The Earth’s Next Fifty Years


In the coming and hopeful era of a fusion based economy, concepts like limits to resources or limits to energy will vanish. Steps towards a fusion economy will increase what LaRouche calls “man’s gains of power within the Solar system, and, later, beyond.” The  absurd idea of overpopulation would cease to exist for a space-faring humanity. Even now, the Hubble Deep Field images have provided evidence that there are about 125 billion galaxies in the observable universe— over 15 galaxies per person currently living on Earth. Each galaxy itself contains billions of stars. These scientific ventures in space would drive the development of planet earth, and would represent the types of scientific breakthroughs required for the development of the Arctic region—a region that will become the place of economic collaboration among the Four Powers— the United States, China, Russia and India— along the development corridors of the World Land-Bridge. This is the coming world defined by LaRouche in his seminal work, The Earth’s Next Fifty Years. This is also the coming world that the British are so desperate to stop with their green genocidal policies, or their final war of thermonuclear annihilation. What will drive these scientific breakthroughs? How will a new dialogue of cultures, based on scientific and technological progress as the new metric for economy, be fostered among the nations of the Four Powers? LaRouche has identified the leading role of Ukrainian–Russian biogeochemist, Vladimir Vernadsky— who has provided the required conceptions of humanity’s relationship to nature in an economy designed for human progress—a concept diametrically opposed to the British monarchy’s Malthusian view of man as a cancer on the planet, as their climate hysteria so loudly proclaims. As part of a new economy based on physical economic growth, the coming breakthroughs in a fusion based economy would overturn the fraudulent carbon-based arguments of the monarchy’s climate hysteria. Already, it cannot be denied that existing nuclear power plants are “carbon neutral.” Nuclear power advocates will often acquiesce to the shrill cries of the climate hysterics by noting this fact, when their arguments should instead be based on nuclear fission as the most advanced power source in terms of energy flux density—with fusion power orders of magnitude higher. Only with a progression in higher orders of energy flux density, culminating in fusion power, could we ever solve the issues facing an expanding global population, presently exceeding 8 billion souls.

Energy Flux Density: nuclear power plants require far less fuel than fossil fuel plants to produce the same amount of power.

In a fusion based economy, humanity’s definition of resources would change. Coastal desalination facilities could provide fresh water for humanity’s needs at a scale previously thought impossible with energy supply “too cheap to meter.” Isotope manipulation, which already exists in fission “breeder reactor” technology– producing medical isotopes and other isotopes for specialized industrial uses–could occur at a scale that could meet the resource needs of humanity as a whole. The “fusion torch” concept, which utilizes the high-temperature plasma of a fusion reactor, could break down waste material and convert that into reusable elements—transforming landfills into reservoirs of resources. It must be emphatically stated in this context that the architects of the monarchy’s “Great Reset” have never drunk the carbon Kool-Aid themselves. They know that humanity’s CO₂ emissions have a drastically overstated effect on the climate, but have only used that argument to advance their geopolitical and economic designs for global dictatorship. Listing CO₂, the basis for growth in all living processes—including for trees that produce the air that we breathe, and plants for the food that we consume—as a pollutant, should be seen as part of the monarchy’s genocide program. The control of agricultural production is essential for population reduction. Similarly, the perverse idea of CO₂ as a pollutant has been used to prevent both developed and developing nations from using carbon-based fuels. Green technology can barely produce the required energy to replicate itself–, when the energy required to produce windmills and solar panels and the required maintenance is considered, let alone being able to power the required expansion of a modern industrial economy–, or power a transition to electric vehicles that would already drain electricity grids suffering from blackouts and brownouts in the trans-Atlantic. Green technology also requires an absurd use of land that could otherwise be used for human needs like agriculture, housing, or even beautiful parks and preserves to enjoy nature. Furthermore, the argument that anthropogenic CO₂ emissions are the sole cause of climate change, diverts attention from the leading hypothesis that long range climate fluctuations result from solar and galactic activity. Nir Shaviv of the Racah Institute of Physics at Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and Henrik Svensmark of the Division of Solar System Physics at the Danish National Space Institute in Copenhagen, have pioneered work in the science of “cosmoclimatology”—the study of climate change driven by variations in galactic cosmic ray flux (with changes in solar activity being the controlling factor over decade-and-century timescales).

It is essential to gain insights into these phenomena for any competent policy approach to climate issues, which is presently stifled by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that focuses solely on the fraud of CO2 driving climate change. Further insights into the science of cosmoclimatology could be gained through space programs, and could be one of the domains for collaboration among the leading nations in space.  But the leading edge of international collaboration in space is related to the coming fusion economy. The lunar soil is hypothesized to have 10,000 years of energy supply in the form of helium-3—a prime source of fuel for fusion power. The development of this resource would also be an integral part of our eventual role as a space faring species, with the requirement of processing centers for helium-3 on the moon. Collaboration with the nations on space, and in particular the leading nations in space of China and Russia—who already have the helium-3 mining projects as part of their space programs—would be one of the cornerstones for collaboration for peace on earth among the Four Powers. These scientific and technological breakthroughs in space would also drive the economic development on earth, particularly that of the hostile conditions of the Arctic region that are akin to those hostile environments in space. The arctic is home to enormous energy and mineral resources, distributed across Russia’s Siberian region, Alaska, Canada’s arctic region, and the territory of the ArcticScandinavian nations. The intelligent and coordinated development of these resources demands an international dialogue.

Moreover, this region will become the center of the urgently needed collaboration that would be the driver of an industrial economic renaissance by linking the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the proposed North American Belt and Road Initiative (NABRI) through the Bering Strait tunnel. That connection would immediately bring cooperation between Russia and the United States. Given the link already established between the Eurasian Economic Union and China’s Belt and Road Initiative, as well as new discussion of joint Indian-Russian arctic development, it would bring those great powers into peaceful cooperation.

LaRouche’s development corridor concept, would open up the potential for new cities and industrial centers using the immense resource base of the Arctic region. This would also be a basis for cooperation between the great powers.

The transportation routes of those rail connections would not only transport manufacturing and agricultural products easily between those nations of the Pacific, but if seen from the higher vantage point of LaRouche’s development corridor concept, would open up the potential for new cities and industrial centers using the immense resource base of the Arctic region.

Given the proximity to the Arctic region, Japan and the nations of the Korean Peninsula, would also play a significant role in this development. Developing this region, and expanding the collaboration into space research, would unleash the scientific and technological capabilities of these nations—opening the door to a new renaissance for humanity. 


LaRouche On Vernadsky: The Science Of Physical Economy

Born in what is today Ukraine, Vernadsky was a towering genius of the 20th century, not only for the then Soviet Union, but for the world. Vernadsky not only laid the foundations for the eventual nuclear capabilities of modern Russia, but is considered one of the founders of geochemistry, biogeochemistry and radiogeology. Vernadsky’s research on the integration of these scientific fields, and the role of humanity’s development of the knowledge of these fields, led him to develop his concept that the nöosphere (that domain of human knowledge—“noös” as Greek for knowledge) was itself a geological force on the planet, organizing both the biosphere (the domain of biological processes) and lithosphere (the domain of geological processes generally) into higher states through our economic activities. For many decades, LaRouche identified Vernadsky’s ideas as resonant with LaRouche’s own conceptions of physical economy—that the scientific and artistic breakthroughs of humanity improve our relationship to nature, to the productive powers of our labor, as applied in such areas as manufacturing, agriculture, and infrastructure. These new capabilities in turn provide the basis for further advances in science. This would lead to an overall increase in “potential relative population density,” the number of people that can live at higher and higher standards of living in a given land area. LaRouche identified the conceptions of Vernadsky as central for the development of the Eurasian landmass, and the coming scientific renaissance, as part of LaRouche’s idea that Eurasian development would be the cornerstone for the development of the entire planet—ultimately culminating in his design for cooperation between East and West along what he called the “development corridors’’ comprising a “World Land-Bridge,” which itself was an expansion of his proposals made at the close of the 1980s for a “New Silk Road.” These development corridors would not merely serve as conduits for transportation between points served by the routes, but as a substrate for developing the productivity of people, land, and other infrastructure along the routes themselves. The economic integration of Eurasia, and the expansion of the development corridors of the World Landbridge across the Bering Strait, would foreshadow LaRouches’ later idea of the “Four Powers”—cooperation between the nations of the United States, China, Russia and India. LaRouche expresses this conception in “The Vernadsky Strategy,” published in the May 4, 2001 issue of Executive Intelligence Review:

Similarly, as for western and central Europe, Russia is also crucial for cooperation among the states of East, Central, and South Asia, most emphatically. A group of nations, brought together through aid of triangular cooperation among Russia, China, and India, and thus bringing in most of the states of Asia, presents us with a reasonable prospect of well-grounded, long-term cooperation, where such cooperation were otherwise virtually impossible to achieve. Under the presently onrushing economic-strategic conditions, in which the Anglo-American financier power largely evaporates, new options are likely to be put on the table, even successfully.

The possibilities of long-term Eurasian continental cooperation (including Japan, of course), thus provide the keystone on which the possibility of a global economic recovery depends. Without that keystone, the situation of already ruined Africa is hopeless beyond description, and the situation of the nations recently assembled at Quebec City, hopeless as well.

I have emphasized, on this subject, in locations published earlier, that the development of the basic economic infrastructure of the territories of central and north Asia, including the tundra regions, is indispensable for the success of the kind of long-term global economic development I have proposed. As I have also stressed in such locations, to grasp what that development implies for practice, we must look at the required development of basic economic infrastructure through the eyes of the great biogeochemist V.I. Vernadsky.

As I have emphasized in such locations, we must recognize that what we call basic economic infrastructure, is an improvement in the biosphere beyond the capacity of the biosphere to develop and defend itself without human cognitive intervention. We must see the biosphere so improved by man, as representing what Vernadsky termed the “natural products” of human cognition produced as the qualitative improvements of the biosphere needed to develop the biosphere into the still qualitatively higher form, of a noösphere.

We must never think of development of basic economic infrastructure as a destructive intrusion upon the biosphere, but rather as a necessary improvement of the quality of the biosphere as a biosphere, and also a form of improvement which raises the biosphere to the higher level of being an integral part of the Noösphere. Indeed, that rule, is not merely a defense of the urgency of developing and maintaining the biosphere through basic economic infrastructure, but, also, represents the rule by which we must govern ourselves in changing the biosphere through infrastructural development.

Although there is a tendency to limit the current proposals for infrastructural development to “A New Silk Road,” such a transportation link, by itself, will not meet the requirements for a general and sustainable upsurge in the economic development of Eurasia. What is required, rather than merely a “New Silk Road,” is a network of corridors of combined transportation, power generation and distribution, large-scale water management, and related changes, all along pathways of development of up to 100 kilometers width.

In that case, not only does economic growth along the transport route reduce the effective net cost of trans-Eurasian goods transport, to levels far below that of sea-borne transport. By such methods, what are presently thinly populated regions of central and north Asia are made more fruitful, and populous, but even what are presently, functionally desert areas, emerge as zones of economic development. Under those conditions, these regions of Asia become, because of their relationship to other, densely inhabited parts of Asia, the world’s greatest, richest frontiers for the immediate future’s economic growth of the planet as a whole.

When those opportunities are taken together with the natural resources of the area in which this development of infrastructure is to occur, Eurasian cooperation, pivoted on this perspective, becomes the great opportunity for Eurasia as a whole, and the economic driver needed for the development of Africa and the revitalization of the states of the Americas participating as partners of this venture.

The peculiar nature of the challenges this presents for broadly based development of basic economic infrastructure, brings the figure of Vernadsky to the fore, as a central scientific figure of reference for this Eurasia-centered cooperation as a whole.

While LaRouche identified Vernadsky and his ideas as significant for the coming development of “Eurasia-centered cooperation,” he did so from the vantage point of his own breakthroughs in a science of physical economy. In contrast to the monetarist dogma of financial “value” in the British financial system, which is used to justify the fraud of a zero-growth economy, LaRouche developed an actual scientific metric for value in an economy based on physical growth, where an accelerated emphasis on very high “energy flux density” technologies increase the “potential relative population density”: the number of people who can live in a given area is increased through scientific and technological progress. In “The Dialogue of Civilizations: Earth’s Next Fifty Years,” LaRouche discusses the role of this metric in crafting economic policy, and its relationship to the work of Vernadsky:

Potential Relative Population-Density
Overall, against the background just summarized, there are two aspects of the process, as roughly described in that manner, which bear upon what I shall now emphasize about Vernadsky’s developed conception of the Noösphere.

One is that kind of improvement of the Biosphere as such which increases the productive potential of an area, as potential may be measured in (human) per-capita and per-square-kilometer terms, rather than other measures.

The second, is the qualitative and quantitative development of that portion of the Noösphere as such, which, in first approximation, is the product of cognitive, rather than biological functions/components of cumulative fossil-formation on the planet.

The general rule already implicit in Vernadsky’s own portrait of the subject, is that the rate of increase of useful fossils of the Noösphere should be greater than the rate for fossils of the Biosphere, while the development of the Biosphere, per square kilometer, should be advanced.

The driver of this latter ratio is the cognitive (noëtic) powers specific to the human individual. Both rates combined can be expressed as one, when we take into account the fact that the willful improvement of the Biosphere, in per-square-kilometer terms, is a product of increases in productivity which have been generated by man’s creative powers.

The foregoing points on economy considered from a physical, rather than a monetary-financial standpoint, converge on a concept which I developed more than a half-century ago, which I named potential relative population-density. The term seemed to me then to be one within the practical reach of industrial engineers or comparable technicians of the productive process, while nonetheless implying the higher standpoint of relevance, a specifically Riemannian view of the process which a productive form of modern economy expresses.

Essentially: given a relevant territory, the potential productivity of the whole population relevant to that territory, as expressed in demographic terms, reflects, on the one hand, the development of the productive process, including the population and its labor-force, as such; but, the level of performance achieved depends upon the development of the territory, including the production facilities and available services, in which this activity occurs.

In the final analysis, this includes mankind’s management of all of those physical processes associated with our planet which are relevant to human existence and improvement of the potential relative population-density of mankind on this planet. On this account, this view from a higher standpoint, the condition of human life on this planet today, elevates the work of Vernadsky on the concept of the Noösphere from the more limited domain of selected applications of scientific research, into being, under presently emerging planetary conditions, an indispensably determining feature of any economics practice to be taken seriously by governments and the like today.

The measure of changes which foster the implied result is the anti-entropy of the relevant current policy of practice.

These indicated factors all orbit about a single central question: the nature of man as a cognitive (i.e., noëtic) being, as set apart from, and above the beasts. The key is the power of hypothesizing, as defined by Plato’s collection of Socratic dialogues. It is to the extent that society is organized around the role of that creative function unique to the human individual, and to the degree that the individual member of society in general is induced to cultivate, and assisted in cultivating and employing that specific creative potential within themselves, that economies may prosper, and the cultural development and improved physical well-being of the people in those societies may be promoted.

Given the need to improve the living standards of billions of people in the underdeveloped sectors of Asia, Africa and South and Central America, LaRouche asserts that there must be coordination in developing the present resource base of the planet. That level of coordination between nations must be seen as diametrically opposed to the British monarchy’s Malthusian agenda, which asserts that humanity’s use of resources is inherently a rape of Gaia, or “mother Earth,” and that resources must be preserved for imperial needs, rather than be used to support a growing population.

Unlike all animal species, humans have the potential for unbounded exponential growth based on higher and higher levels of applied scientific and technological progress.

The British solution for planetary coordination of management of resources for their imperial designs, has always been to establish a “one world government,” as is asserted by their agenda of the “Great Reset.” Instead, LaRouche argues that for the intelligent management of resources, and the cultural development of the “Noosphere” to develop new technological and scientific capabilities that utilize entirely new resources (such as that of a fusion economy), there must be a “concrete form of organization among nations, which defines the immediate first step of general organization toward a permanent, global community of principle among a world composed of perfectly sovereign nation-states.”

The combined effect of the development and application of technology, together with the increase of population and the rise of the acceptable standard of living among those populations, have brought the planet to the foreseeable point of developments, that we can no longer proceed on the assumption that the natural resources, so-called, on which civilization depends, can be treated as if this were the simple bounty of nature. We must now take responsibility for maintaining and increasing the supply of those resources of the abiotic Earth and Biosphere on which the continued increase of population, and improvement of conditions of living life depend.

The presently lunatic, philosophically Physiocratic lust for raw-materials as loot, a lunatic, implicitly homicidal lust which is merely typified by Henry A. Kissinger’s NSSM-200 draft dogma, has become the leading feature of the world’s monetary-financial oligarchy’s zeal today. This lunatic zeal must be checked by a concerted regulation of this matter among sovereign nation-states. As Vernadsky’s legacy makes the needed remedy clear in broad terms, the development of mineral resources and their management must be considered a factor of capital cost shared as a charge against each and all of the world’s economies. We must assure a sufficient supply, at acceptable prices, of all basic such raw materials, for the future of mankind. With the aid of progressive scientific development, this challenge can be mastered, even rather comfortably; but, it must be managed.

This change in the management of raw materials, a change which is now forced upon the world as a whole by the growth of the populations of Asia, especially those of China and India, requires the immediate establishment of a universal fixed-exchange-rate system. This requirement adds the factor of creatively active raw-materials management to the essential agreements on which the new system must be founded.

The planet is finite. We have reached near to the end of the possibility of a form of society which lives by depleting the planet with efforts to compensate for these effects. We must establish a system which increases the supply and accessibility of what we treat as natural resources, by means which include the generation of such resources, rather than merely extracting them. We must manage the mineral resources in this way, as we must develop the Biosphere through large-scale water management, development of desert areas, and so forth.

To absorb these implicitly very large categories of capital costs, we must accelerate the advancement of technology of production and product design in at least a degree sufficient to absorb the added cost of global raw-materials management and related environmental development without reducing the standard of living of any population. This requires greatly increased rates of gain in per-capita physical productivity throughout the planet, and the elevation of the income-levels of presently poor nations through such promotion of technological progress. These costs can be estimated with reasonable accuracy.

This requires accelerated emphasis on very high “energy flux density” technologies, including nuclear-fission and thermonuclear fusion processes. The principal dedication of low-energy-flux-density resources should remain the role of solar radiation in the motivation of living processes, especially plant life, both as a source of useful materials, in water management, and in moderation of the Earth’s climate.

The development of a “general organization toward a permanent, global community of principle among a world composed of perfectly sovereign nation-states,” would signal the end of the British Empire. Wars and geopolitical manipulations over resources and population control would become part of our distant past, and peace through development would become the dominant dynamic on the planet. Relationships between nations could then be based on mutual development, or “the advantage of the other,” as it was stated in the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia [picture of westphalia] that laid the basis for relations among modern sovereign nations. As LaRouche has repeatedly argued over the last decades, only the Four Powers of the United States, China, Russia and India, represent the concert of nations with the power to bring down the British imperial system, and establish a new global community of principle among sovereign nation-states, based on Westphalian principles.

Kissinger’s NSSM-200 argued that population growth in leading developing nations was a national security threat.

The Four Powers: The Power to Reorganize the System

Lyndon LaRouche addressed the necessary power to reorganize the global financial system, grabbing it out of the hands of the City of London,  at a Nov. 18, 2008 international webcast:

Now, you have two ways to go: Either you collapse the world, with starvation and mass death, and those effects. Or, you put the thing through bankruptcy reorganization. And how do you do that? Well, what I specified is very elementary: I have four nations in mind that can take the lead on this thing. And the four nations, which together, represent the greatest consolidation of power on this planet: These nations are the United States, Russia, China, and India, as joined by other nations, which join in the same deal. We put the world through bankruptcy reorganization. How do we do it? We use the U.S. Constitution to do that.

The U.S. Constitution is unique in the fact we have a kind of Federal Constitution we have: that our dollar is not a monetary dollar; it’s a credit dollar. In other words, the United States has uttered an obligation, on behalf of the U.S. government, which can be monetized. That is our obligation; that’s our only obligation, and any other kind of obligation is not fungible.

Other countries have a different kind of system.

Now, if the United States says, that we are going to back up our dollar, and enters into an agreement with Russia, China, and India, to join us, with other countries, in doing the same thing, to put the world through bankruptcy reorganization, in which we will cancel most of the outstanding financial obligations: It has to happen. Otherwise, no planet! If you try to collect on quadrillions of dollars of outstanding claims, from whom are you going to collect, by what means, and what’s the effect? It is against natural law to collect on that debt! How many people are you going to kill, to collect that debt? How many countries are you going to destroy, to collect that debt?

It is  the collapse of the British financial system that drives their Great Reset agenda, as well as their threats of thermonuclear warfare for those nations of the Four Powers who refuse to submit to that agenda. The British see that the new emerging system, centered on the expansion of China’s Belt and Road Initiative—for which Lyndon LaRouche and his wife, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, created the seed crystal decades ago—is gaining ground, which only increases their desperation. Helga Zepp-LaRouche has recently initiated crucial flanks to bring the Four Powers into a reality, calling for the creation of adequate health care systems in all nations to defeat the pandemic, and what she has called Operation Ibn-Sina for international cooperation to deal with the crisis in Afghanistan— countering the centuries old Great Game strategy of the British in Central Asia. She has stressed that the issue of the needless deaths from the pandemic and solving the ongoing starvation of millions in Afghanistan—and other parts of the world— are central to answering the question of whether humanity has the moral fitness to survive. But what is the basis for defining a conception of morality among nations, especially among as seemingly diverse a grouping as the Four Powers nation, especially in terms of cultural systems and religious practices, the domains in which morality is generally discussed? The answer to this question lies in defining what LaRouche just referred to as “natural law,” which must be the basis for new dialogue of culture among nations of the world, in order to establish a new paradigm for humanity. In general terms, the concept of natural law, while itself is a self-subsisting principle, has been defined in the fight against oligarchical systems throughout history. In the Renaissance, this principle of natural law was reasserted as “imago viva dei”—man in the living image of God. While this was presented at that time as a religious concept, it had real implications for statecraft and in Nicholas of Cusa’s {Concordancia Catolica} became the basis for establishing the idea of the “consent of the governed,” which is contained in the US Declaration of Independence. In other words, if all people are created in the image of the Creator—with different and unique talents—then no one person has the right to rule over another without the consent of the governed. The general welfare of society guided the process of democratic deliberation. This was the basis for republican forms of statecraft that were diametrically opposed to imperial systems where the right to rule was based on blood lines or arbitrary power. As LaRouche has identified, oligarchical systems are based on a “Satanic” (“Zeusinan”) model, which again, while couched in what has been historically identified as a religious concept, is actually a concept rooted on the principle of “natural law” and the expression of “imago viva dei.” In “The Dynamics of This Crisis: The Hand Behind the Tragedy,” LaRouche discusses this idea from its historical development as discussed by Homer:

As ancient Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey were understood by sane and intelligent representatives of ancient Greece, the principle of evil, otherwise identified in real life as typified by the Delphic cult of Apollo-Dionysos, is represented in the personified forms of Zeus’s Olympus of Aeschylus’ Prometheus Bound. A seemingly invisible hand, beyond the reach of mortal men and women, appears to be a mysterious force compelling those mortals, such as many among our own U.S. citizens, to torment and even destroy themselves, and even destroy their society, by actions which are contrary to all sane judgment of thoughtful, mortal human beings…

So, a mystical hand, like the hand of Zeus’s own party among the Olympian gods of the Iliad, seems to grip the prevailing will of reigning popular opinion in the U.S.A., in western and central Europe, and other places, today. The spread of economic ruin by currently reigning popular opinion in those places, has impelled the reigning popular opinion of these past decades to destroy the civilization on which the very existence of those nations depends.

In short, the common names for Satan in Greek include, chiefly, Zeus, Apollo, and Dionysus.

Just as the historic personification of the figure of Zeus represented by the oligarchical system of that time, all oligarchical systems have operated on the basis of controlling resources and preventing the development of the “mortals” under policies of population control— what LaRouche refers to as the “ecology cults” of today. But, just as Prometheus brought fire to those mortals, in the form of advancement of their scientific and cultural capabilities, there has been a historic battle against those oligarchical conceptions in the form of asserting the principle of natural law. Vernadsky’s conception of the Noösphere calls to mind the spirit of Prometheus bringing fire to the mortals. As LaRouche states in “Earth’s Next Fifty Years,” the Noösphere must now be the basis for a new dialogue of culture that rejects the Olympian ecology cults and asserts natural law once again in the spirit of a new renaissance for humanity.

V.I. Vernadsky’s experimental principle of the Noösphere defines a science appropriate for what must become a new, Eurasian culture. To evade a true principle, or to impose a false one such as the mass-murderous, Olympian “ecology cults” of the recent four decades, incurs efficient penalties for all mankind, as this has been shown in the Apocalyptic results of forty years to date of the influence and practice of such deluded beliefs. World Wars I and II are useful illustrations of the lawful consequences of overlooking that connection.

As humanity faces the prospect of a third world war, one that threatens the annihilation of humanity itself, we must bring humanity together in a dialogue of culture to once and for all reject these Olympian “ecology cults” expressed today as the green “Great Reset.” While the nations of China and Russia have rejected the imposed ideology of the zero-growth economic models represented by the “cultural revolution” or Soviet ideology, and while India continues to struggle with its colonial legacy under the British Empire, the United States has fallen under its own version of a British-directed cultural revolution represented by the adherence to green ideology and what is called “woke” politics today. While there has been a rejection of the green agenda, as represented by the failure of “FLOP26,” the green ideology must be rejected completely. The Noösphere, as seen from LaRouche’s higher vantage point of his science of physical economy and a new metric for progress as represented by “potential relative population density,” must now be the basis for a new dialogue of culture and a moral standard based on natural law.

Earth’s Next Fifty Years

So while aspects of Flop26 were rejected, what is required is a rejection of the underlying anti-human axioms of the Green British system. LaRouche addresses what are the required ideas about Natural-Law to make agreements among nations durable for the Earth’s Next Fifty Years, and beyond:

In physical science, great Classical artistry, or political statecraft, it is the application of the needed, principled exception, or otherwise known as “revolutionary” exception, such as that of President Franklin Roosevelt’s return to the U.S. Constitution, the exception to the error of the currently accepted habit, which is the mark of a nation’s achievement of greatness; and, it is the choice of exceptional leadership from among the most exceptional members of those professions, which makes possible the changes upon which not only greatness, but even survival of a culture depends. The beasts are vulnerable to nature’s timely condemnation of their continued existence, because those species have a fixed nature; man is not a beast, except when he attempts to imitate the beasts, by adopting the beliefs, such as today’s “radical ecology” dogmas, suited to one of those lower species of a culturally fixed set of genetic-like characteristics.

It is so in religion, too. Those religious beliefs which set the existence of the Creator essentially outside the universe, a universe defined by them as a fixed set of intended rules of a playing-field, thus commit the blasphemous falsehood of denying the Creator Himself the power of creating changes from within His universe. His real universe is that in which He Himself lives. The fool’s hubristic effort, to deny the Creator of the universe this power, thus also degrades the fool who accepts that denial, to adopt the likeness of a beast; he denies the existence of the human individual, the existence of that soul which should outlive that mortal body which it occupies for a bare moment of time. By denying the individual the power, and duty, to contribute willfully to improving the universe which shall outlive his momentary mortal incarnation, we would degrade the individual, in his own estimation, to a beast, and he would then behave as a variety of beast, such as Grand Inquisitor Torquemada—as, we might see again, today, is the frequently manifest result.

The discussion in the form of a “dialogue of cultures” is not only important; it is urgent. However, as history should have taught us, the danger is that the participants might go too far, too quickly, too superficially, in their adoption of attempted, and all too cheaply accepted commonplace assumptions. The danger is that the search for a new compromise, like the League of Nations before it, produces a quickly compromised result.

Therefore, I emphasize an outlook which I have expressed in various earlier publications. How should we attempt to estimate, beforehand, why and how no less than those two generations ahead should judge the results of our agreement to act in concert now? The implicit basis for competent foreknowledge of the competence of our choices, lies not in the experience of the past, but the competence of our experience of the future. That is the crucial paradox with which this report challenges the sponsors of any dialogue of cultures; there lies the crucial paradox menacing any attempt to shape a functional quality of common agreement from within a dialogue of cultures. The best rule-of-thumb statement of the solution for the latter, crucial paradox, is V.I. Vernadsky’s systemic definition of the Noösphere.


The February Joint Statement of Russian and China on International Relations and Global Development Gives Hope for the Future

At the invitation of the President of the People’s Republic of China Xi Jinping, the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir V. Putin visited China on February 4th, 2022. The Heads of State held talks in Beijing and took part in the opening ceremony of the XXIV Olympic Winter Games. The two nations, referred to as “the sides” in this remarkable document, overturned the war policy of Global Britain with a refreshing new approach of Win-Win cooperation between peoples and nations.We reprint here a few critical selections:

Some actors representing but the minority on the international scale continue to advocate unilateral approaches to addressing international issues and resort to force; they interfere in the internal affairs of other states, infringing their legitimate rights and interests, and incite contradictions, differences and confrontation, thus hampering the development and progress of mankind, against the opposition from the international community….

The sides call on all States to pursue well-being for all and, with these ends, to build dialogue and mutual trust, strengthen mutual understanding, champion such universal human values as peace, development, equality, justice, democracy and freedom, respect the rights of peoples to independently determine the development paths of their countries and the sovereignty and the security and development interests of States…

The sides believe that peace, development and cooperation lie at the core of the modern international system. Development is a key driver in ensuring the prosperity of the nations.

The sides call on the international community to create open, equal, fair and non-discriminatory conditions for scientific and technological development, to step up practical implementation of scientific and technological advances in order to identify new drivers of economic growth…

The sides reaffirm their strong mutual support for the protection of their core interests, state sovereignty and territorial integrity, and oppose interference by external forces in their internal affairs…

Russia and China stand against attempts by external forces to undermine security and stability in their common adjacent regions, intend to counter interference by outside forces in the internal affairs of sovereign countries under any pretext, oppose colour revolutions, and will increase cooperation in the aforementioned areas…

The sides call for the establishment of a new kind of relationships between world powers on the basis of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and mutually beneficial cooperation. They reaffirm that the new inter-State relations between Russia and China are superior to political and military alliances of the Cold War era.

The sides reiterate the need for consolidation, not division of the international community, the need for cooperation, not confrontation. The sides oppose the return of international relations to the state of confrontation between major powers, when the weak fall prey to the strong. The sides intend to resist attempts to substitute universally recognized formats and mechanisms that are consistent with international law for rules elaborated in private by certain nations or blocs of nations, and are against addressing international problems indirectly and without consensus, oppose power politics, bullying, unilateral sanctions, and extraterritorial application of jurisdiction…

This indeed represents a hopeful future for Mankind.

Be the first to comment

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.