This article is the ninth in our new campaign, "The Decisive Battle in the War for the Republic, Put the Fed Into Bankruptcy; Create the Third National Bank."
“A sudden, relatively convulsive reorganization of the world’s finances, monetary systems, and trade-relations, is the only hope to be foreseen among those nations which prefer that their nations survive” —Lyndon LaRouche
Denial and dodging will not change reality. We must, finally, recognize—face the reality—that we now live in a revolutionary time. It is chaotic. It is messy. It can appear frightening. But there is no safe haven. There is no “going back to normal.”
Our current financial/banking system is hopelessly bankrupt, as the Federal Reserve prints trillions of what were once called “U.S. Dollars” to prop up the biggest financial bubble in human history. The corporate and financial oligarchy—the modern day British financial empire—at Davos and other elite gatherings, plot ever more totalitarian measures which will destroy what is left of our productive economy and reduce populations to ever-worsening conditions of servitude. The “woke” Biden regime launches assault after assault against the most sacred principles of our civilization.
In such an environment, minuscule “reforms” will not work. Piecemeal legislation will not work. We are now in the terminal phase of a nightmare which began with the assassination of John F. Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963. Our economy has been destroyed, our culture has been degraded, and our government institutions have been corrupted. Only a revolutionary change can reverse this.
Many citizens are now fighting back. Some of these interventions have been very productive; others have been misdirected. We must fight smart. The anger is justified, but it is also essential to recognize who the real enemy is, and to identify the key singular victory which is indispensable to begin the process of reclaiming our nation. What is required is “thinking big.”
The shutdown of our factories, the destruction of our family farms, the current rampant inflation, the deadly narcotics epidemic, the turning of our once-proud cities into hell-holes, and even the massive corruption of our public education system—all of this, all of the horror we now witness—is a product of the policies of the U.S. Federal Reserve and the imperial central banking system over the past 40 years, policies which escalated dramatically, in lunacy and destructiveness, following the crisis of 2007-2008. We are confronted with an imperial financial/corporate “money system” which is desperate to save itself—its own wealth and power—and intends to do so by grinding us into the dust, reducing us to the wretched condition of helpless starvelings, and eliminating all Constitutional vestiges of the American Republic.
Throughout these last four decades there has been one individual who never wavered in his defense of the American Republic. Lyndon LaRouche was hated and feared by the financial oligarchy. LaRouche was targeted, as early as the 1960s, by the FBI. He was vilified in the press in a way that was unprecedented until the same treatment was given to President Trump. He was threatened with assassination. Henry Kissinger personally led a cabal of operatives within the national security agencies to target LaRouche in the mid-80s because of LaRouche’s influence in the Reagan administration. LaRouche was framed up and spent five years in federal prison.
What did LaRouche say that the oligarchy so feared?
LaRouche’s War with Empire
Beginning in the 1940s, Lyndon LaRouche recognized that the greatest evil in the world was to be found in the financial and imperial power of the British Empire. LaRouche did not come to this conclusion by reading about it in books. He experienced it firsthand while stationed in India during World War II, where he witnessed the brutal nature of British colonial rule. LaRouche began a study of monetarist imperial economics as early as the late 1940s. Although still in his 20s, he dedicated his life to fighting the evil which he perceived.
In the 1950s, following the 1951 Treasury-Federal Reserve Accord, which freed the Fed from the 1942-1951 U.S. Treasury oversight, LaRouche identified that the errors in policy by Fed Chairman William McChesney Martin would lead to a disaster, and in 1956 he produced a report which accurately predicted the recession of 1957-1958. In 1970-1971, LaRouche precisely identified the systemic flaws which would trigger a collapse of the post-war monetary arrangements, a forecast which was borne out with the August 15, 1971 action by the Nixon administration to abolish the Bretton Woods monetary system. He also accurately forecast that the abandonment of Bretton Woods would usher in an era of financial speculation and economic austerity.
From the moment that the Bretton Woods System was abolished in 1971, LaRouche warned that what was being unleashed was an agenda of Fascist economics, of “primitive accumulation” against the population. Now, 50 years after that warning, witness the current state of our cities: a permanent homeless class; a permanent class of drug addicts, permanent dependency on the government for meager handouts, the disappearance of industry and small businesses.
LaRouche authored the “LaRouche Gold Proposal” in 1981, “Time to Nationalize the Federal Reserve” in 1992, the “Four New Laws to save the U.S.A., Now!” in 2014, and numerous other proposals over a span of five decades. He not only defined the problem, he spelled out the necessary steps to end the rule of central banking and return to sovereign American System economic methods. What is presented here will only scratch the surface of LaRouche’s insights into these matters. It is designed to whet the appetite, so to speak. At the end of this article links are provided to a number of more in-depth articles authored by LaRouche. It is in studying and digesting that “heavy reading” that individuals can qualify themselves today to serve in the United States Congress.
In his “A Conceptual Outline of Modern Economic Science” (1982), Lyndon LaRouche writes:
Throughout the more than 2,500 years history of European civilization, European culture has been continuously the battlefield between two, and only two, opposing political currents. The first, Judeo-Christian republicanism, the Augustinian republican tradition reflected in the constitutional ordering of the young United States, has been perpetually in mortal combat with the opposing tendency, exemplified by the British oligarchy, a political faction known as the oligarchical current. . . .
The oligarchy proposes, today, to destroy the institution of the sovereign nation-state, and to replace that with a Malthusian form of world-federalist order, more or less on lines of the proposals which the evil Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi embedded in Otto von Hapsburg’s Pan-European Union. This feudalistic world-order is to be ruled by an oligarchical class, a collection of powerful families composed of a mixture of titled aristocrats and wealthy rentier-financier parasites.
Since such a Malthusian world-order does not develop, it does not increase the potential relative population-density of society. Therefore, there is no “free energy” component in society’s production generally, no profit in the sense of profit under industrial-capitalist society.
The forms of income available to sustain the oligarchical ruling families is therefore limited to two forms of exploitation of the stupefied labor-intensive toil of the general population: ground-rent and usury.
With the emergence of the modern nation-state out of the fifteenth-century Italian Renaissance, and the emergence of technological progress and investment of produced profit as the characteristic feature of such states, the feudalistic oligarchy struggling to regain its power within this new form of society, has concentrated, on the economic front, on subordinating industrial-capitalist forms of profit to rent and usury. . . .
“Free trade” does not and could not exist as Adam Smith and charlatans such as Friedman and von Hayek falsely portray such policy as one of “freedom.” The essential point of British “free trade” policy is to keep agriculture and industry poor relative to rentier interest, and also to prohibit the state from revolting against enslavement of both the state and national commerce by a rentier interest which has insolently placed itself in power above sovereign nations.
In an April 11, 2009 Webcast, LaRouche states:
Progress or die! The physical-economic profitability of an economy never lies in a fixed level of technological and related progress; even standing still could not occur unless we continued to move ahead. Thus, for the science of physical economy, the functional value of labor lies in the rate of cognitive process being set into motion. This includes a relative improvement in the conditions of life of those who labor, and their family households. The essence of economic value lies thus in the verb, not the noun. . . .
Value does not lie in money! Money is simply a vehicle to organize exchange: investment, and goods, and exchange. It has no intrinsic value. Statistical measures of money flow, do not really tell you anything about how an economy works.
Everyone who has opposed me has been wrong: They use statistical methods, which are intrinsically incompetent. They measure in terms of money statistics. It’s an incompetent measurement. The important thing is what do you do to invest in the physical productive powers of labor. And also to invest in the development of the mind and social relations of people, which are essential for that increase in productivity. The physical productive powers of labor, made possible by inventions. No animal can make an invention; no animal ever discovered a principle.
In his “New Accounting Standards are Imperative: The Becoming Death of Systems Analysis” (March, 2000), Larouche writes:
The issue for the nation is one of Sovereignty. As defined by relevant sections of the United States Constitution, money has no legitimate existence, except as it is uttered by sovereign government for the sole purpose of advancing the general welfare of the population. The manner whereby such National Credit is issued, how it is put to use, and the rules by which it is governed are entirely within the discretion of the national government. All private financial institutions, financial contracts and bookkeeping practices are subservient to this sovereign power and commitment of government to the general welfare.
A sudden, relatively convulsive reorganization of the world’s finances, monetary systems, and trade-relations, is the only hope to be foreseen among those nations which prefer that their nations survive the sinking of the doomed, present form of the International Monetary Fund’s world-dominating, financial and monetary system.
We must scrap all of those post-1971 changes in economic, financial, monetary, and trade policies, which have been introduced since the August 1971 beginnings of the now hopelessly, systemically bankrupt, present world monetary system. This must include an immediate reversal and elimination of all agreements launched in support of so-called “globalization.” That revival of the best features of the original Bretton Woods system, is not a matter of opinion; it is a matter of choosing survival over what would be nothing other than clinging hysterically to a hopelessly failed, and doomed system. . . .
Today, the great irony of modern financial accounting, is that those so-called modern double-entry bookkeeping methods, which are, axiomatically, the standard of reference for practice today, are, quite literally, medieval practices, first developed by the same Thirteenth- and Fourteenth-Century Lombard bankers, whose accounting practices were directly responsible for that Fourteenth-Century “New Dark Age,” the same dark age which wiped out half of the parishes of Europe, and which reduced the population by approximately the same amount. . . .
The problem has not been merely, that we continue to use medieval methods, those of double-entry bookkeeping, for accounting. The problem is not that such methods are used, still; the problem is, that such archaic administrative practices are worshiped as a fetish, as a guide to misjudging real-world performance of real-life, physical economies. It is implicitly anal fetishism respecting the financial accountant’s so-called “bottom line,” which has been the great folly of recent economic policies.
Economics and the new cost accounting must be practiced, not as a branch of bookkeeping, but as a branch of physical science. John von Neuman’s and Norbert Wiener’s childish play with “connect the dots” is to be expunged from the system.
The transformations expressed in the relation between man and physical processes at the point of production, are intrinsically non-linear processes, whose characteristics must be examined from the standpoint of the recognizable principles involved, and measured according to the same state of mind as the scientist and machine-tool specialist crafting and conducting a crucial experimental test of physical principle. This approach to the point of production considered in the small, must be the bench-mark for understanding the larger process in which these typical qualities of transformations occur.
NOTE: The above quotations are just a foretaste. LaRouche wrote voluminously on the steps that need to be taken to abolish the Federal Reserve and return the nation to sovereign economic policies. LaRouche PAC will have a great deal more to say on this in the weeks ahead.
Suggested Reading by Lyndon LaRouche:
The Wells of Doom (1997)
Coming Soon. . . . Hamilton, Lincoln and Sovereign Public Credit