Schiller Institute on YouTube Schiller Institute on Facebook RSS

Home >

What Was Actually Genius?

Nicholas of Cusa, Kepler & Shakespeare

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

June 2013

The U.S. economic crisis of August-September 1971, had been the opening of a truly revolutionary phase in my own life’s experience. Since the succession of the assassinations of, first, President John F. Kennedy and, then, that of a virtual Presidential candidate, his brother, Robert, the United States had been enmired into the launching of a foolish, post-Kennedy, U.S.A. war in Indo-China.

For the greatest relevant U.S. military mind of that time, General Douglas MacArthur, the launching of that worthless war in Indo-China had been, in effect, an unforgivable act against the vital strategic interests of the United States: the walk of the United States into a British-laid, strategic trap, “The Vietnam War.”

The 15th-Century Golden Renaissance owed a great debt to Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa who, LaRouche writes, was “the leading personal factor” in its achievements. Shown: “The Ideal City” (ca. 1470) by the Renaissance genius, Piero della Francesca.

It had been a worthless war from its outset, a war which had set the United States, and, later, a series of wars engaging the U.S.A., among others, into what would be clearly recognizable as a so-far endless decline of trans-Atlantic riding of a slippery slope, downward, across the decades, since. So, in an echo of the Anglo-American folly of Indo-China, “that naked criminal” Tony Blair (as under, therefore, the Queen of England in his time), had, also, fraudulently, engineered a worse than useless, long war in Iraq (and elsewhere), since which the world has slid, more, and ever more quickly, into the present state of a plunge into a moral, cultural, and economic slide, a slide toward, now, the sudden arrival of a present brink of a virtually global, thermonuclear Hell.

The Thermonuclear Factor

Since what every competent sort of leading strategist had known, as the strategically worse than silly, U.S. nuclear bombing of an essentially already defeated, war-time Japan, every competent U.S. strategist (British dupes like Harry Truman plainly put to one side) had recognized that the deploying of nuclear warfare against targets including the Soviet Union, pointed toward the early expression of an intended, imperial targeting of what were implicitly intended to become, ultimately, and soon, thermonuclear targets, and told to the truly witting types, the simple truth that any clear development in the likeness of a Vietnam War, leads into a threatened thermonuclear consequence.

Earlier, during the Korean war, General MacArthur had been drawn explicitly into reckoning with precisely that issue of new worthless wars, in the continuing Korea conflict then, and had later warned President John F. Kennedy against the U.S.A.’s being drawn into such antics, both during the U.S.A. engagement in North Korea in his time, and in his later role as strategic advisor to that same President.

Indeed, the entirety of the strategic issues of so-called “World War II” toward the closing battles of that war, had depended on the presumption by our leading patriots, including those of the O.S.S., which had been that it would be President Franklin Roosevelt who would control the U.S.A. policies in the concluding conduct of “World War II,” not the Franklin Roosevelt haters such as the Winston Churchill and Harry Truman whose combined agencies had already, adopted a course which set a new global world war actually into motion then, as now.

The outcome of the Churchill policy and of that British imperial policy’s outgrowth, has therefore become, now, the virtual Hell mustered around that present world empire which is led by the intrinsically evil tradition of that imperial Anglo-Dutch degeneration: a degeneration which, when it were considered as a whole, is now still spreading its peculiar Hell throughout the world.

On the subject of that continuing point at issue, the following, essential considerations must be added:

The nominally U.S.-centered, Wall Street financial crisis of Summer 1971,1 had, for a time, discredited the reputations of virtually all of my leading opponents in economic forecasting. This was to be the case, during much of the 1970s, and somewhat beyond. So, in a celebrated debate against me at Queens College, on December 2nd of that 1971, and beyond that, it had been clearly demonstrated, not only in the United States, but also in Britain, and elsewhere, that my own methods of forecasting had been shown to have been uniquely successful for as long as the lesson of the painful memory of 1971 would have survived; whereas, on this account, the U.S. economy’s financial markets, and also the leading economists in Britain, had clearly failed. When we view the history of that matter to the present date, since those times, there has never been an actually net real-economic, per-capita recovery in the U.S.A., nor in Europe (for example)—from then, up to the present time. The world hangs now on precisely that same issue. It hangs, thus, on the prospective sudden end of anything which might be named “civilization,” most significantly in the trans-Atlantic region, up to the present moment: unless necessary, relatively sudden changes occur. In the meanwhile, the trans-Atlantic region is already plunging into a deep and prolonged collapse, now diving, currently, and that at an accelerating rate, into what continues to be the prospect of a prolonged, great dark age.

To where, then, might a sick world now go from here?

The Possible Options

Clearly, then, for example, the financial crisis which had actually first broken out during the Summer of 1971, had been a product of the systemically incompetent type of practice of forecasting generally accepted among such as many of both the U.S.A.’s and British leading economists, as also the continuing financial-panic-driven behavior among most U.S.A. Presidents, generally, since that time. That matter did not end there. As a result, that has been so during most of the latter half of the 1980s, and leading into the worst such case this far, the more than sixteen years—a virtual entire generation of the combined, pathetically failed U.S. Presidency of de facto British lackey George H.W. Bush, and of the later Presidencies of George W. Bush, Jr., and Barack Obama. So, the United States had been plunged, as a simple matter of fact, and that at accelerating rates, toward a trend of the greatest political, economic, and intellectual degeneration into a general collapse presently, a collapse featuring both the worst financial, physical-economic, and moral degeneration in modern U.S.A. history.

It has been shown as fact, thus, up to the present moment, that, if the present trend throughout the trans-Atlantic region were to be continued, an early destruction of the human species’ present economic systems were now probably destined very soon, if current policy-trends were to be continued to their seemingly, presently likely, outcome.2 The most immediate threat, on that account, is that this catastrophe is being brought currently, up to this moment, into its now-threatened, global, hyper-inflationary form of economic disaster. This catastrophe, were it to be continued, would come fully upon us, now, very soon, either through aid of a currently accelerating hyper-inflationary physical-economic collapse, or through the presently accelerating threat-potential for global thermonuclear warfare, a war which were now, probably, already a very early, and had always been, so far, an increasing prospect, if not a certainty up through the present date.

The record has been, and remains, that, beginning with my first systemic quality of a crucial public forecast which had been made in my position in the capacity of an executive for a large consulting firm, that, since that success, I have never erred in any publicized medium-to-long-term forecast actually issued explicitly by me. My most important nominal successes on this account, have represented, chiefly, a demonstration of the inherently systemic incompetence of those leading monetarist institutions, and other forecasters, which were centered on the U.S.A. and Europe, then in 1971, as, unfortunately, by their dupes, perhaps now.3 The proper deduction from that set of experiences, is nothing more, nor less than the elementary truth of the matter, which is: the globally dominant (i.e., Anglo-American) financial institutions of the trans-Atlantic region, and their accomplices, have been usually, utterly incompetent since the death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. That is still the case, as now, when the trans-Atlantic powers are leading nothing but the growth of nothing as much as the already greatest hyper-inflationary monetarist collapse in modern history.

At the Roots of Modern Science

f1-kepler_johannes.jpg F1-Nicholas_Cusanus_portrait_red.jpg F1-Shakespeare_Chandos_portrait.jpg
Johannes Kepler (1571-1630), Nicholas of Cusa (1401-64), and William Shakespeare (1564-1616), each in his own way, exemplify the principle of “vicarious hypothesis,” or metaphor, in contradistinction to sense-certainty. .

During the late 1970s and early 1980s, I had concentrated on two most notable, and very much related subjects, all bearing upon the historical processes of those times. Attention to the importance of the prospect of progress in thermonuclear fusion, for one, and also a retrospective re-assessment of what had been the, then, for me, new principles which had been presented in times now long past, by the outstanding genius of his own time: the same Nicholas of Cusa who has been, in fact, the principal figure in the launching of the greatest of all presently known, but, usually brief, renaissances. Every fundamental step into progress since what was named “The Golden Renaissance,” had, and has depended upon the fruits of a legacy originally centered in what has been known as “The Golden Renaissance” in which Nicholas of Cusa showed himself, consequently, as the leading personal factor in the achievements of what is to be remembered as “The Golden Renaissance.”

The Outcome?

As I explain these now stated matters, this is what must be considered, relatively, summarily, once more, as follows.

I begin this following account here, with a preliminary reference to the subject of the difference between the human mind as such, as distinct from the “mere human brain.” Nicholas of Cusa, his successor Johannes Kepler, and the matured William Shakespeare, are all suitably typical cases for projecting the consideration of the principles which I will have just now emphasized, as in these following pages.

Those errors in general policies, to which I have made reference here, are to be traced, actually, since the death of U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt, or, from the assassinations of both President John F. Kennedy (in November 1963), and, slightly later, his brother, the pre-candidate for President Robert Kennedy (on June 6, 1968). Those assassinations have been, in their effect, a persisting curse upon the United States, ever since. It has actually been the U.S.A. itself which has been cursed on this account, that, in fact, over all those years to the present date.

On Forecasting

There is no honest doubt to be considered from my side, in my having made such a long-ranging forecast.

For example, returning our attention to the subject of Douglas MacArthur: Since the opening of the U.S. war in Indo-China, which President John F. Kennedy had sternly opposed, that in concert with his great strategic advisor of that time, General Douglas MacArthur, the effect which the assassination of President Kennedy brought upon us (and our loss of the heroic Douglas MacArthur not long after that), was a sudden, deep, and presently continuing, decades-long decline in the U.S. economy, a trend which had become more significant in its effects on our U.S. culture then, but which has also been continued to this present time. Any contrary opinion on that point, would be simply foolishness. It has been, and remains, the official “cover-up” of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, which has been both the origin of the fresh re-establishment of systemic economic crises, globally; this has caused, in turn, the persisting decline of the U.S. economy since the launching of the actually systemic “cover-up” of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Any competent effort to bring understanding of the decline of the global economy, were best approached by attention to the cases of the pattern common to the leading, British-dominated, national economies of the trans-Atlantic nations. In a strict sense, the chain of events leading into the causes of that collapse itself, has been intentional, whether by plan, or intended negligence. The great, willful hoax has been the leading continuing cause of repeated such collapses since the untimely death of President Franklin Roosevelt. That is a fact which could often be traced in history, as, for example, most conveniently, to that of the Roman empire.

Consider the still relevant, historical case of the relative collapse of the U.S. economy under the influence of the nominal authority of that wretched scoundrel, President Andrew Jackson. Jackson on the documented record, was actually a British-owned dupe whose personal gifts for virtual treason pop up as an example, one to be traced to a case of typical relevance in tracing the typical roots to be fairly seen as echoing the Fall of the Roman Empire, just as in the model of the British Empire, or of the birth of the British Empire engendered by the dynasty of William of Orange (“very nasty”), which, in turn, created the British Empire as what has been continued as a most intimately linked, dominant element of the trans-Atlantic region and beyond through the present date, and which is the chief source of the recurrent treason-in-fact experienced in our United States.

The true source of the folly of virtually every modern nation of the planet today, including Russia among the other nations to be considered, whether by intention, or negligent over-sight, has been that global pattern. That has been the acceptance of what is identified, “euphemistically,” as a belief in monetarism: the silly belief in “the power of money as such” as a standard of value. Any actually competent nation’s government would, like Alexander Hamilton, have outlawed anything such as the “monetarism” which, for example, has usually dominated, and therefore continues to seek, as now, to bankrupt the United States and its political institutions through the assistance of those institutions themselves. Money as such, has no truly inherent value: as President George Washington and his most essential economist-in-fact, Alexander Hamilton, knew and had demonstrated that fact with perfect certainty. So did John Quincy Adams, as did the relevant circles of President Abraham Lincoln, and of some others, including the most exceptional President Franklin Roosevelt. Unfortunately, many other once high-ranking U.S. officials of recorded history were of much, much lesser intellectual and moral achievements.

A Thesis:

I. The Human Mind

From this point on, in this report, it is now most essential to be clear about the very special qualities of importance which must be recognized as we bring our attention to the very special character of the added subject-matter which I introduce from here on. To begin that enterprise upon which we are now so embarked, henceforth, the crucial, actually revolutionary question to be asked on the matter of science, is: “What, for example, should have been recognized as proof of the distinction of the human mind, in contrast to the mere brain of a creature of a respectively human, or lower living category of existence?” On that account, we must emphasize the fact of the relatively inferior quality of judgment based on any set of functions which are confined to the bounds of subjects attributable to the action of what is “conventionally” defined as being merely the living biological brain in-and-of-itself.

That relevant distinction in my reply to that question, is, that the evidence of the quality of absolutely superior, authentic discoveries of an efficiently living, actual mental principle which defines a human mind, are those discoveries which are ontologically distinct from what were merely conventional, but pre-existing sorts of relevant earlier discoveries. That required precaution, is not confined to actual discoveries of what are truly universal principles. On this same account, the inferior agency is “the credulous over-estimation of the mere brain as such.” The latter, in general, is a subject to be treated as being excluded from the ontologically distinct, higher, reality of the “actual human mind.”4 The two should be recognized as distinctly separate, but interactive, respectively higher, or lower categories contained in a circumstance of conflict, as I shall show here now.

For example: William Shakespeare also made the most relevant point respecting relevant human knowledge on this fact, in his own fashion.5

So, as in the case of the appropriately chosen examples of Max Planck and Albert Einstein, the discoveries of truly original physical (or comparable) principles, were, in such instances, frequently discoveries of solutions for problems of certain universal principles, principles which were great accomplishments on their own account; but, which, have, nonetheless, been accomplishments, as for all the best among us, which have remained largely unresolved on crucial points. I mean, as I shall explain in the following argument, that we now require a far more aggressive standard for solutions of these apparent categorical contradictions. These were solutions which had not actually existed previously in knowledge, until the appearance of a thoroughly unique discovery which was presented at a time when the discoveries of the predecessors had been outdated by a discovery of a new, uniquely original conception of an actually new principle which had then been made and shown as an introduced relatively new principle of action.

This solution which I have just referenced, appears, to the best of present evidence, but only in the rarely actually understood, categorically higher faculties of the human mind. As I shall show, through successive layers of steps, the most crucial elements of the actual evidence which I shall present, layer by layer, and step by step, as the false belief in a notion of “sense-certainty,” is at the root of every false presumption of certainty which is common to mankind. The knowledge is ancient and yet rare; but, the successive discoveries of Nicholas of Cusa and of Cusa’s follower Johannes Kepler, present us with steps into a clear understanding of the foolishly systemic error embodied in the belief in “sense-perception” as “self-evident.” I shall now continue to emphasize that distinction, but step by step, in this present chapter and its sequels. The case, as you should be able to discover, on due reflection, is already essentially provable as a properly defined fact, as I shall show the essentials of the matter later in this present chapter. More relevant qualifications will follow after that.

Obviously, this point of mine requires more than some simple explanation. It is a point which I introduce progressively as within the remainder of this chapter.

First, on account of the point which I have just introduced here above, I present the following.

Truly original discoveries in physical science, such as the discoveries of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, as in his De Docta Ignorantia, would be brought better into actual reach by, most notably, Cusa follower Johannes Kepler’s extensive work in presenting and defending the actual intention underlying the notion of vicarious hypothesis as that was accomplished by Kepler himself, or, as that just-stated intention is supplemented by the related functions assigned to metaphor in Classical artistic composition. The customary, popular, but mistaken interpretation of Kepler’s stated reading, is wrong as a matter of principle.

It is essential to recognize, that the experience of the human mind’s function of sense-perception, must not be treated as “self-evidence.” For guidance on this point, we should turn our attention to the subject of a true metaphor.

Wilhelm Furtwängler’s direction of Schubert’s Ninth Symphony “ranks as the greatest definition” . . . “of the Classical musical principle.” Furtwängler is shown here conducting the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra in Schubert’s “Rosamunde Overture,” in January 1951.

For the case of metaphor, take as an explicit example, the subject of the dramas of William Shakespeare, as in his exemplary introduction of the crucial principle of the Chorus in his King Henry V. Or, similarly, in the exact-same formal ontological principle introduced to Classical composition which has been central to Friedrich Schiller’s Wallenstein Trilogy, and, now at a few centuries’ later time, Wilhelm Furtwängler’s most extraordinary achievement, in his celebrated post-World War II direction of Franz Schubert’s Ninth Symphony. Such is the record of all the great discoveries expressed as both science, and, or, great Classical composition and its performance. It is such originally unique discoveries, and related performances, which mark the distinction of creation from the mere entrails of deduction.

The supplementary conclusion which those just-stated observations require, is of that nature which is properly considered as a noëtic generation of the actual discovery of new physical principles, or, comparable achievements in Classical artistic composition which identify the rigorous employment of the term, creative (e.g., original) discovery: the plant had died, but the offspring of the already created future still flourished.6 Such an apparent allegory, marks the essential distinction of the human mind from the beliefs which might be attributed to the beasts, or, otherwise, crucially impaired systems of human opinion.

I have thus, just stated the notion of the case. Now, I explain as follows.

The particular distinction of the human mind, as distinct from the mind of inferior living species, lies, for our consideration here, at the roots of modern European civilization of science and its history. It is to be recognized as that creative impulse which, ostensibly, is expressed as the best of our present quality of knowledge: I mean that known characteristic which distinguishes our living human species as distinct from all other presently known, other living species.

This same is the characteristic which, to such effect, empowers the human individual mind’s choice of implied creative opportunity. It does that, uniquely, as an individual species, if it were to be shown that we have seized the opportunity to become as if qualitatively, an individual of a virtual new species (relative to the “static” principles of relatively lower, “earlier” states of a species of life) in his or her own characteristics: that, rather than as a merely new variety of the same species as such independently. I.e., an intrinsically noëtic quality of the development, or self-development of the individual human personality. This is a condition, which, when it is successfully imposed on the ability to embody a new species of functional individuality is a “creative personality.”7

It is to be stressed in defense of the type of case as presented here this far, that: each individual person should seek, in oneself, a meaningful contribution to the growing roster of enrichment of the human species in its ontologically fruitfully, extended totality.

Some Pieces of Explanation

As I have emphasized this on earlier occasions, there could be no competent insight into the implications of more advanced considerations of Solar-System space, without recognizing a certain fact already known specifically to such notables in history as Johannes Kepler and William Shakespeare: I mean Kepler’s discovered principle of vicarious hypothesis8 and the related case of his contemporary’s, William Shakespeare’s working-principle of Chorus, as that was first publicly demonstrated “experimentally,” in the course of Shakespeare’s King Henry V.

Pedagogically, King Henry V is the more convenient point of reference for our immediate use here, since it, as like all truly Classical artistic composition, reflects a practical and generally fundamental principle of human psychology. The same relationship to progress to be found in cases such as the role which Shakespeare assigned to Chorus, also applies to Friedrich Schiller’s Wallenstein Trilogy, or, to the Preludes and Fugues of Johann Sebastian Bach, and to Wilhelm Furtwängler’s unique achievement in effecting a profoundly insightful quality of direction of that most remarkable achievement, his post-World War II performance of Schubert’s Ninth Symphony.

The difference between truth and “sense-certainty,” is that sense-perceptual processes are merely matters of the whims of those undeserved beliefs which are, in fact, as Shakespeare demonstrated in terms of his King Henry V, merely shadows cast by sense-perception, not the so-called “real thing.” This distinction is first presented to us in an efficient way, only once we recognize that sense-perception is merely sense-perception, as Johannes Kepler echoed Nicholas of Cusa’s De Docta Ignorantia, and just as William Shakespeare presented, wittingly, the meaning of what is merely sense-perception, rather than efficient cause. The experience of truth lies not in mere sense-perception, but, rather, the recognition of “the factor” of the certainty of sense-uncertainty, precisely as Kepler actually defines vicarious hypothesis, and as Shakespeare does with his emphasis on the universal principle of sense-uncertainty, as Shakespeare’s use of Chorus accomplishes the same intention for effect.

True science and true Classical artistic means, are the common feature of the highest generally known category of truly creative science. That is the practical meaning of “Classical artistic composition in both physics and artistic composition.”

“In other words,” it is the belief in literal “sense-certainty” which is merely the shadow of what it is actually not. To attain the actual truth of a matter of content, we must shift the emphasis from sense-perception, to recognize that it is the sense-perception which is actually the mere shadow of the event, and not the insight of the organ of truth.

Sense-perception by human individuals, is to be considered in the manner that Kepler followed Cusa’s De Docta Ignorantia, with the developed and stated principle of vicarious hypothesis. Or, consider the location of the root of intended meaning in J.S. Bach’s sets of Preludes and Fugues: the principle of metaphor has the same implications as is embedded in the method of Bach. All actually competent expressions of the intention of the Classical composer, are to be located similarly: located in the concept of the intention, or meaning of the actually Classical composer or performer. Thus, Franz Liszt and his followers, are not only inherently lacking in a true compositional intention worth actually mentioning: they substitute their chosen “literalness” of intention, for a reality which exists as reality only in the same “place” as the adduced intentions of Cusa, Kepler, Shakespeare, et al. It is the motive, the motivating intention, which is the truth expressed in the willful human action. Perhaps, the courts of law might finally recognize the inherent fallacy permeating the presentation of what is conventionally preferred as evidence. The evidence is potentially clear, even absolutely clear, if what we have stated above were recognized, and then turned around properly to make the actor the evidence, and, often, the pleading of the actual crime.

As the two sets of preludes and fugues of Johann Sebastian Bach demonstrate the point in practice, it is the performance made according to the intention of Bach himself, not a merely “selected,” “mere interpretation” of a “faithfully served” printed score, which defines Bach’s intended meaning, however honorable the printing of the score itself. The principled characteristic of my argument respecting the reading of Bach’s work, is to be fairly recognized as to truth of intentions by insightful consideration of the transcendent true creative genius of Wilhelm Furtwängler’s heretofore, absolutely unique quality of authoritative direction of the post-World War II particularly great, culminating performance (among all of even his own deliveries) of Schubert’s Ninth Symphony. That specifically unique edition of Furtwängler’s direction of that subject ranks as the greatest definition on the frontier of the Classical musical principle.

Respecting Furtwängler’s great achievement then, the systemic character of the inability of even relevant great talent to express itself in such a fashion as Furtwängler’s delivery of the great version of his unique achievement in that specific performance of the Schubert, attests to the reality, that something comparable has, apparently not yet been achieved again in music, since. We must consider that fact as due less to the Classical principle of composition and performance, than that Furtwängler had been the last director capable of challenging the relative deficiency of the capabilities of even those only relatively best, who found themselves incapable of daring the scientific quality of discovery of principle, whereas what Furtwängler himself had achieved in that marvelous work was, historically, a “swan song” of musical creativity for nearly a century to this date. The present times of presently living generations, have been the bequest of the age of President Harry S Truman; unlike those who actually remember either Furtwängler or Franklin Roosevelt, the present generation lives, instead, morally, in a virtually dead new dark age.

In point of fact, since the age of Truman and Churchill, or the age of the current trash-bin quality of British minister Tony Blair, others did not dare challenge the decadence of their own age seen in the manner of fraud and butchery which Blair continues to wield from his connections as an utterly shameless virtual master of Satanic horrors now inhabiting the ruling British cabinet of U.S. President Barack Obama. The cause of sanity among the trans-Atlantic company of nations is no longer actually civilized; the would-be modern Neros, or their would-be successors, have been lately those most visible among the reigning trans-Atlantic and related nations.

The hope must be, that more leaders in the U.S. government might come forth to regain their own lost honor.

The Subject of Human Creativity

“Life, as we know it properly, is known to us as something coincident with a superior universal principle of Heraclitus, successive measures of progress in permanent change, especially respecting the universe insofar as we know it as an experience.” Shown: Heraclitus, as portrayed by Raphael, in the “School of Athens” (1509).

What I have written here this far, has touched only implicitly on the subject of human creativity.

The emerging subjects which I am presenting here in their—so-to-speak—making have a particularly convenient aspect bearing upon the same purposes of my subject-matter here. I mean, that it is essential, that we first attend to the fact that the very notion of a simply geometric form of existence in the universe, is, when taken literally, a sickness, not a triumph of science. To present this particular issue efficiently, it is sufficient to recognize that, as I have pointed out earlier in this report, the universe does not obey reductionist presumptions of what were mere arithmetic pretending to be principles. All existence, for us, is in the specific quality of motion which coincides with the notion of life, whether, or not, it appears to be life. To restate that point of Classical knowledge in its most elegant expression: nothing exists except change! Life, as we know it properly, is known to us as something coincident with a superior universal principle of Heraclitus, successive measures of progress in permanent change, especially respecting the universe insofar as we know it as an experience.

The substrate of existence, is itself such an echo of a principle underlying that of life. The notion of life, therefore, hangs upon the notion of not a customary state of “old shoe” fixedness, “sameness,” but change. The universe as we experience it, is in no way independent of such a notion of a principled ordering of “permanent change.” Life, especially human life, and most especially creative states of self-development of human life, is, for us, up to this time in our knowledge, the primary point of reference for everything—at least everything about the existence of us.

A Certain Policy

Furthermore, for us, who take into account the subject-matter which I have promoted here, the factor of the power of the human will to affect the course of the universe which we might experience, directs mankind’s specific potentialities, initially, as being unique within our present knowledge and practice. It is the fact that we are enabled, to change the principles of human action, and to demonstrate that to be evidence of a relatively universal activity of transformation in growth and qualitative revolutions in development, which compels us fiercely, if we are good, to change the universe we inhabit, in a certain respect, without submission to tradition for tradition’s sake.

Such a selected standpoint for our discussion, affords our human species a relevance which could not be made known to our experience otherwise.

That is to emphasize, that we must exert increasingly efficient control over the essential aspects of that universe which we inhabit; we inhabit a determining, but self-evolving principle, by which we are properly measured, and by which we must measure in turn. It is our destiny as human, and is also the effect of our obligations. It is an absolute in apparently permanent motion, by which we must measure ourselves, if we are wise enough to do so. What enables us to show ourselves to be what we really are, is the fact that we have access to exerting control over the process which is the government of our constantly changing self-development. The particular requirement is that that development must become what we might recognize as “upward;” in other words, the precondition for continued human existence, includes the requirement of the perfect increase of the “energy-flux density” of the noëtic powers and of the effect of human creativity, as the essentially permanent precondition for the continuation of humanity ordinarily.

Stating matters in the fashion I have just done, is the most useful way of presenting the case to one another among us. The Anglo-Dutch empire is, for example, naturally, to be seen presently as the deadliest, presently known, “green” menace against the continued existence of our human species. If there were a Satan, that same Empire is either it, or its missionary.

That much said this far, what I have said in the preceding paragraphs of this section is placed in position.

Two forms of Life selected:

II. Life as Such, and as Mind

Here, within this present stage of the report, I have chosen to identify a manner for focus of attention to dealing, categorically, with two of three typical selections from among forms of life as so defined currently: (1) plant, (2) animal, and (3) human. For our purposes here, the most significant aspect to be taken from among these three categories for our use here, may be fairly limited, for purposes of this discussion, to place emphasis on the distinction between: (2) the animal’s’ “mind” in general, as compared with what might be considered as the certain features of some among the quasi-animal-like limitations adopted among some categories of many humans, including forms of cultures imposed upon “slaves, serfs,” and also “the common wealthy and other predator types,” as compared with (3) the outstanding function of the capabilities specific to the well-performed role associated with many among the participants in the expressions of the actively noëtic specifics of the human mind’s action per se.

The most notable of the distinctions on this account, is the fact that what might have been identified as the actually creative human mental processes, have been injured, more or less widely, to the effect of appearing to have lost what must be considered the natural human ability to perform those higher noëtic capabilities which are to be deemed as functionally normal human creativity, a lesson from which we should derive a working notion of what should be its actively creative (e.g., noëtic) capabilities.

The Human Noëtic Principle

Max Planck (1858-1947) and Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
  Modern mankind seems to have lost “the natural human ability to perform those higher noëtic capabilities which are to be deemed as functionally normal human creativity,” LaRouche writes. That noëtic quality of mind is to be found in the collaboration between Planck and Einstein, and also between Planck and Köhler.   F1-koehler_wolfgang.jpg
Wolfgang Köhler (1887-1967)

For the purpose of that discussion of this matter, take into account, two most appropriate examples of cases of prominent modern scientists from the turn of the Nineteenth Century, into the Twentieth, as Max Planck, Albert Einstein, and, in the latter century, the highly relevant collaboration between both Planck and Wolfgang Köhler, on the subjects touching on “mind as such,” which I had stressed in the preceding chapter.

These require a quality of creative collaboration which typifies relatively outstanding, often famous cases of persons who have actually produced forecast discoveries of universal physical principle, as contrasted with what were merely the more common, deductively crafted, even otherwise relevant discovery. My essential contention on this matter, pertains to the evidence showing that any human being may be potentially enabled, through adequate personal development and related, and enriching experience, to break through the so-to-speak “walls of evolutionary time.” That is an intention which should tend to have fostered the function of scientifically valid principles of true forecasting; I mean, in effect, what should have been the naturally human discovery of an “event/condition” which had been yet to occur, fully, in reality, although such a forecast itself had subsequently occurred, as in both of those two-plus-one famous leading cases which I have referenced here.

Certain foolish opinion tends to insist, at the least implicitly so, that the successes of such as Planck and Einstein in their own domain of physical science, may have been “lucky guesses,” “successful gambles,” or, “statistical uncertainties,” rather than having been the actually sought-out certainties which had earlier “overthrown” the accepted standard certainties of that pitiful collection which is to be identified as the “sorry caste” of the pathetically strict mathematical reductionists.

The point to be emphasized here and now, is that the table of numbers as merely such, has no actual competence within those categories of alleged “science,” categories into which the de facto mere mathematicians have often, quite foolishly gone, far beyond the powers of their extremely modest competence, as if to seek to make their domain of foolish fantasies a universal empire of their own. For such as them, nothing actually exists outside the pure elementarity of the simple passage of mechanical clock time. The Solar system and its product, does not “exchange” any magnitude in a change which fails the standard which the ancient Heraclitus is cited as insisting on: “Nothing is permanent except change” per se [the relentless fruit of permanently constant change].

Heraclitus’ celebrated aphorism applies with simple scientific literacy, as a correlative of the notion of universal physical principle. Such is the principle of a determined quality of the existence of all forms of life, including the life-like evolution of the planetary system and its content. Therefore, bare mathematics must be a virtually demented, fully obedient slave of the consent given to the existence of a universal principle of life which it itself does not know. Consequently, to remedy such follies as that, an essential attribute must be located, specifically, in the department of the kind of physical science which is expressed by the greatest scientific minds of modern history (among others); and, its very existence lies, ultimately, under the reign of the universal principle of life as such.

Therefore, it follows, that the standard for such occurrences from within the domain of true foresight, is the actual occurrence of knowledge of principles which were actually known by the relevant author of the subject-matter, but could not have been competently crafted by a merely deductive kind of “chopping” practice. I select my reported knowledge respecting such cases, to include certain known forecast discoveries original to me, and, thus, to situations in which scientific, or comparable certainty, is achievable as if “that subject precedes the mere fact per se.” The subject whose treatments I am presenting here now, is a matter of known experimental discoveries taken from the projected future of what might be the formal empirical deductive valuation, one whose empirical demonstration had not yet begun to be experienced.

This category of distinctions converges on cases of what might be defined, alternately, as conditioned to serve as, either, relatively masters (the noëtic approach), or slaves. The people of such categories as that, including Wall Street “slaves of the market” in gambling and gamblers, allow themselves to be degraded (speaking relatively) to virtually mere “talking animals,” rather than speaking for the souls of truly independent human individuals. Unlike the truly human, their direct opposites, the Wall Street creatures, are condemned to create that which is less than nothing, to replace that which is actually useful, categorically, to mankind. Like any victims of a slavish worship of worthless objects, the latter creatures, such as “the Wall Street gang,” are victims of being induced to become intrinsically worthless persons, as typified by the progeny of the Dodd-Frank scheme. They become persons who could honestly claim to own nothing as much as what is, in fact, their own increasing social worthlessness for mankind generally, and who, therefore, actually deserve to gain nothing more than an actual ever-less-than-nothing, as does the current British Queen and her personal current “toy” U.S. President, Barack Obama.

That much just said, “as if to clear some decks,” we are now freed to turn our attention to the principal business of this present chapter, human creativity, as follows:

The Subject of Human Creativity: Metaphor

National Archives
Since the Truman Presidency (1945-53), there has been a downward trend of public and private morality and circumstances of personal life, which dramatically accelerated following the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and, later, his brother Robert. The two are shown here outside the Oval Office, March 28, 1963.

The successful performance of the human species, is to be located in a per-capita rate of increase of the typical rate of physical growth of the net output of the human species, per capita and per unit of time, as this might be measured in units of “energy-flux density,” rather than the silliness of “Cardinal Numbers.” Unfortunately, the presently reigning trend in economies, is what has been rather widely called “the green policy,” since no later than the early 1960s. So, the misdirection of the human population’s shifts in conditions of human life, as in the United States and Europe, for example, has been under the influence of an increasing withdrawal of population and relevant public institutions from any actual sense of what might be called a normal form of human reality. Since the installation of President Harry S Truman, one could trace an accelerating process of moral-intellectual decadence permeating official institutions and popular opinion, alike. Since then, the anointing of Harry S Truman and the spread of popular opinions on economic policy, has created a trend of public and private morality and circumstances of personal life, which have been predominantly downward in quality, and that downward trend accelerating. That condition has been the most so, remarkably, since the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and, later, his brother Robert. Yet, I also recall vividly the origin of the moral decline of the general U.S. population over the period since the time of the incumbency of Harry S Truman.

Looking back now, Franklin D. Roosevelt was a matchless hero of our Twentieth-century United States.

For example, since the emphasis on the introduction of the surge centered in the person of the current British monarch, the trend has been, increasingly, toward either the extinction, or near mass-extinction of the present human population, an effect of what the oligarchical interests centered in the Anglo-Dutch imperial monarchy presently demand. This is why they regard as a very large advantage, a rate of general decay of the standard of individual human existence in such places as the United States and Europe.

In the latter case, and also in other major regions of the world, the trend in the populations, is in the direction of probable relative, or even total extinction, a practice in accord with the recent and current policies of the trans-Atlantic regions under the current common domination of the Americas and Europe by the pro-genocidal policies decreed by the current British (i.e., “Anglo-Dutch”) monarchy spun off from the tradition of the atrocities of the Seventeenth Century of the House of William of Orange, and by the present Queen who still serves as an installed replacement for the performance of the duties earlier assigned to such as the Roman Emperor Nero.9

Those are relevant facts for making broad comparisons and tracing historical connections, but, once taken this far, they fail to get to the heart of the matter. Nonetheless, let us proceed along those lines; some crucial points must, first, be brought together, given a bit of patience in this matter.

The Necessary Approach

For the matter which I have introduced, this far, as on the subject of the policies which must regulate the life and development of national economies, we must now introduce, urgently, a physical-economic standard, rather than the currently prevalent monetarist one. The leading relevant principle is, that the standard for the role of currency must not be a monetarist system, but a purely physical one, as was implicit in the profound successes of the exceptionally successful quality of the actions of the original U.S.A. Treasury Secretary, Alexander Hamilton, rather than any among the present, monetarist ones. The topic which must now be brought forward, prior to the presentation of any intended future standard, is the human standard, rather than the monetary one. This brings us to a consideration of the central issue put before all other issues now, provided that the presently ruling, wildly ruinous, monetarist policies, are cancelled. The notion of physical wealth, rather than a monetary standard for designing prices and profits, is strictly imposed. Glass-Steagall is the only model which could be successful in any part, or the whole of the world under the presently ruined, and rapidly degenerating global economic and social conditions.

Chapter III: The Matter of Money

Why ‘Glass-Steagall’ Now?

To accomplish that task, now, it must be done now, because it were most likely, that the presently miserable destiny of mankind for the period immediately ahead, requires, of the world at large, the choice of a U.S. initiative in re-enacting the precisely original version of the Glass-Steagall law in the United States of America, first. That is a choice of a practically feasible measure under present world economic-policy practices and circumstances, rather than any consideration for egotistical preferences among nations. The entire world urgently needs, immediately, a “full blown” rescue of the world’s respective national economies, a result which could not be assured by any other means than a strict copy of the specifics of that original Glass-Steagall law which had been launched under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

The obviously leading objection to an exact recopy of Glass-Steagall now, comes essentially from the same monetarist packs of swindlers who have clearly dominated not only the United States, but virtually every nation of the world at this present time. That means the rightful choice of sovereign nations is to establish the general system of sovereign national economic systems under a true credit system, rather than the presently unsalvageable relics of a hopeless world system under the standards of monetarism,

The essential characteristic of this global change in policy, is the fact that all of the systems of the nations of the world, have been so thoroughly, and so irredeemably rotted-out, that the only remedy for each and any of those nations, must be mustered for a two-fold measure of rescue from the presently bankrupt parts of the world system, that state of affairs which is to be found among most nations of the trans-Atlantic region and beyond, most emphatically and immediately, but to bring about the assembly of national economic systems premised upon a credit system akin to the initial design of the original U.S. Federal system of credit, as under Alexander Hamilton, rather than a monetarist basis.

To illustrate that point, consider, first, the model case for the restoration of the German economy. By illustration, I mean the original D-mark restored as an internal, sovereign national system of current national banking, as during the course of the onset of the German recovery from the effects of what is named “World War II.” The reformed such economic recovery for Germany’s economy, can be readily structured to dovetail with the restored Glass-Steagall model, without any loss of perfect national sovereignty of practice.

The presently urgently needed reform which I have assigned in this proposal on the subject of the original U.S.A. and Germany cases, can be readily applied to virtually all present (or, now restored) and willing, participating nations of the planet generally.

The “keystone” problem for sovereign nations, other than the original U.S.A.’s original Federal Constitution, needs to be based on the principles of Alexander Hamilton’s discovery of the essential, highly and uniquely needed principle, which exists as a fact of history, notably for the nations of Eurasia, but especially “old Europe” as such. That is to emphasize the fact that the de facto European empire (and its foreign-extended subjects) was founded essentially on the basis of the Netherlands’ “Dutch” takeover of the British Isles through the actions generated by the House of Orange; this occurred, from the midst of the Seventeenth Century, through the Eighteenth, then, through the Nineteenth, also including the accumulated Anglo-Dutch takeovers of the colonized regions of the world generally.

Those considerations signify that, once the presently captive nations of Asia, Africa and so forth, which had been long saddled with so-called European colonialist tyrannies, will have a much easier time in entering the new system, in certain respects, than nations which had been less thoroughly assimilated culturally to special interests of the state, and therefore had less monetarist garbage to dump into this urgently needed venture of reform. Existing privileges, have had, still, another residue: the terrible effects of a specific, colonial-like subjugation to the occupation by a homeland’s own colonial, or “semi-colonial” tyrannies.

To summarize what I have presented in the present chapter, now: what is urgently needed is a set of rapidly installed package-designs of any national credit-system used to replace and excise all willing national economic systems of the world. This intention should incorporate an efficiently durable notion of attempted parity in the trading relationships among relevant nations, and the exclusion of the continued existence of monetarist systems as such. This can be readily accomplished, contingent on “willingness,” among any set of future sovereign nation-states throughout the relevant candidates of cooperation to be found among nation-states. The included objective is to rid the planet of abuses, to the extent nations are willing to do this, which is always in order to create a perfectly national-sovereign form of republican system, the which had been both the characteristic of the sovereign successes of the Seventeenth-century Massachusetts Bay Colony, and of the more difficult creation of the republic of the United States of America, whose original historical basis had been the successful genius of that Massachusetts Bay Colony.

The “scheme,” if you prefer to name it as such, is the use of a properly reformed U.S. economy, as based on the original Glass-Steagall model of a sovereign nation-state working in systemic cooperation with other sovereign nation-states.

The particular, gravest of the obstacles to an efficient result of this intended design among nations, is located in the original Anglo-Dutch tyranny which is continued now as the running sore of the presently still virtually world-wide system of the Anglo-Dutch world-empire in fact.

I add the crucially important observation, that, for the sake of the United States, for its part, a necessarily ruthless, but also thoroughly compassionate reform is required, returning the U.S.A. to its original constitutional intention, freed of European tyrannies’ effort to destroy even the United States itself, as through the complicity of that British agent Aaron Burr, who had virtually created the wretched President Andrew Jackson, and had launched the attempted destruction of the United States through a medley of British bankers rooted in Aaron Burr’s cronies in Manhattan and also Boston, also based in Britain, and the spread of such wretchedness to the takeover of Chicago and other notable places.

The merit in what I have just outlined in this chapter, is that the expulsion of the British imperial reign over the privately based banking systems, would rid us of the massive burden of the evils of foreign Anglo-Dutch swindles which have, so far, virtually taken over the control of the United States’ internal affairs. The question is: Have you the guts to do it? If not, it were not kisses which will be exchanged; and Hell itself were the likely outcome. Otherwise, nothing lies before the eyes of the members of Congress, but a continually seeming infinite, surrounding barrage of habitually murderous (i.e., Anglo-Dutch) “British,” poorly washed butts.

For me, I know that the actually respectable persons of the so-called British Isles, like the remainder of Europe, in particular, do not need the special burden of the Anglo-Dutch imperial tyranny.

The fruits of victory:

Hello, Mars!

It is time to dispel silly fantasies about sending humans to Mars; instead, we should rely upon a “man-free, Curiosity-enriched, Mars surface itself.” Shown: an image of Curiosity, combining dozens of exposures taken by the rover’s Mars Hand Lens Imager between February and May 2013.

Currently, there is a running rash of the worst possible sort of speculations respecting the games which are still being proposed from worse than simply neurotic sources. That subject is currently being addressed by my immediate associates within the science-driver sector of our current intelligence operations. Much might be selected for discussion on subjects such as Mars, much of which is still currently more silly than of current note otherwise. In any case, I foresee no early justification for actual manned deployment onto Mars. Otherwise, long-term possibilities are to be anticipated, even possibly within later decades of present Earth-based developments.

On that account, the very notion of undertaking “colonizing Mars,” is a matter for fools, idiots, or rascals during the span of the prospects for Mars later within this century. On this particular subject, what is immediately relevant for quasi-manned space-deployments, are efforts already overdue for the development of quasi-automatic “factories” within an appropriate depth below our Moon’s surface. For example, the costs of moving weight from Earth’s surface to the Moon, are such, that developing internal elements of preparation for transmissions from Moon to other goals within the relevant regions of the Solar system, selected for such transmissions and transport, will be needed to supply operating elements built up within relative nearby destinations within the obviously appropriate regions of the Solar system.

However, I do not focus on the detailed technologies for such operations; my expressed concern here is the need to dump silly fantasies which have no significant useful options for the early regions of the near-Earth operations within the regions between Earth and Mars. That is to say, that developments essential to closing the gap, without translating humans deployed operationally, between Earth and Mars, chiefly to Mars, would serve as a practice of building up accumulated functioning instruments chiefly based on a build-up of such motions suited to useful functions for a man-free, Curiosity-enriched, Mars surface itself.

So much for permissible, or otherwise useful generalities. My treatment of that discussion of Mars’ prospects, is premised, for me, by matters in which I command relevant expertise, such as defense of Earth from asteroids and other elements which might be threats to Earth. However, my special competence is chiefly centered in the subject-matters which correspond to the rarely considered, but nonetheless crucially decisive role of metaphor as such in operations affecting both in Earth and relatively near-Earth developments affecting, most emphatically, both Mars itself and the activity-rich regions between near-Earth collateral and mankind’s options for the relative “vicinity” of Earth and its neighbors within the range of Earth and Mars.

It is the design and development of operations within such a region, which is my choice for such special attention. Again, as I have stressed throughout this present report, my policies are premised on the principled character of my representation of the functions of the human mind which are nominally outside the range of understanding, which I marked out under the title of the principle of the human mind. The case to be considered may be summed-up in the terms which are specific to the span of my corrections of what has been considered, mistakenly, as the principled character of the human mind.

It is the proper study of very wide berth needed for treatment of the usually evaded notions of the nature of the human mind, which is crucial within those terms of the present discussion. This is “where I come in” with my specific kind of relative expression. This has been the inclusive subject-matter of the preceding elements of this report as a whole.

Notably, those popular errors urgently requiring my classwork of remedies, as I have treated such here, as the most essential of the necessary corrected principles for both physical science and of Classical artistic composition and its performance, are crucial. I mean to emphasize, that the standpoint which I have presented in the first chapter of this present report, is the unique basis for the foundation of mankind’s attempts at a practical, experimental basis for beginning even to understand the very meaning of the present challenge of man’s efforts to break free of the dubious results of attempts to define activity in nearby (and also more distant) space, without the folly of attempting to attribute the activities within both nearby and distant space to the conventional matrix of an inherently fallacious design on a foundation of what are merely proposals for “sense-perception.”

So far, in general, man has attempted to explore nearby space within the bounds of the presumptions rooted in the conceptions of mere “sense-perception.” To enter that space in a seriously fruitful way, we must first abandon all reliance on mere worship of sense-perception as such. That has been the mission assigned to this report as in its preliminary foundations, and to turn attention away from the relatively childish presumptions of making the relative simple-mindedness of an adopted foundation sought in the useless mire of mere sense-perception.

The foregoing report has now completed its preliminary intended mission.

Order Fidelio back issues


1. “Wall Street” was never anything but a British agency, operating under an originally leading role by the traitor Aaron Burr, created by the British Empire with a commission and intent to destroy our United States. Among those created, in turn, by Burr was a one-time President of the U.S.A., Andrew Jackson.

2. I shall treat this specific matter below.

3. The designation “dupes,” as I shall make clear below, is not an “insult,” but simply an essential matter of a scientific fact which continues in downward progress.

4. This refers to the uniqueness of the voluntary distinction of the human mind, from that of all species of life: the power to create new categorically higher physical powers of the mind of the properly developed mind of a member of the human species, such as Cusa, Kepler, Shakespeare, Gottfried Leibniz, Johann Sebastian Bach, Friedrich Schiller, Carl Gauss, Bernhard Riemann, Max Planck, Albert Einstein, et al.

5. The nature of the originality of discoveries in the category of universal physical principles overwhelms, systemically, any attempt to adduce such discoveries of principles from merely “brain” functions. The point is illustrated by evidence of the ability of relevant persons to foresee a willful quality of development which could have occurred only in the actual future of any relative point in the system. Hence, we must take into account the essential distinction of the mere human mind, from the mind of the lower forms of life!

6. What a certain “British bastard” dubbed “neotony,” does occur as a driving force in the history of mankind; but, it could never mean anything actually “good” in those circumstances. The “bastard,” in the referenced case, was actually born on its own account; but, the fact of the matter was, that that method generated nothing actually worth praising.

7. E.g.: the intention is to create a systemically new personal species from among an assembly of individual personalities which were defined functionally within the evolutionary development of such sets of definitions.

8. The original conception had been that of Nicholas of Cusa, as presented in Cusa’s De Docta Ignorantia.

9. This reference to Queen Elizabeth II is simply a matter of fact. Her declared intention to bring about a rapid reduction of the populations of nations, as in the order from seven billions to approximately one, is to be regarded as tantamount to an avowed policy of genocide on a virtually global scale, and as something only like the passions of a wretch such as Britain’s mass-murderous rascal, the Queen’s own Tony Blair. In the meanwhile, the economic policy of genocide against the population of the United States itself, as in respect to U.S. food and related policies, is not an authorship of merely mass-murder in the scheming, but mass-murder already on-going into acceleration. One remedy which might be proposed on that account, would be to break-up the current British (i.e., Anglo-Dutch) empire, by reforming its composition to reduce the present British kingdom to its original root of social-political elements, or to a somewhat comparable arrangement. History attests: small nations tend, sooner or later, and with some exceptions, to be more inclined toward peacefulness than inherently corrupt, even evil degrees of aggregation such as the British Commonwealth and its attachments currently. The United States would have completed a relatively excellent record for itself, on this account, on the condition that British finance, such as that of Wall Street were sufficiently constrained, or closed down if truly necessary.