The Folly of Chronic Wars

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

The subject here, is the issue posed by the repeated folly of the U.S.A., and other nations, in being drawn into "long wars," such as the post-President Kennedy "long war" in Indo-China, or the folly of the present long war in Afghanistan, the latter being that which I treat as a presently, leading case in this report which I present as bearing on the present quality of mental state of the administration of President Barack Obama.


http://hiddenmysteries.com/xcart/product.php?productid=17457

In the matter of recent U.S.A. Afghanistan war-policy, I have not been an admirer of either General McChrystal's policies in Afghanistan, or of the probably worse case of the past and current policies of General Petraeus. Nonetheless; in everything I see, or hear of the interview with Rolling Stone magazine, McChrystal's conduct was neither unlawful, nor his criticisms unjustified.

However, there is a broader and deeper, leading issue posed by the behavior of the Obama Administration in this and coincident other present matters. The combination of several factors, including General McChrystal's remarks to Rolling Stone, including the news that former President Bill Clinton soars above President Obama in popularity, and including the pressures on President Obama to resort to lying, with evident hysteria, on increasingly crucial matters, especially on diverse leading issues posed by a U.S. economy now plunging into a collapse-phase, have witnessed President Obama as driven into a manifest state of mind which must be compared to a besieged Adolf Hitler's state of mind during Hitler's last days within the Berlin bunker, or the last phase of an "Emperor Nero" syndrome.

It was none other than President Barack Obama, not General McChrystal, who must be, most urgently, fired.

In the matter of the almost terminal state of mind of that President, the following relevant facts of the McChrystal case itself, are essential.

The recent U.S. continuation of the decades-long war in Afghanistan, is a continuation of a more than century-long series of "Middle East" wars first launched by the British monarchy during the last decade of the Nineteenth Century. This occurred, at that time, in the guise of imperial London's "Young Turk" operation, an operation which has been continued, to the present date, throughout the entire "Middle East" and adjoining regions, always explicitly, or implicitly, under the provisions of the infamous, Anglo-French imperialist, Sykes-Picot agreement.


This was, for example, the origin of Zbigniew Brzezinski's launching of the presently continuing long warfare in Afghanistan under the auspices of the U.S. Carter Administration, all done in concert with the British monarchy. This pattern was aggravated under President Obama, by his order protecting the British-owned and -controlled opium traffic spreading from a primary source in a British-protected province in Afghanistan, into Europe.


For the sake of purifying the atmosphere of certain crucially diversionary historical myths, it must be not only recognized, but emphasized, that this "Young Turk" affair, was part of the same continuing operation which had been launched, up through the present instance, with the initial assistance of that British Fabian Society's Frederick Engels who had launched the career in the closely related forms of both British secret-intelligence service direction, and British arms-trafficking operations of that British Fabian spy and weapons-trafficker, Alexander Helphand, the Helphand who also was, and is still usually recognized by name as the infamous "Parvus."

Much of "Parvus's" operations, prior to his role in the "sealed train" of Lenin's trip across Swedish territory in 1917, had been centered as in his role as a combined "revolutionary" and British arms supplier to sundry Balkan and related wars and revolutions. This continued in that form, until his crucial role in war-time Scandinavian operations, such as those of the Lenin affair of 1917, and his particular, earlier role in "handling" Helphand's British one-time "patsy" Leon Trotsky, an operation which must be seen as situated in the aftermath of British Prince Albert Edward's crafting of the 1894-1940 British alliance with the Mikado, against China, Korea, and Russia. This was the alliance which led into not only the Russo-Japan war of 1905, but lasted until the time the 1940 fall of France impelled Winston Churchill to turn for help from the U.S.A., thus breaking Japan's commitment to the alliance with Britain. Japan, nominally allied with Nazi Germany, fought the war against its trans-Pacific victims and other opponents, alone.

The crucial, thematic issue of this present report, is the outcome of that British imperial orchestration of the "Young Turk" operations, operations which, in this manner, for this and related reasons, are of the still-living character of all warfare and kindred manipulations by the British empire and its accomplices and dupes within the entirety of Southwest Asia, to the present day.


Although "cabinet-warfare generals" such as Petraeus and McChrystal, have their faults, however confused and misguided they have been, otherwise, McChrystal has remained, essentially a professional with an apparently deep commitment to his profession as a loyal citizen and U.S. military professional, however errant on other counts.

However, to compare either Petraeus or McChrystal to Generals Douglas MacArthur, or Dwight Eisenhower, would be worse than stilly, even obscene. Furthermore, within the matter of Generals Petraeus and McChrystal's part we must consider the stunning incompetence of their inherently ill-fated counter-intelligence and related "cabinet-warfare" schemes for the Southwest Asia matter. McChrystal appears to have followed the guidelines for his conduct with scrupulous attention to the letter of the law for generals operating in the kind of circumstances under which he delivered his remarks to Rolling Stone magazine.


The issue thus posed, is, that since the President of the United States, Barack Obama, had sent U.S. forces into Afghanistan with firm instructions not to interfere with the British Empire's opium production in a British-controlled region of Afghanistan, and since this arrangement created a hopeless situation for the U.S. troops being sacrificed to the cause of what is fairly considered to be the President's treasonous role as such an agent of British international drug-trafficking interests: McChrystal acted under the moral obligation to do something to alarm the relevant institutions of the U.S. government to the effects of President Obama's British-dictated, and thus implicitly treasonous Afghanistan policy.

As far as he went in uttering what was reported by Rolling Stone, McChrystal did his duty as a commander in service of the United States. The fault, in this matter, was all on the side of President Obama himself.


The President had neither the proper grounds nor the means to carry out a politically successful court-martial of General McChrystal. General McChrystal's action has been proven to have been successful in its effort to cut down President Obama's already plunging popularity, all that despite the usual lickspittles from the tradition of our own "yellow press." Thus, an important blow had been struck for our hope of rescuing our United States from the doom which the continuation of President Obama's evil reign would ensure. President Obama's reaction was chiefly the expression of a Hitler-like outburst of pique, perhaps even a sign that Obama's state of mind was now rapidly degenerating into something akin to a Hitler-in-the -bunker pique.


We must situate the distinction of strategic truth from the foolish, Goebbels-like babbling of the Obama Administration. To clarify the relevant features of the present strategic situation, it must be said, in response to what President Obama's follies have promoted, that we must interpolate a certain prefatory note at this point, a remark respecting the forecasts of Russia's illustrious strategic intelligence specialist, Professor Igor N. Panarin, for the U.S.A.'s future, into these prefatory remarks:

I have read an English-language, Dost Foundation summary of the reported argument by Professor Panarin. What I have read, thus, and from other relevant sources available to me here, lacks any formal error in Professor Panarin's particular suggestion that a breakup of the U.S. economy were likely before the close of present year.

Formally, there would be no error, excepting one of omission, in the implied set of facts on which Professor Panarin premised his argument. That crucial error in his particular judgment from early 2009, is his apparent lack of knowledge of relevant principles of Leibnizian-Riemannian dynamics which are specific to trans-Atlantic European civilization, most emphatically; we must emphasize the absolute difference in dynamics operating between the cultures of Europe, today, and the systemically contrary characteristics traced within our U.S.A. from the original New England settlements within the foundations of U.S. history to the present time.

The most significant element of error in Professor Panarin's 2009 paper, is in his presuming, in that report, that Europe generally, or Russia in particular, could outlive a collapsed U.S.A. The Professor's error features a component of lack of understanding of the principles of a science of physical economy, principles which are actually based in the Leibniz-Riemann tradition of dynamics.

At present, the center of the onrushing acceleration of a general, planet-wide, physical-economic breakdown-crisis, is within the British empire's central organization, the so-called "Inter-Alpha" group founded by Britain's Lord Jacob Rothschild in 1971, a group which has been constituted as a correlative feature of the same operation launched by London circles controlling key figures in the U.S. government in the matter of annulling the Franklin-Roosevelt-launched fixed-exchange-rate system.

The race is now on. For the moment, it were more likely that the collapse of the entire planet into a general breakdown-crisis would occur, initially, within the Trans-Atlantic region as a whole, probably within western Europe, first. Such a collapse would be followed immediately by a "chain-reaction" collapse, similar to that of 1923 Weimar Germany, among all of the Eurasian nation-state economies.

It will be of interest to Professor Panarin, on this account, that he consider the fact that the root of the aspect of this global problem for Russia today, is the same London-centered imperial financier interest represented by the relevant controllers of both N.S. Khrushchov and Mikhail S. Gorbachov, controllers led by the Bertrand Russell school of early Twentieth-century, as later, "Cambridge systems analysis." That is the school which was the mother, for Britain's MI6, of such creatures as the Laxenberg Austria International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA). It has been the policies of IIASA which played a crucial, treacherous, leading role in the collapse of the Soviet Union under Mikhail S. Gorbachov, and the same policies conduited into N.S. Khrushchov's earlier role as General Secretary under the influence of IIASA spokesman Bertrand Russell's World Parliamentarians for World Government. In examining such influences, we meet the most virulent of the corrupting external influences on Russia's economic policies presently.

Today, that collapse of the entire world into what, unless reversed, would become immediately a new dark age, takes its root, not in financial matters, but, rather in the specific features of the collapse of physical economies caused by subordinating the physical national-economies to the reign of a presently hyper-inflationary system of speculation of a form comparable to 1923 Weimar Germany.

Unfortunately, if Barack Obama remains President of the U.S.A. past the Summer of 2010, then, the kind of disintegration of the U.S.A. which Professor Panarin projected in 2009, were a plausible estimation, although not a competent one scientifically. Thus, there are certain systemically mistaken presumptions, that of a reductionist error in method, expressed within the Professor's summary argument there; his conjecture errs in the respect that he does not take the Leibnizian definition of the Leibniz-Riemann principle of "dynamics" into account, and, therefore, he relies too much on inherently misleading, statistical-economic, monetarist considerations, through a lack of attention to the overriding importance of Leibniz -Riemann dynamics.[1]


There could have been, but for President Obama, a better outcome than that delivered by the decree of the real malefactor in the case, Barack Obama himself. The Senate should have been convened so that the U.S. Congress would hear, as a single body, what General McChrystal had to say. So, most of the panic-ridden members of the U.S. Congress, kissed the butt of our British-owned "American Nero," Obama, without risking the political-career hazards of their own exposure to the facts which General McChrystal had referenced in his curiously crafted interview with Rolling Stone magazine.

What is a general officer to do in such a situation, one like that fairly compared to a situation of an officer under the reign of the Emperor Nero? Why must we hope that that President will not be impelled to imitate his intellectual forebear, by imitating the Emperor Nero's action of last resort? Therefore, the crucial issue remains: the very continued existence of our republic, is immediately imperilled by each week which passes without actions to oust this President from that office.
Those facts taken into account, my assessment of the present existential crisis in our republic's very life, can be summarized as the threat of a case of another great nation, our own, brought to ruin by its own folly in being drawn into a foolishly conceived long war, such as that which our President John F. Kennedy would have prevented, had his role as an opponent of a long land war in Southeast Asia not been terminated by his assassination. President Kennedy had been explicitly opposed to an extended period of U.S. engagement in warfare in Southeast Asia. The presently ongoing long-war in Southwest Asia, was begun as what has been shown to have been a fatal booby-trap for the Soviet Union, a quality of past folly imitated currently by the Soviet Union's present heirs in the present setting of the same foolish behavior now continued by such as a foolish present U.S. government which has been duped by the drug-pushing British monarchy, all of which must be considered as a case in point against the presently impeachment-worthy Obama Presidency.

If we do not defeat the role of that depraved British puppet, President Barack Obama, in his mimicking of dictator Adolf Hitler, a mimicry which has been already copied as the Hitler-modelled, pro-genocidal health-care and related policies of this President, as also copied from Hitler by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, we have reached such a point, that without the earliest ouster of President Obama, there is no visible future for any part of mankind, inside the U.S.A. itself, or elsewhere, at this critical global moment, now.

I. The Case of the Peloponnesian War
My recently published, leading writings, have frequently returned to the subject of the problematic characteristics of long wars. In light of the role of the present long warfare in Southwest Asia under the Anglo-U.S.A. reign of the U.S. Presidency of British puppet-President Barack Obama, the points which I have addressed on the subject of "long wars" earlier, should be recapitulated now for the specific purpose of conveying an understanding of the deadly implications of what may be identified under such titles as "The McChrystal Case," for our nation at this time. Therefore, I shall begin the body of this report, by reviewing the underlying implications of the historical phenomenon of "long wars," with the immediate issue of the Peloponnesian War in view.

Think of the present U.S. situation under President Obama as like "a new Peloponnesian War," as being echoed, similarly, by the "Seven Years War" of Eighteenth-century-ruined continental Europe, and which, also, established the British East India Company as an empire in fact, through the adoption of the February 1763 Peace of Paris.

To approach this subject-matter, we must prepare our examination of the roots of the world's present crisis with what many might wish to term "the deeply underlying" considerations in the attempted practice of an economic physical science, as I do in the present, opening part of this chapter.

It will not be necessary for me to lay out the full case on the subject of each of the periods of "long wars" here, since I have already done much to that effect in current publications such as my The Secret Economy's Outlook[2] published during the past month. The introduction of a summary of the following character will therefore suffice for use, on this present occasion, in defining the setting of this chapter's subject, the implications of the Peloponnesian War as a precedent.

I proceed now to a matter of relevant scientific definitions essential for understanding the presently continuing implications of that ancient Peloponnesian War.

If we permit a distinction, here, between human archeology and "ancient history," we may date the appropriate notion of history as a science, to the study of the precedents represented by such exemplary cases as those of Sumer, or, of Egypt from the time of the great pyramid associated with the close of the reign of Khufu, or, the history of India as viewed from the vantage-point of the Vedic evidence treated by Bal Gangadhar Tilak's Orion.

This distinction between archeology and history, when history is strictly defined as a matter of principle, is demanded by regard for access, or want of access to those defining qualities of the individual human mind which were examined in exemplary fashion by the dialogues and related literary products of Plato. That is to say, that we must rise above the assumptions associated with the primitive outlook represented by the erroneous, but wide-spread, statistical belief in the evidence of mere sense-certainty. Or, let us agree, that that better approach chosen by me here, may be emphasized by examining the distinction between the reality of the archeological fact of the siege of Troy, and that insight into the Classical Greek legacy epitomized by the method employed in the dramas of Aeschylus and the works of Archytas and his associate Plato.

True knowledge of history begins when the ironies of the pair-wise and kindred interactions of the mental processes among individuals are accessible to our knowledge. Otherwise, we are left to infer history from study of the footprints which a society has left behind in its passing.

I have set forth crucial indicators of the basis for proposing, even demanding that distinction, in such notable locations as my already referenced, recently published The Secret Economy's Outlook. We must escape from the misleading, conventional notions of a mind governed by the mere products of sense-certainties, a feat which which must be accomplished by discovering the reality of the higher domain of Leibniz-Riemann dynamics, a subject which is represented most conveniently for this occasion, by those powers of the Classical imagination typified, for the English-speaking scholar, by the treatment of the specifically ontological principle of metaphor which I associate with my own joyous reading of the freshly minted, 1947 edition of William Empson's Seven Types of Ambiguity.[3]

For the native English-speaker of Classical artistic practice, the most appropriate choice of approach for English speakers, is, thus, that to be met in Percy Bysshe Shelley's A Defence of Poetry.

In Shelley's England
It is notable, for our purposes here, that Shelley's A Defence of Poetry is ironically dedicated to Thomas Love Peacock, not to be confused with the celebrated George Peacock who typifies the legacy of a trio of three young scholars from Cambridge's Trinity College. The second member of that trio, was the future leading astronomer of England, the figure later to become known as Sir John Herschel; the third, was Charles Babbage (the future inventor of the root-principle of design of operations of a modern digital computer).[4] Notably, George Peacock had gone on from scientific training, to becoming, among other professions, a notable English clergyman, and an acquaintance of Shelley. The three Cambridge youngsters of that time at Trinity, combined to translate LaCroix's Differential and Integral Calculus, and more, into English, an act which upset the Newtonian hacks of Cambridge, I would say, " deliciously," at the time. The trio typifies the best of England at that time.

Reference to that trio's work at Cambridge can serve our mission here, as illustrating the true connection between a creative method of physical science, and the non-mathematical notions which are indispensable for an actually scientific approach to the role of creative mental processes, in contrast to an appropriately subordinated department of those mathematical operations in the work of David Hilbert or of the far worse Bertrand Russell traditions.

Contrary to the sundry varieties of the statistical reductionists, really competent science has never been properly separated from Classical artistic composition. The principles of the Classical artistic imagination, as referenced by Shelley in his A Defence of Poetry, are to be approached from that relevant, higher standpoint which I have emphasized within the pages of The Secret Economy's Outlook, where I treat the essential principle of all true creativity, including that of Classical artistic composition and physical science alike.

That identifies the point of the connection of William Empson's ontological definition of a principle of metaphor to the examination of those creative mental powers common to Classical artistic composition and true physical science.

I restate that principle itself as I presented it in my The Secret Economy's Outlook, as follows.

On the Human Mind
What we regard as the individual human mind, has two distinct, but interrelated aspects. The first, the more familiar, is the aspect of mental life associated within the bounds of a systemically mistaken presumption, that sense-perceptions are simply echoes of the presumed mathematical form of physical reality of the universe. The needed correction of that terribly mistaken view, is demonstrated with extraordinary forcefulness, and in the most notable way, by Johannes Kepler's uniquely original discovery of the principle of universal gravitation, as contained within the full text of his Harmonies. This is echoed by Albert Einstein's emphasis on the fact that the universe as defined implicitly by Kepler's actual discovery of a principle of gravitation, is a universe which, as Albert Einstein emphasized, is always finite, but without boundary.

That means that universe is not a permanently fixed creation, but is a continuing, ontological process of creation, as Philo of Alexandria had denounced the contrary opinion of Aristotle on this account. Aristotle's own fraudulent argument was later echoed by Friedrich Nietzsche's modern re-assertion of the corollary of Aristotle's dictum, "God is dead."

Thus, in competent principles of physical science, mathematics is a language of mere shadows, such that competent science depends upon the superseding of putatively fixed systems by the application of that same real-life, real-universe principle of creation, a principle which William Empson identified as metaphor.

This distinction shared by competent physical science and Classical artistic composition, is made explicit by any competent form of scientific reading of Kepler's Harmonies.

Thus, Kepler's solution proceeds from the recognition that the principle of gravitation can be efficiently adduced only by what Empson identified as the principled concept of metaphor, by emphasizing the contradictory character of what might be mistaken for what are often taken to be the apparently ontological implications of such notions of sense-perception as those of sight and heard harmonies. More to the point, all valid kinds of universal physical principles echo, in the method of their discovery, the method employed by Kepler in his discovery of a universal principle of gravitation. That method is the same thing, ontologically, as Empson's conception of metaphor.

With discoveries of principle akin to what I have referenced here as that discovery by Kepler, that individual human mind which is aware of this fact of experimental evidence, is impelled to acknowledge that which is called belief in sense-certainty, tends to mislead the victims of such ontological misbeliefs into a false-to-truth notion of physical science itself.

We are, therefore, properly impelled, in this way, to emphasize that sense-certainties are actually knowable phenomena only to the degree that we rise to the ability to cope with the reality that what appear to be sense-certainties are, in reality, only shadows cast, as by an unseen, but efficient reality, upon the universe of our experience of actually creative forms of the physical action of qualitative, rather than merely quantitative changes. Such is the proper definition of true, universal discoveries of universal physical principle.

Reductionism as a Mental Illness
The success of the individual's progress in the direction of gaining that critical insight, points our attention to the poisonous effects of that sort of incompetence which is expressed as blind faith in the reductionist's notion of a purely mathematical notion of physics.[5] On that point, we are confronted with the fact of the existence of the qualitatively higher than mathematical quality of the scientific-creative, and related creative powers of the human mind, a quality of knowledge which is achieved only through ascent, above and beyond mathematical systems as such, to the notion of a universe premised upon a universal, metaphorical principle of physically efficient human creativity, as shown in the language of Nicholas of Cusa's De Docta Ignorantia. This is what is to be recognized, for convenience, otherwise, as the common principle of the creative imagination, the principle which permeates the work of Leibniz and Bernhard Riemann's discoveries – as the fact of the existence of what should be intended by reference to the ontological conception of the human soul.

The phenomenon to which Shelley brings the reader in the closing paragraphs of his A Defence of Poetry, is just that. Gottfried Leibniz had defined this, during his work of the 1690s, as that principle of dynamics, which he attributed to the precedent of the Classical Greek conception known as dynamis to such figures as Archytas and Plato.

For example, take the exemplary case of the discovery of the inherently anti-Euclidean principle of the catenary by Filippo Brunelleschi, the principle which Brunelleschi employed for the crafting of the cupola of Florence's Santa Maria del Fiore, which was the only practical means available to Florence at that time, for that task of construction. This and related, namably "anti-Aristotelean" discoveries in the practice of a physical geometry (rather than childish academic credulities), as extended by the Leibniz-Jean Bernouilli development of the physical principle of least action, has illustrated what became the crucial point of principled difference between the true Riemannian genius of an Einstein and Planck, or Mendeleyev or Pasteur, as opposed to all among that pestilence of what are merely, a-prioristically mathematicians, such as David Hilbert, or, the actually evil variety of so-called "mathematical physicists" associated with the 1920s romp of the obscene Bertrand Russell and his accomplices during the period of the 1920s Solvay Conferences.

The pattern of reductionist ideology which I have just pointed out in the immediately preceding paragraphs, must be recognized as a systemic expression of mental illness. Not only is that the case, but this is both the most significant of all forms of mental illness—the virtual mother of the evil which is virtually all related mental dysfunctions, and is also a principal root of all other leading forms of mental illness in societies known to history up to this present time.

I explain that point summarily, as follows.

As I have both stated and emphasized within a series of published works during the course of 2009 and 2010 to present date, those actually creative functions which distinguish human individuals from beasts, lie outside the realm of sense-perceptual certainties, such as the implicit insanity of belief in a formal mathematical physics, as distinct from, for example, the modern physical chemistry of a Louis Pasteur, Mendeleyev, Max Planck, Albert Einstein, William Draper Harkins, or Academician V.I. Vernadsky. In other words, as Kepler's uniquely original discovery of gravitation attests, and as Albert Einstein identified that proof of principle as defining a physical universe as being both finite and yet without bounds, sense-certainties are, at their relatively very best, no better than mere shadows cast upon the field of mere opinions, both seen as if cast by the hand of an unseen reality.

That means, among other connotations, that the proper (which is to say, "sane") personal sense of identity, locates sanity in the developed ability of the individual human mind to locate his, or her personal identity as a substance located "as if from above," not to be part of the class of "those mere shadows of reality" which are the quality of all notions of sense-perceptual experience as such.

That distinction is the appropriate referent for the notion of an implicitly immortal, rather than merely "material" human "spiritual" being, a notion which is the only truly human sense of a valid, healthy sense of personal identity. That is the only true and sane notion of individual personal identity, and of the healthy forms of social relations among persons who have gained access to that higher conceptual standpoint for regarded experience.

This distinction is, for example, precisely that of the potential represented by that form of personal individual sanity. That is a quality which is expressed in a notable degree by the genius of Albert Einstein and others like him, or the great Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, on this same account. It is within this specific domain of what we know as mental practice, that all true physical science and Classical artistic composition find their true place of residence. It is the domain which the ancient Pythagoreans identified by dynamis, which Gottfried Leibniz defined as dynamics during the 1690s, which is the source of the same social effect which Shelley identified in the concluding paragraphs of his A Defence of Poetry.

There is, in short, a social process which is mediated by the mere shadows of sense-perceptual experience, but which is not contained within it. It is also the medium with which Plato confronts such implicitly reductionist fools as the character of Parmenides and his modern likenesses.

This distinguishes the higher quality of intellectual domain which allows the inhabitant of such qualities to cope, conceptually, with the otherwise ontologically incomprehensible realities of a universe composed according to the notion of cosmic radiation as primary. It is the state of mind of a future culture of humanity which has then developed, among at least some of its members, the qualities of mind needed for mankind's future adaptation to conditions such as those to be found in future successful return flights from our Moon to Mars, and back.

Science, Sociology & War
Once the ancient notion of dynamis is compared to Leibniz's uniquely original, modern definition of dynamics, we become equipped to reckon competently with the quality of social phenomena met in the expression of systemic social conflicts, as characteristic expressions of both the interior of nation-state and comparable cultures, and among them. Begin our study of this matter with what I have already indicated as this chapter's particular subject-matter, the case of the infamous Peloponnesian War, as follows.

Consider what should have been taken as a forewarning of both the Peloponnesian War itself, and of the aftermath of the failure of the Greeks to follow Plato's intention to destroy his target, and, thus, overturn the folly of the Peloponnesian War, which should have been done by crushing the Mediterranean imperial maritime power vested in the intrinsically evil cult of the Delphi cult of Apollo.

It is now time to recall, today, that the naval victory over Persian imperial forces by the combined forces of what we customarily reference as "the ancient Greeks" today, not only rescued Greece from the earlier, prolonged efforts of the so-called Persian Empire to destroy Greek sovereignties, but created what turned out to have been a wasted opportunity: an opportunity largely wasted through the folly of the Peloponnesian War, for cooperation among the forces of those Greeks and Egypt for a cooperative step forward among the nations and peoples of the Mediterranean maritime littoral.

However, the same Apollo cult which had claimed, earlier, that it had been the power which had destroyed the kingdom of the fabulously rich King Croesus, intervened, despite the warnings of such prophetic dramatists as the great Aeschylus, to plunge Greece into an orgy of destruction of a type, like that of the Seven Years War, later. This was a development which we must recognize as virtually the same quality of strategic significance of that so-called "Seven Years War" through which the British East India Company secured its victory as an empire under the leadership of Lord Shelburne, thus launching what has remained as the world's British Empire from that day in 1763, to the present time of the fag end of the British monarchy's use of Lord Jacob Rothschild's imperial Inter-Alpha group of leadership of approximately seventy percent of the world's eminently bankruptable, reigning international banking power of the world today.

Similarly, it was through the folly of the succession of the French Reign of Terror and Napoleon Bonaparte's re-enacting the precedents of such follies of both the Peloponnesian War and that of the mid-Eighteenth-century "Seven Years War," that the British Empire was enabled to reduce those same great European nations who had, earlier, enabled our American victory in 1782, which were now to fall into a nearly ruined condition during a subsequent time, until the global, revolutionary effects of that great victory over the forces of the British Empire which had been led by U.S. President Abraham Lincoln.

It was, similarly, the success in the mid-1870s of the U.S.A.'s influence in such continental European powers as Bismarck's Germany and Russia's mightily successful programs of the great Russian statesman Count Witte and the great scientist Dmitri Mendeleyev, which were typical of those developments which drove the British monarchy to the desperation of forcing the dumping of Bismarck by the British royal family's German Kaiser, and trapping Germany, thus, into a war aided by Britain's ally Japan, in Japan's attack on China, Korea, and Russia, wars which prepared the way for setting off the so-called "great war" of 1914.

Similarly, we have the case of that assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy, which removed the President Kennedy who had been a stubborn obstacle to Britain's intention for launching a long U.S.A. war in Indo-China, a long war which destroyed the United States to such a degree of British imperial advantage by the 1968-1971 interval, that our U.S.A. was soon transformed, since the Nixon and Carter administrations, into what had been described during the time of Secretary of State John Quincy Adams as the status of "a mere cock boat in the wake of a British man o' war," as, again, since from 1971-72, to the present day.

This British system was, essentially, not really a new kind of expression of imperialism during any part of the interval of world history between the Peloponnesian War, and the ever-worse degree of ruin of our republic by its being suckered, again and again. So, in a similar way, our republic was being ruined, following the catastrophe which was the post-Kennedy, 1964-1975 decade of the U.S. Indo-China War, through the time of the presently ongoing, British-orchestrated U.S.A. military follies of a far worse than merely foolish U.S. President Obama in Southwest Asia. This trend is still, presently continuing through the follies of London's launching of Iraq wars, a virtually continuing, long Afghanistan war, and a series of regional wars, under the influence of the British "Sykes-Picot" control over some very, very foolish Israelis, a certain, presently reigning faction among Israelis whose folly is presently expressed as an immediately threatened nuclear-weapons assault on Iran.

This disaster of repeated follies of "divide and conquer," has been a copy of the practice of, in principle, the ancient Roman Empire. This was the folly practiced by Byzantium after Rome. This was the chronic state of recurring European periods of religious warfare, from the period 1492-1648, which Venetian maritime and monetarist power set off in the effort to crush the successes of the Great Ecumenical Council of Florence, such as that launching of modern European science by the initiatives of such geniuses as Filippo Brunelleschi and Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa.

Must we not ask ourselves: "What is the root of such a persistently recurring, criminal folly of entering into wars and kindred conflicts which are crafted as means for breaking the power of duped, formerly sovereign governments?" Why are governments and peoples so stupid, even stupidly evil, as to engage in such forms of traps of warfare as are typified by the case of the Peloponnesian War, or in the opium-pit of Afghanistan presently?

Machiavelli's Genius
To restate the same issue in a slightly different manner: "What has been the motive for the extent of the lying defamation against one of the greatest strategists representing the true republican cause, the great Niccolo Machiavelli?"

Said briefly: Machiavelli was, essentially, a follower of the great Leonardo da Vinci who had been driven out of Italy, into a place of relative safety, Amboise, in France. Machiavelli had been a middle-ranking, but important official of the Republic of Florence, who was virtually imprisoned and crippled in his freedom by those victorious forces which had crushed the Republic of Florence. He remained such a republican throughout the remainder of his life, and earned the respect, as by all the best professional officer cadres of the modern world, until the period of the U.S. Indo-China war, a Machiavelli who has been one of the founders of modern strategy, always emphasizing the republican cause in seeking arts for dealing with the pestilence of oligarchy and oligarchism polluting all of Europe during his own part of the 1492-1648 religious warfare.

Why was Machiavelli defamed in the manner used against him?

To state the point in the simplest terms: simply said, the oligarchical parties of Europe feared the infectious power of competence expressed by Machiavelli's mind, and hated him on that account (as many in certain leading circles of the world express a similar, deadly fear of me). Chiefly, the oligarchically inclined powers of the modern world, then as now, especially the financial oligarchy typified by Venice, still, to the present day, like their medieval and ancient predecessors, fear nothing as much as the very existence of the leaders in any nation who admire a constitution which converges on the intention of our own republican form of Federal Constitution. The standpoint of our President Franklin Roosevelt, or Abraham Lincoln before him, is what the oligarchs of the world, including our Wall Street brigands and vaulted Bostonians, hate and fear with a brutishly mouth-frothing rage.

Such types as those still today, would also hate Machiavelli to the extent that they actually sensed the specific efficiency of his work.[6]

That much said to describe the global setting within which our view of known history is staged, consider the essential implications of the Peloponnesian War itself.

What Is Imperialism, Actually?
As I have emphasized a short space above, the great folly to be studied in trans-Atlantic civilization, still today, has been the continued toleration of a weakness expressed in the ability of powerful empires to induce the intended victim-nations to quarrel among themselves, to such an effect as we witness in the case of the mid-Eighteenth-century "Seven Years War," in the similarity of the effect of the folly of the Napoleonic wars, and, so, case by case, following that 1763 precedent, as to "World War One," or, in Winston Churchill's launching of that "Cold War" which ruined both the U.S.A. and western and central Europe, almost as much as it did the Soviet Union in the end. So, we have enjoyed the infernal epidemic of worse than useless, bleeding wars and kindred diversions, which have continued the pattern of folly set into motion by those later wars which had been made possible by the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, and up through the present instant.

This weakness has been permitted, in large part, because of an often potentially fatal, wrongheaded belief, respecting the nature of imperialism. The Romans were already clear on this distinction within the body of what has been considered as "natural law" for such matters. The power of the emperor was situated, qualitatively, above, and apart from the mere "kings" of the nations subject to the higher authority of actual imperial rule. Today, in modern European and related types of society, it is the dominant financier-monetarist interest which embodies the imperial reign ontologically.

So, disregard for that distinction licenses the practice of a misguided, but widespread belief, the which identifies the notion of "empire" with a simply misguided notion of imperialism as being the simple subordination of one nation, or nations, to another.

On that account, in fact, since the time of the Peloponnesian War, all forms of Europe-centered imperialism, including the case of British imperialism today, have not been the imperialism of a nation, but a monetary imperialism like that expressed in a typical form, today, by the coincidence of the U.S. Nixon Administration's cancellation of the fixed-exchange-rate system, on the one hand, with Lord Jacob Rothschild's 1971 launching of his Inter-Alpha Group, on the other. That latter, Inter-Alpha Group, is, in reality, a single, London-centered Group of assorted gangs, composed, like the Persian horde at the battle of Gaugamela, of a functionally unified assortment which dominates the field of its about-to-be-defeated army: a reported 70-percentile of the financial power of the world, either explicitly, or through the relationship of a keystone to an arch.

This is ancient pattern of Mediterranean-centered imperialism, whose medieval and modern expressions are to be traced from the root of the rise of Venice as a monetary power, to supersede the imperial power of Byzantium, since about 1000 A.D., and from the modern wars already launched by the orchestrations of a revived Venice's efforts to destroy the accomplishments which had been set into motion by the launching of the beginning of modern European civilization by the great ecumenical Council of Florence.

On that subject: the obvious question so posed, is one which should be nothing which differs from: "but, what is the pathogen which spreads the disease?" In fact, imperialism is not an action of a particular nation, but is a disease of more or less pandemic character, as Rosa Luxemburg, and, later, also our State Department's Herbert Feis understood this, and as the case of the extended present reach of Lord Jacob Rothschild's Inter-Alpha Group and its auxiliaries since 1971.

I should emphasize, for the edification of doubters here, that it is not the U.S. government which presently reigns over the global policy-shaping of the U.S.A., but rather what is called "Wall Street." "Wall Street," which, together with the Boston-based "Vault" were launched, directly, from London, as direct creations of British Lord Shelburne's imperial East India Company. This creation has persisted as an imperial force throughout the planet, to the present day, since the February 1763 close of both the Seven Years War in Europe and the parallel "French and Indian Wars" in North America.

See Anton Chaitkin's Treason in America (1985) and historian H. Graham Lowry's How the Nation Was Won (1988)[7], on the following subject-matters:

The 2008-2010 "bail-out" in the U.S.A. expresses the looting of the United States as a nation, that, presently, since August 1971, into the ground, that on orders from British empire agents such as President George W. Bush, Jr. and, later, outright British puppet and virtual traitor, President Barack Obama. The case of the rape of the United States by British Petroleum, now, is merely an illustration of who is giving imperial orders to whom, and, chiefly, on the behalf of the British empire and its British Petroleum, under what many of our patriots may be coming to consider the treasonous character of the currently incumbent U.S. President.

On that spoken note, our attention is now returned, for a time, to the matter of that infectious mental disease of entire peoples and nations which I have classified as "reductionism as a mental illness."

To simplify the task which I have now set before us in this report, at least somewhat, I refer the reader to my own, recent, March 2010 piece, titled Mapping the Cosmos.[8]

The Cosmic View
My reference to this use of that term, "Cosmos," is as minted by Alexander von Humboldt, of Cosmos fame, the one time leading figure (and collaborator of France's honored "Author of Victory" Lazare Carnot) within France's Ecole Polytechnique, and, member and associate of that same Ecole. The case of the great science-master von Humboldt expresses my emphasis on the relevant conceptions introduced since the time of the British monarchy's 1890 ouster of Germany's Chancellor Bismarck and to the rising importance of the work of Academician V.I. Vernadsky's mapping of the presently known universe as composed of a set of the three distinct, but interacting categories of the presently known universe, the lithosphere, biosphere, and noösphere.

That latter set is to be contrasted, absolutely, to toleration of the contrary viewpoints bearing any semblance of that Newtonian school echoed by the nonsense of such among Vernadsky's adversaries as the British accomplices of Bertrand Russell, and J.B.S. Haldane, such as the Soviet Union's wretchedly reductionist A.I. Oparin, or similar Russian and other admirers of the tradition of the British empire's International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA). British Liberalism is the putrid essence of all modern imperialism since, in fact, that February 1763 Peace of Paris which established Lord Shelburne's British East India Company as the kernel of what became the British Empire of Queen Victoria, her successor, and her monarchy to the present date.

Admittedly, there are important elements of influence in present-day Russia, as elsewhere, which deny any attachment to the presently continued existence of the British Empire as such.[9] Among Russians today, that regrettable belief is often traced to a certain international strain of professedly Communist or related pedigree associated with the duped devotees of the British Fabian Society's Frederick Engels, the same Engels who played a signal role in launching the career of British gun-runner and devotee of "permanent warfare, permanent revolution," and of the British Empire, Alexander Helphand.

Since Ancient History
To situate those systemic distinctions within the relevant, broader historical context, we must reflect on those three leading currents of systemic thinking found among the combined Mediterranean littoral and the Near East region, as a region known to us from the ancient through contemporary history of European epistemology since approximately the self-inflicted fall of Sumer, and since the great scientific accomplishment of the erection of the great Pyramid of Giza.

The first of those three categories is typified by what came to be known as socalled Greek civilization's Pythagoreans, and by followers of the Pythagoreans' method, such as Plato. The second, opposing current, expressed that systemic degeneration of mental behavior associated with Aristotle and Euclid. The third, is that of the modern followers of Paolo Sarpi, that liberal school of European statistical irrationalism expressed as the post-Franklin Roosevelt failed economic policies of both the U.S.A. and European cultural hegemonies of the same period, especially since the wretched changes introduced during the 1968-1981 interval, and, later, since the advent of the malicious Alan Greenspan's entry into the post of Wall Street and London agent, as Federal Reserve Chairman.

The relatively highest category of human thought, as typified by that of such as the Pythagoreans and Plato, is a system of thought based upon the scientific principle of hypothesis. This category is typified by the process of discovery and realization of universal principles which are proven by means of a certain quality of experiment best known to us under such rubrics as "Socratic thinking," or as illustrated by the examples provided by both Pythagoreans, such as that friend of Plato's known as the great Archytas, and by Plato himself. Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa could be, therefore, fairly identified as a modern follower of Plato. The U.S. Declaration of Independence and the Preamble of the U.S. Federal Constitution, are to be read as modern expressions of a renewal of the Platonic principle.

The second category among the three, is typified by the followers of Aristotle, as the domain of substitution of intrinsically corrupted a-priori presumptions for the principle of hypothesis, as the corruption expressed by such as Euclid's denial of the existence of either God's or man's power of genuine creativity within the present universe.

The third, in the order of appearance, is that of the modern European Liberalism of the followers of Paolo Sarpi. That is typified by the present British ideological system of "liberalism," in which there are, avowedly, as Adam Smith put the point, no principles of the type known as being characteristic of the kind of known physical principles specific to the tradition of the Pythagoreans and Plato, but only what is often termed as statistical methods for a merely pragmatic science which, by definition, excludes consideration of actually fundamental principles, as Adam Smith illustrates this case.[10] It is for this reason that all economists of the Liberal persuasion have been consistently incompetent in their efforts at economic forecasting.

The last of the three views, is that which is actually responsible for bringing upon us the great, global economic-breakdown crisis of the post-July 2007 period to date.

However, for long periods of the U.S.A.'s existence under its implicitly Platonic Federal Constitution, ever since the Massachusetts Bay colony, for as long as it retained its Royal charter, the long, constitutional trend of U.S. policy has been that of a fixed-exchange-rate system of physical progress per capita and per square kilometer. This latter principle of economy, is specific to the U.S.A., whenever it has been allowed to function under the protection of a fixed-exchange-rate principle, a principle expressed in a return to the philosophical standpoint traced, implicitly, to Plato and what he would recognize as his antecedents.

The principled forerunner of the constitutional American System of political economy, is, thus, to be traced, fairly, to such standards as those of Socrates and Plato, as those are immediately opposed to followers of the Delphi cult of Apollo-Dionysos, such as those associated with its last reigning priest of Delphi in Roman imperial times, Plutarch.

In that sense, the specific quality of that American System of government is, that it truly represents a universal model, since the treaty-agreements natural to that system provide for its extension to serve, potentially, as the virtual keystone of a universal system among what must be, respectively, perfectly sovereign nation-states of varying local constitutional forms of cultures.

For example: the normal treaty-relationship among the present or prospective, sovereign partners of our United States under present and future conditions, is a connection premised upon two general economic principles common to the partners: a.) a shared form of regulation of credit coherent with what President Franklin D. Roosevelt established in 1933, under a Glass-Steagall law governing banking and public credit, and also, b.) with what that same President Roosevelt established, in the global form of a fixed-exchange-rate system, the system set during the July 1-22, 1944, Bretton Woods Conference, to serve as the common instrument among the currencies of the participating nation-state partners.

There is nothing which should be mysterious to qualified scholars and scientists respecting the uniqueness of the American model of a system of political-economy. The knowledge on which the development of that American system was premised, was knowledge assembled in a modern European quality and form, through the influence of such leaders of the Fifteenth-century European Renaissance as the initiative of, chiefly, Filippo Brunelleschi and Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa.

For example, the main branch of the development of modern European physical science, was an expression of the heritage delivered by Brunelleschi and Cusa to such explicit followers of Cusa as Luca Pacioli, and of that Leonardo da Vinci whose most notable, avowed follower in science, was, later, the Johannes Kepler who was the only unique discoverer of the principle of universal gravitation.

Kepler was a key source of the knowledge which prompted the principal physical-scientific achievements of the Gottfried Leibniz who was the one and only original discoverer of the calculus, a calculus based on a specification which Leibniz had adopted from an instruction presented to "future mathematicians" by Kepler, as was the development of the notions of elliptical functions as physical, rather than formal mathematical functions, by the collaborators of Carl F. Gauss.

The essential realization of these cardinal advances from about the time of the great ecumenical Council of Florence, onwards, through the work of Gauss, was launched through the instrument of the justly celebrated 1854 habilitation dissertation of Bernhard Riemann. Noting the crucial role contributed in this fashion, all the main currents of competent modern scientific principle, which exclude reductionists such as the so-called "mathematical physicists," are associated with the emergence of what was to become known as the science of physical chemistry, from the time of such as Louis Pasteur.

Under the terms of the renewal of such treaty-partnerships which had been launched under the leadership of President Franklin Roosevelt, but betrayed through the collusion of President Harry S Truman with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill:

What I have proposed as the immediate action to set such a most urgently needed, new agreement among nations into motion, would be appropriately launched as an agreement on those specifically proposed points of universal agreement which I have projected as being launched by a group of sovereign nation-states inclusive of a core grouping of the United States of America, Russia, China, and India. This would also include those other nations which were prepared to join those four to create an initiating body for the needed reform in affairs among nations generally.

That said so far, there is an underlying principle of action which must be included as an intention, in order to bring the goal of such cooperation into the form of a successful remedy for the presently desperate state of world affairs.

That principle is typified as a Promethean quality of commitment to a relatively capital-intensive progress in the science-driven progress of the productive powers of labor, per capita, and per square kilometer, globally, and perpetually.

Notably, the relatively long term perspective of realizing a reasonably successful round-trip of mankind to and from Mars, after allowing for three successive generations of recovery of mankind from the ruinous effects which the planet considered as a whole has suffered since the assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy, which have ruined the productive powers of labor in the trans-Atlantic region of the world to such a degree that the reversal of that ruinous decay over the course of time, means that the development of the mission-oriented schooling of at least two entire generations of the populations of the trans-Atlantic region are probably required to launch the realization of the Promethean goals associated with the initial success of the intention to reach beyond the Moon in a successful manned transit to, and return from Mars.

II. Aeschylus' "Prometheus Bound"
Not unlike many subjects of serious consideration respecting categories of human behavior, the subject of "imperialism" can be approached in two ways: once, by identifying its footprint, a point of view which often does more to confuse, than clarify the issues; second, the ontological content corresponding to the process of generation of that subject-matter. The latter is something which no faithful dupe of the evil Paolo Sarpi's Liberalism would wish to understand.

On this subject, we must distinguish what has been merely a form of policy—the virtual footprint, from the actual principle which defines the functional content. In short: what, in real-life history, is the difference between the mind of the master, and that of the slave of the mere appearances? What merely appear to be the issues of their time, issues such as the causes for ruinous long wars?

I have spoken and written, on that subject, on a number of earlier occasions over recent years; I restate the point afresh, but from a slightly higher standpoint.

First, now, we must identify the specific, chronic state of the world's warfare orchestrated, essentially, by the British Empire, throughout the entire sweep of world history since 1890, and up through the present efforts of that Empire to bring about the final destruction of the United States of America through included assistance from the British puppet-President of our U.S.A., Barack Obama.

The Schumpeter Follies
What was then a new quality in modern warfare has dominated the world since the British monarchy effected the 1890 ouster of Germany's Chancellor Otto von Bismarck. The condition has been chronic through the present time. This is to be traced, in simple fact, as a set of consequences which first appeared in rapid-fire succession with the 1894 assassination of France's President Marie François Sadi Carnot, the Dreyfus Case, and the British Prince of Wales' prompting Japan's Mikado in launching a virtually permanent state of war against China, Korea, and Russia, all with the continuing, institutional effects[11] through the time of the surrender of Japan to General Douglas MacArthur in August 1945, effects still reverberating throughout the world at large today.

With the death of President Roosevelt on April 12, 1945, and the surrender of the Mikado on September 2, 1945, the 1939-1945 "World War II" itself had more or less come to an end. However; what began, even back then, as the continuing effort for the intended destruction of our U.S.A., by the British Empire, has been continued since the death of President Franklin Roosevelt in a new guise, through to the present day of the reign of the British monarchy's puppet, President Barack Obama.

The post-1890 process of open British imperial intent for warfare against our U.S. republic, has been a reaction which has been associated with the British Prince of Wales Albert Edward's rise in status to what a famous portrait depicted as the fatuous figure of a "Lord of the Isles." So, in this way, the failure of the effort of Jeremy Bentham's trained successor at the British Foreign Office, Lord Palmerston, to employ its puppet, the London-created Confederacy, to crush the United States out of existence, was combined, in effect, with the consolidation of the continental United States and the great agro-industrial revolution launched under President Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln's leadership to this effect, during his lifetime, had resulted in the echoes of that American triumph of statecraft which was echoed within continental Eurasia by the response of the revolutionary industrial revolution launched by both Germany's Bismarck and Russia's Dmitri Mendeleyev, all in response to the evidence of grand, world-wide achievements radiating from the 1876 Philadelphia Centennial Exposition.

Imperial Britain's enraged reaction to these American developments and their echoes in continental Europe, was expressed by a series of crucial, triggering events leading into the so-called First World War, events beginning the ouster of Bismarck; but, the most crucial of all was the use of a European terrorist imported into Manhattan with the intent of assassinating U.S. President William McKinley.

The virtually dynastic change from President McKinley to Confederacy fellow-travellers Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Ku Klux Klan fanatic Woodrow Wilson, was the passing of the Presidency from a patriot to a child of the British-created Confederacy which set the stage for the British Empire's preparations for and launching of what became known as "World War II." The immediate consequence of that assassination of President McKinley was the moving the United States from an opponent of Britain's launching of what became known as "World War I," which it had been under McKinley, to an ally of the British imperial cause. That arrangement continued until a clear-headed patriot, Franklin D. Roosevelt, assumed the Presidency and brought a Britain almost crushed by its own folly in creating and launching the Adolf Hitler tyranny, begging for rescue at the knees of Franklin Roosevelt.

Then, with the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, the British gang aligned with Wall Street asset Harry S Truman, returned to refresh what had been the dubious intentions of British puppets Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and U.S. President Calvin Coolidge.


Continue to Part two
http://www.hiddenmysteries.net/gltest/article.php?story=20100730023659597

***************
Part one:
http://www.hiddenmysteries.net/gltest/article.php?story=20100730023428235
Part three:
http://www.hiddenmysteries.net/gltest/article.php?story=20100730024457228
***************