This article appears in the March 1, 2024 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
March 16, 2013
GRASPING THE FUTURE!
A New System Among Nations
[Print version of this article]
Editor’s Note: This article first appeared in EIR Vol. 40, No. 12, March 22, 2013, pp. 4-16. It is part of a 2013 four-article series, the other three being: “Nicholas of Cusa, Kepler & Shakespeare,” Vol. 40, No. 25, June 21, 2013, pp. 4-19; “Contemporary Pseudo-Morality,” Vol. 40, No. 40; and “Art, Science & Sense-Perception,” Vol. 40, No. 42.
An ugly era for the United States had begun in fact, with the election of Harry S Truman as Vice-President. That is to say, that, as a candidate, Truman was clearly suited to await the early removal of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Truman did not actually invent evil; he merely wore the shoes.
In large part, the blame for this evil which Truman represented, was well suited to the schemes of Winston Churchill. For example, it had been the British empire’s Churchill, who had contrived to postpone a potential Allied landing for victory in Europe for the equivalent of the greater part of a year, at the least. As for Truman himself, he was, essentially, a “Wall Street maven.” All leading factors for consideration taken into account, once Harry S Truman had replaced the deceased President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in office, everything which had been right about the United States, went, suddenly, shockingly wrong at an accelerating rate, and into very bad, new directions. The prompt insight stated by O.S.S.’s William Donovan, as he had left President Roosevelt’s office for the last time, was soon borne out: “It’s all over!”
Sadly, for as long as the British empire has still lived on since that time, our United States had often fallen prey to “a next U.S. President,” each time for reasons which had been already experienced all too many times, earlier. The replacement of President Franklin Roosevelt, by Harry S Truman, had come, for me, and also many others of both our higher and lower ranks, like a fall into the torment of some Satan’s pit. One lives on, despite almost everything. Even the election of an excellent leader such as President Dwight D. Eisenhower (for two terms), had not been sufficient to undo the wrecking already done to our United States during the Truman years.
It would be the election of President John F. Kennedy which, for a memorable, seemingly mere moment, returned us toward what had been the intended strategic legacy of a Franklin Roosevelt, as so of a Douglas MacArthur, and also of a Dwight Eisenhower. The wonderful, but uncompleted intentions of our Presidency under President Kennedy, while they lasted, were ruined to a large degree, not only by the assassinations of both of the two Kennedy brothers, but, even uglier, by the effect of the official suppressions, still today, of the truth about those two murders.
In the meantime, my own sense of my obligation to a personal mission of a future duty in the course of history, had begun for me, at the same moment when I had received, in India, the announcement of the death of President Franklin Roosevelt.
Chapter 1
The Thermonuclear Challenge
I was among those who were delivered from California, to Bombay, aboard what had been intended, earlier, to have been a luxury-cruise Matson liner, but had been completed, instead, as a high-speed, stoutly armed troop-ship, the Admiral Benson. I was shipped, thus, across the Pacific, by way of Melbourne, to Bombay, and, thence, by rail, from Bombay, across India, to a Bengal military camp in Kanchrapara. It was in Kanchrapara that the news of President Roosevelt’s death was delivered freshly to those of us who were located, temporarily, in India’s encampment there.
It was then, and there, that my assent to what had been proposed to me as a quiet, dusk meeting for a few soldiers, brought me, in effect, to what would be remembered later as my first, later validated inkling of a foresight into what would become my own future.
Their question presented to me by my fellow-soldiers, in that evening there, was, simply, and explicitly, “What is going to become of us, now?”
My reply was literally remembered by me to the present day: “I don’t know,” I had replied. “We have lived under a great President, and the new President is a very little man. I am worried about our future now; but, we will continue through whatever comes for us, because we must.” I was speaking as much to myself, as to them. My own remarks, exactly so spoken, had had the peculiarly indelible effect of a freshly spoken oath, for me.
My brief reply to my associates’ question there, then during my first visit to Kanchrapara, was a very modest event; but, between then, and, thereafter, when I had, still later, departed Calcutta for a return to our post-war United States, in the Spring of 1946, on the U.S.S. General Hershey, my personal outlook on life had already acquired, more and more, the quality of a prescience of something prophetic: that effect came on, as in lurches, step, by step, and beyond, over the decades which had then followed, and continues in a like fashion, still today.
What has it all meant?
I have now lived for more than ninety years: obviously, seventy of those years as an adult. The passing decades, had come on, still, as if in intervals. That had been the case since the fateful first notice of the death of Franklin Roosevelt, in April 12, 1945. This had come on as a pattern in an experience continued throughout the continuing years of our world’s entry into the successively ever deeper realm of, first, nuclear, and, then, in Autumn 1946 a prospect of a now-threatened state of thermonuclear warfare.
Since those times, now about sixty-seven years ago, up to the present moment of my writing here, the history of the planet has been shaped, for me, by what was, in fact, at first, President Truman’s and Winston Churchill’s unnecessary resort to nuclear warfare, a warfare which led, as if almost immediately, into a permanent state of preparations for the future continuing state of threatened nuclear warfare, under President Harry S Truman, both since then and beyond, up through the present date. With Truman’s accession to the Vice-Presidency, and, then, the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, we had then soon entered into the chronic proximity of a thermonuclear “end game,” the same which menaces mankind still today. It is the system which presently reigns over the planet as a whole—unless we might succeed in willfully changing that, now: we in our United States, most emphatically.
An improvement would not be met by a merely simple sort of change; it would now be, presently, an extremely radical, and hopefully profound and sudden change for the better: it must be nothing less than a hope-filled change in the destiny of mankind. That must still become our efficiently adopted intention now: it is a change which must now occur before it were too late to change what had been continued as the seeming endlessness of perpetual war since the death of President Franklin Roosevelt.
Once society had actually launched a first use of nuclear weapons in war, as Winston Churchill and his American stooge, Harry S Truman, had done, the world’s commitment to an entire, global era of domination by a theme of thermonuclear warfare, had begun—somehow, and somewhere beyond this immediately present moment. Therefore, there is an intervening history which must be considered betwixt then and now.
Douglas MacArthur’s Outlook
At the beginning of our republic’s actual crafting of nuclear weaponry’s development: from the opinion where I had sat, had been the pledged intention, to avoid any unnecessary presentation, or deployment of such weapons. The opinion in fact of General Douglas MacArthur, in ending the war with Japan, then, and related roles performed by him later, was that the nuclear bombardment of Japan had been unnecessary, and, in fact, a useless violation perpetrated against humanity. The evidence since that time, had already verified General MacArthur’s judgment against that use of nuclear weaponry: Japan had already been defeated before Hiroshima, in all but name: the use of nuclear weapons then, had never been justified at that time. The actual motive for the nuclear attacks on Japan, had nothing to do with Japan as such. The Churchill gang’s launching of a threat of war against the Soviet Union, was virtually an intended act of treason against our United States; the proper intent of unavoidable warfare, especially nuclear and related warfare, is to seek an appropriate, and, hopefully, a durably crafted peace. The bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, were a nuclear threat-message to the Soviet Union and other future targets over the course of decades to come.
That intention of good will for the cause of humanity, which I have just described as the case for the intentions of General Douglas MacArthur, was never the kind of intention of a Roman or British empire: an empire whose essential roots had been planted, and had persisted as the likeness of the legacy of the horridly evil, ancient Rome and its still persisting New Venetian expression. The Seventeenth Century’s launching of a “New Venetian Party’s” so-called “British empire” had always been the adversary of the birth of our United States in fact, an adversary whose very model and nature had been propagated, and defended, as by the evil legacies of ancient Rome, earlier. We who were actually patriots of our United States, had sought peace with the British empire, but never submission; nor had we been confident that the British empire would willingly repudiate its wicked ways—in fact, to the present day of Tony Blair, it actually never did.
Our republic’s inherently existential quality of strategic policy, had been, simply stated: “war-avoidance, if possible.” We had been created as a new republic, not to become entangled in quarrels with the wars of the nations of old Europe, but to create a new world. This we had even applied to what had been our own most vicious traitors, such as the British spy and rampant murderer Aaron Burr, a killer who had given us the British-created President Andrew Jackson whom Burr had given to the United States, a Jackson thus associated with what was intended to become the British-created Confederacy. All of that evil had been directed under British bankers planted among us, all associated with the legacy of the vicious traitor Aaron Burr and the British banking system’s agents who gathered, like vultures, around what would become known as the British-created swindlers on Wall Street and kindred locations.
A presently new condition for mankind’s habits has been therefore required, now as then; but, now in the context of mankind’s dedication to applications and development of thermonuclear technologies, and beyond. We must not seek thermonuclear warfare as such; however, if the use of thermonuclear warfare were prevented, bold, new, thermonuclear advancement of creative “peacetime” technologies must come somewhat freely into play for peaceful outcomes within our Solar system, instead. This latter outcome, if it occurs, will have the hopeful characteristics of mankind’s reign over relatively nearby regions of the Solar system, and beyond. There, an entirely new destiny of mankind awaits our arrival.
The evidence of the options for a qualitatively distinct, improved, new order in human conditions, already exists, at least implicitly so. It will be sufficient for us, now, to act upon the prompting of those premises now. The principle on which that improved outlook for mankind must be premised, was already defined, implicitly, since the beginning of man’s dependency, not on the flames of an Old Europe, but on the progressive use of fire, a continuing dependency which is the essentially natural distinction of man from beasts, as this has been the case since such instances as primitive man’s creative use of the controlled flames of a fireside.
The time has long passed, since a time when mankind’s required conditions of life did not include the prerequisites of what might be identified as increasing reliance upon an emphasis on artificial preconditions for mankind’s mastery over what had been long since the “artificial” circumstances of managed climates. When our attention is focused upon the requirement of creative thermonuclear preconditions, rather than thermonuclear weaponry as such, attention is quickly turned toward matters belonging to the same general classification as an urgently needed defense of mankind’s role in nearby Solar space, and beyond. Therefore, our laymen, and our foreign neighbors, should be informed, that threats to mankind from asteroids and comets, typify this category of urgent requirements for the defense of mankind’s existence.
Consequently, the difference between the present time, and the errors of the past, lies, essentially, in the presently awaiting, next stage of thermonuclear development within the societies of mankind. This prospect is located not so much in thermonuclear technology as such; it lies in the nature of the steering of those technologies’ applications to the inter-planetary and further domains of mankind’s control over relevant developments of mankind’s increasingly extended role within, and beyond nearby Solar space. The definition lies not in particulars, but, rather, in the broad scope and qualitative implications of the applications. That means, speaking broadly, and also practically, that we now require a policy of upward leaps in the application of the relative scales of “energy-flux density” engaged.
The considerations respecting the need and search for peaceful progress of mankind as a species, which I have now placed before us, here, must be attributed, less to the nature of science as such, than to the degree to which science had been essentially, heretofore suppressed, in one or another degree. In the main, progress had been suppressed under the long reigns of what are properly identified as those “oligarchical systems” traced from the ascent of that putatively oligarchical form of rule attributed to the evil doctrine expressed in the tracing of the principle of evil from the legendary Olympian Zeus, through the reigns of ancient Rome and such depraved successors as William of Orange’s New-Venetian, and presently British, actually global forms of pro-genocidal, imperial systems now.
Presently, the explicitly and emphatically stated, genocidal intention of the British empire of Queen Elizabeth II, has been clearly and repeatedly stated, as by her, to rapidly reduce the human population, from about seven billions living persons, to about one billion, or perhaps less, speedily. That must be recognized as a span of mass-murderous intentions which has been a recurring feature of what has been associated with the depraved Mediterranean oligarchical cultures of more than about three thousand years, and also longer, presently.
Therefore, the following point bearing on what were better identified as a “Brutish tradition,” is to be emphasized as crucial.
The current system of the British empire and its European and other lackey-cultures, must be recognized for its recurring moral degeneracy, as contrasted with those nobler cultures which have willfully increased their rates of energy-flux-density characteristics, those characteristics as distinct from oligarchical (e.g., “degenerate”) cultures which had tended to dominate extended regions of populations for spans as long as millennia, as since the emergence of the specific variety of maritime culture associated with the inherently evil figure of an Olympian Zeus.
The monstrousness of the oligarchical tradition which the implicitly global, presently British imperial system, continues to perpetuate to the present date, is now combined with “radical population control,” and with the division of the human population between, on the one side, a limited portion of anti-humanity oligarchs, all matched against virtual mass-extinctions intended for the ranks of the “common folk” also sometimes known as “the underlings.”
Thus, there is nothing actually new in Queen Elizabeth’s presently ongoing determination to bring about her avowed early extinction of six billions from among the present level of approximately seven billions of the total human population: a policy of practice which the British monarchy has already set underway in concert with the now-launched second Administration of President Barack Obama, as through aid of a prescribed program of massive cut-backs, such as programs of sequestration.
The New Prospect Now Before Us!
For an indication of presently practical considerations, we might presently estimate the expected useful survival of the Solar system to be brought to an end for us, long before two billions years ahead. Consequently, when that fact is taken into account, we must look forward in terms of leaps into the prospects for future generations as measured in the order of four human generations born per century. That measure, demands, in turn, a certain estimated, rising rate of “creativity” per capita, per generation, and per century, as the progress of successive generations is to be measured in generations counted out in increased rates of “energy-flux densities.”
If, as we have been forewarned, the Sun has about two billions years before actually blowing up, that does not signify that we have two billions years for dalliance along the way. Nonetheless, if that “yardstick” which I have proposed for measuring human progress applies, then, there should be adequate “leg-room” available between now and the time when a dying Sun turns very nasty for us. In that case, the prospects for the human species need not be a matter of desperation, provided that we eradicate the present tendency for oligarchical dilly-dallying of the type to be expected from the reign of the presently, extremely decadent, British imperial system.
Nonetheless, despite what fools such as the British empire may have produced, we dare not permit the continuation of the oligarchical system, such as that of the British empire-in-fact presently. However, we must take certain precautions, as much on our part, as theirs, on precisely that account.
On the Reign of Metaphor
As I have emphasized during the course of my related writings delivered over, approximately, the course of the recent two years, the human species is closely nearing a stage of its fresh developments, when science must abandon what has been a naked sort of customary devotion to the means represented as “mere sense perception.” As I have stressed recently, the dubious practice of relying on sense-perceptual measurements for defining the “measure” of physical principles, must be now superseded by notions of essential increase of energy-flux density of population, per capita unit of productivity, and of rising energy-flux density of action.
As I have included these considerations among my recently published writings, the presumption that “evidence” with the characteristics of mere “sense-perception” corresponds to a real action in physical space-time as such, is a belief which must be urgently superseded by a notion derived from an appropriately deep insight into the actual meaning of the subject of “Classical Metaphor.” I mean that metaphor as expressed in the “shadow-form” of the Classical stage—but only for what may be identified as the Classical stage—as in the case for the recognition that the action moved by the playwright, director, and actors on stage, embodies the reality of the effective action, rather than abstract and fixed measures of lapsed physical time. In other words, the emphasis must be placed on a notion of effective action measured in the language of a physically actual quality of true metaphor, instead of per unit of clock-space “space-time.”
The distinctions which I have just proposed here, are the reality of the action as, primarily, an experience of the human mind, rather than a sense-perceptual event in what is usually considered as the mere “clock-space-time” of sense-perception as such. So, I have recently presented my view of the realization of “the chorus principle” of metaphor employed by the inherently future-oriented poet William Shakespeare for his King Henry V. That view points toward the reality of an experienced future physical space-time, that as we must proceed in considering action within the lapsed, relative space-time of the near regions, or broader scope of actions within the realm of the Solar system.
Chapter 2
“Eratosthenes!
Let Us Build the Future for . . .”
Much of the ignorance shown by mankind this far, even putatively learned mankind, can be traced, at least in large degree, to what have been considered as some long-standing venerable and durable, but silly habits. The general assault on that tradition, respecting the subjects of measurement, features the work of the engineer Archimedes and the great Alexandrian Library’s Eratosthenes. Eratosthenes’ measure of the Earth by the Sun, was, in terms of strictness of scientific practice, the greatest achievement in refinement of physical principles up to that time. The most important successor of Eratosthenes on this account, was the school of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, a Cusa whose discoveries had been crucial in leading Christopher Columbus to his discovery of the Americas—as if for us.
the Earth’s circumference to be ~24,500 miles—which is accurate to within 50 miles!
Another, related great leap in discovery within the bounds of that exact-same process, was that by a great student of Nicholas of Cusa, the discovery of the principle of the system of Solar astronomy by Johannes Kepler, as respecting his stated principle of vicarious hypothesis. The crucial discovery came through the medium of Classical artistic composition and its performance, in the domains of Classical composition in the truly Classical arts of such as music, painting, poetry, and drama. The principle of vicarious hypothesis is found as a complement in metaphor. I had recently emphasized the connection to the drama of Shakespeare to that connection. As I shall show here, the results of exploring this realm can be stunning—and wonderfully useful—for mankind today.
Unless the British empire prevents this.
In a long, and originally, often obscured tradition, the human species has become apparently accustomed, but mistakenly, to employ a notion of time and space based on the premises of what had been mere sense-perception. The folly of continuing that originally crude tradition of mankind, had reached a critical stage of practice, at a juncture occurring during a time in which scientists have often based definitions of universal physical principles, mistakenly, as depending upon mere human sense-perception.
A notable challenge to the persistence of that simplistic practice, presented itself at the point at which universal physical principles respecting universal physical space outside planet Earth, were defined on the basis of human sense-perception attributed to processes within the bounds of planet Earth: the future of mankind now demands primary emphasis on the use of the practice of defining experimental principles which must be applied, more emphatically, to regions of our Solar system beyond the realm of Earth.
Insofar as some among us have been apparently enabled to see aspects of the work of such as Nicholas of Cusa and his inspiration, as to be seen in the work of Johannes Kepler’s vicarious hypothesis, and, also, the related principle of metaphor, and, to see still beyond that merely apparent limit: we are, thus, confronted with the actuality of the need for discovering an efficiently defined foresight into the future of our mankind, as within, first, looking at Earth from the space enclosing the relatively nearby regions of our Solar System. My own experience of life since my adolescence, has been filled, increasingly, with an insistent, virtual “knocking-at-the-door” for such an outlook.
Considering my age, and the conditions that go with that, I have adopted no personal prospects for travel beyond residence on Earth. Nonetheless, for me, there is nothing alien to me in an outlook which features actually scientific outlooks for Solar, or even Galactic missions alike: nearby Solar space in mankind’s evident destiny as a species is also a matter of presently urgent priorities.
In the experience of mankind, the slave dwells within the bounds of an apparently pre-assigned course of life; whereas, essentially, the free creative human individual, is naturally impelled to recreate the future of his or her society, but, perpetually, always at an higher level; he, or she, like a good mother, adopts the making of a really foreseeable future for society as such, as being his, or her essential profession. Yet, there are people who are ostensibly freed, even influential in society, but whose soul remains chiefly locked within a tradition of the descent from slaves.
That issue of true freedom, is the subject to be elaborated during the remainder of the present chapter of my report.
Recreating the Actual Future
So far, we have had the modern history dated since the births of such as those of the heirs of Dante Alighieri (1265-1321), and of Renaissance geniuses such as Filippo Brunelleschi (1378-1446), Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa (1401-1464), and the latter’s followers in the process of launching the creation of the best in modern European science.
That, then new-born tradition was partly inspired by, but did not begin with the followers of Dante Alighieri; it was already inherent in the Christianity of the Apostles, as reflected also in the work of Philo of Alexandria (ca. 20BC – 50AD). The fact of that matter is, that the monstrously “dark age” created by the now preceding Twentieth Century and its wicked oligarchical outcomes, had required the actuality of a Fifteenth-Century rebirth of the civilization of the so-called “Golden Renaissance:” a fresh outlook across the great waters, on the future of mankind, a fresh devotion and outlook which has been indispensable for the continued existence of civilization presently.
So, to sum up that brief lesson, the outcome to-be-desired from our presently tortured, new century of mankind, requires the recapture of the same quality of inspiration traced to the roots of such as Filippo Brunelleschi and Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, thence, to both the Christopher Columbus who was inspired to great missions by devotion to his adopted mission of Nicholas of Cusa, and to the same great mission of progress by Cusa which had inspired the magnificent scientific achievements of Johannes Kepler, and also those of the United States of Benjamin Franklin. For both of these, the great mission is to resist the evil of what is presently known by the witting as the British empire still today.
My point of emphasis here and now, while also implicitly theological, is located by me in what I write here, from a viewpoint in the subject of an urgently needed redemption of the pledge to the mission adopted during Europe’s Fifteenth Century, to the principle of modern physical science traced from, most notably, Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa’s De Docta Ignorantia. The contrary cultural current, has been that of the same, ancient evil typified by the virtually Satanic imagery of the Olympian Zeus, his attributed devotions, his oligarchical habits, and those among his traditions spawned as if of his own past evil times.
The “New Dark Age” of a genocide intent on reducing the human population from seven to approximately one billion human individuals, which the Queen of England has demanded for the people of this planet now, is that darkest of all modern evils known to the existence of mankind in known world history this far. This is not to be treated as a matter of “religion” as such. It is, rather, the urgently needed rejection of something inherently “Satanic,” which must be repudiated in a more practical, and also more profound way, as we must despise the evil of that Olympian Zeus which was the evil worshiped by those who demanded the death of Socrates, and the evil of the Satanic Emperor Nero.
The Prospect Before Us Now
The present epoch’s notion of a “Prospect Before Us,” that since the Peace of Westphalia, was put forward, according to the best information which I recall as having been delivered to me in its time, as a musical theme from the impact of the Peace of Westphalia on the culture of England, in particular. Both the music, and the stated theme, are properly appreciated for that reason, as having existed up to the presently dismal times of the wretched Tony Blair. The proposed return to the evil which had reigned prior to the Westphalian peace, would be the worst imaginable evil, the truly Satanic, which could be done only by those among the most evil of men, such as, for example, the British Empire’s Tony Blair, or Blair’s ostensible under-study, Barack, the Queen’s own Barack Obama.
That Blair is truly an ideal modern man of evil, as the policies of genocide presented by the British Empire’s Elizabeth II have shown in the extreme nature of her schemes for reducing the human population of this planet from approximately seven billions, to approximately one billion persons. It is a prospect fit to bring shudders to the thoughts of even a Satan. The fact of the matter is, that, from a physical-science standpoint, the Queen’s scheme, when presented as practice, means not a mere reduction of the human species, but that species’ self-extinction virtually in its entirety.
Why should the Queen be so shameless as to espouse such an evil publicly?
The Principle of Life As Such
The generality of known forms of life, is marked out in fact by what some reference as “natural selection.” What that term means, in being passed from ear to mouth and mouth to ear, varies; nonetheless, certain of the implications of such a stated policy are efficiently clear for our meeting our present duties respecting this topic for discussion. In terms of what is identified as a principle of “energy-flux density,” sets of species which drop down on the relative scale of evolution in its total representation, go extinct. In the matter of the case of policy at hand, the Queen’s stated policy means the self-inflicted extermination of the human species.
I would emphasize that the Queen is not telling the truth about this matter —why should she—since it is not in her particular interest to encourage opposition to that which she views as her interest to destroy billions of present human beings? Her publicly stated interest, as she, herself, has repeatedly defined it, is genocide: the reduction of the human species, from about seven billions persons, to about one, and that, now, as rapidly as possible.
The relevant evidence on that account, is that the actual policy which the Queen is peddling to the stupefied credulous, is by no means new to the experience of the human species overall. “Mass extinctions” of entire social categories, are, like cannibalism, recurring expressions of utter depravity, of unfitness to exist, as in the related case of the practices of ritual mass murder by the Roman empire in the imperial Roman arena. No Nero was ever actually fit to live on “its” own account; it has always been intrinsically an expression of depravity per se. Essentially, the point is, that the Roman empire and its like, were systemically unfit to continue to have existed, under any conditions.
More to the underlying point: the universe itself is driven toward higher orders of “energy-flux density.” The continued existence of our human species depends upon our meeting the effect of that challenge of development from relative backwardness, as in opposition to higher energy-flux densities of organization. In fact, the appropriate conclusion, is that the British empire has been, morally and otherwise, unfit to exist. That is, speaking practically, a law of life. If that empire is not terminated, then, it were likely that humanity itself would threaten its own continued existence.
“That much” on this subject, should be recognized as “clear.”
Chapter 3
An Interlude: Where Do the Nations Go Now?
The great moment of opportunity for the trans-Atlantic world, came with the election of the United States’ President Ronald Reagan. Between the election of President Reagan (November, 1980) and the inauguration of a British-tied, relatively new Soviet head of state, Yuri Andropov (November, 1982), was a great moment in history, an interval during which an agreement among the United States, leading nations of western and central Europe, and the Soviet Union, was on the verge of the feasible realization of a great renaissance in the history of mankind. As events have demonstrated, the installation of a British monarchy-tied Yuri Andropov in the Soviet Union, led, as if inexorably, into the British-empire-directed collapse of not only the Soviet Union, but the entire system of both western and eastern continental Europe, and, then, passed into the presently looming threat of the early extinction of mankind.
As a result of Andropov’s own blocking-out of what has turned out to have been the last chance for a constructive agreement between the United States and that Soviet Union, an agreement which depended, in significant part, on my own initiatives and the crucially leading role of President Ronald Reagan’s agreement to lead, the former Soviet Union was not only virtually dumped into an irreparable physical-economic collapse, but into a wide-scale state of collapse and relative misery. The net effect of that action by Andropov and his accomplices, has become the fact that the entirety of the planet presently hovers at the brink of a threatened thermonuclear extinction.
The Soviet Union is now long dead, killed in fact mostly by its own failure to meet the urgently needed, available solution represented by the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). What, therefore, is the next comparable mistake to be avoided, among the northern trans-Atlantic nations, most emphatically? More nations are destroyed by their own folly, than by their ostensibly external adversaries.
I had worked with some considerable significance, for the relatively successful emergence of a state of readiness for bringing together the collaboration of most among the leading nations of the planet, over the interval of 1975-1983, to bring together the prospective means of agreement needed to bring about the avoidance of general thermonuclear conflict. The agreement of President Ronald Reagan to this intention in his March 1983 televised address had been a great hope for the world.
Among the other effects of the opposition to the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), has been the virtual extinction of the sovereignties of thes nations of Europe under the inherently tragic so-called “Euro” system, and a state of economic despair among the present population of the trans-Atlantic region of the planet which has been now plunged into a state of general economic and cultural disintegration of the trans-Atlantic world—in particular. Many from around the world, especially those in relatively high places, would have very good reason to feel a sense of shame about their own role in their own national history, on this account, this far.
The leading theme for the present moments of crisis, is “If, by a miracle, civilization actually survives, . . . even during the short term. . . I have done my duty on this account,” and, you? How many among you are guilty of what you had not done when you had had the relevant opportunity to take relevant action? If most among you, continue either to do, or not to do, when you might do, or have done, civilization as we have known it, is nearly finished as trends stand now. The effect could now readily become thermonuclear.
However, let us proceed as intended, not forgetting what I have just emphasized. Given, the fact, that the global society as we have known it generally over the course of recent generations, has been an awful failure. Which were the worst, the crimes of commission, or omission, could be debated, probably without any resulting sort of useful outcome for mankind generally. What, therefore, is the change in relations within and among nations, which must be understood and supported as relevant and sweeping changes in the systems of policies and policy-making among nations?
Look back to the Dec. 2, 1971 Queens College debate between me and leading Keynesian economist Abba Lerner. He lost, and the fact and manner of Lerner’s self-disgrace on that occasion, has had significant repercussions internationally, to the present day. That debate was both a consequence and continuing factor in what became the “SDI” up through the present date, even internationally.
Interlude: The Case of Abba Lerner
If any partisans of the December 2nd, 1971 Queens College debate had thought, as had Professor Sidney Hook, that I had caused the defeat of Hook’s adopted champion, that I had defeated Professor Abba Lerner in that debate, they were greatly mistaken. The essential fact is, that it was Lerner’s own foolishness which had defeated him. Indeed, at the close of the debate, that point had been made very clear. “The official conquering hero who had been brought on stage from England for the occasion, Lerner, had demolished himself—on the Queens College stage. In fact, the entire Wall Street gang has continued to do the same to itself, and to the virtual entirety of the U.S. population, and that of Europe, too, ever since. I was, in effect, hindering their efforts at self-destruction, not only that of themselves, but society generally.
The fallacy of the Queens College rooters for Abba Lerner had made not merely a crucial mistake of judgment, but a colossal one. I recall a World War II-vintage witticism, which runs approximately as follows.
The subject of that tale was situated during the U.S.A. of “World War II” vintage. Men had repeatedly left a high-security site with filled wheelbarrows of sand, and carried it off the premises. Where was the profit? The scheme was stealing wheelbarrows.
All day, day after day, British and kindred economists are conducting a routine; they are carrying out virtual “sand” as a form of income, but losing the wheelbarrows in which the sand was carried.
The Queen of England’s notion of “a margin of profit,” lies in the process of destroying the physical economy. That is otherwise better known as “the sickly-green policy” of a form of “profit” based on the destruction of vast quantities of looted wealth, thereby, ultimately eliminating most of the human population, some way down the line. That was very much the same policy which I witnessed in the advent of the great U.S. financial collapse of the 1954-1958 recession, and, the effects of going to a looting of the U.S. economy by the fruitless, unnecessary war covered over by the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert.
Similarly, thus, in the debate at Queens College of Dec. 2, 1971, I was winning the victory in a contest for higher net rates of physical productivity, while Abba Lerner “was carrying out the wheelbarrows.” Which was whose definition of measurable net profit?
In a once-famous debate among rival Islamic scholars, the end-game issue turned out to be, for the moment, who would gain the victory of “the destruction of the destruction.” The same old contest appears to be in progress in certain quarters of statecraft and economy generally, under Queen Elizabeth II presently. Whose, therefore, would be the victory in such a silly design of contest?
The Paradox of Actually Being Human
There are, effectively, two, respectively contradictory definitions of a human identity relative to all animal species. One, the popular, but essentially failed opinion, attempts to measure the nature of human identity by a humanoid definition of animal sense-perception. The alternative is proof of practice of the effects caused by the actually noëtic capabilities demonstrated as being the cognitive powers of the human mind.
The actually human behaviorisms absent from the non-human domain include the discovery of universal physical principles and, also, several most relevant categories of human Classical modes of artistic composition. The latter include truly “Classical,” but not “Romantic,” nor still lower forms of musical composition, the Classical as most clearly represented by the work of Johann Sebastian Bach, but also by Classical drama as merely typified, with a certain excellence, by Shakespeare, as well as Classical composition of visual art, and so on.
The relatively most efficient approach to distinguishing Classical artistic composition, from virtual human noise, is located essentially in the notions of Classical artistic composition: anything which is proffered as a substitute for Classical artistic composition—or for Classical physical-scientific discoveries such as those of Nicholas of Cusa, Johannes Kepler, and so on, is, essentially, trash.
These definitions which I have roughly outlined in this chapter so far, distinguish the specific kinds of noëtic functions unique to Classical science and artistic composition. Focus, for the moment, on the cases of validated discoveries of universal physical principles and Classical artistic composition. Physical-scientific discoveries such as those effected by Cusa, or, later Max Planck and Albert Einstein, Kepler, Leibniz, et al., are functionally interactive with Classical artistic drama. The hallmarks for these stipulated categories of both physical-scientific principles and Classical artistic principles of composition and physical-scientific discoveries, all have the common characteristic of being “categorically outside” the simply defined domain of sense-perception otherwise. In another published location, I have emphasized attention to the function of “Chorus” as that principle was elaborated in Shakespeare’s Henry the Fifth.
The qualities to be emphasized in taking up the matter of the distinctions which I have thus asserted, can be described usefully as being the categories of both physical science and Classical artistic composition which share a commonly exclusive authority in distinction from that of mere sense-perception otherwise defined.
The simplest illustration of what is at issue here, is the quality of insight expressed by the discovery of a principle of Classical artistic composition, or a similar expression of a scientific principle of the type which can not be adduced as a product of sense-perception as such. The same is true for all actually Classical musical composition, and for the discovery of an efficient quality of a universal physical principle which is not definable by nominalist deduction. Some discussion of this set of distinctions, is now timely.
Universal Physical Principles
Those of us who share at least some degree of insight into the experiences of Classical artistic composition and also direct apprehension of universal physical principles, should have discovered, by now, that the mental act of discovery of a universal physical principle in physical, as in Classical artistic composition, is “located outside” the apprehensions of sense-perception as such. No reductionist, therefore, could actually be a competent Classical artist, or an original discoverer of a principle of physical science. The most efficient approach to an attempted recognition of those standards is, probably, the work of Johannes Kepler in the discovery of the principle of vicarious hypothesis and the latter’s ties to the concept of metaphor. The two latter concepts, when competently treated, are essentially equivalent categorically.
What that means, in practice, is that sense-perceptions are not the means for direct knowledge of human experience. Respecting the notion of applicable concepts of principle, as distinct from mere opinion, most human beings, this far in known history, are locked, in respect to the use of sense-perception, into a surrogate for actuality. Actually relative degrees of mental development of the human individual, are expressed not by an assumed experience from sense-perception as such; but, directly the opposite. The quality of human intelligence, as that is most conveniently expressed by the combination of scientific and Classical-artistic experience, is in inverse proportion of relative weight of practical authority, to the much less intelligent case of the merely “practical man.” A beast-versus-human priority of relative values.
It is important, to point attention to the relative degrees of genius, especially in contrast to the trash-like mentality of the so-called “man of practical opinion.” This can be fairly well measured in a study of the relevant cultural trends from the high-point of the great ecumenical sessions centered on the Council of Florence during the life-time of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, and the increasing rates of bestialization in the passing from Europe’s and North America’s Classical artistry and scientific motives during the Eighteenth Century in Europe and North America. The steep descent from the bestiality of a Franz Liszt and Richard Wagner, relative to a Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, et al., was outdone by the trends of generally increased bestiality in the Twentieth Century since the death of President Franklin Roosevelt and his immediate circles. The assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, and that of his brother, Robert, were tolerated crimes which present the leading forces of reigning influence in our society as being driven by a trend toward deep-going proof of a deep bestiality surging within the ranks of the Wall Street-centered “elites,” and the manifestly accelerating rates of moral and intellectual degeneration in the population generally, in the trans-Atlantic region, in particular, since we tolerated the murders of John and Robert Kennedy, for example. From 1971 on, it was manifestly an accelerating rate of plunge into relative decadence and outright degeneracy.
The Cultural Yardstick
So far in this chapter, I have treated the case of the human individual in a cultural context. Examine the moral and intellectual qualities of any subject human individual, as properly measured in the relative emphasis, in their mental-emotional life, on a self-conception premised on a scientific-Classical cultural identity as against the moral and intellectual inferiority of emphasis on relative belief in “the practical man’s simplistic devotion to the intrinsically depraved reliance on sense-certainty.”
On the one side, the up-side, there have been trends of culture in societies, which tend to lead in one of the two, alternate choices of direction, or the opposite.
When the history of the cultures of mankind, is properly considered in light of the point which I have presented and illustrated here, we have touched, at the least, on the distinction between the relative depravity of trends in so-called “popular opinion,” as against the periods of great and rich experience of the noëtic characteristics of Classical-artistic development of the individual human mind. The simple fact of proof of the point at issue here, is that people who prefer the trends of “popular trends” of late, are morally and intellectually inferior as a practical matter of fact.
The Matter of Judgment
Let us, therefore, reconsider the proper choice of definition of “Intelligence Quotient.” Morality, and human intelligence, are to be “measured” in the relative weight of reliance on the interdependent principle of vicarious hypothesis and metaphor, in contrast to the relative weight of sense-perception. Vicarious hypothesis and metaphor, as combined in practice, determine relative human sanity and practical levels of intelligence, that of both the individual personality, and of the generality of the ideology of the society.
To the extent that human society were progressive in its direction of development, vicarious hypothesis and metaphor, when properly combined, tend to become victorious. If not, mankind were probably on the way to extinction. Any contrary opinion is foolish sham, and leads toward the worst probable outcome, that of the same general bestiality which we in the United States have experienced as a trend since the “cover up” of the assassinations of both President John F. Kennedy and his brother, Robert.
In the meanwhile, physical science, notably mankind’s progress toward higher relative concentrations of the application of vicarious hypothesis and metaphor, would tend to reduce the percentile of the human population under the corrupting influence of belief in mere sense-certainties, which lowers the “I.Q.” of each relevant society which has failed to displace customary belief in sense-perception for the advantage of the principles of vicarious hypothesis and metaphor.
Therefore, for example, your attitude towards Max Planck and Albert Einstein, against the depraved Bertrand Russell, may now be measuring your fitness to be regarded as actually a human individual. That is not a matter of mere opinion; it is a matter of those qualities which actually distinguish the intellectual life of the actually human personality, from the pathetic superstitions of worship of the pleasures and pains of vulgar sense-perception.
