Zepp-LaRouche: Let's Realize the Dream of All of Mankind!

February 26, 2019
Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Lyndon LaRouche and Hussein Askary hold up a Schiller Institute publication translated into Arabic during the Schiller Institute Conference in Bad Soden, Germany, June 30, 2018

This article was published as the lead item for Volume 3, No. 1 edition of The Hamiltonian.

Get the Hamiltonian delivered to your Inbox

We are witnessing right now an epochal battle for the true identity of mankind: Are human beings, as the proponents of the New Green Deal suggest, parasites that put a strain on nature, and whose number must, therefore, be kept as low as possible? Or is the human species the only creative one known in the universe so far, a species with a limitless capacity for self-perfection both of its mind and the beauty of its character, with infinite capabilities to discover new principles of our physical universe?

This is not an esoteric question; it is the central axiomatic controversy underlying the present strategic battle between the collapsing old paradigm of the neoliberal system and of geopolitical confrontation, and the emerging new paradigm of an economic model devoted to the common good of all people of this world, living in a harmonious relation of the development of all.

The old paradigm is the British Empire paradigm of voracious greed and of oligarchical control of the world. It expresses itself in the fact that fewer and fewer people own the wealth of the world—a 2018 report found that just 26 individuals possess half the wealth of the entire human population—at the expense of the poor becoming poorer and more numerous. The hardships this paradigm causes for the ordinary man, woman, and child, are the reasons for the Brexit vote in 2016, for President Trump’s election by what Hillary Clinton cynically called the “deplorables,” for the election victory of the present Italian government, and for the protest of the “Yellow Vests” in France, a protest which is spreading to other European countries.

A New Paradigm in the United States?

President Trump promised not only to defend the living standard of the population, by recreating productive jobs for everyone, but also to end the permanent foreign wars and to set US relations with Russia and China on a positive basis. But, so far, the British-designed coup attempt pushed by the Democrats and by neocons in the Republican Party is designed to prevent Trump from carrying out his intention, to force a continued confrontation with Russia and China, and even to draw Trump himself into a new quagmire of foreign interventionist war in Venezuela.

Concerning Russia, in respect to the withdrawal from the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, President Trump may have one intention—possibly replacing the INF with a new agreement—but the Russians are reacting to the reality of the hawkish tones coming from other members of the administration, such as John Bolton, Michael Pompeo, Dan Coats and others, as well as the British “minister of war,” Gavin Williamson, who threatens to use “hard power” and who claims that the “boundaries between peace and war are becoming blurred.”

In response to this strategic environment, President Vladimir Putin declared, in his annual address to the Federal Assembly, that in the wake of the US withdrawal from the INF treaty, Russia does not intend to deploy intermediate-range missiles in Europe, but that if the US does, “It will dramatically exacerbate the international security situation, and create a serious threat to Russia, because some of these missiles can reach Moscow in just 10-12 minutes… Russia will be forced to create and deploy weapons that can be used not only in the areas we are directly threatened from, but also in areas that contain decision-making centers for the missile systems threatening us.”

Putin stressed, that Russia does not seek confrontation, but that it is enhancing its defense capabilities in order to make sure that “nobody would even consider pressuring us, or launching an aggression against us.” In other words: if this spiral of a new arms race and possible confrontation goes out of control, Europe would not be the only nuclear rubblefield. Russian defense minister Shoigu commented on Putin’s speech, that Russia’s new weapon systems, such as the hypersonic glider “Avangard,” which can travel at speeds beyond Mach 20, are a hundred times less costly than the American missile defense system, which can only reach a speed of Mach 5, and which, according to experts, is therefore obsolete.

Defeating the Attempted Coup Against Trump

So it is high time to stop the coup against President Trump, especially in light of the fact that not only has the Senate confirmed that there was not one shred of evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia, but also that members of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity have produced evidence that the so-called “Russian Hack” was actually an inside job. They have produced the technical evidence, that the emails of the DNC were downloaded and not hacked.

What we now see unfolding in the Russiagate coup is what the military analyst Pat Lang correctly calls a “seditious conspiracy,” an effort to “overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States.” The perpetrators of this conspiracy must be brought to justice, and all the documents concerning the role of the infamous Christopher Steele dossier and the role of British intelligence in collusion with forces inside the US must be made public.

President Trump has waged a tremendously courageous fight under these conditions, but he now needs the support of every patriotic American, to free him from the chains of the “seditious conspiracy” of the so-called “Russiagate,” whose entire aim was from the beginning to prevent him from improving relations with Russia, and by implication, with China.

What the fake media have hidden from the American population is the fact, that a new paradigm has been developing with a speed and a depth about which most people, who have been subjected to a wartime-like propaganda campaign against China, have absolutely no inkling. President Xi Jinping, whom Trump continues to call his “very good friend,” has initiated with his Belt and Road Initiative a completely new system of international relations, of countries working together on a win-win basis for the common good of all.

The media try to convince people that China is stealing US technology. But it was China that was the first nation of the world to land successfully on the far side of the moon, and which even got a cotton plant to sprout and grow there! That means China is the first country ever, that has brought other life to an extraterrestrial body! That is a new chapter in the history of mankind!

Reaching the Stars, Together

On December 11, 2017, Trump issued his Space Policy Directive 1, which called for the United States to “lead the return of humans to the Moon for long-term exploration and utilization, followed by human missions to Mars and other destinations.” Immediately following China’s successful landing of the Chang’e-4 on the far side of the Moon, the Chinese National Space Administration (CNSA), said that China is willing to work with the international community, and especially the US, to push forward the frontiers of space exploration! At a recent meeting at the Great Hall of the People, Xi Jinping thanked the 400 scientists and engineers who worked on the Chang’e-4 mission and told them that space exploration is endless, that all great undertakings start with a dream, that dreams are the source of energy.

So the US is truly at a crossroad: The road of confrontation with Russia and China could lead very quickly to the annihilation of humankind. That danger is very real. On the other side, the new paradigm of all nations uniting in the pursuit of the common aims of mankind is developing very fast. Joint space exploration is maybe the most beautiful and lofty of all the domains, where mankind can and will work together for a joined future.

The Hubble Space Telescope found evidence that our universe consists of at least two trillion galaxies! Wow! This means that the people promoting the Green New Deal (essentially, Wall Street) are not only greedy, but also completely off their rocker! Because we are not living in a closed system of the planet Earth, but we are an integral part of this incredible universe! To venture into that great beyond, requires nuclear fusion rockets in space, and an Earth civilization of development, science, and physical productivity, not energy poverty. As Xi Jinping said to the scientists and engineers of the recent lunar mission: “Exploring the vast universe is the common dream of all of mankind!”

Let’s realize that beautiful dream!



Obituary: Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. (1922–2019)

This obituary was originally published by EIR magazine. See also, "A Talent Well Spent" and our campaign report, 'Restoring the Soul of America: The Exoneration of Lyndon LaRouche.'

Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., the American economist and statesman who compiled, between 1957 and 2007, the most accurate record of economic forecasting in the world, passed away on February 12, 2019. The author of thousands of articles and over 100 books and book-length pamphlets and strategic studies, LaRouche was one of the most controversial political figures in all of American history.

One reason for this was LaRouche’s proud, vigorous, and enduring Presidential campaign, 1976–2004, to re-establish American Constitutional self-government following the 1963–1968 assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Robert F. Kennedy. Another reason was his successful establishment of an independent news service and intelligence gathering capability that allowed him and his associates to develop an unfiltered evaluations process, which was unique in journalism, and which equipped them to accurately report the true state of the American economy, and often, the true nature of otherwise mysterious American and international political processes.

LaRouche also created an international philosophical association, on the basis of re-creating the knowledge about the millennia-old controversy between the Platonic tradition and the school of Aristotle, the fight between the republican model of state and the oligarchical system of empire.

LaRouche’s reach outside the United States was the result of his successful recruitment of hundreds of politicized students from many nations, particularly in Europe, and the Americas. This self-selected intelligentsia gave him the power to originate and implement policy shifts through the deployment of modest but well-trained and extremely well-informed units that catalyzed much larger forces in various nations to sometimes act as “one mind across many continents.”

LaRouche was known for his insistence that all citizens of the United States, as well as citizens of any sovereign nation, have the responsibility to educate themselves on the crucial matters of policy that affect the future of their nations, and of humanity; to propose and defend only those policies that “promote the General Welfare” of “ourselves and our posterity”; and to defeat predatory financial measures enacted in the pursuit of racialist depopulation policies, sometimes disguised as “environmentalism” or “sustainable development” aimed particularly at the nations of Africa, Asia, and Central and South America.

Prominent international persons and institutions have recently begun reporting about LaRouche; however, despite his having been one of America’s most prolific writers, no “major media source” has yet dared to quote Lyndon LaRouche’s actual views on any policy matter for which he was noted. This fear of LaRouche is notable, but not new. It was always true that the power of the ideas of LaRouche, as much as, or even more than the person of LaRouche, was deeply feared by his opponents. That fear will not abate with his physical demise.

LaRouche’s Four Laws, his proposal for a United States-Russia-China-India Four Powers Agreement, his invention of the 1983 Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) announced by then-President Ronald Reagan, and his unique five-decade advocacy of thermonuclear fusion power cannot be allowed to be mentioned by “mainstream media” today, even upon the occasion of LaRouche’s death. Were the American people now to know about these policies, and thereby learn what they had been denied by the decades-long enforced conspiracy of silence around LaRouche, particularly during the financial crises and useless predatory wars of the past 15 years, they would immediately conclude that someone has been trying very hard all these years to keep them away from Lyndon LaRouche’s ideas.

“He’s a bad guy, but we can’t tell you why” will no longer suffice as an explanation for these people, as to why they should not, even now, know “who Lyndon LaRouche is.” In successfully breaking the confines of fake news at this moment, the real Lyndon LaRouche can finally be heard and become known. To that end, the following brief, very incomplete account of his life and work is supplied.

The Development of a World Statesman

LaRouche established himself over more than four decades as the foremost enemy of the British Imperial System, in both its pre-World War II and ongoing post-war Commonwealth incarnations. LaRouche’s service in World War II, particularly in the China–Burma–India theatre, was personally decisive. “It was the experience in Calcutta, in 1946, which defined my principal lifelong commitment, that the United States should take postwar world leadership in establishing a world order dedicated to promoting the economic development of what we today call ‘developing nations,’ ” LaRouche wrote in his autobiography, The Power of Reason: 1988. LaRouche began to do battle with the “political economic theorists” and slave-traders of the modern-day British East India Company, whose theories dominated American university Economics departments in the aftermath of World War II.

LaRouche fiercely opposed the conception of man as a beast, advocated by Francis Bacon, Thomas Hobbes, Parson Thomas Malthus, and John Locke. Instead, LaRouche re-established the science of physical economy in the United States, a science invented in 1672 by the German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz, inventor of the calculus and co-inventor of the steam engine. Through an intensive period of study between 1948 and 1952, LaRouche advanced his independent studies in physical science in order to develop his method of economic forecasting. The 1983 book, LaRouche: Will This Man Become President? states: “What LaRouche first recognized during 1952, was that by adopting a conception of energy which is fully consistent with [bernhard] Riemann’s 1854 dissertation, ‘On the Hypotheses Which Underlie Geometry,’ it is possible to measure both technology and economic growth in terms of energy so defined. In LaRouche’s work, economic value—real economic growth—is measured primarily in terms of increases of the potential relative population density of society.”

LaRouche, however, looked at all of his work on physical economy as the specific expression of a deeper epistemological task. In his 1988 article, “Beethoven as a Physical Scientist,” LaRouche writes:

My most important discoveries, in every field which I have contributed, are based upon my successful refutation of the famous Kantian paradox reasserted in Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Judgment. Kant asserted two things of relevance here.
First, he insisted that although creative processes responsible for valid fundamental scientific discoveries exist, these processes themselves are beyond all possible human understanding. That I proved to be false, and from that proof developed an approach to intelligible representation of those creative processes, and hence the implicit measurement of technological progress as such.
Second, on the basis of the first assumption, Kant argued that there were no intelligible criteria of truth or beauty in aesthetics. The toleration which has been gained so generally by all modern irrationalism in matters of art, has depended upon German and other acceptance of this thesis on aesthetics advanced by Kant and Friedrich Carl von Savigny later.

The prolific nature of Lyndon LaRouche’s writings, in the fields of music, economics, history, language, and the physical sciences, inspired many collaborations and exchanges with people throughout the world. LaRouche, importantly, was a statesman—not a politician—a practitioner of statecraft, in the Socratic-Athenian sense. He established organizations through teaching, starting with a several-part lecture series in 1966, through which he advanced and debated his method of economic forecasting, especially on university campuses. Many first encountered LaRouche on one side of a debate, held with campus economic and political authorities of the 1970s. This ended after LaRouche’s famous 1971 debate with economist Abba Lerner, who lost by admitting that if the austerity policies of German Finance Minister Hjalmar Schacht had been implemented in the 1920s, “Hitler would not have been necessary.” Within months, no one could be found to debate LaRouche, and no such debates ever again occurred.

LaRouche’s lectures on what were at the time called “dialectical economics,” were precisely that—dialogues between LaRouche and philosophical, economic and scientific figures from history, portrayed by him with storyteller precision, always done without notes, and often done without any books at all. Students were supplied with an extensive syllabus of reading material, with suggested readings detailed week by week. One student recalled that “passages were referred to from a work like Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason, for example. You would be told to read it. If you did so, and came to the class the next week, he would first describe what his idea was of the passage, which was persuasive as well as accurate. He would then proceed to destroy it piece by piece, and because you had read it, and accepted it, you got to discover the fallacies lurking at the bottom of your own mind. He demonstrated to you the difference between reading and thinking. They weren’t classes: they were soliloquies. And that’s how we got interested.”

LaRouche’s primary organization was the National (later International) Caucus of Labor Committees, a philosophical association organized as a “system of conferences,” usually held twice yearly. From this association sprang many other organizations, such as the Fusion Energy Foundation, the U.S. Labor Party, the National Democratic Policy Committee, the Anti-Drug Coalition, and others. LaRouche also founded and worked with organizations in France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Canada, Denmark, Mexico, Colombia, Peru, Australia, and many other nations.

In December of 1977, LaRouche married Helga Zepp of Germany, later the creator of the Schiller Institute, a policy institution for the promotion of statecraft and a renaissance of Classical culture.

“In the fall of 1977, I suggested that we marry…. I was a little surprised, but pleasantly, when she agreed.… There was nothing ordinary about the lives of either of us, nor was it ever likely to be otherwise. We married in Wiesbaden on December 29, 1977. The service was in German; the official of the Standesamt asked me in German, if I knew what was happening. There was laughter about that question among my friends for weeks afterward.”

They remained married for 41 years.

The combative nature and polemical style of the campaigns, electoral and non-electoral, of LaRouche and his associates were unique in American political life in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. LaRouche’s 1976 half-hour broadcast, “Emergency Address to the Nation,” was the first time an independent candidate had ever purchased that quantity of television time in a U.S. federal election. LaRouche appeared on television fifteen times during the Presidential election of 1984 in 30-minute segments, virtually inventing what would later be imitated as the “infomercial.” The LaRouche Presidential candidacies, and the candidacies of his associates, including the running of 1,000 candidates for office in 1986 alone, both terrified LaRouche’s opponents in the United States, and inspired others to have the courage not merely to run for office, but to support policies designed to benefit all of humanity, not merely “their local mud-hole.”

The eight LaRouche presidential electoral initiatives, from 1976 until 2004, were in fact a single campaign for the Presidency. LaRouche, through these interventions, powered by the daily street organizing and public discussions led by hundreds of members of his international movement, committed the “Promethean” act of “leapfrogging” the British-American Establishment’s presumed influence in the corridors of power. The intellectual output of LaRouche and his movement, through his newspaper, weekly magazine, and periodic special reports and books, allowed the LaRouche movement to directly access the power of the American Presidency to change the world. While his successful campaign to propose the Strategic Defense Initiative “beam weapons” policy was LaRouche’s most stunning success, it was only a reflection of the consistent approach to grand strategy which LaRouche taught to his associates, an approach that the philosopher Plato, or the theologian and organizer of the Council of Florence, Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, would have readily endorsed.

One such policy-expression of grand strategy was the International Development Bank (IDB), a 1975 LaRouche proposal to replace the International Monetary Fund, and to develop what was then termed “the Third World” through providing for the export of, not only American-built technology, but entire cities. These cities were to be built as training sites for the rapid development of the skills of developing-sector populations, enabling them to create their own “full-set” economies, rather than become debt-slaves, as in fact occurred.

Persons such as Frederick Wills, the former Foreign Affairs Minister of Guyana, advocated LaRouche’s IDB proposal in a 1976 session of the United Nations. Mexico’s President José López Portillo and India’s Prime Minister Indira Gandhi met with Lyndon and Helga LaRouche and adopted aspects of his proposals, many of which were presented as book-length treatments, such as “Operation Juárez” for Mexico and “The Industrialization of India: From Backwardness to Industrial Power in Forty Years” and a “A Fifty-Year Development Policy for the Indian-Pacific Oceans Basin”—all papers written by LaRouche in the early 1980s, and whose central outlook is still current, not only for today, but for the next decade or more.

The unorthodox method for dispersing these ideas advocated by LaRouche was Socratic: talking to people one on one. This daily street organizing occurred at unemployment centers, post offices, airports and traffic intersections, street corners, downtown areas and shopping malls. This direct contact with the American population resulted in LaRouche having a better reading on what was happening in the United States “from on the ground” than any other political force in the country. Corrupt elements of the Justice Department, and “quasi non-governmental organizations” who were given the green light to illegally disrupt the Constitutionally-guaranteed right of LaRouche’s associates to organize were forced to resort to characterizing the organization as a “cult” in order to dissuade citizens from contributing to companies associated with the LaRouche political movement.

None of LaRouche’s detractors are able to deny his record of successful economic forecasts, including the collapse of the Bretton Woods System on August 15, 1971, the October 1987 collapse of the Wall Street stock market (which LaRouche forecast in May of that year), and his July 25, 2007 forecast, captured in webcast format, of what later became the September 2008 “trillions-dollar bailout.” Some of the most stunning of LaRouche forecasts, though, were not, strictly speaking, economic. On Columbus Day, October 12, 1988, Lyndon LaRouche, speaking at Berlin’s Kempinski Hotel Bristol, said:

By profession, I am an economist in the tradition of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Friedrich List in Germany and of Alexander Hamilton and Mathew and Henry Carey in the United States. My political principles are those of Leibniz, List, and Hamilton, and are also consistent with those of Friedrich Schiller and Wilhelm von Humboldt. Like the founders of my republic, I have an uncompromising belief in the principle of absolutely sovereign nation-states, and I am therefore opposed to all supranational authorities which might undermine the sovereignty of any nation. However, like Schiller, I believe that every person who aspires to become a beautiful soul, must be at the same time a true patriot of his own nation, and also a world citizen.

For these reasons, during the past 15 years I have become a specialist in my country’s foreign affairs. As a result of this work, I have gained increasing, significant influence among some circles around my own government on the interrelated subjects of U.S. foreign policy and strategy. My role during 1982 and 1983 in working with the U.S. National Security Council to shape the adoption of the policy known as the Strategic Defense Initiative, or ‘SDI,’ is an example of this. Although the details are confidential, I can report to you that my views on the current strategic situation are more influential in the United States today that at any time during the past. Therefore, I can assure you that what I present to you now, on the subject of prospects for the reunification of Germany, is a proposal which will be studied most seriously among the relevant establishment circles inside the United States. Under the proper conditions, many today will agree, that the time has come for early steps toward the reunification of Germany, with the obvious prospect that Berlin might resume its role as the capital.

Targeted for Destruction

Two days after his Kempinski Hotel speech, federal indictments were issued against Lyndon LaRouche and several associates. Later, LaRouche, in speaking at the National Press Club on the indictments, stated: “One could say of the indictment itself, that all those that perpetrate offenses against God, or humanity, or both, are sooner or later punished.”

This was not the first contrived legal action against LaRouche. An earlier prosecution of LaRouche in Boston had concluded with a mistrial in May 1988, and had already revealed what former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark would later term “a broader range of deliberate and systematic misconduct and abuse of power over a longer period of time in an effort to destroy a political movement and leader, than any other federal prosecution in my time or to my knowledge.” As documented in the 1989 book Railroad!, “The prosecution was caught hiding evidence and violating discovery obligations… There were also days of hearings on issues of classified information… Judge Keeton later found that the government had violated the discovery obligations and that there was serious government misconduct… The Boston mistrial was called a ‘stinging defeat’ for the government by the National Law Journal… When the case ended…, the jury declared they would have acquitted all of the defendants on all charges. ‘There was just too much evidence of government misconduct in what was happening to the LaRouche campaign,’ one juror was quoted as saying.”

In the Boston trial, a May 5, 1986 document taken from Iran–Contra conspirator Oliver North’s safe, and made available to the LaRouche defense through the offices of Lawrence Walsh, the independent counsel for the Iran–Contra investigation, referenced Fred Lewis, part of a crew of operatives, working under Vice President Bush’s office, against LaRouche. This, combined with other revelations, led Judge Robert E. Keeton to hold weeks of hearings to determine the extent and impact of the prosecution’s hiding of evidence. As a result, Judge Keeton, following the classified trail which he viewed in documents which he ordered be presented to him in camera, ordered a search of Vice President Bush’s office for exculpatory evidence.

Panicked, the Justice Department rushed a new case to trial in Alexandria, Virginia, the backyard of the intelligence community beholden to Vice President and former CIA head George Bush, in order to “place a thumb on the scales of justice.” The Boston trial was scheduled for retrial on January 3, 1989. Before that could occur, the Alexandria court would indict, try, and convict LaRouche, in the space of two months—October 14 to December 16. The Boston retrial would never occur, and the true nature of the political persecution of Lyndon LaRouche would never be brought before an American jury, since Judge Albert Bryan, who presided over the Alexandria case, prevented the defense from exposing any of the government’s activities, including an unprecedented government-instigated bankruptcy which prevented repayment of the political loans at the heart of the charges.

Yet, even this criminal abuse of law, which resulted in LaRouche’s incarceration, was not the worst of actions carried out against the persons LaRouche and his wife, Helga Zepp-LaRouche. On October 6, 1986, there was an assassination attempt against LaRouche, about which LaRouche wrote in his 2004 pamphlet titled “ ‘Convict Him, or Kill Him!’ The Night They Came To Kill Me.”

On October 6, 1986, a virtual army of more than four hundred armed personnel descended upon the town of Leesburg, Virginia, for a raid on the offices of EIR and its associates, and also deployed for another, darker mission. The premises at which I was residing at that time were surrounded by an armed force, while aircraft, armored vehicles, and other personnel waited for the order to move in shooting. Fortunately, the killing did not happen, because someone with higher authority than the Justice Department Criminal Division head, William Weld, ordered the attack on me called off. The forces readied to move in on me, my wife, and a number of my associates, were pulled back in the morning. This was the second fully documented case of a U.S. Justice Department involvement in operations aimed at my personal elimination from politics.

Though LaRouche and six others were found guilty in an Alexandria, Virginia court on December 16, 1988, and were imprisoned on January 27, 1989, the international and national outcry against those corrupt convictions continues to this very day. Executive Intelligence Review’s September 2017 dossier, “Robert Mueller Is an Amoral Legal Assassin: He Will Do His Job If You Let Him” comprehensively reviews how the current special prosecutor against Donald Trump was a key component of the political persecution of Lyndon LaRouche in the 1980s.

During his time spent in prison, LaRouche continued to write, often by dictating whole chapters of book manuscripts on phone calls, sometimes without reference works of any kind. Apart from the collection titled The Science of Christian Economy and Other Prison Writings, LaRouche, while imprisoned, wrote and recorded many short works, including in the form of correspondence.

During 1989, as it became clear that the Soviet Union’s Comecon sphere was experiencing increasing economic difficulties, LaRouche and his wife Helga cooperated intensely on a program called the “Productive Triangle Paris-Berlin-Vienna,” which after the disintegration of the Soviet Union was extended into the “Eurasian Land-Bridge.” After the elimination of the Iron Curtain, this program suggested the integration of the population and industrial centers of Europe with those of Asia through so-called development corridors. It was the only comprehensive peace plan for the 21st Century on the table at that time, an option which was fiercely countered by British and the Anglophile neo-cons in the United States, who instead pushed their policy of a unipolar world and neoliberal system. The Eurasian Land-Bridge, very early on, became known as “The New Silk Road.” Over two decades later, the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative, which grew out of this concept, has become the primary locomotive of world physical economy.

Changing Thousands of Lives

Upon his release from prison on January 26, 1994, LaRouche continued his career as a forecaster. He developed his “Triple Curve” pedagogy in 1995 to illustrate to non-economists how the process of “Weimar Germany-like hyperinflation” had gripped the trans-Atlantic world, and had so looted it that nothing could be done to preserve the dominant money system; It would have to be reorganized from the top down, utilizing Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal-era Glass-Steagall Act to begin the process of bank reorganization. He warned in January 2001 of the danger of a violent terrorist attack on one or more American cities, placing this warning within the context of reviewing why and how the financial system had entered a phase of a “high-tech bubble” during 1999–2000.

LaRouche spoke of a “Reichstag Fire” possibility in light of the emerging ungovernability of the United States, under conditions of deepening economic ruin. And, as with his May 1987 forecast of a collapse of the stock market in October of 1987, LaRouche stated on July 25, 2007, one year before the Lehman Brothers/AIG meltdown of September 2008:

The world monetary financial system is actually now currently in the process of disintegrating. There is nothing mysterious about this; I’ve talked about it for some time, it’s been in progress, it’s not abating. What’s listed as stock values and market values in the financial markets internationally is bunk! They are purely fictitious beliefs. There is no truth to it; the fakery is enormous. There is no possibility of a non-collapse of the present financial system—none! It’s finished, now! The present financial system cannot continue to exist under any circumstances, under any Presidency, under any leadership, or any leadership of nations. Only a fundamental and sudden change in the world monetary financial system will prevent a general, immediate chain-reaction type of collapse. At what speed we don’t know, but it will go on, and it will be unstoppable. And the longer it goes on before coming to an end, the worse things will get.

LaRouche, as evidenced from the above forecast, produced at 84 years of age, continued to be uniquely productive. At the turn of the millennium, LaRouche spearheaded a movement to recruit youth—a movement which became so successful that the Democratic Party in various parts of the country even attempted to co-opt it. Thousands of youth went through this educational process. Groundbreaking contributions in the presentation of the work of physicist Johannes Kepler, in the practice of bel canto Classical singing both for general secondary school education and as an antidote to cultural self-degradation, and the presentation of American history, including American current history (rather than “current events” or the even more degrading term, “news”), in video format, such as the documentary 1932, were produced by the LaRouche Youth Movement.

From the time of his emergence as a public figure over fifty years ago, the only tragedy that characterized Lyndon LaRouche’s life, is that he was never permitted to carry out, either as President or as an adviser to the serving President, the economic reforms that would have improved the lives of tens of millions of Americans and hundreds of millions around the world.

Although Lyndon LaRouche has many friends who were leaders in the fields of science, music, economy, and politics, his greatest friends, apart from his wife, Helga, were the forgotten men and women of America and other countries.

See also, Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.: 1922-2019, A Talent Well Spent

Visit Exoneration Campaign site

The Green New Deal: Just More Austerity & Population Control

This article was written for Vol. 3 No. 1 of The Hamiltonian

“In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, to contribute something to solving overpopulation.”

—Prince Philip, Consort to Queen Elizabeth II and Co-Founder of the World Wildlife Fund

The “Green New Deal” recently called for by a few unstable members of the U.S. Congress is a farce. It is neither “green,” nor is it new. It has nothing to do with concern for the environment or with so-called social justice. It is not, as some claim, an overly-inflated version of an otherwise worthy goal.

It is an attempt to cause chaos in U.S. policy; to further poison relations between President Trump and potentially collaborative members of Congress; and most of all, to lock the U.S. into an anti-growth, anti-development policy at a moment when the Chinese-initiated Belt and Road Initiative is opening up a new paradigm of anti-colonial progress and development around the world—something the U.S. with its decaying infrastructure and industry desperately needs.

Though the Green New Deal is vague and laughable enough to be denounced even by prominent members of the Democratic Party, it yet retains its prominent place in the daily news cycle, even covered by one news source as a policy rooted in the legacy of Alexander Hamilton. Hundreds of young people have suddenly appeared out of nowhere to call for its implementation, traveling by bus to Washington DC to corner lawmakers and demand “action.”

The obvious question for any thinking person is: Where did this come from, and why now?

The timing and intentions of this attempted hijacking of U.S. policy are no mystery. In December 2018, the British House of Lords released a report on the implications of a “shifting world order” for UK foreign policy, which revealingly named the potential of a second term of a Trump presidency as an existential threat which the British Empire agenda simply could not survive.

As the post-war world order of geopolitics and speculative finance collapses, President Trump’s instincts have been to end US involvement in regime change wars; to resolve decades-long conflicts, such as that with North Korea; to form cooperative rather than antagonistic relationships with other world powers like Russia and China; and to pull the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Accord. In short: to pull the rug out from under the strategic control over nations which the Anglo-American elites have exercised for nearly a century. All of this, a desperate and dying empire cannot abide.

Green Death and Neo-Colonialism

The modern environmentalist movement, to which so many deluded people in the West today pay obeisance, was never a grassroots movement of concerned youth, and never had anything to do with saving the Earth. It was created and promoted from the beginning by the British Empire to stop development: as a depopulation policy.

Emerging out of the eugenics movement, which became somewhat unpopular in the wake of Hitler’s genocide, the re-branded “ecology” or “conservation” movement continued the goal of maintaining the pre-war colonial system in the post-WWII world.

In 1960, Julian “Master Race” Huxley, co-founder of the World Wildlife Fund and once-head of the British Eugenics Society, made very clear the “conservation” movement’s colonial intentions: “These newly independent African nations cannot be trusted with the protection of natural spaces and endangered species. Therefore, we must have an international body which can take stewardship of these lands.” Huxley’s stewardship meant that by the mid-1990s, Britain, through the WWF, regained control over roughly 8% of the African continent, preventing the development of its resources for the people of Africa.

In 1968, money from some of the biggest oligarchical families in the West was deployed to found the Club of Rome, which declared, “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like would fit the bill….But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap of mistaking symptoms for causes…. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.” In parallel the United Nations sponsored a series of conferences on population in the mid-1970s to promote the idea that human population growth is a cancer on the planet, and launched the hoax of “sustainable development.”

Concurrently, under U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger (who famously declared that he felt more British than American), NSSM-200 was authored, defining the economic development of other nations, especially in the so-called “Third World,” as a threat to U.S. national security interests, stating, “Wherever a lessening of population pressures through reduced birth rates can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States.”

Out of this process—not honest scientific work—came the formation of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988, with a goal of inducing nations into signing binding agreements to limit their own development and industrialization based on lies of the dangers of CO2 and a coming climate apocalypse. Should we be surprised, then, that the resolution for a Green New Deal cites the October 2018 report of the IPCC, “Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C” in its first sentence as the urgent basis for action?

Youth Need a Future, Not a Suicide Pact

The public face of support for the Green New Deal is “the future”: school-aged children and young people. Is it the case that these youth are rising up on their own accord? Hardly.

Take the Sunrise Movement, which claims to be a grassroots “army of young people” to stop climate change and create jobs. Members of the Sunrise Movement traveled to Washington, DC for the launch of the Green New Deal, and have been bused to congressional offices around the country to confront leadership about “our future.” The Sunrise Movement, and its partners such as, People’s Action, and CPD Action, have received millions of dollars in funding from oligarchical, establishment funding mechanisms, such as George Soros’s Open Society Foundation, the Rockefeller Family Fund, and the Sierra Club.

These are not only the same channels of funding of the original green genocide policies, but they are many of the same sources which are funding the coup operation against President Trump!

Instead of being used as pawns in an anti-development, anti-growth policy—a virtual suicide pact—our young people must be given opportunity to become geniuses in a society which is committed to human progress. The basis for making this shift was outlined by Lyndon LaRouche in his “Four New Laws to Save the U.S.A. Now!” which calls for shutting down the Wall Street–City of London speculative financial system, and its replacement with a science-driver oriented policy for the development of fusion power and a full revival of the space program. Youth who are engaged in contributing to humanity by making new leaps of discovery will have a very hard time believing, as many of their degenerate parents did, that resources are limited and mankind must stop progressing.

The Green New Deal is nothing but part of a rotting and desperate attempt to stop a new, pro-growth paradigm from taking hold across the planet. It is part and parcel of the coup against the Trump presidency, and was launched by the same British Empire apparatus. As the souls of the victims of British Empire-initiated genocide in 1930s Germany will cry out in warning to us: Been there, done that.

A Great Thinker of Our Time

by Sergei Yu. Glazyev, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Adviser to the President of the Russian Federation.

Lyndon LaRouche has left us. He was a titan of thought, a man of incredibly encyclopedic knowledge, great soul, and love for humanity.

He will always remain in our memory as an ardent fighter for mankind’s happy future, based on implementation of the principles of physical economy—a realistic school of economic thought, directed towards the creation of material benefits and the conditions for socioeconomic development.

In contrast to the libertarian tendency that today dominates mainstream economic ideology in the interests of the world financial oligarchy, Lyndon LaRouche developed genuine economic science in the interests of the development of the productive forces of mankind. His concept of a Eurasian development bridge from Western Europe to Russia’s Far East, and onward to Alaska and the USA, could become a real alternative to today’s hybrid world war. LaRouche foresaw the Russophobic aggression of the American ruling elite and warned of its ruinous consequences, insisting on broad international cooperation for the creation of transcontinental development corridors.

LaRouche forecast the inevitable onset of a global financial crisis, many years before it arrived. LaRouche’s famous curve [the Triple Curve], depicting the growing gap between the volume of real output and that of financial speculation, was a serious warning for all economists who were really thinking. It turned out that not only in Russia, but also in the USA, no one is a prophet in his own country. Instead of being recognized, LaRouche was persecuted by the American financial oligarchy, who imprisoned him on false charges.

I remember one of the leaders of the Brookings Institution urging me, in a whisper, not to have any contact with LaRouche, so as not to spoil my reputation. For me, who had come to the USA to take part in a scientific forum on issues of developing democratic institutions in the post-Soviet region, this was shocking. From then on, I started closely reading LaRouche’s publications and attending conferences he organized. And I must acknowledge that his presentations were often a ray of light in the kingdom of darkness and hypocrisy, which had seized the public mind of “progressive” mankind.

{EIR} magazine, published by LaRouche, was a guidebook through the dark corridors of the Western ruling elite, exposing the hidden springs of the world financial oligarchy’s anti-human policies. Tracing the fonts of its origin from the time of the sack of the Byzantine Empire, he described the eternal struggle against that worldwide evil, which is incarnate in the oligarchical clans of capitalism in the West. Many of the recurrences of racism, Nazism and fascism, and religious extremism, which we observe in the world today, cannot be explained without LaRouche’s investigations, which were striking in their historical depth.

LaRouche enjoyed enormous respect among the expert community in many countries around the world. I have had the opportunity to meet his supporters in India, Latin America, China, Africa, and, of course, in Europe and the CIS countries. One would hope for this international expert community, inspired by the ideas of Lyndon LaRouche, to be preserved. Today those ideas are coming to life in a new world economic paradigm, which we call “integral,” for it unites the interests of the peoples of various countries in the harmonious development of humanity.

Petition: Exonerate Lyndon LaRouche

The January 27, 1989 Jailing of Lyndon LaRouche Defined an Era, Which Now Must End

We Call Upon President Trump to Exonerate LaRouche!

Sign the Petition

Many Americans sat in stunned amazement earlier this month as the venerable New York Times and Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s apparatus moved to put the President of the United States, Donald Trump, on trial for treason, because he dared to meet and converse with Russian President Vladimir Putin; because he has referred to NATO as being “obsolete” and questioned its role; and because he fired his director of the FBI, James Comey, as the Constitution prescribes he has the authority to do. Jaws dropped as it became public that top echelons of the FBI, the CIA, and the Democratic Party—all on instructions from British intelligence—had been, and still are to this day, engaged in an active coup d’etat against the elected President of the United States. Many of you reading these lines today are rightly aghast at the fact that these actors, although they have not yet achieved their objective, have so far gotten away with their plot, and that they act with seeming impunity. “How is that possible?” you ask yourself and your friends.

To find the answer to that question, you only need look to the events of Jan. 27, 1989—precisely 30 years ago—when Lyndon H. LaRouche and a group of associates were railroaded into prison with lengthy sentences, for crimes they never committed. The frame-up and jailing of LaRouche, facilitated by years of lying media vilification of LaRouche and his movement, which continues to this day, was carried out by the same British-run political apparatus—in many cases, by the same individual hit-men, including Special Counsel Robert Mueller—that today is out to topple the President of the United States.

And it is because they were able to carry out that injustice against LaRouche 30 years ago, despite massive opposition nationally and internationally from prominent civil rights and human rights leaders, elected officials and legal scholars, that they are at it again today, on a grander scale.

In fact, the five-year jailing of Lyndon LaRouche defined an entire era of modern U.S. history, much as the 1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy did.

There is no exaggeration in that statement. Ramsey Clark, who served as Attorney General of the United States under President Lyndon Johnson, and who also represented LaRouche in his appeals to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court, stated in an April 26, 1995 open letter to then Attorney General Janet Reno:

“I bring this matter [the LaRouche case] to you directly, because I believe it involves a broader range of deliberate and systematic misconduct and abuse of power over a longer period of time in an effort to destroy a political movement and leader, than any other federal prosecution in my time or to my knowledge.”

Clark also said:

“The purpose can only be seen as destroying— it’s more than a political movement, it’s more than a political figure; it is those two. But it’s a fertile engine of ideas, a common purpose of thinking and studying and analyzing to solve problems, regardless of the impact on the status quo, or on vested interests. It was a deliberate purpose to destroy that at any cost… In what was a complex and pervasive utilization of law enforcement, prosecution, media, and non-governmental organizations focused on destroying an enemy, this case must be number one.”

With LaRouche’s jailing, America and the world were deprived of their most illustrious statesman and economist.

Because LaRouche’s policies for replacing the deadly looting of Wall Street and the City of London with a just New World Economic Order of universal, high tech development, were not implemented, hundreds of millions of people around the world remained in poverty and tens of millions perished unnecessarily. It has only been with China’s recent adoption of policies very similar to those proposed by LaRouche up to 50 years ago, that the genocide has stopped in at least large parts of the planet.

Because LaRouche’s SDI policy, as adopted and proposed by President Ronald Reagan in 1983, was sabotaged and not carried out, the world today teeters at the edge of thermonuclear confrontation. Only a return to LaRouche’s original design of the SDI ballistic missile defense system—based on new physical principles and cooperation with Russia and China, not against them—can now pull us back from the brink.

Because LaRouche’s proposal for cooperation between East and West after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the reunification of Germany—famously forecast by LaRouche in October 1988—was rejected, and LaRouche was hauled off to jail scarcely three months later, Russia was ravaged and the West looted under Thatcher, Bush and Mitterand. And a wave of permanent wars was unleashed, which is with us still today.

Because LaRouche’s proposed war on drugs against London’s Dope, Inc. banking apparatus was never implemented, a drug epidemic today is poisoning our nation and the world.

And because LaRouche’s policies for generating a new Renaissance of classical culture and science were swept aside, we now stare into the pit of hell of a New Dark Age that is engulfing our youth in particular.

Some among you may disagree. Some may think that no jailing of a single man, no matter how unjustly, could possibly cause such results. But those thinking that way have yet to understand how real history works, how ideas are the driving force of humanity’s advance. In fact, the entire body of LaRouche’s life work and his extensive scientific writings, address precisely that central question: the role of man’s unique creativity in shaping his own history, and that of the physical universe around him. Read and study LaRouche if you wish to understand why the British Empire so fears him.

On March 30, 1984, Lyndon LaRouche wrote a Draft Memorandum of Agreement Between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., with a vision for the future which remains as scientifically valid today as it was 35 years ago. In it, LaRouche stated:

"The political foundation for durable peace must be: a) The unconditional sovereignty of each and all nation-states, and b) Cooperation among sovereign nation-states to the effect of promoting unlimited opportunities to participate in the benefits of technological progress, to the mutual benefit of each and all. The most crucial feature of present implementation of such a policy of durable peace is a profound change in the monetary, economic, and political relations between the dominant powers and those relatively subordinated nations often classed as "developing nations." Unless the inequities lingering in the aftermath of modern colonialism are progressively remedied, there can be no durable peace on this planet.

"Insofar as the United States and Soviet Union acknowledge the progress of the productive powers of labor throughout the planet to be in the vital strategic interests of each and both, the two powers are bound to that degree and in that way by a common interest. This is the kernel of the political and economic policies of practice indispensable to the fostering of durable peace between those two powers."

It is time that the damage done by LaRouche’s incarceration three decades ago be repaired—not only because such a terrible injustice was done to LaRouche, but because that injustice has emboldened the British Empire to use the same methods against a sitting President of the United States, which endangers all of humanity. What better way to defend the United States of America and all of humanity than to exonerate LaRouche, ensure that his policies are at last adopted, and recognize his ideas for what they are, the acts of one of history’s greatest geniuses, affording him his rightful place in history.

Add my name to exonerate LaRouche