A NEW DEFINITION OF MANKIND
Taking Charge of the Solar System
and the Galaxy
The Lyndon LaRouche PAC-TV Weekly Report for May 11, 2011, was hosted by John Hoefle, and featured guests Lyndon LaRouche, and Basement researchers Sky Shields and Cody Jones.
[PDF version of this transcript]
John Hoefle: Hello. Welcome to the LaRouchePAC Weekly Report, for May 11, 2011. With me in the studio today are two members of our Basement Team, Cody Jones and Sky Shields, and joining us from Europe, Lyndon LaRouche.
Lyndon LaRouche: There's an interesting subject we should take up today. It has two aspects to it. First of all, Cody [Jones] is pulling together something which will probably be done in, not more than two weeks, this week and next, probably, without glitches: a very important coverage on the history of life on planet Earth, which goes from a long time, about a half-billion years ago, or near that, to the present time.[1] And there are objective lessons to be learned from just what we know, or as much as we know today about that history, which bear upon the present world situation; and especially upon the question: What is the difference between the animal kingdom, which preceded human life by a long time, [and human life itself]?
Animals of various kinds and forms of life have been around for the better part of a half-billion years, whereas mankind is estimated to have been around for only a few million years. And there are a lot of questions which are posed because of the differences, the fundamental difference, between mankind, as a species, and the category of every other form of life known to us today.
There may be something comparable to human beings among planets of those millions of stars, called the Milky Way, of which we're a part, as the Earth. But otherwise, what we know as handshaking agreements with anything that looks like human, is so far limited to human beings as such, although we can not exclude a certain high probability, from the kinds of information that Cody's prepared to summarize, that there is nothing to exclude the possibility that life like that of human beings may exist in a number of locations inside the galaxy: That is something yet to be determined. But we can not exclude the possibility that that is the case.
Or maybe there were life forms like man, before, who were extinguished in so many of the casualties which came up in the course of the Milky Way, but that's it. So, today, we're stuck with man. And we have to act as if mankind were the only species of our kind in the universe. And that poses some questions.
What's the difference between man and an animal? There is a fundamental difference. And many people theoretically say, "Well, man is just an animal, or man is just an improved animal." But man is not just an improved animal.
From what we know of every living species, as much as we know, only mankind, who is estimated to have been on this planet, no more than a few million years, maybe 7, maybe 5 million, only mankind has shown the characteristics of the creative powers which mankind expresses.
So, mankind is a very distinct species. For example, the problem that people have today, is they look at mankind as an animal. Most opinion, even most expert opinion, psychologists, psychiatrists, and others, still think of man as definable as a form of animal which can talk! And they compare the screechings of monkeys, and so forth, things like that, with man—it doesn't work!
The crucial part of mankind is mankind's creative powers. That is, mankind's ability to, in effect, change its species, not as mankind, but change its species in respect to the powers of mankind, with respect to man's relationship to nature around us.
And this involves a very interesting problem: Most people, including experts in these fields, on this planet today, believe that the human mind is a product of sense-perceptions. Now, the curious thing about this is, that there is a tremendous amount of evidence which says that mankind is not defined by sense-perceptions, even though most people, including many scientific experts will insist, that man is a creature of sense-perceptions. Most people, even thinking people, presume that they are primarily based on dependency on five biological kinds of sense-perception. None of which is true.
Mankind is the only creature which is capable of creativity, and thus, I would say the following, and I'm prepared to back it up: That the distinction of mankind, is mankind's creative powers. Which means that unlike the typical animals, in and of themselves as a species, an animal based on powers of sense-perception—unless something intervenes, like a human being from the outside, to change that—that only man has an actual mind, a mind as distinct from the array of sense-perceptions.
Now one of the things we can say about this today, is that since modern times, especially since modern times with some glimpses back from the ancient Greeks, such as Plato, it was understood that the human mind was not a product of sense-perception. It was not bounded within the framework of sense-perception. And that's the big difference.
Mankind has a mind, or the ability to manifest a mind which is independent of sense-perception. Modern science gives us a very clear picture of that kind of evidence: That what we know, in the discovery of principles, is that the power of the human mind, the so-called creative powers, the powers to create a new state of mind, involve demonstrations of the use of artificial senses, as in the form of our sense-perceptions, as the faculties of our mind. Most people who are ignorant of this, will assume that you can trace what people think, and how they think, to the powers located in sense-perception, or in the so-called animal sense-perception, or the biological sense-perception. That is not true. The human mind is not a product of a mere brain, nor of sense-perception, but is actually a product of what we might call cosmic radiation, a peculiar feature of cosmic radiation, which gives man a special power that no other known living species has.
Now, the best way to understand this, from a practical standpoint, is to look at the way the so-called five senses have been superseded, especially by the progress of science. We go beyond that, because we are able to recognize principles, which are not limited to sense-perceptions, and we're able to recognize in certain cases, that the mind itself, directly, is not controlled by sense-perception.
So that's where the point stands.
From Mathematics to Physics
For example, you look at the concluding third section of Bernhard Riemann's 1854 habilitation dissertation, in which he outlaws the use of mathematics as a controlling influence over physical science. That physical science is something above and beyond the limits and boundedness, of sense-perception, and says: To understand the universe, we must leave the department of mathematics, for physics.
Now, what does that mean? That means that we develop instruments, for example, microscopes: Now, small electron microscopes and other things, take us way beyond any possibility of ordinary sense-perception. So you have a microscope, or a telescope, or similar kinds of things, which go into the very small or the very large, which are areas which are inaccessible, to ordinary human sense-perception. What we do, is we take our faculties of sense-perception, and we can create some artificial ones as well. And we now utilize, we create, instruments which act as a middleman between man's natural sense-perceptual powers, and matters in the very small or the very large. We enter into domains which are too hot for mankind to exist in. We span distances which are way beyond mankind's reaches.
Now, what happens then, is that by adding these particular factors—for example, let's take the case of earthquakes: Now, lying idiots called physicists, or scientists, will tell you that you can not forecast an earthquake. But the fact of the matter is, as experimental demonstration has shown, that we can forecast earthquakes. Now, the question is, with what precision can we forecast earthquakes?
Now, actually, dogs, birds, snakes, fish, and so forth, do a much better job than we do, in forecasting earthquakes! And that's because we have given up some of the natural capabilities of animal life, in order to free our mental capacities, for freedom in choosing concepts, and means by which we explore the universe beyond the limits of sense-perception.
So, presuming five senses, which is what people believe, Riemann says, "no." Riemann says, in particular, mankind's knowledge of the universe does not reach into the very large or the very small. Ah! But with a microscope, with a telescope, and with other instruments, man's mind reaches into the universe, into the very small, and the very large! We have all kinds of sense-organs, artificial ones, which man creates in the form of instruments, and similar kinds of thing, where, by interpolation, we are able to take a combination of different kinds of senses, either the natural ones we have, or artificial ones which we create, and we can discover things that are not otherwise possible to the human mind.
And these sense-perceptions, artificial sense-perceptions, throw us something which was demonstrated to us most dramatically, by Johannes Kepler's discovery of the principle of gravitation. What Kepler did, having discovered the organization, of two of the inner planets with respect to the Sun, in his first major work, then goes into a later work, and compares this as an image of what the Solar System is organized as, in the sense of a visual-like image of the Solar System's organization, a visual-like image which he had crafted, based on his discovery of the nature of the orbits of Mars and Earth.
Now, by comparing the harmonics, the natural harmonics of a natural musical scale, and comparing the sight image of the Solar System with the sonic image of this harmonic scale, it came to an irony, in which the notion of the principle of universal gravitation—that is, the principle of physical organization of the Solar System—was independent of either sight or harmonics, but depended upon a combination of them both, where a crucial value was determined by the ironies of a conjunction of both contrasting values.
Now, what we do in scientific instruments, we do the same thing. We build a great number of instruments, which measure things, electronically in particular, that we can't see, that we don't, as human beings, sense; maybe animals sometimes do sense. We take a combination of these, just the way that Kepler looked at the difference between the line-of-sight conception of the Solar System's organization, and the harmonic organization of the ordering of the Solar System, and found a value which was neither, but a conjunction of the contrast with both.
And this is what the meaning is, has been from ancient times, of what we call "real science": is using factors of observation, which create paradoxes which can not be solved by simple sense-certainty, by doing it as a contrast, a paradoxical complex in terms of the attempt at sense-certainty. In that way, mankind has created new kinds of sense-perception very richly, so that our knowledge of the universe is much greater than would have been possible a long time ago, except that we require some natural sense-perceptions.
In other words, if someone had no sense-perceptual capabilities, we are on the verge of demonstrating that we can artificially create scientific instruments, which will enable a person with no sense-perceptual capabilities, to acquire them from some other function in their body.
So, that becomes the new definition of mankind. We realize that the identity of mankind does not lie in sense-perception, or in sense-certainties. The identity of mankind lies in the demonstrated ability of mankind to invent factors, such as instruments or interpretations of experience, which become precursors of the predictable events. And that we are able, therefore, by understanding that, to introduce factors which change the course of events, by understanding these precursors.
Sense-Perception Is Not Mankind
For example, simply today, we are now capable, despite a President of the United States who wants us all to die, apparently, to forecast major earthquakes. Even in the order of 9 through 11, we can forecast them, in many cases, to give humanity time to move to safety, temporarily, while this event is going on. We also can find out ways, by these means, to prevent some of these things: In other words, mankind has a potential, increasingly, to control man's existence and the possibility of existence in the universe. We know this possibility is not limited. It's only limited by what we do in the direction of finding that.
Now, we also know something else, which is rather embarrassing. We know that if the program were allowed, to limit sources of power, as the Greenies demand—no nuclear power, no modern science, population reduction to less than 1 billion people which is what this crowd is proposing right now—that probably, mankind would be extinguished, in the same way that entire species of life were extinguished in crises of previous times. Over 90%, probably about 95% or more, of all forms of known life which have existed on Earth in previous times, have gone extinct, although at the same time, new species have come into play, to replace them. But we are now approaching a condition, where we must speculate on the possibility, that you can have another mass kill of life forms on this planet, and it could happen to us as a species.
The only way we can work to prevent that, or secure that not occurring, is by inventions of the type I just described: By using the creative powers of the mind of man, to introduce changes in practice which will enable man to construct a way of surviving. But in the meantime, the fact is, that the simple passage of time uses up the effectiveness of what had served us well before. We always have to go to higher forms of energy-flux density, for example, and to comparable changes in the conditions of human life, even to maintain human life in its present condition, the advantage of this present condition.
And we look at this, and we say, then, human sense-perception, and the function of the brain as limited to sense-perceptual functions, is not mankind! It seems to be animal mankind, except when man intervenes on behalf of the animal. Mankind often saves animal species, which otherwise are fully qualified to have gone into extinction long before this! Man's intervention is capable of preventing that. Man's intervention can prevent this from happening to mankind himself.
And in this importance of preceptors, which enable us to control processes beyond our previous imagination, which enable mankind to survive when no other living species could survive, except mankind with his special qualities: We know that the secret here, lies not in sense-perception, but in some strange process we do not fully understand, a principle of creativity, of intellectual creativity of a form which is specific to mankind. We know there's a relationship between this, and mankind's ability to develop synthetic powers of perception, which supplement, or even replace, damaged powers of normal human sense-perception, raw sense-perception.
And therefore, we realize that mankind is distinguished from the animals, by being an intrinsically creative species. And what is needed today—we know, for example, the greatest proposal for mass murder of mankind on this planet is now in progress, under a program which is now launched under the British monarchy, and which is being introduced as policy into the United States, under this Presidency in the United States: If this man is allowed to continue the policy he has now followed, since his inauguration, the extinction of mankind is probable. And the extinction of the United States and the people on it, is actually certain, and guaranteed, and that, in short order.
So the time has come, where we have to recognize these powers of creativity, which are implicit in two places, notably, first of all, in Bernhard Riemann's habilitation dissertation, especially in the concluding section of that; and also in the work of many people who have followed Riemann, most notably, Einstein, Planck, and then, of course, our great Russian friend, V.I. Vernadsky.
So we have now come to a point, where mankind must take charge of the planet, by reaching out to begin to take charge of the Solar System, and to reach toward being able to do something about a peace agreement with the galaxy, where mankind can live.
What Cody has been working on, as a particular project, which he's headed up, in this thing, is a picture of life, of the history of life, from primitive types, up to mankind now. And what this demonstrates, is, that the idea of a fixed system, the idea of a Second Law of Thermodynamics, was a complete fraud from the inception. There is no truth, to the idea of that, of a Second Law of Thermodynamics: It's a fraud!
In point of fact, since they're claiming this is a universal principle, a physical principle, how do they reckon with the history of life on this planet? From a half-billion years ago, up to the present? Despite all the kills, the mass kills of entire species, which occurred repeatedly, new species have come into being, which are of a higher order, or more useful to a complex of a higher order, than before? So actually, life on Earth has demonstrated its ability to be life on Earth! And by the inclusion of man, as life, the role of man supplies to life in general, the ability to say that if we can go for higher and higher orders of scientific progress, to more inventions of the mind and of the creative side, we can save mankind for a meaningful future!
And that should be the basis of our understanding of our Federal Constitution, today: That we are committed, to preserve the legacy of the self-development of human life on this planet; that we will tolerate nothing, which jeopardized that, or threatens to jeopardize that!
Man is a sacred creature, whose mentality lies in the universe, lies outside the mere bounds of sense-perception, or the human mind. For example: the crucial thing is, the discovery of the universal physical principles. Everything that mankind has achieved, is largely dominated by man's discovery of universal physical principles, with less and less imperfect insight. That's the basis of progress. And therefore, that defines what our culture must be: We must go to higher orders of energy-flux-density, as man's existence. We must accomplish this by discovering new principles, which lie beyond—far beyond, now, today, those of sense-perception.
So give up the idea, that the human personality is a function of five senses—it is not! And science so far demonstrates that, fully. When we think about the number of things that are out there, that we are already using as mankind, which can replace lost powers of sense-perception, or invent powers of sense-perception, which are not existing normally within mankind—this is what mankind is! This is the implicit constitution of mankind, a constitution which is expressed efficiently by the provisions of the U.S. Federal Constitution, and our opposition to the enemy of civilization, called the British Empire, today.
So that's the general thesis; I thought we should kick it around.
The History of the Biosphere vs. the Greenies
Cody Jones: Okay. I would just start by saying, when we look at current popular opinion, we find it wrought with irony, potentially tragic irony, but that's where we come in, and particularly when you look at the Green movement, and you look at this guy Schellnhuber,[2] and you look at Prince Philip and what they represent: Probably, the greatest repudiation of what they represent as the Green movement, is the reality of the biosphere and the environment itself.
Because if you look at the actual history of the biosphere, the actual history of the development of the environment on our planet, it's actually been one which has consistently gone through successive stages of evolutionary upshifts. That, whereas the Green movement says, "We've got to put ourselves in some state of equilibrium; we've got to find a balance with the environment. We've got to subject our activity now, to the current state of the environment"—by doing that, we're effectively locking ourselves into the same type of potential that exists in the past, which brought about the extinction of many kinds of species, or set of species, that locked themselves into a current state of existence in the biosphere.
As Lyn has mentioned, a video is going to be coming out, that looks at the last half-billion years on the planet, which has been one punctuated by extinctions, but extinctions which seem to be coincident with a process governed by very large galactic and extragalactic processes. First of all, we find that there's a 62-million-year trend, just in biodiversity change, that every 62 million years, you see this sine-wave kind of change of increase and decrease in biodiversity.
Now, along with that, you have that punctuated by very large collapses in the biosphere, and in life. The one I think people are most familiar with, is what happened with the collapse of the dinosaurs, the extinction of the dinosaurs.
Now, there's a lot of evidence that indicates that that extinction came about as a result of some sort of trigger, associated with cosmic radiation, associated with our Solar System's movement through the galaxy. So it wasn't something which was just an Earth-bound effect. It wasn't just something that occurred as a function of life on Earth, per se. But it was a function of a much larger galactic process. Exactly what that process is, we have to do a lot of work to find out, but we know it's galactic in nature, just by the sheer scale of the kind of cycles we're looking at: 62 million years.
You know, whenever you try to locate an entity which can afford you an image that would produce something of that scale, you have to go to the level of something like that of the galaxy. So, within that process of a cosmic radiation-mediated cyclical process, we had something like the extinction of the dinosaurs, that was accompanied with, potentially, mass viral infections, which themselves may have a cosmic radiation trigger, volcanic eruptions, other such things; asteroid hits, there seems to be a combination of different cataclysmic events which all contributed to bringing down, in particular the dinosaurs and what were the reigning species of that time, sort of the dominant forms of life on the planet at that time.
Now, there's one thing which is that, many of the kinds of factors which seem to have brought down the dinosaurs per se, seem to be now becoming more and more abundant in today's world: When we look at the earthquakes, we look at the threats from volcanoes, we look at the general increase in tectonic activity; we look at even what's going on here, in terms of new forms of viral infections, and other things which themselves could have a cosmic radiation trigger. So we're in a period now, where we're seeing an increase in the types of effects which have been known in history to have brought down whole epochs of life on the planet.
So that's one side. That's where we're potentially heading. And there are a lot of indications that say, in terms of the galactic cycles themselves, that we're in phase with periods of the galactic cycle which have corresponded to some of these major extinction events. That's on one side.
Now, if the Greenies have their way, and we continue to reverse technological progress: If we say we're not going to go with nuclear power; if we say, we're not going to go for development of the Third World, well then, we're subjecting our activity, to the existing state of the biosphere. And, as we know, any existing state of the biosphere is always subject to elimination, to destruction. That's what history has shown us.
The flip side of this—and this is where the real irony comes in, and shows just the insanity, and the sheer stupidity, and really, the murderous intention of the Greenie movement—is that the reality is, that in periods coming out of those extinctions, those have actually coincided with periods of biological upshift, of nonlinear development. For example, out of the extinction that occurred toward the end of the Ordovician period, that was actually the period when life first moved out of the oceans and onto land—major plant life, out of the oceans and onto land. That came out of an extinction, but represented then an upshift towards a higher state of the biosphere.
Now you had life on land, you had the potential to capture water over land masses. You had the creation of storms, the Schuman resonances, things we've gone through in the video recently put out by Oyang Teng.[3]
Then, after the next big extinction, the Devonian extinction, where you had, again, another massive wiping out of the existing state of life—but what emerged immediately out of that? That's when vertebrate life first went onto land: You had the amphibians and the reptiles came out of the oceans, and moved onto land. So again, out of the major extinction, you had another upshift, where now you had moving life, you had vertebrate creatures on land. That meant that the biosphere now a greater potential for the movement, reptiles and other large creatures, and very great spreaders of bacteria, of seeds. So now the biosphere had a greater capability to spread and enhance its existence, coming out of an extinction.
The most famous one, coming out of the mass extinction of the dinosaurs, to get back to that, was then, the explosion of the mammals: So, in the wake of the collapse of the dinosaurs, that's whenever you had the takeover the planet by mammals, which represented a much more highly evolved type of living creature than the dinosaurs. Mammals, for example, consume about 10 times more energy per pound, than the dinosaurs, because they maintain a much more regulated system, and internal temperature; they have much greater range of mobility. Which meant that, now, life, again, had a greater capability to exist in more diverse climates. You find mammals from the North Pole to the Equator: That's something you didn't have, prior to that explosion.
That coincided, then, with the emergence of higher forms of plant life, like the angiosperms, where now you had plant life that had things like fruits, grasses, that which represents a higher energy-flux-dense source of food, that could then fuel these more energetic mammals.
And all of this, then, of course, laid the platform for man's emergence, about 2 to 3 million years ago—we all know how much has man depended upon things like mammals, fruits, grasses, these things, for our sustained nutrition, for our biological needs, as well as our use of things like animals for work-labor, almost as a living technology.
So you have these two pictures, where on the one hand, you see the history of life has been one punctuated by extinctions, disaster after disaster after disaster, which is what we're setting ourselves up for now, if we continue this policy of zero growth, no technology, the Green movement: We're putting ourselves in line with the extinction phases of the galactic cycle.
But! If we step back, and think that, one, the governing characteristic of the biosphere has actually been one of upshifts, of one of nonlinear changes, towards higher states of energy-flux density, in terms of the forms of life, in terms of the overall diversity and complexity of the biosphere. And then, we recognize that there's something unique in even that process that you find in man: Because, unlike any other creature in the biosphere, man uniquely is capable of actually holding that whole process as a "One," in our own minds. Right? No mammal, no dinosaur, no amoeba, ever sat back and self-consciously conceptualized the actual governing principle of the development of the biosphere.
They may have been part of an overall creative process, but no one single entity, no one single creature in the biosphere, was ever able to conceptualize and hold the process, and the principle of the biosphere as a one, in their mind. That's something unique to man: The fact that man can actually reflect, and in a sense, embody the entire process of development of the biosphere, in and of itself, tells us there's something unique about man, that you don't find in any other creature. And it's precisely that unique quality of man, to actually know, and grab these kinds of concepts as one, which really has to become the paradigm of our identity, if we're going to emerge out of this kind of crisis.
And so, the irony is sharp there, if we just look at the actual history of the biosphere, the actual history of life, one that is characterized by what are the equivalent of technological revolutions, and compare that to the kind of policy being pushed by this WBGU and others, which says, "no technological progress, no development, no creativity." And you see, that's the choice we're facing: either extinction, as we've seen in the past, or we actually take on, and truly embody, the principle of man, as a creative being, something which reflects the principle of creativity in the universe as a whole, and move forward.
The Oligarchical Principle
LaRouche: That gives you the second question: Why does mankind, with these capabilities, destroy himself?
Now, you have, for example, going on right now, the Green movement. The Green movement, is actually a Satanic movement, by any standard of morality. The Green movement is well known to us from history, at least from history within mankind's sense of history: You had two tendencies, and we're talking largely about something, which our best knowledge of this lies in the Mediterranean region and around it, up to the present time worldwide.
There are two tendencies in mankind, social tendencies: One is called the "oligarchical tendency," the other is our tendency, typified by the United States, and in a certain excellence, our Constitution. The reason we moved from Europe into what became the United States, is that we were able, more effectively, than those parts of the Americas which were under the thumb of the Habsburg influence, we were capable, as a culture, of coming across the ocean to North America, and building up a self-developing society, which was doing just fine in the Massachusetts region, until William of Orange came onto the scene, and put the whole region back under the oligarchical principle, as it's called.
The oligarchy is what's described by, for example, the Prometheus dialogue: Prometheus is portrayed as struggling for the realization of man's natural capabilities, as with the use of fire—and man's the only creature that's ever used fire! No other species has ever been able to use fire! And that's typical of mankind: We're a fiery crew ourselves, by nature, except for those who try to dampen our fires!
But the oligarchy took the view, that they were a privileged group, and there were several kinds, but the one which is most important to use today, is the part that came out of the Mediterranean as the oligarchical principle there, the European oligarchical principle, which became the Roman Empire. And Europe has been living under the legacy of the Roman Empire model, since the time of Octavian. But the first phase, the original Roman Empire, collapsed—partly of its own intention, but partly because some of the oligarchy themselves desired that. That led to what became the Byzantine Empire; and the Byzantine Empire went into a collapse, which then was taken over by Venice, the old Venice.
The old Venice used the old Roman monetarist principle, to set up a new monetarist system, under which old Venetian system controlled money, as the old Roman Empire had done. But their control of money was the so-called feudal Crusader period, which destroyed itself!
We came out of that with a renaissance, which sought, as with the case of the work of the Florentine Renaissance, which made a fundamental revolution in the character of sociology, and economy, and science. But then, the old Venetians came back, rebuilt themselves, rehabilitated themselves, and by 1492, had started a period of religious warfare which lasted into 1648!
And despite the efforts of France and others, at that time, through the Peace of Westphalia, to restore civilization in this new, higher form, the British Empire came into being through the incidence of William of Orange. And William of Orange's British Empire is the same oligarchical system which we saw in the ancient Greek case, as in the legendary story of Prometheus versus the Olympians.
And that's what the problem is.
Now, today what we're dealing with—now these jokers who are behind this crazy environmentalist movement—yes, the fools are the fools; the idiots are idiots; the dupes are dupes. But there's something behind this, where they take a bunch of brainwashed zombies—which is what the typical Greenie is—but behind it is a much more calculating creature, the oligarchical creature, who says, "If we do not control people, if we do not reduce the population of people, if we do not limit their technology, their very development will enable them to get rid of us!"
So most of these people who are spreading lies, like the current lies, like the lies of this President, the lies of his British masters: Many of them know that what they're doing is a damned lie! That everything they're saying is a damned lie! But they've got a bunch of fools, who want to believe in these lies, and they use these fools like rabble, like a mass-insanity movement, like the Crusades, and they use this form of mass insanity to try to destroy civilization. Why? Because they would rather see the human species go extinct, than the rule of mankind by the oligarchy cease! And today, it's what we call the "financial oligarchy."
In point of fact, the Roman Empire still exists. People think about "colonies." Well, yes, empires do sometimes have colonies—often do. But the essence of the empire is not colonies. The essence of the empire is the control of the world by a monetarist system, and the monetarist system is the essence of the oligarchy. They use the monetarist system as a way of controlling the population, and controlling the minds of the population. And that's what we're seeing.
We're seeing the increment of insanity, especially from the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and then his brother, who was in line to become the nominee, and probably successful as the next President of the United States, at that time. They killed these people whom they considered valuable to us, to our cause, to our American System. And they try to destroy the very roots of that within us, which gives us the capability of resisting and ultimately overthrowing the oligarchy.
Most of the stories that are being told to us in the name of environmentalism are complete lies by those who are telling them, or insanity by those who are believing those lies. But if we don't defeat this oligarchy, if we do not eliminate what this President represents, this lunatic, who should not have been allowed in office—he's nothing but a British puppet! He's nothing but a puppet of these genocidalists. If we do not get our Presidency back, the whole planet is going to go to Hell!
Because, you take the fact of what the United States represents and has represented, what is embedded within us, and you crush that, as it is being crushed by this President and his predecessor—who are both a both couple of clowns!—if we don't get rid of that, and get back to our Constitutional system, we will not be able to survive. And if we're not able to survive, Europe won't be able to survive! And if the trans-Atlantic region can't survive, then neither China, nor India, nor the other countries of Asia can survive.
So, we're now in a fight to save the human species, from the British Empire, and its stooges, who are saying things that they themselves don't believe, except they believe that they've got to get you to believe, so you will kill yourself, at their convenience.
The great principle of this, as the case you're doing, with this report, which you're preparing now, is to demonstrate, there is no Second Law of Thermodynamics, except in the mind of idiots or fools. It's false! The nature of the universe is inherently creative!
We see nothing in the history of the galaxy, which we know of, which, while being destructive, was not even more constructive than it was destructive! The nature of the universe is anti-entropic, and the key thing to this is to understand how our human ability, to develop artificial senses, as what we sometimes call "preceptors," of higher orders—beyond the physical-biological capabilities of man as a biological entity: That this is mankind! This is creativity! This is the destiny of mankind, if we can protect it!
As Franklin said: "You've got a universe, if you can keep it."
The Issue Is Creativity
Sky Shields: You know, it's funny, on that: The point you made about the nature of mankind's sense-perception, and the nature of what man is, relative to mankind's sense-perception, actually, you gave a perfect example of, with this whole overview of the history of the creative development on the planet: That, not only do our extended scientific perceptions get us to places that we couldn't exist otherwise—we can move to regions that you're not capable of existing physically, to the insides of stars, as you made the point. You can take the human mind into the very, very small, via these extended sense-perceptions that are not the ones that, as you say, "come in the box."
But the other place we get to transcend is the region of time, that our normal sense-perceptions are capable of accessing: The animal, the beast, is capable of accessing only the time that its body physically occupies. Your animal doesn't exist beyond its death; your animal doesn't exist before its birth. But the nature of human activity, the nature of human society is that you transcend generations: Your own identity transcends generations, and we have instruments that allow us to do that. The development of history, the development of human science, is largely a dialogue across generations, among minds.
But then, what you're demonstrating here, is also significant, that our actual character as human species, as human individuals, can transcend these huge swaths of history that our physical body would never transcend normally. And it seems to me, that gives you a real different sense of our identity, the amount of—the space-time that is characteristic of the human mind, of cognition, seems very different than even what you get in the animal domain, our ability to transcend that.
LaRouche: Well, you have that in the history of European culture, exactly that. If you go back to the time of the ancient Greek cultures and what came out of that, you find the fights, like the fight of Plato against Aristotle, his so-called successor—two contrasting views. Aristotle is completely the Cult of Apollo, whereas Plato represents the heritage from before, of the other side, of human creativity, of the human mind: of human creativity as something more than just a biological effect, a species kind of sense-perceptive biological effect. And this is the issue! The issue is creativity.
And the interesting thing about it, of course, which also gets the freaks freaked out—but the enemy knew it—the crucial point, when they got rid of Napoleon, who was no good anyway, but they did something else. They introduced the attempt to destroy the Classical revolution of the 18th Century. Now, that's been going on, and it took the form of the destruction of science, like the faker Newton! Newton was a fraud. Newton never established a principle in his life! Nothing that Newton ever claimed to have discovered, did he discover! He discovered nothing! He discovered his position—if that. A complete fraud.
And you have people, even scientists, who say they believe in Newton's discovery of gravity—a complete hoax! A complete fraud! And yet, many of our leading scientists, who otherwise were quite sane and fruitful, believed in that nonsense! And you have the whole history—the destruction of culture: You had Classical artistic and musical culture of the 18th Century and beyond, and earlier. Look what happened to it over the course of the 19th Century: It degenerated! The cases of those who were competent in composing vanished with the death of Brahms, practically, and a few people around him.
The ability to perform this music, to understand it, died in the course of the 1980s! We had musicians, whom I was working with, with others, as a group, to defend Classical tuning, which actually is a biological principle, as well as a formal artistic principle: And they went with this elevated voice! They went with this crazy post-industrial society collection, at the end of World War II.
We have been culturally destroyed, scientifically destroyed, with the destruction of those capabilities of Classical culture and science, which characterize man's superiority to the monkeys, huh? And the monkeys are about to take over! Because the British Empire, which now dominates the world, intends to turn the running of the planet over to monkeys, like this crowd that's now coming along with extinction program for humanity.
It is this thing, is what is crucial. Because it lies in the Classical artistic imagination, which explores the universe as the Classical imagination, for successful effects of the imagination, which then becomes science. It's not a progress from plain work into science, into Classical artistic composition. Classical artistic composition is the ground upon which physical scientific progress is nurtured. It's man conception of man, as expressed in Classical artistic composition, which is the essence of the genius of creativity in mankind.
The Slow Death of the Human Species
Shields: It seems that that's the domain of mind where everything ontologically significant exists, both in human activity and otherwise. If you were able to see the space we actually occupy, it would be that domain of mind, that domain of Classical artistic composition.
It also seems that if you were looking at us from that standpoint, what you would have seen over the last several decades, is the slow death of the human species—not something we're about to run into, but it's something we're in the middle of, right now! That as long as we're tolerating the policies that are being promoted by the Greenies, as long as we're tolerating the cultural changes that have been dumped on us over the last several decades, we're actually losing our ability as a species to be able to extend ourselves in these domains.
We're losing our sense of history; that is actually going. The last several, successive generations, have been generations whose sense of their identity in all human history has been steadily collapsing. Corollary with that, has been what you've seen since the collapse of the Apollo space program: that our ability to extend our senses off the surface of this planet, beyond where animals can exist, has been steadily collapsing. Viewed from the outside, that would look like a slow death. That's the definition of a slow death, what we're incurring.
Whatever would happen with a major earthquake, a major asteroid collision, anything that could happen in this period, would just be finishing us off. History will remember that what actually killed us, was this preceding period.
LaRouche: Exactly. This culture now, which is now accepted, which the British Empire, and which our current, insane President represents, can be the factor of extinction of the human species in this generation! That can be the case. And if we have any quality of fitness to survive, we're going to get rid of that factor. We're going to go back to the legacy of our achievements earlier.
And the key thing here, which is lacking, generally, to get in the final point of this thing we've been going through, is: What is this business of creativity? It's most simply demonstrated in physical science, because we keep a nice, neat record of the progress of physical science through the effects of the progress of physical science. And we see the increased energy-flux density of mankind's role in society, as associated with the discovery of universal physical principles, of which there have been less and less, since people like Norbert Wiener and people like that came along: We've gone to a mechanistic, anti-scientific view, in the name of science.
But what's happening is, we're killing the very capability of creativity, as a practice of creativity on which human progress and existence have depended. If we do not eliminate the Green movement from a position of control over leading nations of this planet, the human species is headed for extinction. The important thing here is that the discovery of a true, universal, physical principle is immortal. That is, the individual person who makes such a true discovery of that form, when that person has died, leaves that accomplishment of that principle as a permanent factor in the existence of the human species.
It is that kind of creativity, so expressed, which distinguishes mankind from the beasts. It is that kind of scientific and cultural progress which is the only means which can secure the non-extinction of the human species, now.
Jones: Yes, that's an interesting point. We've talked a lot about the reaches, the extension of the senses, and how that really is an expression of the creative process. I was just running again, through this idea in my mind, which, where you see a breakdown between the very small and the very large, as it comes up, as Riemann brings it up in the last part of the habilitation dissertation: Which is, that if you actually look at the history of mankind's ability to expand his reaches into the very large, in terms of his physical reaches out there, to a certain extent, it's actually been a function of our ability to go ever deeper into the very small. That is, something like the chemical revolution creates the potential for things like long-range locomotion, steam engines, etc. It requires the breakthroughs in nuclear physics to, say, have a competent Moon-based system, a rocket-based system.
Then it requires going even deeper, to the level of fusion, to be able to move towards the development of, say, constant acceleration rockets, to then, move on to successful colonization of Mars. Then it takes an even deeper understanding of things like matter/anti-matter, to then get beyond even Mars, out to some of the further reaches of our Solar System and the galaxy.
And so you see, whenever you go to the domain of creativity and discovery, there's an actual breakdown of even our ideas of "time," "distance," "space," where the very small and the very large, seemingly— from our sense-perceptual standpoint—are actually very much connected through the discovery of these kinds of principles: that each discovery of principle in the small extends our ability to go further and further into the reaches of the galaxy and the universe.
Kill the Second Law of Thermodynamics!
Shields: And it seems like exactly that point is also the case for the cultural discoveries: That the ability to make certain transformations, physically, in the human species, requires certain major transformations in the question of cultural organization that we have on the ground. That you couldn't have the developments that we've seen thus far, since the creation of the United States, you couldn't have that without having the existence of a republic. That this would be impossible. That requires a real new sense, scientific sense of the way the human species is meant to organize itself.
But at the same time, if that republic is not organized around a real capability for self-reflection, of each and every human individual, on the qualities that make them, and other human beings human, you can't maintain a republic.
Jones: Right. And that's the problem with the loss of Classical culture: If people lose the ability to perform Classical composition, or even to compose Classical composition, in a certain sense, you've lost the ability to reflect on the human mind as a One. Because, what you find, in the actual performance of Classical composition, or, at the higher level, the production of it, the composing of it, is someone who's able to reflect on the quality of human mind as a One, and express it as a unity, and not just as an assemblage of parts and sequences.
So once you lose that, you've really lost, in the population, an ability to reflect on their own creative potential. And we see the disastrous effects of that, in what we have in the world today.
Hoefle: Well, we traded our willingness to do that, for the mere accounting of money. So, we think we're doing better, because we have more money, and then the money disappears, and suddenly, we realize, at this point, we're really doomed, unless we can go back to what we were doing before.
Do you have more, Lyn?
LaRouche: I think we've got more to say, but we've got to do the next step. We've got this thing that Cody's doing, to get out. We have some more to say about the details of this structure, about how creativity functions, actually functions, which we simply outlined here, to try to get the connection between the idea of creativity and the existence of living species in the universe. To kill this crazy, stupid fraud, called the Second Law of Thermodynamics! Which a lot of idiots believe in! They're told, to "recite after me, the Second Law of Thermodynamics," and they do it! You ask them why? And they say, " 'Cause that's what we do!" It's like what the baby says, when he makes a stink! And the baby looks at his mother, and says, "That's what do, Mummy! Do-do."
Hoefle: All right, well, we don't want to solve all of the problems of humanity this week. We want to save something for next week's show!
Jones: We'll end on that refreshing note!
[1] Now posted at the Lyndon LaRouche PAC website.
[2]Prof. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, head of German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU), and author of "World in Transition: A Social Contract for Sustainability" (see EIR, May 13, 2011).
