Our U.S.A. Needs A Real Candidate!: 
Let There Be a Time of Thanksgiving

Since approximately July 25th of this year, the world as a whole has been gripped by what survivors of this present calamity would probably remember, as what was in the process of becoming the greatest, global, financial, chain-reaction collapse in modern history. We could escape the worst of those effects, even now, if we were prepared to end the Babel of the presently bankrupt, globalized monetary-financial system, and to adopt, immediately, an appropriate form of a new world system composed of, respectively, perfectly sovereign nation-states. The measures needed to rescue society from the presently ongoing general collapse, are knowable; the question is: "Will society have both the knowledge and the will needed to make the change: a change from the policies of what has become, up to this point, more than three, disastrous recent decades of terribly wrong decisions contrary to the original intention of the Bretton Woods system?"

So far, none—I repeat: none!—among the visible pre-candidacies for the U.S. Presidency, has shown even a meager sign of commitment to competent policies for leading this republic out of, and away from the continuing causes for the presently onrushing breakdown-crisis of the planet. That lack of the competent policies which should have been adopted by those candidates, is a key contributing element in the planet's presently accelerating plunge toward a "new dark age." To restate that crucial fact, our proper task now, is to prevent a dark age' which would be of several future generations' duration in its immediate effects, were it permitted to continue its present course.

To begin to understand our republic's present predicament, we should recognize that we are, thus, now, gripped, globally, by a crisis which has no comparable precedent in modern European history, not since the infamous, medieval, 14th-Century "New Dark Age."

We in the U.S.A. could still, and must now, act immediately to arrest the present, mid-stream onrush of that oncoming catastrophe. Admittedly, for this purpose, we do have one or two capable personalities from among the current roster of candidates; but—alas!—none of them have presently qualified themselves for this extraordinary mission, unless he, or she were to change his, or her present candidacy in ways which could be supplied only as beneficial guidance from some relevant intervention, as it were delivered from above.

We must not blame all of those candidates too much for their shortcoming on this account; but we must, nonetheless, blame them vigorously. The relevant fact is that they represent, largely, a generation born, usually, between 1945 and 1958, to become part of a specifically "white collar" tradition, the "68er" tradition of the children of the 1950s "white collar" and "organization man" generation, in most of Europe as in the U.S.A. It is a generation of "68ers" which has been educated in hostility to any competent view of the social elements of economic processes; worse, if they have any comprehension of economics at all, it has been indoctrination from a press and academia as ignorant, or even more ignorant than they are. All, candidates, academia, and press alike, are currently expressing the kinds of absurd, but widespread beliefs which are largely responsible for the mess in which the virtually doomed present civilization finds itself today.

My mission here, is, hopefully, to enable at least one such prospective Presidential candidate, but hopefully more, to become capable not only of understanding this challenge, but capable of taking up the unprecedented, specific kind of job of leadership which needs to be provided immediately, now.

Consider all of the candidates who are either in the race now, or the "third man," "independent" candidacy, of New York Mayor Bloomberg, who is apparently waiting for a timely moment to launch an intended threat to Senator Hillary Clinton's presently probable candidacy, as Ross Perot did against George H.W. Bush, in 1992. The job to be done must be by a candidate who would be electable, and would consent to be guided into becoming a competent and decent choice for the future of our nation and the world.

Both our republic, and the world as a whole, are in the present grip of a Classically, globally tragic situation. But for my age, I would be the only possible candidate who could actually be presently considered intellectually competent for the role which the next U.S. President must perform under these present, historically extraordinary conditions. So far, none of the present candidates has shown any grasp of the crucial, specific strategic quality of tasks of leadership, on which not only our republic, but on which civilization as a whole would depend, if the world as a whole were not already fated to be plunged, very, very soon, into a deep, and prolonged new dark age.

Therefore, apart from the fact that the mass-media orchestrated campaign debates have been given more of the character of childish spats, than serious attention to the actual business at hand, the choice of potentially credible prospective candidates is limited to less than a handful who are intellectually and emotionally capable of changing their present habits, by absorbing the guidance in economic expertise and related matters which they presently lack, but which I would give freely to each, or all of them, as I do here.

Specifically, most of the campaigning by the candidates so far, has either expressed simple ignorance of the actual policies on which our republic's survival urgently depends, or, the candidate is a victim of his, or her disqualifying habit, of avoiding those issues which "the big campaign financiers," who seem to own most of the candidates, might consider unpleasant. A candidate who fails to change what has been heretofore that prevalent failure shared among all visible leading candidates, would be remembered chiefly for his, or her part in bringing on that monstrous both national, and global tragedy for which our people would suffer for generations to come.

So, the time has passed for society's continuing to tolerate recent decades' customary games of populist Sophistry. The world can no longer tolerate those petty, schoolyard-like games of childishly competitive political sports, into which our republic's principal pre-candidates have been lured in this campaign thus far.

What We Must Demand

For scientifically grounded reasons which will be provided within this report, we must reject any candidate who fails to rely upon reawakening the seemingly already lost, but unique, historical advantage which we still have as a nation. We must reject summarily any candidate who does not rely, without swerving into other ways, on that specific intention of our Federal Constitution which provides the uniquely appropriate premise for crafting a remedy for the present, terrible economic threat to our world as a whole. The essence of that needed option, for which the original founding of our republic's history provides us guidance, lies principally in a recognition of three, historically defined, crucial points of principle, as follows:

1. That, in all truly successful forms of nation-state government since the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, the morally acceptable design for the modern, sovereign form of nation-republic, has been defined by the principle of agape, as that named principle is traced to such ancient precedents as Plato and the Christian apostles John and Paul. This is the same notion as expressed by Gottfried Leibniz's denunciation of John Locke, as Leibniz affirmed the notion of the principled right of people to "the pursuit of happiness." That treatment of the concept of agape, by Leibniz, was not only central to our 1776 Declaration of Independence; it was elaborated as the functional, ruling principle of our constitutional law, as the Preamble of our Federal Constitution.

This already abused, indispensable principle of U.S. constitutional law adopted from Leibniz, has been virtually obliterated from national practice under the horribly tragic Administration of President George W. Bush, Jr. and his accomplices. It has also been the trend of tragic behavior, by the complicit majority on each side of the aisle, in much of the attempted law-making during the terms of the 2001-2007 Bush Administration, and also, usually, the Congress itself, especially so since February 2006. (As for the effect of the incumbency of the current President and his Vice-President, that can be fairly described as comparable to a situation in which science-fiction's "Pod People" had taken power.)

2. That, in all successful forms of nation-state governments during the interval since the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, agape has been expressed in international affairs as the obligation of each society to be governed by the principle of each being bound by the obligation of affording "the advantage of the other." By that standard, much of our so-called political class's putative leadership is presently behaving as a pack of self-doomed barbarians.

3. That, the mode of government must now become, again, our electorate's adherence to the fact that the superiority of the design of the U.S. republic as an economy, is lodged in the Constitutional preference for a credit system, in opposition to that implicitly imperialist character which is intrinsic in the practice of usury under an Anglo-Dutch Liberal monetary system. We must rid ourselves of the most reckless, the most evil, the most destructive, most usurious, present form of a monetarist system: a so-called "free trade" system.

There are, in turn, three—again "three"—leading moral and other crucial, historical advantages subsumed by the foregoing, threefold constitutional characteristic of the U.S. system, moral and intellectual advantages over, for example, the current, morally wretched, Fabian system of government of Great Britain. These advantages include:

a.) That "protectionist" feature of the settlement of what became the U.S. Federal Constitution, the feature which, chiefly, has made our republic so vastly, morally and otherwise superior to the Sophist's system of the United Kingdom. This advantage was then, and remains the influence of those settlers who shaped our immigrant patriots' character, those settlers who emigrated from Europe with the intention to bring the best of the Classical culture of Europe to a North America which had been located then at a relatively advantageous distance from the reach of the European legacy of usury and aristocracy.[1]

b.) The significance of the establishment of the United Kingdom under King George I, as successor to England's Queen Anne, was that his accession embodied the defeat of the cause of the patriotic party in England, a party which had leaned toward the option of choosing Leibniz's assistance, a party whose defeat had worked in favor of that pro-imperialist Anglo-Dutch Liberalism whose power was consolidated under William of Orange's Hannoverian protégé, King George I.[2] When Britain reached out, with the 1763 Peace of Paris, to take away our liberties, our patriots revolted, in defense of a civilized form of life.

Under the leadership of President Franklin Roosevelt, our republic had returned, one more time, to the impulse of our dedication to those principles. The work done then, in that direction, was not completed; but, it was under way. With President Franklin Roosevelt's untimely death, the process of progress was aborted under his immediate successor. The same betrayal of principle was carried out, to a worse degree, with the Sophistry of the "1968ers" in both Europe and the Americas.

So, with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, what had been the partly shackled devils of our destruction were abruptly unleashed; we were stricken by the prolonged virtual imitation of each of a long series of wars like the Peloponnesian War of a self-doomed ancient Greece. These have been wars launched during the interval 1964-2007 to date, by repeated consent of the majorities of the U.S. Congress, and, most emphatically, by outright, implicitly treasonous fraud of forces controlling the administration of the presently incumbent President. Those foolish wars have been an emblematic feature of a series of global developments which have brought both our own ruined republic, and the world at large, into the onset of what will soon become, unless stopped, a global, new dark age roughly comparable to that of Europe's 14th Century. The worst of these wars have been those promoted under what President Dwight Eisenhower denounced as "a military-industrial complex," or the same complex named by others a "revolution in military affairs," as this was associated with Samuel P. Huntington's The Soldier and the State, or under London's Fabian-sponsored, brutish U.S. Vice-President Cheney, and Cheney's London-linked U.S. protectors George Shultz and Middlebury, Vermont's wretched Felix Rohatyn.

c.) The original economic policy which had made the U.S.'s constitutionally defined economic policy morally and otherwise superior to that of the United Kingdom, is expressed as our patriots' constitutional abhorrence of a "free trade" system. The Anglo-Dutch Liberal model, called "monetarism" today, is axiomatically a financial-oligarchical, and, inherently imperialist system of government.[3] Our patriots' system, under which the power to create and regulate currency, is under the control and direction of the institutions of our Federal government, was established, thus, as a credit system, as distinct from, and opposed to the implicitly imperialist form of economic tyranny known as a "monetary system."[4]

To be able, now, to meet the specific challenges thus posed to humanity as a whole, we must commit ourselves, according to these specific principles, to act in concert with certain other leading nations, to bring the world as a whole, not to paradise, but to a durable condition of safety and prosperity. To accomplish that, our government, with our support, must revive the set of crucial principles, cited here above, upon which our remarkable occasions of past greatness were formerly premised, as under Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt.

To that end, a special approach must be taken to escape from the grave hazard expressed by the lack of certain crucial qualities in the visible pre-candidacies.

—————————————————————————-

For obvious reasons, much of what I present, within the subsequent, main body of this report, on matters of scientific principle, must be prefaced here, by pointing to the experience of my repeatedly proven, virtually unique advantage of authority in long-term economic forecasting.

For example, it would be reasonable for a reader to ask: "Just how good is LaRouche's forecasting?" Or, "What is the record of LaRouche's performance?" Therefore, I introduce the body of this report with a review of relevant highlights of that record: I identify the most essential of the scientific premises on which my notable special skills, discoveries of principles, and other relevant accomplishments have depended over the interval 1956 to the present day.

This introduction is also supplied here as indispensable for understanding the root-causes of the tragic, systemic incompetence shown, thus far, in matters of economics and grand strategy generally, among all presently leading official pre-candidates for the 2008 Presidential campaigns and general election. Without taking this matter of forecasting into account, there could be no competent insight into the matter of curing the relative demerits which the notable candidacies have, in fact, exhibited, so generously, thus far.

Therefore, look back to 1956. My first forecast for the U.S. national economy, was a short-term affair, made then, modestly, as part of my specific executive function at that time, a function bearing on supplying needed measures of quality control over that firm's consulting practice. The subject of that report, was my forecast of a crucial change in what I reported as then already in progress, a qualitative change in the marketing conditions in which competent management consulting firms must begin to operate during the immediate years from 1957 onward.

That forecast, which was presented at the beginning of the last quarter of 1956, emphasized the fact of an oncoming, deep recession then in progress, a threat which I had warned would cycle to the surface about February-March 1957. My forecast was focussed, chiefly, on the radiated effects of increasingly reckless major corporate and related speculation, that under the system then associated with Arthur Burns et al. These sources of failure in U.S. economic performance were, most notably, the effects expressed in the operations of firms in the fields of automotive and other hard-goods categories of consumer "capital goods."

The collapse foreseen in that relatively short-term forecast of mine, not only arrived on my estimated time-table; closer examination of the effects of a deepening recession throughout 1957-58, prompted my first, subsequent attempt at a long-range forecast. That longer-range forecast was begun, with successful results, during middle through late 1958, an effort which was continued, as my private endeavor, with significant refinements, into a rounded development of the theses I adopted, and publicized more widely, during 1960.[5]

My long-range forecasting had some, initially limited public circulation through a time from 1961 until the middle of that decade. The circulation of that forecast was accelerated during the latter half of the 1960s, and into the 1970s. The leading among the presently more relevant features of that report were the following.

I had forecast that if the continuing trend in executed U.S. national economic policy of practice which had been expressed, under specialist Arthur Burns, in the aftermath of the U.S. Korean War, were to be continued, into the medium and long term, through the middle of the 1960s, a menacing trend in developments must be expected to emerge during the second half of the 1960s, leading toward a threatened breakdown of the Bretton Woods fixed-exchange-rate monetary system. In none of these publicized reports was I ever mistaken. The collapse of August 1971, and the ensuing, celebrated Queens College debate between me and Professor Abba Lerner, mark the forecast result.[6]

By the time President Dwight Eisenhower completed his terms in office, and despite the attempted reforms by President John F. Kennedy, the most widely taught and practiced modern academic and business-practice traditions in the customary university teaching, and practice of forecasting of developments in economy, had become thoroughly, intrinsically incompetent. In my adult lifetime, all but a diminishing few of my possible intellectual rivals among the leading, and younger academic, business, and related long-range forecasters, in the Americas, or in western and central Europe, have always been wrong, and that more or less disastrously, in their outlook on the subject of so-called "business cycles."

This incompetence has principally three leading aspects.

Firstly, generally, in the U.S.A. and western and central Europe prior to and since 1971-72, the tendency which has been carried, more and more, to lunatic extremes, has been to rely upon more radically monetarist assumptions, assumptions which assume that all success depends upon making the "financial community" happy over the span of the relatively short to medium term. The assumption is, that the secret of economics is to make "the suckers," such as typical Wall Street investors, happy. The critics of that sort of nonsense have become a rapidly diminishing few.

Contrary to prevalent delusions in circles of governments and academia, it is not the financial market, but the physical economy which is real: it is the rate of increase of the physical standard of living, per capita and per square kilometer, which determines the actual health, and stability of the economy over the medium to long term: as in the U.S.A. presently, contrary to the foolish President George W. Bush, Jr.: "How good is your pension, and your cost of actually available and good health-care, when the time comes to retire?" The proper question is: What is the rate of increase (or decrease) of the potential relative population-density, per capita, and per square kilometer, of each and all regions of the nation, over the course of a generation or more? On this account, the U.S. economy has been experiencing a physical net decline in output, per capita and per square kilometer, over the course of (approximately) 1968-2007 to date, especially since the awful bungle of the 2000, Gore-Lieberman Democrats' Presidential campaign.

The second principal consideration, is the difference between the methods for forecasting weather and forecasting human behavior.

If we put the role of human behavior to one side, forecasting physical trends in the planet, and our Solar System, can produce useful results, but not mechanically predetermined results. Forecasting can be made successful, to the degree our science has been successfully developed for that purpose. In attempting to forecast human mass behavior, we are confronted with an additional, completely different challenge. For forecasting developments within social processes as such, we must emphasize attention to a voluntary capability unique to the human individual, a factor which does not exist in either inanimate processes, or living processes other than mankind.

This distinction of human, from plant and animal behavior, has two aspects, one ordinary, the other critical. There is the factor of somewhat animal-like, ordinary choice; but, there is also the crucial factor, which does not exist among lower forms of life, the power to change our societies' characteristic powers as a species, through the individual, original human thinker's discovery, or re-discovery of universal physical principles, as principles are typified for modern science by Johannes Kepler's uniquely original discovery of universal gravitation.[7] These discoveries of principle have an effect comparable to what might be considered as akin, in effect, to mankind's virtually willful evolution into a higher species, through fundamental and related scientific progress of the type which was forbidden by both the Olympian Zeus of Aeschylus' Prometheus Bound, and the present-day, neo-Malthusian dupes of London's "68er" and swindler Al Gore.

Thirdly, what I am stressing here, is the following point. To achieve a competent form of insight into these two factors which I have just listed, we must take a third qualitative consideration into account. No actual form of physical, or mental process can be competently represented by the kinds of Euclidean, Cartesian, or neo-Cartesian methods of the mechanistic-statistical forecasting used by the more typical modern economists. Real economic processes are not mechanistic-statistical, not empiricist processes, but are dynamic. Unfortunately, in the Americas or Europe today, virtually no leading politician, and very few among those trained in the subject of economics, have any competent conception of what the term "dynamic" means for the qualified scientist.

This use of the term dynamic is to be traced by any competent economist, or physical scientist otherwise, from the remarkable quadrivium of the Pythagorean science of Sphaerics, from which all a priori presumptions, such as the later Sophistry of Euclid, were banned; the relevant original term for the method of valid science, was dynamis.

The most famous example of the relevant application of Sphaerics was the proof of the construction of the doubling of a cube by the friend and collaborator of Plato, the Pythagorean Archytas of Tarentum. The revival of the use of the concept of dynamis, under the name of dynamics, was introduced, by name, to modern science by Gottfried Leibniz, in Leibniz's 1692-95 exposure of the fraudulent, mechanistic-statistical character of the same method of Descartes from which the degenerated practice of quacks such as John von Neumann,[8] and forecasters such as LTCM's Myron Scholes was derived.

However, the modern revival of the Platonic form of Sphaerics was actually begun, first, prior to Leibniz's work, by Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa's De Docta Ignorantia; but it was Leibniz who made the crucial connection to the concept of dynamis. Cusa's method was that, combined with Cusa's follower Leonardo da Vinci, from which we have proximate origins of the entirety of the work of Johannes Kepler, the first fully competent modern mathematical physicist after Leonardo da Vinci, and, as Albert Einstein has emphasized, the principal figure on which all competent science since, has depended.[9]

Therefore, all competent practice of economics today, depends upon a Riemannian insight into the principles of physical economy, as opposed to intrinsically usurious, monetarist schemes. This notion of physical economy includes a recognition of the inherently fraudulent and immoral character of the form of practice of usury known as monetarism, and demands an absolute contempt for Cartesian, or neo-Cartesian, statistical modes of so-called "economic forecasting."

Bear the implications of this, just said, in mind, as we proceed. At this point in this report, for the moment, it is sufficient, to take into account the worthwhile approximations of good economic science encountered in the work of Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and the John F. Kennedy whose assassination cleared the way for the steps leading up to the wrecking of the foundations of what had been the successful U.S. economy. This change, after Kennedy's death, led to the policies of continued wrecking to become intrenched under the later, successive stages of wrecking actions under Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Carter.

The administration of President Kennedy had attempted serious, and extremely beneficial changes in U.S. economic policies; but, that excellent effort implicitly ended with his assassination in November 1963. His had been a worthwhile legacy which was soon suffocated by a lie, a lie like that of Prime Minister Tony Blair and his accomplice Dick Cheney later, a lie used to push the fear-stricken, corrupted U.S. Congress of 1964 into launching the folly of a U.S. long, wasting war in Indo-China.

Thus, the assassination of President Kennedy cleared the way for what has proven, since, to have been the kind of effect which I had projected as probable for the second half of the 1960s. This effect came fully to the surface during 1967-68, first expressed as the collapse of the United Kingdom's economy under the wrecking conducted by the first Harold Wilson government, in late 1967, and the consequent, first U.S. steps, during February-March 1968, toward disintegration of the Bretton Woods monetary system.

So, I repeated my earlier warnings of my long-range forecast more forcefully, and more widely during the late 1960s, and into 1971. On August 15-16, 1971, U.S. President Nixon, acting under influences including that of George Shultz, "floated" the U.S. dollar, a measure Nixon had taken under the pretext of his publicly avowed devotion to the traditional enemy of U.S. independence, Lord Shelburne's lackey Adam Smith. At the beginning of 1972, George Shultz was entrusted with the task of formally destroying the remains of the Bretton Woods system.

During that time, I was the only notable, published economist who had forecast that looming outcome of the 1960s. The crucial feature of my forecast, was not that I had forecast merely the threatened breakdown of the Bretton Woods system; but, I had warned that such a breakdown would lead quickly toward a shift into approximations of a new fascist system of the type which we are now experiencing in a rather matured form under the model which the Bush-Cheney Administration has copied from the German author of Adolf Hitler's dictatorship, Carl Schmitt. That is the Schmitt who was also the inspiration for the current U.S. Federalist Society, and was the original sponsor of the man who became the model for Chicago University's Professor Leo Strauss.[10]

However, Shultz's role during 1971-72 was not simply an arbitrary decision by Nixon, made under the influence of Shultz et al. It was the culmination of a process of attempted wrecking of the Bretton Woods system, an attempt which had been launched already under President Harry S Truman, which has been always steered, as under Truman, by President Franklin Roosevelt's enemies in official London, and promoted by those who took greater control over the U.S.A. under the conditions of widespread terror engendered by the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Without that manifold process of intended wrecking, over the 1945-71 interval, President Nixon's unconstitutional sabotage would not have become possible.

Now, as the 1997-98 case of toleration for the unfortunate Myron Scholes, only illustrates today's prevalent delusions, the usual leading economists of today's age of Alan Greenspan have become vastly less competent than even the usual cases from the late 1960s and into the early 1970s age of Paul Volcker. This has been a leading factor in shaping the characteristic incompetence on nearly all crucial issues of economic policy, until now, of all presently leading pre-candidates for the Presidential nominations of the two parties (and also, that of, apparently, Mayor Bloomberg).

Since those events, to the present date, the world as a whole has been constantly on an economic march toward monetary, and financial, globalized, fascist "Hell." This has been a course of development which had now pushed the entire world to the wobbly brink of a total, global collapse into a presently threatened "new dark age."

That difference in respect to competence, is essentially a matter of two things. First, as I have already emphasized, earlier in this introduction, the difference is a matter of method: my method is, essentially, a matter of dynamics in the sense given by Gottfried Leibniz and Bernhard Riemann, as opposed to the silly, mechanistic, neo-Cartesian forecasting methods which are customary among today's usual economists and political leaders, as by university professors of, and graduates in economics generally.

The intrinsically incompetent method of today's usual economist, or relevant university figures generally, on the subject, is a reliance upon the intrinsically incompetent, mechanistic-statistical method of "statistical projections" and emphasis on "exact numbers" methods and practices derived from the model of the bungler René Descartes and his cultish devotees. The example of the work of Myron Scholes, as in the matter of the 1998 crash of LTCM, is to be blamed, essentially, on the foolishness of those who trusted the work of Scholes and his like, in driving the hereditary irrelevance of the mechanistic-statistical methods of Descartes to a positivist's wild-eyed extreme.[12]

Now, review the concept underlying my forecasting of developments since 1972. Consider the summary comparison of change of ratios of monetary, financial, and net physical output over the course of the 1972-2007 interval, especially the "post-Soviet" interval 1992-2007 (Figure 1, below).

That forecast has shown exactly the pathway of choices which relevant events have followed, since 1996 to the present time.

The point to be made in these prefatory remarks, is not simply that I have been right in these matters, where presumed rival authorities, and sundry commentators have been persistently wrong. The crucial point to be considered, is the fact that my work has been premised on a correct principle of science, where my putative rivals have relied upon scientifically incompetent premises. The issue thus posed, is that of dynamics, as opposed to the incompetence of the systems of mechanistic-statistical extrapolations on which the empiricist and positivist number-mechanics rely.

I explain this matter of principle to which I have pointed above, as follows.

Put aside the cases of opinions expressed by wishful dreamers, self-anointed, but illiterate know-it-alls, and many other people who are simply ignorant of competent professional considerations in the matter of the history of modern economy. By modern economy, I mean the period of globally extended European statecraft launched by the A.D. 1439 great ecumenical Council of Florence. Competent historians and economists will contrast modern European civilization, from approximately A.D. 1439 onward, to that earlier form of European society which was collapsed into a prolonged, medieval "New Dark Age" of civilization, an over-ripe collapse triggered by the epoch-making, calamitous, famous Fourteenth-Century bankruptcy of the Lombard banking house of Bardi.

Excepting the types of reforms associated with models of reference provided by such as Solon of Athens and Charlemagne, in all known ancient and medieval European and near-Eastern societies, the organization of society was modelled on the prescription which Aeschylus' Prometheus Bound associates with the Delphic cult's model for Lycurgus' Sparta, the latter a model in which the great mass of the population was bestialized under a system of virtual slavery such as serfdom.

The essential distinction to be emphasized here, is that modern European civilization, as the definition was introduced earlier by the work of Dante Alighieri, was later defined systematically by the combination of a crucial set of two pioneering works of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa: his Concordancia Catholica, defining the principle of the modern European sovereign nation-state republic from which our own U.S. republic was derived, and his De Docta Ignorantia, which laid down the foundations for all competent expressions of modern European physical and related science. When we apply the essential principle of physical science from De Docta Ignorantia to the domain of Classical artistic composition, we have touched, in the outcome of the work of Cusa, that crucial aspect of modern European civilization which separates the foundations of our U.S. constitutional republic from all known ancient and medieval cultures. That is the principle which is otherwise expressed as the only unique distinction of man from beasts.[13] For the purposes of the modern statesman and economist, the crucial developments which separated the new form of society launched by that Florence Council, from what might have been considered a mere revival of something like an earlier (e.g., "feudal") form of European society, were expressed in those two contributions by the man known to history as Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, the founder of both the principle of the modern sovereign nation-state[14] and of modern physical science.[15]

In respect to the history of the quality of European civilization, the poet, dramatist, and historian Friedrich Schiller, defined the issue of that civilization as exemplified by the conflict between the evil legacy of Lycurgus of Sparta, and the benefit typified by the work of Solon of Athens. As a matter of fact, the great English Classical poet Percy Shelley paralleled historian Schiller's thesis, by, for example, contrasting the mission of the fabled Prometheus with the evil of the Delphic Olympian Zeus and (implicitly) Delphi's Apollo-Dionysus cult. Heinrich Heine located decadence in the emergence of the Nineteenth-Century cult of Kantian and related expressions of Romanticism. I agree with the views of the matter by Schiller, Shelley, and Heine, as far as each goes; my work in the science of physical economy has depended upon my going deeper into the matter than these have done, as I do here, in the remainder of this prefatory section of my report. I begin with a crucial, specific discovery by Cusa.

In a brief review: Cusa's broader significance for modern physical science and economy, is his central role in reviving the largely lost knowledge of competent science, a discovery which he made in the course of his attention to the Classical Greek archives of Byzantium. What proved to have been his most crucial practical contribution to the founding of modern science, was his emphasis on correcting a systemic error in the work of Archimedes, Archimedes' mistaken claim to have solved the problem of defining the generation of the circle and parabola from the standpoint of a notion of quadrature. All of the distinct accomplishments in scientific method by modern physical science, from that time, to the present day, including economy, have depended for their earned authority upon the realization of the implications of Cusa's insight into that error by Archimedes.

This specific contribution by Cusa provided the basis for those discoveries by Johannes Kepler on which, as Albert Einstein emphasized, all competent practice of modern physical science depends. Kepler himself defined the principle of these discoveries in two, interdependent contributions which we have come to enjoy from Kepler's discovery of universal gravitation: as what was to become Gottfried Leibniz's uniquely original discovery of the elementary principle of the calculus (the essentially transcendental infinitesimal),[16] and as the development of the concept of physical-elliptical, and higher order transcendental functions by Carl F. Gauss, Bernhard Riemann, and others. These same discoveries are crucially indispensable for the competent understanding and practice of modern political economy.

To grasp the importance of these conceptions from dynamics for a science of physical economy, it is essential to recognize that a competent modern practice of economy as a science, depends absolutely on modern European science's foundations in the work of such outstanding followers of Cusa as Leonardo da Vinci and Kepler, and such outstanding followers of these modern geniuses as Fermat, Leibniz, Jean Bernouilli, Abraham Kästner, Gauss, Abel, Dirichlet, and Riemann. Without a grasp of these matters, no competent working grasp of the principles of modern economy, such as our own constitutional form, were possible. The concept of the infinitesimal, as Leibniz derived that from the work of Kepler, provides the crucial relevant connections.

The concept of the physical infinitesimal, as Cusa exposed the indicated error of Archimedes, is what contrasts the uniquely original discoveries by Kepler to the honest failures of Copernicus and Brahe. Kepler recognized Cusa's principled argument against Archimedes in two successive, qualitative phases of Kepler's own absolutely original discoveries in astronomy.

1. Kepler's strenuously rigorous proof of the falseness of assuming the function of an equant in the Earth's and Mars' Solar orbit, led Kepler to the concept of "equal areas, equal times" of an elliptical Solar orbit. This discovery defined the efficient existence of the true physical infinitesimal (a physical transcendental) as an expression of a universal physical principle of gravitation.

2. Kepler's discovery of a mathematical-physical function for gravitation, which depended upon combining the ironical co-function of two senses, vision and hearing, provided the foundation for all competent approaches to the notion of universals in modern physical science, including a science of physical economy. It defines the efficient form of physical meaning of the term "infinitesimal" for all physical science, and, also, all that which defines the difference of the potential creative powers of the mind of the human individual, from the nature of the beast.

It is those creative powers, so defined, which define any competent attribution of meaning to the notion of those social functions of economy which are of crucial importance for the reshaping of the policy-making of the U.S.A. now.

Since the ancient Sophist Euclid, drooling and other credulous students of secondary and higher indoctrination, have been brainwashed into assuming such fairy tales as the notion that scientific thinking requires us to believe that competent mathematical thinking means accepting the Sophist's voodoo of Euclidean or kindred sorts of "self-evident" definitions, axioms, and postulates. The most radical, and most vicious expression of this sort of practice of academic witchcraft, is met today among the dupes of such miserable creatures as the pro-Satanic Bertrand Russell, as in Russell's Principia Mathematica, or the wickedly demented products of such Russell devotees as the late Professor Norbert Wiener (i.e., "information theory") and the Theory of Games of John von Neumann, or of the infernal wickedness of Russell's avowedly fascist accomplice H.G. Wells.[18]

All competent instruction of the young in the foundations of scientific thinking, requires the exclusion of the Sophist dogma of a priori set of definitions, axioms, and postulates. In other words, only a physical geometry such as that of the Pythagoreans and Plato, or modern Riemannian physical geometry, can be justified for the crafting of the scientific potential of the young mind.

The most significant root of the human errors about scientific knowledge, is the presumption which is central to the inherent, systemic fallacies of notions of sense-certainty associated with a literal reading of the apparent evidence of our senses. The correct view of this matter, is the recognition of the fact that what we think we see, literally, or hear literally, is not the merely apparent, not the actual form of that whose existence our sense-organs report to our brains. Thus, ignorant popular opinion imagines, wrongly, as the teaching of Euclidean or Cartesian geometry insists, that space is simply extended infinitely: the real universe is very large, yes; but, infinitely extended, never.

The truth about sense-certainty is presented to us in the clearest, and relatively simplest way, by Johannes Kepler's uniquely original discoveries of the universal principle of gravitation. In the first instance, Kepler proves the existence of gravitation in terms of an elliptical function; in the second instance, he defines the measure of gravitation within the Solar System as a functional expression of the principle of organization, gravitation, of the Solar planetary system. As Albert Einstein was to emphasize, the fact that the universe is organized according to the principle of gravitation, illustrates the demonstration that the universe, while very large, is, nonetheless finite, because it is enveloped ontologically, bounded, by a universal principle of gravitation, and, in other expressions of the universe's existence as a unified physical field.[19]

The same kind of general conclusion was reached, in a refined way, for chemistry, by Academician V.I. Vernadsky's proofs of the partition of the universe into three physical-chemically distinct phase-spaces, including the Biosphere and Noösphere.

So, experimental physical science demonstrates that our universe is bounded, as finite, by what unique methods of experiment identify as an efficiently functioning universe of physical principles. This does not imply that the universe is of a fixed size, but, is, rather, developing and expanding relatively, but, nonetheless, remains finite, and is anti-entropic, rather than what is falsely presumed, by ignorant believers, to be entropic.

The corollary of these considerations, is that we must never esteem our sense-perceptual processes as "self-evidently true." Rather, we must regard our senses as we regard any other scientific instruments, biological, or man-made, and, as limited in the authority of their findings in the same way as any instrument we create to complement those sense-perceptual powers which are delivered, so to speak, with the baby.

The latter conclusion was delivered to modern science through Johannes Kepler's discovery of the quantification of a universal physical principle of gravitation from study of the organization of a cluster of the planets of the Solar System. This same principle was clarified for the asteroid orbits by Carl F. Gauss. It was not sufficient to rely upon spatial evidence in the form of vision; without including the harmonics of what we associate with the sense of hearing, the measurable, "wavicle" quantum principle of gravitation could not have been discovered.

So, we must think about the proper, practical meaning of terms such as science and education, if we are to recover our seemingly lost penchant for national progress.

The crucial difference with which civilization as a whole is confronted in our selection of a new President, is that civilization has reached a great breaking-point in the history of our planet considered as a whole. For what we face now, there is no precedent in the actual experience of any person presently living on this planet. The planet as a whole is now gripped by a general physical-economic crisis which has no precedent since times when new dark ages were heralded by the disintegration of earlier, past forms of once great empires.

Therefore: "Who is the devil which has taken over the minds of the leading typical representatives of our own, as many other nations?" The most crucial of all of the top-down problems of our society today, is that our once-great republic, like the people of the nations of the Ancient Greek, Shakespeare, and Schiller tragedies, has been taken over by the type of reigning mental disease which gripped the generation of Rome's Caesars, Norman England, and the great religious warfare during most of the 1492-1648 interval in Europe.

In particular, since the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, the planet as a whole has been gripped by a long wave of degeneration in the essential features of the morality and culture of the planet considered as a functionally unified whole process.

What I have just summarized in that way, presents a terrible problem to the believer in what is called empiricism. Empiricism, otherwise known as Liberalism, was introduced to modern society by the Venetian Paolo Sarpi and Sarpi's personal lackey Galileo Galilei. Empiricism, or Liberalism, was cooked up by Sarpi as a trick for solving a Sixteenth-Century political problem identified in the writings on modern strategy by Niccolò Machiavelli. The problem, as Sarpi defined it, was to permit some of the kinds of innovation in technology which made Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa's definition of the sovereign nation-state's science, strategically superior to Venice's efforts to turn back the clock to the feudal system of imperial world-rule by usury. Sarpi's point was to allow some technological and other innovation, where the older faction of Venice wished to stop progress altogether. So, Sarpi intended to create a new form of financier imperialism, called Anglo-Dutch Liberalism today, which would permit some innovations, but would, nonetheless, deny the existence of universal physical principles to be known to typical members of society. In principle, Sarpi took the same position on the "discovery of fire" as the Delphic Olympian Zeus. To copy a new technique (in some cases) was permitted; but, it was not permitted to allow knowledge of the universal principle on which that technique's use had depended.

Thus, Sarpi rejected the strict "zero growth" ideology of the Sophists Aristotle and Euclid, but adopted the utter irrationality of the medieval madman William of Ockham. Sarpi's outlawing of the acknowledgment of the existence of discoverable universal physical principles, is what is to be known as philosophical Liberalism— Anglo-Dutch Liberalism—in matters of both science and morality.

That denial of actually knowable truth of universal principle in science, is known, as I have just said, as Liberalism, or, in its more radical expressions, as positivism, or existentialism. The variant of that doctrine, to the same effect, is typified by the fraudulent positivist dogma of the fanatical Ernst Mach, by the Principia Mathematica of Bertrand Russell, and by such depraved cult-followers of Russell as Norbert Wiener ("information theory") and John von Neumann ("artificial intelligence").

Therefore Sarpi and his followers, who are chiefly known, variously, as empiricists, positivists, or Liberals, do not accept the actual existence of universal physical principles, except as mere "footprints," such as mathematical formulas used to describe an effect. The method of René Descartes is a typical product of the methods of Sarpi and Galileo, as also of modern empiricists and positivists generally. All Anglo-Dutch "economic" doctrine, such as that of Bernard Mandeville, François Quesnay, and that plagiarist (of Quesnay and Turgot) Adam Smith, and their ideological followers, is premised on the same Liberals' hoax by modern European forms of Sophistry.

Modern philosophical Liberalism, is, therefore, a modern extension of the ancient Sophistry (and related superstitions) familiar to scholars from that decadence of ancient Classical Greece leading into the hoax associated with the name of Euclid. The decline of the U.S.A., from its recovery under the leadership of President Franklin Roosevelt, and the U.S.'s decline, since the death of President John F. Kennedy, into the pile of the neo-Malthusian, post-industrial rubbish which it, like western and central Europe, has become today, is an echo of the same principle of moral degeneracy, known as Sophistry, which destroyed ancient Classical Athens. The typical moral and intellectual disorientation which usually characterizes the "white collar Baby Boomer" today, is, clinically, a modern echo of the same moral disorder which led ancient Athens to its self-destruction through its adoption of the same form of corruption, then known as Sophistry, and now as Paolo Sarpi's and Galileo's Liberalism.

The leading source of dysfunction among the white-collar middle-class stratum in the age-interval 50-65 today (the so-called "68ers"), which has been the principal, leading source of self-inflicted incompetence of our nation and western and central Europe, its decadence, today, is just that. It is exactly that ideological corruption which has led our republic down the same pathway of ruinous long wars, under the "68er" influence, as ancient Athens' self-destruction through the Peloponnesian War then, today.

It has been the substitution of Liberalism, and its popularized, degenerated forms of culture and recreation, for the efforts to maintain a Classical culture in education, science, art, and physical economy, which is responsible for all of the degeneracy in which our own economy and that of western and central Europe have been plunged during the recent forty-odd years. The hatred of science associated with grossly perverse figures such as former Vice-President Al Gore, is typical of the moral and intellectual decadence, and outright fraud, which is carrying our republic, and the world generally, toward absolute ruin today.

What has ruined us so severely, and increasingly, since the murder of President John F. Kennedy, and what had already weakened us morally since the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, is the decadence which the leading white-collar edge of the generation of returning World War II veterans permitted to be done to our culture with the accession of Winston Churchill's admirer, Harry S Truman. It was the orchestrated conflicts, between Classical and Popular, and between "Blue Collar" and "White Collar," which have divided and now almost destroyed us since my generation's White Collar children were victimized by a new Liberalism, children then, who grew up to become the leading edge of the "anti-Blue Collar" Liberals of the 68er generation.

Without the "White Collar" generation born between 1945 and 1958, we would not have had the "68ers" in the Americas and Europe, and we would not have had that cult of "post-industrial" utopias which has brought the world at large to the verge of the deepest, longest, and worst dark age in the history of known European civilization.

The one-page "Leaders" editorial for the November 17-23, 2007 edition of Britain's Economist,[20] gloated over the current folly of our United States of America, in the following terms:

"In 1929, days after the stock-market crash, the Harvard Economic Society reassured its subscribers: 'A severe depression is outside the range of probability.' In a survey in March 2001, 95% of American economists said there would not be a recession, even though one had already started. Today, most economists do not forecast a recession in America, but the profession's pitiful forecasting record offers little comfort."

That far, that Economist editorial statement was nearly right, at least formally accurate in its choice of language. However, the same paragraph concludes:

"Our latest assessment [see page 80] suggests that the United States may well be heading for recession."
[21]

Suddenly, with that sentence added, the Economist was wrong. In fact, it is the United Kingdom in its present form, which is now, apparently foredoomed to a dirtier and quicker disaster than that which now, admittedly, threatens the U.S.A. Northern Rock, for example, is no Gibraltar. Those in London, and London's dupes elsewhere, who dream of a triumphant London-ruled western and central Europe, risen Phoenix-like from the ashes of a doomed U.S.A., should be classed in the legacy of fools whose chosen destiny is akin to that of the backward-looking, Biblical "Lot's Wife." "More salt, Mrs. Lot?"

Actually, the U.S. economy had been in a long wave of physical-economic recession in net physical capital formation, in basic economic infrastructure and related, net physical capital-goods, and monetary accounts, since as early as the rather brutal cuts during the term of U.S. Federal fiscal year 1967-68, a U.S. recession which had been triggered, in 1967, by the essentially incredible first Harold Wilson U.K. government's collapse of Sterling. The effect of these 1967-68 developments was later echoed, and accelerated by the inauguration of U.S. President Richard Nixon, especially Nixon's August 15-16, 1971, virtually treasonous actions in bringing down the Bretton Woods monetary agreements.

Since that time, through the January 1981 inauguration of President Ronald Reagan, the U.S. economy underwent two successive phases of steep downturn, and, despite much, soaring, monetary-financial inflation, has never actually enjoyed a net physical recovery since then, up to the approximately July 25, 2007 outbreak of what is now threatened to be the steepest, global, and most deadly physical-economic and monetary depression in the nation's history. However, taking the fact of accelerated, already wild-eyed monetary inflation into account, contrary to the Economist editorial of November 17th, the imperial economy of the U.K. at home is already plunging, into an even steeper depression than the U.S., and is bringing most of Euro-dominated Europe down with it. Like the poor old prostitute she really is at heart, the City of London is running out of her aging financial tricks.

A proper understanding of these developments requires some remarks on the nature of the collapsing Anglo-Dutch Liberal world system's role and character as the planet's still leading position as a failed, global imperial power.

The most misleading feature of the book which Lord Shelburne's lackey Gibbon presented to him as The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, is the suggestion that the British Empire which had been virtually established by the 1763 Peace of Paris, was to become a copy of the empire of the Roman Caesars, or, as Gibbon recommended to Shelburne, the adopted model of the Byzantine reform of the Roman Empire by Julian the Apostate. By and large, that recommendation of the model of Julian the Apostate has been carried forward in actual practice. Nonetheless, the suggestion that Queen Elizabeth II reigns in the manner of Augustus, Tiberius, or Nero would be gravely misleading.

With certain adjustments taken into account, the Anglo-Dutch Liberals' empire, which was established according to the intention of Venetian Party reformer Paolo Sarpi, is essentially, still today, that medieval Venetian empire, usually mislabeled as the system of the Norman crusaders. It was Venice's financier oligarchy which actually ruled the crusading imperial domain of that time, managing, while looting the same empire itself, through exhausting the Norman chivalry either with what were euphemistically termed "crusades," as through tiresome, ultimately fruitless expeditions into nearby Asia, or Byzantium, or simply preoccupying the armored Norman beasts with the pleasures of making wars upon one another, always financed by loans at usurious Venetian or Lombard rates.

What became known as the British empire-in-fact, since the February 1763 Peace of Paris, has actually been the empire dominated by an Anglo-Dutch Liberal financier class, one created by the strategically motivated migration of financier and kindred elements of the New Venetian party of Paolo Sarpi, into the maritime districts of the northern seacoasts of Europe, chiefly today's Netherlands and the United Kingdom. There is really very little difference in their deplorable essential character, still today, between the actually reigning Anglo-Dutch Liberal financier class and its present North American financier offshoots, on the one side of the relevant history, and, on the other, the notorious pirates who Liberally infested the Caribbean of Cayman Islands notoriety during the course of the Sixteenth, Seventeenth, and Eighteenth Centuries.

It is to be recalled, that that British empire-in-fact established in February 1763, under the already rising leadership of Lord Shelburne, conducted the early phases of its attempted global rule largely through the private armies and maritime forces of, principally, the British East India Company. For much of its earlier history, the reigning monarch of the United Kingdom was essentially a public convenience of the Company, with much of the actual power passed down from chief thug Shelburne, to his Foreign Office creature Jeremy Bentham, and, in turn, to Bentham's trained successor Lord Palmerston. It was when a U.S.A. led by President Abraham Lincoln defeated both Palmerston's own treasonous American Confederacy, and launched the defeat of the combined forces rallied against President Benito Juárez's Mexico, by London, Napoleon III's France, the Habsburg monarchy, and London's wholly owned Spanish slave-traffickers in Mexico, that London recognized the U.S.A. of Lincoln's heritage as being the ponderable force which must be subverted and destroyed for the advantage of Britain. London made arrangements, such as two Twentieth-Century "world wars," in the effort to eradicate the once-growing American influence on the continent of Europe, and in Asia, once and for all.

Some, admittedly very silly Americans have exhibited their own lack of intelligence by considering that British empire our oldest and dearest ally. [22] The views expressed somewhat gently in the cited Economist's editorial, are neither recent nor accidental. After all, it was the Old Lady of Threadneedle Street which created and installed Germany's dictator Adolf Hitler, with help from the Basel of the Hjalmar Schacht who was, on London's behalf, the virtual sponsor of Adolf Hitler's rise to power. This was, at a relevant time, the same Schacht who had been the protégé of the Bank for International Settlements, and a protégé of the one-time head of the Bank of England, the Montagu Norman associated with New York City's Brown Brothers, Harriman. These were the British circles of Winston Churchill, which, like the awful, and thoroughly anti-African racist Field Marshal Montgomery of El Alamein, never really forgave President Franklin Roosevelt for causing Adolf Hitler to be defeated "prematurely."

After all, there is nothing really inconsistent in Fabian London's promotion of the careers of its agents Mr. and Mrs. Lynne Cheney, this done against the most vital interests of our U.S.A. Puppet Dick Cheney's role in the British-designed scheme for a "revolution in military affairs," and the antics and profits of BAE to which he has been linked politically, have successfully destroyed the power and reputation of the U.S.A. more extensively and profoundly than any outside power could have done without the Cheneys' assistance. Those who defend Cheney's incumbency still today, may be properly considered in that light.

The British Empire is, essentially, a joint-stock company representing financier partners, and also predatory rivals, of many ancestries and political vintages. Betwixt and between the pleasures of cutting one another's throats for profit, the joint-stock company of that emotionally childishly brutish, infernal financial rabble, requires a certain kind of "nanny," a political instrument of government, an instrument lodged chiefly in the monarchy and parliaments of the Anglo-Dutch Liberal system, to regulate its predatory affairs.

The British monarch is no emperor, but a sort of corporate functionary, whose role is required to keep some semblance of order among a thieving, murdering, predatory financier-oligarchical rabble, the latter a special kind of financial slime-mold, which appears to please itself to spell night-hood with a prefixed "k."

In the meantime, the only relatively healthy economies still to be found in the world at large, are, for the moment, in the East Asian bloc of China, Japan, and Korea, with Britain's enemy Russia still too dependent on fuel exports to be more than a very interesting runner-up, and India's hopeful nuclear-power prospects notable. However, even in those locations, the rate of current collapse in the new world depression now hitting the Americas and western and central Europe, is a clear, increasingly infectious menace to the well-being of even the relatively healthier East Asia industrializing bloc. If the U.S.A. continues to go down, as it has been doing since about this recent July 25th, it will take down the economy of the entire planet with it.

For example: Throughout the trans-Atlantic community in general, the presently onrushing, deep, world, physical-economic depression-process, is not merely a depression in the sense of 1929-33; it also mimics that hyper-inflationary bubble, this time on broader than a trans-Atlantic scale, which struck Weimar Germany with full force during the second half of 1923. The world at large is thus presently gripped by waves of breakdown crises of national and international systems, a breakdown-crisis whose nearest precedent was what became known as "The New Dark Age" of Europe's mid-Fourteenth Century.

I emphasize. This onrushing breakdown-crisis of the present world monetary-financial system, does doom the present world "Anglo-Saxon" (i.e., Anglo-Dutch Liberal) monetary-financial system itself. If nations persist in clinging to the effort to rescue that virtually globalized monetary-financial system, the physical economies of the world will be dragged down into a general breakdown-crisis worse than that experienced under the collapse of the 14th-Century Lombard banking system. However, if we are prepared to dump that hopelessly doomed, Anglo-Dutch Liberal form of financial-monetary system itself, the physical economy of leading nations could be put through an accelerating process of recovery.

Those leading circles which disagree with me on that point, should be either herded, by growing popular assent, out of leading political postings, or, in the alternative, placed under appropriately civilized forms of protective supervision and peaceful, diversionary recreation, all for their own, and our nation's safety, and for the good grace of our souls.

Essentially, the necessary measures will take the form of placing all monetary-financial systems of the world, at least the leading ones which choose to survive, into receivership-in-bankruptcy, Franklin Roosevelt-style, by their respective, sovereign national governments. Globalization and kindred echoes of the Tower of Babel, must be summarily scrapped, and fully protectionist forms of national sovereignty reestablished, forms echoing the Bretton Woods reform of President Franklin Roosevelt, to the effect prescribed by the Preamble of the U.S. Federal Constitution and the principles of the 1648 Peace of Westphalia.

Yet, before taking up the point of the available option for economic recovery, we have some essential other matters of business to take into account.

- My 'Triple Curve'[23] -

As reported here earlier, at the beginning of 1996, I published the first of what were to become two successive versions of what I entitled a "Triple Curve" schematic representation of the general, global breakdown-crisis of the world monetary system which was, then, already in motion. This was circulated widely as a leading feature of my 1996 campaign for the Democratic Presidential nomination. When the deep recession-phase of the run-up to the present world breakdown-crisis hit, during approximately Spring 2000, I was prompted, thus, to produce a slightly revised version of the "Triple Curve" scheme, to reflect the crucial change in composition of the three curves which had just manifested itself at about that time.

This "Triple Curve" did not purport to show exact numbers; no competent economist relies on "exact numbers"—after all, they are only numbers, and usually, these days, especially, exact numbers involve a considerable amount of either official or other fraud, or the delusions of the credulous. As the onrush and aftermath of the August-October phase of the LTCM crisis illustrates this point, no competent forecasting, or related studies, will focus on exact numbers (which are customarily wrong. willfully or otherwise, by their very nature). It will be focussed on interactive trend-relationships (dynamics) within an economic process considered as a dynamic whole; this method of reporting, in use by me since (actually) the closing weeks of 1995, has remained valid, in its two successive forms, respectively, since that time.

Under the Enron-like, leveraged U.S. internal financial "derivatives" and related swindles, which had already contributed significantly to the October 1987, "1929-style" collapse of the U.S. stock market, and since the entry of Alan Greenspan into the post of Federal Reserve Chairman, the character of the trans-Atlantic financial system has been, more and more, the leveraging of anticipated yields on investments into purely fictitious use of merely nominal "multiplier factors." These were, in turn, misrepresented, fraudulently, as newly generated, actual capital values. The present mass of nominal claims generated in the fashion of a "John Law Bubble," a fraudulent "Ponzi" or a "Pyramid Club" scheme, is a scheme which has now reached many, many times the total actual value of physical assets of the world as a whole, into an amount totalling to countless quadrillions of nominal equivalent of U.S. dollar value. The situation of nominal financial claims in today's world at large, now approaches that of the Weimar Reichsmark of late 1923.

This process has been characterized by, and complicated by what has become known as "out-sourcing." These are the effects of the transfer of physical production out from North America and western and central Europe, and into "cheap labor" markets in poorer nations, such as those of Central and South America, Africa, and Asia. The effect of this pattern of out-sourcing, has produced a relative net decline, globally, in physical product per capita and per square kilometer, especially in nations which have abandoned more and more of their productive output, as a result of the cheapening of production in places where it occurs, this at the same time greatly increasing the amount of outstanding nominal debt of all nations.

The notable feature of this process of "out-sourcing," is that the cheapness of labor in the nations to which production of Europe's and North America's requirements is transferred, is a result of not only the offsetting of the inferior productivity of labor in nations to whose cheap labor production is transferred, but the failure to meet environmental and other infrastructure and related capital improvements in both the nations from which production is exported, and within the nations to which production is exported.

So, notably, "out-sourcing" not only relied upon cheaper production labor in targetted supplier nations, and not only destroyed much of capital goods, infrastructure, and productive potential of the labor-force left behind, but, in this way, effected a significant margin of net lowering of the productive potential of the world as a whole. In effect, "out-sourcing" has lowered the net physical value of the potential relative population-density of the planet as a whole.

That effect is seen most clearly in the economies of North America and Europe, where the decline in the amount, and per-capita value of physical output, per-capita and per-square-kilometer, has been catastrophic. In Europe and North America, most emphatically, this is expressed in breakdown levels of contraction of essential infrastructure as much as, or even much more, in useful physical production and essential services such as health-care, education, and pensions.

At the same time, there has been a collapse, as in North America and Europe, in employment and investment in useful production and services, accompanied by a ruin of the class of productive investors, and the replacement of productive capital and productive capitalists by a fungus-like growth of parasitical, (temporarily) super-rich, and soon bankrupted speculators. The effect is worse than that of the John-Law-style "bubbles" of the early Eighteenth Century, and remarkably like that rise of the purely usurious power of wealth concentrated in Venice-orchestrated Lombard banking, which plunged Europe into the Fourteenth-Century New Dark Age.

The function intended, and provided by my introduction of the Triple Curve as a needed pedagogical device, was to equip politically and otherwise responsible people with a way of organizing the portrayal of observable trends in a way which would show the direction in which current policies of national practice were leading the most relevant nations of the present world system. It is not the simple amount, but the direction and rate of change, principally in physical, more than financial terms, which points the way matters have been going, and continue to plunge at a rapidly accelerating rate.

The most significant political effect of the trend so far exposed to view in that manner, has been the transfer of political power from the hands of both the general population and productively employed investment and management, to a purely parasitical political-financier oligarchy typified by the excrescence known as "hedge funds" and kindred, purely parasitical classes. The control of the leading candidacies for Presidential nominations, by competition for funds from the purely parasitical class of usurers, is the most notably pathological feature of the behavior of both the present U.S. Congress and the pre-Presidential candidacies. "Say, Merry Christmas, everyone! and, trust your choice of Presidential pre-candidate, if you, personally, can still afford to say so!"

Dear would-be candidates: Be more prudent. Instead of letting someone else's money talk, and his paid slogan talk for you, learn, once again, to think, and to speak for yourself. However, when you talk, know what you are talking about. For a change: be a citizen, not the sucker you have been for now, more than eight years past.

The accelerating worthlessness of currencies today, should have warned us afresh, that money as such produces no real wealth, and (therefore) earns no profit by its own actions. Decent interest on loans is not properly a source of profit, but a lender's risk-tax.[24] Sensible economies, which are essentially physical economies, support a money-system, which sane and honest governments create, and regulate as a monopoly by government. As our own Federal Constitution provides for this, money, or national credit, is uttered only by government, as both a.) a medium of exchange and, b.) a system of credit. As for the mythical beast, called "intrinsically honest money," it, like Harry Potter, never actually existed, and never could.

There are, admittedly, some people who are either deluded into believing that money itself produces wealth, as through the practice of usury, or who find it convenient to cause their intended victims, such as the dupes of the childish myths of marginal utility, to believe that money itself actually produces wealth. There are also certain types of duped and deranged religious fanatics, who go so far off as to believe in the genesis of "a primeval hoard of money."

Nonetheless, there are many foolish people today who believe, more or less desperately, in "the magic of money" and its "markets."

In any given setting, any species of living creature, excepting mankind, has a presently, relatively fixed range of variable, potential relative population-density. The conditions which determine this estimable value are functionally complex, but they exist nonetheless. These values are conditional, and are set by dynamics, rather than statistical methods. The density of population of any species, or variety, varies, but only dynamically, with factors of competition among species and varieties, and with variability of the conditions which they inhabit.

Moreover, none of those conditions are simply competitive. I repeat: none are calculable in Cartesian terms; they are, in the final analysis, dynamic, as Leibniz denounced Descartes in Leibniz's own definition of dynamic, a conception which Leibniz had revived, during 1692-95, as a translation of the Classical Greek dynamis, from the practice of the ancient Pythagoreans and Plato.[25]

During the course of the Twentieth Century, the application of Riemannian dynamics produced the discovery of two new, categorical types of phase-spaces, in additional to the phase-space defined as being a domain of non-living matter. These additional phase-spaces were the Biosphere and Noösphere, the former the domain of living processes and their specific residues, and the latter the domain of the cognitive potential of the human species and its specific residues.

Both of these added universal domains were defined for physical chemistry by Russia's Academician V.I. Vernadsky. During approximately the same general time-frame, Albert Einstein identified the evidence which showed that the known universe as a whole is also a dynamic process, rather than a mechanistic one. These discoveries eliminated all credible basis for continuing to promote the arbitrary assumption, and deliberate hoax, as by Clausius, Grassmann, and Kelvin, called a "second law of thermodynamics"; the universe which we inhabit is essentially an anti-entropic domain, from which both Aristotle's and Euclid's notions of a universe of space-time are to be excluded by minds which are both literate and sane.

The considerations which I have just identified, summarily, in the preceding two paragraphs, are the proper starting-point, today, for presenting a competent view of a science of physical economy.

In all sane experience of this real universe, money has no intrinsic value as an object-in-itself. All real values are defined by the measure of universal anti-entropy as the fundamental metrical principle of mankind's interaction with the universe which we inhabit. This value is expressed for society in terms of an effect called potential relative population-density. It is not necessary to have a different measure of actual value for economies, since the measure of value for the society as a whole defines the implied functional notion of value for the specific product, or particular action within that social process as a whole.

In a sane society, money, so to speak, experiences a notion of its own relative value, according to the way in which it is circulated, and its circulation is regulated. Money never has any independent economic value, but only a relative one, one which is defined politically, by its function within the physical dynamics of a physical-economic process as a whole. Only an idiot, or virtually brainwashed dupe, could have believed that the wrecking of the Bretton Woods system, under President Nixon, and the Trilateral Commission's wrecking of the U.S. fair-trade system, under Zbigniew Brzezinski's influence on the President Carter Administration, was anything better than a product of either insanity, or virtual treason.

Contrary to the relevant impulses of Shultz, Brzezinski's Trilateral Commission, et al., in a sane and moral society all gambling and other forms of usury are regarded as crimes, since they corrupt the mental processes and morals of both the population and society's institutions, as in the case of the legalization of usury under the direction of the Trilateral Commission's Chairman Paul Volcker of the constitutionally dubious Federal Reserve System; it appeared that this had destroyed the economy and morals of the U.S.A., until the performance of Alan Greenspan provoked longing for the return of Volcker, as Paulson and Bernanke may be now sparking a wish for the return of even Alan Greenspan. It was no coincidence that the Trilateral Commission itself had pre-defined Chairman Volcker's action as a method dedicated to "the controlled disintegration of the economy."

The Trilateral Commission has nearly succeeded in its adopted mission; our economy has been virtually destroyed, as if this had been done by some evil intruder from outer space. What has been virtually destroyed in this fashion, must be restored, and the relevant practices reversed.

The principal scientific contribution which I have made to our knowledge of the workings of political economy, has been expressed in the manner in which I have defined both the notion of potential relative population-density and its application. At the present time, under present crisis-conditions, when money is no longer even an approximate standard of value, we must now turn to dig deeper into the roots of that modern conception of potential relative population-density to find our solution.

There are no nations among the beasts.

From close observation of the behavior of those who would pretend, successfully, or mistakenly, to be thinking and acting as "statesmen," we should be able to recognize the function of contrasting qualities of passion in relevant decision-making. On this account, insight into the principles and implications of the development of artistic principles is crucial, especially under crisis-conditions. The world is presently gripped by increasingly intense crisis-conditions.

In the introduction to this present report, I have already pointed out, that not only was Nicholas of Cusa the principal author of the key principle of all competent modern science (as in his De Docta Ignorantia), but also the author of the concept of the modern sovereign form of nation-state (in his, earlier, ecumenical Concordancia Catholica). Now, we have come to the point of this report, of showing that these discoveries, those of modern science and the principle of the modern nation-state, share, like Kepler's discovery of the general principle of organization of our Solar system, a common root in both physical-scientific principle with the passions which must be associated with Classical-artistic principle.

Without insight into the implications of what I have said in those words, it were extremely difficult for today's leading political figures, even to begin to understand the nature of the required remedies for the presently onrushing threat of a planetary new dark age. The issues I have just posed, in preceding elements of this report, in this mode, especially the notion of the identity of value in economic processes, are the very same ideas on which a competent leadership, such as that of one qualified to head the government of our own United States amid today's mounting, national and global disasters, might depend.

However, without an appropriate, accompanying passion for truth, formally true formulations in politics are impossible. Truth in national policy-shaping, is a matter of the effect which government and others produce for the future. On this account, the policies of our own government (in particular) have been increasingly incompetent, even in relatively short-term foresights, over the decades since the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, especially since the trans-Atlantic, Dionysian tumult of 1968.[26]

Therefore, to emphasize the implications of taking the long view in such matters, I introduce this chapter's content, with a few more or less indispensable, prefatory statements respecting what is the presently known, usual form of composition of extended European society leading into to the A.D. 1439 Council of Florence.

With certain important exceptions, as only typified by cases such as Solon's reform of Athens and the system of Charlemagne, the presently known aspects of ancient and medieval cultures of the so-called Near East and Europe were premised on holding the majority of the human population in a condition either of slaves or serfs, an arrangement called then "the oligarchical model," in which the majority of society was degraded to a status comparable to that of wild animals to be hunted down, either taken captive for slavery or serfdom, or killed, as the Spanish did much the same under the notorious aftermath of Torquemada's legacy, and as their British and Dutch successors continued this practice, through, chiefly, London's Nineteenth Century auxiliary, the Spanish monarchy. These royal criminals and their like, butchered populations of northerly west Africa, throughout the course of the period from the beginning of the Sixteenth Century, deep into the last half of the Nineteenth Century.

This was, essentially, that same condition imposed upon the relatively greater mass of humanity which the cult of Delphi supplied to the system of Sparta, the violation of humanity on behalf of which, the legendary figure of Aeschylus' Olympian Zeus condemned Prometheus to perpetual, inquisitional torment.

Those debased practices, are traced by European history from origins which were known to Europeans as the imperial and related systems of west Asia, systems of practice classified as the oligarchical model; these had been spread from Tyre and other locations, into expressions such as the emergence of the Roman and Byzantine empires, and, thence, the Venetian and neo-Venetian systems of the respective medieval and modern centuries. The Anglo-Dutch Liberal system is essentially the current continuation of that tradition of the inherently tragic "oligarchical model" typified by the Olympians represented in the performance of Aeschylus' Prometheus Bound.

The echoes of Charlemagne's relatively magnificent reforms were echoed later in the best efforts at reforms by the frustrated Hohenstaufen, against the Venetian medieval tyranny, as these needed reforms had been typified, intellectually, later, by great intellectual figures such as Abelard, and, still later, after the fall of the Hohenstaufen, in Dante Alighieri's design for a revival of the Italian language from Romantic (e.g., Venetian) captivity. It was in the environment of readings from Dante's Commedia delivered in the public streets of Florence, that the great Florentine Renaissance blossomed coincidentally with both Brunelleschi's catenary-formed cupola of Santa Maria del Fiore, and with the birth of modern European civilization.[27]

So, in mankind's known past, a pathway of development of cultures spans centuries, or even longer terms.

The key to all this, is something very elementary for modern physical science, which I have already pointed out in earlier parts of this report: Cusa's recognition of the crucial fallacy permeating Archimedes' attempt to define the circle and parabola in terms of the notion of quadrature. Here, in this chapter, we apply the same principle met in physical science in its aspect as the related principle of social relations.

The historical foundations for the emergence of what we now know as the concept of the nation-state, are to be recognized in the most essential human features of a language-culture: the same transcendental feature which separates a literate use of the English language's comma from the greatly inferior intellectual domain of the mechanical rules of The New York Times style-book. For this purpose, we require the same principle of the Pythagorean comma, from which to adduce that breath of Classical irony which separates the underlying, common intention of the well-supported Florentine bel canto singing of the Classical counterpoint of J.S. Bach and such of his followers as W. A. Mozart, Ludwig van Beethoven, and Franz Schubert (for example),[28] from Aristotelean or worse expressions of popularized human bestiality.

This principle is that which sets computer-programmed talking, automatic dolls, and also today's customary popular entertainments, apart from, and far beneath the thinking and the productions suited to the work of actual human beings. It is the same principle, expressed in the use of spoken and written language, which separates science from brutishness. It is the transcendental principle of the comma.

The issue of combat which this conception entails, is the same posed by the surviving middle portion of Aeschylus' Prometheus trilogy, Prometheus Bound. The transcendental breath of the comma, as with the Pythagoreans, corresponds, in an uttered mode of speech rich in cognitive ferment, to the expression of a thought from the same domain of human creativity which sets the potential of the individual human mind apart from the limited capabilities of the beasts, and from the aspirations of those brutalized persons, Wikipedians and others, who are content to force others to live as slaves, serfs, or worse.

A clearer view of the relevant connections implied here thus far, is made available by contrasting the modalities of actual modern science (that of Cusa, Leonardo, Kepler, Leibniz, for example) with the bestiality rampant in the denial of the existence of human creativity by the cult-circles of Leibniz-haters such as Abbé Antonio Conti, Voltaire, Abraham de Moivre, D'Alembert, Leonhard Euler, Lagrange, Laplace, Cauchy, Clausius, Grassmann, Kelvin, and so on.[29] The issue is to be recognized, in that specific physical-science context, as what is more commonly referenced as the principle of the Leibniz infinitesimal. That infinitesimal is, as I have already emphasized in this present location, the key to recognizing the fallacy underlying Archimedes' quadrature of the circle. Denying this principle of the so-called "infinitesimal," better named the transcendental, amounts, implicitly, to the same thing, ontologically, as a denial of the existence of the human soul. On Archimedes' part, such an offense would have been certainly unintentional.

This is the same quality identified as the principle of Classical irony for poetry, drama, and polyphony. It is that aspect of the use of language, for polyphony as more rigorously defined by Johann Sebastian Bach, as a vehicle for imparting such higher functions unique to the human mind, which points our attention to the indispensable role of the sovereign nation-state in the promotion and defense of true human freedom. I mean a defense against the efforts of those evil forces seeking now to impose a recreation of the Tower of Babel, or some alleged "universal language," a born-dead lingua franca, such as so-called Esperanto, upon which the hapless, brutalized victims of "globalization" might be foredoomed to depend.

The point being made as central to the subject of this present chapter, requires that we bring together what might appear to some as somewhat unrelated elements, as follows.

Like the rings of an ancient, legendary Sequoia, the "bole" of a culture expresses, under its outer surface, an ancient history of generations of the experience of the people who share the heritage of that language. For the English-speaking novice in study of such matters, William Empson's Seven Types of Ambiguity[30] would be a good beginning.

The generator of such a succession of concentric "rings" is the same principle of the human mind which we should associate with an "evolutionary" succession of discoveries of, and adjustments of discovered principle, changes which are passed from one generation to another, and also across "lines" of interaction, to similar effects, with other branches of culture. Unlike the succession of the cross-sections of the rings of the bole of a tree, the process is qualitatively evolutionary.

The principle of action which distinguishes this cultural-evolutionary transformation in human cultures, is to be recognized in the actions of the principle of irony, which is the same principle as actual human creativity. This principle is expressed, essentially, in its most clearly distinct form as metaphor, as a discovery of a universal physical principle is discovered, such that old words acquire new meanings, as in creative forms of punning. Here we would wish to point to Percy Shelley's passage from his In Defence of Poetry: "... profound and impassioned conceptions respecting man and nature." The essential quality of this process is typified by the evolution of well-tempered counterpoint, from Bach's "48" through the influence of the van Swieten Vienna salon on the work of Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, et al.

The literate user of a literate form of language uses and adds to the literate forms of development of a language steeped in a growing mass of such ironies. In this process, each irony partakes of the same role within the speaker's use of the language, which proceeds as the accumulation of discoveries by a creative scientist or poet. This is illustrated very well if we trace the development of emerging archetypes within musical composition from origins in Handel and Bach, most notably, from Bach's development, through Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, and so on, especially Beethoven's own development through his last string quartets. Each composer quotes his predecessors, and their contemporaries, such that the accumulated material quotes itself in novel forms, as in a convention of gifted scientists meeting, from time to time, over the span of a generation or two of highly creative activity in discoveries.

Each of these discoveries embedded in the fabric of the user's language's development to date, has the function of a comma. This is the "location," so to speak of the function of human creativity, a function which exists in no known living creature but mankind. In that sense, the New York Times style-book practices inhumanity.

Such is a living language, as distinct from a synthesized language which is born dead, and will essentially remain so. It is the implicit aggregation of discoveries, each in the form of ironies expressing the Pythagorean function of the comma, which defines the richness of a well-developed language, and defines its uniqueness relative to other languages.

The true meaning of a European language, for example, is not discovered until we of modern times have also considered such exemplary cases as the use of a sung language in the compositions of Handel, J.S. Bach, and such among their faithful students as Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, and Schubert, and the musical settings of poetry from Heinrich Heine by Schubert and Schumann. It is only in such music, or the kindred of that music in Classical poetry, that the creative potential of the spoken language is truly brought to life. It is such Classical modes in music and poetry which must teach prose how to think.

It is to be noted with great emphasis at this point, that creativity can be expressed through language only in this way which I have just indicated. It is the function of irony in the literate use of such language which adapts itself to that principle of creativity which flows through the gr