August 31, 2013

END THE WALL STREET NIGHTMARE:

What If Wall Street Had Died Now?

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

[Print version of this article]

This article was first published in EIR in its Sept. 13, 2013 issue.

It is long time past to end the torture (and the bull****) of the global economic depression, brought on by the Wall Street criminals and their Greenie shock troops.

The odd thing about this presently plunging, global economic depression, is that almost no one whose experience bridges the trans-Atlantic continents, seems to have brought up the subject of the need to end the torture! In fact, it seems to us, on reflection now, that our so-called “greenies” had somehow tried to set our planet’s economic clock to running backwards, as the present U.S. system had been doing since about the same time that President John F. Kennedy had been assassinated.

That much now said, the essential difference between human beings, on the one side, and all other varieties of mammals, on the other, presents us with two inseparable characteristics. First: that the known history of all human varieties is, that all successful, human cultures evolve upwards mentally, rather than according to some simple biological clock.

For example: the human species uses means which are equivalent to “the use of fire” as a standard for our species’ progress; and, that this progress should be normally measured, essentially, in terms of increase of the energy-flux-density of the activities of the human species, as this is to be measured in ranges from simple fire, to both higher modes and effects, all measured, essentially, in a chemistry of a succession of orders of increase of relative energy-flux density. “Normally,” this variation runs upward, as from the simple cooking-fire of the most ancient humans, into successive categories of the higher chemical energy-flux-density chemistries of thermonuclear fission, fusion, or, perhaps matter-anti-matter, and beyond.

Normally, a progress to higher chemistries, is not to be considered as optional in any sense; the viability of all human societies must depend upon the persistently, relatively higher energy-flux densities of modes of existence of mankind as a species. However, sometimes, as now, what should be considered as normal, is turned around, as if by some evil genie.

For example, the current Queen of England, Elizabeth II, has lately prescribed a steep reversal of human progress throughout the planet; she, now, prescribes a radical reduction of the human population, from a human population of seven billions persons, to a recent, increasingly precipitous plunge toward her adopted goal of less than one billion persons. It could be said fairly, that it must seem that the Queen has, therefore, already out-classed Adolf Hitler in setting an intended record for genocide. This pattern is not limited to killing off individual persons; she is, simultaneously, destroying the level of productivity of those who might survive her campaign of genocide. The technical term to describe her presently ongoing intentions, is a freakishly rapid collapse of human “energy-flux density.”

Preface:
Beyond Sense-Perception

The stubborn problem to be considered for an understanding of the problems posed to physical sciences, can be assessed as by errors inherent in the merely ordinary physical mathematics as such. That has been, heretofore, a problem which had been largely created by the uncritical adoption of sense-perception as a standard of measurement for physical science. The issues so defined, have been better treated in such closely related, published references, as in my “Nicholas of Cusa, Kepler, & Shakespeare”[fn_1] (June 10, 2013); “How The Future Builds Its Past”[fn_2] (August 10, 2013); and “Mankind Is No Beast”[fn_3] (August 18, 2013). The common feature of all three of these titles (and some of my other choices of titles of a kindred relevance), typifies a set of references which share a common actuality.

For purposes of discussion of such models here, the common feature is simply definable as a model composed of two distinct parts: (1.) human experience prior to any present moment, and (2.) an actually mental experience of what I name “the future past” yet to be experienced, as this had been demonstrated, for example, in the noëtic, mental experiences of the discoveries of Max Planck, Albert Einstein, and, otherwise, of certain others who are notable for discovery of a future of a to-be-discovered principle existing beyond the actually present time (i.e., in the actually perpetual future). This distinction of those two modern geniuses’ thus contrasted functions of the human mind, can be considered as if acting along a pre-fixed course, but is better referenced to an irregularly moving point in time of immediately most recent experience: by a point which is approached by a march along a sequential line of sensible experiences, but actually occurs during the moment existing in a future which lies beyond the momentary present, the future moment where the mind’s experience lies in its actualized experience of an actual, progressive future beyond the simple reach of every present time.

To rephrase what I have just written here above: there are states of willfully created discoveries of a human-willful quality of change in mankind’s experience-able future discoveries: discoveries of such as actionable physical principles, which pre-determine whether, or not, the human species will have acquired the ability to change those possible principles which would, then, in turn, enable mankind to discover and, thus, change the principles which represent the potential for the change of any relatively predetermined choice of mankind’s knowable future.

That was the same point which I made here, as for example, in my recent June 10th publication of “Nicholas of Cusa, Kepler & Shakespeare.”

To recapitulate what I had just spoken above:

Both of those two points, both the notion of a clock-time present and its mentally experienced sense of an ontologically actual future, define, as a combination, the systemic distinction of the human mind from the, “mentally,” actually moving point, a “point” which is the experience of the progressive movement of the “point” which corresponds to reaching a place not only in the actual present, but, also on the other side, beyond the reach of “every clock time,” in the experience of the second of the two “moving points,” present and future, the second point of which always dwells only in the instant of (ordinarily) the relatively immediate futures. The notion has two contrasted sets of practical meanings: first, an immediate present which has been experienced as the present, and, then, a point always expressed from a movement, or more, beyond that: the moment of experiencing of an actual future (i.e., a foresight). The three examples with which I had opened this Preface, thus identify the difference between man’s supposedly “actual” experience of the human individual’s immediate sense-perception, for man and beast alike, as that difference between present and the future which must be contrasted with the experience of that actual future which only a human forecaster could have actually experienced as by a human being’s own ontological experience of the actual future.[fn_4]

The notion of the actuality of the knowable future, and, also, of that future’s power over the generation of its consequence, is well typified by the actual meaning of Johannes Kepler’s use of his term called by me, and by relevant others, as a vicarious hypothesis. The same principled expression is expressed by me in my references to the specificity of Friedrich Schiller’s Wallenstein trilogy, as by Shakespeare’s Chorus in King Henry V; and, as I have emphasized as the principled quality of Wilhelm Furtwängler’s post-World War II direction of the performance of Franz Schubert’s Ninth Symphony. Each of these cases pertains, specifically, to the experiencing of that which, when spoken, will have come to have occurred only in the future of the expression in progress. So, all truly great Classical art, like the discoveries of physical scientific progress, alike, occurs only as by actions being generated in the actually future instants beyond the present of the onrushing future, as by Johann Sebastian Bach.[fn_5] Hence, the inevitable failure inhering in the attempted simulations presented by the compositions of Franz Liszt and Richard Wagner, as contrasted to the achievements of Johann Sebastian Bach and his followers in the development of what may be distinguished as the “Classical school” of composition and its performance. The same principled fact coincides with the same manner in which William Shakespeare created and displayed his own most remarkable character of “Chorus” in his King Henry V.[fn_6]

The particularly notable aspects of Shakespeare’s actions on that account, are several. First, most obviously, Shakespeare had based himself on the ancient Greek Classical model of “The Chorus,” emphatically borrowing from the ancient Greek model of a chorus operating from “seeing from behind their own masks,” while passing their collective judgment on the characters in the play, otherwise: like honest judges pitting their collective consciences against the law-breaker occupying a seat of great power, as might be said of President Barack Obama, or of both Obama’s predecessor in office, and Obama himself, each to be charged with the high crime of overturning what had been already proven to have been the precious Glass-Steagall law.

Unfortunately, the underlying meaning of the Glass-Steagall law, as underlying the U.S. Administration of President George Washington and the sheer genius of the virtually martyred Alexander Hamilton, had been lost with the advent of the morally disturbed President Thomas Jefferson and numerous among Jefferson’s followers. It would have been a careless quality which would have been expressed in an objection to my use of the term “martyred” here. The notion that injustice is not a violation of an expression of the true liar, would be the mark of an offender’s disposition for a deep moral corruption of himself as the believer: the corruption which is the adoption of a policy of high-ranking folly practiced in the mightily abused license of the privilege of the state, or other power, to lie. The highest of crimes perpetrated under the nominal authority of the state, or in some comparable case, are those which perpetrate crimes under the adopted authority of the convenience of the rule of merely secular forms of government per se. Indeed, most among the known such governments from history, were either purely evil, or malefactors of a somewhat lesser degree. The point is, that, for persons who are competent in their shaping of their intentions, truth can not be merely negative.

NASA Goddard Laboratory for Atmospheres

“The ‘fire-like’ upgrading which can be measured in terms of increase of the energy-flux-density of the activities of the human species, is the most essential feature of beneficial ‘evolutionary effect’ on which the continued success of our species depends.” Shown: (above) The Sun, with its thermonuclear reactor; (below) MIT’s Alcator C-Mod Tokamak (interior).

Wikimedia Commons/Mike Garrett

I.
The Characteristics

The distinction of the human species from all others known to us presently, lies within the development of qualitative, more than merely quantitative, upward transformation of human society. While the human species preserves the essential characteristics of that species, the quality of fire-like upgrading of the abilities of our species, is the most essential feature of beneficial “evolutionary effect” on which the continued success of our species depends. Those effects have been essentially qualitative, rather than merely quantitative. As I have emphasized in my reports in other locations, the characteristics of the upward evolution of the capabilities of the essentially fixed “design” of the member of our species, has the effect of evolutionary development into a higher order of our species in its efficient effects.

Those specific kinds of effects “reside” in the most unique distinction of mankind from all other presently known species. The evolution is not “simply biological,” but “also intellectual.” That is to emphasize that the uniqueness of the human species lies in its inherently revolutionary self-development, as when it is not trapped into those kinds of habits of insanity which would be normal behavior among all other presently known “animal” species, that including mammals generally, otherwise.

I now explain, accordingly, as follows.

Somewhere, as if to say, in the course of time, the membership of our human species degenerated in quality, that done by means of the degeneration of human societies into an apparently intrinsic separation of human overlords and their human subjects.

That separation had the correlated effect of quenching the naturally higher quality of effects which corresponds to “the noëtic effect” in the individual’s and societies’ human mind, as that effect were otherwise “natural” to the member of the human species. Nineteenth-century-rooted cases such as those of Bernhard Riemann,[fn_7] Max Planck, and Albert Einstein, are excellent choices of cases which illustrate the role of what were appropriately named “the noëtic effect” otherwise properly known as the intimately inseparable qualities of both human artistic and scientific creativity.

That, which we must define here as the “truly human creativity” of the mind itself, is the naturally available, essential distinction of those truly noëtic powers of the human individual, which are to be distinguished from the human beings who have been degraded into the brutish categories of interacting virtual “masters and slaves” of the types which are typified by the quality of fraud incarnate intrinsically in such cases as those of H.G. Wells and Bertrand Russell in their time, and by the more recent reductionists’ type of the respective likenesses of the British or brutish, of either, once more, the current British Queen of England or the brutish harvest of such “merely practical” creatures as the resident Wall Street “vegetables” presently.[fn_8]

Indeed, since the death of U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and with the succession to the brutishly crude Harry S Truman, there has been a predominantly downward moral and intellectual trend in the political course of both the United States and Europe, in particular; the assassination of President John F. Kennedy has marked an insistently prevalent trend, downwards, in intellectual and moral life, an accelerating decline which has reached a virtual nadir with the downward-plunging, accelerating loss of intellect, of morals, and conditions of life, alike, as typified in the incumbencies of such wretchedly evil U.S. Presidencies under the influence of the plunging moral illiteracy which is expressed in the “Green Disease” of 2001-2013, under the reigns of loutish President George W. Bush, and brutish Barack Obama.

The typical expression of this plunging trend, has now reached that kind of nadir which has been typified by mankind’s arrival at the threat of an extinction of the human species inherent in such specific influences as the current Anglo-Dutch regime and the nadir now reached by the Bush-Obama U.S. Presidencies. The essence of that current situation and its inherently, immediately present threats to the continued existence of the human species, is now the pending menace of a threatened extinction of the human species caused as under the effects of an accelerating trend toward human thermonuclear extinction under the combination of, chiefly, the British empire, its Saudi accomplices, and the plunge of the U.S.A. under the manifestly, wildly evil trend of the influences of the most recent Bush and Obama Presidencies.

Wikimedia Commons

Among the great achievements of the 15th-Century Golden Renaissance, and its exemplar Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, were Columbus’s voyages to the Americas. This painting is “Columbus on the Santa Maria in 1492,” by Emanuel Leutze (1855).

The America Principle:

The central issue to be considered in the light of such trends, has several converging implications for a hopeful future of mankind. The best indicators of a betterment in trends and conditions have been typified by what became known as the age of the “Golden Renaissance,” a moment in history which has been typified by the powerfully extended influence of the Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, who, among his great achievements, generated the impetus which had led Captain Christopher Columbus to his famous crossings of the Atlantic, and, thus, to the ultimately leading consequence of the establishment of the United States of America. Despite all else, this impetus brought about the establishment of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, until the point at which the Dutch tyranny had crushed that precursor of a United States of America, but which had, in principle, re-emerged with a massive set of implications for the world at large, up through the achievements of President John F. Kennedy’s (and his brother’s) quenched life, deaths which set the destiny of our republic spinning into a net downward direction from which it has never yet recovered, to the present date.

Nonetheless, the direction of the future United States, despite the crushing of the richly abundant achievements of the Massachusetts settlement while it “still lived,” set a spark which had never yet been actually quenched until, perhaps, the most recent, evil developments under British lackeys such as Presidents Bush and Obama. This fact has implications which are, here and now, of the greatest importance for both this republic and the nations of the world generally.

II.
The True Principle of
Human Nature

It is true, that the ability to forecast the future, as I have defined the future here, this far, is still, currently, relatively rare in fact. The potential for such foresight is potentially universal, excepting the fact that the existing cultures of society tend to crush such mental capabilities through the effects of customary drills, by means of which societies this far appear to have dulled the relevant “noëtic cutting edge of reason.” This “crushing process,” often identifiable as “the desire to be accepted” among one’s peers, is typical of the oppression which I had experienced, and deeply resented, as a child, and, more emphatically so, as an adolescent student, and young adult.

A useful name for the “crushing of the intellectual spirit,” is “conformity with those rules of behavior” which are imposed by the environment of daily life. Some among us resist that sort of imposed conformities. The freedom we seek, when we are in defiance of popular and related sorts of unjust “conformities,” enables us to enjoy a broader freedom, a freedom to experience a less confining domain of experience, and, thus, also, one to enjoy both the pains incurred and the better chances for actual experiences of foresight than most others. The basis for that relatively greater “freedom to think,” is usually to be expected during childhood and adolescence, often as the result of what may be fairly identified as an “habituated resistance to destructive conformities.” Such “refusers” are the more likely to be creative thinkers, as this is typified by such cases as Johannes Kepler, Pierre de Fermat, Gottfried Leibniz, Bernhard Riemann, et al., and Max Planck, and Albert Einstein.

The broader range of “refusers” is divided between those cases which are devoted to a sense of obligation to the pleasure derived from the promotion of the human good, as contrasted to the case of what is essentially an “asocial refuser,” such as one of the Wall Street types, and those others who typify the predatory cases.

‘The Prospect Now Before Us!’

The most regrettable influence to which children and young adults might have been subjected by habituation, had been, in my own time spent as a child, adolescent, and young adult, a hated submission to that which they were induced to adopt as if it had been truly of their own “independent discovery,” when it had not been a discovery at all, but essentially a fear-driven act of submission motivated by the induced “desire to be accepted.”

Put aside the customary excuses passed in the name of “being accepted.” There is an essential difference between knowing and merely believing. There are, in fact, modes of influence which challenge the student (for example) to make an actual discovery which had been prompted, often enough, by the student’s own life-experience, as in the cases of such as Max Planck and Albert Einstein, or such of their predecessors as the Bernhard Riemann presenting his habilitation dissertation in the presence of Carl Friedrich Gauss—especially that wonderful single, concluding sentence with which Riemann had, on that occasion, sweetly damned all foolish mere mathematicians.