Story 21 - 'Empty' People
having been said, our host invited us and the four students to a waterfront
sidewalk restaurant for tea. On the way to the market square, along crowded
streets I had a chance to mention something to the students that they were not aware of. Actually, the students themselves prompted me on that.
"What shall we call our discussion session?"
asked the young woman who spoke English well. "Shall we call it, Welcome to the 21st
Another girl, who had been silent until then, shook her
head. "We should call it, Welcome to the 18th Century," she said
slowly in broken English, which was difficult for her to pronounce.
The tall man agreed. "Euler was hired to refute
Leibnitz who grew up in the 'sunlight' of the Treaty of Westphalia, who through
his scientific insight had become the intellectual driver behind the American
independence movement. Euler tried to discredit Leibnitz, but failed, because
Gauss later refuted Euler, and all that had something to do with the independence
movement becoming a powerful force in the world which the oligarchy tried to prevent.
They were so scared, they staged the French Revolution in order to murder the
leading edge thinkers of France, and created Napoleon Bonaparte later, who destroyed
the intellectual elite of Europe, just for that. Yes, Welcome to
the 18th Century, sounds good, because Gauss fought back."
I shook my head. "If you focus on the 18th
Century, you deny the achievements
along this line in the 19th Century," I intervened. "At the end of the
19th Century, an American scientist by the name of Mary Baker Eddy pursued the
same course as Gauss did, but within the spiritual sphere of Christianity. She
elevated the sphere of Christianity from its low Roman level, based on dogmatic religiosity that
people were forced to accept on a platform of faith. She had created a high level scientific
platform for humanity, for its moral, spiritual, and scientific development. Her pedagogical
infrastructures for this platform have never been surpassed, neither have they been
implemented yet, except by herself."
I explained that she herself, had been highly
successful in implementing that platform which is located completely in the complex
domain. Through years of observation, studying, and personal experiences based
on pondering the great paradoxes that Christ Jesus had laid before humanity with
his profound healing work, she discovered what she called, the absolute principle
of scientific mental healing. And she delivered proof, by doing her own healing
work that mirrored that of Christ Jesus.
"You say that she worked her way up
into the complex domain, in the spiritual sphere?" repeated the tall man. "You
say that she proved this by doing the same
kind of work that Christ Jesus did. You can't deliver better proof than that.
But can that proof be understood? Can its geometry be understood?"
"The answer is both, yes and no," I
replied cautiously. " Yes, the
poof was understood, because she was able to teach other people to heal in the same
manner. And no, that proof is no longer understood." I explained that she
created a vast pedagogical infrastructure that enables a student to discover in
a visual manner the complex interrelationships of profound universal principles,
covering everything related to being human. " It covers the whole range of human
experiences, from uncovering depravity, then ranging all the way up to the
highest level of embracing the absolute
spiritual domain. Whoever sits down and develops these pedagogical infrastructures
in his or her mind will be able to determine at an instant what forces are
working for or against the truth about man as a spiritual being in the image of
God. All that was put in place in the latter part of the 1800s. She had used essentially
the same process to refute religiosity of Christianity, which Gauss had used to refute Euler.
Unfortunately, her pedagogical infrastructures still remain largely hidden
behind the cloak of secrecy. As a consequence, the science that she had
discovered and founded, has been reverted back into the sphere of a religion that people take
merely on a note of faith.
"So you see, Euler won again, even while he was
long dead," commented the young woman who spoke fluently English. "Euler
won once gain, probably for the same oligarchy that he worked for earlier, and
which all the modern criminals in high places are still subservient to."
"That project of ours really gets interesting,"
answered the other girl who spoke English only with great difficulty.
"It gets more interesting still," I
added. "The Eulers of this world may be able to hide that spiritual
infrastructures, but they cannot hide the evidence of the impact of her work
that had evidently been built on these infrastructures." I explained to the
students that during
last 35 years of that woman's life, no major victories were won by the synarchists and fascists
of this world, for whom Euler had paved the way. Her effect on the world was
like that of Gauss. But that all changed soon after hear death. Within two years
after her death all hell broke loose, especially in the USA. The Federal
Reserve, a private central banking system, was established in the USA by an act of Congress
that gave away the nation's sovereignty over its currency into private hands.
This crime may yet kill us all. Also, in the same year the Income Tax system was cemented
into law, and the year after that, World War I broke out.
The tall man, listening intently, sometimes nodded and
sometimes shook his head. "That's Interesting!" he said at the end.
were having out tea at the sidewalk restaurant near the market square, the tall
man took a napkin and drew LaRouche's triple curve on it. He pointed to it.
"This is a small example of the kind of visual images that you said the
woman from America had created for the spiritual domain, isn't that so?"
He pointed to the lower curve that he had drawn steeply
declining into the negative area of the graph. "That steep decline
represents the physical economy," he said. "That is what society has
experienced in terms of lost productive capacity in supporting society and fulfilling
its needs. That decline is real. The curve represents real physical measurements
of lost household income in terms of a family's available market basket. All of
that has been collapsing since 1965, approximately."
Then he pointed to the steeply rising curve in the upper
part of the graph. "That curve represents the rise of the values in
society's financial portfolios. And what do we see if we look at both of these
curves together? We see the physical production of society collapsing, and the financial values
shooting sky high at the same time. In other words, these values don't represent anything real anymore."
"They represent a dream world," I
agreed, " that is
connected with the real world only in as far as the looting of the physical
economy makes the financial values rise."
"Anybody who looks at these curves with
an open mind will instantly recognize, beyond any doubt," said the tall
man, " that this system is in
a systemic collapse phase. There is no way it can continue on, and there is no way it
can be saved. The graphs illustrate that reality. A single look reveals the
systemic crisis that the world is in. That's the reality. A single look
reveals that the world's system of greed based economics is doomed, that it
can't work, and never has worked. The graph
can be supported with real numbers. But without this simple geometric illustration
of these interrelationships, society has to
take everything on faith. And with that, it is exposed to also take in all the
oligarchy's lies, on faith.
He sighed that the irony is, that the public is more
inclined to accept the lies than to look for the truth which so easily provable. "Gauss refuted
Euler, probably in order to put scientific honesty back onto the table which
Euler had scrapped."
"That means nothing more, than that we have to
become honest with ourselves in all areas," I said to him, "even in respect
to the way in which deal with one another as human beings, including in the
social domain, and this right down to the lowest grassroots level. What should
motivate us there? Should we be motivated by historically trained emotions and
long standing axioms about the way things should be, that we take on faith? Or
should we be motivated by recognized, universal principles that are understandable
I pointed to the Lu Rose, our ship that was anchored
nearby, that was visible from the sidewalk restaurant. Its name was clearly readable.
"That's what the name means," I said. " It means that we aim to be
motivated by recognized universal principles, because they are understandable
tea, we continued our discussion on the upper deck of the Lu Rose in the light
of the evening sunshine. The discussion lasted until long after the sun had set,
when it was finally high time for dinner.
"I wonder if Beethoven or Schiller had any
idea as to what their music and their poetry might set in motion, centuries
after their death, as is happening here in a small fishing town on the far end of
the world from where they stood," said Steve while we were all busy preparing a quick dinner.
The young woman, who had been our host, nodded. "I think they
knew," she said. "I think they understood their immortality. The more
important question that we should ask, is this: Do we ourselves understand our
immortality, or are we afraid of it like Hamlet had been, and try to shrink away from
the responsibility that accepting our immortality brings with it?"
On that note the discussions on the Lu Rose adjourned
that night, long after dinner,
near midnight. That final question that had bee posed, remained unanswered. We all knew that this
question is the very question that LaRouche had challenged humanity as a whole,
to answer, and to answer it honestly. We also knew that this answer would change
and would evolve and be continuously unfolding as we continue to uplift our humanity
as human beings all over the world.