February 26, 2007

A U.S.A. DROWNING IN ITS GORE?

The Great Luddite Hoax of 2007

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

[Print version of this article]

Editor’s Note: This article originally appeared in EIR Vol. 34, No. 10, March 9, 2007, pp.4-18.

We must never forget that former Vice-President Al Gore’s 2000 Gore-Lieberman campaign was the midwife of the Bush-Cheney Presidency.

The issue to be considered here is no mere difference of policy. The issue is existential. At issue is a choice between one policy, under whose influence our civilization would soon cease to exist, that of Gore’s policy, against the directly opposite choice of policy required, if civilization is to continue to exist during the immediately foreseeable future.

Let us now proceed in the confidence that the issue treated here is of no lesser importance than just that.

Essentially, after Al Gore’s marbles are counted, his recent Hollywood, pulp-science-fiction-style production, on the theme of “Global Warming,” is, obviously, a fraud designed by someone. Whoever that someone was, Al’s fraud was done, apparently, for the pleasure of what were, obviously, swindlers, and has served to titillate many among our nation’s, and others’ current crop of the more excitably credulous, middle-class “Bio-Fools.” [Box: Lyndon LaRouche compares Al Gore’s Global Warming hoax to Zero Mostel’s swindle in The Producers, a play named Springtime for Hitler]

Stated for the record, the essentials of the relevant scientific evidence against Gore’s latest version of the “Global Warming” hoax, are adequately summarized, in the weekly Executive Intelligence Review’s March 2, 2007 edition.[fn_1] Some people, no doubt, will also see the ironical hand of Mother Nature (no Hard Gore Luddite herself) in the great winter storm which chose to wrack entire regions of North America, at just the time that Gore’s off-season Hollywood Hallowe’en party was being staged. Since those of us whose attention is focused more intently upon the actual dynamics of the U.S. political landscape, have never considered Al Gore the brightest bulb in the cloakroom, the question for us, is: who is using the notoriously mean, dumb, and clearly fat-headed Al “Ozymandias” Gore, again, and why, this time, in this way?[fn_2]

However, our duty in this matter does not end there. In addition to the first issue, the evidence that Gore’s package itself is a hoax, there are two elements of scientific method which must be addressed, if the larger, much more crucial issues involved are to be settled.

Second on the list of three, is the larger scientific issue: Gore’s fraud aside, what are the considerations which actually govern the principal features of the Earth’s cycles of alternate warming and cooling? What about the pattern of recent intensification of Solar radiation hitting the Earth? Does this year’s early report from Denmark on the role of cosmic rays, answer the question, at least in significant part?[fn_3] If so, what is the relationship to the earlier indications of the concentration of cosmic rays received from the area of the Crab Nebula?

Or, what about the movement of population out of traditional family-farm agriculture and productive employment in industry, into the ruin of a so-called “post-industrial society,” all of which post-1968 trends of change away from a science-driver, agro-industrial economy, have had pernicious effects on the environment which we manage and inhabit? What about “bio-fuels,” which are inherently energy-inefficient, and which will, if continued, cause a generations-long ecological disaster, and pro-genocidal food-crisis for our nation in particular, and the planet as whole?

Third on the same list, we have the principal subject taken up in the body of this report: what is the actual strategic motive for the continuing persistence of the promotion of the Kyoto hoax at this particular time? This third point, is the crucial point addressed in this present report.

The case of Gore himself, is a simple one, in every sense of the word. Whatever the intended implications of simple-minded Gore’s travesty, the motive for his being used in the way he has been used most recently, takes us to much deeper political issues, as in the issues treated in the body of this present report, after the immediately following, additional prefatory remarks.

Unfortunately, Al Gore is not the only fool of his type among our republic’s and Europe’s political classes. Were he the only such fool, we might treasure him, even despite his bad temper, vicious fits, and silly Hallowe’en pranks, as we would value an endangered species of Madagascan forest lemur.

Unfortunately, Gore’s type of so-called “Baby-Boomer” generation of North America and western and central Europe, is not a lovably rare species. It is a generation already represented by a great excess of the modern Sophist types from among the so-called “68er” generation, sometimes regarded justly as a “de-generation,” born during the 1945-1956 interval: a species which proliferated between the close of World War II and the culturally shocking advent of the 1957-1960 U.S. economic recession. Therefore, we have that third point which I shall address in this present report: I explain.

On That Third Point

It is most notable, on account of this third point, that, today, those representatives of the professions of honest scientists and political historians who were capable of seeing, truthfully, the future actually embedded in the present, are those who, in the case of those nominally considered scientists, are a precious minority of their profession, and, who, among historians, appear to be almost a vanishing species.[fn_4] When compared to the school of American historians, for example, even into the early parts of the post-World War II decades, the greater part of the currently reigning “Sixty-Eighter white collar” political class, has shown itself, with remarkable exceptions, as now, as a generation of the astonishingly credulous, which avoids any actual knowledge of science, and yet expresses opinions about science and its effects, which reveal either the influence of the most evil man of the Twentieth Century, Bertrand Russell, or simply a generation virtually incapable of thinking either historically or scientifically.

This has been a persisting, increasing challenge in my dealings with even some among my own associates who have expressed the characteristic moral failing of the predominantly Sophist Baby-Boomer generation, albeit on different issues than Gore’s Luddite followers.[fn_5] In my experience, today’s usual Baby Boomer refuses to recognize what is happening to our nation, or even his, or her own generation. He or she is therefore a member of what had been called, ironically, “the Now Generation,” the representative of a kind of species which recognizes moral accountability to neither a predecessor generation, nor a follower. It is a social stratum, unique to this interval of our national history, which is relatively hostile to the generation of its own parents, and, also, like the typical President George W. Bush, Jr., is blind to what are, in fact, the essential interests of the present young and future adult generations, and beyond.

The typical representative of that Baby-Boomer type, usually lacks even a semblance of the standard of comparison which the history of ideas had provided to the able scholars, scientists, and strategists of earlier generations. It might be said, that he, or she, as the “68er” and former Vice-President Al Gore illustrate the type, is a Luddite fanatic, or, if you prefer Classical references, an heir of the ancient, pro-Satanic, Delphic cult of Dionysus.

Therefore, those cases, like Gore, very rarely think in terms of a successful period of history as a process of an emergence of an added phase of the lawful evolution of human culture, to higher states out of a preceding one. Rather, all too typically, cardboard, or wind-up-toy personalities like Gore, think in terms of arbitrarily adopted “rules of thumb,” as merely current fads in styles of “fashions”; typically Sophists, they think in terms of opinions about opinions: Athens’ Pericles should blush. These are opinions which they tend to treat in a more reckless and hostile disregard for discoveries of any actual notions of principle, as this hostility to principle was expressed in the emergence of even such cults of Sophistry as ancient followers of Euclid, or, a grim, medieval Sophist variety of theologian among those of the Scholastic persuasion.[fn_6]

I encounter this same problem in the course of reviewing the briefings produced among today’s usual political figures, commentators, and so forth. The relevant types to which I refer have few principles, or even none; but, nonetheless, they produce an abundance of opinions, and curious “assessments” of sets of alleged facts, such as momentary opinions about the auspicious implications of an ephemeral item of news, or the like.

This pattern of behavior is typical of a stubborn persistence of the kind of sophistry we might associate with today’s typical representatives of the Baby Boomers among North Americans, or those from western and central Europe. Those types are reacting to their narrowly defined immediate experience, but evade the reality of that process of those long waves of historical change, within which merely current events and decisions are trapped, often as passing exceptions.

It is, in other words, as we read, in Plato, the report of the ancient Egyptians, warning the ancient Greeks that “you have no old men among you.” Today’s leading political classes, and most others, too, rarely show any sense of an historical process as being anything more than a kind of mechanistic-statistical system of percussive interactions, interactions occurring chiefly within the confines of the local time of a certain generation’s hope of rising to political and related ascendancy. They are Sophists, who think in terms of trend-lines in mere opinions, not realities. Therefore, usually, their assessment of almost any situation of significance, as in economic forecasting, is tragically wrong-headed, and stubbornly so.

So much for the unfortunate Gore and his sociological type; the question is: Who is using him now, in that way, and why? The answer is to be found within the realm of Riemannian dynamics.

1. History as Strategy

A contemporary neo-conservative, Francis Fukuyama, proclaimed some crucial events of the close of the 1980s and beginning of the 1990s, as portending “the end of history.”[fn_7] On the surface, his statement makes no sense, unless we take it to mean the perverted notion, that the collapse of the Soviet system signaled the birth of a single, world empire to be controlled in perpetuity—at least for a short time—by something which might be represented as a single and eternal, Anglo-American Liberal’s world-empire.

Whether Fukuyama would still make such an argument as that today, is not settled, as far as I know. However, the argument as he made it, has no meaning in the known universe, excepting as the notion of a single, perpetual and eternal world-empire. The relevance of the case of Fukuyama to the case of Gore here, is that Fukuyama would be making the same form of argument respecting the making of policies, which is implied by the assertions of former Vice-President Al Gore. Gore’s argument, is, notably, also the same implicit in currently avowed strategic policies of the current Bush-Cheney Administration.

Gore is implicitly, a pro-imperialist of the type we associate today with “globalization,” and is also a follower of the ideology famous to ancient Greek culture as the pro-terrorist cult of Dionysus, which was putatively the original pro-environmentalist, terrorist cult of ancient European history. His more recent antecedent, is the cult which Bertrand Russell and H.G. Wells presented as Wells’ 1928 The Open Conspiracy; there are virtually none of the policies of globalization and “environmentalism” expressed by former U.S. Vice-President Gore which are not also those of a faithful devotee of the cult of the Bertrand Russell who vowed his aim to be to destroy what the U.S.A. represented. Do you wish, therefore, to “drown in Gore”?

In the ordinary course of things, it has been the custom among a numerous ration of an immoral people, to propose that a certain awful trend, or outcome in developments, or lack of change, is “inevitable,” in and of itself. Usually, what that attitude reflects, is either a coward’s refusal to take the risk of changing what must be changed, or an expression of either simply moral indifference, or cowardly laziness. A related indifference to responsibility appears in a much more important expression, as a doctrine, such as Al Gore’s “Bio-Foolery,” which claims the right, as follows, to impose a perpetual world imperialism.

In point of fact, since earlier than the fictional Olympian Zeus of Aeschylus’ Prometheus Bound, imperialists of sundry shades and temperaments, have proclaimed the permanent inevitability of this or that, more or less global, empire, as if that empire might have been divinely ordained by mortal oligarchies disguised as pagan gods. Belshazzar’s Feast, as portrayed successively by Rembrandt and the poet Heinrich Heine, is an example of such asinine imperial pomposity. The great Classical poet Percy Bysshe Shelley captured the essence of this matter in his Ozymandias, whose title served as the name later deliciously bestowed on Al Gore by some of his schoolmates. Such alleged “inevitability” was the intention of Imperial Rome, of Byzantium, of the European medieval ultramontane imperialism, of Adolf Hitler’s “Thousand-Year Reich,” and the design for the British Empire presented to Lord Shelburne by his lackey, Gibbon. That was the sense of the way in which Fukuyama trumpeted his expectations from the post-1989 decline of the Soviet system.[fn_8]

Today, that “eternal,” but nonetheless short-lived, presently doomed, post-1989 world financiers’ empire of Anglo-Dutch Liberalism, as envisaged by Fukuyama’s book, is already virtually in ashes. Unless a special intervention is made soon, the ashes could also be our entire civilization’s own. Today, modern European views of such pretended forms of eternal empires are often, like Fukuyama’s, even sillier than comparable cases from ancient and medieval times.

The modern problem of empire is of special form, distinct from the ancient Roman and Byzantine types, a modern pattern which has been specific to globally extended European civilization since the latter quarter of the Sixteenth Century. I refer to what is termed, alternately, as the modern empiricism introduced by Venice’s Paolo Sarpi, which has been specific to Sarpi’s followers since the brutish Anglo-Dutch Liberalism of William of Orange, and, simply, the generic form of the British Imperialism of Lord Shelburne et al. since the February 1763 Peace of Paris. In known forms of modern European society, empiricism and Anglo-Dutch Liberalism are alternate names for a specific, modern, implicitly imperial type of oligarchical society, a type with a distinct kinship to, but also with qualitative distinctions from the medieval ultramontane system under the Venetian financier-oligarchy.

To understand the present course of that modern world history scientifically, there are two distinct, categorical conceptions to be defined, as if independently of one another, but then combined as one.

In the first category to be considered scientifically, we must consider the nature of the present world monetary-financial system, of approximately the 1968-2007 interval to date, as a passionately anti-American (e.g., anti-Franklin Roosevelt) outgrowth of that empiricist form of monetary-financial system founded under the leadership of Venice’s Paolo Sarpi.

This presently collapsing, specifically anti-American system, is not only a monetary-financial system. It is also a systematic form of organization of the entirety of a generally accredited set of currently leading ideas associated with the extent of the reach of the present world monetary-financial system. That present, anti-American world system, still depends upon the legacy of the Bretton Woods dollar; but it is otherwise controlled as an Anglo-Dutch Liberal world-empire of financier-oligarchical rule. This hybrid is that present, Anglo-Dutch Liberal monetary-financial system, which has dominated the world increasingly since that 1968-1972, “neo-Venetian” undermining and collapse of the U.S.-dollar-based, fixed-exchange-rate system, a collapse which was orchestrated chiefly from London.

The second such category of relevant scientific evidence, is the essential, crucially functional distinction between systems of relations in the animal kingdom, and of the systems of ideas associated with each cultural phase of physical development, or lack of development, of human cultures.

These two, just-stated, crucially principled features of the present world organization, both the monetary-financial and the cultural-economic, are the most crucial features of the world situation to be urgently considered at this immediate juncture. We shall consider these two aspects and their interdependency at some modest length within the next chapter of this report.

Some auxiliary features of this process are to be considered before proceeding further with the scientific argument as such.

In that context, over the 1933-2007 interval to date, the central feature of the dynamic relations between the two competing monetary-financial/economic systems, the American System versus the Anglo-Dutch Liberal imperialist system of globalization, is, summarily, the following:

Earlier, during 1945-1967, the dominant world monetary-financial system had become, since 1933, the Twentieth-Century expression of the American System of political-economy, the so-called “Hamiltonian” system as expressed under the Administration of U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. That pro-Hamiltonian system was still premised, during the 1944-1967 interval, on the emergence of the U.S. fixed-exchange-rate world system, based on the U.S. gold-reserve-denominated dollar.

Modern world monetary-financial and economic history, was still pivoted, then, on the fact of the emergence of the U.S. leadership of the world system, under the leadership of President Franklin Roosevelt, during 1933-1945, and, after that, the regaining of imperial power by the anti-Franklin Roosevelt, Anglo-Dutch Liberal system of imperial monetarist power, over the period from the U.S. official plunge into the 1964-1972 official U.S. Indo-China war, to the present date.

The weakening of the U.S. economy by the folly of its protracted, 1964-1972 colonialist war in Indo-China, made possible Anglo-Dutch Liberal operations to bring down the U.S. fixed-exchange-rate-dollar-system over the 1964-1972 interval, and beyond. This process of post-1964 U.S. decline, was highlighted by the role of the first government of the United Kingdom’s Prime Minister Harold Wilson, which sank the U.K. physical economy, savagely, to set up the conditions needed to pull down the U.S. dollar over the 1967-1972 interval.

A similar British strategy for ruining the U.S.A. is in operation at the present time, using the follies of the Bush-Cheney war-policy in Southwest Asia, to take the place, for today, of the 1964-1972 phase of the U.S. folly in Indo-China. The leading Anglo-Dutch Liberal faction is moving, currently, to wreck the United States as both an economy and a political power, absolutely, through aid of the effects of the U.S. and British Southwest Asia military adventures, and the rapid wrecking of the U.S. dollar through sinking the pound, temporarily, in a fashion echoing the first Harold Wilson government of the U.K.

This echoes what the U.K. of Thatcher and its French asset, the Mitterrand government of France, did to ruin Germany, beginning with 1989’s “The Fall of the Wall,” and, what their followers are doing now, through Cayman Islands-centered operations, combined with the deployment of fascist gangs, as out of Hamburg, echoing the Baader-Meinhof and like precedents today.[fn_9] The strategic objective of that Anglo-Dutch targeting of the U.S.A. for destruction, is to remove the last principal obstacle, the United States itself, to setting up a “Tower of Babel” style of “unipolar,” “free trade”-based world empire of “globalized” raw financier power. This would be a new form of world empire, but one modelled in principle on the precedent of the medieval partnership of the Venetian financier-oligarchy and its allies of the Crusading private armies of the Norman chivalry.

An Anglo-Dutch Liberal “success” against the U.S.A. in this current attempt already under way, would mean a probable, rather immediate plunge into a planetary dark age for all humanity; but, if anyone believes that latter fact would deter the Liberals, it is because those believers do not understand the force of ideology in existential extremes such as the present crisis. Meanwhile, if the political class of the U.S. continues to be brainwashed into adopting the “bio-fools” policy of the Bush Administration and Al Gore’s latest Hallowe’en prank, the U.S. would cease to exist as a sovereign nation, that, relatively, very soon. Otherwise, the Anglo-Dutch Liberal system will give up its current intentions only if the rest of the world acts efficiently to compel it to do so.

Culture: The True Force of Destiny

The most commonplace, and most characteristic intellectual failure in what passes for the presently reigning generation’s attempted definitions of grand strategy, is the currently customary failure to take effectively into account the crucial aspect of the functional distinction of men and women from beasts. The cult of “information theory,” is one of the important illustrations of the way the post-World War II U.S. generations have been brainwashed into a virtual stupor on account of this scientifically absurd cult-belief.

This kind of current cultural decadence, prevalent as a result of the mass brainwashing of the “white collar” strata among the reigning “Baby-Boomer” generation, is echoed in a study of bookshelves, the content of leading periodical publications, and, one may presume, temporary withdrawals from libraries. Such evidence reflects a present state of our society, a society whose influential professional and other educated classes, are concerned with the matter of what are merely heteronomic arrays of conflicting opinions, that in inverse proportion to the same persons’ occupation with actual ideas. A study of addresses and discussions from policy-influencing assemblies, points to the same conclusion.

That class of evidence reflects a significant intellectual and moral degeneration, the worst of which has occurred with the dying out of the generation of the population, my father’s and my own generations, generations which had been born between, approximately, the time of the assassination of U.S. President William McKinley and the onset of the celebrated 1929-1933 U.S. economic depression. The import of those general trends in culture among today’s putatively literate classes, is demonstrated in a relatively simple way, by the case of the professional who mistakes an associated mathematical formula for a universal physical principle; he, or she thus substitutes a mere footprint of the relevant species, for the actual living species which casts that footprint!

The point which I have just made here was illustrated dramatically in a differing reaction of two audiences, linked simultaneously on the same electronic network, to the nature of a demonstration of a universal physical principle. Both were scientifically literate, but the one which reflected its experience with its own practiced demonstration of the principle of the “comma” in the choral counterpoint of Bach’s and related performance, associated the physical principle with the “passion” of a proof of principle in relevant choral singing, whereas the other audience tended to list a series of formal proofs tantamount to mathematical formulas. The difference so expressed was that between “I know …,” and “I know about ….”

In the second case, “I know about …,” an opinion about an opinion of scientific principle was foremost; whereas, in the other case, it was the experience of generating the proof of the idea of a principle itself, which was the prevalent object of the thought itself.[fn_10]

Two matters of principle were thus illustrated by the experience of that occasion. First, the indispensable role of the experience of generating a solution for a challenge in Classical choral counterpoint, as typified by the standard of Bach, is essential for the development of the mind of the otherwise literate student of physical science and related matters. The successful exercise in counterpoint expresses the experienced quality of passion of belief which distinguishes “I know about” in physical science practice, from the actuality of “I know.”

It was on this account, that I emphasized the development of a choral training program of regular practice based on the challenge of a strictly Florentine bel canto mastery of J.S. Bach’s Jesu, meine Freude motet. It is in that contrapuntal heritage of Bach, as practiced by the greatest musical composers, from Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, et al., that the human soul is able to express passionate certainty for the discovery of a universal physical principle of physical science, or any expression of Classical composition and performance of art. A “strictly scientific” educational program in science tends to produce legions of well-rehearsed recitations by dead souls. Without the quality of Classical artistic passion of certainty, there is no vital scientific certainty.

Such is the secret of the way in which the promotion of the irrationalist views of rabidly existentialist Theodor Adorno et al., in the matter of musical composition, has been used, with relative success, in not merely corrupting a generation, and more, but virtually destroying its ability to think rationally, through the radiated influence of the Congress for Cultural Freedom and related programs and practices. The destruction of the ability to know works of Classical drama, among the generality of the Baby-Boomer generation, is the demonstrated effect of what is called in Germany “Regietheater” on the both quality of performance of Classical music and drama, and the souls of the members of the audience habituated to such, or even worse popularized forms, such as the case of “The Beatles,” of pro-existentialist corruption.

The issue is not merely that such relatively brutish practices in artistic composition and performance, have a morally and intellectually lowering effect on the mental life of performers and audience alike. Something essential for the very notion of the idea of principle and of truth, is lost, as the essential artistic faculty for a sense of truth is more or less lost. “How you get your kicks!” tells more about you, than you know; it tells much of your ability, or lack of ability, to know what the term “truth” should signify.

Such matters determine the capacity for truthfulness and related matters in the individual and in the culture; this source of corruption, which was typified in expression by the tragic impact of Sophistry on that generation of Pericles’ Athens which plunged into the cultural suicide of the Peloponnesian War, or the comparable Sophistry expressed by the U.S. plunge into the 1964-1972 War in Indo-China, and the consent to George W. Bush’s lying which brought the U.S. into the currently continuing and spreading warfare in Southwest Asia.

So, as in the self-inflicted doom which Pericles’ Sophistry-ridden Athens brought upon itself, such is the effect which turns much of the U.S. population, including many among its leading political circles, into former Vice-President Al Gore’s and President George W. Bush’s “Bio-Fools,” today.

Responsible citizens of the U.S. today must change certain of the habits which are ruining themselves, our nation, and the chances of civilization generally. We must recognize the immorality implicit in support for the lunacy of Gore’s fantasy, and of the related “Bio-Fools” syndrome, as an expression of the typical anti-science Sophistry usually expressed by the “68ers.”

This example, this expression of the net effect of the pro-existentialist indoctrination of much of the Baby-Boomer population born during the approximate 1945-1956 interval, and of the effects of that on the further cultural decay of the “Baby-Boomer” culture of the 1960s, is today’s echo of the self-inflicted ruin of Pericles’ ancient Athens. It typifies the outcome of the degeneration of Athens and its influence during the Peloponnesian War; it is also the cultural decadence which made possible the emergence of the Roman and Byzantine empires, and, later, the ultramontane imperialism of Venetian financier-oligarchs and Norman Crusaders leading into the collapse of the Middle Ages into Europe’s Fourteenth-Century “New Dark Age.”

We are witnessing precisely such a kind of lurch toward a new Dark Age of global humanity today, in the surge of organized popularity for former Vice-President Al Gore’s hoax, and for the cult of “Bio-Foolery” in general. The followers of the Pied Piper of Cardboard, Al Gore, are to be compared with the children of Hamelin who followed their cult-leader out of the town, into the land of nevermore. A population which, like those foolish children, no longer governs itself by a passion for truth, but, rather, mere “popular opinion,” is a population which has, at least for the moment, lost its grip on the moral fitness to survive.

Do any among you really wish to turn out to have been one of those kinds of unfortunates? Shame on you, if you do!

2. The Science of Society

In practical terms, the term “science” has a varying meaning for practice, as our attention shifts from emphasis on non-living processes, to living processes and their products, and, after that, as we shift attention from emphasis on living processes in general, to human behavior and social processes in particular. This distinction, which has been traditional for known European science since ancient Greece, was rigorously defined through the work of Academician V.I. Vernadsky’s experimentally premised notion of a universal principle of life, and his preliminary success in beginning the same approach to the matter of the distinction between what are merely living processes and human characteristics, and specifics of the social behavior associated with those latter characteristics.[fn_11]

Without emphasis on this implication of the work of Vernadsky, including, emphatically, the function of the Noösphere, there could not be a competent economic science, nor a competent insight into the topics posed by the questions which the Delphic cult of “environmentalism” poses today.

The problems which had already been set into motion by systemically incompetent trends in thinking about economy and its management, prior to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, were transformed into wildly systemic expressions during the late 1960s period of the U.S. War in Indo-China, and, then, went beyond bad fiction, to outright economic-financial insanity, in the pro-Malthusian and related effects caused by the insurgencies of the “68ers,” during the course of the 1970s.

As a continuation of that plunge from national economic pride to galloping, prurient forms of decadence, over a time from the beginning of the 1980s, especially since reforms in U.S. Government and Federal Reserve methods of reporting from about 1982-1983 on, matters went beyond Sophistry, to the generally habituated fraud of economics reporting and bad analysis by leading governments and international institutions today. In this process, as the leaders of the economy and political institutions of the immediate post-war decades were winnowed out by the aging process, and with the rise of the “68ers” and their Dionysian impulses to replace the generation which began to die out during the 1970s and 1980s, the Dionysiac ideology of economic insanity came to reign in what was perceived as the presumed higher wisdom bred into those strata of the upper eighty percentile of family income brackets of the “68er” generation.

Today, nearly forty years since the “68ers’ ” plunge into their fashions in economic insanity, took a grip on generally accepted policy-thinking in the public and private sectors, our leading public and private institutions have come to be dominated by generally accepted views of national and global economic matters which lie far beyond what the U.S.A. of the 1930s and the post-World War II generation would have tolerated, rightly, as the outer limits of rational behavior. The toleration of the lunacies exemplified by the cult-followings of former Vice-President Al Gore, merely illustrates the degree to which the “68ers’” axiomatic qualities of thinking have come to dominate our nation’s, and western and central Europe’s policy-shaping, increasingly, over the recent several decades.

Therefore, the decadence, and even actual insanity, in much official forecasting and formulation of arguments as to policy of practice, have gone far beyond any competent sort of needed, comprehensive treatment of those issues posed by what we have pinpointed here as the nasty behavior of the illiterate Al Gore. This situation requires that we adopt a new basis in principle for that relevant scientific discussion which is located, uniquely, outside the mechanistic-statistical conceptions usually associated with financial forecasting and economy today, to locate the real, essentially physical, rather than wildly fictional assumptions, which pollute attempts at understanding of the issues confronting us today.

Therefore: Our Situation Now

This history of recent decades requires that what is addressed here be resituated in an elementary way, within the bounds of the Riemannian dynamics of human behavior and with the social processes defined by that behavior.

As an essential matter of review, consider the following crucial points respecting the history of the diseases our economies are suffering today,

To this end, look at the history of European science in retrospect; consider the history of that European science since the influence of Egypt, in the shaping of what had become the European culture associated with Thales, Heracleitus, Solon, the Pythagoreans, and Plato. As I, among others, have reported in various locations over recent decades, the known sum-total of success and failures in European science, from the influences of ancient Egypt, up to the present time, is the outcome of the conflict between, on the one side, oligarchical forms of corruption typified by the Sophists generally, and the Euclid cult in particular, and, on the opposing side, the anti-Euclidean, dynamic outlook associated with the Pythagoreans, Plato, Nicholas of Cusa, Kepler, Leibniz, Riemann, et al. That is the underlying continuing pattern of conflict within now globally extended European civilization as a whole, from the founding of Classical European culture as among the followers of Solon of Athens, to the present day.

Within the bounds of the historical development of modern economy itself, the relevant conflict within European civilization, is to be seen, clinically, as Plato saw it, as between the reductionist followers of the Sophists, as Euclid and the modern empiricists typify the Sophists, against the dynamic outlook associated, in physical science, with the Pythagoreans, Plato, Kepler, Leibniz, Riemann, et al. Today, this is merely typified by the example of the conflict between the Cartesian mechanistic-statistical folly expressed by the 1998 folly of LTCM’s [Long Term Capital Management] Morton Scholes, and the dynamic view of the physical-scientific basis of the American System of political-economy in which my own contributions are currently leading examples.

At the present time, for reason of the pathological effects of currently popular mechanistic-statistical modes of forecasting, it has been an imperative, existential challenge, that we must correct recently prevailing policy-shaping, by treating today’s “conventional” shaping of economic policies as the disease, and my own alternative as the cure.

From that vantage-point, I proceed now, by presenting all the relevant matters to be treated from the standpoint of my method, that of Riemannian dynamics, as I have defined the special characteristics of actual dynamic systems as ordered by human mental and related behavior in relevant locations published earlier.

An Outline of Dynamics for Today

For reasons clarified later in this chapter of the report, in any competent expression of modern economic studies and policy-shaping, the notions of economic principles are composed of a nested set of four distinct physical phase-spaces. These are, at the lowest end, principles expressed by intrinsically non-living processes. Physical functions in that domain are contained within a superior domain, the principles of living processes and their specific products: the Biosphere as defined by Academician V.I. Vernadsky. The Biosphere itself is contained within what Vernadsky defined as the Noösphere: the activities of, and interactions among living human individuals. Finally, the existence of mortal mankind, as mankind lies within an inclusive, superior domain, a domain whose existence is expressed by a universal principle of anti-entropy, the domain of the willful action of the Creator, and the related quality of the thus-finite, but unbounded universe as a whole.

However, it should not be inferred from the preceding paragraphs, that these processes are defined as attributes of elements; they must be defined in terms of differing qualities within the hierarchy of the universal processes in which the relevant elements are subsumed. Thus, an atom belonging ostensibly to the non-living domain, may participate in a process which is, itself, intrinsically an expression of the living domain. Thus, in that higher domain, the nominal elements are not linked mechanically, statistically; they are distinguished by the intrinsic unity of drama in which they are called to play their parts. In other words, the four indicated physical domains are dynamically, rather than kinetically interactive, that in the sense of dynamics employed by the Pythagoreans and Plato, and, in the same sense by Leibniz and Riemann.

These four, thus-nested domains of universal physical principles, efficiently bound all that occurs within our presently known universe. This is the general principle of Riemannian dynamics, as this arrangement is referred to by Albert Einstein. This is the crucial point of reference for the central, scientific argument presented in this present writing.

The relevant principle of what is sometimes termed “Grand Strategy,” is, therefore, as follows.

Redefine the first of the two categories identified above. Instead of measuring economic processes in terms of monetary values, measure the economic effects in terms of physical-economic effects, per capita and per square kilometer. End the folly of usurer’s ideology, that value is lawfully determined within monetary-financial systems. Employ relevant physical-economic parameters of an economy, such as that set defined by the crafting of the first government of the U.S.A. under its Federal Constitution, as by Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton: to define changes in net rates of gain in physical productivity, as Hamilton did in his Report to the U.S. Congress On the Subject of Manufactures. It is especially important to emphasize measuring of the rate of changes in physical productivity for the national economy, and its population and territory, in their entirety as a (Riemannian) dynamic function defining economic value, rather than relying upon simple measurement of the current productivity within the financial accountants’ microcosms of localized production itself.

A truly dangerous sort of “national idiot” is the fool who argues that “Some of our population produces profitable income for some of our business investments, whereas others so employed, or unemployed, apparently do not.” Therefore, those misguided fellows deduce the proposal, that the job to be done is to get rid of those sections of the population and their activities, such as the lives of the ill, the unemployed, and the retired segments of the population, so that the surviving portion of the society will be “profitable.”

The “Big MAC” rape of New York City, under the guidance of the true grandfather of that city’s pot-holes, Felix Rohatyn, and similar operations of George Shultz’s “Chicago Boys,” conducted under the roles of Henry Kissinger and Felix Rohatyn through the installation of Chilean dictator Pinochet, are seen more clearly in the effects of the related “Operation Condor” against the formerly prosperous nations of the “Southern Cone.” Consider the wealth extracted by some through the promotion of the drug cartels and the export of their product into the U.S.A. itself, as a financial profit, and increase of political power of some, as the means for promoting the ruin of the nations of the Americas as a whole.

Therefore, in other words, to avoid falling into such traps as those, we must measure the increase in physical-economic productivity (per capita and per square kilometer) as a function of the level of physical consumption per capita and per square kilometer. Measure physical consumption by the society as a whole, including the functional role of basic economic and social, as much as physical infrastructure as a whole, as the source of the increase of productivity of the whole process as a whole, and, thus, define the specific courses of action which increase total productivity as a whole, by means which increase the average rate of increase of physical consumption of the entire population and entire area as a whole. Full employment is the aim, and scientific and technological uplifting of the quality of the total national territory’s infrastructure and science-driven technological progress, is the means.

Treat the second of the two categories as the “factor” of scientific and Classical-cultural progress.

To define the combined effect associated with the interdependency of the two categories, begin by tracing the interdependency of all land-area, and all parts of the population, combined in generating a net rate of physical growth, per capita and per square kilometer, of the national physical economy as a whole. Raise the productive power of the entire system of economy through highly energetic priorities set for capital-intensive modes of technological progress in modes of both production and basic economic infrastructure, per capita and per square kilometer of the nation as a whole.

‘Energy’: A Typical Mistake

The most typical evidence of scientific incompetence in treating modern economic processes, is to assume that uses of power can be measured in terms of simple, linear measures of so-called “energy,” as in the terms of the hoax against the Ecole Polytechnique’s Sadi Carnot’s treatment of heat employed by the Sophists Kelvin, Clausius, and the mathematician Grassman, and in defiance of the evidence of Gauss, Wilhelm Weber, and their associate Bernhard Riemann.

Contrary to the arguments by the British and Austrian (Machian) school of thermodynamics, and also Maxwell, physical chemistry, as typified by the work of Mendeleyev and Harkins later, compels us to measure “energy” by such language of compromise as relative “energy-flux-density,” in which what might be nominally treated as calories, must be adjusted conceptually, in regard for such matters as the higher energy-flux-densities required to proceed up-scale from chemistry, atomic physics, nuclear physics, thermonuclear physics, etc. The “quality of work” which power delivered with a certain “energy-flux-density” is able to accomplish, is the crucial determination of the relationship between generation and consumption of generated power and the quality of technology for which it is useful.

This approach actually dates explicitly from the work of Kepler in his discoveries respecting the harmonic relations among bodies within the Solar system as a whole, the harmonics which were actually crucial for Carl Gauss’s defining the hypothesis for the orbital pathway of the asteroid Ceres. It is the same general matter which crops up in reflection on the celebrated “wavicle” issue of modern physical chemistry, and has, as Draper’s leading student Professor Robert Moon recognized, the actual principle of ordering of the isotope domains, rather than some arbitrary scheme of “magic numbers.”

To illustrate this point, contrast my method of long-range economic forecasting, which has been relatively infallible over decades, relative to the consistent, long-ranging failures of the notable putative competition, with the latter’s foolish, mechanistic-statistical, implicitly “percussive” projections of most statistical-forecasting and related schemes.

The typical forecaster today still clings to the folly of attempting to predict a future result as the consequence of a kinematic sequence of actions. The catastrophic performance of Morton Scholes et al. in 1998, illustrates the point.

To illustrate the principled remedy for the usual errors of attempted long-range forecasting, simply say to oneself that the trajectory of a sequence of currently ongoing developments does not define its own pathway of action, nor does it define the rate of that action. Riemannian considerations must be employed, instead.

The Riemannian physical universe is, as Albert Einstein emphasized, the same physical universe, but in a more developed form of expression, seen by Johannes Kepler during the beginning of the Seventeenth Century. It is a finite, but unbounded universe, for the reason that nothing exists efficiently outside it. The universe is defined by a potentially enumerable set of universal physical principles, such as the principle of gravitation discovered, uniquely, by Kepler. The individual actions within that universe reflect the way in which the concerted, dynamic interaction among the relevant powers (principles) affects the phase-space under consideration.

Thus, in economics, for example, the most effective way of increasing productivity, is the introduction of the role of another universal physical principle to the domains of generalized basic economic infrastructure, as much as to production itself.

For example. Today, without the massive investment in technologies of nuclear fission and thermonuclear fusion, there is no possibility of avoiding a foreseeable general collapse of human existence on this planet. It is through bringing new “rules of the game” into play, rather than acting on the game within the current rules of play, that progress in the human condition is feasible. There is no possibility that civilization could outlive the presently onrushing general economic breakdown of the present planetary system, unless the foolish ideas of Al Gore and his like are excluded from the enforced aspects of the political practice of the U.S.A.

3. The Relevant Strategic Confrontation

... when I first became politically conscious Gladstone and Disraeli still confronted each other amid Victorian solidities, the British Empire seemed eternal, a threat to British naval supremacy was unthinkable, the country was aristocratic, rich and growing richer …. For an old man, with such a background, it is difficult to feel at home in a world of … American Supremacy.

—Bertrand Russell, 1953[fn_12]

Look at the case of Fukuyama, again. Since, in fact, the evidence which I gave in earlier reports, shows that a British ruin of the U.S. economy under the present world conditions of crisis, would be the doom of the world at large, including suicide of the Anglo-Dutch Liberal interests themselves, why should the British monarchy even consider the kind of clearly anti-American scheme which the Anglo-Dutch financier interests are currently deploying? Why should a Fukuyama have lent his own peculiar sort of support to what is, in fact, the same damned and doomed, Anglo-Dutch Liberal scheme? Why, really, did Adolf Hitler arrange his own and Eva Braun’s deaths on the eve of the absolute defeat of his empire? (“Put out the light, and then put out the light”: that the truth might be, hopefully, silenced forever, and thus, hopefully, tragically concealed.)[fn_13]

The present state of mind of pro-Malthusian Liberal Americans is not that far distant from the kind of despair which the frankly satanic Russell expressed in his 1953 The Impact of Science on Society. Indeed, most of the wild-eyed varieties of “Greenie” fanatics, such as Al Gore himself, are explicitly followers of Bertrand Russell on account of precisely these issues. Some similar types among us (the wildest of the neo-Malthusians) are sufficiently far gone, ideologically, that they would actually seek the disintegration of the U.S. as a nation, but would do this for their own reasons. What is common to them all, is their devout wish not to continue to live in a world in which, in fact, the victory of their fantasy is clearly, immediately denied them.

All these and related other matters of politics, are reflections of the principles of dynamics.

There are two mutually opposing categorical systems of mankind, as typified by the republican model of Solon of Athens, Aeschylus, the Pythagoreans, Socrates, and Plato, on the one side, and the Delphic cult of the Pythian Apollo as typical of the opposing side. The principled significance of the division is, chiefly, the subject of Aeschylus’ Prometheus Bound, in which Prometheus brings scientific knowledge to human beings, in opposition to the oligarchical, Mesopotamian-like, oligarchical model of the Delphi cult’s Olympian “Greenie” Zeus.

The evolution of European history, as the concept of a European civilization emerged from those ancient times and their conflicts, has been a continuing struggle between two great, opposing systems: on the one side, we have the republican model as realized in the founding of commonwealth forms of states, as under France’s Louis XI and his follower, England’s Henry VII; on the opposing side, we have the modern continuations of the Roman, Byzantine, ultramontane, and those modern Liberal imperialist systems which were developed over the course of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries into the Anglo-Dutch Liberal form of imperialism established and developed as the British model since the February 1763 Peace of Paris.

In brief, the conflict among the English-speaking peoples, between the emergence of the U.S. republic and the development of the Anglo-Dutch Liberal imperialism of the British Empire, has defined the global conflict between the republican and oligarchical systems to the present moment. The conflict between the “uncomfortable allies against Hitler,” President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Britain represented by its Prime Minister Winston Churchill, continues to define the leading systemic features of the conflict throughout the crisis-stricken planet of the present moment.

At the time of the approach to the close of World War II, President Franklin Roosevelt’s intention for the post-war world had been: 1.) to bring the existence of the British and other empires to an end; 2.) to liberate the colonized peoples, and 3.) to aid their physical-economic development, and to secure this elimination of imperial systems of the present and past by developing the United Nations Organization as a forum to promote the peaceful physical-economic and cultural development of the nations of the world as a whole. This intention was premised on the achievements of the American System of political-economy, as opposed to the British and related systems of oppression.

From the moment of President Franklin Roosevelt’s death, the imperialistic oligarchical system created in the form of Anglo-Dutch Liberalism was committed to the systematic destruction and eradication of the American System of political-economy, as that system of economy had been defined by the American Revolution and the emergence under the leadership of such as Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamilton of what became known world-wide as the new commonwealth form of society, modelled on the intentions of the Fifteenth-Century European Renaissance’s establishment of the anti-feudal sovereign nation-state republic. The hateful anti-Franklin D. Roosevelt cult, rampant still today, has reigned since the virtual moment of the news of President Roosevelt’s death.

Putting to one side the now passed interval of communist states, the world is chiefly divided on principle, but the essential conflict is between two global standards: one, the American System as associated with the legacy of U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt, and, the other, the principal enemy of that design of U.S. policy, the Anglo-Dutch Liberal system, otherwise described as the present expression of the New Venetian oligarchical system which was established by the initiatives of Venice’s Paolo Sarpi.

Oligarchical Society Today

In the case of Bertrand Russell’s 1953 utterance, Russell’s declared existential difficulty of accepting a world dominated by the constitutional tradition of our American System of political-economy, can have principally one of two existential meanings: either that Russell would risk almost anything, including the “preventive nuclear war” which he proposed publicly in 1946, in the hope that his beloved British Empire might be freed of the existence of any power which did not affirm the triumph of the Anglo-Dutch Liberal system over the American System. Should that option fail, he would simply prefer not to exist, if the American System were to continue to be hegemonic.

In ancient society, including that of ancient Greece and Rome, the dominant imperial form of society was the oligarchical model typified by Babylon and by the Greece under the sway of the Delphic cult of the Pythian Apollo. This oligarchical model was based on the assumption that the ruling stratum of society, the only part of society allowed to define the principles of law, is an oligarchy representing a consortium of powerful families who rule over the rest of society as men rule over herded or hunted cattle. This was also known in relevant ancient Greek times, such as the times of Socrates and Plato, as “the Persian Model.” Aeschylus defines the Olympian Zeus as typical of the oligarchical model, under which some families reign by treating the majority of society as either hunted or herded cattle.

The charge which Aeschylus makes against the Olympian Zeus, of denying mankind access to knowledge of the use of “fire” (e.g., nuclear-fission power), was a crime against humanity then, as it is today.

This real-life legacy of Aeschylus’ image of the Satanic Olympian Zeus, served as the basis for the spread of Sophistry in ancient Greek culture. It is the basis for so-called “environmentalist” cults, such as those of former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore and his like today, including the terrorist cults launched, largely from London, via Hamburg and other locations, into Germany during the 1970s and 1980s. This is the import of the cult-formation of “Bio-Fools” built up recently, both within the George W. Bush, Jr. Administration and among Gore’s devotees in the U.S.A. today.

The issue goes much deeper than the mere fact of the cult organized by the Club of Rome and its Soviet ally the Laxenburg, Austria-based International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA). Like the Luddite cult built up around the circles of the British East India Company’s Haileybury School of economy, around Thomas Malthus et al., these often characteristically violent, “environmentalist” cults, as the terrorist and insurrectionist paramilitary operations by the “Greenies” in Germany during the late 1970s throughout the 1980s (and in the name of the then non-existent RAF, later).

Religion as a Medium of Oligarchy

Take the case of the death of Jesus Christ and of Apostles such as Peter and Paul. Jesus was born in the time of the Emperor Octavian (Augustus Caesar), and was judicially murdered under the authority of the Emperor Tiberius, resident at the Isle of Capri, where the Roman Empire of the Caesars had, in fact, been born. The Roman Empire was of the character which the Apostle John identified as “The Whore of Babylon”: in brief, as a continuation of the oligarchical model of empire, under which the mass of humanity was denied the exercise of those creative powers of human reason which express man as above the beasts. Jesus’ Crucifixion by the Roman Empire of the Caesars, defines the future of mankind as mankind.

The Anglo-Dutch Liberal system, which is, as I shall explain here, essentially an imperial system of rule by a Venetian-style financier-oligarchy, is the typification of the same oligarchical model traced, implicitly, to the Roman Empire of the Caesars.

To understand such phenomena efficiently, you must look at these and kindred matters, in systemic terms of reference.

With the death which either occurs to a human individual, or which the individual brings, willfully, upon himself or herself, or risks for a cause of future humanity, we are confronted with something which is not comparable to the death of any other living creature than the human individual. With mankind, the living human body is the vehicle of the efficient existence of the individual human personality which continues beyond death, rather than the human identity an epiphenomenon of that body. For those who know the truth of this matter, the individual human identity is immortal, as contrasted with the mortal incarnation of that identity: the human mind’s creative powers, unique to the human individual among all living individuals, expresses a function which surpasses death, through the medium of the human mind’s expression of physically efficient ideas generated by a creative faculty whose character is typified by Johannes Kepler’s uniquely original discovery of gravitation.

To avoid mystification of what I am writing here, recognize that those qualities of ideas which express the same processes of thought through which experimentally validated discoveries of universal physical principle are brought forth for human practice, express that aspect of human mental life which is lacking in the lower forms of life. It is by this instrument that the human individual mind may contribute a discovery of a universal physical principle, such as Kepler’s uniquely original discovery of universal gravitation, by means of which man’s power to exist, as a species, in the universe, is increased by as much as even orders of magnitude of potential relative population-density.

Evil as a characteristic of a society, or a class of persons in society, is usually expressed in the form of suppressing the development of those creative powers of the individual human mind through which discoveries such as those of Kepler, are made available to mankind. The perfect example of this is the practice of the death penalty by the social forces behind the creation of London’s U.S. puppet, called the Confederacy, against both the slave who had learned to read and write, and the person who was accused of assisting that slave. It was the suppression of the slave’s access to the most advanced culture and science of his or her society, which presents us an image of slavery in its cruelest aspect, as the reckless use of Ritalin in schools echoes that today.

The role of Christianity under Christ and his Apostles was, in effect, to free mankind from what the Roman Empire represented, what the dream of the Apostle John denounced as “The Whore of Babylon,” an alternate name for Gaea, the Whore of Delphi. Christianity’s political expression was the freeing of mankind from that status of herded or hunted chattels, virtually mere beasts, by freeing them in their own minds, first, as Frederick Douglass emphasized for the U.S. slaves, and letting their minds then free their bodies.

To defend themselves against the forces of Christianity, the oligarchy sought top-down imperial control over the Christians, seeking to degrade the Christian churches to controlled institutions of the Roman Pantheon. As the case of Charlemagne illustrates, the struggle of Christianity to free itself from the imperial control of the Roman and Byzantine rule, and from the alliance of the brutish Norman chivalry with the Venetian financier oligarchy, is an essential aspect of the process through which the modern sovereign nation-state emerged during the course of the Fifteenth-Century Renaissance. This does not imply that Christianity is not what Apostles such as John and Paul claimed it to be; it signifies that the freeing of mankind is a mission inherent in the ecumenical missions of Christianity.

However, the aspect of that of greatest relevance here, is the mission of freeing mankind to be mankind, free of bondage in the shackles of oligarchical traditions.

Today’s Roman Empire

For the Christian today, Satan waves the Sophist’s banner of Anglo-Dutch Liberalism. This view of history leads to clearer understanding of the actual great conflict on this planet as a whole today.

Prior to Paolo Sarpi’s Liberal reform of the Europe-wide Venetian financier-oligarchy, the most often characteristic feature of oligarchical culture was the reduction of the state of mind of the great mass of the population to a kind of brutish, illiterate’s ignorance like that which the Confederacy’s advocates demanded be imposed upon American slaves. The Fifteenth-Century Renaissance, as centered in the great ecumenical Council of Florence, unleashed a rebirth of science, together with the launching of the modern sovereign nation-state republic, the so-called “commonwealth” organization of nation-state society.

However, the effect of the reforms launched under the banner of the Council of Florence, especially under the leadership of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, had launched the commonwealth form of nation-state, and also the modern physical science of such explicit followers of Cusa as Leonardo da Vinci and Johannes Kepler. As I have noted in an earlier report. Niccolò Machiavelli illustrates the crucial points in, especially, his Discourses on the First Ten Books of Livy, where he illustrates the reasons that the emergence of the modern state, including the development of the city, had created a situation in which “traditionalist” feudalist measures could not secure an assured defeat of modern society militarily. The effect of technology on society’s capabilities, meant that the Venetian financier-oligarchy would lose its battle against modern society, unless it made certain Sophistical forms of adaptation to the use of new technologies.

However, Sarpi made it the essential principle of Liberalism, that scientific truth be excluded, as the attacks on Kepler and the attacks on Leibniz by the followers of Descartes attest. The statistics of gambling, as developed out of its beginnings by Sarpi’s personal lackey Galileo, became the substitute for actual principles of science, and mere mathematical formulas, premised upon Euclidean-Cartesian axiomatically aprioristic assumptions, replaced acknowledgment of the discovered existence of the actuality of universal physical principles such as Kepler’s uniquely original discovery of the principle of gravitation.

Probability replaced reason, so that the Devil himself might gamble with the fate of human souls drawn to the relevant American Enterprise Institute or kindred cultural bordello.

This was the basis for Paolo Sarpi’s creation of the Liberalism which became later known as Anglo-Dutch Liberalism. Thus, today, we have a form of Anglo-Dutch Liberal imperialism, which dominates the post-1968 world. This functions as a new, only somewhat reformed version of the same design for world order familiar from European feudalism under Venetian financier-oligarchical hegemony of the past.

In one sense, the recent efforts, since the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, to weaken and destroy that American System of political-economy which has been the only durable threat to the Anglo-Dutch Liberal monetarist system of imperial tyranny, the U.S.A. has been virtually destroyed, chiefly by its own induced Liberal corruption, rather than foreign state power. The irony is, that a world economy dominated by today’s Anglo-Dutch Liberalism can not be prevented from plunging the planet as a whole into a new dark age. Like Adolf Hitler at the end, Bertrand Russell would prefer such destruction of the world, to a world of cooperation among sovereign nation-states as prescribed by President Franklin Roosevelt.

We must therefore see the Christianity of Apostles such as John and Paul, as Jesus Christ’s defense of the mission of mankind against the evil system which was the Roman Empire. We must see this as essentially a spiritual battle, a battle to ensure the fulfilment of the destiny of mankind’s souls, by creating a mankind organized around missions consistent with the assignment made in Genesis 1: 26-31.

The problem of the Baby-Boomer generation, is that in its systemic character as a generation unto itself, it has lost sight of its own immortality, and prefers the frenzy of the gambling halls to the building of a better future, the building of an actual meaning for the mortal life we each inhabit.

---

Unlike Perennial Failure Al Gore, Zero Mostel, once featured with Milton Cross on NBC Radio’s “Basin Street,” became one among the legendary comedians of my generation. One of my favorite instances of this was the film, The Producers, featuring Zero in a swindle whose theme was a sure-to-fail choice of Broadway play named Springtime for Hitler, whose unintended success, as a perceived piece of buffoonery, had the two characters known as “the producers” fleeing to the hills. The myth of “Fat Al” Gore’s recent success reminds me of the moral of The Producers: Gore’s latest swoon-song may have a real-live outcome comparable to the fate of the characters portrayed as the two producers in the film.

Persons have been awarded, and even sometimes actually earned, long prison sentences for frauds far less serious than former Vice-President Al Gore’s latest version of the Hollywood “Global Warming” hoax. Benito Mussolini was, similarly, like some other cases, considered as a stunning success by his admirer Winston Churchill, for a certain time. Just at the time facts published by Executive Intelligence Review weekly were exposing Gore’s “Global Warming” hoax as, scientifically, an outrightly simple fraud, the most notable winter storm of the season struck the U.S. East Coast, and Mid-West, spilling into the Washington Post’s own precincts at just the time a season of hot triumph was scheduled for Gore in the nation’s capital. Only that recently accumulated fat around Al’s head seems to shield him from the clear, cold evidence that Al may propose, but, as usual for Gore’s ventures, God disposes.

—Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr [back to text].