SCIENCE & CHRISTMASTIME by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. December 25, 2013

http://larouchepac.com/node/29317

Updated version posted 7:43pm Eastern, 12/26/13.

The New Year’s day now before us:

SCIENCE & CHRISTMASTIME

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

December 25, 2013

To review the relevant history:

The most important evidence gathered during the passage of this midday’s discussions among our leading circles, now concerns the revolutionary statements from a collection of associated nations assembled explicitly around both President Putin’s Russia and a group of associated nations being apparently gathered together as a newly re-defined gathering among nations ranging, along the northern Coast of Eurasia, from Belarus to the Pacific coast, now affirming their respects for the sovereignty of the nations to the south of those particular borders.

The probably indicated borders are not settled matters; but, the suggested outcomes of what remain more or less settled directions of concluded intentions, have been, to say the least, strong indications, and should be assessed with due modesties, accordingly, all for purposes of current discussions.

The pivotal implication for this moment, is (1) that the attempted trans-Atlantic capture of Ukraine by the de facto trans-Atlantic western alliance, has been rather decisively set back, thus far, and, (2) that there are crucially important other indications that, the new eastern arrangements reflect a rising physical-economic advantage, gained by the indicated Eurasian partisans, that with respect to the accelerating physical-economic collapse underway under the reign of the Anglo-American faction, and in its suggested current parameters.

By no means does this mean a victory of the trans-Eurasian over the trans-Atlantic sector at this time. What Russia’s current proposals represent is re-establishment of a sovereign region of economic cooperation, amounting to a revised approach toward the same political-economic systems of cooperation which had been reached between U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt and among the allies associating themselves with the leadership of U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt’s guidance. The essential feature of that is a tendency toward re-assembly of the allied powers under the leadership-role of President Franklin Roosevelt, as opposed to the implicitly treasonous factors introduced under the Churchill-Truman atrocity.

I direct our recollections of the relevant facts of history, to a moment when the leadership of the U.S. World War II command under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, feared that President Franklin Roosevelt was about to die, and feared a pre-prepared disaster for both the United States and most of the allies, which would be set into confusion among one another. On this account, now view President Putin’s arguments accordingly. It is not the same package presented by U.S. President Franklin D Roosevelt, but it was the agreement which President Franklin Roosevelt had secured, and which the British empire’s Winston Churchill, and such Churchill accomplices as former Hitler supporters, Prescott Bush and his London-Cabal cronies, had conspired to destroy at the relevant times.

By the time that a new U.S. election had occurred, not only had a new party established a pro-Churchill grip within what had been the U.S. government of President Franklin Roosevelt, but the right-wing Anglophile opportunists were entrenched; only President Franklin Roosevelt’s administration now existed to defend the essential interests of the United States against the anglophile opportunists gathered around the British imperialist faction which had been gathered around the eternal British imperialist Winston Churchill and Churchill’s Wall Street cronies.

The head of the OSS had muttered along the corridor leading to the White House exits (to his friend): “It’s over ...” “It’s all over.” Essentially, what the OSS chief had muttered to his companion, then, has proven to have been thoroughly all-too-true, to the very present day!

To speak honestly and very plainly, the founders of the United States, both the founders of the original Massachusetts government, and the United States, would have considered the present U.S. governments under George W. Bush, Jr. and Barack Obama as worse than treasonous. The evidence is solid, but most of the populist opinion on that subject currently, would be very sinfully, worse than silly at the very best. Most of it is far worse than silly; there is a large dose of treason mixed in, even among the ranks of the U.S. Presidency and other notable institutions.

In these present times, virtually no political voice in the United States will actually tell the truth about anything of national importance. They have claimed to have found an alternative to truth, in a rejection of any real meaning of truth, a truth which has been rejected in favor of so-called “popular opinion.”

For, consider what is permitted in institutions such as schools, that at various stages of behavior. There are sometimes truthful statements made (but rarely publicly); but our educational institutions do not believe in a principle of truth. The prevailing statement of education even among what might be considered well-meaning instructors, and even some students, is that a supposed reliance on teaching “the truth,” is masked by the demand that the teacher dictate the truth to the student, and that the textbooks should dictate (usually) to the teachers. Thus, the changing opinion among those who prize favorable gradings, over telling the truth, has successfully driven the currently educated bodies of our graduates who are presumed to be certifiably educated, to an accelerating current rate of disintegration of the minds of the current crop of products of accepted standards of educational practice.

Take, for example, the particular case of secondary school geometry. What is taught? Usually, “Euclidean” geometry, which has been a fraud which had become virtually the universal standard of teaching of science in what was miraculously regarded as Secondary School education, and, has been often experienced from the mouths of even relevant leading university professors. Take the case of even many regarded as leading scientists in Europe since no later than a putatively leading scientists’ opinion during the post-World War II education, as under Britain’s frankly, mass-murderously evil Bertrand Russell, as in contrast to such true scientists as Bernhard Riemann, Max Planck, or Albert Einstein, against the usual trash still taught as “scientific principles” then as now.

All that I have said, in these opening remarks here, presently, is true; but, that, in a certain, very significant degree, does not yet address the underlying frauds which continue to dominate even the supposedly leading circles of public belief and opinion.

The essential issue, which I will now introduce, having stated my preceding remarks, is rarely acknowledged as even existing. Hence, the prevalence of fraud in nearly all high-ranking opinion. The subject which must be forced into view, is the subject of the difference between the consistent lying of Zeus and the persistent honor of Prometheus.

I explain, appropriately, as follows.

ZEUS vs. PROMETHEUS

The contrast between Zeus and Prometheus, has been a relatively new phenomenon within the attributable history of mankind as a species. The actual origin of the pure uniqueness of the human species, is ancient, and appears as a point of distinction of man from beast: a distinction of mankind’s attribute of “cooking its food.” From such origins as that, the characteristic of mankind’s survival and progress as a species is distinguished best by references to the table of chemistry. Thence, man evolves willfully by means and aid of impulses directed toward successively rising levels of achievement in the tables of the functions of heat. This is not merely “heat” as heat-as-such, but, rather, the ingenious means employed in man’s utilization of the application of heat. Man’s relatively recent mastery of the use of nuclear and thermonuclear powers of practice marks the future, higher perspective for the future of mankind within the Solar System (and, implicitly beyond): that, as a metrical standard for the evolutionary revolutions expressed as the rise of our human species, from lower, to higher standards of achievements.

Therefore, whence the contrary expressions respecting the limits self-imposed by some relatively inferior parts of human behavior: parts which fail to meet the standards of limitless progress for the role of the human species, per capita? It is precisely that factor which distinguishes the inherent bestiality of the intentions of the (frankly Satanic) Zeus from the fiery creative passions of Prometheus-the-fire-bringer. That is, not so incidentally, the essential practical distinction of the British empire (for example) from the tendency of the intention underlying the purposes of such as the creation of the North American republic of that (already established) Massachusetts settlement of the 1660s, which found itself pitted against the inherent bestialities of the Anglo-Dutch tyrannies of the Seventeenth and the Eighteenth centuries, and beyond.

The distinction which I have just emphasized as a matter of illustration, is also an expression of the same difference which separates the notion of the principle of Prometheus from the intrinsic principle of evil which is expressed at the root of the expressed intentions of a Zeus, or of a Roman empire. It is the distinction of the effects of devotion to progress, through advances in the creative use of ever-richer concentrations of the principle of fire by our human species. The oligarchy, by contrast, is committed to the bestial Zeus’s intention, which is to prevent mankind’s progress (as the current Queen of England and Wall Street do), to prevent mankind’s evolutionary progress toward the achievement of higher qualities of the existence of man within the universe which he occupies. President Barack Obama’s suppression of the accomplishments in astronomy, is, specifically, an expression of the practice of Obama in all matters of interest. All of the unnecessary suffering of human beings throughout the planet which we presently inhabit, is fairly compared to the intrinsic principle of evil to which Obama, among others, have already devoted their present intentions.

Consider the elementary facts respecting the origins of Christianity, as in opposition to the Roman empire’s rule. Rome is the child of Zeus, and the enemy of the mission of Jesus. The child of Zeus is not located essentially in material resources, but in the evil of the Roman empire’s suppression of the inherently required dignity of the human personality in superseding the bestiality which Zeus imposes upon mankind. Let us be completely clear in this matter, as now follows.

The essential principle of creativity, which Christianity had heralded during its greatest moments, was not in mankind’s material acquisitions as such: but, in the accomplishments of the development of the human individual’s achievement of what may be regarded, therefore, as the source of the satisfactions delivered to the devoted companions of the Creator. It is mankind’s achievements of that specific quality of achievement which partakes of the essential quality of a divine intention.

The Case of That Silly Fellow

By “The Silly Fellow,” I mean to identify persons who, shall we say, “devoutly insist,” that the human individual is inherently incapable of foreknowledge, for knowing the future. Yet, all among the great advances of the member of the human species are provided to the members of our fellow human beings by individual persons who are actually “creative” scientifically (and in comparable respects) in the foreseeing of the means of achievement of something which had been hitherto unknown, such as the greatest among the actually creative scientific discoverers of modern (and, also, earlier) history. Take the case of Nicholas of Cusa as an excellent choice, for example, or, his dutiful followers the great discoverer Johannes Kepler, or a William Shakespeare who had identified the concept of the principle of “Chorus” as expressed in his King Henry V. Or, the case so of Gottfried Leibniz, Carl F. Gauss, Bernhard Riemann, Max Planck, and Albert Einstein.

Each among those illustrious cases gave birth to a leap into a domain which has been brought into active existence through revolutionary discoveries of universal principle, whose effect had been to elevate mankind’s condition to heights of achieved existence previously unknown by fellow mankind.

The pitiable fellow protests: “No one could know the future!” Yet, precisely such discoveries of what could not have been otherwise known, are the only basis for the devotion to progress of man’s service to the notion of the Creator. That devotion, whether a direct discovery of a hitherto unknown principle, or the promotion of the sharing of that achievement, is that which is an expressed devotion to the true intention of a true Creator.