The Russian Federation continues to insist that the United States and NATO commit to satisfying Russia’s need for assurances that its national security requirements will be respected. But the responses this week — delivered officially by the U.S. and NATO — fall far short of the mark. While offering room for negotiation on secondary matters, the U.S. and NATO have given no positive response on Russia’s core security demands.Russia, which is moving forward with military exercises in Belarus and the Arctic, and organizing training drills using its nuclear forces, has repeatedly made clear that failure to respond will force the use of “military or military-technical measures.” Will those measures include the forward deployment of hypersonic nuclear missiles? Placing short-range nuclear missiles in Kaliningrad? The U.S. maintains some 200 nuclear gravity bombs in Europe, through joint nuclear missions. If Russia moves to bring similar pressure to bear on the United States, how small will become the window of decision for responding to a real (or perceived) nuclear attack? You and I can’t count on U.S. politicians, British imperialists, or NATO commanders to get this right — to avoid a situation which, whether through calculation or accident, could rapidly escalate to an unsurvivable nuclear exchange that would kill hundreds of millions of human beings within an hour and devastate civilization globally, perhaps permanently. Neither can the NATO/Anglo-American maniacs attempting to force Russia and China into submission count on the acquiescence of their supposed partners and instruments. Secretary Blinken claims that NATO is unified, that there “is no light between” the views of the U.S. and other NATO countries. But he is wrong. Those intent on crushing Russia fret that a single NATO country could destroy the consensus on which its decisions must be made. Will Croatia stand firm? Will Bulgaria? Will Hungary dutifully play its suicidal role? Will Germany, after its 1941-1945 attack on the Soviet Union, truly set up another war against Russia? Will diplomats, politicians, generals, and thinkers break ranks? This is the unanswered question of the moment. As Russian diplomats are kicked out of Washington, D.C., as American diplomats reportedly plan to leave Beijing, as the media drumbeat for war intensifies and as supporters of peace are cast as traitors — as weapons fly into Ukraine, as new sanctions are mulled — as calls for censorship grow — will you stand up for the dignity of the human species, and for your own life as well? Will you overthrow the hideous Malthusian dogma that says we are too numerous, and the false culture that says we are animals? Will we be here to marvel at the shocking observations the James Webb Space Telescope will soon be transmitting back to Earth? A crisis of this magnitude — an absolute branching point in history — demands great things of us. The LaRouche movement, headed by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, has warned of the magnitude of the crisis, to which increasing numbers are awakening, and has committed itself to catalyzing the needed new paradigm on this planet. In his poem The Artists, Friedrich Schiller — the namesake of the Schiller Institute — expressed the awesome responsibility that forces itself upon each of us today. “The dignity of man into your hands is given, “Protector be! “It sinks with you! With you it is arisen!” Can the future count on you?
Natalia Vitrenko, the Chairwoman of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine, has announced that the party's Central Committee had issued an open letter to the leaders of the world, ripping apart the fraud of those pushing for confrontation with Russia on the pretext of allowing the people of Ukraine to “write their own future.” She opens bluntly: “The Central Committee of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine, expressing deep concern over the socioeconomic catastrophe in Ukraine, considers it unacceptable and dangerous, for both the citizens of Ukraine and the entire world community, to use political blackmail in inciting Ukraine to war with Russia. Countries of the West, led by the USA and NATO, are inciting our country in that direction.”The letter follows: On January 19th, the Central Committee of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine (PSPU) issued the following Open Letter, signed by the Chairwoman of the PSPU, renowned Ukrainian economist Natalia Vitrenko, and addressed to the Heads of State of the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and Poland, and NATO General Secretary Stoltenberg, with copies for others noted below. To:President Joe Biden, USA;PM Boris Johnson, UK;PM Justin Trudeau, Canada;President A. Duda, Poland;General Secretary of NATO Jens Stoltenberg CC:UN General Secretary A. Guterres;General Secretary of the Council of Europe Marija Pejčinović Burić;General Secretary of the OSCE H.M. Schmid;President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky;President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin Dear heads of state and government, dear leaders of respected international organizations, The Central Committee of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine, expressing deep concern over the socioeconomic catastrophe in Ukraine, considers it unacceptable and dangerous, for both the citizens of Ukraine and the entire world community, to use political blackmail in inciting Ukraine to war with Russia. Countries of the West, led by the USA and NATO, are inciting our country in that direction. Since 2014, to our deep regret, fratricidal warfare has been under way in Ukraine, in which more than 15,000 innocent civilians have already been killed. In violation of international law and Article 17 of the Constitution of Ukraine, the Armed Forces of our state have been dragged into this conflict. In our view, the reason for this situation in Ukraine is not only the rewriting of history, making heroes out of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and Ukrainian Insurgent Army (OUN-UPA) collaborationists who abetted Hitler, but also the implementation, unacceptable for a civilized nation, of a state policy based on the ideology of Ukrainian “integral” nationalism (fascism). This is what has given rise to ethnic and religious hatred and discrimination against “non-indigenous” ethnic groups, which lawfully enough led to a split within our country. That policy has been enshrined in the laws on “lustration,” “de-communization,” indigenous peoples, and languages. The split in society and deceiving of our population have been intensified by the policy forced upon our country of seeking to join the EU and NATO. In 1991 Ukraine’s sovereignty was recognized by the world community on the basis of the norms and principles set forth in the Declaration on the State Sovereignty of Ukraine, which was twice affirmed by our people in nationwide referendums (17 March and 1 December 1991). The legal force of this Declaration still has precedence. That means that the world community not only recognized, but is obliged to defend the sovereignty of Ukraine as a neutral, non-bloc state, committed to a foreign policy of creating a union state with the former republics of the USSR. We understand that you, the leaders of countries in the West, do not like that kind of sovereignty for Ukraine and it does not benefit you in geopolitical terms. But that was the choice of our people, as against the false choice of the Ukrainian puppet regime that has been dragging the country towards joining the EU and NATO. It is quite clear that as long as our country maintained its non-bloc status, we had peace and tranquility. The policy of joining the EU and NATO, however, and the policy of Ukrainian “integral” nationalism (fascism), have led not only to a socioeconomic catastrophe and the loss of state sovereignty, but also to our people’s transformation into cannon fodder in the West’s geopolitical struggle against Russia and China. The Central Committee of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine categorically opposes that policy, which is forcing the Ukrainian regime to provoke a full-scale armed conflict with the Russian Federation. We have drawn these conclusions not only from the aggressive rhetoric of your countries’ officials and the NATO leadership, and not only from the bellicose propaganda of the Ukrainian regime and all its mass media, but also from the continuous supply of lethal weapons to Ukraine, construction of (essentially foreign) military bases on our territory, and the dispatch here of one after another unit of special forces, instructors and advisers from your countries. We understand that capitalism, by its objective nature, is sinking into an ever deeper crisis and that ominous social and economic problems are increasing in your countries. We understand that in the People’s Republic of China a magnificent event will soon take place, the Winter Olympic Games, which will show to the entire world an unprecedented, never before achieved level of development of a socialist state. That is why your countries have organized a “diplomatic boycott of the Olympics,” and to discredit this great international sports festival, just like in 2008 you need a military provocation. If it’s not Georgia against Russia, then this time it’s Ukraine against Russia. It’s clear that you want a military conflict, but you want it to be done by somebody other than yourselves. You won’t be the ones with zinc coffins coming home, and it won’t be your cities and villages that lie in ruins. You’ve grown accustomed to getting somebody else to do it for you. And for this purpose you buy off and intimidate the puppet regimes in your colonies. We are categorically opposed to this being done in general. And, included, to its being done through Ukraine and at the expense of the people of Ukraine. We draw your attention to the fact that delivering weapons to Ukraine today, in the current blistering-hot conflict situation, is a violation of the UN Charter, the Minsk accord on the peaceful settlement of the conflict in the Donbass (an agreement affirmed by the UN Security Council!), and international humanitarian law — in particular, the international Arms Trade Treaty (April 2013). Beyond any question, your countries’ supplying weapons to Ukraine is harming peace and security and provoking an intensification of the armed conflict and a growth in tension. This is expressly forbidden by that Treaty. We also draw your attention to the International Code of Conduct on Arms Transfers, drafted in 2000 by laureates of the Nobel Peace Prize. In particular, Article 4 of that Code, “Compliance with international human rights standards,” and Article 8, “Commitment to promote regional peace, security and stability.” The Code calls for not supplying weapons in instances of a Nazi regime or if it may lead to “a significant number of displaced persons or refugees.” Peace and accord will be established in Ukraine not by weapons deliveries, but by implementing the Minsk agreements, recognizing that Ukrainian “integral” nationalism is a criminal ideology, and the denazification and democratization of our country. The governments of your countries and of Ukraine are obliged to realize that war and incitement to war are not the main values of world civilization. Those values are peace, life, and the mental and physical health of people. Dr. Natalia Vitrenko is a noted Ukrainian economist, who formerly served as a member of parliament and ran for president. In 2019, she delivered an address on the topic “LaRouche’s Science of Physical Economy as the Key to Solving the Problems of the World, Eurasia, and Ukraine” at a Schiller Institute conference.
Today could prove to be a fateful day for history as U.S. Secretary of State Tony Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov meet to discuss the security proposals Russia formally introduced in writing, just over one month ago. Speaking to an audience in Germany on Thursday, Blinken said, “I don’t expect a breakthrough.” But a breakthrough is what is needed to pull humanity back from the brink of nuclear war.In the United States, former member of Congress and presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard denounced the White House and Congress — on both sides of the aisle — for hiding from Americans the immense danger of ongoing provocations against Russia. Tucker Carlson interviewed a guest who warned that the “U.S. is sleepwalking towards conflict” with the other biggest nuclear power on the planet. Meanwhile, the U.S. legacy media are in overdrive mode to demonize Russia (while still keeping the pressure on China). They claim that nothing less than democracy and goodness itself are at stake, and that only an enormous display of anti-Russian might can save all that is good in the world from the Russian menace. Time is running short to avert catastrophe. The U.S. has participated in tyrannical overreach around the world — twenty years in Afghanistan, the murderous Iraq War, the murder of Qaddafi and consequent chaos in Libya, the destruction of Syria, and the 2014 coup in Ukraine that has since been used to demonize Russia. This tyranny in the name of democracy knows no shame. And that same tyrannical overreach is increasingly occurring domestically. The failed vote on ending the filibuster for a partisan voting bill was intended not so secure that bill’s passage. Its purpose is more aligned with the declaration that domestic terrorists — that is, people with unorthodox opinions — must be denied rights. It is of a piece with the spreading censorship of non-Atlanticist views on social media. Do you oppose war with Russia? You must be in Putin’s pocket. In fact, you should be prosecuted for treason. Do you oppose war with China? A CCP spy must have gotten to you. Do you support affordable energy capable of powering a growing human population at higher standards of living? You are supporting ecocide, and should be tried for your crimes. Have you revealed inconvenient truths? Ask Julian Assange how the UK and US treat practitioners of press freedom — a virtue they hypocritically claim to promote around the world. A new security architecture is needed, one that both ends attempts at unipolar hegemony, and that recognizes that peace is not merely the absence of conflict. What are to be the economic, social, and scientific-technological contours of that peace? Whatever may be presented as the outcome of today’s Blinken-Lavrov discussions, the world needs the analysis and direction of the LaRouche Organization and the Schiller Institute — to be presented at an event tomorrow, “Can War with Russia Still Be Averted?” Learn more on Saturday at 11am PT, 2pm ET, 8pm CET, on schillerinstitute.com
In response to the devastating situation in Afghanistan and the clear focus the LaRouche movement has placed on turning Afghanistan into a crossroads of development, Bernie Sanders — who plays the role of a principled fighter for justice on TV — has been forced to take a stand.One day after the Schiller Institute's Jan 17 conference "Stop the Murder of Afghanistan," the Vermont senator tweeted: "Afghanistan is facing a humanitarian catastrophe. I urge the Biden administration to immediately release billions in frozen Afghan government funds to help avert this crisis, and prevent the death of millions of people." Afghanistan is facing a humanitarian catastrophe. I urge the Biden administration to immediately release billions in frozen Afghan government funds to help avert this crisis, and prevent the death of millions of people.— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) January 18, 2022 Afghanistan's central bank funds — which belong to the people of that nation — be released immediately. The leading powers of the world — particularly those NATO nations that helped to create its present disastrous state — must join forces to support Afghanistan in building a proud future. Learn more in Helga Zepp-LaRouche's recent presentation on Operation Ibn Sina and its namesake.
On Tuesday, Fox personality Tucker Carlson hosted Clint Ehrlich to denounce the media-backed drive for war with Russia. After explaining that the U.S. has nothing to gain in backing Ukraine's accession to NATO, Carlson introduced Russia scholar Ehrlich, who said that even if Russia doesn't invade Ukraine, there are many in the U.S. saying that the U.S. should effectively invade, by sending in troops for conflict with Russia. "It's not just nuts, it's dangerous. We're sleepwalking towards conflict with a country that has 4,000 nuclear weapons. The Russians are talking about potentially deploying strategic forces to Cuba and Venezuela in a repeat of the Cuban Missile Crisis. It's just shocking that people are not more upset about this, because the lives of Americans are being threatened over a situation where we have no vital strategic interest." America is moving towards war with Russia, and the media is encouraging it. pic.twitter.com/hE9Hv8Xu63— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) January 19, 2022 In a tweet thread, Ehrlich listed insane responses to his appearances: "Tucker all-in for Putin" pronounced neocon lunatic Bill Kristol. "Your nightly reminder that @TuckerCarlson and @FoxNews are not loyal to the United States of America" said the totally sane Keith Olbermann. "We are potentially on the verge of a land war in Europe aimed at extinguishing democracy and sovereignty and the American right wing is on the side of ethno-nationalist authoritarianism. That's where we're at," wrote Ben Rhodes, Obama's favorite speech writer. Exceedingly deep thinker and CNN chief White House correspondent John Harwood weighed in: "that the leading Fox host unabashedly makes Putin's case shows how the disinformation successes of Russian intelligence extend way beyond Trump." "This isn’t journalism, it’s an ongoing FARA violation. Tucker Carlson needs to be prosecuted as an unregistered agent of the Russian Federation and treason under Article 3, Sec. 3, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution for aiding an enemy in hybrid warfare against the United States," demanded DNC operative Alexandra Chalupa of Russiagate fame. My segment last night on @TuckerCarlson is having a bigger impact than I ever imagined. It's causing pro-war pundits and politicians to lose their minds!Let's catalog their meltdowns. A thread... 🧵— Clint Ehrlich (@ClintEhrlich) January 19, 2022 This followed Tulsi Gabbard's appearance with Steve Hilton on Fox. Gabbard denounced the White House, particularly Jake Sullivan and Tony Blinken, for being architect of regime change policies in the past and making policy at present. "They are stoking tensions. They are escalating the situation that can only lead us down a more dangerous path that directly undermines the interests of the American people and our country. Let's be real about what we're dealing with here, Steve. We're talking about the United States and Russia, two great nuclear-armed powers in the world. There is only one place that that conflict ends. That ends in destruction of this world and life as we know it. Don't be naive, don't be shy about pointing out exactly what is at state. That is what the American people need to know, and that is what people in the White House and leaders in Congress on both sides of the aisle refuse to tell them the truth about."
Perhaps the most certain thing about the world today is the immense uncertainty about the future. Will geopolitical games targeting Russia and China cross the line—even if unintentionally—thereby triggering a nuclear holocaust that would destroy human civilization for generations? Would anyone be so mad as to allow that to occur? Or will the trans-Atlantic financial power centered in the City of London and Wall Street be forced to its knees and put through bankruptcy, as a new paradigm of growth is inaugurated worldwide, led by the mission of ensuring health, purpose, and growth in all nations?While there are no guarantees that humanity will choose a sane path, there are many reasons to hope that the latter outcome will come to pass. The success of the Helga Zepp-LaRouche and the LaRouche movement in forcing the issue of Afghanistan is seen in the spate of reports and actions from the International Crisis Group, the United Nations, and even the New York Times and Financial Times. The ICG has issued an extensive report on the situation, denouncing efforts to cause the Taliban to fail, which would bring “famine … migration … terrorism, and … drugs.” The bitter pill of Taliban success must be swallowed, and the lives of Afghanistan’s people put ahead of ego. Funds are desperately needed, and there is no way around working with the current de facto government. Otherwise, tens of millions risk famine and death. Will Afghanistan—a crossroads of trade—prove to be a crossroads of history, a branching point in the axioms animating human behavior? The dangers are immense. It seems that Joe Biden does not personally want to risk nuclear war, but does he control his administration? Russia insists on formal, written responses to the security concerns it has raised with the U.S. and NATO, and talks continue, even as NATO nations say that Russia’s demands are absolutely unacceptable. The answer is up to you. Choose to forge a new future, to give a meaningful direction to the Earth’s next fifty years. Today, join the Schiller Institute’s seminar “To Stop the Murder of Afghanistan” and commit yourself to acting on the famous words of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., that “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
The axioms under which they operate, have led the U.S., NATO, and the other members of the OSCE to make essentially no response to Russia’s central security concerns, which that nation laid out repeatedly over a series of meetings this week. But those axioms can be junked at the moment the decision is made to do so. And the accelerating approach of the menace of nuclear annihilation must serve as the catalyst for this change!Will the Treaty of Versailles approach being taken by NATO — whereby the victor dictates terms to the vanquished — give way to a new Peace of Westphalia, whereby the interest of the other must guide a nation’s (and one’s own) actions, as the key to durable peace? Consider the example of Syria, which has been pummeled by years of economic warfare, invasion by outside military forces, and support for domestic and imported terrorists. Despite its suffering, still the State Department and Members of Congress demand more blood. But China offers something else — something that the trans-Atlantic world could have offered, but didn’t. China offers development, investment, advancement, and growth. Syria just joined China’s Belt and Road Initiative, a modern approach like that of the Treaty of Westphalia that ended the brutal and bloody Thirty Years War by creating an active peace — one based on cooperation for the future, rather than recriminations for the past. Can empty politicians, selfish billionaires, and City of London and Wall Street institutions be reformed? Kazakhstan’s newly empowered President, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, shows a way to achieve that goal, with a little “assistance.” His country possesses vast mineral resources, a phenomenally wealthy elite, and great need for economic, cultural, and scientific advancement. To help achieve those latter ends, Tokayev has announced the establishment of a “National Fund” to invest in “health care, education, and social services.” How will it pay for these investments? Tokayev is direct: through “meaningful and regular contributions to the fund on the part of businesses.” “Thanks to the first president [Nazarbayev], there is a group of very profitable companies in the country and a layer of people who are rich even by international standards. I think the time has come to pay back the people of Kazakhstan, and help them on a systematic, regular basis.” He even offers to help, by compiling a list of eligible “donor” companies, and a calculation of how much they should “contribute.” A similar approach towards such extravagantly and unjustifiably wealthy institutions as the British Monarchy, Blackrock, and Jeff Bezos could have a salubrious effect on both donors and recipients. On a national and global scale, the Four Laws of Lyndon LaRouche can guide the establishment of a system whereby the many “contributions” given to the financial oligarchy over the decades can be redirected to create growth through infrastructure, technological leaps, and scientific advance. The world is ready to be turned upside down. Will we take this great opportunity to think big? Join the Schiller Institute’s January 17 event “An Injustice Anywhere Is a Threat to Justice Everywhere: Stop the Murder of Afghanistan” for the outlook capable of creating such revolutionary change.
Is it entirely a coincidence that the ongoing events in Kazakhstan, which shares the world’s longest land border with Russia, are occurring one one week before a series of strategic dialogues between Russia and the U.S., NATO, and other members of the OSCE?Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has responded to protests that became violent in a way that suggested organization, by changing the government, requesting and receiving security assistance from his Collective Security Treaty Organization partners, refusing to negotiate with violent bandits, and ordering his security forces to shoot perpetrators of violence without warning. He has thanked Russian President Vladimir Putin for his support, and received praise from China’s President Xi Jinping, whose country also borders Kazakhstan. The United States has, predictably, focused on warning that the “world” is watching for (or are the Anglo-Americans hoping for?) human rights violations. What are the origins of these protests? Who ran them? What went into preparing them? Plans for destabilizing Russia, published by the RAND corporation in 2019, included six geopolitical options. The first four—starting with providing weapons to Ukraine—have been implemented; the fifth calls for attacking Russian influence in Central Asia (where Kazakhstan is located). If this is an attempted replay of the 2014 Maidan protests in Ukraine, as seems more than possible, then we should look for that event’s British-American parentage. And that’s precisely where the investigation of a purported leader of the protests leads: to London. While additional inquiry is required to unwrap what is occurring in Kazakhstan, the world context is clear. Next week’s dialogues are an opportunity to make an abrupt about-face on priorities and paradigm, to drop the anti-Russia, anti-China, anti-growth (green), and slavishly pro-finance policies that are leading civilization to the brink of a catastrophe from which there were no return: nuclear war. Far better to look to the heavens, source of endless wonder and discovery. The James Webb Space Telescope, launched on Christmas, will be fully operational by this summer, sending images of galaxies from ten billions years ago, based on wavelengths our eyes can’t see. In this Year of Lyndon LaRouche, we must challenge ourselves to play a successful role in building a worthy, human civilization.
The New Year has the potential to start with a significant shift in the direction of sanity, with the series of meetings next week—held with the U.S., NATO, and the OSCE—to directly discuss with Russia its emphatically stated security concerns. Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche has called on the U.S. and NATO to sign the agreements put forward by Russia, to completely change the world strategic trajectory, which otherwise inexorably leads to what would invariably become nuclear war of global dimensions.Why is the world on such a deadly path, and why are there not enormous protests in cities all across the trans-Atlantic to oppose this deadly course? The Anglo-American financial-military-information oligarchy has no intent of allowing its system of domination to be overthrown by the meteoric economic (and increasingly political) rise of China and the committedly independent sovereignty of Russia. Its anti-growth destructive paradigm demands sacrificing civilization, now on the altar of purported green gods to avert a rumored cataclysm in the future. With the refusal of such nations as India, Russia, China, and Nigeria to “follow the séance” by entering suicidal agreements during the COP26 climate conference in Glasgow, more direct, and brutal means are being called to the fore. The sensible course of affairs would be to dissolve NATO, whose raison d’être vanished several decades ago, or at least to limit and undo its Eastern expansion. Consider Finland, which borders both Russia and NATO-member Norway, and whose President Sauli Niinistö had helpfully offered last spring to host a 2025 conference in Helsinki on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Conference of Security and Cooperation in Europe, as a forum for talking through strategic tensions. Niinistö, in comments echoed by that country’s prime minister, has announced that Finland would not rule out joining NATO. This Anglo-American oligarchy, intent on maintaining a rules-based-order in which it makes the rules, is cynically indifferent to the human suffering it causes, whether through war, medical neglect, or the brutal, genocidal treatment of Afghanistan, which is being denied access to its own resources. But this oligarchical model, so powerfully critiqued in dramatic form by Verdi in his opera Rigoletto, can be overcome! As the locus of economic power in the world moves to Asia, the trans-Atlantic world must develop a new role. As Lyndon LaRouche expressed the need for a new type of cooperation already in 2007, the "medieval legacy of predatory power of usury has gained such power that it can not be defeated except through a concert of clearly defined, mutual self-interest among a combination of powerful nation-states. “That is the common interest which we in the U.S.A. and China, share at this juncture. That is the crucial importance of those within the U.S.A. who typify that common interest of the people of the U.S.A. and Asia. It is our awareness of this common interest, which is therefore a crucial factor in world history at this juncture.” Flashes of opportunity for such cooperation can burst forth, powering a mighty engine of growth. How will you catalyze that change? Will we make 2022, the centennial of Lyndon LaRouche’s birth, the “Year of LaRouche”?
On Friday, Dec. 17, Russia released to the public two draft agreements it had proposed to the United States on Wednesday, Dec. 15: a Russia-U.S. treaty and a Russia-NATO agreement. These documents, written as full and designed to be ready to sign, are designed to address Russia’s security concerns.These agreements make sense for anyone who wants to assure peace on this planet. Those speaking out against them, rejecting the agreements and dialogue with Russia out of hand, will reveal themselves to be war-mongers. The release of these documents comes amidst a mounting drive for war, driven, for example, by efforts to incorporate Ukraine into NATO, something Russia has very clearly stated would be crossing a bright, flashing red line. But crazed geopoliticians, intent on maintaining a unipolar world order directed from the British Empire and the United States, are pursuing a policy that ineluctably leads to nuclear warfare that would destroy global civilization. The documents call for recognizing a principle of “non-interference in the internal affairs” of each other, acknowledge that “direct military clash between them could result in the use of nuclear weapons that would have far-reaching consequences,” reaffirm “that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought,” and recognize “the need to make every effort to prevent the risk of outbreak of such war among States that possess nuclear weapons.” The operative part of the U.S.-Russia treaty calls for refraining from taking actions “that could undermine core security interests of the other Party.” Cognizant of the drive for NATO-ization of Ukraine, Article 4 states: “The United States of America shall undertake to prevent further eastward expansion of NATO and deny accession to the Alliance to the States of the former U.S.S.R.,” and “The United States of America shall not establish military bases in the territory of the States of the former U.S.S.R. that are not members of NATO, use their infrastructure for any military activities or develop bilateral military cooperation with them.” It goes on to state that the Parties (the U.S. and Russia) will not take military actions outside their own borders that threaten each other’s national security, or fly bombers or sail warships outside of their territorial waters in ways that would threaten each other. On the U.S.’s expansion of its nuclear weapons to include those stored in such locations of Germany, the treaty states, “The Parties shall refrain from deploying nuclear weapons outside their national territories and return such weapons already deployed … to their national territories.” The Russia-NATO agreement states that “The Parties reaffirm that they do not consider each other as adversaries.” It essentially calls for rolling back NATO to its 1997 status (at the time of the signing of the Founding Act of Mutual Relations between Russia and NATO), and insists that NATO “shall not conduct any military activity on the territory of Ukraine as well as other States in the Eastern Europe, in the South Caucasus and in Central Asia.” It also calls for all Parties to agree not to conduct “military exercises or other military activities above the brigade level” within a certain range of the borders of NATO and Russia and its military allies. The conditions describe a reasonable state of affairs among allies, and reads like a peace treaty recognizing that the Cold War ended decades ago. A development and peace plan is also desperately needed In Afghanistan, where a two-decade U.S.-NATO military adventure ended just months ago. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation is holding a two-day extraordinary meeting in Islamabad, Pakistan, on the subject of developing a humanitarian and development perspective for Afghanistan, where millions of people face starvation and disease due to two decades of warfare and ongoing economic sanctions and the withholding of billions of dollars of central bank reserves. There is a potential for this conference to conclude with a broad aid and reconstruction/development proposal for Afghanistan, which the nation sorely needs. Schiller Institute Founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche and Schiller Institute Activist Hussein Askary appeared on Pakistani PTV World’s coverage of the OIC ministerial on Friday to discuss their views of the potential for the event. Zepp-LaRouche denounced the failure of the West to take human responsibility for the situation it has created in Afghanistan, and decried the withholding of billions of dollars of the Afghani people’s funds as shameful. Money is withheld based on the excuse that the Taliban mistreats women and children, but look at the devastating conditions created by economic warfare! She promoted the Schiller Institute’s Operation Ibn Sina as a path forward in creating a health and development path forward for Afghanistan, a proposal that could be incorporated by the OIC in its final resolutions. She appealed to the entire world to choose the side of humanity over barbarism. In fact, the crisis presents an opportunity, to those willing to do good, to overcome geopolitics through a commitment to a higher principle. If the United States could be induced to make a positive contribution, this would be of absolute world historical importance in shifting the world paradigm: “I think the whole destiny of mankind is concentrated like a laser in what happens in Afghanistan,” she said. It must become an issue of the whole world. Is humanity fit to survive? “In one sense, I think the fate of Afghanistan and the fate of humanity are more closely connected than most people can imagine.” Askary further developed these themes, laying the blame for the current situation in Afghanistan not on the Taliban, but on 20 years of destructive Western policy. He concluded with an optimistic note on the power of truth over lies: Although narratives may appear to have a certain power, it is reality that ultimately has the upper hand. (Their remarks are transcribed for this briefing.) Reality is asserting itself in Europe, where EU deliberations on its energy sector broke down due to the inherently enormous physical costs of an energy “transition” asserting themselves. Although its use has been marketed as a warm and fuzzy pleasant act of benignant goodness, “green” energy’s intermittent nature and extremely low energy density mean that non-nuclear attempts at decarbonization will unavoidably be extremely expensive. Poland and the Czech Republic want to totally jettison the EU’s CO₂ Emissions Trading System, while ideological lunatics in Austria cheer the potential to remove nuclear from the EU’s “Taxonomy” list of “green” power sources. But ideology will not heat your home, and wishful thinking will not propel your bus or car. The Malthusian worldview of limited resources, overpopulation, and geopolitics is a narrative: both false and devastating to those foolish enough not to overcome it. Will we choose to allow the reality of the anti-entropic nature of the universe and the limitless perfectibility of our beautiful species to inspire us to achieve great things, under a paradigm of economic, scientific, and cultural growth?
The farcical Summit for Democracy hypocritically held by the United States at the end of this week put on display both how little the “democracy” brand name has to offer, and the increasing disregard it receives from other nations of the world. But it has unintentionally served as a useful foil against which to discuss policies that actually would create a better future.The “Summit for Global Dominance,” as one Russian leader accurately called it, was officially devoted to “strengthening democracy and countering authoritarianism, fighting corruption, and promoting respect for human rights.” But coinciding with the summit (and Human Rights Day of the United Nations) came a decision from the U.K. that showed just how opposed to authoritarianism and respectful of human rights the United States truly is: the U.S. won its appeal to extradite Julian Assange to face charges of violating the (likely unconstitutional) Espionage Act of 1917. Assange’s crime? Publishing information passed on to him, including proof of U.S. war crimes and of Democratic National Committee (DNC) bias towards political failure Hillary Clinton in 2016. The publication of those Democratic Party documents were used as the excuse to launch the Russiagate hoax, which paralyzed needed efforts to improve U.S.-Russia relations and was used to attempt to effectively undo the democratic election of political outsider Donald Trump in 2016. Apparently the aspirations of the demos, the people, of other nations mean little to the organizers of the sham summit, as U.S., U.K., and NATO institutions continue to drive towards war with Russia and China. Their crimes, in the eyes of the Anglo-American elite? Economic development and political-strategic independence. China’s response to the “Democracy Summit” excoriated the United States for using the term “democracy” into “a weapon of mass destruction,” used to spread war and chaos, to drive confrontation between nations. While the status of “democracy” in the U.S. itself is nothing to be proud of, China has adopted a different vision of what it calls “whole-process people’s democracy,” and the outcomes in terms of quality of life have been tremendous! As for Russia, one need only look to 2014 to see the cynical use of “democracy” as a weapon of war. In that year, billions of dollars were poured into Ukraine from the U.S. and the U.K. into effecting a coup in that nation, after its President hesitated to reject Russia and to tie its fate to the European Union. That coup, which brought literal fascists into power, was rejected by people in Eastern Ukraine and Crimea, who resisted the anti-democratic change in government through forms of autonomy, or, in the case of Crimea, voting overwhelmingly to rejoin the Russia of which they had been a part. What would true “democracy” mean for the future? Some slight potential is seen in the assent by a World Bank donors’ group (led by the U.S.) to allow a portion of the funds set aside for Afghanistan to be released this month towards urgently needed projects for food and humanitarian assistance. This slight advance comes as the Red Cross warns that “the international community is turning its back as [Afghanistan] teeters on the precipice of man-made catastrophe.” The Indira Gandhi Children’s Hospital in Kabul reports a 50% increase in malnourished children. Amnesty International has called for the easing of financial restrictions, which prevent the provision of basic services for fear of running afoul of the U.S. sanctions regime. Another possible advance is seen in the Russian motion towards presenting a framework for legal security guarantees to provide stability with respect to NATO. But the forces promoting a “war seeking a reason” are not motivated by specific security considerations. They are driven to conflict by the relative failures of the “Green” policy to achieve their aims of preventing development, reducing population, and reversing the potentials of scientific advancement. They trumpet the decoupling between “GDP” and carbon dioxide emissions, as though the post-industrial financialization this change reflects is a good thing. They propose, today, locking up 30% of the Earth’s resources, land, and water away from human use. But why would they stop there? Think of what could be called a global democratic approach, one that would advance science, living standards, and cultural optimism. In the midst of the Covid pandemic, the achievement of modern health infrastructure in each country, with the other physical, social and other infrastructure and physical development needed to support it, can serve as an organizing point for a new paradigm of growth and development, as proposed for decades by the Schiller Institute and the entire LaRouche movement, a paradigm whose potential global realization has taken an enormous leap forwards with China’s economic success and its Belt and Road Initiative. War, which should be unthinkable, is actively contemplated. What do you think you will do about it?
Since the COP26 flop, along with the inevitable economic breakdown from the casino-monetarist system, and the green madness to-date, the geopolitical confrontationist hysteria against China and Russia from the U.S./UK/NATO alignment has reached the stage of war provocation. This is exactly the dynamic that the Schiller Institute has warned of, and its process of international dialogue sought to prevent. More voices are now sounding the alarm. The urgent task is to create a mighty chorus.Peter van Buren, an American with a long career in foreign service, has issued a warning posted today, in an article titled, “What Will Be the Casus Belli for War with China?” He makes the point that China “appears to be the next war now searching for a reason.” When it comes to making war, in recent decades, the U.S. “created a false pretext for doing so,” in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, and so on. In contrast, in the case of Pearl Harbor, the aggression against the U.S. was real. But in these other cases, the casus belli was made up, like WMD in Iraq. The same thing is going on regarding China, and the danger is extreme. Tulsi Gabbard, U.S. political leader based in Hawaii, ripped into the rabid war-talk of Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi) this week. Wicker, the second-highest-ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said on Fox TV, Dec. 7, that U.S. military options against Russia must include that “we stand off with our ships in the Black Sea, and we rain down destruction” on Russia. “I would not rule out American troops on the ground. We don’t rule out first use nuclear action.” Gabbard responded on Fox TV last evening, "Anyone who would propose or even consider what he is saying as an option must be insane, a sociopath or a sadist. Let’s go and launch a nuclear attack that would start a war that would destroy the American people, our country and the world and, oh, also, the Ukrainians so that we can save Ukraine’s democracy? I mean, it literally is insane. “And the crazy thing is, Senator Wicker is not an outlier. He is the number two Republican on the Senate Armed Forces Committee, and you are hearing the same kind of rhetoric coming from Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the administration and in the media—no problem with this because they actually agree with this. They are pushing this same narrative themselves, which is why this is such a dangerous, dangerous situation…. We are being pushed closer and closer to a hot war, a nuclear war.” By whom? By “the same neocons and neo libs in Washington who dragged our country into regime change wars in places like Iraq and Libya and Syria.”There are consequences to leaders in our country, influential people in our country to throwing things out like, [that] a first use nuclear attack is on the table. This directly undermines our national security, and it directly puts the American people and our country and the world at risk." Against these voices of reason, comes the U.S-convened Summit of Democracy, which opened today, online from Washington, D.C., and stands out for its lies and confrontation. China and Russia were not invited. Pakistan declined, given their exclusion. Many poor nations were among the roster of 80 countries, participating with short messages out of fear of retribution. President Biden and Sec. of State Blinken announced that a new organization to combat corruption and misinformation that, they assert, threatens democracy, is being formed, called the Global Anti-Corruption Consortium, which has funding from the United Kingdom, Taiwan, the Open Society Foundation (George Soros,) Denmark, and the United States. The State Department’s Agency for International Development (USAID) will start up a Partnership for Democracy program, under the direction of its administrator, Samantha Power, who has been in the forefront of U.S. initiatives at this Summit and at COP26. The USAID was founded 60 years ago, under President John F. Kennedy, for the purpose of providing aid where needed, and doing good. It has been itself subverted years ago to serve British geopolitical purposes, as shown in the extreme by its latest mandate to enforce “democracy.” Now is the time to mobilize for true emergency aid, rebuilding war torn nations, starting with Afghanistan, and building the world economy. Kennedy’s mandate for the USAID was seen in action early today, when China’s air shipment arrived at Kabul International Airport, with 800,000 doses of vaccine against COVID-19, and other supplies. More will be coming soon. Tulsi Gabbard, who is an Army Reserve officer, currently serving at Ft. Bragg, displayed the needed spirit when she spoke out Dec. 7 on Pearl Harbor Day (before Wicker’s insanity), wearing her Army fatigues, delivering a call to action (on Twitter): “It’s time for anyone who cares about their loved ones, other Americans, and all human beings and wildlife, to wake up to this very grim reality of what lies ahead … if we allow the mainstream media, military industrial complex, and self-serving politicians to lead us into the apocalypse of World War 3.”
Globally, does democracy—rule by the people—include all people, or only the manipulated opinions of those who reside in nations possessing enormous military, logistical, and informational power? If the world took a vote, would it endorse current U.S. policy?Following the video summit between Presidents Biden and Putin—which comes just days after a flurry of breathless claims that Russia is preparing to invade Ukraine, the United States on Dec. 9 will open its “democracy” summit, in which that word will be twisted to mean whatever the purveyors of color revolutions wish it to mean. Hysterical and numerically impossible claims about Russia mounting an army to invade Ukraine sound like the intended outcome of a scheme under which Ukraine, with U.S. and other military or at least (im)moral support, launches an attack to retake the eastern provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk. Were these regions to request (and receive) Russian support, the entire operation would be reported as though it were an unprovoked Russian attack on Ukraine’s sovereignty. This would parallel the situation in Crimea, in which a complex situation created following a coup backed by the U.S. and U.K. was presented as a simple matter of a Russian invasion of that peninsula. How should Russia respond to such an action by Ukraine? And how should you act today to prevent such a situation from unfolding? The ongoing assault on China comprises several flanks: hypocritical claims of human rights abuses in Xinjiang, promotion of a drive for Taiwan independence, and attacks on the upcoming Olympics beginning in February 2022. These destructive strategies of conflict are coming from the supposedly “democratic” leaders of the trans-Atlantic world, who have left a disaster in Afghanistan and cruelly deny the humanitarian and development assistance that nation so desperately needs. An op-ed in Al Jazeera, written by an international group of supporters of Afghanistan, sums it up: “The Afghan people should not be denied vital healthcare and be abandoned without food because the international community sees economic starvation as the only available tool to influence the Taliban regime. The international community is effectively punishing Afghan civilians for the actions of a regime brought upon them by force.” The op-ed concludes, “The international community that 20 years ago promised to support Afghans in their pursuit of peace, prosperity and human rights has a moral obligation to stop its freefall towards starvation and death. And the time to act is now.” Is “democracy” practiced by murdering the people of Afghanistan? Are the “democratic rights” of the people of Russia supported by pursuing a reckless policy that threatens military engagement? Are the aspirations for “freedom” of the Chinese people advanced by stirring up trouble for them and their country, to prevent its growth? The paradigm that drives this cruelty and fosters the cultivated indifference that tolerates it must be replaced. But how? The economic success of China’s development and its willingness to bring its infrastructural know-how, hard capabilities and financing to projects around the world through its Belt and Road Initiative is a promising reference. The ongoing Covid situation presents an opportunity to address the pitiful state of health infrastructure in much of the world, including significant portions of what are considered to be “developed” countries. Can an initiative to partner with long-suffering Afghanistan to develop a modern health infrastructure in that nation force a rethinking of national goals and serve as a catalyst to bring into being a new paradigm of statecraft? Will the conflict between what is promised under a Green New Deal, and the physical economic despair that that policy’s implementation would necessitate, be used to provoke a deeper understanding of power density and infrastructure platforms? The answers to these questions lie in our hands. Lyndon LaRouche and his movement have, over decades, developed, fought for, and succeeded in realizing policies capable of reversing economic collapse and inflation, cultural decay and division, geopolitics, and scientific stagnation. Will you ensure that those efforts succeed?
Diane Sare, an independent candidate for U.S. Senate from New York, issued a campaign statement pointing to the hypocrisy of the United States holding a "Summit for Democracy" while her state is depriving its residents of the opportunity to vote for a candidate of their choosing, through nearly impossible ballot access requirements for candidates independent of the two-party system. The LaRouche Organization agrees with Sare's criticism, which opens with a quote from Matthew: Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. (Matthew 7:5)Sare writes that on December 9-10, 2021, "U.S. President Joe Biden will host a virtual 'Summit for Democracy' with the noble-sounding goal of 'providing a platform for leaders to announce both individual and collective commitments, reforms, and initiatives to defend democracy and human rights at home and abroad.'" "As an American candidate for the United States Senate from the State of New York, and as a long-time associate of the politically-persecuted American statesman and economist Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.," she continues, "I am writing to urge the participants, and the uninvited nations, to look behind the flowery phrases on the State Department’s webpage at the actual state of affairs within the United States, and to consider that this 'platform' may be more like the platform beneath the feet of unfortunate souls waiting to be hanged." Sare's campaigning over the past year and a half has included "over 50 weekly symposia on various urgent topics, including homelessness, food shortages and famine, Afghanistan, education, election reform, nuclear power, water management, and more, with panel participants from among leading national and state experts including medical doctors, scientists, prisoner rights advocates, farmers, housing association leaders, teachers and others." "If I am denied ballot access," she stresses, "the voting public will have no opportunity to express their opinion on these important policies." At the time of her writing, Sare tells us that "of the several candidates supposedly challenging Schumer, I am the only candidate who has filed any report with the Federal Elections Commission. Thus, as of this time, if I am excluded from the ballot, there will be no opposition in this very important U.S. Senate election." She concludes: "Perhaps some courageous individual will ask their American hosts at the upcoming 'Summit for Democracy' about the question of ballot access in American elections, as well as the case of Julian Assange, and the case of former presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche. If the summit hosts were sincere, these clearly un-democratic matters would be at the top of the agenda as issues to be happily rectified." The full statement is available on Sare's campaign webpage.
Russia and China are flanked to the west and the east by the threat of military conflict in the flashpoints of Ukraine and Taiwan. Warnings of a supposedly impending attack upon Ukraine by Russia are used as an excuse by NATO leaders to push for the stationing of troops and weapons in Ukraine. President Putin has made it clear that this would absolutely cross a red line for Russia. And the statement earlier this week by former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe that Japan and the U.S. would defend Taiwan militarily in the case of an invasion by the Chinese mainland was met with extremely forceful condemnation from the PRC.On Tuesday, Putin explained the threat posed to his country: “The Russian Federation also has certain apprehensions regarding the large-scale military exercises held near its border, including unscheduled ones, like the recent Black Sea drills during which strategic bombers, which are known to carry precision and possibly even nuclear weapons, made flights within 20 kilometers of our border.” With NATO expanding towards Russia over the last twenty years, including the placement of supposedly defensive BMD systems in Poland and Romania, with equipment also capable of launching Tomahawk and other missiles, Putin warned that an absolute red line comes from missile threats in Ukraine. "I will repeat this once again that the issue concerns the possible deployment in the territory of Ukraine of strike systems with the flight time of 7—10 minutes to Moscow, or 5 minutes in the case of hypersonic systems. … “So, what should we do? We would need to create similar systems to be used against those who are threatening us. … [W]e have held successful tests, and early next year we will put a new sea-launched hypersonic missile with a maximum speed of Mach 9 on combat duty. The flight time to those who issue orders will also be 5 minutes.” “Why are we doing this?” Putin asked. “The creation of such threats for us is the red line.” Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told the OSCE Foreign Ministers meeting in Stockholm that NATO’s involvement in Russia’s immediate vicinity (most notably Ukraine) would “have the most serious consequences and will force [Moscow] to take retaliatory measures.” The monster of armed conflict within Europe has returned. China’s Assistant Foreign Minister Hua Chunying reminded Japan: “During its colonial rule over Taiwan for half a century, Japan committed numerous crimes, over which it has grave historical responsibilities to the Chinese people. No one should underestimate the strong resolve, determination and capability of the Chinese people to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity. Those who dare to pursue the old path of militarism and challenge our bottom line will find themselves on a collision course with the Chinese people!” And it’s not just war! The ideological drive that seeks to use the threat of military conflict to destabilize development and control the growth and sovereignty of nations independent of the Anglo-American slime mold is the same force promoting the explicitly Malthusian agenda of the Great Reset. A pandemic is running wild across much of the world, with vaccines unavailable in sufficient quantities to meet the demands and needs of lesser developed countries. But instead of solving this problem, and developing an in-depth health infrastructure, the world is told it must mobilize tens or even a hundred trillion dollars of investment to prevent relatively minor changes in the climate. This anti-human paradigm requires urgently to be replaced with a new paradigm of growth and development. The deadly Covid pandemic itself provides an opportunity. By shining a light on our extreme lack of unpreparedness, both against emerging viruses and in terms of health infrastructure overall, it points the way to using the need to have modern, advancing health care for all people, as a driver for shaping infrastructural, industrial, educational, and cultural development overall. Join the Schiller Institute this Saturday for a discussion of how the full development of health infrastructure can serve as a driver to sweep away anti-human Malthusianism and geopolitics, replacing it with an approach coherent with the dignity of each human individual.
How many times have you heard your grumpy neighbors complain that “they” (the third person mysterious) are ruining the country, but that there’s nothing that can be done? Often enough, this is followed by some mumbling to the effect that “I’m only one person”. Perhaps, possibly, maybe, you yourself have been afflicted with this mindset. If so, then there’s someone you badly need to meet.
Nov 10 — If the crushing defeat of the “woke” Democrats on November 2, 2021 taught us anything, it’s that Americans often go from supporting “absolute crazy” to returning to “somewhat normal,” like a drunk who wakes up in the morning regretting their debaucheries of the previous night. “Turns out we voted for a lunatic! I hope this next one won’t be so bad,” the typical American voter may be heard murmuring to themselves. Most of the Democrats have gone crazy with the green agenda and can not understand that the American people are now rejecting the horrible pain this Administration is putting them through. But do the Republicans have actual solutions? Are they less tied to Wall Street? Are they less committed to war?What’s been missing is actual leadership for the Good, something which uplifts the character of the nation as a whole. That’s what Lyndon LaRouche represented, but sadly the American people never had the wisdom to elect him president, and most cowered when he came under attack by the establishment. Americans have settled for “the lesser of two evils” for years. Leaders will not be successful without real support from the American people, who must take responsibility for our nation and the world. If you are disgusted with the state of things today, it’s useful to remember that it’s not just those elected officials who have failed, though failed they have, but that ultimately, the responsibility lies with us, not with our terrible political parties. On the occasion of his 90th birthday in 2012, Lyndon LaRouche had the foresight to announce the end of the party system: Now, George Washington, President George Washington and others, at the founding of our republic, as an independent republic, tried to prevent the formation of a party system. And I think, the time has come, to eliminate the party system… We don't need this party system which is a system of inherent corruption. What we need, is the election, due process election, of a composition of government. And we don't want people diverting the attention of the population, from the issues of the nation, over the issues of partisanship! That's where the problem lies!When you rely on parties, as such, you set up a kind of controversy, or competition, for power, between or among party systems. These party systems then excite the passions of the foolish voters, who now are concerned about voting for the party, first, and the nation, second! When it must be the nation, first, and not the party.The LaRouche Organization holds itself to this principled standard in deciding whether to endorse candidates, those committed to their nation over party. Moreover, LaRouche constantly stressed that true statecraft required an adamant commitment to the general welfare of the world, as much as to one’s nation.We at the LaRouche Organization will not endorse a candidate just because we think they won’t do any harm, or they might do some good. The American people need to know that they can trust that TLO will only endorse candidates we know with certainty will fight for the good, even when in many cases it’s not popular. That was John F. Kennedy’s standard in his book Profiles in Courage.The LaRouche Organization is proud to announce our first endorsements for the 2022 midterm election cycle. Diane Sare, running for Senate in New York
The discussion in Plato’s drama known as The Republic is of the creation of an ideal society. We are far from such an ideal society today, but one issue that is raised by Socrates in that dialogue is of tremendous relevance today. Even if the members of the dialogue worked out an ideal way of directing society, what would the next generation do? Lyndon LaRouche addresses something similar in his France After De Gaulle, when he points to the impossibility of relying on a benign tyranny as a structure of government: “The … more profound objection to the choice of oligarchical government is that the associated estrangement of the overwhelming majority from responsibility for the shaping of policy causes and perpetuates a corresponding tendency for moral degradation among the subjects of a nation.”He asks: “How do we impart the powers—the qualifications—of citizenship to the adult members of society generally?” Attempt to answer that question after a review of the crises confronting the world, the existing solutions already beckoning, and the greater potentials still to be created. The strategy employed by the financial-military empire centered in London, Wall Street, and Washington to maintain its power and its system is mass-murderous in its intention. The confrontation between oligarchical financial rule and the breakdown of the physical economy on which it feeds will be resolved. But how? Will it be through a Glass-Steagall bankruptcy reorganization guided by a recommitment to the economic principles of the American System, as developed upon by Lyndon LaRouche, for science and technology-driven growth in productivity? Or will it be through geopolitical warfare to prevent the rise and sovereignty of China and Russia, accompanied with a new supranational power structure of supremacy through financial “regime change” and physical economic collapse enforced through the false crisis of “climate change”? Will hyperinflation be allowed to loot populations as “green” ideology prevents development? This is the question that confronts every citizen of the world. With the catastrophic conditions afflicting Haiti, Afghanistan, the millions facing starvation around the world, the victims of cruel geopolitical warfare—fear must be overcome with a greater commitment. The induced immorality of indifference so characteristic of trans-Atlantic nations is the product of decades of social engineering, through culture, through political terror, through an alienation from the decision-making process. By crafting a reconstruction policy for Haiti, the Schiller Institute and EIR present hope for the future and issue a challenge: will you make it happen? With its Coming U.S. Economic Miracle on the New Silk Road, the LaRouche Organization challenges Americans, in particular, with the tension between what the United States has been at its best moments, what it could become in the future, and its current, pathetic condition. The question of self-qualification for leadership is posed to every citizen of the world.
As increasing portions of the world are moving in a positive direction — towards development and cooperation — the United States remains stuck in the British muck it has been wallowing in for decades, assuming the role of a new imperial power, devoted to maintaining supremacy through whatever means, including military confrontation, geopolitical suppression, and economic sanctions.At the United Nations, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken tried to direct the UN Security Council towards considering “climate change” as a major strategic threat, drawing rebuke from Russian and Indian diplomats, one of whom sharply pointed out that “To view conflict in poorer parts of the world through the prism of climate change would only serve to present a lopsided narrative when the reasons for the conflict are to be found elsewhere.” Among those reasons for conflict is the British system of geopolitics, seen in full force with the creation of AUKUS (“Orkus”) just weeks after the withdrawal from Afghanistan after two decades of disaster. In the meeting of the Quad today in Washington, while the U.S., Australia, and Japan spoke, as if reading from a British script, of a “free and open Indo-Pacific” (i.e., combatting China), Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi stressed the Quad’s 2004 formation in response to the devastating December 2004 tsunami and urged the Quad to promote “prosperity and peace” in the Indo-Pacific, through such efforts as vaccines, supply chains, and technology. As the U.S. continues to deport, en masse, Haitian migrants to Port-au-Prince in a condition described by a Haitian Senator as a “death camp”; as the U.S. promotes conflict with China; as the U.S. maintains a commitment to the regime of bailout instituted in 2019, the question arises — will the United States change? What sort of mission can inspire it to a better path? The LaRouche Organization (TLO) is committed to transforming the United States, to break from British geopolitics and colonial economics, to return to its historical creation as a force for good, and its pamphlet, “The Coming U.S. Economic Miracle on the New Silk Road,” currently being printed and posted online, is a major new tool to achieve this goal. The introduction to the report—which will soon be available at thelarouche.org/usa—follows: Introduction: Make America Good Again On January 20, 1961, in his inaugural address at the height of the Cold War, John F. Kennedy spoke these words to the nation: “Let both sides [the U.S. and the Soviet Union] seek to invoke the wonders of science instead of its terrors. Together let us explore the stars, conquer the deserts, eradicate disease, tap the ocean depths, and encourage the arts and commerce…. “And if a beachhead of cooperation may push back the jungle of suspicion, let both sides join in creating a new endeavor, not a new balance of power, but a new world of law, where the strong are just and the weak secure and the peace preserved…. “Now the trumpet summons us again—not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need; not as a call to battle, though embattled we are—but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, ‘rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation’—a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself.” “Can we forge against these enemies a grand and global alliance, North and South, East and West, that can assure a more fruitful life for all mankind? Will you join in that historic effort?… “And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country. “My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.” With Kennedy’s assassination, has something in us died as well? We are no longer in a cold war. How do we find ourselves on the brink of a thermonuclear war? Now, after leaving Afghanistan, we must ask ourselves: How have we been misled into one aggressive war after the next, after the next? Why do we “go abroad in search of monsters to destroy”? Why do we spend trillions destroying other nations instead of trillions developing ours? Who has convinced us that the nations of Russia and China are our enemies? Why do we fear that their development is a threat to our “power”? Why do we see the economy as a zero-sum game, where no one may gain without someone else losing? Why do we not recognize the Belt and Road Initiative of China as the furtherance of our nations’ mission against the Empire System? Why don’t we join efforts with Russia, China and other nations against the “common enemies of man”? The British Empire has infected the thinking of our policy making “elites,” manipulating the American people into seeing as enemies, those nations who were historically our friends. They have stolen from us the real American history. We have lost our way as a nation. But we can find it again. The LaRouche Organization hopes and intends to reignite in the American people the sense of historic mission our founding fathers had, to be a Temple of Liberty and a Beacon of Hope for the world, against the darkness and barbarism of the British Empire. When we are ourselves, we bring internal improvements in the physical economy and scientific progress not only to our nation, but to the world. We are Good! Lyndon LaRouche committed his life to the mission of ending “tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself.” Further, he proved that unlike the cynical British Malthusian view, mankind is not a cancer on the planet, but rather a creative species capable of solving all problems that confront us. LaRouche’s mission was to reestablish that noble conception of mankind. It is our job to complete it.
The imperial establishment of the U.S./NATO/trans-Atlantic created a murderous bloodbath in Afghanistan, killing tens or hundreds of thousands, wasting trillions of dollars, destabilizing the region, and having less than nothing to show for it 20 years later.And, now, that establishment is taking out its rage on the people of Afghanistan, choking their fragile economy by withholding—either directly or through financial means—the food, fuel, electricity, and development the nation so desperately needs. The people of these trans-Atlantic powers are tolerating the denial of development assistance or even cooperation with Afghanistan, with the demand that a government more to the liking of that elite comes to power. But what 20 years of military might could not achieve, will also not be brought about by financial force. Afghanistan will have a government through the decisions and actions of its own people, and the capable nations of the world—particularly those who created its current calamity—bear a responsibility to assist that government in bringing Afghanistan into a peaceful, productive, and proud role in the region and the world. The UN Development Program released a 17-page report that details the current suffering in Afghanistan and how trans-Atlantic institutions are poised to make it much worse. External aid accounts for three-quarters of the Afghanistan budget. How will schools, hospitals, or infrastructure be funded, if it is cut off? The entire country has only 600 MW of installed generating capacity—less than 1% the per-capita level of the United States. Ten million children require humanitarian assistance to survive, with 1 million projected to suffer from acute severe malnutrition. Over 4 million school-age children are out of school. At present, 72% of Afghans live below the poverty level of $2/day. UN modeling suggests that that figure could increase by 25%, to create the specter of “near universal poverty.” Against this backdrop, the Biden administration continues to freeze the assets of Afghanistan’s central bank—over $9 billion. An IMF allocation of $450 million worth of SDRs is out of reach thanks to the Fed shutting off dollar access. The World Bank has also suspended financial support. This is murder, and it must be stopped! On May 12, 1996, Madeleine Albright, was asked by a CBS interviewer about the tremendous cost of the Gulf War against Iraq, including more than 500,000 Iraqi children under the age of 5 who died as a result of the sanctions. Albright, unfazed, responded that the price of those deaths were “worth it.” Worth what? Biden must immediately take his knee off of Afghanistan’s throat, unfreeze the nation’s assets, and play a positive role in its development. Despite the past 20 years, the Taliban has said it is open to U.S. cooperation. The solution is clear. It was laid out at the July 31 Schiller Institute conference “Afghanistan: A Turning Point in History After the Failed Regime-Change Era.” Start the development process now. To achieve this, Schiller Institute Founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche has called for putting to immediate use the experience and talents of Pino Arlacchi, former Executive Director of the UN Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention, who made a powerful intervention at that conference. We do no honor to the American victims of 9/11 by adding piles of additional deaths across the world. May this 20th anniversary of that disaster mark the end of two decades of disastrous policy. Let Afghanistan breathe!
On September 11, the FBI released a declassified (but redacted) report from April 2016, which provides additional conclusive information of the involvement of agents of the Saudi Arabian government supporting the 9/11 hijackers. And this is only the first of a series of declassifications set to occur over the coming six months under Biden's Sept. 3 executive order. The full story of Saudi Arabian involvement in 9/11 will become increasingly clear, but this involvement itself poses larger questions.First, who within the United States acted to cover up Saudi involvement on 9/11? This question is intimately tied with such unresolved anomalies as the lack of air defense response after it became clear at the World Trade Center that an attack was underway, as well as abnormalities about the effects of that attack itself. Second, who promoted and financed the operation, and to what end? Asking "cui bono?" points us not to Riyadh, but to London. September 11, 2001, set into motion what has been two decades of emergency rule, in which long-term planning has been replaced by responses to supposedly urgent threats, in which intelligence agencies and financial institutions have taken increasing power in the trans-Atlantic world. This two-decade change in the governance of the planet, or at least its trans-Atlantic sector, was forecast by Lyndon LaRouche, before the September 11 attacks. Responding to a question from the Congressional Black Caucus, regarding Bush's nomination of "inveterate Confederate" John Ashcroft as his Attorney General, during an EIR January 3, 2001 webcast, Lyndon LaRouche warned of the danger of U.S. government itself being replaced by crisis management, and of the threat that a Reichstag Fire event would be used to usher in dictatorial powers under the incoming Bush Administration, all driven by a collapse of the financial system. LaRouche: "We're going into a period in which either we do the kinds of things I indicated in summary to you today, or else, what you're going to have, is not a government. You're going to have something like a Nazi regime. Maybe not initially, at the surface. What you're going to have is a government which cannot pass legislation, meaningful legislation. How does a government which can not pass meaningful legislation, under conditions of crisis, govern? They govern, in every case in known history, by what's known as crisis management. "In other words, just like the Reichstags fire in Germany. "How did that happen? "Well, a Dutchman, who was a known lunatic, used to set fires, as a provocateur. And he went around Germany setting fires. And one night, with no security available for the Reichstag [the Third Reich Parliament], he went into the Reichstag building, and set the joint on fire. And Hitler came out and said, 'Well, let's hope the Communists did it.' And Göring moved, and the Schmitt apparatus, that is, of Carl Schmitt, the jurist. And they passed the Notverordnung. And on the basis of a provocation—that is, crisis management—they rammed through the Notverordnung [emergency decree], which established Hitler as dictator of Germany. "What you're going to get, with a frustrated Bush administration, if it's determined to prevent itself from being opposed--its will--you're going to get crisis management. Where members of the special warfare types, of the secret government, the secret police teams, will set off provocations, which will be used to bring about dictatorial powers and emotion, in the name of crisis management. "You will have small wars set off in various parts of the world, which the Bush Administration will respond to, with crisis management methods of provocation. That's what you'll get. And that's what the problem is. And you have to face that. You've got to control this process now, while you still have the power to do so." Several years following the attacks, an enormous scandal around a 22-year deal starting in 1985 known as "Al Yamamah" between British weapons manufacturer BAE and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia erupted. This involved enormous quantities of off-the-books cash, bribes, and weapons. On June 21, 2007, LaRouche, speaking at a webcast entitled "BAE: The World's Biggest Loose End," returned to his earlier warning: "The world has been living under a system, which is the 9/11 system, which already existed, as I warned at the beginning of 2001, before President George W. Bush was inaugurated for the first time in January of 2001. Where I said The world system has reached the point, that an onrushing collapse of the system is now in process. We can not determine exactly when or how this will occur, but we know the following two things "Number 1, we know that this President and this Presidency can not deal with this crisis. Therefore, we must expect that the entire world will be subjected to the kind of thing we experienced in February of 1933, when Hermann Göring, the man behind the throne, the sort of Dick Cheney of the Hitler Administration, orchestrated the burning of the Reichstag as a terrorist event. And this terrorist event was used on that night, or the following day, to install Hitler with dictatorial powers, which Hitler never lost, until the day he died! "And I said then, the danger is that something like this will occur, under present trends in the United States, and it did occur. And it was called 9/11." "Now, without going into the details of what we know and what we don't know about how 9/11 was orchestrated, we know that the only means by which this kind of thing is orchestrated, is found in one location in a financial complex which is centered in the identity of the BAE. Now, that's the mystery of 9/11. How it was done, the mechanics—that's irrelevant. We'll find out. And everybody in and around government, who understands these matters, knows that! And that's where the heat is here. "We've come to the point that an entire system is collapsing. That system, at this point, because of the complicity of the present U.S. government, and the complicity of the leadership of the Democratic Party, as well as the Republican Party, because of this, we are living under a one-world system, called generically 'globalization.' It's a preparation for the new Tower of Babel, under which there are no nations, and in which languages begin to become babble. Under this system, what controls it? It's called 'globalization'; it's called the 'global warming crisis'; it's called these various kinds of things, referring to these things. It's a one-world system! It is not consolidated, but every obstacle to this one-world system is crumbling." Now, 20 years later, the misguided NATO/American adventure in Afghanistan has ended in disgrace, and additional truth about the event that ushered in a global shift in governance is coming to light. Will the past two decades of geopolitics and hegemony be repudiated and reversed? Will the American people, and the world, come to know what happened on 9/11? A "big lie" created 20 years of such offenses against human rights as the Patriot Act, the Afghanistan War, the Iraq War, the Libyan disaster, the Yemen War, military intervention in Syria, and, if not stopped, war with Russia and China. If that lie is not countered, and the theft, by ongoing crisis management, of the very concept of "future" is not reversed, the human race could be decimated by the dark age conditions envisioned by proponents of geopolitical war, "green" supranational governance, and financial "regime change." Lyndon LaRouche was right when he forecast this train of development over 20 years ago. Will the world take his advice today?
The American and NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the entire 20-year military occupation there, are widely recognized as the worst disaster in NATO’s history. But have the lessons from his failure been learned?Shortly following the suicide bombing that killed a dozen U.S. troops and over 100 Afghans at the Kabul airport, President Biden announced to those responsible: “We will not forgive. We will not forget. We will hunt you down and make you pay.” While making such a statement (and using drones for revenge) was obviously far superior to extending the date of U.S. withdrawal, that such a statement would be considered politically necessary or expedient points to a deep and widespread sickness in the trans-Atlantic establishment. This sickness is seen in far more advanced form in Britain, whose institutions are frantically trying to assure themselves of their ability to continue to project force anywhere in the world, and to continue their endless war policies, with or without the United States. The sickness comes in a denial of the nature of the human species, a denial that looks towards a future of maintaining past dominance, rather than one that looks towards an era of new development, of growth, and of changing dynamics. Aeschylus captured this tension in his Oresteia trilogy, in which a series of revenge killings, including a demand for revenge in the form of the Furies—the Erinyes—is transformed, through the mediation of the goddess of wisdom Athena herself, to a concern for the future. The furious Erinyes become the Eumenides (the Gracious Ones), and serve as a constructive force for the future of Athens. The “forever war” policy that has come to characterize the trans-Atlantic approach since the murder of U.S. President Kennedy, against which Trump inveighed in his campaigns, and against which Biden took what could be a significant step with his Afghanistan withdrawal, must be replaced with a policy of peace through development. In the Eastern Economic Forum, held in Vladivostok, Russia, aspects of this principle were raised by Presidents Putin and Xi, who insisted that development is the path forward, and that “democracy” could not be instilled at gunpoint. Will Biden’s executive order on declassifying 9/11 reveal truths that will cast the 20-year experience in Afghanistan in a new light? Terry Strada, the leader of 9/11 Families United, rejoiced: “We are thrilled to see the President forcing the release of more evidence about Saudi connections to the 9/11 Attacks. We have been fighting the FBI and intelligence community for too long, but this looks like a true turning point.” Biden’s move for declassification, following his decision, taken despite enormous pressure from media and political layers, can be a powerful flank against the intelligence agencies whose lies have been used to maintain the forever war policy. Will the momentum away from permanent warfare continue through improved relations with Russia and China? Will a growing portion of the world’s leaders and thinkers—aided by you—come to understand that the true, immortal self-interest of the human individual lies not in maintaining power over others, but in doing good? If so, this present era can be a singularity, an inflection point, a change from one geometry to another, in which we defeat empire and raise our heads from the muck of conflict to look to the stars that hold our future. Lyndon LaRouche devoted himself to fighting for such a world, a commitment carried on by Helga Zepp-LaRouche and the LaRouche movement, internationally, today. Will that movement, and its allies, succeed?
Afghanistan can become stable, and its enormous potential for growth can be leveraged to the benefit of Afghans and the world at large, through helping to shape a new paradigm on this planet.But even after two decades of U.S.-led warfare, attempts to destabilize the nation and region continue. The U.S. government has frozen the nearly $9.5 billion in assets of the Afghan central bank and halted shipments of cash to the nation. The International Monetary Fund has suspended Afghanistan’s access to IMF resources, including $440 million worth of Special Drawing Rights (SDR) reserves. A cash shortage is developing in Afghanistan, where it is used for most purchases. Germany has announced a halt to all financial aid to the country, which will affect ongoing infrastructure projects. FaceBook-owned WhatsApp has shut down a Taliban help hotline, as well as other Taliban-linked channels, in a decision attacked by aid workers as “absurd.” Are these decisions temporary, due to uncertainty of who runs the country? Or are they being used to foster ongoing chaos in a nation already suffering decades of warfare, a nation lying at a strategic crossroads — bordering or closely concerning Iran, China, Pakistan, Russia, and three of the Central Asian republics? As has been the case for over a century, the British game of geopolitics seeks to ensure that there is no world rival to their dominance, exerted today through the “special relationship” with the United States. A new “Northern Alliance” has announced its emergence in Afghanistan, seeking Western military support. What will it receive? The Belt and Road Initiative, which is overturning the world’s economic and strategic chessboard through a paradigm of infrastructure development and productivity growth, achieving, at China’s initiative, a policy that parallels the World Land-Bridge concept developed by Lyndon LaRouche, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, and their collaborators. Into this dynamic Afghanistan can be integrated, with results that would be stunning in terms of how rapidly they could transform the region, which can hardly be said to have benefited significantly from the over $1 trillion spent on military adventures there. The antidote to chaos — in addition to identifying its origin — is growth! This Saturday, the Schiller Institute, founded by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, will convene an urgent international seminar to pursue the solution of peace through development. The seminar will continue the prescient discussion held by the Schiller Institute on July 31, with many of the same panelists, as well as new ones. Zepp-LaRouche explained on Wednesday: “I do not agree with the hysteria of the Western media that this is the end of the world. … I think it is, on the contrary, the real chance to integrate Afghanistan into a regional economic development perspective, which is basically defined by the Belt and Road Initiative of China. There is a very clear agreement of Russia and China to cooperate in dealing with this situation. The interest of the Central Asian republics is to make sure there is stability and economic development; and there is the possibility to extend the CPEC, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, into Afghanistan, into Central Asia. So, I think it’s a real opportunity, but it does require a complete change in approach.” Expressing her view of the proper role of the United States, Zepp-LaRouche said, “John Quincy Adams said that the United States should have alliances of perfectly sovereign republics, and this is now the moment to really do that. The idea is to not oppose China linking Afghanistan into the Belt and Road Initiative, but rather see it as an opportunity to cooperate, and stop this geopolitical confrontation which can only lead to catastrophe. … That’s the kind of discussion which we have to catalyze.” The event will be this Saturday at noon EDT (6pm CEST), available at schillerinstitute.com
The rapidly shifting situation on the ground in Afghanistan gives increasing urgency to developing an understanding of the work of Lyndon LaRouche, who laid out, with increasing insight, his vision for the Earth’s next fifty years, and beyond. As the delta Covid variant lays bare the inadequacy of health care throughout the world, we see the profound need to develop a platform of productivity capable of sustaining billions more people with standards of physical and cultural life adequate to the creative potential of the human race.The second panel of the LaRouche Legacy Foundation’s event “So, Are You Finally Willing to Learn Economics?” took up the topic of LaRouche’s vision of “Earth’s Next Fifty Years,” with a view towards the efforts led by Helga Zepp-LaRouche to realizing those revolutionary objectives. Moderator Megan Dobrodt, Secretary-Treasurer of the LaRouche Legacy Foundation Board of Directors, launched the panel with a video of the LaRouches’ close friend and collaborator, Norbert Brainin, the lead violinist of the legendary Amadeus Quartet. Brainin began a 1995 master class in Dona Krupa Castle, Slovakia, by introducing the concept of Motivführung, or “motivic thorough-composition,” an approach to classical composition developed by Haydn and refined by Mozart and Beethoven, of thorough composition according to principle. Brainin explained to the class that he often talked about Motivführung with professional colleagues and students who recognized the term, but that the only person who understood it completely was Lyndon LaRouche. LaRouche often said that Brainin had introduced this concept to him, but he recognized it as a universal process for developing, not only great music, but natural and human compositions of any kind. Knowing this, Brainin explained that true classical composers are “scientists.” This was followed by a recording of LaRouche addressing the issue of human creativity at the July 3, 2011 European Schiller Institute conference. He asserted that human beings were the only known creative species, and explained that “classical artistic culture” can be transferred “to the department of physical science,” in the words of Riemann. LaRouche explained that he determined to build a movement, when he realized that no one but himself understood the disaster the financial disruptions of the 1960s were creating. He started by visiting universities and discussing his ideas. He briefly identified his understanding of his fundamental principle: “You get a demonstration of that in the department of Classical artistic composition, in which the mind is experimenting with the attempt to discover principles, and expresses the yearning for that experimental result as the incentive of creativity for the human mind. That is creativity. It is getting outside the ordinary habits, or habituation, of life….” He concluded with the simple statement, “It’s not magic: It’s really humanity.” The first guest on the panel was Jacques Cheminade, a long-time LaRouche associate, President of the Solidarité et Progrès party in France, and a former Presidential candidate. He described how, as a French diplomat, he first encountered LaRouche at an event in Manhattan and, while studying LaRouche’s writing, was confronted with a New York Times supplement in which he saw a photo of French soldiers in World War I with the caption, “Once again triage—Who’s going to live? Who is going to die?” Several pages later, there was a picture of an Ethiopian mother and child with their “skin floating off,” with the caption, “Who will be fed and who will die?” This led him to decide that, despite his prospects as a young diplomat, “Well, these are my people, even if to join them I have to pay a dear price.” He described his collaboration with LaRouche in writing a book, in French and English, titled France After de Gaulle (La France après de Gaulle), promoting the idea of getting France back on the path of republican development as characterized by General Lafayette’s engagement with the American Revolution. Maurice Allais, the only French citizen ever to win a Nobel Prize in Economics, wrote Cheminade a letter on November 27, 2009 saying that he was “fully associating myself to LaRouche’s efforts to generate a wide public debate to radically rebuild the credit system and the international monetary system,” and authorized Jacques to make this public. Former Prime Minister Michel Rocard, Cheminade said, also shared LaRouche’s economic outlook. In 1983 LaRouche and his wife Helga led a Club of Life event in Paris. The Club was founded by Mrs. LaRouche as a counter to the radically Malthusian Club of Rome. The Paris event was attended by world-famous oncologist Georges Mathé, resistance heroine Marie-Madeleine Fourcade, and de Gaulle’s associate, World War II hero, General Jean-Gabriel Revault d’Allonnes. All of these later wrote to request freedom for LaRouche, when he was politically incarcerated in 1989. LaRouche’s universal appeal was demonstrated by support from leading members of the French Communist Party as well as the Secretary of State under President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, Pierre Christian Taittinger. Following Cheminade, two representatives from Argentina, Roberto Fritzsche and Eduardo Fernandez, used discoveries of the great Russian biogeochemist Vladimir Vernadsky to explain LaRouche’s concept of “relative potential population density” in relation to “energy flux density” and improvements in living standards. Man’s role in this complex was explained in relationship to Vernadsky’s concept of three realms of existence: the lifeless lithosphere; the living biosphere; and the realm of cognition called the noösphere. Man is the master of all three, and, as LaRouche has explained, also participates in a fourth realm, that of cognition that we can recognize in the design and growth of the Universe, but, as yet, do not know its source in the way we know how humanity can discover concepts and “laws” of the Universe. They use Vernadsky’s calculations and more advanced knowledge to demonstrate that, with new energy sources which are on the horizon, the Earth could support a human population of 3 trillion. This was followed by greetings from Carlos Gallardo, President of the Christian Democratic Party of Peru. Harley Schlanger, also a long-time leader of the LaRouche movement, followed with an ironically revealing behind the scenes report on the origins of Richard Nixon’s disastrous August 15, 1971 announcement. It happened that on January 23, 1983, a dozen years after the event, John Connally of Texas, who had been Secretary of the Treasury under President Nixon, was present as his, Connally’s, possessions were being sold off at a bankruptcy auction, and agreed to an interview. Schlanger asked about the Aug. 15, 1971 decision, and Connally proudly declared it to have been his decision, and a great success. When Schlanger challenged him with LaRouche’s declaration that the decision was the cause of the subsequent disasters, which were, among other things, the cause of Connally’s personal demise, he became despondent, and eventually slinked away. Daisuke Kotegawa, formerly a top official in Japan’s Ministry of Finance and Japan’s Executive Director at the IMF, sent a greeting backing LaRouche’s distinction between investments in the real economy as opposed to speculation, and called for restoring Glass-Steagall. Fred Huenefeld, an agricultural economist who has served in multiple government positions in Louisiana, and a long-time board member of the Schiller Institute, gave an animated description of his years of agitating for LaRouche’s ideas and hounding the U.S. Congress to wake up. Former South Carolina State Senator Theo Mitchell, a leader in the Democratic Party and a board member of the Schiller Institute, discussed his work to expose the FBI’s misjustice in the prosecution of LaRouche and in the “Fruhmenschen” campaign which targeted Black elected officials, including himself. The concluding section, on LaRouche in the Universities, gave youth leaders of the LaRouche movement an opportunity to discuss their commitment to getting LaRouche’s work into universities and elsewhere. Gretchen Small, a leader of the Ibero-American branch of the LaRouche movement and President of the LaRouche Legacy Foundation Board of Directors, began this session with video segments of the notorious 1971 City University of New York debate between LaRouche and top Keynesian economist Abba Lerner, in which LaRouche induced Lerner to admit that Nixon’s economic policy, and his own, were in keeping with those of Hitler’s Reichsbank governor and Minister of Economics Hjalmar Schacht. Sidney Hook, a leading academic “philosopher” of the day and an intelligence community operative responsible for stifling unwanted discussions, told a LaRouche supporter after witnessing LaRouche’s impact on the downed champion, Lerner, that LaRouche would never be permitted another such contest. The first youth speaker was from the Philippines, Carlos “Itos” Valdes, the son of Carlos “Butch” Valdes, the founder and leader of the Philippine LaRouche Society and many other organizations. Itos Valdes gave a sincere and moving description of how his understanding of the movement changed his life, beginning in childhood with his family’s involvement in the LaRouche movement, and continuing with his organizing others through the ideas of Plato, Leibniz, FDR and LaRouche Carolina Dominguez, an extraordinary leader of the movement in Mexico and throughout Ibero America, spoke about the campaign to make the work of LaRouche available throughout the university system, and presented videos of young colleagues from Mexico and Colombia. She described the problem by exposing an economics professor who said the purpose of education was to help students become part of the wealthy 50%, rather than to lift the poor 50% out of poverty. José Vega of the Bronx closed the presentations with a video he had made discussing LaRouche’s policy for the next 50 years, including his idea of a “Space Civilian Construction Corps” modeled on FDR’s Civilian Conservation Corps, to recruit youth to participate in a revitalized space program. The prepared presentations were followed by a profound discussion among the participants on the significance of what had been done and what must urgently be accomplished. One comment by Jacques Cheminade briefly highlighted the secret to LaRouche’s success. He said he was delighted to see three generations of LaRouche Youth Movements in action: the early 1960s campus recruit, Paul Gallagher; people in their 40s and 50s who were recruited by LaRouche in the 1990s-2000s, now playing a leading role in the movement; and those in their early 20s who are ripening as a highly effective force. The full conference can be viewed at the LaRouche Legacy Foundation website.
The strategic instability of Afghanistan desperately calls out, not for unending military intervention, but for a realizable vision for future development. Fools respond to events, while geniuses create, sometimes urgently, the longer waves of thought and commitment that shape human history.On this weekend, the fiftieth anniversary of the action taken by the Richard Nixon administration to end the Bretton Woods system and adopt floating exchange rates, the world has much to learn from the economist who forecast that point of decision, understood its implications, and fought for half a century to put in place a just economic system to achieve economic development around the entire globe — Lyndon LaRouche. Because of the power inherent in the potential for human reason to respond to his ideas, he was imprisoned, attacked, but not defeated. Today, his vision of a paradigm for development capable of bringing the human race entirely out of poverty is being carried on by the movement he created, his cothinkers, and especially by his wife Helga Zepp-LaRouche. It offers the potential to build on the Belt and Road Initiative, itself inspired by his work and that of his wife, to draw further benefit from the best aspects of trans-Atlantic culture — of the Golden Renaissance and its view of man, of the creation of modern physics by Johannes Kepler, of the musical advances of J.S. Bach, and the American System of economics that so far surpassed the oligarchical system which it was developed to overcome. Join the LaRouche Legacy Foundation for an event on LaRouche’s Discovery and the Earth’s Next Fifty Years, starting today, Saturday, at 9 a.m. EDT/3 p.m. CEST.
