ON ‘SHIFTING THE ECONOMIC NARRATIVE’

What Was the Real Agenda Then?

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

[Print version of this article]

Editor’s Note: This article first appeared in EIR, Vol. 40, No. 50, Dec. 20, 2013.

December 15, 2013

To: Greenberg, Carville & Seifert:

In June 2012, you, as the authors, uttered a published piece which you titled “Shifting the Economic Narrative.”[fn_1] You had then suggested that “the voters are very sophisticated.” Obviously, you should now know that the voters, as such, were not “sophisticated” by any means. I suggest that we might come to agree on a timely change in that nominal agenda now.

There was a time, when two prominent members of the World War II intelligence services were walking down a White House corridor, one, a high-ranking intelligence officer, to meet with President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the President’s private office. A second prominent member of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), waited outside the office. As the OSS chief walked out along the corridor, he muttered softly to his companion: “It’s over,” and a moment later as they walked, “It’s all over.” A few decades later, I was engaged in a related kind of role in our nation’s intelligence services, in 1982-3, when I would experience a similar defeat of what have been identified as our nation’s intelligence services, this time, not as a part of the OSS, but in my prominent role in launching the SDI project.

In both of the incidents, the one their leaving President Franklin Roosevelt’s personal office, and my own in leaving the SDI mission behind me, later, there was much more to be considered than merely a coincidence of circumstances. I doubt, from where I stand even now today, that the trio of Stan Greenberg, James Carville, and Erica Seifert, would have actually thought carefully through the two precedents, the one from the moments of the imminent death of President Franklin Roosevelt, and, the other, my own efforts on behalf of the SDI. The indicated trio could not have fully understood that connection yet; I do. That root of their own mistake, while not actually their intention, points to their lack of insight into the circumstances of their actual situation which they had identified on the June 11, 2012 occasion.

Their mistake, if we would wish to define it as I know the truth of the matter before us, is that they failed to take into account the most essential features of the defeat of the mission of our United States, during those evil times when the wretched President Harry Truman had been scheduled to await the moment when his then incoming new Presidential administration would take over, and would largely destroy what had been the great mission of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, a great mission like that which would be similarly destroyed by means of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

If, in the course of events of great consequence, such as those two moments which I have identified above, one plays the consenting fool in hiding unpleasant realities from oneself, one seeks, thus, to cling to consoling fictions of a sort which one wishes to hope might make everything come out conveniently, in spite of the true reality of both the current situation, and, much more significantly, its true consequences. I avoid indulging in wishful fantasies: I remember that hero, Alexander Hamilton, who actually made the successful outcome of the launching of our republic, but was not merely murdered by the British spy Aaron Burr, but that leading figures, even some later Presidents, had either connived implicitly at the British empire’s assassination of Hamilton, but even some Presidents of our Republic, both then, and later, had shamefully connived with the accomplices from the relatively higher ranks of republic’s leadership, as if to protect the fairy-tales cultivated to support the wishful fantasies of those who flagrantly condoned the criminality of Burr.

That much said this far, let us unveil the actually relevant truth of this subject-matter.

View full size

EIRNS/Stuart Lewis

“How could any sane person actually believe,” LaRouche asked, rhetorically, “that there was ever any truth or other expression of honest reason in what Wall Street has always represented: theft, treason, and also such as assassinations, to our republic?”

Real life, is a matter of real history, not the wishful temptations of what might be esteemed to serve as the temptations of pathetically childish fantasies. The fact is, that more leading citizens are what I have often considered wishfully dreaming fools, or liars who pretend to believe in sweet intentions of murdering thieves, and the like, who even merely pretend to believe that their simpering colleagues are paragons of good intentions and good judgments. Polite hoaxes are the more likely products to be considered. How could any sane person actually believe that there was ever any truth or other expression of honest reason in what Wall Street has always represented: theft, treason, and also such as assassinations, to our republic?

It were sufficient to examine the accounts of so-called practices of “quantitative easing,” to expose every last one of those miserable creatures, for the utter swindlers, at their very best, and, more likely, currently, murderers-in-fact they are.

Wall Street has robbed us, and is now intent on also killing our people, all for the bloody Queen’s publicly avowed intention, to reduce the human population—rapidly—from seven billions persons, to less than one. That is Wall Street’s practical policy in fact; and any one who is not merely a child, knows it, if they were both competently informed, and also competently educated and also effectively honest with themselves.

Honesty Was Never a Mere Quantity

If truth be known, truth was never merely a quantity; it was always, and only, a living species of existence. The time has come, in the present course of this specific report, to insist upon a specific quality of distinction of the human species from professed adherents of Wall Street’s and similarly perverted creatures. The measure of truth is located in the character of the de facto biologically upward biological evolution, called appropriately progress, of the human individual. Monetary gains, as merely such, have no inherently moral value on that account. The convenient measure for this is locatable in the named magnitude of relative rates of increase of energy-flux density. The terms to be used, include temperature of increase of thermonuclear fusion and relative matter-anti-matter action: implicitly, thus, concepts of a type associated with the contributions by such as Nicholas of Cusa, Johannes Kepler, and so on, through, and beyond, Bernhard Riemann, Max Planck, and Albert Einstein, but in no way the like of such charlatans as Isaac Newton and Bertrand Russell, nor can human progress be measured in terms of money as such; it can only be measured (competently) in expressed increase of energy-flux density of actual gain by means of net work of increased energy-flux density, per capita of total population and the physically efficient progress of its net progress in work per-capita of total population.

For example: not only is Wall Street’s income net worthless, but has been, in fact, monstrously counter-productive, as in the United States since the death of President John F. Kennedy, up through the present date at an accelerating loss of net output of actual work per capita. More to the point, any society which achieved a fixed standard rate of productivity, is necessarily a decaying (i.e., degenerating, morally and otherwise) society in fact of the effect.

A similar approach must be applied to the general pattern of all sets of living species. The interesting fact, on this account, is the notion of the difference between the upward evolution required by the human species, as systemically distinguished from the biological evolution of non-human processes. That is to say, that the human rate of progress is measured as if intellectually, rather than simply biologically. Hence, the general trend in human biology is that the apparent progress of animal species, does not correspond to the characteristics of the actually required progress of the human species: the mode of actual human progress is specifically noëtic in the non-linear orders of magnitude of energy-flux density required to maintain a culture of the human species.

For example, consider the following.

The Beastliness of Wall Street

The brutish characteristics of Wall Street since, most notably, the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and his brother, Robert Kennedy, had set a pattern of persisting, but uneven rates of decline of the physical economy and consumer economies of the United States (and of European nations, too), from that time to the presently, now highly accelerated rates of an actually mass murderous trend in both the U.S.A. and western and central Europe generally, up to the present moment.

The overt commitment to that policy of genocide directed against Anglo-American populations, among others, is to be recognized as a reflection of a long-standing ebb and flow of intervals of the practice of oligarchical mass-assassinations of the human populations, a trend which has been nakedly asserted as the policies of such as the United States and most of Europe, among other regions, since the death of U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, but, more emphatically, the intended deaths of those two brothers, deaths whose design has coincided with the so-called “Green” policy which was unleashed in an accelerated impulse since the latter time.

That genocidal policy of such as the baldly asserted British imperial monarchy of savage “green” population-reduction practices, presently, is to be recognized as a very long-standing policy of genocide since the dawn of what has been identified since the genocide against Troy. So far in known recorded history, civilization in general, whatever exceptions hither and yon, has been dominated by pro-genocidal governing regimes from the mists of the most ancient cultures known to us, to the presently most recent times. Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II’s launching of her genocidal programs, is nothing different, in many ways, than what has been practiced by ruling dynasties for as far back as our knowledge of these societies.

The essential difference, between that past, and now, is that the machinery of genocide has reached a degree of capability which points toward a relatively early threat of the actual extinction of the human species in total. She, that Queen, has been most specific in setting forth a policy of rapidly reducing the present human population from a recent seven billions human persons, to no more than one billion.

The correlative of this horrid atrocity has been centered to a considerable degree in the Anglo-Dutch financial system of the United States and the Anglo-Dutch elements engaged in organizing and enforcing policies of genocide fit to make even an Adolf Hitler blush.

The most frightening aspect of that horror itself, is the monstrously disgusting willingness of the leading nations of the Americas and Western Europe, to promote those practices. It appears, as the present trend, that only the immediate liquidation of institutions such as Wall Street, could check the immediately threatened mass-extinction of the greatest majority of the human populations of the trans-Atlantic community, and who know what more beyond. The greatest horror, is the willingness of the most influential economic and political institutions to not only condone, but promote such genocide as this which is currently in process by the implicitly virtual consent of a large segment of our own national political-party institutions.