with all this product that they’ve got on hand. So, a lot of them, as far as the vegetables and such, are plowing it down; farmers are euthanizing their animals because they can’t afford to feed them.

To make matters worse,— I’ll give you just an example: The farmer’s share, once the product goes from the farmer to the consumer. For example, for a pound of bacon, the retail price is $5; the farmer’s share is 63 cents. You want to look at wheat? Wheat is something we do around the world. Here, a loaf of bread is two pounds. The retail price is $3.99; the farmer’s share is just 12 cents. You can go on forever. For those of you who like to drink beer, for a six-pack of beer, the retail price is $9.99; the farmer’s share is 4 cents. So, those things are just unheard of.

It’s time to make a change. We need to work together as a global industry and try to figure out how to develop food prices that work for everybody around the world, and that are a fair and equitable and get rid of the speculative issues. Thank you so much. God bless you all, and I hope this is helpful.

Courtesy of Mike Callicrate

Mike Callicrate

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

An Alternative Food System

Mike Callicrate, Owner, Ranch Foods Direct, Callicrate Banders, and Callicrate Cattle Company:

As we sit here today with this COVID issue, I think it’s really pulled the curtain back on the failures of our industrial food system. Today, there’s never been more money in the food business. Consumers have never paid more for food. And the producer of that food, whether they’re a farm worker, or a food processing worker, or the farmer or rancher, have never received so little of what that food dollar represents at the consumer level.

So, I think this is a good time to maybe talk about and begin to implement the alternative food system; the one that is more local and regional. With Ranch Foods Direct, we’ve been doing this for about 20 years. I was really forced into it 20 years ago when I couldn’t sell my cattle anymore. I decided, well, we can litigate, we can legislate, but why don’t we do something else? Why don’t we just build an alternative pathway to the consumer? Which is what we have here today with Ranch Foods Direct.

We raise our animals in St. Francis, Kansas; we process them there. We process them into carcasses; they’re shipped into Colorado Springs where they’re cut up and sold directly to consumers. We’ve really built the system, and it’s been really hard. We’ve run into all kinds of barriers, and all kinds of challenges; but we’re still around. I really think the timing is right today, to build this out in other parts of the country. As long as that rural community can connect with that urban community, this kind of thing can be done and replicated around the world, really. But I think it has to be done with the objective of increasing income to the farm and ranch gate, increasing a fair living wage to the worker.

When you think about that today, and the pork plants that are shut down because they had so many COVID-19 cases, why are these people getting sick? Well, they work in very close quarters; they eat in very close quarters; they ride in the same car together; they live multiple families to apartments. Why are they doing that? Because they’re not paid; they’re not paid a living wage and they’re really living in the shadows. Most of them aren’t legal citizens, so they’re afraid. I’m saying, let’s make it better for everybody; from the farmer and the rancher to the worker, and for the consumer to get good healthy food, as opposed to the highly processed stuff that makes the packer and makes the processer and makes the retailer a lot of money, shortchanges the producer and the consumer.

I think now is the time. We need to build that today. But we’ve got to get some regulations that fit that model. And we’ve got to get a government that is friendly to the idea. That is probably going to be one of the biggest challenges, because this thing has to be financed by everyone; not just on the back of a farmer, not just on the back of a rancher, and certainly not on the back of the workers that are processing that food before a consumer gets it.

It has to be financed by everyone. Right now, the people on the farms and the ranches have really no money. They have been plundered and pillaged for so long. They’ve given up their equity; they can’t make any money because they don’t have fair markets to sell in. We’ve really got to step up here as a society and finance this thing and build it and support it.

Man in the Image of God

Baker: What you just heard was from six of the leaders of the U.S. agricultural sector. They are all gravely concerned about this because we have turned a corner in terms of the degree to which the farm producers cannot withstand it. As was mentioned, such consolidation into big farming units. A recent report indicates that the 40 largest pork producers in the United States, produce 66% of the pork. They estimate they’re going to lose on average $18 million {apiece} in this crisis. We’re now starting to see plans lined up to euthanize thousands and thousands of pigs. There are plans lined up to euthanize millions of chickens. That is just unheard of when you have such food shortages around the world.

This is why, when Helga and our organization speak of a paradigm shift, we have to have a shift back to the idea of man in the image of God. What is the purpose of all these mechanisms of economics? It’s not to make money. It’s to create an environment of economic production, and also utilize the idea of creating an environment that increases and stimulates the creative potential of every single human being all through their life in various ways. Thus, the discussion on culture that we had this morning.

When you put that all together with what’s going on around the world, it becomes very clear that this is getting focussed more clearly in terms of the two forces that are at work. You’ve got one pushing economic bail-outs of big Wall Street speculators and bank monopolies that are bigger than ever dreamed. Then you see war hawks pushing, trying to create good guys and bad guys around the world. Let’s instead pull the world together around the idea that we are created with creativity in us. That’s what we have economics for; that’s why we increase the cultural level and focus on that, and not just focus on making money in a market.

Iowa and Xi Jinping

Speed: Please tell our audience about the relationship of the present President of China to Iowa and to the United States.

Baker: Well, before he was President of China, in 1985, Xi Jinping came to the United States and stayed in Iowa for a while, living in Muscatine. As a result of that visit, Xi got very well acquainted with U.S. agriculture, the advanced technologies that our farmers use. Today U.S. agriculture is literally what I call astronaut farming, because the technologies used in the space program are sitting in the tractor cabs of every farmer in the United States and many parts of the world.

Xi realized the degree of that technology, and now has had many occasions to work with U.S. farmers and especially Iowa farmers, because he made a lot of contacts there. A lot of that is now being transferred and utilized in the most sophisticated way in China. Drones, GPS, advanced irrigation and sciences.

Muscatine has put together a China-Iowa Friendship Society and has had many exchanges of people. Chinese orchestras have toured through the Midwest and vice versa. This really demonstrates the speed at which we could bring the nations of the world together around the idea of mutual development. But it left a big impression in terms of the agriculture sectors. The current U.S. Ambassador to China, Terry Branstad, is a former governor of Iowa.

It’s a tremendous thing to consider the need for food, because it actually accentuates the need for all the things that are faceted in being a human being. That’s what Lyndon LaRouche really focussed on throughout all his writings—developing the creative potential of every human being. That’s really something that you can see manifesting itself through the magnitude of lifting the poor people in China out of poverty at a scale that’s never been seen in history.

The Question of the British Empire

April 26—An excerpt from the discussion that followed Panel 4 of the Schiller Institute’s April 25-26 teleconference.

Dennis Speed: We have a question for all of our panelists from Jessica White, a long-time political activist in New York.

As a member of the LaRouche PAC and an active follower of LaRouche for many years, I have come to realize that many people, especially Americans, see the definition of the term “empire,” as an enemy that only exists in the fantasy world of a George Lucas movie, with no correlation to the so-called “real world.” They have been taught to believe that the British Empire was something created and controlled by kings and queens centuries ago. They naively do not understand that the British Empire, in its many covert, evil forms, still exists to this day. Many Americans talk about the so-called “deep state,” or the “American empire,” but they dismiss the truth of the existence of a very dangerous, and very present British Empire, along with its notorious, traitorous American puppet allies.

It is this British geopolitical entity that continues to control and manipulate the U.S. and the world economy, mainly through Wall Street and the City of London. It is this British geopolitical entity which continues to spread war and famine and regime change. It is the British Empire that also continues to incorporate the ideology of eugenics, describing most of humanity as “useless eaters,” and continues to instill the evils of racism all over the world.

This may seem like a simplistic or stupid question, but please ask any or all of the panelists to explain, how would you address those Americans and others, who refuse to comprehend that Wall Street and the City of London are, actually, the arms and legs of the body of the British Empire, which must be destroyed, and replaced by a New Paradigm under LaRouche’s Four Laws, beginning immediately with establishing a global Glass-Steagall in order to infuse the funds in the form ...

Ramasimong Phillip Tsokolibane: We should look at the media, the role that the media in the United States of America is spreading. You can start with the hippies’ sex counterculture era. That’s when the strike started. You can add it up, education: The education that most people of less than maybe 50 or 40 years got in America, killed them. It turned them into zombies through the attacks of the media. The British Empire controls the media. The youth of today are always on Facebook, WhatsApp, social media. What are they texting? They don’t go to internet sites like LaRouche PAC; that’s the only place where you can get what we talk about, within the LaRouche movement.

They’ve been turned into animals. They are living there. It’s our job. At times, I picture LaRouche speaking when he came from the Second World War, from India. In a webcast, he related somebody asking him, “Who the hell are you, Lyndon LaRouche?” It was an Afro-American. He said, “Since I’ve joined your movement, I’m no longer being invited to tables, to dinners that I used to be invited to. I’m bruised. Who the hell are you?” So I think LaRouche was singing, silently, while making fishers of men—if you follow me. And he fished me.

So it’s our job. We don’t need to be paid to do this job, because we are human beings. We don’t have to follow animals, because we see that they’ve chosen evil ways. We must always fight for the truth, try to bring them to the light, because we are the torchbearers. Let their blood not be on our shoulders. Thanks.

Sébastien Périmony: Concerning what Helga was saying about whether it is too late to act: Of course, it’s never too late, but we all know that we have 25,000 people dying every day of hunger. That’s an official figure from the Food and Agriculture Organization. So, already in the last decades, 10 million people dying every year of hunger. What I have heard from the American farmers is just unbelievable. We have the same problem in France, the same problem in Germany, farmers striking, demonstrations all over the world. It’s just amazing that civilization is no longer able to feed its population. I think one of the most important questions for the world health system, is food production that we have to develop worldwide. I think it’s very important that we fight on this subject.

Ellen Brown: The British and American systems go back to the Bank of England. The British system was, banks privately issued money at interest, and the American System was government-issued money. We clearly need to go back to the American System. It has gradually eroded. Originally, the American colonies issued all of their own money, and then we had coins. Coins were the official money when the Constitution was written, and were a big part of the money supply at that time. They were issued by the Treasury. The portion of coins has gotten smaller and smaller, and now we’re just talking about nickels, dimes and quarters, and all of the rest is issued privately by banks and particularly by central banks. The Bank for International Settlements is the head of the central banking system, but it was originally British until after World War I, when they no longer had the money to do it themselves, at which point they partnered with three other central bankers and that moved to Switzerland.

The locus of the problem is this parasite that is sucking money out of the system at all times, the whole financialized system, which you could call the British system. I think the British system is probably more nefarious than that. I’ve seen whistleblowers talking of being in meetings where the talk was about quite bad things, like bringing down the global economy with a pandemic.

I would agree that that’s where the problem is, and to get control of it we do need some sort of global movement. But first, I think we need a global understanding of what the problem really is, and how it can be fixed.

Speed: We are approaching the 250th anniversary of the American Revolution. Most Americans think that revolution is “over,” that it doesn’t exist dynamically. I’d like to see if you have any recommendation for the questioner about how you would explain to Americans, the idea of how these two systems operate.

Cédric Mbeng Mezui: I don’t know if this will explain it to Americans, but it’s more to try to share the American experience with Africans: The story of America as the way to build our economy has to be well-known. All these discussions about some countries exporting raw materials, about producing manufactures are somewhat known. There is much international suppression. You can see that in the fact that Africa depends 100% especially for food, for jobs, for everything, even for money. And this is where I think there is a lot for Africans to learn from what was implemented in U.S. during the same period. This is a Hamilton time for Africa. To make a decision and work to implement the same kind of measures, not exactly the same, because it’s not exactly the same story, but there is a key fundamental in the way the economy can be built, the way to build up industry, and the way to use manufacturing to absorb the workforce on the continent. This is the kind of experience that can be shared between the U.S. and Africa in this kind of discussion.

Speed: You’re referring to your own writings on Hamilton’s economics and the possible applications of that in Africa. Is that what you’re saying?

Mbeng Mezui: Yes. In two of my books, I use Hamilton’s view as the key for production, in terms of manufacture and banking systems, to see how it can be used to help Africa take off, and also to try to explain the challenges that we faced during our encounters with the British Empire at that time.

In another one of my books using Hamilton’s ideas, it was more to show how a country or a region can use Hamilton’s public finances as a banking system to actually fund the real economy and use it for the benefit of the population, not just to speculate. These kinds of ideas need to be shared on the continent.

Speed: Jack Lynch, on this panel, is also a banker. Jack, do you have anything to say? The questioner said she has a problem being able to explain to dumb Americans that there actually is a British Empire that runs things, because the people she talks to think America runs things, the “American empire.”

Lynch: I just don’t think the British run things. It’s one of the areas that I have a hard time understanding, and maybe it’s my own fault for not researching it. I’ve read all the materials from Lyndon LaRouche and I see the point, but—I just think—I don’t see how the Brits can really control us. And, frankly, the world economy. I just don’t see it.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: I can only say that in my presentation yesterday I tried to go into some of the ideology of it. If you look at it just like “facts,” it blurs, because the British are very smart in always taking all sides. They give each side the impression that they’re on that side. In a certain sense, it’s the “divide and conquer,” it’s the idea to subvert organizations. If you look at the Integrity Initiative, the way they plant what they call “cluster agents” in the media who spread—I mean, if you look at German TV for example, you don’t need to have a list of who is a British agent, because they reveal themselves by having the line of the geopolitical attack, almost like clockwork. Like when the anti-China campaign started to escalate. If you develop a sense of how it works, you see it every day.

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, a prominent columnist for the Daily Telegraph, once wrote an editorial, saying that the European Union is doing exactly what the British interest is. So that is how they work!

The H.G. Wells book, The Open Conspiracy, of 1928, describes it very clearly, that when the British realized that they could not militarily reconquer the American colony, they determined to subvert the American establishment to get Americans to adopt the British Empire as a model to run the world based on the Anglo-American special relationship. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, they decided to establish the unipolar world, based on the model of the British Empire.

So you can say that the Americans have more power, they have more muscle, they have more military—that’s all true. But I think if you want to understand how it works, you have to go back in the history of the United States. The British never gave up on the idea that they had lost the American colony; they first tried to re-win the colony in the War of 1812. That didn’t work. They tried again in the Civil War, siding with the Confederacy against Lincoln. That did not work. Then came the assassinations. Since they managed to get the United States into World War I, it’s like a textbook. If you really try to figure it out, you can. The subversion of the establishment is the big problem.

What is lacking is the patriots—the patriots who would reassert the ideals of the American Revolution, to fight for America as a republic. I don’t know how to communicate this: The United States would have such an easy time to be friends with every country in the world if they would go back to the ideas of the American Revolution. People are not anti-American. They’re anti-this thing which has emerged after the assassination of Kennedy, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the regime-change wars, the color revolutions, the interventionist wars—this is really far gone!

It’s a calamity, because if the United States is not part of the solution, it for sure will be part of the problem. I don’t think that the United States will dissolve as peacefully as the Soviet Union did in ’91. If the United States were to collapse, I think we would have World War III. Therefore, I think it is in the interest of the whole human race to find a solution where the United States plays an important role, is maybe even primus inter pares—I don’t care. As long as there is the principle of the acceptance of sovereignty, of having alliances. Go back to the John Quincy Adams conception of foreign policy, and there will be no problem. I can tell you, all the people in the world, all the peoples in the world, would be overjoyed if the United States would find its way back to its tradition. That’s all I can say.

Lynch: Thank you, Helga. I have a better understanding, now that you said all that. I now have a different perspective. Thank you.

Bob Baker: The one thing I was thinking is the massive capability through mass media and the advertisements that are used—they’ve got these things scientifically designed to promote concepts and ideas and philosophies that just overwhelm people at this moment. And that’s a process of the Empire. One of the challenges we have is how, even as individuals, to survive over-bombardment through the mass media. In my investigations into agriculture and what’s going on there, you can’t hardly find a major farm magazine that isn’t just completely full of ads from the big cartel monopolies. Of course, that leads everybody in a certain direction. I just use that as a short example of the process that we’re discussing.

Périmony: Maybe one point for Mr. Lynch about the British Empire: Yesterday, Jacques Cheminade referred to a book by Nicholas Shaxson, Treasure Islands: Tax Havens and the Men Who Stole the World, in which Shaxson writes about the second British Empire, with the process of transformation from a political British Empire to a financial British Empire. It’s very interesting. If we take the case of Africa, recent reports show that between 1980 and 2010, you have $1.2 trillion of capital flight which went to the tax havens, which is the equivalent of the GDP of the whole continent. So you have $1.2 trillion in 30 years going to the tax havens of the British Empire—most of them are British. So that’s a point, also to understand that it’s not a political empire, as such, but it’s a real financial empire, and I think it’s important also to have this idea in mind.

Schiller Institute Conference on the Internet

April 25-26, 2020

Mankind’s Existence Now Depends on the Establishment of a New Paradigm!

Panel One

The Urgent Need to Replace Geopolitics with a

New Paradigm in International Relations

• Opening Remarks and Introduction

Dennis Speed, Moderator

• The Crimes and Downfall of British Liberalism and the New Paradigm of the Future of Humanity

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Founder and Chairman, Schiller Institute

• Remarks

H.E. Dmitry Polyanskiy, First Deputy Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations

• For a Better Future: Proposed Principles Needed to Ensure Peaceful and Productive Relations Between China and the United States

H.E. Ambassador Huang Ping, Consul General of the People’s Republic of China in New York

• A Europe Not To Be Ashamed Of

Jacques Cheminade, Chairman, Solidarité et Progrès, former French Presidential Candidate

• The Role of the Philippines in Restoring U.S.-China Friendship

Butch Valdes, Chairman of the Philippine LaRouche Society

• One Humanity, A View from Italy

Michele Geraci, Italian Economist, former Undersecretary, Development Ministry, Rome

• Crisis and Hope: A Report from Lebanon, Prof. Bassam El-Hachem

• Introducing the LaRouche Legacy Foundation

Helga Zepp-LaRouche

• The World Needs an Agapic, Scientific Hypothesis of What Mankind Is

Daniel Burke, LaRouche independent candidate for U.S. Senate in New Jersey

Panel Two

For a Better Understanding of How Our Universe Functions

• In Defense of the Human Species

LaRouche PAC Science Team: Megan Beets, Benjamin Deniston, Jason Ross

• The Role of ‘Free Invention’ in Creative Discovery

Jean-Pierre Luminet, PhD, Astrophysicist, Emeritus researcher, National Center for Scientific Research,

France

• Friendship Between Astronauts: An Exemplary Precedent for International Cooperation

Michel Tognini, Astronaut; Association of Space Explorers founding member

• Apollo 7: An Astronaut’s Reflections

Walt Cunningham, Apollo Astronaut

• The Necessity of Science Education for African Youth

Marie Korsaga, PhD, Astrophysicist, Burkina Faso

• Making Nuclear Fusion a Reality

Sen. Joe Pennacchio, New Jersey State Senator

• The Inside Story of Contemporary Science,

Will Happer, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Physics, Princeton University

• Chinese Medicine Treatment of COVID-19

Guangxi Li, MD, PhD, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing

Panel Three

Creativity as the Distinctive Characteristic of Human Culture:

The Need for a Classical Renaissance

Moderators: Kesha Rogers and Dennis Speed

• Performance of Beethoven’s “An die ferne Geliebte,”

op. 98

John Sigerson, tenor, Margaret Greenspan, piano

• “I Have Insisted That Music Is Intelligible!”

Lyndon LaRouche

• Helga Zepp-LaRouche , Founder and Chairman, Schiller Institute

•˜A Poetic Musical Offering

William Warfield

• The Presence of the Classical Principle in Folk Music

Willis Patterson, Bass-baritone, Professor Emeritus; Associate Dean, University of Michigan School of Music, Theatre & Dance

• The Physical Power of Classical Poetry and Music

John Sigerson, Music Director for the Schiller Institute, co-author of A Manual on the Rudiments of Tuning and Registration

• Hall Johnson and the Dvorak Dream: From Spiritual to Art Song

Dr. Eugene Simpson, Professor Emeritus of Voice and Choral Literature, Rowan University of New Jersey; Founding Curator of the Hall Johnson Collection

• On the Employment of Chorus in Politics

Diane Sare, Founder and Co-director, Schiller Institute NYC Chorus

• Conference Greetings

Gregory Hopkins, Founder and Artistic Director, Harlem Opera Theater

• Central Concepts of Chinese Aesthetical Education

Teng Jimeng, PhD, Professor of American Studies, Foreign Studies University, Beijing

Panel Four

The Science of Physical Economy

Moderator: Dennis Speed

• LaRouche’s Legacy: Foundation of the Modern Science of Physical Economy

Dennis Small, Schiller Institute Director for Ibero-America

• When Africa Looks to the Stars

Sébastien Périmony

• Unlocking the Potential of Africa—Ideas by Alexander Hamilton

Cédric Mbeng Mezui, Author, Gabon; financial sector expert; Think Tank FinanceAfrika

• Greetings to the Conference

Kelvin Kemm, CEO Stratek; former Board Chairman of the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation

• Make Africa an Economic Powerhouse to Benefit All Mankind

Phillip Tsokolibane, Leader, LaRouche South Africa

• Franco-Chinese Cooperation in Africa

Ms. Yang Yan, Political Counselor, Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in Paris

Feed the Future: Eating is a Moral Right

A DIALOGUE WITH AMERICAN FARM LEADERS

Bob Baker, Virginia; Schiller Institute Agriculture Co-coordinator

Joe Maxwell, Missouri; former Missouri Lt. Governor, Co-founder of Family Farm Action Alliance

Tyler Dupy, Kansas; Executive Director of the Kansas Cattlemen’s Association

Frank Endres, California; member of the National Farmers Organization for 63 years

Bill Bullard, Montana; CEO of R-CALF USA

Jim Benham, Indiana; State President, Indiana Farmers Union; National Board member, National Farmers Union

Mike Callicrate, Kansas and Colorado; Board of Directors, Organization for Competitive Markets; Owner, Ranch Foods Direct

• The Productive vs. the Speculative Economy: A View from Central America

Prof. Mario Roberto Morales, Professor and writer

• Reinstate Glass-Steagall

Jack Lynch, Consultant, former Vice-President, First Midwest Bank of Illinois

• Failure to Address the Cause of 2008 Financial Collapse Caused Public Health Collapse

Daisuke Kotegawa, Research Director, Canon Institute; former official, Japan Ministry of Finance; former IMF Executive Director for Japan

• Productive Credit, not Predatory Debt

Ellen Brown, President, Public Banking Institute, USA

• Greetings to the Conference

Dr. Joycelyn Elders, former U.S. Surgeon General

III. The Principles Which Define Life

March 15, 1987

Remarks on Gurwitsch’s Method

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

Editor’s Note: An edited version of this text appeared in two parts, in 21st Century Science & Technology magazine, Vol. 11, Nos. 2 and 3, Summer and Fall 1998, available at http://21sci-tech.com/Subscriptions/Archive/1998_S.pdf and http://21sci-tech.com/Subscriptions/Archive/1998_F.pdf. Further articles on the subjects of Gurwitsch and his work are in those same two issues of 21st Century Science & Technology magazine.

I have just read a review of Alexander Gurwitsch’s work presented by one of the great biologist’s former students [Michael Lipkind]. Gurwitsch’s method has striking resemblances to the notion of living processes which I developed as a criticism of Mathematical Biophysics of Chicago’s Nicholas Rashevsky, at the close of the 1940s, a criticism which aided me greatly in effecting my discoveries in economic science.

This is, I think, no mere coincidence; at the beginning of the present century, the Pasteur Institute exerted important influence on certain leading circles of Russian science, both in biology and the nuclear physics of fission. The case of Academician Vladimir Vernadsky is exemplary. Also, although my friends and I have so far failed to uncover relevant aspects of the Pasteur Institute’s work, some associated with that Institute showed variously the direct and implicit influence of Bernhard Riemann’s method, in their approaches to biological and biogeochemical processes. My own work has also been influenced very strongly by Riemann, notably in treating the processes of social reproduction (Leibnizian physical economy) as coherent with principles otherwise characteristic of living processes.

Hence, my own work on non-linearity of development of physical-economic processes sheds this sort of light on some of the methodological approaches which the reporter [Lipkind] identifies in Gurwitsch’s leading work.

www.arttoday.com

“Modern science has known, since the collaboration of Luca Pacioli and Leonardo da Vinci, that healthy living processes are characterized by a kind of harmonic ordering.” Here, Leonardo’s Star-of-Bethlehem and other plants.

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

What is Life?

Despite the recent hegemony of molecular biology, modern science has known, since the collaboration of Luca Pacioli and Leonardo da Vinci, that healthy living processes are characterized by a kind of harmonic ordering, consistent with the derivation of Kepler’s astrophysical laws, coherent with the construction of the circle’s Golden Section, a construction cohering with the uniqueness of the five platonic solids within the ordinary discrete-manifold space of faith in naive sense-perception. It is demonstrable, that, excepting the extremes of astrophysics and microphysics, any process which exhibits these harmonic morphogenetic characteristics is either a living process or a special case of activity by a living process.

This was emphasized already in Plato’s dialogues, the Timaeus most emphatically, but the appreciation of such harmonic orderings antedates Plato in such respects as the original design of the Athens Acropolis and the early forms of well-tempering in classical Greek music. This standpoint was revived, most notably, by Louis Pasteur’s work on optical activity of living processes. Advances in quality of spectroscopy’s instruments have lately promoted the specialized form of optical biophysics known most commonly as “non-linear spectroscopy.”

The eruption of the global pandemic, AIDS, has placed great importance on study of the spectroscopy of the mitotic processes, work in which Gurwitsch was a pioneer. However, the practical implications are much broader, including relevance to cancer research, and studies of the diseases of aging of tissues more generally. A. G. Gurwitsch was a true pioneer in development of the optical biophysics which promises now to dominate future leading work in biology.

Left: Friedrich Gauss (1799-1855); right: Bernhard Riemann (1826-1866).

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

The standpoint in mathematical physics most appropriate to these lines of research is that of Carl Gauss and such among his scientific heirs as Dirichlet, Weierstrass, Riemann, and Cantor. Where the method of Pacioli, Leonardo, and Kepler, was derived from Nicolaus of Cusa’s rigorous treatment of isoperimetry in such locations as his De Docta Ignorantia, Gauss reworked the leading accomplishments of Kepler, Leibniz, et al., superseding simply isoperimetric notions of least action with a notion of conic, self-similar-spiral action as the elementary form of least action in the universe. The work on mathematical physics by Gauss, Weierstrass, and Riemann, must be examined from the vantage-point of a synthetic (radically constructive) geometry, without employment of the axiomatic-deductive forms of mathematics of a (Cartesian) discrete manifold.

This Gauss-Riemann approach accounts uniquely for the common harmonic orderings in astrophysics and living processes, and implicitly demands that the microphysical domain be treated from this same methodological standpoint. A mapping of principal features of the microphysical domain from this standpoint is already in progress, with some experimental proofs of this already supplied. This obliges us to supplant the notions of “negentropy” associated with the standpoint in statistical mechanics characteristic of the work of Ludwig Boltzmann et al., with the definition of “negentropy” first elaborated by Pacioli and Leonardo, and asserted by Kepler. The Gauss-Riemann standpoint in radically constructive physical geometry of conic self- similar-spiral least action, provides us a vastly more adequate view of this matter.

This also signifies fundamental, ontological as well as methodological flaws of assumption in the definitions of “cybernetics,” derived from Boltzmann et al., as supplied by Norbert Wiener et al. If the astrophysical is ordered as Gauss’s reconstruction of Kepler’s laws indicates, then the elementary laws of the universe are “negentropic,” not “entropic” in form. Similarly, the discrete manifold is to be viewed not as ontologically elementary, but as a projection of a higher-order continuous manifold, such that ontological elementarity lies in the physical geometry of a continuum described by a Gauss-Riemann construction of the complex domain.

Such was the standpoint of my own discoveries of the early 1950s. A brief summary of key points indicates the relevance of my own work to a reading of Gurwitsch’s work.

The point of departure for my discoveries was my rejection of Norbert Wiener’s definition of “negentropy” in human behavior and “information” transmitted by this behavior. Like Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Judgment, Wiener’s approach insisted that true synthetic judgment (creative discovery) was accomplished by an unknowable process. Wiener went further, to insist that such synthetic judgment was non-existent. Since the progressive evolutionary development of the biosphere exhibited a characteristically creative process of morphogenetic development, and since the increase of demographic potential of the human species exactly paralleled such evolution within the biosphere, the cause of human creative thought must be a special sort of development of the same kind of negentropic principle characteristic of living processes. I.e., that the physiology of the human brain’s function must provide the efficient substrate for higher manifestations of human intelligence.

The MIT Museum

Norbert Wiener in 1955, studying the record of his brain waves emerging from a new device developed at Massachusetts General Hospital. The device compares brain waves in one time period with those which preceded them. Wiener’s cybernetics denies the existence of human creative discovery.

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

In other words, mentation must not only be rooted in the mechanisms of reproduction of cells, but must be subordinated to the same, subsuming morphogenetic principles of (Riemannian) potential which delimits the cell-production processes to the effect of producing a definite member of a definite species.

The convergence of my own approach with that of Gurwitsch is already suggested strongly.

In physical economy (ignoring superimposed monetary processes), the characteristic event is the increase of the society’s potential population-density, which has increased by about three orders of magnitude since the upper limit of a 10 millions human population estimated for pure hunting-and-gathering society. The source of this increase in population potential, is the generation of those modifications of social and individual behavior we associate today with scientific and technological progress.

Although the development of the individual scientific discoverer is socially determined, each discovery is the product of an individual mind, although the realization of that discovery is, again, socially determined. It is in the power of the individual to generate discoveries, or related acts, which transform the potential population-density of society, in which the efficient connection between the individual (microcosm) and the society (macrocosm) is directly exhibited in physical-economic processes.

The causal connection between such advances in technology, generated by individual discoveries, and a resulting increase of the productive powers of labor (potential population-density), served thus as the most convenient point of reference for a necessary and sufficient refutation of Wiener’s Cybernetics.

My concern was the feasibility of measuring this causal connection, such that technological progress, measured from the standpoint of Gaussian notions of least action, enjoy a measurable connection to ensuing increases of the productive powers of labor. On condition that Gauss-Riemann physics is comprehended in terms of the indicated synthetic geometrical elaboration of conic least action, the methods appropriate to solution of the problems of measuring such a “non-linear” process-connection were implicitly available.

By virtue of the derivation and elaboration of this hypothesis, what is shown to be characteristic of physical-economic processes in the most elementary terms, is also a reflection of that which is true elementary in living processes. On this basis, during 1973, I outlined to my associates a project for estimating the impact of continued, then-prevailing trends for collapse of human population-potential upon the proliferation of new and old varieties of epidemics and pandemics. During 1974, it became clear that continuation of mutually reinforcing monetary-policy and Malthusian trends would bring mankind to the threshold of proliferating entirely new kinds of pandemics, as well as reviving old ones.

The projection made by my associates at the close of 1974, aptly forecasts the epidemiological developments of the 1980s, approximately on schedule. Although the original generation of human AIDS is unresolved, the conditions have developed which would tend to suffice to have generated such a new pandemic in nature. Whether or not AIDS is the product of accidental recombinations occurring in cancer research on human tissue, during the 1960s or later, the conditions for its proliferation were fostered by a lowering of the standard of life.

Excepting pockets of anomalous behavior (homosexuals and drug-users), the evidence is that the rate of proliferation of the infection among normal portions of populations varied according to the misery index among compared populations. Homosexuals and drug-users have had the special significance of rapidly building up a reservoir of carriers among industrially developed regions of society.

This point of view requires us to examine the way in which a rapid lowering of the potential population-density of populations, to levels below existing population-density, may cause human bodies to generate new forms of diseases, especially viral diseases. This requires mastery of the mitotic processes, treating the existence of parent and daughter cells as special aspects subsumed by a determining, morphogenetic function of mitosis. For known reasons, this requires a concentration on the spectroscopy of such mitotic functions.

The relation between the processes of the brain’s cortex and the possibility of human synthetic judgment as an activity coherent with such cortical processes, becomes a central concern. The spectroscopy of these functions, from the vantage-point of mitosis in general, defines the general approach under which investigation must be broadly subsumed.

Therefore, the work of Gurwitsch is properly of extraordinary interest.

The Transfinite As Ontologically Existent

Gurwitsch apparently first elaborated the approach of most specific interest to me in a 1929 paper, “Der Begriff der Äquipotentialität in seiner Anwendung auf physiologische Probleme.” In this, the reporter emphasizes, “the notion of ‘brain continuum’ was suggested and considered with incredible profundity so characteristic of A. G. Gurwitsch.

According to this concept, the cortex presents a three-dimensional continuous non-structural constellation and all the structural histoelements are plunged into it and ‘impregnated’ by it.... However, the continuum state is determined by excitations of the related neurons only to a certain degree, since the excitation corresponding to the “perception of the whole” of the “image perception” (“Gestalt”) cannot be considered as an associative connection of the excitations of the neurons. The evidence is that the elementary excitations flow into the continuum as a common reservoir.

This is precisely what is readily demonstrated for the function of creative scientific discoveries within the developmental processes of entire economies. This can be no mere coincidence, since it is precisely the highest order of brain functions which determine this relationship of microcosm to continuum (macrocosm). The reporter continues:

The above abstract conception of the brain continuum was revived and concretized when the theory of the vectorial biological field was established (A. G. Gurwitsch, 1944). In light of it, the cell field as a dynamic principle, spreading over the cell borders to intercellular space, continuously constitutes current connection between the cells and the resulting integral field, in a single general indissoluble, continual whole, interspersed with “points of condensation,” or maxima, which are the intracellular areas of the cell fields. [An interesting observation, respecting recent researches into AIDS dementia] The actual integral field of brain areas is now the expression of the above abstract continuum. It has constant (invariant) characteristics, which finally are suggested to determine the general character of the individual organism, including physiological manifestations.

My own epistemological investigations into memory and the Riemannian physics of ordering of technological advances, suggests that human memory is essentially geometrically holographic, rather than “digital.” We do not “recall” a particular memory, but, rather, regenerate (reconstruct) that which is presented as a recollection, holographically. This brings us to another of the reporter’s key points.

Strictly speaking, the psychical sphere, although closely related to (being an attribute of) the physiological activity of the brain cortex, does not belong to reversible processes, as [do] other functional activities of the cortex or any other physiological system. Indeed, the irreversible psychological “maturation” continues during all the individual’s life-time.

From my standpoint in physical economy, the reporter’s description of Gurwitsch’s concept echoes my own knowledge of the role of culture in the technological progress of society. The individual’s development is shaped by culture, but the individual who contributes or otherwise distributes valid scientific-technological progress, modifies the culture of the society in that respect and degree. The individual’s ability to modify the culture in this way is conditioned by the culture; the modification of culture so effected, determines the behavior of the society thereafter.

Cultures which are transformed in a way corresponding to increase of potential population-density, manifest what might appear to be a directed series of cultural transformations, each associated within a corresponding enhancement of potential population-density. Culture defined in terms of such interaction of microcosm and macrocosm, corresponds to the unifying morphogenetic principle of Gurwitsch. Culture is to society, in this respect, what Gurwitsch’s principle is to the continuum of brain-function.

The reporter emphasizes that the empirical study of brain functions from the vantage-point of Gurwitsch’s principle must take into account two distinguishable classes of phenomena.

The first one, is the connection between the external stimuli and the psychical manifestations which can be designated as feelings. The second one, concerns the current, incessant stream of chaotic thoughts, which is a certain background for all the other psychical activities. [for broad purposes of description, I would not introduce a quibble—LaR] These two, evidently quite different phenomena have a common basis, which is as follows.

Analysis of both the cases inevitably reveals what is designated by A. G. Gurwitsch as “the break of continuity,” or “the gap in the entirety”: these are, perhaps, imperfect translations of the notion introduced by A. G. Gurwitsch, in Russian, in the original manuscript (Analytical Biology, unpublished). This “break of continuity” is meant to occur while analyzing the somato-physical and psycho-somatic chains of the process: such a chain is considered to be continual as soon as at least once parameter is common for both its parts—somatic and psychical. Both the “classical” and Gurwitsch’s points of view accept as evident “the break of the continuity,” but both differ in principle in the further analysis.

Here I introduce an important qualification. Where the reporter writes “the gap in the entirety,” I read “singularity” in the sense of Riemannian physics. Where he writes “the break of continuity,” I read “discontinuity” in the sense of Lejeune Dirichlet’s principle of Gaussian topology, and as defined by Karl Weierstrass: another aspect of singularity.

One of the convenient measures of “negentropy,” as I choose to define it in physical economy, is as an increase of the density of discontinuities per interval of action. The relevant Cantorian theorem, on enumerability of discontinuities within an arbitrarily small interval of action, applies; this Cantorian theorem must be read not only from the standpoint of Weierstrass, but as a proposition in Riemannian potential theory, as viewed, generated from radically constructive Gaussian synthetic geometry.

This has a simple demonstration in physical economy, where the structure of the division of labor becomes richer in singularities in correspondence to raising of the level of technology and productivity, and where the density of such singularities of process-structure diminishes under influence of economic devolution.

The remainder of the reporter’s account of this matter, respecting Gurwitsch’s work, speaks for itself. With one important exception, to be stressed next, my views are already implicitly identified above, or else the report is of such a nature that I should add no embellishment to it. There is one subsumed point, on the subject of “feeling,” in which the reporter’s account oversimplifies the problems to be considered.

The Matter of ‘Feeling’

The classical Greek recognizes two distinct qualities of “feeling.” This is typified by the use of two different terms, “eros” and “agapē,” to correspond to the domain of one English term, “love.” In reality, a purely contemplative form of knowledge does not exist. All thought pertaining to the quality of rational knowledge involves what are potentially extremely strong degrees of emotion. All thought is a disposition either for action, or relative inaction. It is the “feeling” aspect of thought which supplies the quality of action or inaction. The most important feature of this connection of thought to “feelings,” is the proper discrimination among the two qualities of feeling available.

The woman challenges her lover, “Do you love me for my body or my mind,” and should be quite sorely disappointed—sooner or later—if either option is strictly the case. “Male chauvinism” is a product of the preponderance of the former, “eros,” and nothing but “agapē” brings the woman’s recommendation that her mate might be happier in celibacy.

A certain combination of both is required, but such that the former feeling is altogether dominated by the latter.

This issue bears most directly on the reporter’s portrayal of Gurwitsch’s views, when we pose the distinction in a more universal frame of reference. The domination by a compulsion akin to “eros,” is the prototype of irrational behavior, just as efficient action promptly subsumed by rational thought, is the hallmark of the rational, socially responsible personality. The relevant question, is whether the individual locates his emotional sense of personal identity more efficiently in “eros,” or in “agapē.” This has direct bearing on reading the account of Gurwitsch’s treatment of “Psychical Indeterminism.” My point here, is to show that what appears a moral distinction, must also be a physiological distinction, bearing upon the self-developing continuum-principle of morphogenesis of development of the human mind.

The rational person is, first of all, a patriot, but also a “world-citizen,” without there being any contradiction between the two. The mortal individual’s circumstances are such, just because his mortal individual existence is a brief and fragile one, that he must depend upon his society to foster, and give meaning to the good he contributes through his life’s work. He also requires, that as he, as microcosm, should be a positive factor in the relevant macrocosm, that his nation, as microcosm, finds true meaning in its contribution to the advancement of civilization. Thus, the proper policies of his nation, assure the merit of world-citizenship to the outcome of his otherwise fragile, individual existence.

To be a person for mankind’s advancement, causes a shift in the sense of personal identity, from the erotic individualist, to the agapic sense of patriotism and world- citizenship. The person who retains an infantile sense of personal identity, the erotic one, will select his feeling for certain choices of action, and of personal self-development, accordingly. The same is true of the person who rises out of the infantile-erotic sense of identity, to the agapic. These are two distinct kinds of continua of morphogenetic development of the personality. As such, each must have its own peculiar physiological substrate.

I read the account of Gurwitsch’s “psychical indeterminism,” to signify that the morphogenetic process is “non-linear” in the Riemannian sense, as the notion of a “Riemann Surface,” for example. This signifies, axiomatically, that no mechanistic determinism prevails, for reasons already stipulated by Riemann in his 1854 inaugural dissertation, “On the Hypotheses Which Underlie Geometry.” Or, as in the case of the famous 1859 paper, “On The Propagation of Plane Air Waves of Finite Magnitude,” the driving of a process to its apparent discrete-manifold limit, defines a singularity which transforms the terms of statement of the continuing action relative to the discrete manifold. Both Riemann references are essentially equivalent, and are classic illustrations of truly non-linear processes.

This may be restated. The emergence of higher physical states, generates behavior which is not comprehensible, determined in terms of a discrete-manifold representation of the preceding state. This does not imply “indeterminacy” in the familiar sense of Bohr-Heisenberg, but only that higher states of discrete manifold are not comprehensible in terms of the lower ones. This seeming paradox is removed, by recognizing that an ordered succession of higher-order phase-spaces is itself a continuous function, but one “transfinite” with respect to each and all of the discrete manifolds associated with the successive phase-spaces.

In consequence of this fact of ordered states, we must shift causality from the discrete manifold to the higher domain which continuously subsumes the successive lower, discrete-manifold states. This shift in the elementary location of efficient causality demands a corresponding shift in the location of ontological reality, away from the discrete (Cartesian or quasi-Cartesian) manifold, to the continuous, transfinite manifold. This admits of empirical demonstration, just as the Riemann Surface has empirical demonstrations.

There is nothing mystical in the notion of “vitalism” attributed to Gurwitsch. If the matter is stated in the proper terms of Riemannian physics, the definiteness of its causal and ontological efficiency is located in the well-defined transfinite domain.

A most attractive feature of Gurwitsch’s reported work deals with the nature of the kind of “memory” which guides an embryo to produce the proper form of its species. This is not a discrete memory, simply genetic-mechanical, but rather some developmental impulse within the living process which follows a least-action pathway in respect to its relationship to its own previous development and its setting. This, again, is precisely what we find in physical economy.

Conventions of language oblige us to use either such terms as “potential” and “equilibrium,” or to resort so such qualifying neo-logisms as “meta-potential” and “meta-equilibrium.” The phenomena are more or less readily demonstrable, and their demonstration obliges us to find new, more precise terms to distinguish these phenomena. Perhaps, if we but define the proper, Keplerian-geometric meaning of the phenomenon of “negentropy,” and construct our functions and experiments to reflect such Gauss-Riemann definitions of negentropy as the proper definition of a universal principle of least action, the formal representation of these conceptions were better accomplished.