Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 18. november, 2016; International Webcast – Det står nu helt klart, at hele det tidligere regeringssystem, det gamle system, brat og endegyldigt har nået slutningen. Men spørgsmålet lyder stadig: Hvad skal erstatte det? Og dette er langt fra konkret eller afklaret på nuværende tidspunkt. Det lederskab, som LaRouchePAC har ydet, og fortsat yder, udgør den afgørende faktor i dette spørgsmål – både på den nationale og den internationale scene. Det er meget tydeligt, at dynamikken nu er skiftet over mod det, Xi Jinping har anført med den Nye Silkevej og med samarbejdet med den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin omkring skabelsen af en ny, strategisk og økonomisk, international orden; og det er bestemmende for verdensbegivenhederne i øjeblikket, og som går langt ud over noget, der finder sted på den hjemlige front, internt i USA. Spørgsmålet er, hvordan responderer vi til det?
LaRouchePAC fortsætter med at lede; og, som vi diskuterede i mandags, så var dette en meget vigtig uge. Kongressen samledes igen – selv om det kun var for nogle få dage; men, på stedet dér, for at byde medlemmerne af USA’s Kongres velkommen, så snart de vendte tilbage til Washington, var nogle af vore førende aktivister fra Larouche Political Action Committee (LPAC). Vi havde en dag med aktioner på stedet ved Capitol Hill onsdag; og vi mødte ganske afgjort en totalt rystet og langt mere åben situation, end vi har set i de seneste måske 16 år i Washington, D.C. Både det Republikanske lederskab og absolut det Demokratiske lederskab har fået alvorlige tæsk; og de mest mentalt sunde aspekter i begge partier er ved at indse, at tiden er inde til at forlige sig med det. Hvor skal de se hen for lederskab? Til LaRouche Political Action Committee.
Vi vil nu afspille et kort uddrag af en diskussion, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche anførte. Dette er bemærkninger, som hun gav til aktivisterne som en slags marchordre, før de tog til Washington. Hun giver en meget klar gennemgang af præcis den situation, vi er i, og det ansvar, vi har. Efter dette korte klip fortsætter vi diskussionen med nogle meget mere uddybende synspunkter om det, vi nu har været i stand til at opnå, og hvilke udfordringer, vi har foran os.
(For en dansk oversættelse af hele Helgas indslag, se http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=16093)
Friday LaRouche PAC Webcast November 18, 2016
OUR ROLE MUST BE TO SHAPE THE INSTITUTION OF GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES FROM THE VERY HIGHEST LEVEL.
MATTHEW OGDEN: Good evening. It's November 18, 2016. My
name is Matthew Ogden and you're joining us for our weekly
webcast from larouchepac.com. I'm joined in the studio by
Benjamin Deniston, and via video by members of our Policy
Committee: Diane Sare, joining us from New York City; and Kesha
Rogers, joining us from Houston, Texas.
We had the opportunity just now to have a discussion with
both Lyndon and Helga LaRouche, and I think Mr. LaRouche's point
is very clear. It is decisively determined that the entire
reigning former system, the old system, has abruptly and
decisively come to an end. But the question still remains: What
will replace it? And that is far from concrete or finalized at
this point. The leadership that the LaRouche PAC has delivered
and continues to deliver, is the deciding factor in that — both
nationally and on the international stage. It's very clear that
the dynamic is now shifted towards what Xi Jinping has led in
China with the New Silk Road and in collaboration with Russian
President Vladimir Putin in creating a new strategic and economic
international order; and that is what is determining world events
right now, far beyond anything that's happening domestically from
within the borders of the United States. The question is, how do
we respond to that?
The LaRouche PAC continues to lead; and as we discussed on
Monday with the Policy Committee, this was a very important week.
Congress came back into session — albeit for just a couple of
days; but there to greet the members of the United States
Congress as soon as they returned to Washington were some of the
leading activists of the LaRouche Political Action Committee. We
had a day of action on the ground on Capitol Hill on Wednesday;
and we definitely met a completely shaken up and much more open
situation than we have faced in perhaps the last 16 years in
Washington, DC. Both the Republican leadership and absolutely
the Democratic leadership have received a severe drubbing; and
the most sane aspects of both parties are realizing that now is
the time to come to terms with that. Where else can they turn
for leadership? The LaRouche Political Action Committee.
So, what we're going to do right now is play a short excerpt
from a discussion that was led by Helga Zepp-LaRouche. These are
remarks that she delivered to those activists as sort of marching
orders before they went to Washington, DC. I think she gives a
very clear overview of exactly the situation we find ourselves
in, and the responsibilities that we have. Coming out of that
short audio clip, we will continue the discussion with some much
more elaborated views of what we have now been able to
accomplish, and what the challenges still are ahead of us. So,
let me play that clip for you right now:
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE : OK. So, first of
all, I want to say hello to you. Obviously, this is a very
important intervention because the election results in the United
States, which many people did not anticipate, is really part of a
global process. It's not something which is accountable in all
the explanations given by the US media; for the most part, the
cover-up or some phony explanation like it was the FBI who cost
Hillary the election and so forth and so on. What really is
going on strategically is that the masses of the population of
the trans-Atlantic sector in particular — also in some other
parts of the world, but in Europe and the United States in
particular — have really had it with an establishment which has
consistently acted against their interests. People in those
states which are not represented by the anti-establishment, they
know that; because for them, the working and living conditions in
the last decades one can say, but in particular in the last 15
years, have become worse and worse. People have to work more
jobs; they still can't make ends meet. They have many cases
where their sons and sometimes even daughters have gone to Iraq
for five times in a row, to come home to be completely broken.
So, people have experienced that life is just getting worse for
them; and they do not have any hope in the Washington-New York
establishment. You had the same phenomenon leading to the Brexit
vote in Great Britain in June; which also was not just the
refugees and most of the obvious issues — even though they did
play a certain catalyzing role; but it was the same fundamental
sense of injustice. That there is simply no more government
which takes care of the common good. Whatever explanations they
now come up with, this will not go away until the situation is
remedied, and good government is being re-established in the
United States, in Europe, and in other parts of the world.
One immediate next point where the same kind of resentment
probably will show is with the referendum in Italy where on the
4th of December — that is, in 2.5 weeks from now — they will
have a referendum about a change in the constitution which as the
sentiment now goes, will be also a vote against the Renzi
government. Even so, he promised he would resign; now, he
doesn't want to resign. But in any case, this type of a process
will continue until a remedy has been put in.
Now, obviously, the situation is that the Trump victory is
an open question. It's not yet clear what this Presidency will
become; but as Lyndon LaRouche has emphasized emphatically almost
every day since the vote, this is not a local US affair. This is
a global issue; it's a global international question because one
major reason why Trump won the election is because especially in
the last period, he had emphasized that Hillary Clinton would
mean World War III because of her policy concerning Syria. She
demanded the no-fly zone and was proposing a head-on
confrontation with Russia. That was absolutely to the point,
because we were on an absolutely very dangerous road to a
confrontation with Russia and with China.
Trump in the election campaign had said repeatedly that he
would have a different attitude towards Russia; and he said
something more kinetic[?] things against China. But since he has
been elected, he has been on the phone with Putin and Xi Jinping;
and in both cases, said that he would work to improve the
relations between the United States and Russia or respectively
with China. Now that is obviously extremely important; and the
other extremely important question is will he carry through with
his promise on Glass-Steagall? Especially in his speech in
Charlotte, he had reiterated that he would immediately implement
Glass-Steagall. Obviously this is the key, because only if one
stops and terminates the casino economy which is really the cause
for the war, can the situation be brought in shape. Obviously,
all the progressives — Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren; even
Pelosi said that they would already cooperate with Trump if he
would go for this infrastructure job creation Glass-Steagall
economic program.
So, we should give the benefit of the doubt that he really
means it; but we should also be aware that naturally, the entire
Wall Street crowd, the neo-cons in the Republican Party will do
everything possible to not have that. So therefore, we have to
have this intervention to really educate the Congress and the
Senate on what is really at stake. The world is now really
looking, holding their breath; will there be a change in American
policy for the better? Which hopefully it will; but it requires
these measures: Glass-Steagall as an absolute precondition
without which nothing else will work. But that is not enough,
because you are not just talking about banking reform; you are
talking about a completely new paradigm in the economic system.
That has been defined by the Four Laws of Lyn, which everybody
should really make sure that they completely understand when you
are doing this kind of lobbying work. Lyn has been stressing in
the last couple of days, that the key thing is to increase the
productivity of the labor force; and because of neo-liberal
policies of monetarist policies of the last one can really say
decades, this productivity has gone down in the trans-Atlantic
sector below the break-even point. This is why we need a
national bank in the tradition of Alexander Hamilton; we need a
credit policy; we need an international credit system, a new
Bretton Woods system. And you obviously need a "win-win"
cooperation of all nations building the New Silk Road. Also, in
the United States, building the Silk Road to become a World
Land-Bridge.
Now, extremely important is the fourth of the Four Laws,
which basically says that we cannot get an increase in the
productivity of the economy unless you go for a crash program of
fusion power, and you go for a crash program of international
cooperation for space research. Only if you do these kinds of
avant-garde leaps in the productivity — like fusion technology
brings you in a completely economic platform with the fusion
torch. You will have energy security for the whole planet; you
will have raw materials security because you can use any waste
and differentiate out the different isotopes and reconstitute new
raw materials by putting the isotopes together in the way
required. So, it's a gigantic technological leap; and the same
thing goes for space technology. It will have exactly the same
impact as during the Apollo program when every investment in
space technology, in rockets and other new materials, brought 14
cents back from each cent of investment. Everything from
computer chips to Teflon cooking ware to all kinds of benefits
occurred as a byproduct from space research. To get the world
economy out of this present condition — especially in the
trans-Atlantic sector — you need that kind of reorientation
towards the scientific and technological progress, increases in
energy flux density. All of this Green ideology which is really
no development ideology has to be replaced; and the world has to
go back in a direction where the real physical laws of the
physical universe are the criteria for truth, and not some
ideology."
OGDEN: Now, Helga LaRouche also delivered an equally
inspiring, but much more extensive speech at a very important
conference this week that occurred in Peru. This was the 23rd
National Congress of the Association of Economists of Peru, that
was held in conjunction with the APEC meeting which is occurring
over this weekend in Lima, Peru. The title of the conference was
"The Peru-Brazil Bi-Oceanic Train; the Impact on the Economy of
the Amazon Region and the Country". So, this is Peru-Brazil
transcontinental railroad. Helga LaRouche's presentation was the
keynote address; and she delivered it at the opening session. It
was titled, "The New Silk Road Concept; Facing the Collapse of
the World Financial System". This APEC summit which will be
occurring this weekend, will be hosting world leaders including
Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping. There has been a major surge in
interest and engagement between China and these countries of
South America, around the idea of expanding the New Silk Road
into South America. That would also obviously have to include
North America. This is the vision that Helga LaRouche has been
emphasizing, and what she laid out in a very inspiring way in
this speech in Peru; the idea of the New Silk Road Becomes the
World Land-Bridge. The organizers of that conference — this
national congress of economists, the economists' association in
Peru — drafted their own copy of a 60-page pamphlet that they
distributed to all the participants of this conference, that was
based on excerpts from this report by {EIR} — "The New Silk Road
Becomes the World Land-Bridge". It also included a printing of
Lyndon LaRouche's Four New Laws concept. So, this is obviously a
very significant event; and the fact that it's happening in
conjunction with the APEC summit at this moment in history, is
very important. We hope to make the proceedings of that
conference available to viewers of this website.
But what I can say is, we have now set the agenda. What's
happening now is that the world is being forced to respond to the
agenda that has been set over decades — but really in the last
few months — by the LaRouche Movement internationally. You can
see this by the flurry of coverage of Glass-Steagall inside the
United States, and the fact that there's open discussion
including from the new leadership of the Democratic Party:
Warren, Sanders, Keith Ellison, and others. Now is the time to
put Glass-Steagall on the table and get out in front of this.
But the other element of this is the discussion of so-called
"infrastructure". Now infrastructure can mean a lot of different
things, and I'm sure that people watched the victory speech by
President-elect Trump where he talked about building rail,
building bridges, building airports, and so forth.
The latest development in that discussion is an article that
is featured on the front page of the {New York Times} today,
called "Trump-size Idea for a New President; Build Something
Inspiring". Good headline, and the article starts off pretty
inspiringly; it says the only way that you're going to be able to
unify a bitterly divided America, is by building great
infrastructure projects. Not just painting rusty bridges, or
laying a few miles of asphalt, but "Build something
awe-inspiring. Something Americans can be proud of. Something
that will repay its investment many times over for generations to
come. Build the modern-day equivalent of the Golden Gate Bridge,
the Hoover Dam, the Lincoln Tunnel " All of which were built by
Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal administration. Then the
article does also say, "Can anybody remember anything that came
out of Obama's $800 billion [stimulus package]? I don't think
so." So, this article usefully cites what Franklin Roosevelt did
with the PWA, the WPA: 700 miles of airport runways; 650,000
miles or rail; 78,000 bridges; 125,000 military and civilian
buildings, [including] 40,000 schools. This is massive. The
article also usefully says the idea that any infrastructure
project today could pay for itself through user fees is a
ridiculous prospect. But the alternative that this article poses
is just as bad; saying, the way to do it is for government to
borrow most of the money from investors.
So, I think this demonstrates that we have a lot of work to
do with putting the full concept of Lyndon LaRouche's Four Laws
on the table. Now, this article cites a few useful
infrastructure projects: a new rail tunnel under the Hudson
River; California high-speed rail; a Northeast mag-lev corridor;
a Miami sea wall; so forth and so on. But if you look at the
vision that's presented in this pamphlet — "The United States
Joins the New Silk Road: a Hamiltonian Vision for an Economic
Renaissance" — with the Bering Strait tunnel rail project to
connect Eurasia with the North and South American mega-continent.
If you look at the amount of high-speed rail, if you look at the
water management programs; and most of all, if you look at what
China has been able to accomplish in just the last few years,
you'll see that everything that is cited in this article
absolutely pales in comparison.
And, there are some much deeper scientific points that have
got to be addressed. 1. The understanding of what Alexander
Hamilton actually did; and 2. What Lyndon LaRouche's science of
economics defines as real productivity from the standpoint of
increases in energy flux density. So, I think that sets up the
discussion that we can have here right now. Ben, Diane, Kesha,
and I think we should maybe expand from there.
BENJAMIN DENISTON: I think it's very important that Mr.
LaRouche, increasingly in the last couple of months, has said
over and over again, "Productivity; productivity; productivity."
We have to start thinking about not just providing jobs, not just
providing needed infrastructure projects. I think it's worth
making a distinction between on the one side things that are just
needed to maintain what we have. We have a massive deficit just
to maintain the standard — I think the appropriate term is
"platform" as Mr. LaRouche had introduced a couple of years back
— about how to think about infrastructure and the real
development of a national territory in a scientific way. You
have a certain platform of activity, a standard of activity level
that maintains a specific level of existence for your society;
directly connected to the potential relative population density
of your society. We should always be looking to push to higher
and higher platforms; higher levels of activity. Our current
platform is degraded; much of the infrastructure we live upon was
built largely under Franklin Roosevelt and a few spurts of
activity following him on that. So on the hand, yeah, we need to
rebuild some of these things. Our existing dam systems,
transport systems, even soft infrastructure like health care
systems are in need of repair. But we also need to push to a
higher level; we need to go to a new platform which has higher
degrees of productivity per capita. Higher degrees of ability to
support a larger population in new area, new territories of the
country; increase the productivity of existing territories, and
that begins to create real growth. You're not going to get real
growth just by rebuilding what you have; although you need to do
that, because we've been letting this decay for decades now.
But you also need to create real economic value, real
economic growth. And that goes to this issue of, are you
increasing the productive powers of your labor force? Are you
increasing the ability of your productive sector to produce the
physical goods needed to support society more efficiently and at
higher qualities with less physical input per capita, you could
say? Can you measure those kinds of steps of growth? Are you
taking that metric into account? That's critical right now; and
it's worth recognizing that we've been living in a
post-industrial policy for many years now. This whole idea of
the services economy, that somehow we can support ourselves by
creating jobs in services; where we take turns washing each
other's laundry. I make you a cup of coffee; you make me a
hamburger. That doesn't actually create qualitative changes in
the ability of society to sustain more people at higher living
standards. You're just trading service work back and forth.
So in all of this, we need to have a serious re-focussing on
what are the essential principles of human economic growth? And
that's why Mr. LaRouche's Four Laws in totality is so crucial.
That's why I thought it was very good in Mrs. LaRouche's
orientation into our deployment into DC, she made a very clear
point on Mr. LaRouche's fourth law — this fusion driver program.
These are the kinds of things that you might employ a relatively
small part of the population even in that specific endeavor; but
you're pushing the frontiers of engineering capabilities,
scientific capabilities. That actually has the most important
radiating effect on the entirety of the economy, the entirety of
the productive capabilities of the labor force.
You absolutely need this science driver, this
high-technology, high capital-intensity driver program to really
push the whole program forward. The depth of the crisis that
we've gone into just makes it that much more important that we
have that element up there, front and center. Since Mr. LaRouche
put out this Four Laws document, he has also obviously been
increasingly focussed on the role of space in that focus, in that
goal. That is another absolutely critical element of this. It
was not an incomprehensible or miraculous thing that John F
Kennedy's Apollo program had such a massive spin-off effect in
terms of payback to the US economy from the investments that were
made. The studies not that long after the project finished, were
already showing a 14-1 payback in terms of the totality of
increases of productivity of industries that were not part of the
space program; but acquired technologies. Precision engineering
capabilities; high-precision control systems for production;
various things that were created out of necessity to make this
super-advanced Moon mission work. But that increased the ability
of mankind generally to be more productive in his production
capabilities. That was then able to be applied throughout the
economy generally.
So, those are the kinds of things that we absolutely need
right now; not just repairing our existing degraded
infrastructure. We're going to have to do that, sure; but how do
you create the growth where you can afford to do that, and afford
to make completely new investments? Part of this infrastructure
discussion should be opening up new territories of the country.
A major part of this pamphlet that we put out, and a huge part of
Mrs. LaRouche's focus, has been new cities. You've got huge
territories in the United States that are not developed. Let's
develop the nation; let's expand new territories; let's create
huge areas of new growth. That's the kind of stuff that's going
to drive the whole process forward. We're in a real need for
some precise, clear, authoritative leadership on these issues,
because these things are not understood. We're not just going
into this in a vacuum; we have a completely broken down system;
not just in the financial sector, but in the physical economy,
too. So we need clear, precise, immediate action. We don't have
years for somebody to figure this thing out over time; people's
lives are on the line right now in terms of what's needed to turn
the US economy around.
DIANE SARE: Well, I'd like to just put this in a context;
because we're not having a discussion here in the abstract. And
I want to go back to what Mr. LaRouche did in the 1970s with the
creation of the Fusion Energy Foundation, and his role in being
brought into a team to create a Presidency. I want to be very
clear with the people watching this that what we are doing is not
an academic discussion of nice things that we, sitting in a
little corner, want to do. Mr. LaRouche — as you heard from
what Ben laid out — had a very clear conception of the necessity
of fusion energy at that time. Also, people remember the Jimmy
Carter Presidency; small is beautiful. I think we were talking
about global cooling back then, and now it's global warming.
[One sentence paraphrase because of bad audio] What we needed to
do, in collaboration with Edward Teller, was to take the Mutually
Assured Destruction doctrine off the table. The only deterrent
to a nuclear war between the US and the Soviet Union was who
could blow up the world more times over. What happened was, in
the process of this, Ronald Reagan as a candidate and then as
President, was recruited to this idea; and I think we've been
told there a number of things which Mr. LaRouche was working on
with the Reagan administration. Not the least of which was the
SDI, which the Soviets rejected and Reagan announced, which led
in a not-so-indirect way to the Berlin Wall coming down. Also,
there was discussion of a meeting between President Reagan and
Indira Gandhi, former prime minister of India who had been leader
of the Non-Aligned Movement. Reagan, as people recall, was shot
in '82; Indira Gandhi was assassinated; Mr. LaRouche was put in
prison. I'm not saying that to say that we're worried about it;
there's all kinds of questions of security and safety. But my
point is that LaRouche personally has played a major, important
role in shaping the institution of the Presidency; and his
incarceration was timed for when we had earlier another such
great opportunity, which was when the Soviet system collapsed
economically as he warned it would. He was in prison, and his
wife Helga Zepp-LaRouche put on the table with him the Productive
Triangle and so on. We know what happened; that was sabotaged by
a series of wars. The Balkans; the first Iraq War; we later had
9/11 and so on.
What we are doing today is to shape the American [nation] in
participation with what is a New Paradigm; which LaRouche and his
wife personally have been very much involved in creating. Two
years ago, Mr. LaRouche announced that we should move the center
of our American operations to New York City; which was done. In
the last three or four months, we have begun circulation of a
newspaper appropriately titled {The Hamiltonian}. I'll just say
I found it ironic that the {New York Times} today has these
headlines about infrastructure. They also have articles about
how school children in Estonia and Latvia were terrified that
Hillary Clinton was going to drag them into the middle ground of
a war between NATO and Russia. It's very interesting.
The big title on {The Hamiltonian} this week is "We Are
Facing a New Epoch for Mankind"; the subtitle is "The New York
Times Has Become Irrelevant". So, they may be scrambling to make
themselves relevant. But what you also see, is we have printed
now, four weeks in a row, Mr. LaRouche's Four Laws. They have no
excuse to be so idiotic on their proposals; both for how you fund
this, and how they're thinking about it, which is all domestic.
The world now, what Mrs. LaRouche described in her speech in
Peru, was that Xi Jinping made his announcement of this in
September of 2013. In those three years, he travelled to 37
nations; he made bilateral agreements with 56 nations; 39 new
cargo routes have been opened. These are major international
transportation corridors; 98 airports. The magnitude of this
completely boggles the mind. It really is in keeping with what
Hamilton would have envisioned; what you saw with Henry Carey, or
John Quincy Adams in terms of their role in the United States.
And I would say geographically, if you could step away, if you
could get on a space ship and look at the Earth from a distance;
or just take out a globe and look at what the United States is,
where we are between the Atlantic and the Pacific. What North
America is, and South America now getting involved, we have a
great opportunity before us to play an absolutely strategic role
in this. Our intent is to bring this about, which is why it's so
crucial that everybody watching this, makes it a point to master
the principles in Mr. LaRouche's Four Laws. Particularly the
fourth principle, and also particularly the principle of credit;
which is in a sense tied to the increase of productivity. We're
not going to fund so-called infrastructure by tolls; we're not
going to build a new bridge, a tunnel under the Hudson and charge
people a toll and that's going to pay for it. No, if your
population is able to produce orders of magnitude more than it is
currently producing, that is a net increase in the wealth of the
nation. It has nothing to do with tolls, or tickets for public
transportation; which are all sort of a form of tax farming and
looting.
I do want to underscore: 1. The role of Lyndon LaRouche in
shaping the Presidency; 2. That this is going to occur from
Manhattan; the entire transition seems to be being organized from
Trump Towers on Fifth Avenue in New York City. It is incumbent
on all of us to raise this to the appropriate level of discussion
and to not tolerate anything smaller.
KESHA ROGERS: Just to follow up on that, another important
aspect of the fight waged by Mr. LaRouche and his wife Helga,
going back to the 1970s around the fight that you just mentioned,
Diane, of the Fusion Energy Foundation, was the fight against
this apparatus of a zero-growth or no-growth culture. He was
very instrumental with Mrs. LaRouche and also their collaboration
with space pioneer Krafft Ehricke — who we've mentioned a lot —
on taking on this degeneracy of the attack on population
reduction that was being promoted and continues to be promoted to
this day. Many people may remember that there was a book put out
in the 1970s by two men, Dennis Meadows and Jay Forrester. Jay
Forrester just died recently at 98 years old. He was
instrumental in putting out the computer models which indicated
that there was a certain relationship between the limited
resources on Earth and the production of food to how many people
you can sustain on Earth and so forth. This is something that
Mr. LaRouche has taken directly in terms of this is an attack on
the human identity, an attack on the real productivity based on
the creative potential of the human mind and LaRouche's model has
been brought up on the increasing of the energy flux density of
your economy per capita, and per land area.
I think it's really important right now to look at the fact
that Mr. LaRouche sees this fight as a complete shift in the
global direction of mankind; unifying mankind on a level that
nations have never been unified on before. I thought it was
important that yesterday, we had a discussion with Mr. LaRouche
— Ben, myself, and others from the leadership team; and one
thing that he brought up was the integration of the space program
and the development of space research, space science, and the
exploration of space to Classical music — which we're really
defining in the development of our Manhattan Project, which is
really shaping our organization across the country and
internationally. You have seen a culture which is completely
degenerated under the Bush-Obama Presidencies. You take the
inspiration, the culture which shaped the identity of the fight
and the vision that led President John F Kennedy to implement the
space program in the way he did. The fact that he brought in
people like Pablo Casals into the White House; that this
classical identity and classical culture was very instrumental
throughout the space program, by people such as space pioneer
[Werner] von Braun and various others working with him. Some of
these scientists who came with von Braun, like Krafft Ehricke and
others, from Germany; who helped to shape the US space program.
It's interesting; you compare that to what you've seen under
Bush. Who did he bring into the White House during his
inauguration? I think it was Ozzy Osbourne; rock music, heavy
metal. Then you had Obama bringing in Beyoncé, not to mention
the other very degenerate cultural figures that he has brought
in. So, I think what Mr. LaRouche is saying around this is
extremely important.
I think it's also important to look at the space program and
the integration of the classical culture as the expression of a
higher identity of what it means to be human, and the inspiration
and optimism that's been missing from the population. There's a
few more things we can say on this; I think it's also important
to recognize the importance internationally of what China is
doing. We can say more on this later, but the fact that when you
talk about inspiration and optimism, we have now the Shenzhou 11
space crew, the crew in China who just docked 33 days ago to the
Tiangong 2, the space lab for China. They're doing experiments
that are quite phenomenal; but what they're really expressing —
they're going to continue doing these experiments in space. One
of the things we saw back in 2013, when you had the astronauts
docking the first space lab for China, videoing this and beaming
it back to Earth; and 60 million children watching it. They're
going to do something similar for this space experiment. This is
something that we have to go back to right now; the space program
is not just some abstract thing on the side for gurus who like
it. We have to make it part of the culture; we have to make it
something that inspires and uplifts the population again, but is
instrumental in the development of the increases of the
productivity of society and increases in the platform. So that
means that the population has to come to a higher level of
understanding of their identity; and the way to do that is really
an integration of culture, as Mr. LaRouche has made clear.
OGDEN: One thing you brought up, and I thought it was good
to go back to; the conjunction of Kennedy's space program, the
kind of inspiration and culture needed. This was something very
conscious to the Kennedy administration; not only did they bring
Pablo Casals to the White House, but this was part of a broader
discussion between John F Kennedy, Jackie Kennedy, and Pierre
Salinger, who was the Press Secretary. But before he became
Kennedy's Press Secretary, had been a child prodigy; had been a
concert pianist, a composer. He had discussions with Jackie
Kennedy which he records in his book, where Jackie Kennedy said
the role of the White House should be to set a tone for the arts
which will encourage great culture, classical culture around the
country. And we should exhibit the finest of culture, of art; we
should set the standard which everybody else can then rise to
that level.
It is good that you brought up, Kesha, in conjunction has
happened politically, where New York City has definitely become
the center of gravity of the political universe of the United
States. It's not just Trump; Clinton was also New York City. It
was a strategic decision to center a very active organization in
New York; but that entire process has also happened in parallel
with what Diane has been leading there with this revival of
Classical music and culture. That's very important, even from
the standpoint of what is our idea of man; and the dignity of
human beings. Yes, granted, there were dark tones during this
Presidential campaign which is not acceptable. But the idea of
the dignity of man, and the creativity of the entire human
species is what is embodied in the greatest of Classical music.
It's one thing to point actually, Diane; that first Messiah
concert which launched the New York City renaissance project,
happened in the context of this racial tension that was heating
up in New York at that time. So, this still is a very important
aspect of addressing that.
SARE: I just wanted to add one quick thing on that note;
which is a musical question actually, if you think about a
symphony orchestra or a chorus and the role that individuals play
as part of that body; where the whole is definitely greater than
the sum of its parts. Were we to launch a transformation of
society along the lines of what Mrs. LaRouche outlined in Peru;
that is, the US to become integrated in part of the Belt and Road
program, then I think we would quickly discover that we actually
don't have enough people in this country. So that all the things
that people are afraid about, about who's going to be excluded,
who's going to be deported, etc.; you will find yourself looking
at your fellow human beings with new eyes because of the creative
potential of each individual which will be necessary to transform
the nation and the world in the immediate future.
OGDEN: Ben was just referencing some of Mr. LaRouche's
early writings on economics which really get to the question of
how do you measure productivity. This is not just raw labor
power; this is not just the number of jobs. But it is the
question of generation upon generation, can you produce more than
is consumed? But can you do it in a way where the power of the
human species actually is transformed almost as a species
characteristic, step by step? I've found it very inspiring that
during those opening remarks that we played by Helga, she went
back to the discussion of what we used to call the isotope
economy. What power can mankind wield if we penetrate not just
to the molecular level, but to the very atomic level? Fission
power is breaking apart the atom; fusion is an entirely different
matter, where you actually have the ability to create new
elements. You have the ability to create new isotopes of any
given elements, which have very differing characteristics. It's
the promise of Promethean fire, which mankind has been working
towards over millennia; but we have not yet achieved. This is an
inspiring subject, but the ability of mankind to wield power at
the very basic level of the fabric of matter; that's an entirely
new power.
DENISTON: Yeah, and it's a huge subject that could be
probably taken up in much more detail. It really goes to the
question of what is a resource? What do we consider as a
resource; and how that continually changes as mankind develops.
Once you go to this level of an isotope conception of resources,
we don't use up isotopes. When you use petroleum or wood,
anything you use — unless you're actually doing fission and
fusion, when the total amount of matter you're working with is
very small — you're not actually destroying the elements
themselves. You might be acting on a state of organization
that's been created. We might be looking for certain states of
organization to utilize the properties of that as a resource at a
certain point. But I think this goes right to the issue of the
isotope economy, the intimate connection with energy flux density
where we could begin to create those states of organization
ourselves; or work with lower states of quality of concentrations
of ores and various things. Where things that were not
economical before to do, or not even possible to do before; if
you get a higher energy flux density, a higher energy throughput,
you can begin to manage in a completely new way. Separating the
quality of resource elements that we want; organizing them in new
ways.
Helga mentioned this very exciting prospect that's been
talked about to some degree for years of this fusion torch idea.
That you could take stuff that now is just trash, trash is
fundamentally everything we use; that's why it's our trash. It
was something that we were using that was useful to us. Now, we
might have degraded it in some way and put it in a landfill; but
the fundamental constituents of what made it useful are still
there. So, it's not inconceivable to think of mankind
progressing to a point where we could reprocess even these
landfills. That might be a little ways away; there will be some
steps along the way to get there. But those are the kinds of
complete transformations in what mankind can do to recreate the
cycles of productivity that support, again, larger populations at
higher living standards; and really going in the opposite
direction than we've been going in for decades.
Right now, a family needs to work three or four jobs just to
not get by month-to-month, and not be able to afford health care,
not be able to afford education. We need a society where one job
can sustain a significantly sized family and provide these kinds
of benefits — higher education, health care, and have free time
for arts, for recreation, for developing the cultural mental
powers of your family and yourself. How you're going to get to
that point is going at these issues we're talking about here, of
actually increasing the productivity of the labor force as a
whole; the productive powers of the labor force as a whole.
Pushing these kinds of science driver, technology driver programs,
that make these kinds of breakthroughs.
Mr. LaRouche's point on this as a new focus, that he's put on
this in the recent period, is really critical. We got to raise
this discussion to not just jobs, but productivity. What's your
ability to produce things? If we're serious about turning the
economy around. It's kind of been referenced here and there, but
we have allies in doing that. It's not just going to be
completely on our own shoulders. We have to decide to do it, but
China has said, "Hey, United States! If you want to quit this
geopolitical, 19th Century crazy game and get to some serious
discussion about creating a future for mankind, that's what we're
doing. So, if you want to work with us, we'd be happy to
cooperate with you in a serious, honest investment and
development for our nations." Many other nations are rallying
around China in their effort to do that; so that's there as a
critical support point, if the United States makes this shift.
These are the critical issues that we've got to put on the table
and fight out.
And again, Mr. LaRouche's Four Laws, as he said, is a
central organizing document around that whole perspective.
ROGERS: Yeah, it's also important to note that as Mr.
LaRouche said, in the calling for the implementation and
enactment of the Four Laws that he's put on the table as an
urgent necessity, Glass-Steagall being the first and urgently
needed measure, is not an option or a compromise with the Wall
Street bankers. He indicated that it has to be the Franklin
Roosevelt; and it can't be a watered-down Dodd-Frank compromise
or anything of that nature. There's only one way you're going to
wipe out this casino economy, Wall Street speculation; and I
think that goes the same for the measures needed with the
development of the types of density and increase in energy source
and fusion economy as Mr. LaRouche is calling for. There's a lot
of compromise out there about that, too. "Fusion is a long way
away; it's never going to happen. The politicians aren't going
to let it happen." All of this stuff.
I attended a space conference this week; and one of the
things that was being promoted in terms of deep space exploration
was solar-electric power. "Yes, we agree; nuclear, increase in
fusion sources is most important, but it's not practical. So,
we're going to go with this." Or, "We're going to push this,
because it's probably something we can get through Congress."
That's the most insane thing you can think of. When they talked
about to carry cargo into space would be 2-3 years, is that real
productivity? How are you going to advance mankind's exploration
into space and the ability to actually go out to a Moon mission
as a base? And a Mars mission? Also, just increasing what Ben
was just discussing in terms of our ability to increase our
resources here on Earth. The mining of Helium-3 on the Moon and
various other resources, that we've talked about.
Once again, the point was, a lot of people want to
compromise on these things. There cannot be compromise because
there is a global shift underway; and that global shift is
requiring an increase in the highest levels of scientific
development that has to be implemented immediately. This is why
Mr. LaRouche's fourth law in terms of fusion driver program, is
something that — just like Glass-Steagall — cannot be
compromised on; and is absolutely fundamental for pushing forth
the breakthroughs which are necessary.
OGDEN: Well, that was Helga LaRouche's point during the
opening segment that we played today; that it is incumbent on all
the activists, all the viewers of this broadcast, to master the
contents of Mr. LaRouche's Four Laws document. This might seem
like a short document, but it's a very dense document; and a lot
of the subjects that Ben has brought up here today in terms of
the definition of economic productivity and what the nature of
mankind is. Kesha, what you were saying; there really are no
limits to growth. This is not some kind of thing, where when we
reach our carrying capacity, that will be it. It's mankind
transforming its own species; transforming the universe, and
transforming our relationship to the universe. That's what's
addressed in this policy document by Lyndon LaRouche. You have
to set the bar that high; it cannot be any lower than that level
from which you're going to effect the kind of revolution in
policy that's necessary for the entire planet at this time.
So, we have a lot of work to do. The Congress was only in
session for a day and a half this week. But what that means, is
that they are back in their districts; and I'm telling you, it's
not going to be like business as usual. This is not what the
conditions were before this election. It's all the more
important to think from the standpoint of what Diane was
mentioning in the beginning of the show: Our role is — and has
always been — to shape the institution of government of the
United States from the very highest level. This is not coming in
from the outside; this is not a voice calling in the darkness.
This is working with the leadership of the nations of the planet
and creating the dynamic that you now see taking over. This has
been decades in the making; but I can guarantee you, Lyndon and
Helga LaRouche have played a role that has been central to this
reality now coming into being. I'm talking about the New Silk
Road; I'm talking about this trilateral relationship between
Russia, China, and India, creating a new dynamic on the Eurasian
continent. Everything that's happening in South America right
now is something that Lyndon LaRouche was personally involved in
over decades; and now South America coming into the New Silk Road
and joining this new World Land-Bridge is something that is very
real.
Nothing is determined; but our role is to continue that
fight inside the United States, and to make this a reality —
"The United States {Joins} the New Silk Road". We put it in the
present tense for a reason.
So, I'd invite Diane, Kesha, if there's anything concluding
that you'd like to say before we close out the show?
SARE: I think one great benefit of launching this recovery
and increasing the productivity is all the states which just
voted to legalize marijuana, will have second thoughts about
that.
DENISTON: We want high productivity, and it doesn't mean
that.
OGDEN: You'll turn out like Gary Johnson and have an
"Aleppo moment".
OK. We'll take that as a concluding point here. Please stay
tuned. We will make the full speech that Helga delivered in Peru
available. The audio at least, or maybe the video. There was
also a very productive dialogue that occurred with the
participants of that meeting with Helga, following her keynote
speech. So, that's an important thing to stay tuned for. Also,
we will be producing a feature video — about 10 or 15 minutes in
length — on the content of the Four New Laws. That fleshes out
some of the Hamiltonian aspect of that; and it's an educational
tool to teach yourself and to teach everybody else real
economics. So stay tuned for that; that will be coming to the
website soon.
Thank you for watching; please subscribe to our YouTube
channel and our daily email updates. All of the information is
available in the description of this video available below the
video in the YouTube player. Thank you and we'll talk to you
soon. Stay tuned.