Video: Medlemmer af New York City Schiller Institut borgerkor synger den russiske nationalsang uden for det Russiske Konsulat i New York fredag, til ære for ofrene for flystyrtet, mange af dem medlemmer af Alexandrov Ensemblet.

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 31. december, 2016 – På vegne af det Internationale Schiller Institut ønsker jeg at overbringe vores dybeste kondolence i anledning af det tragiske tab af 92 menneskeliv, der døde i flystyrtet på vej til Syrien. Denne ulykke er så meget desto mere årsag til sorg, fordi musikken og den patriotiske ånd hos Alexandrov Ensemblets medlemmer ville have overbragt et budskab om håb til det syriske folk. Dette er en befolkning, der i fem år har været ofre for den kriminelle politik for regimeskifte og behandlet som bondebrikker i et geopolitisk skakspil, i en total overtrædelse af deres suverænitet.

Alexandrov Ensemblet har været et udtryk for de højeste, moralske værdier i Rusland og, som klassisk korsang generelt, taler til tilhørernes sjæl og skabende potentiale. Det er derfor ekstremt vigtigt, at den russiske forsvarsminister Sergei Shoigu meddelte, at han nu indleder prøver for at udvælge de bedste talenter til fuldt ud at genrejse Alexandrov-koret.

At optræne sangstemmen er vigtigt for alle, eftersom en velplaceret stemme kan udtrykke komponistens kreative hensigt og tale direkte til den samme egenskab hos tilhørerne. Det repræsenterer derfor et uerstatteligt element i den harmoniske udvikling af karakteren. Lad mig derfor dele den idé med Dem, at man, ud over at genopbygge Alexandrov Ensemblet, opretter tusinder af Alexandrov-kor i skoler over hele Rusland for at ære Ruslands heroiske bidrag i befrielsen af Syrien og samtidig udbreder den opløftende virkning af at synge i kor til den unge generation.

Et nyt paradigme er i færd med at blive til, som det eksemplificeres af integrationen af den Eurasiske Union og det Nye Silkevejsinitiativ, og som etablerer en helt ny relation mellem nationerne. Vi har brug for en dialog mellem de bedste traditioner fra hver kultur for, at dette nye paradigme kan vokse til at blive en ny æra for civilisationen – kendskabet til det bedste fra en anden kultur vil føre til en kærlighed til denne kultur, og vil derfor erstatte fremmedfjendskhed og had med mere ædle følelser. I denne nye æra vil geopolitik blive overvundet for altid, og loyaliteten over for menneskehedens fælles mål vil etablere et højere niveau af fornuft. Det er grund til trøst for os alle, at flystyrtets tragiske dødsofre bidrager med deres udødelighed til opbygningen af denne bedre verden.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche,

Præsident, Det Internationale Schiller Institut.

[Dette budskab blev modtaget på det Russiske Konsulat i New York om eftermiddagen, den 30. december, og efter anmodning ligeledes sendt til TASS.]

(2. januar 2017 — 440.000 mennesker har set videoen indtil nu!)

Foto: Alexandrov-koret og Yosif Kobzon synger i Warszawa, oktober, 2009.  

Vi befinder os i nedtællingen til afslutningen af Obama-administrationen og begyndelsen af den tiltrædende Trump-administration. Om præcis tre uger finder indsættelsesceremonien for den tiltrædende administration sted. Der er stadig meget, der er uafklaret og usikkert; men verdenssituationen ændrer sig meget hurtigt. Som hr. LaRouche advarede om for mindre end 48 timer siden, så må vi stadig holde øje med Obama; så længe, han beklæder embedet, kan han lave en forfærdelig masse ulykker. Blot i dag forsøgte han, fra sin ferie på Hawaii, at optrappe og fremprovokere en konflikt med Rusland. Han meddelte, at 35 russere vil blive erklæret persona non grata og ville blive udvist af USA under anklage om angivelig spionage; og at der ikke alene ville blive pålagt Rusland flere sanktioner som gengældelse for den såkaldte »russiske hacking«, men at to russiske ejendomsområder, der angiveligt bliver brugt til spionage – et område på Marylands østkyst og et på Long Island, steder, hvor russiske diplomater til USA og Washington D.C. kan bringe deres familier til en hårdt tiltrængt ferie og afslapning – han meddelte, at føderale styrker ville rykke ind og lukke disse områder ned. Jeg er sikker på, at Obama regnede med, at dette ville provokere hans ærke-Nemesis Vladimir Putin til at gøre gengældelse, men Obama blev sørgeligt skuffet. Til trods for, at Sergei Lavrov, Ruslands udenrigsminister, sagde, at de var i deres gode ret til at gøre gengæld, øje for øje, og udvise 35 såkaldte amerikanske diplomater af Rusland som persona non grata og lukke amerikanske feriesteder i Moskva og omegn ned; men i stedet foretog Putin, på klassisk Putin-vis, et judo-træk og gjorde ingenting. Et træk fra Putin side, som generelt erkendes som at udmanøvrere Obama – f.eks. i overskriften i Daily Beast, »Putin udmanøvrerer Obama i spionkrig; Moskva griner ad Obama-administrationens sanktioner og udvisninger som de sidste handlinger af svaghed«. Putin afslørede Obama for det, han er, en ’lam and’; og han nægtede at respondere. I en erklæring offentliggjort på Kremls webside i dag sagde Putin følgende: »Alt imens vi forbeholder os ret til at tage forholdsregler til gengældelse, så vil vi ikke degradere os selv til et niveau af ’køkkendiplomati’. I vore fremtidige skridt på vej imod en genoprettelse af de russisk-amerikanske relationer, vil vi gå frem fra den politik, som Donald Trumps administration forfølger.«

Så dette er en perfekt afslutning og diplomatisk sejr for Putin; og det er på linje med et tweet, der blev udsendt af det Russiske Udenrigsministerium, og som var et billede af en gul and med ordet »lam« skrevet over billedet. Obama og hans hold, selv om de kan skabe en masse ulykker i de resterende tre uger, anses ikke for at være særlig magtfulde mere, af Putin og andre i verden.

Samtidig kan russerne hævde en sand diplomatisk sejr i Syrien. Oven i befrielsen af Aleppo og genoprettelsen af regeringskontrol over en stor del af landet imod ISIS og andre oprørsstyrker, så forhandlede russerne en våbenhvile igennem sammen med Tyrkiet; men uden USA. Foreløbig holder denne våbenhvile. Dette er en meget håbefuld situation og demonstrerer endnu engang, at Obama definitivt har mistet lederskabsrollen i verden¸ og Rusland er en formidabel strategisk leder på verdensscenen, mens denne administration træder tilbage og den nye administration går om bord.

Samtidig har vi en nedsmeltning af det finansielle system; Monte dei Paschi banksituationen kører fortsat videre. Vi har en eksponering til derivater fra hver eneste bank på hele planeten. Enhver af disse – Deutsche Bank, Monte dei Paschi – hvad som helst kunne udløse en nedsmeltning af hele finanssystemet. Hr. LaRouches Fire Love er fortsat de afgørende og særdeles presserende forholdsregler, der må tages i USA. Som jeg sagde, så er intet afgjort, men der er meget, der er muligt. Som I har set i vore diverse udsendelser de seneste dage – Fireside Chat i går, en LPAC e-mail, der blev udsendt i dag, hovedoverskrifter på larouchepac.com hjemmesiden – så er vi engageret i en absolut presserende og afgørende mobilisering for at tvinge Glass-Steagall på dagsordenen, endnu før den tiltrædende administration indsættes. Dette må være det absolutte top-lovforslag, der lægges på den nye præsidents skrivebord til underskrift. Kongressen kan handle på det, når de træder sammen i næste uge; i modsætning til [senator] McCains meddelelse om, at han vil have høringer om russisk hacking, eller sådan noget. Dette er den afgørende forholdsregel; og vi vil have aktivister, der kommer til Washington, D.C. Vi har allerede afleveret marchordrerne; og vi vil diskutere dette yderligere i aftenens udsendelse.

Men dette er fortsat blot det første skridt i Lyndon LaRouches Fire Hastelove til at redde USA, nu. Det bedste eksempel, vi stadig har, den bedste præcedens, er Franklin Roosevelts første 100 dage; hvad FDR var i stand til at opnå i sine første 100 dage i embedet. Kongressen trådte sammen; han vedtog omgående Bankloven af 1933, erklærede banklukkedag, reorganiserede hele det bankerotte finanssystem og satte Amerika i arbejde igen. Kongressen holdt ikke pause før nøjagtig 100 dage senere; og 100 milepæle i lovgivning blev debatteret, vedtaget og sendt over til Det Hvide Hus til Franklin Roosevelts underskrift, hvilket ændrede historien. Dette er fortsat præcedensen; det er fortsat modellen, og indholdet af disse første 100 dage bør være Lyndon LaRouches Fire Love til USA’s redning.

Jeg giver nu ordet til Jason [Ross], for der er nogle specifikke måder, hvorpå vi kan gå i gang med disse presserende forholdsregler.  

WE NEED GLASS STEAGALL SITTING ON TRUMPS DESK
AWAITING HIS SIGNATURE WHEN HE TAKES OFFICE!

LaRouche PAC International Webcast, Dec. 30, 2016

MATTHEW OGDEN:  Good afternoon!  It's December 30, 2016.  My
name is Matthew Ogden and you're watching our final Friday
evening broadcast for 2016 for this year on larouchepac.com.  I'm
joined in the studio today by Jason Ross from the LaRouche PAC
Science Team; and via video by two members of our Policy
Committee — Bill Roberts from Detroit, Michigan (Hi, Bill); and
Michael Steger from San Francisco, California.
Now, obviously we are in a countdown to the end of the Obama
administration and the beginning of the incoming Trump
administration.  Exactly three weeks from today is the
inauguration of the incoming administration.  There are still
many things that are undetermined and up in the air; but the
world situation is moving very fast.  As Mr. LaRouche warned less
than 48 hours ago, you still have to keep your eye on Obama; as
long as he remains in office, he can cause an awful of mischief.
And we saw that just yesterday, in an announcement that came from
Obama while he was vacationing in Hawaii; he attempted to
escalate and provoke a conflict with Russia.   He announced that
35 Russian nationals would be declared {persona non grata} and
would be expelled from the United States under supposed spying
charges; and he announced that not only would there be more
sanctions imposed against Russia in retaliation for the so-called
"Russian hacking", but also two Russian estates that are
supposedly being used for espionage purposes — one on the
Eastern Shore of Maryland and one on Long Island, places where
Russian diplomats to the United Nations and to Washington DC can
bring their families for much-needed vacation and rest and
relaxation — he announced that Federal forces would be moving in
to close down those estates.  Now, I'm sure that Obama expected
that this was going to provoke his arch-nemesis Vladimir Putin
into retaliatory measures, but Obama was severely disappointed.
Despite the fact that Sergey Lavrov, the Foreign Minister of
Russia, said that they would be fully justified in retaliating
tit-for-tat and expelling 35 so-called US diplomats from Russia
as {persona non grata} and closing down US vacation homes in
Moscow and the Moscow suburbs; Putin instead, in classic Putin
fashion, judoed Barack Obama and did nothing.  Vladimir Putin, in
a move which is being universally recognized as outfoxing Obama
— for example, in a headline in the {Daily Beast} "Putin
Outfoxes Obama in Spy War ⦠Moscow Laughs Off the Obama
Administration's Sanctions and Expulsions as Feeble Last
Gestures".  Putin called out Obama for what he is, a lame duck;
and he refused to respond.  In a statement that was put out on
the Kremlin website today, Putin said the following:
"While we reserve the right to take reciprocal measures, we
are not going to downgrade ourselves to the level of
irresponsible 'kitchen' diplomacy.  In our future steps on our
way towards the restoration of Russian-United States relations,
we will proceed from the policy pursued by the administration of
Donald Trump."
So, this is a perfect ending and diplomatic victory for
Putin; and I think this goes along with a tweet that was sent out
by the Russian Foreign Ministry, which is a big picture of a
yellow duck with the word "lame" written over top of it.  Obama
and his crew, although they are in the position to cause an awful
amount of mischief in the remaining three weeks, are not being
recognized as all that powerful anymore by Putin and others
around the world.
Now, at the same time, there is a true diplomatic victory
that the Russians can claim in Syria.  On top of the liberation
of Aleppo and really restoring government control over a vast
part of the country against the ISIS and other rebel forces,
yesterday the Russians brokered a ceasefire with Turkey; but
without the United States.  This ceasefire has, up to this point,
been holding.  This is a very hopeful situation, and yet again,
demonstrates that Obama has definitely lost the leadership role
in the world; and Russia is a very formidable strategic leader on
the world stage as this administration exits and as the new
administration comes on board.
At the same time, you've got a meltdown of the financial
system; the Monte dei Paschi banking situation continues to
unravel.  We have the exposure of derivatives from every single
bank in the entire planet.  Any one of these — Deutsche Bank,
Monte dei Paschi Bank — anything could be the trigger to blow
out the entire financial system.  Mr. LaRouche's Four Laws remain
the essential and most urgent measures that need to be taken in
the United States.  As I said, nothing is determined, but there
is a lot that is possible.  As you've seen on various channels of
our communications over the last few days — the Fireside Chat
yesterday, an LPAC email that went out today, headlines on the
larouchepac.com website — we are engaged in an absolutely urgent
and critical mobilization to force Glass-Steagall onto the agenda
even before the inauguration of the incoming administration.
This should be the number one bill that is delivered to the new
President's desk for his signature.  It could be acted on by
Congress as they come into session next week; as opposed to
McCain's announcement that he's going to have hearings on Russian
hacking, or something like that.  This is the critical measure;
and we will have activists that will be coming into Washington,
DC.  We've already delivered the marching orders; and we can
discuss that more on the broadcast today.
But of course, that remains just the first step in Lyndon
LaRouche's Four Urgent Laws to Save the United States Now.  The
best example that we still have, the best precedent, is the first
100 days of Franklin Roosevelt; what FDR was able to accomplish
in his first 100 days in office.  The Congress came into session;
he immediately passed the Emergency Banking Act, declared a bank
holiday, reorganized the entire bankrupt financial system, put
Americans back to work.  Congress did not leave session until
exactly 100 days later; and 10 landmark pieces of legislation
were debated, passed, and sent over to the White House for
Franklin Roosevelt's signature, which changed the course of
history.  So of course, that remains the precedent; that remains
the model, and the contents of that first 100 days should be
Lyndon LaRouche's Four Laws to Save the United States.
So, with that said, I'd like to hand it over to Jason,
because there are some very specific examples of means by which
we can undertake those urgent measures.

JASON ROSS:  Let's also put it in the context of the world.  The
US desperately needs an economic recovery, a change in direction.
Think about the world as a whole; there's so much to be done.
Two and a half billion people on the planet don't have access to
continuous electricity; 800 million don't have access to fresh
water; 1.5 billion people don't have access to basic sanitation;
and over 1 billion people don't have access to telephone
capabilities.  There's much work to be done, and the United
States is definitely for a large shift.
President-elect Donald Trump has said that he's got big
plans to make America great again; that he wants to spend $1
trillion on infrastructure in the United States over the coming
period.  There's a lot that we could learn from China on this.
China, over just the past decade, has built the largest
high-speed rail network in the world.  In one decade, it went
from basically nothing, to now being the world's leader.  That
network is slated to double its size in the next 1.5 decades to a
level of 40-50,000 kms; about 30,000 miles of high-speed rail.
They're working, through their Belt and Road initiative, with 65
other nations in the region and beyond on cooperative projects;
on rail, energy, transportation, logistics, water, information,
training, expertise, education, a whole slew of projects for
economic cooperation and development that itself will entail
beyond China's borders tens of thousands more kilometers of
high-speed rail.  So, how are they financing this?  How are they
doing it?  China's been spending $1 trillion a year for the past
decade; so the idea of spending $1 trillion in the US to get
everything up to some great standard is far too low.
The other aspect is, how is this going to be financed and
how is it going to be built?  How is a $1 trillion going to be
brought to bear for the US economy?  Let me read the concluding
paragraph of an op-ed that was published in the {People's Daily}
online of China; an op-ed by Curtis Stone.  He wrote:
"Trump wants to spend $1 trillion on infrastructure upgrades
in America to rebuild the nation and put people back to work. The
problem is how to pay for it and how to do it. China knows how to
fund and carry out serious infrastructure building, and
deep-pocketed Chinese investors want to invest billions more in
America. One way for Trump to realize his plan would be to use
Chinese funds and technology. This would help return some of
Americaâs investment in China back to America for the benefit of
America, and strengthen the bilateral relationship. Trumpâs plan
to rebuild America is bold, but it remains to be seen if he will
be bold enough to do what is best for America."
So, on that, let's think about how China can be involved
here.  The need for financing in the US is very great; there is
not a lot of credit available in the way that people think.  The
very low interest rates that currently exist, as Paul Gallagher
has explained well in the "Economics Frequently Asked Questions"
section on our website, we can't just sell a bunch of bonds at
low interest rates; the rates will go up.  Where is that money
going to come from?  Private investors?  What's the return?  What
this really requires is a totally different way of thinking about
economics.  So, let's look at the LaRouche approach — very
briefly — to economics.  In his policy document for the US,
called "Four New Laws to Save the USA Now", LaRouche gave four
very primary steps.  First, Glass-Steagall, to end the connection
to the outrageously decrepit and collapsing financial system that
we have; it's almost totally divorced from the physical aspect of
economy.
Second, that we need a national banking approach.  Now, what
does that mean?  Let's think of some examples in US history as to
how a national approach to economy has occurred.  If you look at
what Alexander Hamilton did in the early days of the new United
States, he turned the huge liabilities, the huge debts of that
new US and the state governments into something very valuable by
turning that debt into what became the basis for the First
National Bank of the United States; using that debt to become the
basis for a huge amount in loans that were necessary to build the
roads and then later the canals in the United States.  To take a
more recent example, Matt had mentioned Franklin Roosevelt as the
best precedent that we have in the United States of late.  Look
at what Roosevelt did with the Tennessee Valley Authority, for
example.  This is a project that dramatically improved the
economy in the southeast part of the US; in the Tennessee Valley
area that it serviced.  The increased productivity in that region
itself more than paid for the cost of the investment of the
project.  This was the type of project where it doesn't really
matter whether the money that's spent on building it is paid back
directly; and that's something that private investors would
demand.  "Can we build a toll road that we'll be able to get
money back from?  Can we upgrade an airport terminal which
charges passenger fees for passing through it, and then we'll pay
back the investment in that terminal at the airport?"
Well, what about the large projects that shape the economy
as a whole; that provide a platform for economic activity?
That's the sort of thing where you look at the nation as a unique
economic actor that's able to finance investments whose payback
isn't direct in the way that a private investment would be; but
comes back in the sense of "Did we improve the productivity of
the nation as a whole in a way that makes the project
worthwhile?"  That's what we saw with the creation of the
railroads in the United States, for example.  This was something
that wouldn't have happened without the government support that
it got to build the Transcontinental Railroad.  The payback was
that we had a connected economy; we had a whole country.  We had
definitely the improvements that made it worthwhile have done
that.
So, if you think about that today, to get away from
project-by-project — does it pay for itself? Is it worth it? —
and to think about how do we institute in the U.S. a higher
platform of technology in our infrastructure: are we building a
high-speed rail network? Are we building power generation of the
highest energy-flux density? Or are we building solar panels? Are
we investing in fusion technology, to make that breakthrough in
our knowledge of the atom and nuclear processes that will
transform our relationship to materials, to energy, in a way that
will be far more profound than the development of the steam
engine?  These are the kinds of things: the space program — what
are the {drivers} of our human identity as a species that goes
beyond and that develops? And I think maybe to start a discussion
on it, here on the program — I don't have everything to say
about it — but this also raises the issue of the culture in the
population. In other words, what expressions, culturally, do we
have of what it is to be a person; of what it is to live in a
society; of our relations among each other? What is the kind of
culture that's commensurate with going to space, with developing
fusion, with developing our economy, with becoming better human
beings, and how do we bring that culture into being? I think that
that's a very major question. It's not one that addressed quite
as directly as, say, national banking or financing of a national
high-speed rail network, but is just as important. I think that's
something to take up here.

BILL ROBERTS: Yeah, I would say this, what you've just touched
on, Jason, is the real question of sovereignty of nations to
participate in the development of mankind, to free themselves
from the diktats of this dying trans-Atlantic financial system.
That really is sort of the crux of the entire shift that we're
experiencing right now.
Just to mention a few things on this: Yesterday, in an
interview that Bashar al-Assad did with the Italian newspaper,
{Il Giornale}, he identified that the issue in the Syrian war,
was that Syria wanted to make a sovereign decision on the
development of both oil pipelines, but also railroad lines
running east-to-west through Syria; rather than Syria simply
being sort of a passing-through point of oil pipelines from
Qatar, north-to-south. Of course the east-to-west route — for
those of you who are familiar with our plan, the Phoenix Project
for Aleppo and the Integration of Syria, the proposals that the
Schiller Institute has made for the integration of Syria into the
New Silk Road; this is designed to make Syria an energy hub, an
industrial hub, and sort of restore Syria's ancient tradition as
an important step along the New Silk Road.
This is the implication of Vladimir Putin's intervention
into Syria to crush the terrorists in that area. This was the
same question with respect to Japan's recent decision to resume
its historical role as a country that is not going to be part of
an offshore, trans-Atlantic financial system, but it going to be
a "machine" for the development of the interior of Asia. Japan
had made this decision against the interests of what's
historically been the attempt by the United States to try to
prevent Japan from negotiating a peace treaty with Russia over
the remaining islands in dispute from World War II. So, Japan
made this decision as a sovereign nation, and was really prompted
to do so by Vladimir Putin, who made the issue directly that
Japan had to make a sovereign, independent decision.
I would say in the United States, the question of the Trump
Presidency and the United States Government being able to address
the horrid conditions of the American population, and uplift,
both culturally and in terms of the physical standards of life,
depends upon the immediate reinstatement of Glass-Steagall.
Number one, because if Glass-Steagall is not reinstated before
the crash that is looking very likely to happen soon in the
European banking system, hits, there will be more bail-outs; and
this will further increase the death-rates of Americans. But also
number two, as both Matt and Jason were just discussing, the
United States has to make a serious commitment to providing
massive financing, and mobilizing our workforce, to build
entirely new platforms of infrastructure. That's not going to be
possible without a credit system; and that will not be possible
without the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall. That may require, as
this recent {People's Daily} article points out, in certain cases
that may mean that China will come in and build certain aspects.
They may be better suited to build high-speed rail systems, for
example. We've seen the problems [inaud; 22:09]. We've seen the
problems with [California Governor] Jerry Brown's program on the
West Coast with high-speed rail. Perhaps we should just set up a
Chinese initiative for doing this.
Our sovereignty today, ironically, does not mean
isolationism. I don't know that Donald Trump thinks that it does;
I don't think he does. But in many cases, what the New Paradigm
has meant is that certain countries have made breakthroughs in
certain areas. Certainly we have in the United States. We should
look at {all} the potentials that exist for cooperation: the
space program, medicine, certain aspects within the machine-tool
sector that we still have — in the same way that this was
considered by Kennedy when he placed the science centers, the
space program centers, in the more-backwards, southern part of
the United States. Or when FDR placed the Oak Ridge facilities,
the "secret city" that developed the Manhattan Project outside of
Knoxville, Tennessee. Or like the Russians are doing, currently,
in their plans to have Rosatom invest in building a new science
city for the development of nuclear science, in one of the
poorest cities in South America, La Paz, [Bolivia] which has
basically been the center of a drug-production economy. These are
some of the things that we're going to continue to be filling
out; but these are the issues behind the immediate necessity of
Glass-Steagall, that every American has to know the ABCs of.

MICHAEL STEGER: Yeah, that's great! There are just a couple
of things I'd like to touch on. One is the Putin situation,
because as Bill just indicated, the whole situation
internationally seems to have been greatly shaped by Vladimir
Putin. If anyone were to watch some of the news alerts, the {New
York Times} and the entire political establishment of the United
States was taken off guard, significantly. As Matt indicated,
Obama had clearly expected his nemesis, Putin, to have the
strong-man response. The {New York Times}, at 6:00 Eastern Time,
sent out a message indicating they [the Russians] are going to go
for a "massive retaliation. Thirty-five people evicted." This was
blasted out on the internet airwaves. Within just two hours, the
{New York Times} had to report a "head-spinning turn of events,"
in terms of the fact that not only did Putin not retaliate, as
Matt indicated, but I believe he invited all of the U.S.
diplomatic corps to the Kremlin to celebrate the New Year and
Christmas!
The way Putin has shaped this process — and we were
reflecting on this here this morning — that it was just a little
over a year ago, the end of September 2015, that Russia formally
entered into the Syrian conflict on the side of Assad against the
terrorists. It was just November of last year, just a little over
a year ago, when a Turkish fighter jet shot down a Russian
fighter jet. It was then last Christmas — in that entire holiday
period — when we on the verge of what could have been a
break-out of nuclear war. The tensions were incredibly high. The
rhetoric was incredibly high. And what we had in the White House,
Obama, is now on full display in its psychotic kind of pettiness.
So the way that Putin has shaped this process — and it's
worth situating the recent events — that not only did we have
this display of psychosis by Obama. There was also the
assassination of Russia's Ambassador to Turkey, Andrei Karlov.
This came just a few days after Obama had made an illicit threat
against Russia, which Mr. LaRouche had captured very
specifically. This meant that Obama was looking to kill, and kill
people of significance. And then you had the assassination of
Ambassador Karlov by someone tied to what looks to be some kind
of Western intelligence-coordinated network. And then, it's not
yet clear what happened, there's much speculation, but
regardless, there's the unfortunate loss of the Alexandrov
Ensemble (the Red Army Chorus).
As we speak, we're in Manhattan at the Russian Consulate,
singing Russian patriotic songs, as well as American songs. I'd
like to read a section of a leaflet that Helga Zepp LaRouche
wrote on this occasion for our chorus outside the Russian
Consulate. This is just a small taste of it, which will be
released in its entirety today, following that event. She says:
"Let me therefore share with you the idea that in addition
to rebuilding the Alexandrov Ensemble, which they intend to do,
thousands of Alexandrov choruses be established, in schools all
over Russia, to honor the heroic contribution of Russia in the
liberation of Syria, and at the same time, broaden the uplifting
effect of choral singing to the young generation."
I think that proposal stands out as the quality of idea and
initiatives that can now be taken; that there is unfolding a new
paradigm. There's a paradigm of win-win, or almost as Putin
displayed today, of turn the other cheek. We're not going to go
tit-for-tat. We're not going to descend into kitchen-level
politics. We're going to rise to a higher level, of a discussion
of mankind and the collaboration towards world peace and global
development. Nothing better expresses that than what's developed
in Syria, and the collaboration of Russia, Turkey, and Iran to
consolidate that. This really has been the work of Putin, and
this last year has really been shaped by Vladimir Putin more so
than anyone else.
Now, the question is: how do we respond to this in the
United States? That's the onus upon us today. As Matt indicated,
the financial crisis around Monte dei Paschi and the other major
trans-Atlantic banks, are clearly at a point of breakdown. I
would ask people just to reflect upon, look at the electoral
maps. Some of this has been done by various studies after the
election, where they saw the kind of vote turnout for Trump
happened the greatest in areas that had been hit the hardest by
the drug epidemic, the suicides, the unemployment levels.
If you look at the demographic condition of the country
today, it is defined by the insanity of our financial and
economic system. The financial bubble that has been run,
perpetually, really going back even since the early '90s, and we
saw it then regained after the dot.com blow-out with the housing
bubble. Then the blow-out of the housing bubble only accelerated
even further towards what is an entirely just fictitious
financial derivative scheme, with almost {no} benefits, even
monetarily or financially, to the population of the United
States.
What you see is limited pockets, small specific areas.  The
New York City area; the Washington, DC area, major Dulles airport
area; San Francisco and the Bay area; certain key pockets where
the financial bubble that Obama has pumped up and has called his
"Obama recovery".  This was the dominant area where you saw the
votes come in against Trump and for this Obama program.  But more
importantly, you saw the reaction, the rebellion against Obama
and this Bush-Obama legacy, came from a majority — 80% to 90% of
the land area of the country, and a good majority of the
population; whether they voted for Bernie Sanders or they voted
for Donald Trump, they voted against this Obama-Bush tyranny.  A
majority of the American people have been left out and forgotten;
they have become the forgotten men and women of the country, as
Franklin Roosevelt characterized them in the Great Depression.
It is the question of, how do you bring together the entire
country?  Because we're looking for an economic development that
is based on physical reality, not on some fictitious financial
numbers; you can't forecast an economy based on the financial
numbers that are presented today — they're all lies.  Let alone
Obama's recovery, but even notions of financial success; it's all
lies.  The physical reality is, the United States is crumbling;
it's in horrible disrepair.  It's not just our infrastructure, or
our manufacturing capabilities; it's our cultural level of our
society, it's the educational orientation.  It's the sense of
optimism; it's the productive skill set and sense of integrity
and confidence in the ability to produce something of
significance that has been crushed and taken away from our
population.
So, Mr. LaRouche — as Jason indicated — presented Four
Laws; and those four laws really start with the fourth law, which
is an immediate commitment towards the restoration of a space
program which has been laid out in detail by Kesha Rogers, and
the fusion program.  The initial first step on these four laws to
initiate this kind of science-driver program is Glass-Steagall;
because Glass-Steagall ends this financial cult, this financial
bubble.  And it integrates that part of the country which has
been forgotten into the conception of our economy and of our
society.  And we're going to take the entire nation and take it
upwards.  There's no longer going to be fly-over areas of the
country; there's no longer going to be these provinces on the
outskirts of our economy.  We're going to look at the entire
productivity of our nation; and most importantly, the
productivity of our people.  The greatest sham of Obama's
recovery is the fact that you have 100 million people not in the
workforce; not involved or engaged in any kind of economic
activity.  Many of them are on painkillers, and out of work or on
disabled lists.  We've got to bring this entire part of the
country into the economy immediately; in the areas which increase
the productivity per capita of the nation as a whole.
So, we've got to move on Glass-Steagall.  As Matt said, it
should be on Trump's desk the day he comes into office on January
20th.  Congress comes back into session next Tuesday; they're
sworn in.  That's mostly a reception day.  There will be some
activities Wednesday and Thursday, and then they'll be in session
again the following week.  We have reports from this morning that
Obama has the gall to go to Capitol Hill next Wednesday to meet
with Senate and House Democrats.  This, of course, is the party
he's crushed and destroyed.  I'm sure he will browbeat or worse,
the Democratic members of Congress.  So, we will definitely have
a presence in Washington, DC; we will have {Hamiltonian} issues
distributed throughout New York City and throughout Washington.
We are definitely asking people to participate in a full-scale
mobilization.  That doesn't mean just Congress; Congress will be
available for meetings not this coming week, but likely the next
week.  The bigger question is to get to Democratic clubs, state
legislators, union leaders, other activists, other writers, other
people who have advocated and promoted Glass-Steagall.  We should
set the country on fire around this notion that Glass-Steagall is
not something to support; it's not something showing that you are
on the right side of things.  Glass-Steagall must be passed; it
must be passed quickly, because we have a lot more work to do in
2017 than to simply deal with the insanity of this financial
crisis.
We're asking people to mobilize as much as possible; and
have in mind how much work we have to do to rebuild the country's
infrastructure, its manufacturing, and most importantly, rebuild
the minds of the coming generations — which is really the most
important work any of us can participate in doing.  So, that's
the mobilization LaRouche PAC has set forth.  The email went out
today, and we're asking everyone to participate.

OGDEN:  Well Michael, what you're describing is the kind of
policy revolution that Franklin Roosevelt ushered in, in his
first few days as President in 1933.  Of course, he was
inaugurated in March; the inaugurations back then used to happen
in March, not January.  But it's that first 100 days, as we've
said, that remains the kind of model; and unfortunately, there
are very few people in the United States for whom that historical
accomplishment of Franklin Roosevelt remains something from their
living memory.  It's our job to educate and remind people of what
Franklin Roosevelt was able to accomplish.  Now, I don't think
any of us are assuming that this is something that's going to
happen by itself; this is why we are mobilizing.  This is why we
are saying, in the countdown to this inauguration, it's our job
to set the agenda.  And at the same time that we're doing that
domestically, you really do have the winds of history are blowing
in from around the world.  There's a shifting global dynamic
which is forcing a change in the United States, as Jason
referenced with that article in {People's Daily}; the role that
China can play with the One Belt, One Road policy in transforming
the economic potential of the entire planet and the strategic
changes that are coming out of Russia.  But with that said, it is
always very useful to go back and review what Franklin Roosevelt
did in his entire administration; it's almost something you could
not discuss in abbreviated form — from the beginning of his
first term into his fourth term, with the victory in World War
II.  But if you just take those first 100 days and quickly review
what he was able to accomplish, that's the kind of urgent
revolution in policy that is needed right now in the United
States around these four LaRouche economic laws.
So, let me just very quickly list what Roosevelt was able to
accomplish.  Of course, this was not unilateral actions from the
White House by any means.  This was done by a willing and
cooperative Congress, who recognized the urgency and the
emergency of reversing the economic despair and disintegration
that the entire nation was experiencing.  But, as I said, from
the very first day of his administration, he passed the Emergency
Banking Act; which reorganized all of the banks across the entire
country, declared a banking holiday, audited these banks, and
allowed them to open under completely new standards.  He passed
the Government Economy Act — slightly less important — but it
eliminated certain waste that was in government; he also passed
the Volstead Act, which temporarily suspended the rules of
Prohibition — that was popular.  He passed the Farm Credit Act,
which was very important; this refinanced farm mortgages across
the country.  Farmers who were unable to keep their farms open
because they couldn't pay their mortgages and their farms were
being foreclosed; this was a very big story in Iowa and the
heartland states.  In fact, there were vigilantes who were
standing up to sheriffs, saying "We will not let you foreclose on
our farms."  This resolved that situation, and also provided
operating funds for farms across the country at very low interest
rates; to keep the food on the plates of the American people.  He
established the Homeowners' Loan Corporation; this provided
relief for struggling homeowners across the country, and in fact,
actually directly assumed one-sixth of all the mortgages in the
country from homeowners who were struggling to pay their
mortgages.
He provided within the first 100 days a half-billion dollars
in 1933 dollars in unemployment relief; which was administered by
Harry Hopkins.  That was greatly expanded in the following months
after the first 100 days.  Here's a very important one which
we've been discussing a lot lately:  He established the CCC, the
Civilian Conservation Corps, which provided training and
employment for unskilled youth from across the entire country to
build public works projects and conservation projects.  Over six
years, this ultimately employed {3 million} young people in the
United States.  As Jason mentioned earlier, within the first 100
days, he established the Tennessee Valley Authority — the TVA;
this was passed through law and shovels were hitting the dirt
within five weeks.  This transformed one of the most backward
parts of the entire United States in Tennessee and Kentucky and
the neighboring states.
To address what had caused the Great Depression in the first
place, FDR passed the Truth in Securities Act — an important
element; and then, of course, as we've been discussing, passed
the Glass-Steagall Act.  This required banks to immediately
divest within a certain amount of time, all of their securities
operations; and established the FDIC, which created the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation protections for the average
American depositing their savings in commercial banks.  Then he
created the National Industrial Recovery Act, which — among many
other things — guaranteed collective bargaining for unions,
greatly increased the union membership across the United States,
and made available $3.3 billion in 1933 dollars; that's $50
billion dollars in today's dollars in public works financing.
That's the first 100 days; and Congress did not leave
session.  Congress did not go home from the day that Franklin
Roosevelt was inaugurated until the day they left, exactly 100
days later.  That's the kind of policy revolution that has to
happen in the United States; and it will only function if it's
carried out according to the principles underlying LaRouche's
Four Economic Laws.

STEGER:  That's great, Matt.  I think it's important to
indicate and let people know that LaRouche PAC also has two other
initiatives.  One is a new pamphlet coming out, which will
highlight this kind of economic program based on Lyn's Four Laws.
It looks at how is it possible in the most effective way to
increase the productivity of the American people and that we as a
nation build our own recovery.  We build ourselves out of this
economic rot that we have been plunged into.
The other initiative, which maybe Jason can say more on, is
going to be an educational initiative to the American people a
sense — especially members within the Trump administration — of
how real economics is.  Because Lyndon LaRouche has been the
leading economic thinker for the last 50 years on the planet, let
alone the United States.  He has forecast some of the most
significant events in the course of that 50 years; and he is the
leading figure from the standpoint of real physical economics and
scientific advancement.  I know Jason is part of that, so maybe
he can say more on that as well.

ROSS:  Sure.  Economics is a pretty funny subject because
it's one that so many people get so wrong.  One that specifically
so many experts get so wrong.  If you look at the Society of
Professional Economic Forecasters and you look at how good their
forecasts have been over the last 50 years, they're not getting
any better.  You'd say that's a science that really isn't
improving, is it — economic forecasting.  It's because it's not
treated as a science.  There is so much ideology and there's so
much just plain old stupidity about looking at measures that are
based on money, rather than a physical understanding of what
makes economy possible.  So, we're going to be preparing and
presenting a series, a number of pedagogical discussions; some
tools to help think about how an economy really functions,
drawing on Lyndon LaRouche's decades of experience as an economic
writer and forecaster — as a remarkably accurate one.  We will
have these things available, like some of the concepts that he
brings up frequently; like what is energy flux density in an
economy.  I know that I made a video on that recently, and
there's much more to say than could fit in a short summary video
that touched on it only briefly.  Or, other concepts, like
capital intensity, and the concept of an economic platform, which
is not something to get into detail right now on.  But a
reconceptualization of what many people think of as just
infrastructure and public works, and how to think about that as a
mediating a relationship of a society and the physical world
around them and within that society itself; in the way that
Vladimir Vernadsky, for example, looks at the human species in
terms of what is the power of cognition?  How does that transform
the relationship of the human species to the planet and to the
biosphere in a way that is unlike any purely biological species?
What is the physical power of cognition?  How can we measure that
as geologists, as biologists, as economists?  So, definitely more
coming on that.

OGDEN:  The central theme in Mr. LaRouche's Four Economic
Laws document is the necessity to increase productivity — per
capita and in terms of the productivity of the labor force.  As
we've discussed, going back to Alexander Hamilton, this is really
the root of economic science.  In the "Report on Manufactures",
Hamilton's theme is how do manufactures and technology and
industry increase what would otherwise just be the raw labor
force of the population.  It has a multiplier effect.
One thing going back to Mr. LaRouche's Four New Economic
Laws document, one point that he makes is that this is not just
an option — as we've said before; but this is an absolute
necessity.  Not just because of the urgency of the collapse, but
also because of the nature of our nation.  Alexander Hamilton was
the founding economic genius of the country, founding father of
our system of economics; but he was also one of the central
authors of the United States Constitution.  He made a very
explicit point of putting the clause in there which is the
General Welfare Clause; which not only gives permission to the
United States Federal Government to act in the general welfare of
the United States — this was used as the reason behind the
constitutionality of the National Bank — but it also mandates
that this is part of the responsibility of the Federal
government.  This is what gives it legitimacy; that it {must} act
in the interest of the general welfare of the American people.
And {all} of the American people, not just sections; not just the
coasts or the big cities, but all of the American people.  This
is a point that Mr. LaRouche makes in one very short sentence in
that Four Economic Laws.  He says: "The ceaseless increase of the
physical productivity of employment, accompanied by its benefits
for the General Welfare, are a principle of Federal law which
must be a paramount standard of achievement of the nation and of
the individual."  So, the word "law" is in the title of this
document; and Mr. LaRouche is asserting that this increase in
productivity is included under the idea of the General Welfare,
and is a central principle of what we should understand as
Federal law under our Constitutional republic.
It was recently stated in a similar way in the white paper
that was put out by the Chinese government; where they declared
that development is an inalienable human right.  The same way
that we talk about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as
being inalienable rights, the Chinese, who have lifted 750
million people out of poverty in their country, were declaring
that development itself is an inalienable human right.  I think
this is an important understanding of what the responsibility of
government itself needs to be; and this central principle of
economic science — understanding what it means to, and how one
proceeds to increase the physical productivity of one's labor
force for the benefit of the General Welfare as a whole.

STEGER:  I think that captures the New Paradigm.

OGDEN:  OK, wonderful.  I do want to say that I really
appreciate Bill being on, and I think increasingly we need to
return to some of the questions that Mr. LaRouche was directly
involved in, in Detroit and Michigan and Ohio and some of these
Midwest areas.  What you brought up, Michael, about there are no
fly-over states; we should no longer have the word "Rust Belt" in
our vocabulary.  The question is, how are we going to take the
skills that are inherent in these machinists and former
machinists and skilled workers in that region — who are now in a
state of real despair and increasing mortality — and put them to
work again for the development of the country.  So, you can say
something about that now, but Bill, I think we should also
revisit that maybe in some of our future shows; and have that be
part of our countdown to the new Presidency.

ROBERTS:  Yeah, sure.  It's a real challenge.  This is the
subject of what Marcy Kaptur took up in a recent op-ed, when she
said the Democratic Party has to do some "soul-searching" is the
way that she put it.  But really, it's not soul-searching; we've
got to define what the commitment is going to be to the American
population and all of the American population.  It's a real
challenge; I think much more so than what Franklin Roosevelt had
to face.  Part of it is what we didn't get into so much today —
the deep cultural degeneration process that has left young people
without very much of a sense of character or identity.  You
mentioned the CCC program of the past; [that] had to be tailored
to address — and Franklin Roosevelt himself was very personally
involved in crafting that program, which he saw as being
absolutely critical if the nation was going to have a future.
So, I agree; this is going to have to be something we put a lot
of thought and effort into how to make that shift upward in
productivity that is so required today immediately, but also for
the future, for the long-term.

OGDEN:  Great.  Well, thank you very much.  Thanks, Bill;
thank you, Michael; thank you, Jason.  I would recommend reading
the op-ed that Jason referenced at the beginning of the program;
this was in {People's Daily}.  I know when we spoke with Lyndon
and Helga LaRouche earlier today, Helga put a major premium on
that op-ed.  We, of course, encourage you to participate as fully
as you can in this mobilization to immediately not build support
for Glass-Steagall, but immediately make Glass-Steagall law.  So,
as Michael said, the marching orders are available; we sent out
an email to the entire LaRouche PAC email list today.  If you're
not yet a subscriber to that email list, you need to sign up
immediately.  We're going to have marching orders such as that as
we count down the next 21 days, the three weeks until the new
administration; and we're not going to stop there.  So, please
subscribe to the email list and please subscribe to our YouTube
channel as well.
Thank you all for watching today, and Happy New Year to you!
I think we all can look forward to a 2017 full of a lot of
potential; and it's our job to realize that potential.  Thank you
and good night.

29. dec., 2016 – Her til aften meddelte præsident Obama, at USA ville udvise 35 russiske »efterretningsagenter« (diplomatisk personale), lukke to russiske områder i USA og pålægge økonomiske sanktioner, diplomatisk censur og offentlig »udhængning ved navn« som gengældelse for angivelig russisk hacking for at influere på det amerikanske valg. Iflg. rapporter fra nyhedstjenester inkluderer sanktionerne en udvidelse af en eksekutiv ordre fra 2015, der giver Obama mulighed for at straffe dem, der er indblandet i cyberangreb imod USA. Finansministeriet vil få mulighed for at indefryse aktiver, tilhørende dem, der digitalt beskadigede afgørende amerikansk infrastruktur. FBI og Homeland Security udgav torsdag også en rapport, der angiveligt skulle forklare, hvordan de russiske hackerangreb fandt sted.

Svaret kom omgående. Moskva overvejer nu forholdsregler til gengældelse mod USA, sagde præsident Vladimir Putins talsmand, Dmitry Peskov. Han sagde, at de nye sanktioner er et eksempel på præsident Obamas »uforudsigelige« og »aggressive udenrigspolitik«, rapporterede Associated Press. Han beskrev ligeledes de nye forholdsregler som værende rettet mod at forsøge at »levere et slag mod nyvalgte præsident Donald Trumps udenrigspolitiske planer«. »Sådanne skridt fra en amerikansk administrations side, som kun har tre uger tilbage at arbejde i, har to formål: at yderligere beskadige russisk-amerikanske relationer, der i forvejen befinder sig på lavpunktet, samt selvfølgelig at levere et slag mod den tiltrædende præsidents udenrigspolitiske planer.«

»Vi har intet andet valg end at holde os til princippet om gensidighed«, sagde Peskov. Vladimir Dzhabarov, viceformand for den russiske Dumas udenrigspolitiske udvalg, sagde til det russiske nyhedsbureau TASS, at der vil blive taget »gensidige skridt« og tilføjede, »Den amerikanske ambassade i Moskva og, sandsynligvis, konsulaterne, vil også blive skåret ned.«

Konstantin Kosachev, formand for det russiske parlaments overhus’ komite for udenrigsanliggender, blev citeret af RIA nyhedsagenturet for at sige, at Washingtons beslutning torsdag om at udvise 35 russiske diplomater repræsenterede »de sidste krampetrækninger hos dem, der er politisk døde«.

29. dec., 2016 – Den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin annoncerede under et transmitteret møde med forsvarsminister Sergei Shoigu og udenrigsminister Sergei Lavrov, at dokumenter for en våbenhvile er blevet underskrevet af syriske oppositionsgrupper og den syriske præsident Bashar al Assads regering. I dag kommenterede Lyndon LaRouche, at aftalen er usikker. »Man kan ikke regne med den, fordi Obama ikke er uskadeliggjort«, sagde han.

»Der er netop«, sagde Putin ved mødets start, »indløbet rapporter om, at, for flere timer siden var der en udvikling, som vi alle har set frem til og arbejdet så hårdt på. Tre dokumenter er blevet underskrevet. Et dokument er en våbenhvile mellem den syriske regering og den bevæbnede opposition. Et andet dokument omhandler en pakke af forholdsregler til at kontrollere våbenhvilen. Og så er der en erklæring om beredvillighed til at indlede fredsforhandlinger for en afgørelse af den syriske konflikt.« Rusland, Tyrkiet og Iran har påtaget sig forpligtelser til at garantere en fredelig afgørelse i Syrien. Aftalen er et resultat af Ruslands samarbejde med partnere i regionen, understregede Putin.

Putin gav klart udtryk for, at det virkeligt hårde arbejde begynder nu.

»Der er ingen tvivl om, at de opnåede aftaler er skrøbelige og kræver særlig opmærksomhed og assistance med bevarelse og udvikling som mål. Men det er ikke desto mindre et betydningsfuldt resultat af vores fælles arbejde, bestræbelser fra Forsvarsministeriet, Udenrigsministeriet og vore partnere i regionen«, sagde han. »Som vi udmærket er klar over, så er de opnåede aftaler meget skrøbelige, de kræver særlig opmærksomhed og tålmodighed, en professionel fremgangsmåde over for disse spørgsmål og en konstant kontakt med vore partnere«, understregede Putin.

Iflg. Kremls udskrift præsenterede Shoigu Putin for en liste over de bevæbnede oppositionsgrupper, der er gået med til våbenhvilen, og som efterfølgende blev offentliggjort på Forsvarsministeriets webside sammen med et kort over deres fordeling. Han rapporterede, at Forsvarsministeriet, med Tyrkiet som mægler, brugte to måneder til at forhandle med de øverstbefalende for disse syv grupper, der udgør henved 60.000 kæmpere.

Lavrov rapporterede, at Udenrigsministeriet vil tage skridt til at sikre, at pakken af aftaler, der blev underskrevet, blev uddelt som officielle dokumenter i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd, og at medlemmer af Sikkerhedsrådet bliver briefet og deres spørgsmål besvaret.

»Det er vigtigt at øge antallet af garantlande, og vi ønsker derfor på dette stadium at invitere vore egyptiske kolleger til at tilslutte sig disse aftaler«, sagde Lavrov. »Senere, på efterfølgende stadier, kunne vi sikkert også få andre nøglelande med indflydelse på begivenheder i Syrien involveret, lande som Saudi-Arabien, Qatar, Irak og Jordan.«

I Damaskus annoncerede den syriske arabiske hærs generalkommando en »omfattende« standsning af fjendtligheder, der skal træde i kraft ved midnat i dag, lokal tid.

»Kommandoen tilføjede, at terroristorganisationerne Jabhat al-Nusra og ISIS og hermed affilierede grupper er ekskluderet fra aftalen og påpegede, at våbenhvilen sker med det mål, at skabe passende betingelser for at støtte en politisk vej i den syriske krise«, rapporterede SANA. Underskriverne på oppositionens side inkluderer, som det rapporteredes af det Russiske Forsvarsministerium, Ahrar al-Sham og Jaish al-Islam, de to største grupper, så vel som fem andre mindre grupper: Jaish al-Mujahideen, Faylak al-Sham, Suvar al-Sham, Jaish Idlib og Jabhat al-Shamiya.  

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 29. december, 2016 – Diskussionen mellem Lyndon og Helga LaRouche og Videnskabsteamet og Komiteen for Strategi tirsdag, 27. december, eksemplificerede processen, der karakteriserer en renæssance – og en nutidig, økonomisk genrejsning for USA. I denne dramatiske dialog kom den ene taler efter den anden frem med nye og varierende ideer – alle forskellige, men alle sammen fremprovokeret af en fælles, uudtalt hensigt, og alle tenderende imod et implicit, fælles mål samtidig med at nære hinanden, som gnister af samme bål. Man bliver mindet om Platons beskrivelse af sin dialogmetode i skriftet »Syv breve«.

De var ligesom små strømme, der samledes i åer og sluttelig i store floder, altid ført frem af en usynlig, uhåndgribelig kraft. Hvilken kraft? Den største af alle kræfter: det selvopretholdende bekræftende, menneskehedens fælles mål. Hvordan går det til, at noget, som man på ét tidspunkt ikke engang troede eksisterede, senere kan blive formålet med ens liv? Kan blive den mission, hvis betydning langt opvejer ens eget liv?

En generel modsætning i hele diskussionen, og som er særlig skarp i nutidens USA, var modsætningen mellem »kultur« versus »produktivitet«, som fejlagtigt opfattes som indbyrdes afvigende fra hinanden. Denne falske todeling går tilbage til Hegels løgnagtige skelnen mellem »Geisteswissenschaft« (humaniora) i modsætning til »Naturwissenschaft« (naturvidenskab) i det 19. århundrede. Det blev forværret af Bertrand Russels afskalning af videnskab, imod Einstein, med begyndelse i 1900. Franklin Roosevelt arbejdede med held på at overvinde det, indtil han i realiteten blev fjernet fra embedet af FBI, mens han endnu levede. Dernæst, efter Anden Verdenskrig, blev det yderligere opflammet af giften, der blev pumpet ud af Det britiske Imperiums Kongressen for kulturel frihed.

Kongressen for kulturel frihed i sit fulde omfang slog aldrig an i Sovjetunionen, selv om der var mange andre, alvorlige problemer; det er grunden til, at Friedrich Schiller synes mere respekteret i den sovjetiske satellitstat Østtyskland end i Vesttyskland. I sovjetisk tankegang var der altid overensstemmelse mellem produktivitet og det kulturelle niveau. Se den sovjetiske film fra 1972, »At tæmme ilden«, et stærkt fiktionaliseret portræt af rumfartshelten S.P. Koroljov. Instruktøren Daniil Khrabrovitskij blev af censuren tvunget til at ændre næsten alle fakta og navne, men han lagde så meget desto mere vægt på visse grundlæggende sandheder. Allerede næsten i begyndelsen af filmen forsøger den russiske, videnskabelige rumfartspioner Konstantin Tsiolkovskij lidenskabeligt at forklare den unge Koroljov, hvordan og hvorfor hele landets »kulturelle niveau« må bevæges langt, langt fremad, hvis landets fabrikker skal kunne producere kosmiske raketter, kunstige satellitter (»sputniks«) og rumfartøjer.

Det meste af det, præsident Putin gør, reflekterer hans højere standpunkt om denne kamp for at opgradere russisk kultur, som det for eksempel reflekteres i hans konference ved årets afslutning.

Inden for rammerne af det nye, internationale paradigme, skabt af Vladimir Putin og det kinesiske lederskab, og efter dumpningen af Bush-Obama-diktaturet, er en renæssance og en økonomisk genrejsning i USA – én og samme sag, set fra to forskellige synsvinkler – nu umiddelbart på dagsordenen, hvis vi handler for at frembringe dem.

Foto: Prima ballerina ved Bolsjoj-balletten i Moskva Maria Alexandrova varmer op i det historiske teater før en forestilling. Foto fra 2013.

28. dec., 2016 – Anadolu nyhedsagentur, den tyrkiske regerings pressetjeneste, rapporterer, at Rusland og Tyrkiet er blevet enige om en våbenhvile i Syrien, mellem syriske regeringsstyrker og oppositionsstyrker, og som kunne træde i kraft ved midnat, den 29. december. Våbenhvilen gælder ikke for terroristorganisationer og er inden for rammerne af FN’s Sikkerhedsråds resolution 2254. Våbenhvilen vil bane vej for forhandlinger om en politisk afgørelse af konflikten, forhandlinger, der skal finde sted i Kasakhstans hovedstad, Astana, hvor Moskva og Ankara vil stå som garanter for afgørelsen.

TASS rapporterer, at Quadri Jamil, leder af Folkefronten for Forandring og Befrielse, og repræsentanter for »Moskva-gruppen« af den syriske opposition, tidligere sagde til TASS, at Astana-forhandlingerne mellem Damaskus og oppositionen vil finde sted i sidste halvdel af januar.

Forespurgt, om han kunne bekræfte Anadolus rapport om våbenhvilen, sagde Kremls talsmand, Dmitry Peskov, til reportere, »Jeg kan ikke besvare dette spørgsmål nu, jeg har ikke tilstrækkelig information«, rapporterer TASS i en separat dækning. Han bekræftede imidlertid, at »der foregår konstant kontakt med de tyrkiske kolleger for at drøfte forskellige former for en mulig dialog, der er planlagt til at finde sted i Astana. Dette foregår alt sammen i overensstemmelse med en søgen efter en politisk afgørelse i Syrien.«

Den tyrkiske udenrigsminister, Mevlut Cavusoglu, gik imidlertid senere videre med at bekræfte, at en aftale er nært forestående.

»Vi arbejder stadig på det. Det kunne blive effektueret hvad øjeblik, det skal være. Det handler om at udvide våbenhvilen. Vi arbejder også på en forhandlet, politisk løsning«, sagde han.

Aftalen er blevet forelagt både den syriske regering og oppositionsgrupperne og kunne træde i kraft snarest. Cavusoglu indikerede også, at diskussioner stadig foregår mht., hvem, der skal deltage i Astana-forhandlingerne, selv om han udelukkede deltagelse af PYD (Partiya Yekîtiya Demokrat, et kurdisk syrisk politisk parti).

Foto: I sidste uge mødtes den russiske udenrigsminister Lavrov (2. til venstre) med den tyrkiske udenrigsminister Cavasoglu (2. til højre) og den iranske udenrigsminister Zarif (højre) i Moskva for at drøfte krisen i Syrien. Onsdag meddelte tyrkiske statsmedier, at en våbenhvileaftale var opnået mellem Rusland og Tyrkiet, der støtter modstridende sider i konflikten.

27. dec., 2016 – En rapport fra Den europæiske Centralbank (ECB) afslører, at europæere i gennemsnit bliver fattigere, mens de rige bliver rigere, baseret på en rundspørge af 84.000 husstande. De rige bliver rigere, med 5 % af husstandene i toppen, der tegner sig for 37,8 % af nettorigdommen i 2014, sammenlignet med 37,2 % i 2010. Samtidig havde 5 % af de fattige husstande kun gæld.

Gennemsnitsrigdommen for husstande faldt med omkring 10 % til 104.100 euro i de fire år frem til 2014, hovedsagligt pga. faldet i huspriserne. Som man kunne forvente, havde Grækenland og Cypern de største tab og mistede i gennemsnit 40 % rigdom. Græske husstande gik fra 108.700 euro i 2009 til 65.100 euro i 2014. Grækenland fremviste ligeledes et lignende kollaps i sine årlige indkomster, som faldt fra 23.500 euro før krisen i 2009 og til 17.600 euro i 2014.

»I Italien, Portugal og Spanien faldt den gennemsnitlige husstandsindkomst med mere end 15 %, siger ECB-rapporten, iflg. Greek Reporter. I kontrast hertil øgedes rigdommen i Tyskland med 10 % i den samme periode. En forøgelse af rigdom blev også registreret i Østrig, Finland og Luxembourg.

»Faldet i nettorigdom var hovedsagligt et resultat af faldet i værdien af aktiver, især ejendomme«, sagde ECB-undersøgelsen. »Reduktionen i nettorigdom er større for husstande med lån, især for husejere, der har belånt deres hjem, sammenlignet med ejere uden huslån og folk med lejeboliger.«

Uoverensstemmelsen mellem de forskellige lande er enorm. For eksempel er den gennemsnitlige rigdom pr. husstand i Luxembourg 437.500 euro, mens det i Letland kun er 14.200 euro.

(Se også artiklen: »Et græsk forslag: Sammenkald til en europæisk konference om statsgæld«, http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=4759)

Foto: De sidste seks års økonomiske tilbagegang i Grækenland, der ikke mindst skyldes Trojkaens brutale nedskæringspolitik over for befolkningen, har sat sig dybe spor. Lukning af foretagender og arbejdsløshed har kostet mange husstande et massivt fald i indkomst, og mange mennesker er henvist til maduddeling, som her, mens endnu andre har mistet deres hjem og er henvist til at overleve gennem suppekøkkener og tiggeri.

27. dec., 2016 – Den tyske udviklingsminister Gerd Müller har præsenteret et hjælpeprogram for Aleppo, hvor hovedfokus vil ligge på at genopbygge byens sektor for lægehjælp. Omkring 1.000 syriske læger, kirurger og sygeplejersker, plus yderligere 200 personel til behandling for traumer, vil blive finansieret med 15 mio. euro fra hans ministerium hen over de kommende 30 måneder.

Müller opfordrede andre lande til at bidrage til genopbygningen af Aleppo og sagde, at, efter det internationale samfunds stater har forholdt sig passive under hele denne krig, »må der nu komme en humanitær indsats for befolkningen i Aleppo«. Situationen for lægehjælp er katastrofal, sagde Müller og advarede om, at, hvis der ikke kommer omgående lægebehandling og pleje til tusinder af syriske børn, vil de ikke overleve den kommende vinter. Ud over Aleppo har 13 millioner syrere et akut behov for humanitær hjælp, og 90 % af disse mennesker har behov for medicin.

Foto: Situation for lægehjælp i Aleppo, og andetsteds i Syrien, er katastrofal, og især vil mange børn med forbrændinger, diverse lemlæstelser og alvorlige traumer ikke overleve vinteren uden læge- og medicinhjælp fra det internationale samfund.

27. dec., 2016 – Talsmand for det Russiske Udenrigsministerium, Maria Zakharova, opfordrede i dag det internationale samfund til korrekt at vurdere beviserne for jihadisternes krigsforbrydelser i Aleppo.

»Syrerne kom ud på gaden for at fejre byens befrielse og lykønskede hinanden med sejren og takkede de russiske og syriske soldater«, sagde hun. »Det var imidlertid en festdag med tårer i øjnene. Vi får fortsat kendskab til det, der fandt sted i Aleppo, da byen var kontrolleret af terrorister og ekstremister. Der er især fundet massegrave med resterne af dusinvis af mennesker. Og det har yderligere vist sig, at disse mennesker er blevet tortureret.«

»Der er al grund til at tro, at disse forfærdelige afsløringer vil fortsætte«, sagde Zakharova. Hun bemærkede, at »beviserne for disse forbrydelser vil blive overgivet til medierne af det russiske militær og offentliggjort«. »Vi håber, at det internationale samfund vil fremkomme med en upartisk vurdering af denne blodige nedslagtning, hvor syriske borgere har været underkastet tortur og vold af ekstremister og terrorister«, understregede hun.

Foto: Kvinder i Hanano, i det østlige Aleppo, fejrer kvarterets befrielse fra Nusra Fronts besættelse.

28. december, 2016 – Mens Obama fortsat demonstrerer, at han er »politisk afdød«, som Lyndon LaRouche udtrykker det, og kaster tordenkiler fra sin politiske kiste, som om han stadig var »dræberkongen« fra før, udstedte nyvalgte Trump i dag et tweet, hvor han fordømte de »mange inflammatoriske udtalelser og vejspærringer«, som kommer fra Obama. Obama har meddelt, at han snart vil annoncere »forholdsregler til gengældelse« imod Rusland for fantasifostret med Putins angivelige tyveri af valget, i håb om, at han kan underminere Trump-teamets plan om at gøre en ende på galskaben.

Men, Putin har ikke spildt tiden med at fumle rundt med det amerikanske valg. Hele Mellemøsten er blevet transformeret af hans succesfulde intervention i Syrien, der har vendt stormløbet fra de saudisk-britisk sponsorerede terroristnetværk. Ødelæggelsesprocessen imod Irak, Libyen og Syrien – de tre stærkeste, sekulære, antiterrorist-nationer i området, er nu slut. Undervejs er der dukket beviser op allevegne for, at Obama har bevæbnet terroristerne – russiske sappører, der rydder miner fra det befriede Aleppo, annoncerede i dag fundet af et terrorist-våbenlager, proppet med amerikanske, tyske og bulgarske våben, mens den tyrkiske præsident Erdogan annoncerede, at han havde sikre beviser for USA’s bevæbning af selve ISIS.

Men, hvad der er vigtigere, så har kombinationen af den russiske rolle i Syrien og Putins nylige besøg i Japan transformeret begge områder og forenet dem bag kendsgerningen om et nyt paradigme, baseret på udvikling. Den østrigske mellemøstekspert Karin Kneissl kom i dag med den indsigtsfulde pointe, at Ruslands evne til at hjælpe den syriske regering med at knuse terroristtruslen på dramatisk vis blev fremhjulpet af Kinas »den bløde magts strategi« og bringer den Nye Silkevej ind i regionen og således skaber jobs for de millioner af unge mennesker, hvis fremtid var blevet tyvstjålet af Bush’ og Obamas krige, og som skaber potentialet for, at de millioner af flygtninge kan vende tilbage til produktive beskæftigelser i deres hjemlande.

I dag pegede Lyndon LaRouche på Putins højst succesrige besøg til den japanske premierminister Shinzo Abe i denne måned, hvor han igangsatte enorme, fælles udviklingsprojekter i det russiske Fjernøsten, og endda på de omstridte Kurilliske Øer, og som således forbereder vejen for en fredstraktat mellem Rusland og Japan.

»Dette er ikke blot en lokal aftale«, sagde LaRouche. »Det vil stimulere væksten ikke alene i hele Asien, men det vil stimulere hele verden.« Abe besøgte Pearl Harbor tirsdag sammen med præsident Obama, hvor førstnævntes udtalelser kun kunne forstås som en advarsel til USA om ikke at følge Obamas vanvittige konfrontation med Rusland, men derimod gå sammen med Japan og med Kinas Nye Silkevejsproces for at skabe et nyt paradigme for fredelig udvikling for menneskeheden.

LaRouche Political Action Committee (LPAC) er i færd med at forberede en opdateret rapport om »USA tilslutter sig Den Nye Silkevej – en Hamilton-vision for en økonomisk renæssance«. Rapporten vil gennemgå det utrolige tempo, i hvilket udviklingsprojekter er blevet igangsat i hele verden i 2016, under Kinas Bælt-og-Vej-initiativ og dermed relaterede bestræbelser fra Ruslands og Indiens side, og fremlægge for det amerikanske folk, og Trump-teamet, at USA kan og må deltage i denne revolutionære proces. Ikke alene kan en genoplivet amerikansk industri i stor stil bidrage til disse globale projekter, men den smuldrende, amerikanske infrastruktur kan også selv blive genopbygget, med nye, storstilede projekter inden for vand, transport, et genoplivet rumprogram og videnskabelig udforskning på den menneskelige videns fremskudte grænser.

Magten hos det finansielle oligarki, der har påtvunget verden sin vilje, har nu mistet kontrollen over det meste af verden uden for de transatlantiske nationer, og dets magt dér står nu på højkant. Deres finansielle kartellers bankerot kan ikke længere udskydes, og deres befolkninger er i en tilstand af oprør, som de miskrediterede oligarker afviser som »populisme«. Raseriet imod deres onde nedskæringspolitikker, og imod deres fremstød for krig imod Rusland og Kina, er åbenbart overalt i Vesten. Dette raseri må finde sit fokus i positiv hævdelse af sund fornuft, baseret på fremgangsmåden med LaRouches Fire Love: underkast kartellerne konkursbehandling iflg. Glass-Steagall; skab nye kreditinstitutioner efter Hamiltons model; målret kreditudstedelse til genopbygning af industri, landbrug og infrastruktur; og stimuler vore borgeres kreative evner, for at virkeliggøre fusionskraft og rumforskning, og for skabelse af en fremtid i overensstemmelse med menneskeværdet.

Foto: Kesha Rogers fra LaRouche Komite for Politisk Strategi (LPAC) ved NASA’s Johnson Space Center, (Houston), i januar 2016. Se hendes artikel: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=11543          

Et nytårsbudskab til nyvalgte præsident Trump og det amerikanske folk.

Af R.P. Tsokolibane, LaRouche-bevægelsen, Sydafrika.

23. dec., 2016 – Mit navn er Phillip Tsokolibane, talsmand for LaRouche-bevægelsen her i Sydafrika. Med min hilsen til Dem, nyvalgte præsident Donald J. Trump, og til det amerikanske folk, mener jeg at give udtryk for mine sydafrikanske medborgeres, og alle afrikaneres, håb for Deres succes.

Hr. Trump: De indtager embedet på en international bølge af folkelig modstand mod, og afvisning af, den magtfulde elite, der har kontrolleret det kollapsende, transatlantiske finansimperium og dets mislykkede politik, som har efterladt det meste af verden, inklusive store dele af Deres egen nation, i økonomisk ruin. Præsident Barack Obamas to embedsperioders vildledelse har bragt Amerika ud på randen af militær konfrontation og mulig atomkrig med Rusland og Kina, hvilket ingen mentalt rask person ønsker. Obama har lanceret krige for regimeskift og støttet og bevæbnet terrorister og således myrdet befolkninger i en grad, der svarer til folkemord, over hele planeten. Jeg kan fortælle Dem ligeud, at USA under Barack Obama, hans klon (og Deres besejrede modstander) Hillary Clinton, samt Bush-klanen, hvis politik Obama kopierer, spottes i hele verden og her i Afrika for denne politik, og han støttes kun af det døende, angloamerikanske imperiums lakajer.

Men, med udgangspunkt i Øst, og under direktion af præsidenterne Putin i Rusland og Xi i Kina, kommer der betydningsfulde initiativer, der, hvis de bliver forstået korrekt, og De selv og det amerikanske folk tilslutter sig dem, kan omstøde forbandelsen med en Obama, som i realiteten ikke er andet end en marionet for det onde britiske monarki og dets oligarkiske følge. Vi har nu, i bogstavelig forstand, mulighed for at opbygge en ny fremtid for menneskeheden – en fremtid, der hurtigt kan føre til en ny æra med samarbejde mellem nationer – og som således gør en ende på geopolitik og en konkurrence, der sætter folk og nationer op imod hinanden, til fordel for de degenererede monetarister og deres pengeimperium. Vi må gøre hele menneskeheden rig i en fremtid med kreative opdagelser, med gennembrud inden for videnskab, der vil være drivkraft for civilisationen som helhed hen imod kæmpe spring for fremskridt.  

En sådan verden kunne indtil for nylig kun store mænd drømme om, såsom jeres egen Martin Luther King, Jr., og vores fader, Nelson Mandela, men som Wall Street og City of London konspirerede om at knuse.

Skabelsen af BRIKS-alliancen, af hvilken mit land er det stolte medlem, med dets forpligtende engagement til at udstede massive mængder kredit til det, der kaldes storstilet ’infrastruktur-udvikling’, som i Kinas ’Bæltet-og-Vejen’, er podekrystallen til et nyt, globalt system, et system, der gør en ende på den påtvungne underudvikling i Afrika og andetsteds. Denne politik er helt igennem amerikansk i sin oprindelse og er baseret på Det Amerikanske System for Fysisk Økonomi, som blev udarbejdet af jeres første finansminister, den store Alexander Hamilton (se hans Fire Rapporter til Kongressen)[1]; han forstod, at al værdi skabes gennem den uophørlige forbedring af den produktive, menneskelige arbejdskraft. Det er den førende, moderne fortaler for Hamiltons system, verdens førende fortaler for fysisk økonomi, statsmanden Lyndon LaRouches udtrykkelige politik.

Lyndon LaRouches moderne ’opdatering’ af Hamilton, som fremlægges i hans ’Fire Love’, afviser det monetaristiske systems behandling af mennesker som dyr, som en hjord, der skal udtyndes af en selvudnævnt elite, og gør i stedet den uophørlige realisering af menneskets skabende potentiale til universets fremmeste kraft for forandring til det gode. Regering – alle regeringer – må handle ud fra det princip, som er omdrejningspunktet i jeres egen Forfatning: at al politik må tjene det almene vel, nu, ved at handle nu for at forbedre de fremtidige vilkår for alle mennesker, og ikke blot for en dekadent, oligarkisk elite.

Det, som kineserne og russerne i realiteten foreslår, er en politik for gensidig fordel og forbedring, der tjener princippet om det almene vel, hvis moderne forsvar kan spores direkte til det arbejde, som hr. LaRouche og hans hustru, ’Silkevejsladyen’, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, har udrettet i løbet af de sidste 50 år. Som jeg sagde, så er dette i realiteten en ’amerikansk’ politik i traditionen efter Hamilton, Henry Carey, Abraham Lincoln og, i sidste århundrede, Franklin Roosevelt og John Kennedy.

Det er i sandhed ikke blot i Amerikas virkelige interesse, men også dets historiske mission, som er testamenteret os af Hamilton og jeres grundlæggende fædre, for at lede den globale revolution imod britisk monetarisme og dets kvægrøgter-politik, hvilken sidstnævnte politik uvægerligt fører til befolkningsmæssig kollaps, fordi en sådan anti-human økonomi aldrig vil kunne støtte og opretholde selv det nuværende befolkningsniveau, især under et finanskollaps' betingelser. I dag konfronteres Afrika, med mindre en sådan politik omstødes, med et overlagt og forudsigeligt folkemord på en skala, der ville gøre den britisk-skabte, unaturlige skabning, Adolf Hitler, grøn af misundelse. Vi i Afrika anser de nye initiativer, der kommer fra BRIKS-medlemmerne Rusland og Afrika, for anvendelse af kernekraft og anden infrastruktur, som værende ikke blot ønskværdige, men afgørende for vores overlevelse.

Men hvis vi skal finde vej til en fremtid med fred og fremgang, må vi henvende os til Dem, hr. Trump, og til Deres store, amerikanske republik, og kræve, at I også er med til at løfte os bort fra afgrunden, der vinker forude. Vi afrikanere trygler ikke. Vi beder ganske enkelt om, at I atter påtager jer den storhedens kappe, som jeres nation skabtes til at bære, i en revolution mod trældom for britisk imperialisme. Lad Amerika, sammen med verdens andre store, kontinentale magter, Rusland og Kina, slutte sig til at sætte menneskets kreative udvikling i centrum for en ny æra med fred og udvikling, og vi vil få begge dele.

I 1980’erne, da Lyndon LaRouche stillede op til præsident for jeres nation, fremlagde han et budskab over tv, der beskrev en fremtidig koloni for jordboere på Mars, anført af en kvindelig, amerikansk forsker. Dette udtryk for en mission for menneskeheden blev knust af de successive Bush-regeringer og deres klon, Obama-regeringen, som har ødelagt jeres bemandede rumprogram. Men tiden er inde til atter at drømme store drømme og til at anbringe mennesket uden for og væk fra denne lille planet og ind i universet, i søgen efter nye opdagelser og ny viden. Det er mit håb, at, med hjælp fra det amerikanske folk, kan denne ’kvinde på Mars’ blive afrikaner!

Idet vi rækker hånden frem til venskab, forstår vi afrikanere – især på denne tid af året, hvor vi reflekterer over vores menneskelighed og menneskets grundlæggende godhed – at jeres hjælp til os, og til andre i verden, der har hjælp behov, også vil hjælpe jeres egen nation, ikke alene i et partnerskab for økonomisk udvikling, men på et spirituelt plan, idet vi alle bliver bedre mennesker. Det er således i ånden af denne universelle tid, at vi søger ’fred på Jord, og i menneskene velbehag’, i hele verden.

Jeg sender således mine hilsner til det amerikanske folk og minder dem om, at verden har brug for, at I bliver det store folk, som Hamilton, Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt og Kennedy opfordrede jer til at være. Og jeg rækker hånden frem til Dem, nyvalgte præsident Trump, i venskab fra Afrika, og ønsker Dem succes med deres ofte erklærede mål, atter at gøre Amerika til den store nation, som var meningen med den, og som den må blive igen.

Ramasimong Phillip Tsokolibane, 23. december, 2016.

Foto: Fra BRIKS-topmødet i Brasilien, 2014: Statslederne Vladimir Putin, Rusland; Narendra Modi, Indien; Dilma Rousseff, Brasilien; Xi Jinping, Kina; Jacob Zuma, Sydafrika. Dilma Rousseff blev afsat ved et politisk kup i 2016; alle de øvrige er fortsat deres nationers ledere.

27. dec., 2016 – Den italienske finansavis Il Sole 24 Ore rapporterede i går, at Den europæiske Centralbank, ECB, har sendt et brev til bestyrelsen for Monte dei Paschi, MPS, med krav om en kapitalforøgelse, der er næsten dobbelt så stor som tidligere fastlagt. Brevet blev afsendt få timer efter at MPS havde anmodet om bemyndigelse til at gå med i den italienske regerings »forebyggende« bailout, eller nationalisering. ECB kræver nu en kapitalforøgelse på 8,8 mia. euro, i stedet for det tidligere fastlagte beløb på 5 mia.

Skiftet bygger på ECB’s nye klassificering af MPS, til samme vurdering som de græske banker under den græske finanskrise.

ECB kræver, at 4,5 mia. skal tegnes af regeringen, mens 4,3 mia. skal indhentes gennem »fælles ansvar«, dvs., en bail-in af obligationsindehavere af første og anden prioritet. Regeringen insisterer imidlertid på sin plan med at refundere 100 % til detail-obligationsindehavere og på en 30 % ’s nedskæring af institutionelle obligationsindehavere.

ECB’s krav er det samme som en krigserklæring mod en national afgørelse, der trodser EU-lov. Dette kommer fra samme Mario Draghi, der sluttelig er ansvarlig for MPS’ bankerot ved i 2008 at have bemyndiget en overtagelse, der kostede MPS 19 mia., og som en undersøgelseskomite har peget på som den ene, enkeltstående årsag til MPS’ finansielle problemer. Draghi løj og sagde, at omkostningerne ved overtagelsen ville blive 9 mia. euro, vel vidende, at en rapport fra Banca d’Italia – Italiens centralbank – et år tidligere havde fremlagt det virkelige beløb.

Draghi bemyndigede også en kapitalforøgelse og udstedelse af underordnede obligationer for at finansiere overtagelsen, så vel som også derivatinstrumenter, der tilføjede yderligere tab. Hvis MPS ikke var gået med på denne vanvittige operation, ville banken have været bedre i stand til at takle sit problem med kommercielle lån.

Med dette seneste træk har ECB gjort det italienske 20 mia. store sikkerhedsnet endnu mere utilstrækkeligt for hele banksystemet, men frem for alt, så har ECB erklæret sin plan om at påtvinge Italien den samme, brutale behandling, som den påtvang Grækenland.     

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 27. december, 2016 – I denne uge udgav Kina sin rapport, »Kinas aktiviteter i rummet i 2016«, med en gennemgang af rumprogrammets præstationer igennem de seneste år, og med en fremlæggelse af planer for den kommende periode, med det formål, lyder rapporten, at tjene »menneskehedens utrættelige forfølgelse af en fredelig udforskning og anvendelse af det ydre rum. Kina står ved en ny, historisk startlinje og er fast besluttet på at fremskynde udviklingen af sin industri og aktivt udøve international udveksling og internationalt samarbejde omkring rummet således, at resultater fra aktiviteter i rummet vil tjene og forbedre menneskehedens trivsel i bredere omfang … «

I skarp modsætning hertil befinder USA og det transatlantiske område sig i et økonomisk sammenbrud, der udgør en stor fare for hele menneskeheden, og de fortsætter desuden med at forfølge den selv samme politik, der var årsag til dette sammenbrud.

Nærmere bestemt, så finder der i øjeblikket et opgør sted mellem Den europæiske Centralbank (ECB) og Italien over Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena (MPS), som truer med at bryde ud i kaos. I denne uge kom det frem, at ECB har beordret MPS til at fremskaffe – genkapitalisere – 8,8 mia. euro, og ikke de tidligere 5 mia., som den italienske regering har arbejdet på at fremskaffe. Befolkningen er rasende.

Den eneste fornuftige respons til alt dette er at dumpe det døde system ved at indlede en Glass-Steagall reorganisering og etablere et ordentligt banksystem. Udsted kreditter til prioriterede, produktive aktiviteter og promover den økonomiske virkning, med videnskab som drivkraft, af at fremme arbejde omkring rummet og omkring gennembrud inden for fusion. Dette fremlægges i Lyndon LaRouches forslag fra 2014 med de »Fire Love«, som vi vil præsentere i den kommende, nye brochure fra LaRouchePAC til masseomdeling – en opdateret version af brochuren »USA går med i den Nye Silkevej; en Hamilton-vision for en økonomisk renæssance« (2015).

Dette program må sættes øverst på dagsordenen i USA, og ligeledes i Europa og andre steder, og det må ske omgående. Det er desuden ligeledes presserende nødvendigt at formidle videnskaben bag de ’Fire Love’. Se tilbage og studer LaRouches gennembrud inden for metodologi i årtiernes løb. For eksempel, hans koncept med potentiel relativ befolkningstæthed; hans koncept med energigennemstrømningstæthed; hans koncept med den ’produktive platform’ – og ikke blot infrastruktur.

I dag bemærkede Helga Zepp-LaRouche, at det, man ser i den netop publicerede kinesiske rapport om rum-infrastruktur, faktisk er, at man har taget halvdelen af Lyndon LaRouches forslag for en økonomisk platform og projiceret det ud i rummet. Det er meget rigt og håbefuldt.

Den 3. januar vil den nye, 115. Kongres træde sammen i Washington, D.C. De skal mærke presset for at handle. Den 6. januar vil alle kongresmedlemmer være til stede for at gennemføre protokollen med at optælle valgmandskollegiets stemmer og officielt erklære valget af Donald Trump, hvis kampagne red ind på en bølge af befolkningens afsky for den nuværende politik med økonomisk destruktion og krig. Vi må nu sætte dagsordenen for, hvad der må gøres for at gøre en ende på denne befolknings trængsler, fortvivlelse og vrede.

Lyndon LaRouche talte om denne bydende og presserende nødvendighed: »Læg pres på kongresmedlemmerne for at få tingene til at ske.« Han sagde, »Vi må opbygge mennesker, der blev ødelagt af det, som Bush-familien og Obama gjorde. Det er spørgsmålet.« Han talte om Franklin D. Roosevelt og sagde, »Se på, hvordan FDR var foregangsmand for nye fordele for USA’s befolkning« og bemærkede, at FDR og hans politik dernæst blev knust. Men, »vi har en latent mulighed. Vi kan få det tilbage«. Ideen er, at »vi må genopdrage. Brug redskaber til at gøre folk kreative … Se, hvad FDR opnåede. Det må gøres klart.«      

26. dec. 2016 – I dag i Skt. Petersborg sagde den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin til mødet i det Eurasiske Økonomiske Råd (der inkluderede statshoveder fra Armenien, Kasakhstan og Kirgisistan), at de havde »opnået nogle vigtige resultater med vores indsats for at opbygge den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union (EAEU)«. Han sagde, at »en af EAEU’s hovedprioriteter er at etablere et favorabelt forretningsklima med det formål fuldt ud at udvikle vore landes produktion og teknologiske potentiale«. Han sagde, at et fælles marked for medicin og medicinske varer trådte i kraft i år, og nu har man en aftale om konceptet for et fælles marked for gas, olie og olieprodukter i år 2025. De vil også arbejde for »at etablere et fælles finansmarked i år 2025«. Putin afsluttede med at bemærke: »Vi har underskrevet en frihandelsaftale med Vietnam, som I ved. Israel, Indien, Iran, Singapore og Egypten har alle udtrykt interesse for lignende relationer. Vi arbejder sammen med Folkerepublikken Kina.«

I efterfølgende kommentarer til pressen tilføjede chef for den Eurasiske Økonomiske Kommission, Serzh Sargsyan: »Præsidenterne for fire lande har godkendt et forslag om, at det er nødvendigt at lancere forhandlingsprocessen [om skabelse af en frihandelszone] med Iran, Egypten, Indien og Singapore. Vi vil påbegynde en intensiv forberedelsesproces for underskrivelse af aftaler med disse lande.« Kirgisistan underskrev ikke denne del af aftalen, udtalte han, men tilsluttede sig de andre med underskrivelse af en aftale om en ny toldkodeks.

Under mødet i CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization) sagde Putin: »Vi ved, hvor urolig situationen er i mange dele af verden. Antallet af arnesteder for spændte situationer falder ikke, og årtier gamle konflikter er ikke løst til vores tilfredsstillelse. Problemet med Afghanistan, Mellemøsten, Syrien, f.eks. og andre steder … Antallet at problemer er ikke for nedadgående.«

Foto: Kasakhstans præsident Nursultan Nazerbajev mødtes med Ruslands præsident Vladimir Putin på sidelinjen af møderne i det Eurasiske Økonomiske Råd den 26. dec., 2016, i Skt. Petersborg, for bl.a. at drøfte Bajkonur kosmodromen, som Rusland lejer af Kasakhstan.

25. dec., 2016 – Et TU154-fly fra det Russiske Forsvarsministerium med 92 mennesker om bord, som var på vej til Syrien, styrtede ned i Sortehavet kort tid efter, at det havde tanket op i en lufthavn i feriebyen Adler, nær Sotji. Alle ombord blev dræbt.

Den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin har beordret premierminister Dmitry Medvedev til at oprette og lede en regeringskommission for at efterforske flystyrtet. Efterforskningskomiteen (svarer til russisk FBI) meddelte, at man havde indledt en kriminalretslig undersøgelse, baseret på »overtrædelse af regler for flysikkerhed eller forberedelse«, iflg. TASS.

Forespurgt, om en terrorhandling var en mulighed, sagde transportminister Maxim Sokolov i Sotji, at efterforskerne undersøgte alle muligheder, iflg. AP.

Frem til 10:00 EST var ligene af 10 ofre blevet samlet op af et redningsskib. »Et eftersøgningsområde på 10,5 km² er blevet oprettet«, sagde en ministeriel talsmand i en erklæring.

Flere end 3.000 mennesker, inklusive dykkere og piloter, deltager i eftersøgningen efter styrtet i Sortehavet, sagde Forsvarsministeriet. »Syvogtyve skibe, 37 dykkere, 4 helikoptere, ubemandede luftfartøjer og remote-opererede dybvandsfartøjer deltager i eftersøgningen. Flere end 100 dybvandsdykkere med specialudstyr vil snarest blive sendt af sted til ulykkesstedet«, sagde Ministeriet.

Blandt de 8 mandskaber og 84 passagerer befandt sig 60 medlemmer af Alexandrov Ensemblet, kendt som den Røde Hærs Kor, samt dansere, der alle var på vej fra Moskva til Hmeymim-luftbasen i Syrien for at deltage i nytårsfestlighederne.

Med om bord var også den administrerende direktør for Spravedlivaya Pomoshch (Fair Aid) velgørenhedsfonden, Elizaveta Glinka, i den russiske offentlighed bedre kendt som dr. Liza, samt soldater og reportere.

Ikke et ord fra Obama, selv om USA’s ambassadør til Rusland overbragte kondolencehilsener.         

Foto: Sotji, 25. dec., 2016 – Et eftersøgnings- og redningshold på ulykkesstedet, hvor et russisk TU154 med 92 mennesker om bord styrtede ned. [Artur Lebedev/TASS ]

Hvordan får vi folk ud af det her? Hvordan får vi folk til at være deres ædlere selv? Hvordan får man folk til at være mere ophøjede end blot at sige, »Lad os håbe, at Trump konfronterer dem«? For, dette er stadig væk en følelse af vrede, frustration og så videre. Problemet er, som vi så ofte har diskuteret, at oligarkiet regerer over samfundet ved at reducere folk til at være væsener, der kun beherskes af følelser, emotioner; og de er meget dygtige til at manipulere disse følelser. At folk er vrede; at fok er deprimerede; at folk føler raseri; at folk føler glæde ved dekadente nydelser. Alt dette er oligarkiets redskaber. Når mennesket befinder sig på et sådant niveau, er det ikke virkeligt menneskeligt. Den første, der virkelig beskrev dette, var Platon i sit berømte eksempel med grotten. Han sagde, at folk, der kun tror på deres følelser, er ligesom de mennesker, der sidder i en grotte, hvor de kun ser svagt oplyste skygger af begivenheder, der finder sted uden for grotten; og de antager disse skygger for at være den ægte ting. Folk, der kun tror på sanse-vished; disse kan antage forskellige former. For eksempel er monetarisme en sådan form; en tro på de (fysiske) sanser. Eller utilitarisme – nyttefilosofi, at kun det, der er nyttigt, har værdi. Eller nominalisme; positivisme. Der er alle disse variationer af ’ismer’, men de betyder grundlæggende set, at folk ikke tænker.

Det følgende er et uddrag af et møde på Manhattan, med Helga Zepp-LaRouche, lørdag, den 17. dec., 2016. Webcastet med mødet, inkl. den efterfølgende diskussion, kan ses her: https://larouchepac.com/20161218/manhattan-town-hall-event-helga-zepp-larouche-and-megan-beets

Jeg mener, at alle befinder sig i en tilstand med store spændinger, for verden er endnu ikke et trygt sted. I går så jeg præsident Obamas angiveligt sidste pressekonference, live, og det, han sagde, var virkelig utroligt ondt. For han siger, at de har beviser; – nej, det påstod han ikke engang; de sagde, at Rusland havde hacket den Demokratiske Nationalkomite og andre computere og havde grebet ind i valgprocessen i USA. Der er hidtil ikke fremlagt nogen beviser. Dernæst truede han med gengældelseshandlinger imod Rusland; både åbenlyst, men også skjult, men at Rusland ville finde ud af, hvad budskabet var. Det er en temmelig utilsløret trussel; og de mennesker, der tabte valget, er virkelig hysteriske. I dag udtalte Hillary Clinton offentligt, grundlæggende set, at dette var Putins personlige hævn, fordi han ikke kunne lide det, hun gjorde som udenrigsminister. Det skal understreges, at en meget respekteret gruppe, Efterretningsveteraner for Fornuft (VIPS), med personer som senator Mike Gravel og Ray McGovern, og andre, offentliggjorde en erklæring om, at deres mangeårige erfaring som eksperter inden for cybersecurity havde fået dem til at se på disse e-mails; og de var ikke i tvivl om, at dette ikke var hackerangreb, men derimod lækager, som den form for ’leaks’, som Edward Snowden og Chelsea Manning havde foretaget indefra. Hvorom alting er, så er der en stor hype, og vi bør være opmærksomme på, at dette er meget farligt.

Det andet, der kunne ske fra nu og frem til nyvalgte præsident Trumps faktiske indsættelse i embedet, er, at der stadig kan komme en konfrontation med Rusland og med Kina. De nylige udviklinger i det Sydkinesiske Hav er bevis på det. Verden er på ingen måde i sikker havn endnu. Hysteriet omkring Aleppos såkaldte »fald«, som medierne karakteriserer det, er ikke mindre. Her har vi en militær løsning på et problem, der tydeligvis ikke kunne løses politisk; bl.a. pga. USA’s sabotage af forhandlingerne i Genève. Så den militære mulighed var den eneste tilbageværende; og nu er folk befriet. Folk burde vare lykkelige over, at ISIS har lidt et forfærdeligt nederlag. Jeg vil bare sige, at disse utrolige spin om begivenhederne virkelig viser, at vi absolut ikke befinder os i en sikker situation. I USA, men også i Europa, har man praktisk talt den situation, at folk kan opdeles i to grupper: dem, der endnu ikke er kommet sig over det såkaldte »chok« over Trumps valgsejr. Dette er de mennesker, der er tilhængere af geopolitik, af globalisering; som er tilhængere af det nuværende system, der har bragt verden til det punkt, hvor vi nu er. Og så har man de mennesker, der er lykkelige over, at Trump vandt; de håber på, at han vil konfrontere Wall Street, hvilket vi vil få at se, om han gør, i betragtning af den klasse, han tilhører, og hans udnævnelser af folk fra Goldman Sachs. Eller, at han vil konfrontere etablissementet generelt.

Jeg refererer blot til disse omstændigheder ganske kort for at påpege den situation, at jeg ikke mener, nogen af disse tankegange – hverken den første, med de mennesker, der er flippet ud over, at Hillary tabte; og heller de mennesker, der siger, at Trump vil konfrontere etablissementet – at ingen af disse to tankegange er fyldestgørende. Jeg mener, at vi må indføre en tankegang på et helt andet niveau, i den politiske proces: hvilket er grunden til, at opførelsen af Messias og en hel række af andre koncerter er så ekstremt vigtig. Vi har diskuteret dette mange gange, men lad mig gentage det. Hvorfor er klassisk kunst og klassisk musik i særdeleshed så absolut afgørende, hvis menneskeheden skal komme ud af denne krise? Problemet er – jeg tror, I vil være enige med mig – at i mange år, næsten i 50 år siden mordet og mørklægningen af mordet på John F. Kennedy, har paradigmet i den vestlige verden, og især i USA, virkeligt ført til en utrolig forråelse af befolkningen. Mange mennesker er utilfredse med deres fremtidsudsigter; det faktum, at den forventede gennemsnitlige levealder i USA falder før første gang i lang tid, og der findes simpelt hen ingen anden indikator for levestandarden og en befolknings velbefindende, end netop den forventede levealder. Hvis den forventede levealder falder i en civiliseret nation, er det et sikkert bevis på, at nationen befinder sig i en total krise, og i et totalt forfald.

Hvordan får vi folk ud af det her? Hvordan får vi folk til at være deres ædlere selv? Hvordan får man folk til at være mere ophøjede end blot at sige, »Lad os håbe, at Trump konfronterer dem«? For, dette er stadig væk en følelse af vrede, frustration og så videre. Problemet er, som vi så ofte har diskuteret, at oligarkiet regerer over samfundet ved at reducere folk til at være væsener, der kun beherskes af følelser, emotioner; og de er meget dygtige til at manipulere disse følelser. At folk er vrede; at fok er deprimerede; at folk føler raseri; at folk føler glæde ved dekadente nydelser. Alt dette er oligarkiets redskaber. Når mennesket befinder sig på et sådant niveau, er det ikke virkeligt menneskeligt. Den første, der virkelig beskrev dette, var Platon i sit berømte eksempel med grotten. Han sagde, at folk, der kun tror på deres følelser, er ligesom de mennesker, der sidder i en grotte, hvor de kun ser svagt oplyste skygger af begivenheder, der finder sted uden for grotten; og de antager disse skygger for at være den ægte ting. Folk, der kun tror på sanse-vished; disse kan antage forskellige former. For eksempel er monetarisme en sådan form; en tro på de (fysiske) sanser. Eller utilitarisme – nyttefilosofi, at kun det, der er nyttigt, har værdi. Eller nominalisme; positivisme. Der er alle disse variationer af ’ismer’, men de betyder grundlæggende set, at folk ikke tænker.

Klassisk kunst gør det, at den viser, hvordan mennesker først og fremmest lærer at forstå virkelige principper; de principper, der ligger bag den sanselige, den fysiske, fremtoning. Og de kan lære at blive virkeligt frie. Dette er den egenskab, der i høj grad har været en sjælden råvare i disse perioder. At mennesker har en indre frihed; at de har deres egen dømmekraft; at de udvikler deres indre stemme; at de lærer at lytte til deres indre stemme – man kunne også kalde det samvittighed. Det er generelt set stor kunst, der gør det muligt for folk at på en måde træne denne egenskab på en legende måde. For, når man ser på eller lytter til stor kunst, så er det ikke det alvorstunge i det virkelige liv; det er i denne forståelse ligesom det eksistentielle. Men man kan på en legende måde studere, hvad kreativitet er. Det er ekstremt vigtigt, at vi ikke glemmer, at, med mindre menneskeheden foretager springet til et helt nyt paradigme, hvor vi ikke blot tænker på én nation. Trump har lovet, at Amerika kommer først. Det er muligvis en god modgift mod det, der har fundet sted med denne hidtidige såkaldte globalisering; men det, der kræves, er en fuldstændig ny tankegang, hvilket er grunden til, at jeg er så glad for Friedrich Schiller; for hans ideer repræsenterer en sådan rigdom, som vi har brug for, for at komme til det nye paradigme.

Schiller sagde for eksempel, at det ikke er selvmodsigende at være en patriot og samtidig en verdensborger; og jeg mener, at vi har nået en tilstand i menneskets historie, hvor vi må fastslå, at ingen nation kan give udtryk for en egeninteresse, hvis denne er i modstrid med målet for hele menneskeheden. Vi må derfor i denne debat introducere denne egenskab med at blive en verdensborger og samtidig elske sin nation. Kun da kan det amerikanske folk alliere sig med det nye paradigme med den Nye Silkevej og menneskehedens fælles mål, for et skæbnefællesskab for menneskehedens fremtid, som Xi Jinping kalder det.

Jeg mener, at Schiller også af en anden grund er meget vigtig; han var fuldstændig rystet over sammenbruddet af den Franske Revolution, der førte til det jakobinske rædselsherredømme og drab på folk i guillotinen. Som reaktion på alt dette skrev Schiller De æstetiske breve; heri sagde han, at den eneste måde, hvorpå man kunne skabe en forbedring i det politiske liv, var gennem en forædling af individet. Jeg ved godt, at dette ikke ligefrem er det, folk tænker om politik; de tænker ikke på – den eneste måde, hvorpå mennesket kan gøre fremskridt, er, at vi alle sammen, jer, mig, alle, bliver forædlede, eller bestræber sig på at blive det, i hele deres liv. Jeg mener, at den idé om menneskeheden, som Schiller udviklede, er ideen om den skønne sjæl; for jeg mener, at det er nøglen til en masse ting.

Schiller udviklede denne idé om den skønne sjæl, idet han sagde, at det er en person, for hvem frihed og nødvendighed, lidenskab og pligt, er forenet. Dette er en idé, man bør tænke over, for frihed og nødvendighed – hvad betyder det? Det betyder, at, uanset omstændighederne i ens liv, så gør man det, der er nødvendigt, ikke kun for sig selv og sin familie, men for menneskeheden som helhed – der kan have forskellige former og forskellige krav til forskellige tider. I øjeblikket betyder det at bringe USA ind i paradigmet sammen med resten af verden, og at overvinde denne forfærdelige fare for en konfrontation med Rusland og Kina; som med sikkerhed ville betyde civilisationens udslettelse. Hvad betyder det, at finde sin frihed i det, der er nødvendigt? Jeg vil gerne have, I tænker over det, for det har de fleste mennesker ikke gjort; og det er nøglen til virkeligt at blive fri. Frihed betyder ikke fraværet af lænker og fraværet af begrænsninger. Det betyder, at man er en totalt selv-determinerende person, samtidig med, at man gør sin pligt med lidenskab. Man er ikke en kantianer, der siger, »Åh, jeg må gøre min pligt, og derfor er jeg virkelig sur; men jeg er en moralsk person, og derfor gør jeg, hvad jeg skal«. Man ser mange sådanne mennesker, men man må gøre det, der er nødvendigt, med glæde. Det kræver, at man opdrager sine følelser, så man altid, som Schiller siger, kan stole blindt på dem, fordi ens impulser aldrig vil diktere én andet, end hvad fornuften ville diktere.

Dette er en høj standard, men jeg mener absolut, det er muligt at opnå det. Klassisk kunst udgør det felt, i hvilket man kan øve sig i, hvad dette kræver. I et meget interessant skuespil, som Schiller skrev, og hvor han brugte et klassisk, græsk eksempel, nemlig Bruden fra Messina; og han skrev en indledning, hvori han diskuterer, hvilken funktion og magt, stor kunst har. Han siger, at, når folk lytter til et stort kunstværk – han talte i dette tilfælde om det græske kor; ikke et musisk kor, men koret i græske dramaer; og det sætter hos de mennesker, der oplever dette, en evne i dem fri; en evne, der gør mennesker virkeligt frie, en indre frihed. Denne frihed bliver tilbage, når forestillingen er slut.

Nogle af jer har allerede oplevet dette under festlighederne i anledning af 15-års dagen for 11. september (2001), med vore opførelser i fire katedraler i New York. Dette er selvfølgelig en meget dyrebar gave, som vi virkeligt må kæmpe for at gøre til den mere fremherskende kultur. Og jeg vil gerne give den nyvalgte præsident kredit for, at han vil gøre interessante ting; mindst halvdelen af det, han foreslår, vil blive til sandhed; nemlig at forny relationerne med Rusland og Kina og sætte dem på et godt fundament; det ville være gigantisk. Men jeg har alvorlige tvivl om, at dette spørgsmål om klassisk uddannelse og den æstetiske forbedring af mennesket kan forventes at komme fra denne Trump-administration. Men det er et absolut nødvendigt krav, at Amerika atter bliver stort, hvilket han har lovet at gøre.

Jeg mener, at vi behøver en ånd af forædling, af det sublime; og dette niveau finder man ikke i nogen af udtalelserne. Jeg har i hvert fald ikke hørt noget, der ligner det. Men, man har hørt det fra folk som Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, John Quincy Adams og især Abraham Lincoln. Tænk på Gettysburg-talen og den skønne ånd, der udtrykkes i den; det er den tankegang – ikke i erklæringerne, men i ånden – i hvilken folk altid bør være, hvis de virkeligt er frie.

Så, i denne forstand, mener jeg, at vi har en enorm mulighed hen over denne juleperiode og ferieperioden, hvor folk altid har lidt tid til at læse, tænke og lytte til musik. Jeg vil opmuntre jer til ikke blot at gøre de ting, I plejer at gøre i denne tid, som at tage i indkøbscentret for at købe gaver til folk. Det er udmærket; men den virkelige mening med denne periode er, at man selv finder denne virkeligt højere identitet, som vi må mobilisere for at få verden til at blive et tryggere sted.

Det er, hvad jeg gerne ville sige, og det er mine bemærkninger til jer i dette øjeblik.[applaus]

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 25. december, 2016 – Imellem Rusland, Tyrkiet og Iran er der dybe uoverensstemmelser; de støtter endda modstridende styrker i Syrien. Og alligevel er de tre kommet sammen for at afslutte kampene i Aleppo – et afgørende vendepunkt. Som det næste er det deres plan at mægle i forhandlinger mellem den syriske regering og oppositionens repræsentanter; forhandlinger, som en fjerde partner – Kasakhstan – skal være vært for.

Dette kom som en overraskelse for alle, med undtagelse af Vladimir Putin selv og Lyndon og Helga LaRouche – men denne form for overraskelser har i realiteten i mange år været markant for Vladimir Putins karriere. Vi har allerede set det i »Traktaten for godt venskab og samarbejde mellem naboer, mellem Folkerepublikken Kina og den Russiske Føderation«, fra 16. juli, 2001. Traktatens 25 punkter opstiller krav om »en fair og fornuftig, ny, international orden«, og om at »løfte relationerne mellem de to lande op til et helt nyt niveau« og afgør, »at venskabet mellem vore to folk vil fortsætte i alle fremtidige generationer«. Hver af parterne har forpligtet sig til aldrig at gå med i en alliance, der truer den anden part; aldrig at rette deres missiler imod hinanden; og omgående at rådføre sig med hinanden, hvis en af parterne trues af aggression.

Dette var to lande, der havde kæmpet mod hinanden, med våben i hånd, i 1969.

Traktaten påtænker også en opgradering og udvidelse af systemet med kinesisk-russiske, interguvernementale kommissioner, som præsident Putin ivrigt har fremmet. Der er p.t. flere end et dusin sådanne kommissioner således, at en stor del af hver af de to regeringer uafbrudt rådslår med den anden regering for at glatte uoverensstemmelser, hvoraf mange er alvorlige. »Men vi finder altid en løsning«, sagde Putin.

Shanghai Samarbejdsorganisationen, SCO, var en udløber af denne traktat fra 2001 og de forhandlinger, der førte til traktaten. I løbet af de 40 år, hvor der har fundet forhandlinger sted om den russisk-kinesiske grænse og dennes demilitarisering, er der opstået tre nye, uafhængige, centralasiatiske stater på grænsen til Kina, og som afløser det forhenværende Sovjetunionen. Dette var med til at skabe betingelserne for dannelsen af SCO som, oprindeligt, en organisation bestående af Kina, Rusland og centralasiatiske stater, og som havde til formål at opretholde sikkerhed i og omkring Centralasien.

På lignende måde har Putins geni vist sig i skabelsen af BRIKS, endnu en grundpille i det nye, fremvoksende, globale arrangement sammen med de ovenfor anførte organisationer. Her ser man klarest påvirkningen fra Putins forgænger, nu afdøde Jevgenij Primakov. Men selve Putins rolle ville have været utænkelig uden Lyndon og Helga LaRouches årtier lange lederskab, udøvet gennem det Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ i 1977 og de efterfølgende år, og gennem initiativet med den Eurasiske Landbro, som de udarbejdede i kølvandet på Berlinmurens fald, og som nu har udviklet sig til det verdensomspændende initiativ fra den kinesiske regerings side under præsident Xi Jinping, kaldet »Bælt-og-Vej«.

Foreningen af disse organisationer og initiativer, der er forbundet med Vladimir Putin og med Xi Jinpings »Bælt-og-Vej«, definerer det aktuelle, historiske øjeblik som værende fuldstændigt enestående og uden fortilfælde. Det fremgår klart, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche siger, at det nu er muligt at gøre det forbi med geopolitik. Vi har en klar opgave, og den er uerstattelig. Fuldstændig uerstattelig.  

Foto: Ruslands præsident Vladimir Putin og Kinas præsident Xi Jinping stiller op til fotografering i forbindelse med et af de seneste års mange møder for styrkelse af partnerskab og økonomisk udvikling i begge lande. Her fra 2015.

24. dec., 2016 – Efter at besætte hovedindgangshallen til Ministeriet for Videnskab og Teknologi i Buenos Aires i fem dage, og med løfte om at blive dér julen over, har unge forskere fra det Nationale Forskningsråd for Videnskab og Teknologi (Conicet), samt deres allierede inden for den statslige sektor, tvunget den neokonservative præsident Mauricio Macri til at bøje sig og genindføre bevillinger til 343 forskere, der er blevet nægtet finansiering.

Desuden aftalte Conicet at skabe yderligere 107 »ekstraordinære bevillinger« til kandidater, de var blevet anbefalet til at modtage bevillinger, men fik at vide, at der ikke var penge, fordi Macri havde beskåret forskningsbudgettet for 2017 med 32 %. Aftalen gælder kun for et år.

Den landsomspændende protest, der omfattede syv byer, hvor Conicet har faciliteter, fremsatte direkte det fundamentale spørgsmål om, at udviklingen af den nationale videnskabs- og teknologisektor er en integreret del af national, økonomisk udvikling. Det er ligeledes almindelig udbredt, at løsningen blot er midlertidig. Den er blevet afvist af Cordoba-afdelingen af Conicet, hvis personale korrekt fastslog pointen: »Vi forsvarer landets videnskabelige system, og ikke kun 500 bevillinger; [vi forsvarer] argentinsk videnskab.« I løbet af den seneste uge har nogle af Argentinas mest prestigiøse forskere fastslået den samme pointe.

Forskningsminister Luis Baranao, der indledningsvis havde nægtet at mødes med demonstranterne og insisterer på, at Argentina »ikke har brug for mange forskere«, mødtes med Macri den 23. dec. – der gik rygter om Baranaos tilbagetræden – og mødtes dernæst med forskerne for at tilbyde regeringens kompromisløsning. Cadena 3 rapporterer, at demonstranter afviste Baranaos tilbud om at sikre dem stillinger i den private sektor, og fik ham til at forpligte sig til, at de i stedet blev garanteret en overførsel til andre statslige institutioner, universiteter og forskningsenheder.

Demonstranternes skilte under den ugelange, landsdækkende protest, omfattede budskaber såsom »Jeg ønsker at tjene mit land gennem videnskab« og lignende budskaber.

23. dec., 2016 – I dag benyttede Vladimir Putin en udveksling med journalist Jevgenij Primakov, barnebarn af den store premierminister Primakov, som anledning til at formidle et budskab til amerikanske borgere og ledere om, at konstruktive relationer mellem USA og Rusland kan og må genopbygges, som mange amerikanere også ønsker. Hans budskab kom inden for rammerne af en bidende fremstilling af det Demokratiske Obama/Hillary-partis dårlige tabere, der søger at splitte USA, og som giver Rusland skylden for deres fiasko. Som modstykke fremhævede den russiske præsident sådanne »fremragende Demokrater i amerikansk historie« som Franklin Roosevelt, der forenede sit land i de vanskeligste af tider.

Putins bemærkning om, at FDR »ville vende sig i sin grav« over nutidens Demokrater skabte omgående overskrifter, selv i amerikanske medier.

Primakovs livlige spørgsmål kom under Putins årlige maraton-pressekonference ved årets afslutning, der også blev udsendt med engelsk oversættelse. Primakov bad Putin om at kommentere, hvilket nyt, globalt landskab, der kunne vokse frem af denne periode med fundamentale forandringer, hvor folk stemmer »imod gamle, politiske koncepter og gamle eliter … som folk er dødtrætte af«, med henvisning til Brexit og Trumps valgsejr. Primakov spurgte Putin om Barack Obamas bemærkning under dennes sidste pressekonference om, at »at 37 % af Republikanere har forståelse for Dem [Putin], og hvis han hørte dette, ville Ronald Reagan have vendt sig i sin grav« og tilføjede skælmsk, at vestlige journalister fortæller os, at De har magt til at manipulere verden, udpege præsidenter og gribe ind i valgprocesser både her og der«.

Putin svarede det følgende:

»Jeg har kommenteret dette spørgsmål ved flere lejligheder. Hvis I gerne vil høre det en gang til, kan jeg sige det igen. Den nuværende amerikanske administration og ledere af det Demokratiske Parti forsøger at lægge al skylden for deres fiaskoer på udefra kommende faktorer. Jeg har nogle spørgsmål og nogle tanker med hensyn hertil.

Vi ved, at ikke alene tabte det Demokratiske Parti præsidentvalget, men også Senatsvalget, hvor Republikanerne har flertallet, og valg til Kongressen (Repræsentanternes Hus), hvor Republikanerne også har kontrollen. Gjorde vi, eller jeg, også det? Vi har måske fejret dette på resterne af et 1600-tals kapel, men var det os, det ødelagde kapellet, som talemåden lyder? Dette er ikke sådan, tingene i virkeligheden er. Dette viser alt sammen, at den nuværende administration konfronteres med spørgsmål om hele systemet, som jeg sagde på et møde i Valdai Klubben.

Det forekommer mig, at der består et svælg mellem elitens version af, hvad der er godt og dårligt, og så versionen hos dem, vi i tidligere tider ville have kaldt de brede folkemasser. Jeg opfatter ikke støtte til den russiske præsident hos mange Republikanske vælgere som en støtte til mig personligt, men ser det i dette tilfælde snarere som en indikation på, at en væsentlig del af det amerikanske folk har lignende synspunkter til fælles med os, mht. den måde, verden er organiseret på, hvad vi burde gøre og de fælles trusler og udfordringer, som vi konfronteres med. Det er godt, at der er mennesker, der sympatiserer med vore synspunkter om traditionelle værdier, for dette udgør et godt fundament, på hvilke relationer kan bygges mellem to så magtfulde lande som Rusland og USA, og opbygge dem på basis af vore folks gensidige sympati.

De ville stå sig bedre ved ikke at tage deres tidligere statsmænds navn forfængeligt, selvfølgelig. Jeg er ikke så sikker på, hvem, der ville vende sig i sin grav lige nu. Det forekommer mig, at Reagan ville være lykkelig over at se sit partis folk vinde overalt og ville hilse velkommen valgsejren hos den nyvalgte præsident, som så dygtigt indfangede den offentlige stemning, og som tog præcis denne retning og fortsatte helt til slutningen, selv, når ingen – undtagen os – troede på, at han kunne vinde. [Applaus]

Men de fremragende Demokrater i amerikansk historie ville sandsynligvis vende sig i deres grav. Roosevelt ville i hvert fald, for han var en exceptionel statsmand i amerikansk historie og i verdenshistorien, der vidste, hvordan nationen skulle forenes, selv under den Store Depressions mest dystre år i slutningen af 1930’erne og under Anden Verdenskrig. Men nutidens administration splitter tydeligvis nationen. Opfordringen til valgmændene om ikke at stemme på nogen af kandidaterne og, i dette tilfælde, ikke at stemme på den nyvalgte præsident, var ganske enkelt et skridt henimod en splittelse af nationen. To valgmænd besluttede ikke at stemme for Trump, og fire for Clinton, og også her tabte de. De taber på alle fronter og leder efter syndebukke, som de kan give skylden. Jeg mener, at de krænker deres egen værdighed. Det er vigtigt at vide, hvordan man taber nådigt.

Men mit virkelige håb er, at vi kan opbygge forretningsmæssige og konstruktive relationer med den nye præsident og med det fremtidige Demokratiske Partis ledere også, for dette er i begge landes og folks interesser.«          

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 24. december, 2016 – Tidligere på måneden var den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping leder for et møde, der blev afholdt i Kinas kommunistiske partis centralkomites politbureau, der var trådt sammen for at studere konceptet med »styrelse ved lov og dyd i kinesisk historie«.

Ifølge en rapport fra 10. dec. i Xinhua, bemærkede Xi her, at »lov er dyd omsat i ord, og dyd er lov født i menneskers hjerte«, og at kombinationen af begge er afgørende for den rette regering af samfund og stater. Han understregede dydens »nærende virkning« og opdragelsens betydning for dydens fremme, med det formål at »være en retningslinje for, at folk af egen fri vilje påtager sig deres lovpligtige forpligtelser, såvel som også forpligtelser over for samfund og familie«, rapporterede Xinhua. Regering ved lov bør omfatte moralske idealer og således yde pålidelig støtte til dyd fra institutionerne. »Love og regler bør fremme dyd«, erklærede Xi.

Disse tanker fra Xi Jinping reflekterer konfuciansk filosofis dybe rødder i Kina, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche ofte har understreget. Og, med hensyn til princippet om lov, minder de også stærkt om lignende ideer hos Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, der kunne beskrives som De forenede Staters og dets forfatningsmæssige systems filosofiske, grundlæggende fader. I sin Overvejelse over det Almene Begreb om Lov fra 1702 skrev Leibniz:

»Den højeste visdom har så vel forordnet alle ting således, at vor pligt også må være vor lykke, og at al dyd frembringer sin egen belønning, og at al forbrydelse straffer sig selv, før eller senere … [Dette] er, som det anstår sig, for at der kan blive mere udøvelse af frivillig dyd, visdom og ikke-verdslig kærlighed til Gud …«

»Lov er godhed tilpasset visdom … Lov er intet mindre end den vises næstekærlighed, det vil sige, godhed, tilpasset visdom, mod andre. Og visdom er, efter min opfattelse, intet andet end videnskaben om lykke.«

Da Xi, tilbage i november 2014, offentligt inviterede USA – og alle nationer – til at forlade det transatlantiske områdes synkende Titanic og tilslutte sig Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet for at skabe et helt nyt system, tilbød han mere end en økonomisk politik til at takle krisen. Han fremlagde en filosofisk »win-win«-anskuelse og strategi, der er helt samstemmende med de klippefaste principper, på hvilke USA grundlagdes. Det er de samme principper, som Abraham Lincoln påberåbte sig i sin Første Indsættelsestale, og som »atter engang vil få Unionens samstemmighed til at svulme, når de atter røres, som de bestemt vil blive, af de bedre engle i vor natur«.

Dette er det nye paradigme, vi er i færd med at skabe, og som nu er inden for synsvidde. 

Foto: Statue af Konfucius.     

Leder af LaRouchePAC, 23. december, 2016 – De neokonservative i USA, inklusive Obama og hans controllers, flipper ud over, at det lækkede Trump-Pentagon overgangsmemo ikke opregner Rusland som den første, eksistentielle trussel mod USA, på trods af tågesnakken fra nogle af de højtplacerede inden for det amerikanske civile lederskab under Obama. »I årevis har topregeringsfolk i Forsvarsministeriet og efterretningssamfundet nævnt Rusland som den største trussel på grund af dets enorme atomarsenal, sofistikerede cyber-kapaciteter, sit nyligt moderniserede militær og beredvillighed til at udfordre USA og dettes allierede i Mellemøsten, Østeuropa og andre områder«, lyder det samstemmende i Foreign Policy Journal i en artikel, udlagt den 20. dec. General Joseph Dunford, den nuværende amerikanske generalstabschef, har endda nævnt Rusland som den største trussel mod USA foran ISIS, Iran og Nordkorea!

Vi citerer Myra Ricardel, en af den nyvalgte præsident Donald Trumps overgangsfolk i Pentagon, i et memo, der siger, at Trumps prioriteringer inden for forsvaret er:

1. Udvikling af en strategi til at besejre ISIS;
2. Opbygning af et stærkt forsvar;
3. Udvikling af en omfattende cyber-strategi; og
4. Finde større effektivitet i Forsvarsministeriet.

Rusland nævnes ikke.

Realiteten er den, at alt, hvad Washingtons udenrigspolitiske etablissement og det amerikanske militær har gjort for en omdirigering imod Rusland, frygter dette etablissement kunne blive omstødt af en Trump-administration, der ønsker bedre relationer med Moskva.  

I dag påpegede Lyndon LaRouche, at nøglen til den aktuelle, strategiske og økonomiske krise ligger hos personen Putin. »Putin gjorde det rigtige«, sagde LaRouche. »Putin generelt, og hans team, gør det rigtige.« Alt imens han måske ikke forstår alting, »så er alt, hvad der er af betydning, noget, som Putin er sig bevidst – eller vil blive sig bevidst.«

Ved at udmanøvrere Obama i Syrien har Putin demonstreret, at terrorisme kan besejres ved at arbejde inden for international lov og med suveræne regeringer, og afslørede herved Obamas kriminelle alliance med de britisk og saudisk sponsorerede terrorister, med det formål at opnå sin kriminelle politik med »regimeskifte«.

LaRouche pegede også på mordet på den russiske ambassadør til Tyrkiet, Andrej Karlov, kort tid efter, at Obama havde truet Putin og Rusland med »gengældelse«, som en faktor, der bør efterforskes. »Jeg mener, at advarslen om det, vi så med mordet, der fandt sted, giver et fingerpeg om det, vi skal bekymre os om«, sagde LaRouche. »Spørgsmålet er ikke, hvad Putin foretager sig, men hvad han har til hensigt at foretage sig – ved at få et kompetent skøn over, hvad han vil gøre. Det er nøglen.«    

Vi befinder os på tærsklen til jul; og vi mente, at det var meget vigtigt at få en diskussion i aftenens show, for vi har en ekstremt intens og vigtig politisk situation i øjeblikket. Vi håber, I alle har en fornemmelse af, hvor vigtige de umiddelbart forestående timer og dage er, og at I ikke er for optaget af julehøjtidelighedens festligheder.

På trods af de massive, falske nyheder, der i øvrigt kendes som de etablerede medier; på trods af de ting, vi dér hører, så er der i øjeblikket et betydningsfuld historisk og strategisk skifte i gang på globalt plan.

For blot at sætte fokus på ét element i dette, så er man i stor stil flippet ud over det faktum, at et lækket overgangsmemo fra Pentagon, fra den tiltrædende Trump-administration, udtrykkeligt ikke opregner Rusland som en eksistentiel trussel mod USA. Alene dette er en lille, men betydningsfuld indikation på den type overgang, vi ser. Der er mange spørgsmålstegn omkring Trump-administrationen, men det, der ganske klart er fremgået, er, at han har til hensigt at tage hele denne geopolitiske trussel om Tredje Verdenskrig af bordet. Dette er endnu en indikation på, at han ikke er indstillet på at spille hele dette Obama-Hillary Clinton, geopolitiske spil, der går helt tilbage til George Bush-administrationen, gående ud på at forsøge at true, underminere og ødelægge Rusland og Kina i forsøg på at opretholde en eller anden form for anglo-amerikansk globalt herredømme. Dette skræmmer livet af Obama og folkene bag ham i USA, i Europa, i London og lignende steder. Det skaber på den ene side en åbenlys, klar mulighed; men også en temmelig spændt og farlig situation. For blot et par dage siden advarede hr. Larouche udtrykkeligt om, at i denne periode, selv, når det ser ud, som om vi er tæt på Trumps indsættelse, så befinder vi os stadig væk i en meget farlig overgangsperiode; og Obama sidder dér som en dræber, en morder, der har begået mord i hele verden, ødelagt nationer i hele verden, dræbt amerikanere, fuldstændigt revet forfatningsmæssige forholdsregler i stykker, og sådanne ting. Dér sidder, han, stadig i embedet, stadig ved magten. Og blot umiddelbart herefter så vi, næsten efter bogen, en bølge af handlinger af en terroristisk art over hele planeten. Der var terrorhandlingen i Tyskland, der stadig er årsag til udbredt hysteri dér, med ubesvarede spørgsmål mht., hvad det var, der rent faktisk fandt sted. Og selvfølgelig, mordet på den russiske ambassadør i Tyrkiet, som var en direkte trussel mod hele den operation, der med held køres af Putin, for at bringe stabilitet og en reel bekæmpelse af reel terrorisme i dette område, i sammenhæng med en række andre terrortrusler og forsøg på aktioner i hele verden. Det er næsten efter bogen, at denne kaos-operation så bryder ud.

Men i aften vil vi diskutere noget, der er mere gavnligt. Mike [Billington] vil gå mere i dybden med, hvor verden i realiteten er på vej hen, og kunne være på vej hen; under forudsætning af, at vi kan grundfæste dette strategiske skifte; samt, hvorfor planetens nye direktion, under lederskab af Putin, Kina og allierede kræfter, virkelig er i færd med at omstøde dette historiske paradigme, der frem til i dag har knust verden i årtier.

EVERY GENERATION SHOULD BE FOCUSSED ON A COMPLETE REVOLUTION IN THE VERY NATURE OF MANKIND!

LaRouche PAC Webcast, Dec. 23, 2016

   BENJAMIN DENISTON:  Hi!  Welcome to the LaRouche PAC Weekly
Report for December 23, 2016.  My name is Benjamin Deniston; I'll
be hosting the discussion today.  We're happy to be joined by
Mike Billington of {Executive Intelligence Review} here in the
studio; and over Google Hang-outs, we have Diane Sare, leader of
the LaRouche PAC Policy Committee joining us from the New
Jersey-New York area.
   So today we have, I think, a rather exciting and important
discussion.  We're here on the eve of Christmas Eve; and we
thought it was very important to do a show today and have a
discussion, because this is an extremely intense and important
political situation right now.  We hope all of you have a sense
of the importance of the situation in the immediate hours and
days right now; and are not too swept up in the festivities of
the holidays.  Despite the massive fake news operation, otherwise
known as the mainstream media, despite what you're hearing from
that, there is a major historical and strategic shift underway
right now globally.
   I think just to highlight one element of this, there's been
a major freak-out around a leaked Pentagon transition memo from
the incoming Trump administration, which explicitly does not list
Russia as an existential threat to the United States.  This alone
is one more small but important indication of the type of
transition we're seeing.  There's a lot of questions around the
Trump administration, but what's been absolutely clear
consistently is that he is looking to take this entire
geopolitical threat of World War III off the table.  This is just
another indication showing that he is not willing to play this
Obama-Hillary Clinton going back to the George Bush
administration, geopolitical game of trying to threaten,
undermine, and destroy Russia and China to try and maintain some
kind of Anglo-American global hegemony.  This is completely
terrifying Obama and the people behind him in the United States,
in Europe, in London and related places. This is creating on the
one side obviously a clear opportunity; but also a rather tense
and dangerous situation.  It was just a few days ago that Mr.
LaRouche emphatically warned that in this period, even if it
seems like we're close to the inauguration of Trump, we still
have a very dangerous transition time; and you have Obama sitting
there as a killer, as a murderer, who has committed acts of
murder around the world, destroyed nations around the world,
killed Americans, completely ripped up Constitutional measures
and those grounds.  And he is sitting there, still in office,
still in power; and it was only in the immediate hours and days
after that that you had almost by the book, a wave of
terrorist-type activity launched all over the planet.  You had
this terrorist event in Germany, which is still creating major
hysteria over there, and there are still major questions about
what actually happened with that operation.  You obviously had
the assassination of this Russian ambassador in Turkey, which was
a direct threat to the entire operation that's been run
successfully by Putin to bring stability and an actual fight
against real terrorism in that region in connection with a series
of other terrorist threats and attempted actions around the
world.  It's almost a by the book response of this chaos
operation blowing up.
   But what we're going to discuss more today is going to be
very useful.  Mike is going to put some depth in where the world
is actually going and could be going; assuming we can solidify
this strategic shift; and why the new directionality of the
planet under the leadership of Putin, China, and allied forces is
really threatening to overturn this historical paradigm that's
crushed the world for many decades at this point.  I want to hand
it over to Mike; and we're going to get into the discussion.

   MICHAEL BILLINGTON:  OK, thanks Ben.  I'm certainly glad to
be here.  It is an incredible moment in history; it reminds me of
the opening of Dickens' {A Tale of Two Cities}, where he says,
"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times …"  He
meant it, and it's true; we are in a revolutionary period,
there's no question about that.  This is sweeping the globe; it's
already largely taken over Asia, and the Brexit and the Italian
vote, the Trump vote, and so forth, indicate that people have
finally reached the limit to the power of tyranny over their
economy, over perpetual warfare.  But a revolution doesn't
necessarily have a positive outcome, and that's actually what
Dickens was talking about.  The French Revolution came soon after
the historic and wonderful American Revolution based on a new
conception of man; based upon science and technology and a new
financial system under Hamilton's ideas to defeat the power of
the British Empire which lay in their global financial empire.
But the French Revolution was taken over actually by the British;
but turned into chaos.  It's what Schiller said was "a great
moment [in history] has found a little people."  So, instead of a
great republic, you ended with the guillotine; you ended up with
Robespierre saying the revolution has no need for science, and
ultimately this led to the emergence of the first fascist —
Napoleon.
   So, we cannot be complacent; we have a tremendous victory in
the defeat of Obama and his clone, Hillary, and their British
operation.  But we certainly cannot sit back and cross our
fingers and hope that Trump is going to do the right thing.  It's
going to be up to us.  We should reflect on how the American
Revolution succeeded.  It succeeded because it was focussed on a
tremendous sense of history and philosophical thought; the
Founding Fathers put together the {Federalist Papers}, the
writings of Alexander Hamilton, which we've recently published.
If you read these, these are not easy; yet this was the basis on
which the so-called common men and women studied and came to the
conclusion that in fact this small group of leaders were leading
them in the right direction, and had created a future.  It was
based on poetry.  In fact, Schiller was known as the Poet of
Freedom and was treasured for 100 years after the American
Revolution as the poet of the American Revolution; despite being
German and writing in German.  But this was known to the American
people.  The music; the great {Messiah} by Handel was composed in
1741 — it was known.  Our Schiller Institute just performed a
phenomenal version of this great work — the {Messiah} — at the
Co-Cathedral of St. Joseph in Brooklyn last week in an extremely
moving ceremony.  These are the kinds of ceremonies that took
place at that time; that lifted people to a higher sense of their
humanity, of the dignity of man, and of creating a future.
   So, which of these two paths are we going to be taking
today?  Well, it's obvious which way Obama was going; we've made
that very clear.  His intention was war; not only the perpetual
wars in the Middle East, but leading to a war with Russia, a war
with China.  These are not completely resolved, but as Ben said,
we're a long way away from that horror, which was facing us had
we not defeated that in this final election.  But the result of
these 16 years of Bush and Obama can be seen in what's happened
to our own country; not just the Hell that's been taken to the
Middle East and other parts of the world.  We now have a decline
in life expectancy for the first time in our nation's history.
We have a drug epidemic in which 1 out of 15 Americans are
addicted to heroin or its substitutes; 1 out of 15 Americans.
This is not a problem; this is a disaster, a collapse of
civilization which is not only tolerated and supported openly by
our President, who promotes legalizing drugs and who is doing
everything in his power to stop the emergence of a war on drugs
in the Philippines, which I'll come back to.
   So, on the other hand, we see that Russia, under Putin's
direction, has intervened to stop this series of regime-change
operations.  What's happened in the tremendous victory in Aleppo
against terrorism, is that Putin has demonstrated that if you
work hand-in-hand with sovereign nations, with their leaders, you
can defeat terrorism.  And he basically exposed the fact that
Obama — like Bush — was on the side of the terrorists; under
the guise of fighting terrorism, was openly working with the
Saudis and the British, who were arming and creating these
terrorist movements to overthrow regimes who refused to follow
their dictates — the so-called "regime-change" movement.  That's
been probably crushed; this is not completely solved, but what's
happened in Aleppo not only stops the disintegration of Syria,
but it should — if properly pursued — mean the end of the
regime-change criminality of both Bush and Obama once and for
all.
   I'm going to read to you — today happened to be the day
that Putin gave his annual end of year press conference.  I think
just reading one section of part of that, and paraphrasing a few
others is important.  It's important for people to watch Putin;
it's done with an English voice-over.  It's useful to watch to
see why it is that the oligarchy is so terrified of this man.
I'm just going to read you — actually it was a question that
came from a man named Yevgeny Primakov.  It turns out that he is,
indeed, the grandson of the great Yevgeny Primakov who died
recently; but who was the original architect of the idea of
China, Russia, and India collaborating to form a new core of
nations that could appeal to America to join them.  Which is, of
course, what has to happen, as a basis of reversing the imperial
decline of the human race; and which led to the BRICS, it led to
the New Silk Road.  So, his grandson asked a question which said,
"Mr. Putin, Barack Obama, who is still your official colleague,
said that 37% of the Republicans sympathize with you.  And
hearing this, Ronald Reagan would have rolled over in his grave."
So, he says, "Our western colleagues often tell us that you have
the power to manipulate the world, to designate Presidents and to
interfere in elections here and there.  How does it feel to be
the most powerful person on Earth?  Thank you."  So, with that
humorous, but very insightful question, Putin said the following:
   "The current US Administration and leaders of the Democratic
Party are trying to blame all their failures on outside
factors¦…
   "We know that not only did the Democratic Party lose the
presidential election, but also the Senate, where the Republicans
have the majority, and Congress, where the Republicans are also
in control. Did we, or I also do that?…
   "It seems to me there is a gap between the eliteâs vision of
what is good and bad and that of what in earlier times we would
have called the broad popular masses¦… [A] substantial part of
the American people share similar views with us on the worldâs
organization, what we ought to be doing, and the common threats
and challenges we are facing. It is good that there are people
who sympathize with our views on traditional values because this
forms a good foundation on which to build relations between two
such powerful countries as Russia and the United States, build
them on the basis of our peoplesâ mutual sympathy.
   "¦… I'm not so sure who might be turning in their grave
right now. It seems to me that Reagan would be happy to see his
partyâs people winning everywhere, and would welcome the victory
of the newly elected President so adept at catching the public
mood, and who took precisely this direction and pressed onwards
to the very end, even when no one except us believed he could
win.
   "The outstanding Democrats in American history would
probably be turning in their graves though. Roosevelt certainly
would be because he was an exceptional statesman in American and
world history, who knew how to unite the nation even during the
Great Depressionâs bleakest years, in the late 1930s, and during
World War II. Todayâs administration, however, is very clearly
dividing the nation. The call for the electors not to vote for
either candidate, in this case, not to vote for the
President-elect, was quite simply a step towards dividing the
nation. Two electors did decide not to vote for Trump, and four
for Clinton, and here too they lost. They are losing on all
fronts and looking for scapegoats on whom to lay the blame. I
think that this is an affront to their own dignity. It is
important to know how to lose gracefully."
   Helga LaRouche commented when I read this to her, that this
is a call not only to the Democrats in America, but to the
oligarchs throughout the world who are acting as if this
revolutionary change is not taking place; as if they still have
the power to dictate policies, and who are hysterical about what
is happening in America.  Putin concludes this way; he says:
   "But my real hope is for us to build business-like and
constructive relations with the new President and with the future
Democratic Party leaders as well, because this is in the
interests of both countries and peoples."
   So, this is leadership; what we so sorely miss here in the
United States.  There's much more; more will be made available in
the {EIR}.
   Now let me turn to Asia. Asia today should — in fact China
in particular, but not just China — be seen as the model which
America must follow if we are to pull ourselves out of the morass
that we're in today. We've discussed this in this program and in
our publications many times: the entire Silk Road development,
the development of corridors. I want to put some maps up, and
just very quickly review some of the incredible development
projects that are going on, virtually every single day.
   This [Fig. 1] is a map published just in the last few days
by something called MERICS [the Mercator Institute for China
Studies]. They have a competent article on the whole Silk Road
process. They've marked in this red graphic where some of the
corridors are; they're not all there. Of course you have the
original corridor, which was the Trans-Siberian Railroad; which
was developed with consultation and advice from Henry Carey and
the American System, who worked with the Russians to replicate
what had been done in the United States with the Transcontinental
Railroad, not just to be from one end to the other, but to
develop the entire region in between.

   DENISTON: It's the black-gray dashed line of the existing
rail lines.

   BILLINGTON: Yeah, this one here, where I'm running that
thing. Now, you see the lower one that goes through China,
through Xinjiang Province, into Kazakhstan. This is the New Silk
Road, which was developed following the 1990s, with the fall of
the Soviet Union. Helga Zepp LaRouche helped organize in Beijing
a conference in 1996 on what the Chinese call the New Eurasian
Land-Bridge. Helga called it the New Silk Road even then.
   This led to the building of this rail which is now
functioning. It has several branches, both in China, and, on the
far side, in Europe, as well as branches down into central Asia.
It's being upgraded. It's not connected, it doesn't have the same
grade, most of it is not high-speed. So this is a
work-in-process.
   Now look at what's happened just in the last couple years.
This red line down here, is what's called the Pakistan Corridor.
This is a connection by rail, from China, down through Pakistan,
into Baluchistan (the southern part of Pakistan), and to the
Gwadar Port, which is being transformed into a major hub for oil
from the Middle East, for trade with India. Hopefully, if the
India/Pakistan relationship can be resolved.  Then — not on this
map — right around here in southern Iran, is the development of
the Chabahar Port, from which there are rail connections up
through Iran to Teheran, and then into Azerbaijan, and into
Russia.  Another north/south route; so, you have several
north/south routes.
   Over here, you see this red line that goes from Kunming in
southern China, through Thailand, Myanmar, and into India. This
is the old Burma Road that was built during the Second World War.
Mr. Lyndon LaRouche had a hand in building the Burma Road (or
worked along that Road). That's now being reconstructed. It will
eventually be a rail connection. And you see that this pipeline
— the black line here — is an offshoot from China all the way
down to the coast of Myanmar, where they are now taking in
shipments from Middle East oil and piping it up into China.
   Over here, this corridor. You already have rail connections
from Kunming down to the Laos border, and now the Chinese are
building a high-speed rail through Laos, down to the Thai border.
Just in the last few months, they've concluded their plans to
build a high-speed rail from the Laos border down to Bangkok. At
this point, there's only an old railroad from Bangkok down to
Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia — down here. But that will eventually
be done; and in the meantime, probably the Chinese, maybe the
Japanese, are building a high-speed rail from Kuala Lumpur to
Singapore. So, eventually, you'll have all the way from Kunming
down to Singapore.
   In Indonesia, the Chinese are building a railroad from the
capital of Jakarta to Bandung. Many of you have heard of Bandung
from the famous Bandung Conference in 1955, which was the first
meeting of Asian and African leaders who had formerly been
colonized, meeting without their colonial masters — the
so-called Asia-Africa Conference that was organized by Sukarno
and Nehru and Chou En-Lai (from China), and others. So that's in
the process; other developments there.
   If you look at this part of the Africa map [Fig. 2], these
are some railroads that have already been constructed. Go to the
next map of the two Africa maps. Okay. This [Fig. 3] is
from{EIR}'s report "The New Silk Road Becomes the World
Land-Bridge". This shows, on this side, the existing rail
structures as of a few years ago. You see that basically there's
no way to get from one capital to another. You can only get the
raw materials from the mine out to the port, where it was shipped
off to Europe and America. That's all the colonial powers cared
about in developing Africa.
   What you see here, is a general map of the kind of
commitment that the Chinese have made to {connect every capital
of Africa} with high-speed rail, several cross-continental
railroads. The Chinese need raw materials, just like the
Europeans did, but they're paying for it; they're {building
nations}. They're building nations that have industry,
agriculture, water, power, education, using a model which we used
to call the American System, but which we've deserted in our
country.
   The same in South America. You can go to the next map [Fig.
4] here. This is also from our report. It's not quite accurate
for what is in the process now, actually, because the Chinese are
talking about building {two} trans-oceanic railroads: one that
goes from Peru directly into Brazil and to the coast; one that
goes south of that through Bolivia. The Bolivians, of course,
want that railroad to go through Bolivia.
   So, again, transforming the world in a way which, of course,
the U.S. long ago ceased to do; becoming more of a British-style
colonial power which looted the raw materials, imposing huge
amounts of debt, and then using that debt as a weapon to keep the
countries in a state of backwardness.
   Now, I'm going to look at two other aspects of Asia: the
Philippines and Japan — where huge transformations are taking
place. Most of you have seen — either in our material or just in
the daily news — about Rodrigo Duterte, the new [Philippine]
President who took office in June of this year, who has {totally
transformed} the Philippines, with massive, massive support from
the population, estimated at more than 80%. Why? It's because he
took on the reality that the country had been destroyed. The
history of the Philippines, in brief, was that in the 1970s and
'80s, they were viewed by the rest of Asia — including Korea, by
the way — as {the} model for development, under Ferdinand
Marcos. They had built the first nuclear power plant. They had
made the country self-sufficient in rice, by direct support for
infrastructure for agriculture. They had built 11 major
industrial infrastructure projects. They had built rail and road
infrastructure. Imelda Marcos, whom most of you know only because
she supposedly was wildly extravagant and had millions of pairs
of shoes. Well, the reason she had the shoes was because {she
built a shoe industry in the Philippines}. She brought in Italian
shoemakers; she shipped in cattle from Australia, for the
leather; she created a shoe industry. And those who produced the
shoes in the Philippines were so grateful that they gave her the
first pair of any new shoe they developed. That's the reality,
contrary to the "fake news" that we received back in the 1980s,
when the neo-cons, under George Schultz and Henry Kissinger and
others decided to overthrow Marcos, to make a horrible example of
him; that they would not allow Third World countries to have
nuclear power, to be self-sufficient.
   The result is, that what was once the greatest rising power
in Southeast Asia, has become the basket case of that region. And
this is what Duterte is acknowledging. He's saying, "We've been
destroyed by the so-called big-brother, who looks down at the
little brown brothers in the Philippines." And he said, "We're
not going to tolerate it anymore. We're going to crush the drugs
that have been brought into our country and are destroying our
children. And we're going to reject the U.S. domination of our
economy, where all they want is our raw materials, and to use our
bright young people who graduate from college who have no jobs as
engineers or scientists or teachers, or nurses or doctors, even,
but who can only work all night long in call-centers, answering
calls from the master back in the United States who has a problem
with his computer or his banking code." This is how the country
was destroyed.
   So, he's turned to China; he's turned to Russia. His Defense
Minister, Delfin Lorenzana, has gone to Russia; he's going to
China. They're going to build that country. They're going to end
this drug epidemic. And for that, he's being told he's going to
be taken to the International Criminal Court for extra-judicial
murders, for human rights violations, by the fact that drug
dealers who fight back are being killed.  Well, this is rather
hypocritical, I would say. If you count the tens of thousands,
hundreds of thousands of people that Obama has killed through
extra-judicial murder — no court, no due process, no proof. Just
the king decides: "This is my list of people to kill this week";
he and John Brennan, Director of the CIA. This is rather
hypocritical. What's really behind it? {The British don't want to
stop drugs}. The banking institutions in London and New York are
{drug dependent}, meaning they're drug-money dependent, in
addition to the fact that many of the bankers are high on cocaine
and heroin. They're drug dependent in the sense that the biggest
business in the world is propping up these bankrupt Western banks
who do nothing but speculate. This is the reality of this.
   And of course, the main thing is that they don't want to see
this war on drugs brought home. One out of 15 Americans addicted
to heroin; this is mind-boggling! And they know that the American
people, if they're given a sense, like we did with our War on
Drugs policy under LaRouche's direction back in the '80s and
'90s; that this could capture the American people.
   Lastly, let me mention Japan. The British-American strategy
for containing China and Russia in the Asian side, has always
been South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, and Australia. And
Singapore is in there someplace. Many of you know Korea's in
total upheaval. The President who started off wanting to work
with Russia and China, and was somehow completely taken over by
Obama, turned against the collaboration with Eurasia; agreed to
bring in these U.S. THAAD missiles, supposedly to protect them
from North Korea. But these are missiles that go up into the high
altitude. North Korea is 30 miles away from Seoul. You don't need
this for Korea! You need them for China and Russia, for war. They
were in the process of turning the Philippines into a massive
U.S. military base, under an agreement with the former
puppet-President.
   In the Korea case, the President is now being impeached.
She'll probably be out in April or so. The Opposition wants to
stop that THAAD deployment. The Philippines we know; we've just
discussed it. Just in the last week, Duterte repeated that he's
probably going to absolutely cancel the strategic agreements with
the United States. "We don't need foreign soldiers in our
country," he said. "We're not going to have a war with China."
   Now, Japan. Lyndon LaRouche has always said that there are
two Japans. There's the Japan that came out of feudalism with the
Meiji Restoration, which was highly influenced by the American
System.  Key people who brought in the work of Henry Carey,
Friedrich List, which gave rise to this great industrial
explosion in Japan; which turned them into the leading nation of
Asia at that time, that superseded the 5000-year old culture and
tradition in China in terms of its strength.  But there was also
the Japan of the British Empire; the British came at the same
time, and basically said, "Look, Japan, you're an island nation
like we are.  You need to get raw materials, you don't have them
in your own country.  The only way you're going to get them is by
having a mighty military and colonizing; taking over countries
and taking their raw materials like we have — the great British
Empire."  Without going through all the details, as you know,
this eventually won out in the sense that Japan adopted a
militarist policy and unleashed the horror of the Second World
War, which started long before Pearl Harbor.  It started with the
invasion of China and the looting of China; but then led to the
destruction of China and other countries and ultimately to the
destruction of Japan.
   So, President Shinzo Abe represents both of these things.
He has had his problems with China; he has wanted to remilitarize
to get out from under the Constitution in Japan, which basically
forbade them to fight war — a Constitution worked out after
World War II with General MacArthur's collaboration.  And he
wants to be what he calls a "normal nation".  But, he also
recognizes that he's gotten nothing from the collapsing Western
financial system; and he sees the future of Japan in the real
development of Russia and China, of Asia; and not by taking it
over this time, but by collaboration through the New Paradigm,
through the New Silk Road.  Through the collaboration especially
with Russia.  His grandfather, who was a prime minister, and his
father, who was a politician, were committed to developing good
relations with Russia; and he is now on course.
   So, what's happened this year?  It's an extraordinary
transformation taking place.  It began with his visit with Putin
in Sochi in May; at which point he laid out an eight-point
program for the development of the Russian Far East using
Japanese technology and resources and financing.  Also, in May,
there was a meeting of the G-7 in Japan.  Russia wasn't there,
because they threw Russia out of the G-8; it became the G-7
again.  So, he didn't meet Putin there; but at that event, Abe
basically said to the other G-6 leaders — including Obama —
that we were on the brink of a horrible financial breakdown
crisis — worse than 2008.  This was absolutely rejected.  Obama
said "No, we're in a recovery; it might be too slow, but it's
going well."  He didn't say this, but because there's lots of
money being printed to keep the speculation going in the banks;
there's lots of drugs flowing everywhere, things are going fine.
   So, Abe was crushed on that; the final communiqué didn't
mention what Abe had said, but everybody knew.  Then, in
September, he went to Vladivostok for a conference organized by
Putin on the development of the Far East; and they went further
ahead with these development projects.  And then, finally this
month, Putin came to Japan; and he went to Yamaguchi, Abe's
hometown; he then went to Tokyo.  He visited the karate teacher
that had Putin one of the great black belts.  But at that, they
knew they would not be able to overcome the still-festering
problem of the territorial issues of the so-called Northern
Territories, or the Kurile Islands.  At the very end of the
Second World War, the Russians had come in to help with the war
in Japan; had taken the Kuriles, which had been back and forth
throughout history.  These are basically four islands north of
Japan.  Both sides claim sovereignty; the Japanese want them
back.  But, what they agreed to was that they would go with a
policy that had first been put forward in 1956 to divide the
islands two and two, which had been stopped by the US.  The
Dulles brothers came in and said, "Don't you dare; you must
demand all of these islands back from the Russians, or else we
won't turn Okinawa back to you."  So, the Japanese backed away
from that deal, and after that, the Russians said, "OK, that's
it.  You're not going to get any of them back."  So, now Putin
has said, "OK, we can start joint development of these four
islands.  Joint development.  And over time, we can go back to
the 1956 agreement and come to a settlement; meaning that we'll
be able to finally have a peace settlement to World War II by
probably 2018."
   But in the meantime, huge development projects.  They made
agreements for $2.5 billion of infrastructure projects throughout
the Russian Far East; ports, rail, agriculture, nuclear,
pharmaceuticals, education, cultural exchanges, $1 billion joint
fund which can be leveraged into more, and this framework for
peace.  So, just as Putin has largely unified the entire Middle
East — he's even now talking to Bibi Netanyahu and the Saudis;
because he's in charge.  Obama and the British game is largely
defeated.  So, they're basically creating a common policy of
common interests of all these nations.  And in the same way in
Asia; the China Silk Road process, the new financial institutions
are bringing all of these nations together.  There are still a
few problems, but it's a new world; it's a new world which the
United States can and must join.  It's the only option.
   And again, I'll repeat that while Obama's Pivot to Asia is
dead, the TPP is dead, the regime-change policies are largely
dead; but don't just sit back and say, "Yahoo! Trump's going to
do it for us!"  Because that is not the case.  This is going to
be done by us; we created the environment in America and around
the world which made it possible for these revolutionary changes
to take place.  It's the power of ideas that moves history; it's
Lyndon LaRouche and Helga LaRouche and this institution who
fought for these ideas before they became popular.  In other
words, we fought to bring these ideas into circulation; which
made it possible for the emergence of people who recognized the
truth of those ideas and have begun to take them up.  This is
doubly true now; we're at a moment which is going to go one way
or the other.  It's going to depend on you and me; on making sure
that we take this fight now at a crucial moment — what Schiller
called a great moment — and make sure that {we} define a future
that uplifts people to a level of the dignity of their true
humanity through activating the creative powers that they have by
the right of being human beings created in the image of God.
   This is our task, and this is where we stand today; and it's
a great time to be celebrating Christmas, but you should be
thinking about George Washington leading the fight across the
river on Christmas Eve.  That's the way we have to approach the
fight that we have on our hands today.  A good fight; one that
gives us reason to be happy, but which is deadly serious.  Thank
you.

   DENISTON:  I think that was excellent, Mike; and I liked
your concluding point.  We're seeing a lot of horrific, awful
things being removed; but I think Helga Zepp-LaRouche's focus on
this being the potential transition to a new historical paradigm
centered around a new positive conception about the truly
creative nature of mankind, is our mission, is our unique task
today.  As our viewers know, Mr. LaRouche defined New York City
as a critical point of intervention on that level; to really
revive that true American spirit and true American insight and
understanding into this historical unifying mission for mankind
that we're talking about.  So, I know Diane was part of our
discussions with Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche earlier today, and she was
raising some of the critical aspects that we have to focus on in
terms of getting the American people to realize that you're not
just passive observers in this process.  Like you were saying,
we're not just going to sit back and root for who we think might
do this or that.  We have a critical leadership role — including
our audience, everyone involved with us — to actually take this
fight to this higher level.  So, I think that Diane has some
remarks on that; I know she would like to contribute here.

DIANE SARE:  Mrs. LaRouche said something this morning that I
think is very important, which is that in a period where
everything is stable, then the subjective factor is not as
crucial.  That is, if everybody gets all worked up over a
particular celebrity's drug addiction problem, or various fads,
various emotional things that people get tangled up in; but when
you have a moment like this, which on the one hand, I'm really
glad that Mike just went through what he did, because I think
most Americans have absolutely no idea of this incredible picture
of what's happening in the world.  And also, should reflect a
little bit on where these countries are coming from; what did
China look like 45 years ago, for example, compared to how they
look now?  You'd get a sense that there is no reason, except a
subjective reason of the mindset of the American people, why our
nation cannot similarly be self-transformed to a completely
different domain, a completely different culture.
   I'll say here this past weekend, we had another musical
intervention.  The Schiller Institute chorus, which I helped to
organize and direct, sponsored by the Foundation for the Revival
of Classical Culture in a performance, a unity concert in
Brooklyn of African-American spirituals, the Bach {Wachet Auf}
cantata, and Handel's {Messiah}.  But what was so striking about
this particular performance is, my sense was that the musicians
were completely engaged.  In other words, it wasn't like a stuffy
thing that you go to at Lincoln Center, where everyone is going
through the motions; and of course, the tuning is way too high
anyway, so their voices are strained and they need all kinds of
electronic adjustments and things like this.  But the thing
really was from the heart; and there's clearly a potential where
Americans have a sense, they want something substantive.  Who
actually doesn't want their life to have had a purpose?
   What we have right now, is a moment of extraordinary
opportunity; it is also dangerous, because as you said, Ben, at
the beginning, Obama issued these threats, this intent to kill as
LaRouche put it, a week ago today at his crazy press conference
and interview on NPR.  Saying, with no evidence whatsoever that
Russia had any involvement in hacking, that we will retaliate at
a time and place of our choosing.  Those are murderous words, and
therefore, we're not at a moment of stability; and it requires
from us, as Schiller would say, a certain sublime quality of
thinking where we look down on the world as if from above, and
consider what are the common aims of mankind and what mankind can
do together.  And the potential that we have, given that the
defeat of Hillary Clinton was really a defeat of Bush and Obama;
it was a defeat of a 16-year legacy of evil.  It doesn't
guarantee — as Mike said — that what comes in under Trump is
going to be good; that is for us to determine.  It just indicates
that there is a tremendous potential for this, as we see with the
communication between President-elect Trump and Vladimir Putin;
that's very promising.  There are other aspects of a potential
with China that are very promising, and then there are some
appointments that are not so promising.
   It is definitely a moment for each of us to consider our
responsibility to future generations; because we have a moment,
hopefully a revolutionary moment where we have not found a little
people, but a people who will grow into the situation and will
take the actions that LaRouche has outlined.  Specifically, the
Four Laws; beginning emphatically with Glass-Steagall, but not
ending with Glass-Steagall.  The fourth law is not an end, but is
really a beginning; which is the development of mankind on the
imperative of exploring the Universe, of mastering thermonuclear
fusion and getting ourselves out of this Solar System.  I think
that's the challenge: To objectively address where we are; to not
get flustered by every piece of crap that gets put in the
mainstream press, which is a bunch of propaganda designed to make
everyone hysterical; and to really fight for the direction that
is required.

   DENISTON:  Another thing that does lie in that issue of the
creative development of mankind, and I was also struck in some
recent discussions with Lyndon and Helga LaRouche.  Helga was
making the point that what we're seeing now is really the
realization of this World Land-Bridge perspective that she and
Lyn had fought so hard for.  We were discussing how this really
should be seen from the standpoint of Mr. LaRouche's unique
insights into the fundamental nature of human creative progress
and human creative revolutions.  And in a sense, what we're
seeing — what Mike just presented — what's being led by China,
the potential for that to expand globally with the United States
jumping on board, really is a certain potential culmination of a
certain platform of development for the entire planet.  What that
sets the base for, is the next leap for the expansion into space
and the creative development of nearby space first; as Krafft
Ehricke had been one of the leading visionaries for as a basis
for the expansion further into the Solar System.  I think this
idea of continually defining the next levels of creative leaps,
creative developments is absolutely critical; because it's not
that we are completing some process of some steady state level of
development, but it's the fact that mankind is always
participating in creative revolutions.  Every generation should
be focussed on a complete revolution in the very nature of
mankind.  The very understanding of mankind's existence is
continually being reshaped, recreated on higher and higher
levels.  That's the positive principle of this New Paradigm.

BILLINGTON:  What Diane referred to that Helga said this morning
about certain moments in history in which the subjective becomes
crucial, is a reflection of what Percy Shelley said in his "In
Defense of Poetry" which we've quoted often.  He develops the
concept of great revolutionary moments in history, at which he
says, in his describing why the poet is the legislator of history
in moments of great crisis like this.  But he describes how in
such moments, the common person who normally doesn't have to
think about profound ideas, is suddenly capable of understanding
very profound concepts about man and nature — both about society
and about scientific reality of the Universe.  That's clearly
where we stand; where we've reached a point at which there's
nothing holding back any human being.  Perhaps he's been drugged;
perhaps he's been degraded; perhaps he's been left unemployed,
driven out of the workforce.  But nonetheless, it's a moment in
history in which everybody can, in fact, bring themselves up to
those creative capacities that they were blessed with by being a
human being.  To activate that now, in learning huge amounts of
things in a very short period of time, is possible and necessary.

   DENISTON:  I think that definitely defines our mission for
the next coming year — 2017.  This can be the year of the shift
of the United States under the leadership of what we're doing.
   So, I think we gave people a very good overview of where the
world stands today, and what the challenge is before us.  So,
unless Diane you want to have any additional ending comments, I
think we're coming to the conclusion of our discussion today.

   SARE:  I would just like to encourage people over this
holiday period, as we're about to enter a new year, which could
be a very different year, to protect your mind and not engage in
degraded cultural activities.  But take advantage of the LaRouche
PAC website, which has phenomenal educational material.  You can
choose to study the Four Laws of Mr. LaRouche; read the papers of
Alexander Hamilton; watch the video on Operation Phoenix — the
reconstruction of Syria.  There's just an abundance of material
here that, if you set your mind to it, to determine that between
now and the beginning of next year, to be a more ennobled human
being, and more able to articulate these profound ideas and
organize your friends and neighbors; then we'll be off to a very
good start.

   DENISTON:  With that, I think we have our mission defined
before us.  We thank you for joining us, and we will be back next
week for the next Friday webcast; and we'll be sure to be
delivering some material for you between now and then.  So, thank
you for joining us.

22. dec., 2016 – Den italienske finansminister Carlo Padoan forsikrede den 21. dec. offentligheden om, at »det italienske banksystem er solidt, selv om der er nogle krisesituationer«; men nu er dette ikke sikkert. Den umiddelbare »krisesituation« er, at man den 23. dec. sandsynligvis vil beslutte at nationalisere Monte dei Paschi di Sienna (MPS) Bank, den tredjestørste i Italien. Bankens meddelelse den 21. dec. om, at den kun havde likviditet tilbage til et par måneder, førte til styrtdyk og suspendering af handel med både bankens aktier og obligationer; og bankens desperate forsøg på at rejse €5,5 mia. i ny kapital synes næsten sikkert at være slået fejl. Både MPS’ bestyrelse og den italienske regering havde planlagt møder til torsdag aften om nationalisering.

Nye elementer forværrer i dag situationen. For det første vil obligationsindehaverne efter al sandsynlighed blive brændt af generelt. De større, institutionelle investorer, der frivilligt har accepteret en »swap« for at rejse kapital, har iflg. rapporter taget en ’hårklipning’ på 20 % i værdien af deres obligationer. Detail-obligationsindehavere, der er almindelige bankindskydere, vil også blive brændt af; en nationaliserings-bailout vil omfatte en bail-in.

For det andet rapporterer både Bloomberg News og Financial Times i dag, at to eller flere andre banker kunne blive nationaliseret umiddelbart efter MPS; og at den italienske regerings nye €20 mia. store bailout-fond igen kan blive forøget. Banco Popolare di Vicenza er en af de banker, rapporten nævner.   

Sluttelig, så handles nogle MPS-obligationer nu til så lidt som 40 cents/dollaren; hvis en nationalisering »afbrænder« obligationsindehaverne med kun 20 % af deres indeståender, kunne den Europæiske Centralbank og/eller den Europæiske Kommission afgøre, at dette er en bailout, hvilket overtræder EU’s regler om bail-in, og kræve, at obligationsindehavernes tab sættes op.

Smittespredning har ramt andre italienske bankaktier og bankobligationer, selv om det hidtil har været i langt mindre målestok end MPS; og den har ramt Spaniens statsobligationer, med en stigning i rentesatsen (1 % på 10-årige obligationer) til følge.     

22. dec., 2016 – Under et interview med Rossiya 24-Tv, opfordrede den russiske FN-ambassadør, Vitaly Churkin, andre lande, der har indflydelse i Syrien, inklusive Saudi-Arabien, til at tilslutte sig de aftaler, der er indgået af Rusland, Iran og Tyrkiet, rapporterede TASS i dag. »Efter min mening er det meget vigtigt, at denne erklæring indeholder en invitation til andre lande, der har indflydelse på jorden, om at tilslutte sig sådanne bestræbelser«, sagde Churkin. »Det forekommer mig, at det vil være vigtigt for Saudi-Arabien at indtage en lignende holdning og arbejde i denne retning.«

I Beijing kondolerede Kinas præsident Xi Jinping Rusland med mordet på den russiske ambassadør til Tyrkiet, Andrej Karlov, og sagde: »Den kinesiske side bekræfter vores hensigt om at udvikle yderligere samarbejde med Rusland og det internationale samfund omkring bekæmpelse af terrorisme, som er i den fælles sikkerheds interesse«, rapporterede TASS i dag.

Ved et trepartsmøde i Moskva den 20. dec., gav Rusland, Tyrkiet og Iran udtryk for deres beredvillighed »til at handle som garanter for en ny aftale om Syrien«, sagde den russiske forsvarsminister Sergej Shoigu, iflg. Gazeta.ru. Shoigu sagde, »eksperter arbejder nu på at færdiggøre teksten til det nye dokument, med titlen, ’Moskva-erklæringen om omgående skridt til fremme af afgørelse af den syriske krise’«. Hvis aftalerne opnås, ville det, iflg. udenrigsminister Sergej Lavrov, »fremme processen for en afgørelse af den syriske krise og skabe favorable betingelser for politiske forhandlinger og levering af humanitær hjælp, og samtidig sikre nultolerance over for terrorister«, rapporterede TASS den 20. dec.

Foto: Den russiske udenrigsminister Sergej Lavrov (midt) var vært for sine iranske og tyrkiske modparter ved et topmøde den 20. dec. i Moskva om Syrien.

17. december, 2016 – Under sin embedsperiodes sidste pressekonference beskyldte præsident Obama Rusland og præsident Putin personligt for at have manipuleret den amerikanske valgkamp med cyber-angreb, og bebudede repressalier – hvoraf nogle ville blive eksplicitte og offentlige, mens andre ville blive af en sådan art, at Rusland ville erkende ophavsmanden. Disse bebudede, hemmelige operationer må give anledning til et globalt alarmberedskab – hvilken form for operationer menes der, droneangreb eller »indirekte skader« af enhver art? Obama vil tydeligvis bruge sin resterende tid i Det Hvide Hus til fordel for en konfrontation med Rusland, en konfrontation, som Trump gennem sine udnævnelser til regeringsposter har signaleret, at han vil stoppe. De neokonservative, til hvilke Obama, gennem sin fortsættelse af Bush’ og Cheneys politik, absolut hører, vil tydeligvis ikke acceptere deres tab af magten.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Foto: Bruno Kahl og kansler Angela Merkel har advaret om virkningen af cyber-angreb i opløbet til næste års valg i Tyskland.