Monday, November 02, 2009

You Are What You Eat

6 comments:

CNu said...

In a 1971 essay, still writing from an ostensibly Marxist perspective, LaRouche tried to imagine how fascism might come to America. He looked at Rabbi Meir Kahane's Jewish Defense League, Joe Colombo's Italian-American Civil Rights League, George Wallace's American Party, and various black-nationalist groups. These, LaRouche argued, were the germs of a uniquely American fascism. America is an "ethnic-cultural polyglot," and a powerful fascist base can't be built on one ethnic community alone. A successful U.S. fascism must include multiethnic alliances different from anything in Hitler's lexicon.

LaRouche predicted that the "mutually segregated" ethnic fascist groups would join with youth from the drug/rock counterculture in a "common front" around a "populist" cover ideology. This coalition would launch the "direct street-battle between socialism and fascism," growing into "the sort of large organization which U.S. fascism must become to be taken seriously."

He was aware that a fascist movement embracing white Christian ethnics, Jews, blacks, and Hispanics, even in segregated units, would seem to be a strange combination. But was it not fascism's nature to unite apparent opposites?

The Beethoven Gang....,

Denmark Vesey said...

Radical Empiricism: The Epistemological Pretext for Re-Sculpting Reality

Most of contemporary science is predicated upon empiricism. This is the epistemological stance that all knowledge is derived exclusively through the senses.

Lyndon LaRouche explains the inherent flaws of empiricism:

"By the nature of our processes of sense-perception, our direct perception of the world "outside our skins" (so to speak) does not show us that world "outside our skins," but, rather, the impact of that unperceived real world upon the biology of our mental-sensory processes. In other words, the shadows on the wall of Plato's Cave" (LaRouche).

Thus, the world becomes little more than an ever-shifting pliancy of impressions. All that a percipient surveys is an amorphous amalgam of "shadows." It comes as little surprise that an exclusively empirical approach relegates causality to the realm of metaphysical fantasy. The obviation of causality holds enormous ramifications for science."

What is perceived as A causing B could be merely a consequence of circumstantial juxtaposition. Although temporal succession and spatial proximity are axiomatic, causal connection is not. Affirmation of causal relationships is impossible. Given the absence of causality, all of a scientist's findings must be taken upon faith. Ironically, science relies on the affirmation of such cause and effect relationships. This is all one can deduce while working under the paradigm of radical empiricism. Thus, the elite merely exchanged one form of mysticism for another. It comes as little surprise that, within certain occult circles, contemporary science is considered sorcery disseminated on the popular level. For instance, Satanic high priest Anton LaVey regarded science and technology as "sanctioned, but ineffectual 'occultism'" (Raschke, 214).

In fact, science has become a new form of sorcery for the manipulation of matter. According to the epistemology of empiricism, reality is little more than a quagmire of impressions. It is analogous to a holograph, the fabric of which is pliable enough to be manipulated. Thus, reality becomes the ever-shifting canvas upon which scientists paint whatever they wish. The scientist's role in this reconfiguration of reality was delineated in an esoteric tract entitled The Way of Light. Authored by Comenius in 1668, the manifesto was dedicated to the British Royal Society. Researcher Michael Hoffman elaborates:

"In it, Comenius addressed the first formal scientists as "illuminati" and outlined their scientific purpose, "…which is to secure…the empire of the human mind over matter" (Hoffman, 23).

Denmark Vesey said...

Years later, Bertrand Russell would recapitulate the "illuminati's" (i.e., scientists') role in the establishment of "the empire of the human mind over matter." Redefining science as an instrument of radical empiricism, Russell wrote:

"The way in which science arrives at its beliefs is quite different from that of medieval theology. Experience has shown that it is dangerous to start from general principles and proceed deductively, both because the principles may be untrue and because the reasoning based upon them may be fallacious. Science starts, not from large assumptions, but from particular facts discovered by observation or experiment. From a number of such facts a general rule is arrived at, of which, if it is true, the facts in question are instances… Science thus encourages abandonment of the search for absolute truth, which belongs to any theory that can be successfully employed in inventions or in predicting the future. "Technical" truth is a matter of degree: a theory from which more successful inventions and predictions spring is truer than one which gives rise to fewer. "Knowledge" ceases to be a mental mirror of the universe, and becomes merely a practical tool in the manipulation of matter" (Russell, 13 - 15).

In other words, science or "knowledge" becomes the instrument by which the "illuminati" re-sculpts reality. It also becomes an epistemological weapon against the minds of men, wielded by the proverbial Descartean "evil demon." This was the central precept of Weishaupt's Illuminati and the conceit of the Technocracy today: God was not in the beginning, but evolved from Man in the end. According to this conceit, Man could recreate Eden without the God.

It comes as little surprise that sci-fi predictive programmer and British intelligence asset Arthur C. Clarke commented: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

dx said...

Denmark Vesey is school

CNu said...

for aspiring members of the cult of LaRouche...,

dx said...

@CNu

"for aspiring members of the cult of LaRouche...,"

i hear ya CNu

but when i read it, it resonates...

sign me up!!