Xi Jinping har, i alle sine skrifter, i alle sine taler, understreget, at dette »fællesskab for menneskehedens fælles fremtid« er baseret på total respekt for det andets lands suverænitet, total respekt for den andens samfundssystem, og der kommer ingen bestræbelse på at påtvinge noget andet land den kinesiske model. Det er ganske enkelt, at Kina har tilbudt især udviklingslandene at hjælpe dem til at overvinde deres underudvikling. Det er et win-win-samarbejde, hvilket er grunden til, at 140 lande i mellemtiden samarbejder med dette, for det er naturligvis i Kinas interesse – for det er en stor befolkning, et stort land, en meget rig kultur, 5.000 års meget rig kulturtradition, så det er et af verdens store lande, og måske endda det vigtigste, i betragtning af dets befolknings størrelse.

Men de påtvinger ikke nogen det, de anser for at være »kinesiske karaktertræk« – helt forskelligt fra de neokonservative og de neoliberale, der havde regimeskifte, ’farvede revolutioner’, eksport af ’demokrati’ og det, de kalder »menneskerettigheder«. Folk bør virkelig ikke være fordomsfulde, men bør se på det med friske øjne, selv læse Xi Jinpings taler. …

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Schlanger: Lad os begynde med betydningen af samtalen mellem Trump og Putin, Helga.

Zepp-LaRouche: Dette var en fremragende udmanøvrering af denne britiske operation, for netop, som Russiagate var forsvundet i USA eller næsten kollapset og faktisk vendte sig mod britisk efterretnings rolle i hele denne affære, lancerede den britiske Theresa May denne absolut utrolige provokation mod Rusland. Det var et klart forsøg på at tvinge præsident Trump hen i et hjørne, hvor han ikke ville vove at forsøge at opfylde sit løfte om at forbedre relationerne med Rusland. Så, ved at lykønske Putin med genvalget til endnu seks år, og så have meget vigtige diskussioner om de virkelige udfordringer i verden, nemlig strategisk stabilitet, at forhindre et våbenkapløb; Syrien, Ukraine, Koreakrisen, etablerede de to præsidenter absolut en direkte forbindelse og fik den britiske bestræbelse til at se ud som det, den er, nemlig en absolut sindssyg provokation.    

Engelsk udskift:

Schiller Institute New Paradigm Webcast, March 22 2018
With Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Desperation of British Imperial Elites Forces Them To Make a Big
Blunder

HARLEY SCHLANGER:  Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger: Welcome to
this week’s Schiller Institute international webcast, featuring
our founder and President Helga Zepp-LaRouche.
In the last days the British have been in an open assault
against Russia and Russian President Putin, using the Skripal
case as the basis for that, with Theresa May going completely
wild in trying to build a unified front against Russia, and
implicitly, against President Trump’s efforts to establish
cooperative relationships between the United States and Russia.
In the last days, this was completely outflanked by a call made
between President Trump and Vladimir Putin.  So we have lots to
cover today, but I’d like to start there, with the significance
of the Trump-Putin discussion, Helga.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think this was a brilliant
outflanking of this British operation, because, just as
Russiagate had vanished in the United States, or almost
collapsed, and actually turned against the role of the British
intelligence in this whole thing, this is the moment when Theresa
May launched this absolutely incredible provocation against
Russia.  And this was a clear effort to basically push President
Trump into a corner, where he would not dare to try to make good
on his promise to improve relations with Russia.
So by congratulating Putin for his reelection for another
six years, and then having very, very important discussions about
the issues which are the real challenges in the world, namely,
strategic stability, prevention of the arms race, Syria, Ukraine,
the Korea crisis, I think the two Presidents established
absolutely a direct connection and it makes the British effort
really look rather what it is, namely, an absolutely insane
provocation.
Now, I think it’s very important that in that same phone
call, President Trump not only congratulated Putin for his
reelection, but he also was very positive on the fact that
President Xi Jinping, that the limit to his terms was eliminated,
so he can stay on in these crucial years ahead.  And he said this
is a very good thing, because President Xi Jinping has provided
very, very good leadership.
I think the geopolitical faction is absolutely going
bananas, and that is reflected in really hysterical media
coverage about this, but I think it’s a good thing.  And the fact
that there is a relationship and a dialogue among the Presidents
of the three most important countries on the planet — the United
States, Russia, and China — everybody who loves peace and who is
not a moron should be happy about it.  But if you contrast that
with rather unbelievable warmongering of Stoltenberg, the head of
NATO, for example — I mean, this guy, can you imagine he said,
because there was this poison attack on Skripal, a former double
agent, that means the likelihood that Russia is dropping nuclear
bombs — this is {really} crazy.
The war faction, they have gone beyond all reason, and
Merkel, the German Chancellor, when she went to Poland, even went
so far as to say that Russia has to prove that they didn’t do it!
Can you imagine this?  I mean, there is such a thing in
international law as {in dubio pro reo}, which means “in doubt
for the accused,” and that the accuser has to provide the
evidence and not the accused, and that’s exactly what the Russian
Foreign Minister Lavrov said.  And he used that occasion to say
that Merkel’s behavior, unfortunately, points in the direction
that the European leaders are not coming back to reason.
So I think, nothing can be expected from the Europeans at
this point.  The British are on a rampage; Merkel and Macron, for
their own reasons, backed this up completely, and therefore I
think it’s very, very good that President Trump cut through all
of this and established direct contact with Putin. {And} they
announced that they will have a summit fairly soon between the
two of them, Putin and Trump. And Serbia already offered Belgrade
as a neutral place for the two to meet.  So I think this is a
very, very good sign.

SCHLANGER:  And while this discussion has been going on,
there have been a number of other discussions that I think are
quite significant between the U.S. and Russian military,
political leaders, a briefing at the Russian Foreign Ministry; it
does appear as though the Trump administration and the Putin
administration see this as an opportunity for outflanking it.  Is
that your assessment?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yes.  Because, as you said, there were all
kinds of other diplomatic initiatives.  The two military chiefs
of staff communicated, then there was a meeting between the
Russian Ambassador Anatoly Antonov and Senator Rand Paul, which
is very important, because in the midst of all of this
demonization, almost nobody dared to speak with the Russian
Ambassador, like what happened to Sessions.  So, the two of them,
Antonov and Rand Paul also agreed to reestablish U.S.-Russian
inter-parliamentarian dialogue.
So every effort to reestablish dialogue and trust building,
confidence building, is extremely welcome, because, as it has
been developing — in the ’60s and ’70s you had the idea of an
East policy, of rapprochement through cooperation, détente,
trying to have a good-neighbor relationship in Europe, and all of
that with, really, starting with PNAC, the Project for a New
American Century, with the neo-cons when the Soviet Union
collapsed, that basically led to a complete build-up of a Cold
War mentality, NATO expansion, regime change, interventionist
wars, and this has poisoned the atmosphere so much that you can
really ask yourself, what was the purpose —  or what {is} the
purpose of that?  What is the purpose, when the British are
trying to build such a war-like enemy image of Russia?  I mean,
there are some few, very lonely voices who share our view, that
once you build up such an enemy image, and you poison the
atmosphere, you completely make wild accusations, I mean, this is
the kind of atmosphere in which things can go very quickly very
wrong.  And that would be devastating.
Now, in this context, it’s also noteworthy that there was a
Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, where the commander of
the Strategic Command of the United States, General Hyten, was
asked:  Does the United States at this point have any defense
against the kind of weapons systems which were announced by
President Putin on March 1? And he said, no.  Then his answer was
to say, therefore, the use of low-yield nuclear weapons should be
considered more strongly, which is in the new nuclear doctrine of
the United States.  And he was immediately refuted by a
Democratic Senator who said, nobody should think that such
so-called “low-yield nuclear weapons” use cannot immediately lead
to an all-out nuclear war.
So people should not be blind in repeating this Cold War
demonization against Russia, and in a certain sense against
[China], because this is {really} dangerous.  It’s very
dangerous.  And you have the distinct feeling that with the
exception as such people as President Trump and a few others,
that the present crop of politicians in leading positions have
been so self-brainwashed and so incapable of strategic thinking,
or even thinking of the consequences of what they’re saying and
doing, that they are not capable to see the cause and effect of
their warmongering.  And I think we need a real discussion that
what is needed is cooperation, confidence-building, dialogue,
cooperation on economic projects, cooperation in space, which was
also mentioned in this context, as a positive step.  But we have
to have a debate that this kind of confrontation should stop, and
we should support President Trump when he is trying to mend
fences with Russia and China, and not attack him.

SCHLANGER:  And there is a counterattack against May from
within the United Kingdom, from Jeremy Corbyn, even from some of
the people in the chemical weapons section of British
intelligence.  Will this backfire, this whole effort to turn this
against Russia?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Well, I think it shows like never before,
the role of the British, and I think that’s a useful thing.
Because those among our audience who know the LaRouche movement
for a longer time, will remember that we were, and especially my
husband, was always attacked for his having pointed to the role
of the British.  And it was the British Empire — which still
exists, not in the old form, but it exists in the from of the
leading financial institutions, and their whole system of private
security firms, and the whole central bank/insurance company
system.  The trans-Atlantic financial structure, is the present
form of the British Empire, and my husband always pointed to the
fact that it is that which is corrupting the United States, and
running much of the dope traffic.  And he always was accused that
said, the British monarchy is behind all of this.  Now, anybody
who looks at the present manipulation of the situation, can see
very clearly the role of the British, the role of Boris Johnson,
the role of Theresa May who are just the instruments of this.
But I think this is very useful, because the real United
States after all made an American Revolution and War of
Independence against this British Empire, and if you look at the
history, that same British Empire never gave up the idea of
reconquering the United States, and finally they succeeded to
establish the “special relationship” between the United States
and Great Britain to run the world as a unipolar world.  And if
President Trump breaks out of that, — and that was the real
reason for the attacks on him — and establishes a direct
communication with Russia and China, then that’s the end of this
kind of geopolitical manipulation, of divide and conquer of the
world. And that is a very good thing. And I think that should
happen, right now.

SCHLANGER: Well, when we talk about backfiring, this calls
to mind something you often bring up, Schiller’s idea of the
“Ibykus principle.”  We see it also with Russiagate, in the
firing of [FBI Deputy Director Andrew] McCabe in the last days;
the focus now on [former CIA Director] John Brennan,  — there
are a whole series of articles attacking John Brennan, who’s
coming out openly saying, Trump is crazy, he has to be removed.
And then, there’s a whole story that the attempt to ensnare Trump
in this Cambridge Analytica, and there’s a whole different story
that’s now coming out on this.  This is the Ibykus principle,
isn’t it?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yes.  And it’s also very useful, because we
always warned against the addiction of young people to the
so-called “social media,” where real life, real friendships, real
studying, real studying, were replaced by this almost autistic
dependency on the so-called social media, which is a virtual
reality.  So-called “friends” are not friends — and now it turns
out that this whole thing was just a commercial operation to
collect private data, sell them for commercial and other
interests.  And I think it’s a very useful think.
Interesting in this context is also a comment by Edward
Snowden, who said:  A firm which collects and sells private data
should be rightly called a surveillance institution. And to call
that social media is the most successful fraud since the story
that the Department of War is really a Department of Defense was
sold officially to the public.
So I think this whole affair should lead to a re-thinking,
what do you do with this surveillance apparatus, and how do you
trust this, and how do you demand, especially, the
reestablishment of privacy control, control of private data, and
forcing government and legislators to go back to a protection of
the privacy of its citizens.  I think the idea that everything is
transparent and everything is allowed for everybody to be
manipulated, it’s really part of giving up your individual
freedom, and being completely controlled, profiled, shaped,
nudged,  — nudged into any direction — I think people should
reflect on all of this, and not be so absolutely naïve.
And I think this Cambridge Analytics story and the role of
Facebook is a very useful reminder to think about these matters
in a different way.

SCHLANGER:  Well, then you have the whole other irony, of
the efforts to pin Press Secretary Sanders down on why didn’t
Trump talk about the fraud in the Russian elections? And she made
the comment that “we’re not in the business of telling other
countries how to run their elections,”  but it does seem as
though we completely — by “we” I mean the United States
government — constantly talk about Russian interference in
private lives, when, what Snowden showed, and Clapper tried to
lie to cover it up, is that the biggest violator of that is the
National Security Agency!
Now, on the Ibykus principle, Helga, I don’t know if we have
enough on this, yet for you to say much, but it should be noted
that former French President Nicolas Sarkozy was arrested
yesterday, one day after the seventh anniversary of his role in
working together with then British Prime Minister David Cameron,
and also with Obama and Hillary Clinton, to destroy Libya and
kill Qaddafi.  Do you have anything on that story?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I have to see what our French colleagues are
actually saying about that.  But I can tell you that much, that
the story is breaking big time in Italy, where many former
politicians are now commenting on it, saying it was a big mistake
for Italy to be drawn into this war, basically by the British, by
Hillary Clinton; who then convinced NATO, and then drew in Italy
to join in this attack.  And that they should have talked more to
Germany at the time.
Germany at the time, the foreign minister was Guido
Westerwelle, who fortunately refused to be part of this.
But what these Italian politicians are pointing to, is — if
the story is what the accusations are right now, which obviously
needs to be determined — that Sarkozy did receive large money
from Qaddafi.  Qaddafi’s son and former advisor have now
testified that Sarkozy would have demanded $50 million for his
election campaign; Qaddafi only gave him $20 million, but then
that Sarkozy later — that’s what the Italian media and some
politicians are saying right now — carried out person warfare
against Qaddafi, to eliminate a witness.  If that is true, it
would be a really incredible story!  And these Italian
politicians, former deputy secretary of defense, for example, say
that this war has led to a complete destruction of Libya,
terrible economic, social and humanitarian catastrophes erupting
out of that.  The whole Libyan state is still completely torn
apart, and part of the refugee crisis, and naturally, the impact
of that on Italy, in terms of the refugees, in terms of energy
supplies and so forth, was quite devastating.
But this is just one more symptom among many.  Because if
you look at what has come out in terms of the political class,
the managers, academia, — there has never been such an open
disgrace of so many representatives of this so-called “elite” and
establishment, that I think it is a very serious problem we have
in the West!  And the reason why, in Europe, for example, some of
these right-wing populist parties are coming up, is because of
that.  And you have right now, a completely collapse and
disappearance of the so-called people’s parties, and they’re
being replaced by populist movements or extreme right-wing
movements, and I think it’s a reflection of a real moral crisis
of the West.
And that’s why we need a change, we need a New Paradigm, and
we need to call on you, you the audience, you our viewers, to
help us and enter with us into a discourse:  Where should our
future be and why we need a New Paradigm.

SCHLANGER:  And let’s move now from this discussion of the
corruption of the establishment in the West, and we should just
remind listeners that Hillary Clinton played a big role in the
Libya operation, and this was one of the points that President
Trump focussed on, when he said that this administration would
stop regime-change policies.
But let’s move to something much more positive.  You brought
up the New Paradigm:  President Xi Jinping just gave a closing
speech at the “two sessions” conferences in China, in which he
reiterated the long-term goals for China in his Presidency, and
I’d like your thoughts on what he had to say.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Well, first of all, he emphasized both
humility and pride.  He said the purpose of leadership is to
serve the people, and he repeated that many times, and thanked
the Chinese population for having the confidence in him to
continue his leadership. And naturally, the Western media were
completely freaked out about Xi Jinping being now in the
leadership position in the next period indefinitely.  But from a
Chinese standpoint, Xi Jinping has proven to be an exceptional
leader.  And he said, this is going to be a very difficult period
for China, because it takes place in a very complex world
situation; and he, indeed, called for a new “Long March.”  And
this is quite an amazing historic reference to this history of
China.
So I think he is clearly somebody who is devoted to the
common good of the Chinese people, and the contrast to what China
is actually doing, and how the Chinese people are happy to have
such a leader — as the Russian people are happy to have Putin;
after all, 76% vote for Putin is more than the West for sure
expected.  And there is a very funny little joke:  Saying that,
oh, Putin won the election — and the Russians did it! (Anyway, I
find this amusing with all of this Russia-bashing, that the
Russians are behind everything.)
So I think we have a situation where Russia is clearly
responding to Putin’s leadership.  China is clearly devoted to
continuing on the course of the New Silk Road, the Belt and Road
initiative; many more countries are joining, and even Morgan
Stanley, one of the Wall Street banks, put out a report saying
this is the largest infrastructure project in history and it will
continue, it will make China a very strong, modern economy, with
wealthy inhabitants and all the countries that join will have the
same; and they say that the AIIB is estimating that  there is an
infrastructure financing gap of something like $21 trillion.  And
this is obviously a gigantic task to accomplish, because the
previous leading financial institutions of the West, the IMF and
World Bank, they did not give that kind of development credit,
and therefore China is doing something for the uplifting of the
developing countries, which is actually priceless, because, for
the first time, these countries have the chance to overcome their
situation which has been really terrible.
And I think it’s very good, because the New Silk Road Spirit
is something which, once people understand it, that it’s based on
the idea of a harmonious development of all, working together for
the mutual benefit; naturally, China is pursuing its interests,
but all the other countries are happy, that for the first time,
somebody is taking care of their interests as well.
So I think the whole propaganda about China is really —
that’s what it is:  It’s propaganda, coming from geopolitical
warmongering people in the West, and we should build a mass
movement of people who say “no”:  We should take up the offer of
Xi Jinping and have a win-win cooperation, join the New Silk Road
projects, and there are plenty of tasks where we can have a
common destiny of mankind.  And Xi Jinping, in this speech, he
used the very beautiful idea, “let the Sun shine on the shared
community for the one future of humanity,” and basically, make it
innumerous.

SCHLANGER:  In contrast to the positive report from Morgan
Stanley on China, we saw one of the chief market economists for
Goldman Sachs, a man named Himmelberg, warning of the financial
fragility in the West, especially if liquidity flows are cut, and
of course, yesterday the Federal Reserve Board met, and said
they’re going to cut liquidity flows by raising interest rates
another three to five times over the next 12 months!  So I think
we can see the contrast very clearly.
Now one of the other areas where a contrast comes in, that
in spite of the threats from the anti-China lobby in the United
States about the “danger” of China becoming a hegemonic power, we
see developments that continue to be positive on the Korean
Peninsula, which include collaboration between President Trump
and Xi Jinping.  There’s a couple of summits that were announced,
and Helga, it looks as though this is just going to  continue to
build toward the possibility of an outbreak of peace:  how
horrible, huh?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yeah. The possibility that it comes to a
trilateral summit in May, between Trump, Kim Jong-un, and
President Moon Jae-in from South Korea, is right now very likely.
Also, there will be other summits, involving Japan, Russia; so I
think there is a strategic realignment.
And I really think that the countries that are stubbornly
insisting on the geopolitical confrontation, they will be
sidelined.  I’m not underestimating the danger as we can see by
the British behavior, but I think the overwhelming tendency is
really development and cooperation, and this is a very good
thing.
Let me just mention one last point on this contrast:  While
China is cooperating with many African nations, building
railways, we talked about the beautiful Transaqua project which
is now on the table, and this is bringing the Silk Road Spirit
into Africa.  Now, what is the EU doing?  They just had an
African Union/EU summit in Kigali, in Rwanda, where only 25
Africa countries participated, and notably absent was President
Muhammadu Buhari of Nigeria, who refused to go, and does not want
to have Nigeria sign the proposed free trade agreement between
the AU and the EU.  Why?  Because naturally, many of the
industries of African nations are still in their infancy, very
backward and not developed, and fragile; and if you have a free
trade agreement, then all the European products would just flood
the African markets even more than they do already, and that way,
absolutely prevent and strangle the young, emerging industries in
the African nations.  And therefore, some of the Africans are
just refusing to go along with it.
But the reason why I’m mentioning it, is because it just
shows you that the neoliberal/neo-con geopolitical system is
really not out for win-win.  They want to exploit their
advantages, and that the EU is doing that is really one more
reason to say that they represent a system which is not in the
interest of anybody they cooperate with, nor their own members.
And if you want to know the proof of that, just look at the
southern European countries, which have been completely smashed
by the austerity policies of the Troika, and I think that what we
need instead is exactly what Italy is now doing: working with
China and the African nations in building up real economic
development like the Transaqua project.
So I think we have a real, very crystal clear picture, where
you see the intention of the two paradigms.  The old paradigm of
neoliberal control of the world, and the New Paradigm of
harmonious development of all nations.  And I think people should
really help to make sure that the second one becomes the
victorious one, and join with us!

SCHLANGER:  And Helga, when you talk about being stuck in
the old paradigm, do you have anything to say about the new
appointments to the new German government?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yeah.  That is a very sad story. As for Mrs.
Merkel who had nothing better to do than to be the puppy dog of
the British, really, this is a disgrace, and it should be noted
and understood by everybody.
But also the SPD, which is in a deep crisis, they have been
falling in the polls to less than 15%; the new Finance Minister
Olaf Scholz, what did he do?  He appointed a banker from Goldman
Sachs, Jörg Kukies, to be the deputy finance minister, and that
has caused a revolt in the German population.  There was a poll
whereby 64.9% of the people thought this was disgusting.  And
then he also appointed another guy, called Gatzer, who is known
to be the architect of the “black zero” policy of Schäuble.  And
then Scholz said oh, he’s so happy that he was able to put
together a good team.
Now, that forebodes not good things for Germany, because as
everybody knows, we are on the verge of a new financial crash,
and this was again mentioned by Sheila Bair, the former head of
the FDIC in the United States, who warned that the absolute
continuation of the derivatives trade, the speculative excesses,
the non-correction of the reasons that led to the 2008 crisis,
means we are in absolute danger of a new, even bigger crash.  And
she contrasted that, by the way, with what China has been doing,
by trying to completely forbit speculative investments, by
stabilizing the banking sector by increasing the reserves of the
banks to 15%.
But if you have such a pro-bubble government in Germany this
is not good.  And also despite the fact that there are many
Italian politicians from the Lega and Five Star Party who are
calling for Glass-Steagall, the EU is trying to get a Five
Star/Democratic Party coalition government, which would be from
their standpoint, the optimal option to preserve this speculative
system.
So I’m saying this because the Damocles Sword of a new
financial crash is absolutely still hanging over the world.  All
I can say is, given the fact that China has tried to move it’s
financial into safe waters, they are probably better protected
against the effects of such a crisis, coming than anybody else.
And I would ask our viewership, join with us, join with the
Schiller Institute to try to help mobilize for the Four Laws
proposed by my husband:  Glass-Steagall, a return to Hamiltonian
banking; a credit system and National Bank; a crash program for
thermonuclear fusion research and power, cooperation in space
exploration.  And join with the New Silk Road countries, and we
could have a New Paradigm in the world very, very quickly.  But
it requires you.  And it requires people to become active and no
leave events and history of mankind in the hands of an obviously
corrupt establishment.

SCHLANGER:  Helga, I think we can conclude by coming to the
commemoration of an event which proved that cynics are not right,
that people who say you can’t change the world with big ideas —
35 years ago from tomorrow, March 23rd, 1983, there was a shock
effect around the world, when Ronald Reagan gave a primetime
speech, and at the end of that speech, he endorsed the policy
that your husband first introduced with his pamphlet “Sputnik of
the ’80s” in the late 1970s — that is, the Strategic Defense
Initiative.  And it’s especially relevant today, given what we’re
seeing from Russia and President Putin.  So I’d like your
reflections on the importance of the anniversary of this event
from 35 years ago.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Well, I think that the SDI proposal, which
was absolutely not what the media made out of it, calling it
“Star Wars,” and things like that, the SDI proposal of my
husband, Lyndon LaRouche was an absolutely farsighted vision of a
New Paradigm!  And if you read the relevant papers about it,
especially the proposed draft for a dialogue among the
superpowers, which was published one year later, which you can
find in the archives or in the newer {EIR}s. [“The LaRouche
Doctrine: A Draft Memorandum for an Agreement between the United
States of America and the U.S.S.R.,” {EIR}, April 17,1984] This
was a vision where both superpowers would develop together, new
physical principles which would make nuclear weapons obsolete.
And I think what Putin announced on March 1st in terms of new
physical principles applied for new weapons systems, is
absolutely is in this tradition. And Putin also asked, now they
have to sit down and we have to negotiate and put together a new
security architecture, including Russia, the United States,
China, and the Europeans.
This was all envisioned by my husband in this famous SDI
proposal, and it was a very far-reaching to dissolve the blocs,
NATO and the Warsaw Pact,  to cooperate instead among sovereign
republics, which is exactly what the New Silk Road dynamic today
represents. And it was also the idea to use a science-driver in
the economy to use the increased productivity of the real economy
for a gigantic technology transfer to the developing sector, in
order to overcome their underdevelopment and poverty.
And this is what we’re seeing today, also, in the
collaboration between China, Russia and the countries that are
participating in the Belt and Road Initiative.
So I think, in a certain sense, part of this danger of peace
breaking out, that there is right now the very vivid tradition
and actualization of that tradition of the SDI, and I think we
should circulate this proposal by my husband again.  I think we
should enlarge it to become the SDE, the Strategic Defense of the
Earth, because it was just discovered that very soon, another big
asteroid is already taking course on the planet Earth: So we need
to move quickly to the common aims of mankind, and all countries
should cooperate and be a shared community for the one future of
humanity.
This is the New Paradigm which I think is so obvious.  I
mean, if you look at the long arc of history, we {have} to
overcome geopolitics and we have to move to a kind of cooperation
where we put all our forces together to solve those questions
which are a challenge to all of humanity — nuclear weapons,
poverty, asteroids — there are so many areas where we could
fruitfully cooperate — space exploration is one of them.  And I
think we are in a very fascinating moment in history, but we need
more active citizens:  So please contact us, work with us, and
let’s together make a better world.

SCHLANGER:  I think that’s a very good place to end.  People
should now realize that giving up your pessimism is one of the
keys to bringing online this new paradigm.
So, Helga thank you very much for joining us today, and
we’ll see you next week.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yes, see you next week.

http://newparadigm.schillerinstitute.com/

Facaden, der har dækket for de århundredlange metoder, som de britiske imperieeliter har brugt for at opretholde deres kontrol, er i færd med at blive revet i stumper og stykker, og deres desperation er blevet særdeles synlig nu, hvor de agerer åbenlyst, i deres eget navn! Dette er en kæmpebrøler, idet selv de, der fornægter eksistensen af Det britiske Imperium, nu kan se, at London åbenlyst står i spidsen for et fremstød for krig. I de seneste par dage er de irrationelle tirader mod Rusland fra Theresa May og Boris Johnson blevet mere og mere skingre og demonstrerer klart deres frygt for, at de er ved at miste kontrollen.

Konsolideringen af lederskabet i Rusland og Kina omkring præsidenterne Putin og Xi står i grel kontrast til sammenbruddet af de regerende partier i det transatlantiske område, med begyndelse i Brexit. De fortsatte indikationer på, at præsident Trump går ind for samarbejde med Rusland og Kina snarere end geopolitisk konfrontation, forhøjer hysteriet i London. Alt imens en krig fortsat er en reel mulighed pga. britiske provokationer, så er det også højst tænkeligt, at det, vi hører, er et kollapsende imperiums dødsrallen.

Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche gentagent har understreget, så er det Nye Paradigmes »win-win«-fremgangsmåde, centreret omkring Kinas Nye Silkevejspolitik, ustoppelig. Hør med på torsdag, når Helga fremlægger sin enestående analyse af, hvad der nu må til, stedt over for Londons optrappede fremstød for krig, for at høste fordelene for menneskeheden af et Nyt Paradigme, baseret på økonomisk samarbejde på den største skala i menneskets historie.

Der er mange spørgsmål, vi bør diskutere, og mange ting, vi bør gøre, for det image, folk har af Vesten, er virkelig noget, folk bør tænke over. Hvordan kan det være, at det kommunistiske Kina, som er et socialistisk land, baseret på socialisme med kinesiske karaktertræk, som de siger – hvorfor klarer dette land sig så meget bedre end Vesten? Det bør give stof til eftertanke. Hvad er der i vejen med den neoliberale metode, et system, der forårsager svælget mellem rig og fattig at blive større hele tiden? I alle europæiske lande, og dette reflekteredes også i valget af Trump, væmmes mange mennesker fuldstændig ved den politiske klasse, med klassen af direktører, med bankfolk, med akademikere, og føler sig ikke længere repræsenteret af disse institutioner, hvilket er meget farligt, for i Europas tilfælde giver det grund til, at der vokser nogle virkelig meget farlige, eller i det mindste problematiske, partier og organisationer frem.

Så, manglen på fornuft afføder monstre, som Goya så klart påpegede i sine tegninger.

Folk bør begynde at blive aktive, for man kan ikke sidde passivt i et paradigmeskifte som det, vi oplever på dette tidspunkt.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Jeg vil gerne opfordre vore læsere til … at læse følgende artikel af min mand, som blev udgivet 30. marts, 1984 … : »Draft Memorandum of Agreement between the United States and the U.S.S.R.« Jeg har altid ment, at dette særlige dokument var et af de mest fremsynede og visionære artikler af de mange, mange skønne artikler, min mand har skrevet i årtiernes løb, for dette var et år efter, at SDI blev foreslået af præsident Reagan. Som vi ved, så var modreaktionen mod dette forslag utroligt. Det kom fra kredsene omkring Bush i Reagan-administrationen, men det kom også fra Ogarkov-lejren i det sovjetiske militær. Så efter et år fremsatte min mand et meget fremsynet forslag, som var ideen om at grundlæggende set at opløse NATO- og Warszawapagt-blokkene; og bruge samarbejdet mellem NATO og Warszawapagten – men i særdeleshed USA og Sovjetunionen – til at udvikle våben baseret på nye, fysiske principper; anvende dem i civilsektoren til at forårsage en videnskabsdrevet virkning; og dernæst bruge den øgede produktivitet i begge økonomier – men især også i den sovjetiske økonomi – til at gennemføre en betydningsfuld overførsel af teknologi til udviklingslandene og overvinde disses underudvikling og ophøre med at bruge udviklingslande til stedfortræderkrige mellem supermagterne. Principperne, der blev fremlagt i denne artikel, for det politiske grundlag for en varig fred, må være alle nationers absolutte, betingelsesløse suverænitet; samarbejde mellem suveræne nationalstater; ubegrænsede muligheder for at deltage i fordelene ved teknologisk fremskridt, til alle og enhvers gensidige fordel; og så fremdeles.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Er det virkelig OK med narkoepidemien, der i USA har ført til et fald i den generelle levetid; guvernør Bevin påpegede det faktum, at nogle af disse sataniske budskaber også er i teksterne i popmusikken, i filmene, i videospillene – bør vi tillade alt dette, og få vore samfund totalt ødelagt? Der er en virkning af alt dette på de kognitive evner! Hvis man ønsker Lyndon LaRouches Fire Love som den eneste løsning til at undgå systemets kollaps, jamen, især den fjerde lov kræver et forceret program for fusionskraft, for international rumforskning og rumrejser. Man kan ikke have folk med ødelagte hjerner, fordi de er afhængige af disse ting, og så få dem til at blive kreativ, produktiv arbejdskraft.

Så det er én og samme diskussion, vi har brug for – vi har brug for et Nyt Paradigme, og vi må have et uddannelsessystem, der understreger skønheden i klassisk kultur, der understreger karakterens skønhed som et udviklingsmål. Det var Wilhelm von Humboldts idé, som trods alt havde indflydelse på meget af undervisningssystemet i Europa og USA i det 19. århundrede, og det holdt sig endda til langt ind i det 20. århundrede, og han havde den idé, at formålet med uddannelse må være karakterens skønhed. Hvem taler om dette nu om stunder? Hvis man tager nogle af disse børn, der er afhængige af disse voldsvideospil, eller endnu værre, der kigger på forfærdeligt materiale på Internettet, hvor der bruges tortur og sådanne ting, og som virkelig bliver ødelagt. Deres hjerner bliver fuldstændig ødelagt!

Eftersom guvernør Bevin har krævet en national debat om dette, og præsident Trump heldigvis også ønsker at tage dette spørgsmål op, mener jeg, vi må have en sådan debat, for det er efter min mening en integreret del af USA’s tilslutning til det Nye Paradigme og den Nye Silkevej, for vi kan ikke have, at dette fortsætter.

Schiller Instituttet har i mange år bevist, at, med klassisk musik, med klassisk poesi, med Schiller, med Shakespeare, kan man transformere folk og få en æstetisk opdragelse, og det er præcis, hvad vi har brug for lige nu.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Så man skal forstå dette som førkrigs-propaganda, og folk falder let for ting, som er i de gængse medier, hvor de hellere skulle tænke sig om to gange. Det, som Rusland og Kina gør, er, at de er i færd med at opbygge en helt anden model for internationale relationer, der er specifikt modelleret efter ikkeindblanding og respekt for det andets lands anderledes samfundssystem. Derfor er denne propaganda simpelt hen et forfærdelig farligt scenarie med løgne, der faktisk tjener som en forberedelse til krig, og det er, hvad folk virkelig må forstå.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Introduktion v/ Harley Schlanger: 

De voksende krigstrommer, der høres mod Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ, og som kommer fra transatlantiske geopolitiske institutioner og deres politiske marionetter, såsom den amerikanske senator Marco Rubio, udgør et vidnesbyrd om den voksende indflydelse, som Xi Jinpings »win-win«-diplomati har. Det, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche først identificerede som et »Nyt Paradigme«, har vundet tilhængere i hele verden med den smitsomme »Nye Silkevejsånd. Nationer i Afrika, Asien og Syd- og Mellemamerika, der er blevet udplyndret under IMF’s og Verdensbankens krav om nedskæringspolitik, vender sig nu mod BVI, der demonstrerer, at reelt økonomisk fremskridt er muligt. BVI-processen tilbyder et håb om, at fattigdom kan elimineres i hele verden på samme måde, som den er blevet dramatisk reduceret i Kina.

I stedet for at fejre denne proces eller gå med i den, så har de transatlantiske eliter gang i deres gamle tricks i et desperat forsøg på at forhindre det Nye Paradigme i at lykkes. Deres gamle paradigme, med regimeskifte og krige, med anvendelse af terroroperationer, med frihandelsaftaler kombineret med nedskæringspolitikker, der producerer morderisk økonomisk ødelæggelse, fortsætter, selv med et væsentligt svækket fundament for deres overlevelse.

I USA er operationen for regimeskifte mod præsident Trump afsløret som et kupforsøg, Made in London. Nye afsløringer fra senatorerne Grassley og Graham forventes at vise, hvor dybt involveret, folk fra Obama-administrationen – og Obama selv – var i at brygge svindelhistorien om »Russiagate« sammen. Vi er nu nærmere end nogensinde før på at knække denne operation, som ville befri præsidenten for de begrænsninger, der er påtvunget ham, og til at forfølge de mål, han førte kampagne for.

Hør Helga Zepp-LaRouches analyse af udviklingerne omkring disse spørgsmål:

(her følger engelsk udskrift af videoen):

Harley SCHLANGER:  Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger with the
Schiller Institute.  I’d like to welcome you to this week’s
webcast with the Schiller Institute Founder and President Helga
Zepp-LaRouche.
Helga, I think what we need to start with this week, is the
issue of geopolitics.  You’ve always emphasized, that geopolitics
is an imperial game, it’s part of the old paradigm and the
greatest threat to mankind. This was on display yesterday in the
U.S. Senate:  The Intelligence Committee has the Threat
Assessment hearing; Dan Coats, the Director of National
Intelligence, said, “Frankly the United States is under attack.”
And Marco Rubio said, “China is the biggest threat.”  He said,
“it’s aggressively promoting infrastructure as part of its long
geopolitical arm.”
What’s behind this?

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think it is very clear that, as it
becomes clear that China is becoming sooner or later the largest
economy in the world, it’s already bypassing the United States in
certain respects, — I mean, there is obviously a freakout on
the side of those people in the West who are sticking to the
conception of an unipolar, the idea of a Pax Americana, where,
basically the United States is the only remaining superpower.
And the fact that a nation which is after all, 1.4 billion
people, is eventually becoming stronger, especially if it has the
kind of science and technology oriented policy which China is
pursuing, it is clear that some people respond to that with the
idea to contain that country.
Now, I think it should be clear to anybody that that is a
complete impossibility, unless you go to war.
Now, China has answered to the recent attacks, which are
really ranging from Australia, to the United States, to certain
European think tanks, in a very calm way.  For example, there was
a response to the formulation that China would be a “competitor”
or a “rival,” as Trump said it in his State of the Union address,
where there was a quite reasonable article in Global Times,
answering to this, and making the point that the United States
has to make an historic choice: That it is clear that the rise of
China has caused certain strategic phobias among certain people,
who recognize or help to see that China is offering a different
development model which is especially attractive for developing
countries, and that they are now reacting in this way; but that
obviously, cooperation is the only way for these two largest
countries in the world — the United States and China.  And if
they find a way of cooperation, then they have a bright future.
This is completely crazy to say that everything China does
— the Chinese culture, the Chinese system — all of this would
be a threat to the West.  It is absolutely not the case, and
China has offered cooperation, and anything else can only lead to
a catastrophe.
Now, I would make still a big difference between how
President Trump reacts; while all of these attacks were going on,
he met with State Councillor Yang Jiechi in Washington, and they
reopened the four-level strategic dialogues, that they will
continue.  And I think this is very good.  But obviously, the
propaganda campaign against China right now is reaching an
absolutely unprecedented pitch.

SCHLANGER:  At the same time, we’re seeing the changes going
on with Russiagate. You hear very little these days about
questions of what Russia did, what Trump did, but there are new
things emerging. I think it’s quite interesting: The Obama role
is starting to be talked about, Joe diGenova had another
statement.  What’s your assessment of what’s going on with the
whole Russiagate story?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Essentially, I think what this Joseph
diGenova points out, which I think is quite relevant, that the
counter-memo to the Nunes memorandum which was basically coming
from Adam Schiff, was kept back by the FBI and the DOJ, diGenova
says, because there are certain formulations in it which need to
be redacted according to these two institutions, and he points
out to the fact that the formulation because there is a criminal
investigation going on, is very interesting. And he points to the
fact that all the culprits who were involved in this Russiagate
coup attempt eventually will face criminal prosecution. So that’s
one thing.
And also the role of former President Obama is now an issue.
There was a funny email which Susan Rice sent to herself as a
kind of memo, reminder, on Jan. 20, 2017, where she reported
about a meeting involving Obama, Biden, Comey, herself, in which
this was discussed that the incoming President Trump should not
be told by the secret services, things relating to Russia,
because of the suspicion of a collusion with Russia.  Now, that’s
quite incredible, that the outgoing President would instruct the
intelligence services to withhold information from an incoming
President.  And this refers to a meeting which apparently took
place on Jan. 5th, and then, one day later, the four heads of the
intelligence services went to Trump in the Trump Tower, — this
was still in the transition period — and they told him about the
supposed collusion with Russia.  And later, when Comey made this
big speech in front the Congress, he said this was his “Edgar
Hoover moment.”
This is all now in the public domain, and I think everything
we said in the dossier on Mueller, which we published last
September, is now proven absolutely to the point by these
congressional investigations.  [“Robert Mueller Is an Amoral
Legal Assassin; He Will Do His Job If You Let Him!”]  So, I think
the battle where the United States will go looks much better for
Trump than the people who tried the coup against him.

SCHLANGER:  To go back to what you said about the Susan Rice
memo:  if you look at the Intelligence Committee hearing
yesterday, it seems as though the heads of intelligence today are
still holding to the same line that they did under Obama.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yes, they keep saying it, but that doesn’t
mean that these investigations in the House and Senate will not
continue.  Some mills are grinding slowly, but they’re grinding.

SCHLANGER:  The other big news from the United States was
the introduction of the so-called infrastructure bill.  What’s
your assessment on that?  It doesn’t seem to be what it was
cracked up to be.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think it’s noted as a good thing by many
people that there is, finally, somebody proposing an
infrastructure program, because infrastructure is a phenomenon
which lasts 30, 40, 50 years, or maybe sometimes even longer, but
then eventually it ages, it’s disintegrating, and that’s what we
see in many instances in the United States — the roads, the
nonexisting fast-train system, the general condition of bridges
and so forth.  So it’s a good thing that somebody talks about
that.
But I think the way how Trump is going about it, by hoping
there will be private investors, and a lot of burdens on the
state and local governments will not function.  And I think that
China has noted that point in commenting that the political
system in the United States is making it impossible.  Because the
moment Trump said anything about his program, the Democrats
completely opposed it.  And obviously infrastructure is in the
national interest, and therefore, should be a nonpartisan issue.
But the fact that you have this partisan system in the United
States and elsewhere in the West, as part of the so-called
“democratic” system, this prevents any progress in this respect
and therefore, it’s all the more important that a professor from
Beijing University offered to use the large foreign exchange
reserves which China has, especially in the form of U.S.
Treasuries and U.S. bonds, to invest those in the infrastructure
in the United States.
This is a proposal which we have made from the very
beginning, because obviously, China has the financing, China has
the infrastructure expertise; they have built an enormous amount
of fast train systems, and other infrastructure.  So I think that
that would be the only way to make this function.  But I think
short of that, you need Glass-Steagall, you need a National Bank
in the tradition of Alexander Hamilton, and a credit system, and
then the cooperation with the Belt and Road Initiative; and then
it would function.
So that remains the task, basically in the United States,
our colleagues are encouraging state legislators and others to
make pressure from the base, so that neo-con pressure in the
Republican Party and the Democratic opposition to Trump’s
proposals are overcome, through such a program in the national
interests of the United States, which would also be a
peace-building measure. So that is the battle right now.

SCHLANGER:  We also have this fairly interesting article on
Bloomberg about the Chinese economy, where they say, our models
show that it should have crashed, but it hasn’t crashed, and they
say they’re confounded by this.  It’s obvious, these models don’t
work, but the Chinese are aware of that, aren’t they?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yes. As a matter of fact, as these attacks
against China have escalated, they had a very interesting
counterattack on “democracy,” saying that “democracy” is the
hobby-horse of many people in the West, but in reality, it is not
in the common interest, it’s basically a weapon to defend the
interest of an oligarchy.  And also the West are not the only
ones who can claim to have a democratic system.  And then they
say basically that this goes back to Mencius, who already
demanded that the government must follow the Mandate of Heaven,
and in China it is the highest obligation of the party to follow
the Mandate of Heaven, which means following the common good of
the people.
So, they basically say democracy is being used for regime
change, that when they target a country, they demand people
should follow “democracy,” then they play up through the
mainstream media some demonstrators and if everything goes well
it leads to regime change and if it doesn’t go well, they go for
a nice color revolution.
So I think these kinds of renewed, sharp responses coming
from China reflect the fact that they do not intend at all to be
intimidated, and that they’re quite aware of double standard of
the so-called “liberal system” which claims they’re liberals, but
then demand global hegemony and controlling the rules on a global
scale, and that this double standard is visible for anybody who
wants to see it.
So there is a new tone of self-confidence and
self-assuredness in the Chinese responses to these accusations.

SCHLANGER:  And I would assume the Chinese have to be asking
the question, “What’s wrong with reducing poverty?”  And here we
see this situation where poverty is growing in the West, it has
been growing from the 2001 period on, and yet, Chinese efforts to
alleviate poverty, not just in China, but also in their neighbors
and all around the world as well, is seen as somehow an imperial,
expansionist policy.
I mean — do the Chinese have a reaction to that?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yeah.  They have right now the most
impressive program to alleviate poverty inside China by 2020.
For those people who are interested in that, there is a
documentary on CGTN, the Chinese Global Television Network, where
they show how they absolutely map out every spot, every village
where you have poverty, they have a file on every family to look
at what are the reasons for it, what can be done to overcome it
— education, infrastructure, industrialization, relocation of
people to better-off areas — and President Xi Jinping is very
much hands-on.  He travels to these villages — not all of them,
but some; he talks to the families; he makes it clear that it is
his personal concern that the goal of eliminating poverty by 2020
is reached.  And this is very, very impressive.
There was another article in the Chinese press, where they
say, infrastructure development and poverty alleviation is also
an area of competition. And not only is the economic growth of
China absolutely incredible and outstanding, but so is the
infrastructure building and the poverty alleviation.
So the West has to basically suffer to be judged:  Who is
doing more for their people, is it China, or is the West, with
their so-called austerity systems, which in the case of, if you
look at Europe, there is now a new study out by the European
Center for Economic Research [ZEW], which looked at what was the
difference, after the 2008 crisis, in those countries which an
anti-cyclical focus on basic research and development, R&D, and
they had a massive increase in productivity. The countries that
did that were Germany, Denmark, Sweden and Finland.  As compared
to those countries which were hit by with EU Troika austerity
policy — namely, Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Poland,. Czech
Republic, Lithuania — which had to make cuts also in the basic
research and development, and as a result had a terrible collapse
in productivity.
I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the
system of the free market, which after all is not that free,
given the fact that all central banks did was to bail out the
banks and keep money pumping for the benefit of the speculators,
so that the rich become richer, and the poor become more poor,
and the middle class is shrinking.
This article by Bloomberg, which you referenced earlier, is
very interesting, because the author admits that according to his
theory, China should be collapsing, it should have meager
economic growth, but obviously the contrary is the case.  And he
says that China is doing everything which according to his theory
are terrible, like state intervention, party control, — things
like that — and China is prospering. And actually, he says,
he’s not yet ready to completely overturn his theory, but he’s
willing to make corrections.
There will be a lot more corrections, because I think we
need a public debate, what are the economic criteria for a
functioning economy?  And obviously, the works of my husband,
Lyndon LaRouche, and his development of physical economy, going
back to Leibniz, to Friedrich List, to Henry C. Carey, to Wilhelm
von Kardorff, who was the economic advisor of Bismarck and was
one of the key influences to bring about the industrial
revolution in Germany; as compared to the so-called free market
model, I think we have to have a real debate, what is the cause
of wealth?  Is it money, or is it the idea of the creativity of
the individual, which then leads to scientific and technological
discoveries, which applied in the production process leads to an
increase in productivity, which then leads to more wealth,
longevity, and all of these things.
We need a discussion about that, because the notion of what
is economy, equating that with money, has really become one of
the axiomatic assumptions of a failing system. So we need a
debate about that.

SCHLANGER:  One of the great contributions of your husband
was making the connection, between geopolitical doctrine as an
imperial doctrine, and the imposition of these kinds of economic
policies, which only work for the handful of the most wealthy.
Now, we had talked earlier — actually, it’s been a focus
of the Schiller Institute for a while — extending the Silk Road
into the World Land-Bridge, and we’re seeing that now with the
bioceanic railway, the progress in Africa.  What can you tell us
about how these projects are advancing?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Oh, I think they’re on a very good
development:  There was just a reiteration in Brazil coming from
the Chinese Embassy, that the bioceanic railway, connecting the
Pacific and the Atlantic from Brazil to Peru, is still very much
on the agenda, that a feasibility study has been made.  So this
is on a good trajectory, and all the projects agreed upon at the
China-CELAC meeting — the Caribbean and Latin American
countries meeting with China; and naturally, also the Africa
projects are all progressing very nicely.  So I think the World
Land-Bridge is becoming a reality, very quickly, to the benefit
of all countries that participate in it.

SCHLANGER:  I’d like to come back, as we wrap this up, to
the question of geopolitics.  We got a question from a viewer,
who wanted to know why you always blame British geopolitical
manipulations for World War I and World War II?  And they ask the
question, what did they do, and what were they responding to?
Why don’t you give us the answer to that?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  If you look at the British Empire’s policy
toward the Continent in the 19th century, they clearly were
extremely upset about the industrial revolution in Germany,
introduced by Bismarck.  Bismarck, as I mentioned earlier, was a
free-trade follower in the beginning, working with the Prussian
Junkers.  But then he got acquainted with the theories of Henry
C. Carey:  He had this friend, Wilhelm von Kardorff who was the
head of the German business association at the time, and they
recognized the fundamental difference between what Friedrich List
had called the “American System,” and the British system.
So Bismarck changed to a proponent of protectionism, and
this led to a very quick industrial revolution in Germany.  Now,
the British, through relatives in the oligarchy, manipulated so
that Bismarck got ousted, which was really a tragedy, because
Bismarck was very smart and he had basically established a peace
order on the European Continent, by having many diplomatic
treaties with every nation, and especially with Russia, he had
the Reinsurance Treaty, which was a very important element to
prevent a possible outbreak of war, in case there should be some
French-German tensions.
His successors were not so smart, so they didn’t pay
attention to this Russia Reinsurance Treaty, and then the British
started to manipulate the chessboard of the European countries,
step by step, by creating incidents to create the Entente
Cordiale; the Triple Entente; the war between Russia and Japan;
the Balkan Wars; so that basically, every country was set
already, ready to go so that the shooting in Sarajevo was only
the trigger but not the cause for World War I.
Now, what was behind that, also, was the idea of geopolitics
as it had been developed by Mackinder, Milner, and later by
Haushoffer, which was the crazy idea that whoever controls the
Eurasian land-mass is in control of the world, to the
disadvantage of the Atlantic rim countries, in that case, United
States and England.  So basically, that idea that you have to
orchestrate conflict in order to prevent such a development, that
became an issue, naturally, with the Trans-Siberian Railroad,
which was built essentially in the 1890s; and the plans to build
a Berlin-Baghdad Railway, was regarded by the British at that
time, as a fundamental threat to their control of the sea trade.
Now, obviously, today, with the New Silk Road, if you think
in terms of geopolitics, you could easily arrive at the same
mistaken conclusion, and I think that is the British thinking.
And as we can see now, in the case of Mr. Rubio, or the
intelligence heads of the United States, that is their thinking.
But as I had said, many, many times, geopolitics led to
essentially all the wars in history.  It led to two World Wars,
because the idea with the Second World War, was everybody who had
read Mein Kampf and knew the background of Hitler, knew that
eventually a war between Russia and Germany would result, and
there were backers who wanted Hitler to come to power — [Bank of
England Governor] Montagu Norma, in the United States, the
Harriman interests and others — so this was a manipulation where
it was clear it would result in such a war.
It should be clear to everybody who is not completely losing
his marbles, that in the age of thermonuclear weapons, you cannot
continue this game, if you do not want to risk the extinction of
civilization!  And I think what China has proposed with their
“win-win cooperation,” with their offers for China and the United
States to cooperate on the basis of a special relation among
major powers, the offer for European countries to cooperate, that
is catapulting humanity to a higher level of cooperation and
reason!  And I think it is so much in our self-interest — what
is the problem with the United States?  It’s not that China is
rising, the problem is that the United States has moved away from
the policies of the Founding Fathers, of Lincoln, of Franklin D.
Roosevelt, of Kennedy.  And the United States, indeed, could
become great again, if they go back to these policies, and then
they would not regard China as a threat.  It’s only when the West
is collapsing that there is ferment to see a rising power as a
threat.  But as the Chinese ambassador to Washington Cui Tiankai,
he said — and I think that that is definitely something to think
about — that in history, there were 16 cases where one nation
would rise and the dominant one up to that point would be faced
with such a situation:  In twelve cases, there had been war, and
in four cases, the rising country had just bypassed the old,
dominant one and that would have been the new situation.  And the
Chinese ambassador said: China does not want the twelve cases
where it led to war, but they also don’t want the four cases
where China would just take over and become the unipolar,
dominant country; but that they want to have respect for the
sovereignty of each, and that is what all the developing
countries that are participating in the Belt and Road Initiative
are experiencing.  That’s why they cooperate, they have benefits
from it, and they have, now for the first time, the chance to
overcome their underdevelopment and poverty.
And I think it would be absolutely dangerous to listen to
these people who are now saying everything China represents is a
threat.  Because if you look at China, it’s actually a very
well-functioning economic model:  The people are happy, the
philosophy is for the common good, and it is not a threat.  And I
want to keep insisting on that, because nothing would be more
dangerous than if you get into a complete anti-China hysteria,
anti-Russia hysteria, and the only consequence of that could be a
terrible catastrophe for all of us.

SCHLANGER:  I think from what you just said, it becomes
increasingly clear for people, why Donald Trump’s desire to have
good relations with Russia and China, is seen as such a threat to
the City of London, and its extended worldwide interests.
Helga, that brings us to the end of the program today.
We’ll see you next week!

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yes, till next week.

Derfor er det så meget desto mere vigtigt, at den eneste løsning på denne finanskrise, nemlig gennemførelsen af Glass/Steagall-bankopdelingen og de Fire Love, min mand, Lyndon LaRouche, har udarbejdet; at de nu kommer frem på bordet, og at der kommer et krav fra befolkningerne i alle landene om, at deres regeringer responderer til Xi Jinpings tilbud om at samarbejde med den Nye Silkevej. Europa, Tyskland, Italien, Frankrig, USA; de har alle et presserende behov for en forbedring og modernisering af infrastruktur.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Så inden for dette system befinder man sig i et ’Punkt 22’, og den eneste løsning er at gå tilbage til det, som Franklin D. Roosevelt gjorde i 1933: gennemfør Glass-Steagall, afslut kasinoøkonomien og så gå over til et banksystem efter Hamiltons tradition – man kan kalde det, hvad man vil, Reconstruction Finance Corporation eller Kreditanstalt für Wiederafbau (kreditanstalt for genopbygning) – og når man først har gjort finanssystemet sundt igen, er der absolut intet til hinder for, at de vestlige lande fuldt og helt kunne samarbejde med AIIB, Silkevejsfonden og andre finansinstitutioner, der støtter Bælte & Vej Initiativet. Og dette er den eneste måde, hvorpå man kan undgå en total katastrofe, og det er, hvad folk virkelig bør være med til at gennemføre.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Vi har brug for en politisk diskussion om, hvor skal menneskets fremtid være om 50 år, om 100 år fra nu, og ønsker vi at blive voksne, som art, hvor folk skatter andre ting end blot materielle ting? Folk bør, mener jeg, tænke over det faktum, at vi befinder os ved en korsvej, hvor, hvis vi gør vores job ordentligt, lige nu, og bringer USA og de europæiske nationer ind i samarbejde med den Nye Silkevej, så kan vi få en totalt ny civilisationsæra, sandsynligvis i vores egen levetid. Og jeg vil appellere til vore lyttere, til dig, om at kontakte os, gå sammen med os, hjælpe vore bestræbelser og gør de ting, vi siger, mere kendt.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Så vil jeg gerne sige noget om de subjektive grunde til, at jeg, på trods af alle disse farer, er fundamentalt meget optimistisk: Og der er ikke er nogen pointe i at være bekymret. Man må have en vision for, hvor man med sit liv vil bidrage til forbedringen af den menneskelige race. Jeg har en vision, der ikke er helt identisk med Xi Jinpings, men min vision er også meget lig min mands, med hvem jeg i 40 år har arbejdet på dette, at vi har en verden, hvor hvert enkelt menneske på denne planet kan få et anstændigt liv, kan opnå at opfylde hele det potentiale, som det enkelte menneske har, og at menneskeheden kan blive voksen! Vi kan gå tilbage til de værdier, der er karakteristiske for den Amerikanske Revolution, for den Tyske Klassik, for den Italienske Renæssance og andre af kulturens højdepunkter. Jeg er forhåbningsfuld mht., at vi kan få en kulturel renæssance for klassisk musik, klassisk poesi, og eftersom Kina allerede er på denne kurs ved at genoplive den konfutsianske tradition og lægger stor vægt på klassisk kultur og videnskabelige gennembrud, mener jeg, at Vesten virkelig bør gentænke, hvad vore bidrag til universalhistoriens fremme var, og dernæst genoplive dem og få en dialog mellem kulturer med alle landes bedste traditioner.

Jeg mener, at dette er menneskets natur.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

http://newparadigm.schillerinstitute.com/

I en artikel i Consortium News den 11. jan., skrev Ray McGovern, leder af Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) og tidligere højtplaceret efterretningsanalytiker hos CIA, at det er åbenlyst for alle, undtagen dem, der er forblindede af deres had til præsident Trump, at et »blødt kup« er i gang, dirigeret af britisk efterretning og deres amerikanske allierede, med det formål at drive ham ud af embedet. Formålet med dette »regimeskifte« i USA er at bevare dets koordinatorers geopolitiske rænkespil selv, når det betyder at sætte verden på en kurs mod atomkrig. Sidste uges »missilvarsel« på Hawaii bør være en påmindelse om, hvor faretruende tæt vi er på en atomar udslettelse.

Schiller Instituttet har fået selskab af VIPS-ledere i afsløringen af dette kup, med flere nylige, offentlige begivenheder i New York City. I sin artikel påpeger McGovern, hvilken betydning den »tidligere« MI6-agent Steeles svindelagtige dossier har haft i udførelsen af dette kup. McGovern opfordrer Kongressen til at tage sagen op med denne »J. Edgar Hoover-stil afpresning på steroider, som er blevet mulig gennem overvågning af stort set alt og alle …« Med flere beviser for FBI-korruption, der vælder frem, siger han, at »Russiagate er ved at blive til FBI-gate«.

At gøre en ende på Russiagates svindelagtige angreb, der som sit mål ikke alene har Trump, men også lederne af Rusland og Kina, ville åbne døren for USA’s fulde samarbejde med Bælte & Vej Initiativet. Det ville gøre en ende på æraen for imperial konfrontations-geopolitik, hvilket er, hvad Kinas præsident Xi mener, når han taler om »win-win«-samarbejde.

Fr. Zepp-LaRouche vil give os en strategisk opdatering af fremskridt i denne proces, og hvad der er nødvendigt for at opnå dette ønskværdige resultat, i denne uges webcast.

Mange gange er denne form for pessimisme blot en ’comfort zone’, for når folk først har boret hælene i jorden med deres pessimisme, betyder det, at de ikke behøver gøre noget, for verden er alligevel håbløs, og derfor behøver man ikke ændre den.

Det er min holdning, at, når tingene udvikler sig i en positiv retning, har alle – næsten alle på denne planet – mulighed for at forbedre ting og ændre ting til det bedre, hvis muligheden skabes. Jeg vil derfor appellere til folk om at have et kulturelt optimistisk livssyn på disse spørgsmål, for at sidde på hænderne og intet foretage sig i et historisk øjeblik som det aktuelle, er næsten en forbrydelse.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

9. jan., 2018 – LaRouche PAC har udgivet følgende erklæring i dag, til massedistribution:

Vores fremtid vil blive bestemt af valgene i 2018. Ingen af de to partier har et program for på fundamental vis at føre nationen fremefter, og da slet ikke for blot at sikre vores overlevelse på kort sigt. LaRouche PAC fremlægger den følgende politiske platform, og vi annoncerer hermed, at vi vil gennemføre en økonomisk uafhængig kampagne for at få det til at ske. Vi vil føre kampagne ud fra dette program og støtte eller være imod kandidater, baseret på, om de vil føre kampagne for disse ideer. Vi søger at skabe store blokke af vælgere i afgørende kongresdistrikter til at slutte sig til os.

Begge partier kontrolleres af Wall Street. Begge partier er tilhængere af imperiesystemet efter Anden Verdenskrig for relationerne mellem nationer, et system, der har frembragt evindelige krige og folkemord og nu, en farlig, ny kold krig. Demokraterne har til hensigt at bruge disse midtvejsvalg til at stille præsidenten for en rigsret (impeachment). Republikanerne er fanatiske tilhængere af økonomiske aksiomer, der vil ødelægge Trumps præsidentskab, samtidig med, at de nominelt støtter præsidenten.

Vort program har to flanker. Afslut kuppet imod præsidenten og retsforfølg de ansvarlige. Gennemfør LaRouches Fire Love for USA’s økonomiske genrejsning, og slut USA til Kinas store Bælte & Vej Initiativ for økonomisk udvikling.

Dette vil skabe millioner af produktive jobs, her og internationalt, samtidig med, at det også vil skabe en særdeles fundamental og bydende nødvendig forandring i de strategiske relationer. Under LaRouche-programmet vil nationer samarbejde omkring store projekter, der fremmer menneskehedens fælles mål, snarere end at konfrontere hinanden som geopolitiske modstandere i hybridkrige, hvor selve menneskeheden konstant står og vipper på randen af termonuklear udslettelse.

Her er LaRouches Fire Love. De er ikke adskilte planker. Hver og én af disse love må forstås og gennemføres sammen.

• Genindfør Franklin Roosevelts Glass/Steagall-lov, og gør det nu, forud for det umiddelbart overhængende kollaps af finansboblen, som Wall Street har opbygget i kølvandet på 2008.
• Vend tilbage til et system for et topstyret, nationalt (statsligt) banksystem, der skaber den nødvendige kredit til at sætte vores infrastruktur på en fuldstændig moderne platform. Modellerne for et sådant program findes allerede i form af Hamiltons Nationalbank for USA, Lincolns system med ’greenback’-dollaren og Franklin Roosevelts Reconstruction Finance Corporation (kreditanstalt for genopbygning).
• Brug det statslige kreditsystem til at skabe en trend for højproduktivitet i forbedringer af beskæftigelsen, med den ledsagende hensigt at øge den fysisk-økonomiske produktivitet og levestandarden for individer og husstande i USA. Fremskridt er afhængigt af at opbygge en moderne, national infrastruktur og en kulturel platform, der er befordrende for at nære menneskelig kreativitet.
• Skab en fusionskraftbaseret økonomi og dediker atter nationen til udforskning af rummet. Fusionskraft repræsenterer et kvalitativt spring i befolkningens potentielle, produktive evne og vil blive energikilden til en forberedt udforskning af rummet. Fundamentale videnskabelige fremskridt er hjørnestenen i al økonomisk fremskridt.

Hensigten med disse love, taget sammen, er at skabe en afgørende nødvendig, ny, menneskelig renæssance.

Folk må ændre deres tankegang! Det er ikke et nulsumsspil. Det er ideen om, kan vi definere mål for menneskeheden; kan vi gøre det, der blev diskuteret i Federalist Papers allerede i det unge Amerika? Kan vi finde en måde at regere os selv på, der er for det langsigtede perspektiv for vort samfunds overlevelse? Jeg mener, vi kan. Jeg mener, at menneskeslægten er i stand til fornuft; jeg mener endda, vi er i stand til kærlighed – og folk tror, kærlighed intet har med politik at gøre, men det er ikke sandt! Udfaldet af Trediveårskrigen var en forfærdelig ødelæggelse i Europa, men ud af det kom den Westfalske Fred. Ser man på principperne i den Westfalske Fred, så var de to vigtigste træk, at, for fredens skyld, glem alt ondt, der blev begået af den ene eller den anden side, og koncentrer om fælles udvikling; og det andet princip var, for fredens skyld, så må udenrigspolitik fra nu af være baseret på »den andens interesse, i kærlighed«.

Jeg mener, dette er, hvad Kina gør: Det er i overensstemmelse med ideen om en harmonisk udvikling af alle nationer, og det var John Quincy Adams’ politik, så det er ikke fremmed for amerikansk historie. Det var også associeret med humanisme i Europa, med ideerne hos Leibniz, Cusanus og mange andre store personer, der tænkte i forhold til udvikling som historiens mål.

Så vi befinder os alle sammen i en afgørende forandring af æraen, hvor vi må lade geopolitikkens æra bag os og bevæge os til en helt ny fase i civilisationens historie.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Kan vi i tide, før et nyt finanskrak kommer ned over os – det hænger jo over vores hoved som et Damoklessværd – kan vi i tide skabe denne form for forandring i USA i særdeleshed, men også i Vesteuropa, hvor vi tilslutter os dette nye paradigme, eller vil denne kamp for civilisationen blive tabt? Jeg er meget optimistisk mht., at den kan vindes, men det kræver aktivitet: Vi oplever ikke dialektisk materialisme, eller historisk materialisme, hvor positive begivenheder får deres eget liv; for, det er altid den subjektive faktor, der spiller en meget stor rolle, og et sted, hvor dette ses meget tydeligt, er med Xi Jinping, der virkelig har frembragt en positiv kinesisk udvikling, en total opgradering og en total transformation ind i et nyt paradigme. Og vi har brug for sådanne mennesker i Vesten til at gøre ligeså.

Schiller Instituttet har absolut indgået en forpligtelse til at gøre alt, hvad der står i vores magt, for at få USA og Europa til at samarbejde med den Nye Silkevej, for det vil blive den afgørende kamp i det nye år.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Jeg mener, dette simpelt hen kræver en fortsættelse af vores mobilisering. Jeg ved, vore kolleger i USA fra LaRouche PAC har produceret en ny brochure med krav om at gennemføre min mand, Lyndon LaRouches Fire Love, og om, hvorfor USA må gå sammen med Kina om opbygning af den Nye Silkevej, både hjemme og internationalt. Brochuren [»LaRouche’s Four Laws & America’s Future on the New Silk Road«] [1] er udgivet. Jeg vil opfordre vore seere og lyttere til at få fat i dette dokument: Læs det, for det indeholder alle løsningerne, de korrekte økonomiske koncepter for USA og resten af verden for at komme ud af den nuværende krise.

Dette er en presserende hastesag, for vi kunne få en nedsmeltning af systemet, hvornår, det skal være. For lige at nævne det ganske kort, så minder denne bitcoin-mani, der nu finder sted, virkelig om tulipanboblen [i 1637] før den brast. Kina har erkendt denne fare og forbyder grundlæggende set spekulation i bitcoins. Alle disse tossestreger gør det klart, at det er presserende nødvendigt at gennemføre Glass-Steagall, og alle hr. LaRouches Fire Love, der især omfatter en massiv forøgelse af arbejdsstyrkens produktivitet gennem et forceret program for fusionsteknologi, samarbejde om rumforskning og højteknologiske investeringer generelt; og med mindre, man gør dette, inkl. højteknologisk infrastruktur – og den nylige Amtrak-ulykke i staten Washington understreger blot, at dette er absolut nødvendigt – med mindre man gør dette som en samlet pakke, tror jeg ikke, verden vil komme ud af denne krise.

[1] https://larouchepac.com/20170225/four-laws-pamphlet

Download (PDF, Unknown)

I løbet af de seneste uger har en række afsløringer, med cirkuleringen af LaRouche PAC’s dossier om Robert Mueller, den »umoralske juridiske lejemorder«, opildnet dem, der kæmper mod kuppet i USA, som var udtænkt til at omstøde Donald Trumps valgsejr i 2016. Flere hovedoperatører, der arbejder direkte sammen med Mueller, er blevet afsløret som del af et spind af kriminalitet, og hvor deres marchordrer kommer direkte fra toppen af britisk efterretning. Briternes ledende rolle, eksemplificeret af det »skumle dossier« fra Christopher Steele/Fusion GPS, og som blev finansieret af Clintonkampagnen, er nu emne for høringer for kongresudvalg og er endda blevet et emne i de gængse mediers dækning.

Men selv om tidevandet har vendt sig mod Mueller, så er kampen endnu ikke vundet. Der er afgørende strategiske spørgsmål, som Trump-administrationen må adressere, inklusive en intensivering af samarbejde med Rusland og Kina samt også den skæbnesvangert farlige finanskrise i de transatlantiske nationer. Med udsigt til det nye år står det nu klart, at, hvis den rette kurs tages i de kommende dage og uger, er det nu muligt at gøre en ende på den folkemorderiske tåbelighed, der er indlejret i den geopolitiske imperiedoktrin; en doktrin, der er udtænkt for Imperiets overlevelse på bekostning af verdens befolkning.

Der er i dag intet, der er så presserende som at vælte det herskende, geopolitiske, unipolære, globale system og erstatte det med et Nyt Paradigme, baseret på, at hver nation arbejder til fordel for alle nationer. Begivenhederne i året 2017 har vist, at Schiller Instituttets bestræbelser under ledelse af Helga Zepp-LaRouche, på at bringe USA ind i det Nye Paradigme, nu er ved at bære frugt.

Stil ind på kanalen og lyt til webcastet torsdag, når fr. Zepp-LaRouche fremlægger strategien for, én gang for alle, at lægge den geopolitiske doktrin i graven.

newparadigm.schillerinstitute.com

torsdag kl. 18 dansk tid.

Jeg mener, der også er en aftale mellem USA og Rusland om sammen at bygge en rumstation på Månen. Og Trumps beslutning – jeg mener, man kan virkelig se, hvem, der er hvem, når man ser, hvordan folk reagerer til dette. ESA, det Europæiske Rumagentur, var fuldstændig entusiastisk og hilste dette velkomment; den kinesiske regering udtrykte glæde over denne beslutning. Alt imens de europæiske medier dækkede dette, som om Trump var fuldstændig sindssyg for at ville tage tilbage til Månen – dette er virkelig utroligt! Alle mennesker, der har været i rummet, astronauterne, de kommer altid tilbage og siger, dette er en utrolig oplevelse, for i rummet betyder det ingen ting, hvilken nationalitet, man har, for man må stole på hinanden, ellers kan man ikke gennemføre en så ekstremt udfordrende mission. En russisk kosmonaut har netop sagt: Vi bør udvikle en holdning til at løse problemer på Jorden i samme ånd, med hvilken vi samarbejder i rummet.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

I Europa ser det endnu mere dystert ud, for de europæiske nationer befinder sig i en totalt kaotisk tilstand. Der er de øst- og sydeuropæiske nationer, der ønsker at gå sammen med Kina i Bælte & Vej Initiativet; der er et totalt hysteri fra EU’s side og også i vid udstrækning fra den tyske regerings side – hvad der så er tilbage af den – og som siger, »Kina opsplitter Europa«. Hvilket ikke er sandt! Kinesernes svar på denne anklage var, at Kina ikke behøver opsplitte Europa, det har det allerede selv gjort. Men der finder ingen diskussion sted i Europa om bankopdeling. Faktisk traf EU for blot et par uger siden beslutning om nye retningslinjer, der forbyder bankopdeling. De europæiske nationers overlevelse og disse EU-politikker er således uforenelige.

Vi må have en offentlig diskussion i Tyskland om f.eks., at vi må vende tilbage til den form for kreditpolitik, vi havde i perioden efter krigen med Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (Kreditanstalt for genopbygning); men, vi må have finansiering af realøkonomien, og hele denne kasinoøkonomi må lukkes ned.

Jeg mener, at den største fare lige nu består i et ukontrolleret kollaps. Disse advarsler fra Bundesbank og BIS er virkelig en advarsel om, at folk må se at vågne op og ændre politik, før det er for sent: Så gå sammen med os i kampen for at få Glass-Steagall på dagsordenen, også i de europæiske lande.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Siden afslutningen af den historiske Schiller Institut-konference i Bad Soden, Tyskland, den 26. november, er tempoet for udviklinger for udvidelsen af det kinesiske Bælte & Vej Initiativ (BRI) accelereret dramatisk. Dagligt har der været konferencer, forummer og meddelelser om nye aftaler, der omfatter Asien, Afrika, Østeuropa og Sydamerika i takt med, at den Nye Silkevejsånd spreder sig i hele verden. På én af disse konferencer om den Maritime Silkevej, der blev afholdt i Zhuhai, Kina, holdt Schiller Instituttets Helga Zepp-LaRouche en stor præsentation.

I takt med, at denne positive bevægelse går frem, bliver det i stigende grad mere utåleligt, at heksejagten mod præsident Trump, der begås af de Londondirigerede, neokonservative/neoliberale imperiekræfter, med det formål at forhindre Trump i at bringe USA fuldt og helt ind i et samarbejde med BRI, får lov at fortsætte. Nye beviser er ved at komme frem, som demonstrerer, at, som vi har sagt fra begyndelsen, disse angreb intet som helst har med »russisk indblanding« at gøre, men derimod udgør bestræbelser fra disse »Deep State«, ’staten i statens’ side på at holde hele menneskeheden som gidsel for deres dødbringende krige, bailouts og morderiske nedskæringspolitikker.

BRI’s fremskridt, såvel som de nye beviser, der afslører den af Mueller anførte heksejagt som værende et desperat, »Made in London«-svindelnummer, gør det nu mere muligt end nogen sinde for borgere til at handle for at bringe deres regeringer ind i et samarbejde med det Nye Paradigme, hvis de kendte sandheden om disse afgørende, strategiske udviklinger. Det er grunden til, at Helga Zepp-LaRouche har indledt disse ugentlige opdateringer, så borgere kan handle på en fuldt informeret baggrund for muligheden for en totalt ubegrænset fremtid for menneskeheden.

Lyt til Helga Zepp-LaRouches live opdatering torsdag, kl. 18.

Tiden er således i dag inde til, at en ny, europæisk, politisk klasse tænker over, hvad der kunne være et alternativt projekt for Europa; som kunne stille spørgsmålstegn ved den eksisterende ramme for den Europæiske Union. Som jeg sagde, så stiller vi – og jeg selv personligt, som repræsentant for det europæiske og italienske folk i Europaparlamentet – spørgsmålstegn ved denne TINA-retorik (There is No Alternative – der er intet alternativ). For vi har behov for en alternativ, institutionel ramme for det europæiske folk.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Efterklangen af præsident Trumps tur til Asien og til Kina i særdeleshed rusker fortsat op i amerikansk og global politik i takt med, at flere politiske »mainstream«-personer og tænketanke nu lægger mærke til det; nogle synes endda at være blevet vundet over til den Nye Silkevejsånd. Trump sagde til sin regering, at hans tur til Asien var »en historisk 12 dage lang rejse«, med »aftaler til en værdi af over $300 mia. … [hvilket] betyder jobs på et meget højt niveau i USA«.

Kina og Rusland, de to lande, med hvilke Trump ønsker at øge samarbejdet, fortsætter med at gå ind i betydningsfulde, diplomatiske og økonomiske initiativer for at fremme fredeligt samarbejde og fredelig udvikling, og med nye forslag, der kommer fra dem bogstavelig talt hver dag.

Alligevel, som Zepp-LaRouche sagde mandag, »er vi endnu ikke i smult vande«. Man kan se en britisk imperiehånd i Mellemøsten, med krigssnak, der kommer fra Israel og Saudi-Arabien; og finanssystemet er fortsat »én dårlig handel« fra den totale nedsmeltning. Og, som Helga udtalte i sidste uges webcast, så er kansler Merkels forsøg på at sammensætte en »Jamaica-koalition« kollapset, hvilket vil sige, at Tyskland vil være uden en reel regering i denne mulighedernes, og krisernes, tid.

Lyt til vores webcast torsdag og få en ugentlig, strategisk opdatering fra fr. LaRouche.

newparadigme.schillerinstitute.com

Dette webcast har til formål at gøre folk aktive; gå med i Schiller Instituttet; hjælp os med at udbrede den idé, at en ny relation mellem nationer absolut er mulig og allerede er ved at blive til virkelighed. Så sid ikke på sidelinjen. Bliv aktiv sammen med os, for dette er en af de perioder, der har et enormt potentiale. I sidste uge talte vi om Murens fald og den store, historiske chance, dette repræsenterede; men jeg mener, at, hvis man ser på den mulighed, at menneskeheden kan bevæge sig ind i en total ny æra, hvor der er velstand for alle; fred mellem nationer definerer en ny civilisationsæra. Det er min absolutte overbevisning, at, under forudsætning af, at der ikke kommer en stor tragedie som et finanskrak, for hvilken der ikke gennemføres nogen løsning i tide, eller en anden krise, der sparkes i gang omkring en eller anden hændelse, en ’fake’ historie; jeg mener, at det nye verdenssyn, denne idé om, hvad Vestens populærkultur er blevet til, eller hele kulturen, hvor alt er tilladt, ingen kriterier, ingen standard, ingen moralskhed; det er noget, der ikke kan holde. Det er en falsk tro, det er en ideologi; det er en afsporing af menneskets sande natur, og jeg tror, det vil forsvinde på samme måde, som skolastikken forsvandt, fordi det var en utilstrækkelig idé, der var knyttet til en bestemt periode i Europas historie i middelalderen. Det forsvandt; i dag har vi ingen skolastikkere, i hvert fald ikke i denne gamle form. Jeg er overbevist om, at vi har en chance for at få en ny renæssance, at få en opløftelse af folk, hvor alle kulturers, alle planetens nationers bedste traditioner bliver genoplivet; og ud af dette kan vi skabe en ny renæssance. Jeg mener, dette er en absolut realistisk mulighed. Så være glad og gå sammen med os!

Download (PDF, Unknown)