Vi befinder os i en nedtællingsperiode; vi er i de sidste to uger, før overgangen til det nye præsidentskab. Om præcis to uger fra i dag er det indsættelsesdag, den 20. januar, og vi vil have en ny præsident i dette land. Som I ved, hvis I var med i går på Fireside Chat på LaRouchePAC’s hjemmeside, og hvis I har fået vore daglige og ugentlige e-mailopdateringer, så er vi engageret i en stor mobilisering. Det er vores ansvar, og jeres ansvar, at skabe dagsordenen for dette tiltrædende præsidentskab. Det må være vores holdning, at 2017 er året for den Nye Silkevej, året for det Nye Paradigme internationalt, året for en genoplivelse af Alexanders Hamiltons ideer, og for Lyndon LaRouches ideer. I USA betyder det, at Glass-Steagall omgående må vedtages; må sættes på dagsordenen; må underskrives og sættes i kraft som lov af den nye præsident. Dette vil ikke ske af sig selv; der er intet internt momentum, der vil gøre det muligt for dette at ske, mens vi læner os tilbage og kigger på. Som det hele tiden har været tilfældet, så vil dette kun ske på baggrund af en ekstraordinær mobilisering fra aktivisters side, i hele USA. Et meget vigtigt initiativ er blevet taget af en gruppe aktivister fra det nordlige Ohio; og LaRouchePAC vil udgive et åbent brev eller en pamflet, som skal forstærke og opmuntre mobiliseringen omkring dette initiativ.
Jeg vil indlede vores udsendelse med at læse LaRouchePAC’s introduktion i denne pamflet, og derefter oplæse lidt af teksten i dette åbne brev. Det lyder som følger:
»Dette brev blev oprindeligt omdelt af en gruppe ved navn, ’Vores revolution i det nordvestlige Ohio, med et forpligtende engagement til at forene hele nationen. De har udstedt en opfordring til alle grupper – for eksempel, Tea Party, Republikanere, Demokrater, fagforeninger og erhvervslivet – til at komme sammen omkring det nødvendige, første skridt, som er vedtagelsen af Glass/Steagall-loven. Da deres indsats er i overensstemmelse med LaRouchePAC’s mål, cirkulerer vi det, som en del af en national mobilisering for en omgående vedtagelse af Glass/Steagall-loven i Repræsentanternes Hus og Senatet, og underskrevet og sat i kraft af præsident Trump.
På dette grundlag anmoder vi alle borgere om at samles omkring dette økonomiske program, som den eneste, reelle måde, hvorpå både den alvorlige, økonomiske og finansielle krise, efter årtiers ødelæggende politik, kan adresseres, såvel som også muligheden for storslået udvikling – som vi nu ser det i hele Asien og videre, med Kinas initiativ for den Nye Silkevej.«
Dernæst anmoder brevet:
»Underskriv denne appel; omdel den til jeres venner, familie og netværk. Hvert underskrevet eksemplar vil blive personligt overbragt til jeres kongresmedlem og senatorer. Som præsident Franklin Roosevelt erklærede i sin første indsættelsestale: ’Denne nation kræver handling, og handling nu.’«
Teksten til dette åbne brev er som det følgende. Jeg læser det i sin helhed, fordi vi støtter dette initiativ. Det bærer titlen, »Åbent brev til Donald Trump og til alle medlemmerne af Kongressen«; dato januar 2017.
»Underskriverne af dette brev føler stærkt, at det er nødvendigt at beskytte vores økonomi fra endnu et unødvendigt markedssammenbrud og en recession som den, vi oplevede i december, 2007. Med Deres indtræden i embedet er omstændighederne for et kollaps alt for lig dem, der eksisterede i 2007: stigende værdi af værdipapirer, sammen med en manglende adskillelse af bankvirksomhed, der er beskyttet af FDIC, og så højrisiko-investeringsaktivitet.
Vi bifalder [præsident Trumps] kampagneudtalelse i Charlotte, North Carolina, 26. okt., 2016, hvor han støttede et krav om ’En Glass/Steagall-version for det 21. århundrede’, og om en genindførelse af en moderne Glass/Steagall-lov. Vi har tillid til, at De forstår, at en stabilisering af erhvervsklimaet og en sikring af de værdier, der er adskilt fra Wall Streets spekulation, er af afgørende betydning for velstand under Deres administration.
For at slå tonen for drøftelser i Kongressen i 2017 an, anmoder vi om, at [præsident Trump] gentager [sin] støtte til Glass/Steagall-loven i sin Tale til Unionen.
De kan være forvisset om, at, med denne handling, vil De finde fælles fodslag med både Republikanere og Demokrater; siden begge partiers politiske programerklæringer indeholder støtte til en banklovgivning, der adskiller forsikrede konti fra Wall Street spekulation, i de respektive partiers politiske programmer.
Vi takker Dem for Deres respons til krav fra borgere, folk fra erhvervslivet, bankierer og kongresmedlemmer, på vores vej frem. [Med en opfordring til, at Glass/Steagall-loven vedtages i både USA’s Repræsentanternes Hus og Senatet, og at loven underskrives og sættes i kraft af den tiltrædende præsident, Donald Trump, underskriver de følgende personer:]«
Så igen, dette er en appel, der cirkuleres af en gruppe aktivister; mange af dem var oprindeligt tilknyttet Bernie Sanders kampagne i det nordlige Ohio. Men det er en tværpolitisk gruppe ved navn »Vores revolution« med hjemsted i det nordlige Ohio, og som nævnt i pamflettens indledende afsnit, så er LaRouchePAC enige i dette initiativ; og dette er ét aspekt af vores nationale mobilisering for at tvinge Glass-Steagall på dagsordenen i de 14 dage, der er til indsættelsen af den nye præsident. Dette må selvfølgelig ske i sammenhæng med den fulde vedtagelse af programmet for LaRouches Fire Love; dette adresseredes af en resolution, der blev vedtaget af staten Illinois’ delstatskongres i juni sidste år, 2016, med titlen, »Appel til Kongressen om at vedtage Loven om Amerikas Økonomiske Genrejsning«, og som nævner de fire elementer i LaRouches Fire Økonomiske Love – Glass-Steagall; statslig bankvirksomhed efter Hamiltons princip; statslige kreditter til forøgelse af den produktive arbejdsstyrke i USA; og en tilbagevenden til et forceret rumprogram, med videnskab som drivkraft, og et forceret program for opnåelse af fusionsteknologi, og så fremdeles.
Så jeg siger det ligeud, at vi har 14 dage; vi befinder os i en nedtælling. Obama-administrationen er for afgående, og den nye administration tiltræder. Som vi ser på mange fronter, så befinder USA sig virkelig i et opgør netop nu om, hvad det nye præsidentskab vil blive; intet er afgjort. Vi ved dog, at der er hysteri mange steder, som de ses af de deciderede angreb på den tiltrædende præsident fra førende medlemmer af efterretningssamfundet; virkelig et uhørt niveau af angreb, giftigheder fra James Clapper og andre i deres beretninger for kongressen. Jeg tror ikke, vi har set dette tidligere i historien; og det står klart, at hysteriet opstår omkring den kendsgerning, at der er udsigt til et dramatisk skift i vores udenrigspolitik. [Dette skift] defineres mest af den kendsgerning, at den tiltrædende præsident har erklæret, at vi ikke vil indtage en holdning med krigskonfrontation med Rusland; hvilket har været de sidste otte års politik med Obama, hvis ikke mere. Så der er et stort potentiale mht. USA’s forhold til et paradigmeskift, til en dynamik, der er under forandring, på verdensscenen; men meget er fortsat uafgjort. Det er vores ansvar at tvinge Glass-Steagall/Hamilton-programmet på dagsordenen i løbet af de næste 14 dage.
For at kunne gennemføre dette, har vi brug for et langt dybere niveau af forståelse hos den amerikanske befolkning som helhed, og især hos de ledende borgeraktivister i dette land, en forståelse af, hvor Lyndon LaRouches økonomiske politik kommer fra, og hvad den større dybsindighed bag denne politik er. Vi erklærer hermed, at år 2017 vil blive et år, hvor disse ideers større dybsindighed bliver udviklet og forstået; meget lig den måde, hvorpå vi i løbet af de seneste måneder har haft en aktivering omkring en forståelse af Alexander Hamiltons ideer, med en tilbagevenden til hans politik, hans originale rapporter [til Kongressen] om statsbankvirksomhed, om producenter og så videre. Det er denne form for fordybelse og undersøgelse af den fysiske økonomis grundlæggende principper, der vil gøre dette initiativ succesfuldt og gøre det muligt for os at hæve niveauet mht. vores involvering i skabelsen af dette Nye Paradigme på verdensscenen.
Det vil Ben [Deniston] uddybe lidt nærmere; men dette er i realiteten en appel om handling og om mobilisering for at komme godt i gang med dette i det nye år.
(Her følger udskrift af hele webcastet på engelsk):
MAKE 2017 THE YEAR OF LAROUCHE'S IDEAS! CHANGE YOUR CONCEPT OF WHAT IS POSSIBLE!
LaRouche PAC International Webcast, January 6, 2017
MATTHEW OGDEN: Good evening; it's January 6, 2017. Happy
New Year! This is our first Friday evening webcast of the new year from larouchepac.com.
My name is Matthew Ogden, and joining
me in the studio is Ben Deniston from the LaRouche PAC Science
Team; and two members of our Policy Committee joining us over
video. Kesha is joining us from Houston, Texas; and Rachel is
joining us from Boston, Massachusetts.
We are in a countdown period; this is the final two weeks of
the Presidential transition. Exactly two weeks from today is
Inauguration Day, January 20th, and we will have a new President
in this country. As you know, on the LaRouche PAC website, if
you were on the activist call last night, the Fireside Chat, if
you've been receiving our daily and weekly email updates; we are
engaged in a major mobilization. It is our responsibility, and
it is your responsibility, to shape the agenda of this incoming
Presidency. We have to have the attitude that 2017 is the year
of the New Silk Road, the year of the New Paradigm
internationally, the year of the revival of Alexander Hamilton,
and the year of the ideas of Lyndon LaRouche. What that means
immediately in the United States is that Glass-Steagall must
immediately be adopted; must be put on the agenda; must be signed
into law by the new President. This is not going to happen on
its own; there is no internal momentum which is going to allow
this to happen while we sit back and watch. Just as has been the
case all along, this is only going to happen from an
extraordinary mobilization by activists from all across the
United States. A very important initiative has been taken by a
group of activists in northern Ohio; and LaRouche PAC is issuing
an open letter or leaflet which is meant to amplify and encourage
the mobilization around this initiative.
I'm going to begin our broadcast by just reading the
LaRouche PAC introduction, and then some of the text of this open
letter. This reads as follows:
"This letter was originally distributed by a group entitled
'Our Revolution' in northwest Ohio, with a commitment to unify
the whole nation. They have issued a call to all groups — for
example, the Tea Party, Republicans, Democrats, labor, and
business — to rally around the necessary first step of passing
Glass-Steagall legislation. As their effort is consistent with
the aims of LaRouche PAC, we are circulating this as part of a
national mobilization for the immediate passage of Glass-Steagall
legislation by the House and the Senate; to be signed into law by
President Trump.
"On this page, we are asking every citizen to rally around
this economic program as the only effective way to address both
the dire economic and financial crisis after decades of
destructive policies, as well as the potential for great
development — as we now see throughout Asia and beyond, with
China's New Silk Road initiative."
So it asks, "Sign this petition; share it with your friends,
family, and networks. Each signed copy will be hand-delivered to
your Congressman and Senators. As President Franklin Roosevelt
stated in his first inaugural address, 'This nation asks for
action, and action now.'"
Now the text of this open letter is as follows. I'm going
to read it in full, because we're encouraging this initiative.
It is entitled "Open Letter to Donald Trump and to All Members of
Congress"; dateline January 2017.
"We the undersigned strongly feel the need for protecting
our economy from another unnecessary market crash and recession
like the one experienced in December of 2007. As you take
office, the conditions for a collapse are too similar to those of
2007: rising asset values together with a lack of separation
between FDIC insured banking and risk-investment brokering.
"We applaud [President Trump’s] campaign statement in
Charlotte, North Carolina, October 26, 2016, endorsing a call for
'A 21st Century version of Glass-Steagall,' and reintroducing a
modern day Glass-Steagall Act. We trust that you understand that
stabilizing the business climate and securing the assets as
separate from Wall Street speculation is a key to prosperity
during your administration.
"To set the tone of discourse in Congress 2017, we ask that
[President Trump] restate [his] support for a Glass-Steagall Act
during [the] State of the Union address.
"Be assured in doing so, you will find common ground with
both the Republicans and the Democrats; since both party
platforms have the support of banking legislation that separates
insured accounts from Wall Street speculation in their respective
platforms.
"Thank you for responding to the call from citizens,
businesspersons, bankers and legislators as we move forward. [In
urging that Glass-Steagall legislation be passed in both the
House and the Senate of the U.S. Congress, and signed into law by
incoming President Donald Trump, we are the undersigned:]"
So again, this is a petition which is being circulated by a
group of activists; many of whom were originally associated with
the Bernie Sanders campaign in northern Ohio. But it's a
non-partisan group called "Our Revolution" based in northern
Ohio, and as we said in the introductory paragraph, LaRouche PAC
finds common cause with this initiative; and this is one aspect
of our national mobilization to force Glass-Steagall onto the
agenda in the 14 days between now and the inauguration of the new
Presidency. Of course, this also has to go along with the full
enactment of the LaRouche Four Laws program; this was addressed
by a resolution which was adopted by the Illinois state
legislature in June of last year, 2016, which was called "Call
Upon Congress to Enact the American Recovery Act" and this cites
the four elements of LaRouche's Four Economic Laws — Glass
Steagall; national banking in a Hamiltonian form; Federal credit
to increase the productive labor force in the United States; and
a return to a crash science driver program for space, fusion
technology, and so forth.
So again, I'll just say right off the bat, we have 14 days;
we are in a countdown. The Obama administration will be exiting
and the new administration will be coming in. As we can see on
many fronts, the United States is really in a showdown right now
for what the new Presidency will be; nothing is defined. We {do}
know that there is hysteria in many quarters, as can be seen by
the outright attacks on the incoming President by the leading
members of the intelligence community; really an unprecedented
level of attack, vitriol from James Clapper and others in
Congressional testimony. I think this has not been seen before
in history; and it's clear that the hysteria is coming around the
fact that there is a dramatic change in our foreign policy on the
horizon. Defined mostly by the fact that the incoming President
has declared that we will not be in a war-confrontation posture
with Russia; which has been the policy of the last eight years of
the Obama administration if not before. So, there's a lot of
potential in terms of the relationship of the United States to a
changing paradigm, to a changing dynamic on the world stage; but
a lot remains undefined. It's our responsibility to force the
Glass-Steagall Hamiltonian program onto the agenda in the next 14
days.
Now in order to do that, we are going to require a much
deeper level of comprehension among the American population as a
whole, and especially among the leading citizen-activists of this
country, of where Lyndon LaRouche's economic policies come from
and what the deeper profundity is behind this policy. We are
declaring that 2017 is going to be a year in which the deeper
profundity of these ideas is developed and understood; much in
the way that we had an activation around understanding the ideas
of Alexander Hamilton in the last few months with a return to his
policies, his original reports on national banking, on
manufactures, and so forth. It's this kind of delving deep and
researching the essential principles of physical economics which
is going to make this initiative successful and allow us to raise
the bar in terms of our involvement in creating this New Paradigm
on the world stage.
So, I think Ben might have a little more to say on that
subject; but we're really approaching this as sort of a call to
action and a mobilization to get the new year off to this kind of
start.
BENJAMIN DENISTON: The key point is that Mr. LaRouche has
defined the scientific standard for a recovery of the United
States; that's true, but more fundamentally, for the future of
mankind. His work in defining a more rigorous science — he
definitely drew upon the work of Hamilton and followers of
Hamilton — but he made a completely revolutionary discovery in
terms of what is the actual hard, physical science underlying
human progress, underlying economics. One area that we're doing
some work on, this is kind of a critical convergence point in the
fight around understanding these issues, is what people call
infrastructure. It's become a kind of hot, popular word;
everyone just says it. Republicans say it, Democrats say it;
it's become kind of a buzz word as some people have said. It's
as American as apple pie at this point; everyone talks about how
great infrastructure is. I think Schwarzenegger even struggled
to pronounce it once or twice in California. But do people know
what it actually means? That's a fight that Mr. LaRouche has
waged in the recent years, that people don't understand what the
real significance of full-scale, integrated infrastructure
systems is. You're not going to define what's needed in terms of
the next level of infrastructure if you're not operating from the
standpoint of an insight into the role this actually plays in
revolutionary economic progress. You can have a lot of
discussions about how we need to rebuild this, this is decaying,
our water systems — the American Society of Civil Engineers I
think it is, puts out this report card, and you can just run
through it on the infrastructure systems and it's just
horrendous. The water leakage, the transportation systems being
run down, the power systems, the locks and dams that are ready to
bust. But the issue is not just repairing all of those things;
the issue is infrastructure mediates a process by which mankind
is able to initiate completely unique and revolutionary
self-transformations in mankind's very nature of his relationship
to the natural world, so-called. Mr. LaRouche pioneered key
metrics of this with his work on potential relative population
density, for example; and actually examining how we can quantify
and understand the fundamental nature of human economic progress.
One starting point might be if you just take the standpoint of
ecology; ecology is a general idea of studying a species'
relation to an environment. If you apply that to species, you're
able to define certain characteristics of what that species is;
not just by its color, or size, or mass, but by how it relates to
the natural world — to the biosphere around it. That as much
defines that species as its other characteristics.
So, it's a general study for life that has validity. But
what happens when you apply that to mankind? You don't get any
fixed metric; mankind is not defined by any particular ecological
relationship to the environment. What you see that distinguishes
mankind is something fascinating; that mankind actually changes
those metrics. Mankind's very nature is the fact that he can
fundamentally change his relationship with the natural world
through his own actions and the actions of society. You can
measure this in terms of what Mr. LaRouche defined as the metric
of potential relative population density. If you take any animal
species, you can have some idea of a carrying capacity, a maximum
potential population that could be sustained for that species in
an environment in the biosphere as a whole, for example. You can
apply similar studies for mankind, and you can define — maybe in
broad strokes — certain boundary conditions for the number of
people the planet can sustain. But those change; and that's the
most fascinating thing. Mankind changes those characteristics.
Today, we have 7-8 billion people on the planet; hopefully
increasing now that we have some order in the world moving in a
better direction. You go back to society 1000 years ago, you
could not have supported that level of population in the
conditions of human society back at that time. Today, you can;
and if we win, tomorrow we'll be able to support a whole lot
more.
What drives that? This concept is critical right now,
because especially in the West in the United States, people have
really gone full on board with this zero-growth idea. The very
fundamental concept of completely revolutionizing our society as
a whole to support an order-of-magnitude higher population,
completely revolutionary technological development — that should
be natural; that's not in most people's minds today.
But that's infrastructure! That's what infrastructure is.
Infrastructure is an expression of defining how mankind creates a
system by which he relates to the natural world. I think some of
Mr. LaRouche's work on this is really worth digging into a lot
more. He took his understanding of potential relative population
density to some degree to a new level with this concept of the
physical-economic platform, as a proper understanding of what
"infrastructure" really is. He laid out this amazing insight into
the arc of human development as expressed in a motion between
successive physical-economic platforms. He said go back as far as
we have records of civilized humanity, to what is sometimes
called "pre-history," and certain insights into very ancient
intercontinental ocean maritime civilization that was very
sophisticated. It could travel the world much earlier than most
modern academics admit.
The very nature of that society was defined by mankind's
relation to the ocean systems and to the coastal regions. That
kind of defined a certain boundary condition for the potential
relative population density, the state of the society globally at
that time. And then you had a complete revolution with the
beginning development of inland water systems. That became a
means by which — and the technologies associated with being able
to do that, and the energy-flux densities associated with being
able to do that — that defined a means by which an entire region
of the planet, of the natural world, which was just not
accessible to human development, became accessible to human
development. People could go to these places; you could walk
inland, but you couldn't support a city there. You couldn't
support society there, you couldn't support a growing population
there; it wasn't part of the domain of the influence of mankind.
With the development of these inland waterway systems — and Mr.
LaRouche points to the work of Charlemagne in particular as
really pioneering this — this was a revolution in mankind's
ecology (if you want to call it that), in his ability to interact
with the natural world in a completely new way.
But it didn't end there! Then you had the development of
rail systems. Now you're not just limited to certain rivers and
man-made canal systems and waterways. Now you can bring, with
rail — and again, the associated leaps in physical-chemistry,
materials sciences, energy-flux density obviously with moving
into new fuel sources: steam engines and these sorts of things —
now you open up the inland territories in a completely new way,
in a way that was never …
OGDEN: Rail corridors are almost like artificial rivers —
places where you didn't have the means of navigation, but now all
of a sudden you have this rail corridor which allows you to open
up areas that are not even accessible through water.
DENISTON: Yeah, absolutely! Once again, you have a complete
transformation in what territories, what areas are accessible to
real human development. Mr. LaRouche said the next step is really
high-speed rail systems; magnetic levitation, other advanced
high-speed rail; also inter-continental connections. You're
integrating the whole world in a very high-speed transportation
system; which is being pursued now by what China's leading, with
the New Silk Road program. We could spend hours going through all
the spin-offs of that that are really taking us closer and closer
to this full World Land-Bridge proposal. But that is really the
pursuit — the development of this next platform that Mr.
LaRouche had defined. The next one, really beyond that, is space,
and we should be looking to that.
But the thing is, people have to understand infrastructure
is not something you measure just by the payback you get from it
itself. It's not a cost you have to pay for by the direct
immediate service. It pays you! It pays society. It's what
supports the ability, for again, these kind of revolutionary
changes. These issues are usually banalized by discussions, just
by using the term "infrastructure." Take transportation systems.
When mankind goes through revolutionary changes in his
transportation systems, people reduce it to "just getting
somewhere quicker." You're literally changing the physical
space-time relationship of mankind; individuals, but also
productive processes. A day means something completely different
in the context of an integrated high-speed rail system, maglev
system, than it did in the prior platform. What does "one day"
mean? It means now you can have access to a much greater
territory, various types of productions, various specialized
regions that were not accessible in that same timeframe, or maybe
for the same processes. Now they become accessible to you.
You're talking about revolutionary leaps in the very
fundamental character of mankind's interaction with the natural
world. That has to be the standard. We're not going to have a
recovery by rebuilding what we had before. We need to fix things
that need to be fixed; but it needs to be done in the process of
creating this next higher stage that's going to support, again, a
completely new level of existence. We have a critical role in
elevating the discussion to that level. Because you take
transportation, you take water management — another key issue —
it's pretty obvious and simple. Mankind takes desert regions and
then they become flourishing, green bastions of life. The
greenies out there don't like water projects, they don't like
green; they don't want to actually have increased plant growth.
It's insane. If you look at the kind of water management systems
we can be developing, you take entire territories that are just
devoid, pretty much, of life; and we could make them into very
productive, accessible regions. You combine that with a real
driver for fusion power, nuclear power, a full nuclear economy;
and you're defining a future of mankind which can have the same
relation to how we view society presently, as we might look back
to the 1850s or something.
That's how we should be thinking! That also defines the
space program on a completely new level. Space doesn't always
have to be this super-expensive niche area that only a few things
can be done in, but it's left to this exciting side-part of
society. It's going to become an integrated part of human
activity more and more, if we pursue these natural qualities of
human progress.
OGDEN: What you said in the beginning about these platforms
of infrastructure being measured, not by the money that it
returns, or the tax revenue, or something, but by, literally, the
metric of how have you changed your carrying capacity, how have
you changed your potential relative population density for a
given area.
You can think about that in the negative. If you didn't have
that sort of transportation infrastructure to bring the food to
the cities, if you didn't have the sanitation infrastructure, if
you didn't have the water management, if you didn't have the
electricity infrastructure; think about how quickly your
population your population level would collapse. Think about how
quickly you would lose the current carrying capacity of a given
land area; and how you would move backwards in what you were able
to support in terms of population density.
That is the metric for any given platform, and how you
quantify one platform to the next. It needs to be seen as that
sort of metric of potential relative population density. The
other thing to think about is the fact that over the last 40-50
years, we've had access to technologies which really should have
revolutionized our economy, but for one reason or another, have
not. We have yet to reach full saturation, in terms of nuclear
power. We have yet to reach full saturation, in terms of
high-speed rail — rail for that matter — but high-speed rail.
We have yet to fully exploit even what our capabilities were, in
terms of space exploration. Coming up in two years, in July 2019,
we're going to be observing the 50th anniversary of man landing
on the Moon, and we haven't even been back to the Moon for 45
years; let alone have we gone where we should have gone, as was
envisaged at the time that Kennedy created the mission to put a
man on the Moon. We have yet to exploit and yet to follow
through, even on the level of technology that we had {then}, let
alone using that as the diving board to leap off and to get to
the next platform of what we should have achieved.
KESHA ROGERS: What you're talking about, what we're speaking
about, is not just inter-continental development; we're talking
about inter-galactic development. I think it's important to go
back to, again, making 2017 the year of Lyndon LaRouche's ideas,
which have completely shaped and transformed the planet, to this
very point. I think it's important that we really draw out the
conception that what Lyndon LaRouche's Four Laws and the
foundation of his work behind those Four Laws, really do, is to
take away the power of the oligarchy and of this British imperial
system which has been involved in the destruction of nations and
of bringing down the potential for real scientific progress of
mankind to flourish. LaRouche's Four Laws takes away the power of
the oligarchy to push through their policy of population
reduction.
The idea that Mr. LaRouche has founded his science of
physical-economy on, is, in essence, to take the idea from
Genesis 1:28. That is, the prerogative of mankind to multiply and
subdue and replenish the Earth. This is what the oligarchy has a
problem with; this is what the British imperial system doesn't
want to see happen. I think that what Mr. LaRouche has continued
to define — even before the question of infrastructure came out
— he really coined and developed this conception of a true
science of physical-economy, which is the basis of what was
established and what was really at the center of the human
creative mind of Alexander Hamilton's works — the definitions
that were defined in Hamilton's understanding of a national
banking policy and a credit policy.
But even with that, it's not as understood as what Mr.
LaRouche has been able to take up, as you just said, Ben, in the
beginning. How is it that society has been able to get to a point
where we have over 7 billion people on the planet? Without the
breakthroughs in technological and scientific leaps of making new
discoveries and bringing new principles into the domain of the
organization of society, we would not have ever gone from a
coal-burning society. We would not have ever developed the
capability where right now, despite the fact that the British
oligarchy and their puppets like Obama want to hold mankind back
from the development and the complete breakthroughs which are
necessary in fusion technologies, in advancing mankind into
taking up a new leap in fusion development; we are now on the
verge of doing that, because of what has been set forth in the
potential for international cooperation and relations.
So, I think we're saying we are now in an urgent
mobilization to put on the table the immediate economic solutions
that the newly-elected President Donald Trump must take up.
First of all, there has to be a crash educational on getting the
American people and getting the leadership of this nation —
Congressional leaders and others — to understand that economics
is not what you were taught in your 101 classes in college, of
macro- and micro-economics and following the charts of the Wall
Street market status of where the markets were taking you. The
question of economics is on this question of the power of the
individual human mind to make new discoveries that are going to
increase and actually develop new capabilities for replenishing,
multiplying, and creating a more fruitful society. I think
that's what has been missing, now that the buzz-words that are
thrown around as you said — "infrastructure" — they don't have
a real human foundation to go with them. How are you going to
build infrastructure if you don't have a productive labor force?
This is what Mr. LaRouche has laid out in some of the
fundamentals and the foundations of his educationals in
economics. The power of labor and the science of physical
economy start with the fact that at the core of economics is the
human mind, and are human beings. The productive capabilities of
human beings which have been destroyed. That's going to be the
challenge to President-elect Trump; and what he really has a
challenge of doing right now, which is something which has not
been done in a very long time. Not really since the foundation
of our nation under Alexander Hamilton. What Hamilton, what
Franklin Delano Roosevelt had to create, was really a new
economic system; that's what we're challenging and educating on.
This is not just about passing a piece of legislation and
separating the banking system by putting forth Glass-Steagall.
LaRouche has laid out the metrics to create a new economic system
that is going to be a system based on the development of the U.S.
potential for increasing our productivity and productive powers
of labor in collaboration with international relations which are
absolutely fundamental right now. It's not going to happen, as
has been pointed out in many cases already, without very concrete
and prominent cooperation with leading nations such as Russia and
China. We can come back to some of that, but I just wanted to
make those points at present.
RACHEL BRINKLEY: Listening to this discussion and
participating in it, it's just very fresh and optimistic compared
to what you hear everywhere else in the media. I think it's just
there for 2017 — we're entering a new year — to take it upon
ourselves, for every person viewing this webcast to take it upon
themselves to really live these ideas and grow by it. To see
your life not just as trying to pay the bills and survive in a
British mode of existence in our current culture; but to realize
that this is the way the Universe operates. I think it's just
very fresh and exciting; people should not just view it as
something that they watch and support; but really figure out how
you can do more yourself as a person to make this happen. It's
not just going to come from Trump. We support what he's done in
the positive, and he deserves all support of the population at
this time; but we also have to look at this from LaRouche's work,
as has been discussed. And as Helga LaRouche has really
emphasized, this has to really be the year of LaRouche's ideas.
We need to recognize that we're in a cycle of history which is a
larger arc of history, which is created by ideas which actually
had no physical existence — had no color, had no weight — but
are having an effect.
Just for the sake of this idea of the Year of LaRouche, I'll
just read a short section from his paper from 2006 called "Saving
the U.S. Economy". He says: "The most common failure of
economists and others today is their inclination to view economic
and cultural cycles incompetently from the standpoint of
Cartesian or Cartesian-like mechanistic statistical projections.
That method is easily recognized as the common failure of
generally-accepted economic forecasting today. However, a still
deeper problem presents itself. Actual cycles in history are
never determined in the way which mechanical, statistical methods
tend to imply. Actual cycles of importance are, as I have said,
dynamical rather than mechanistic; and may be compared on that
account with the notion of astronomical cycles as Johannes Kepler
first, uniquely, introduced those conceptions into modern
physical science in his {Mysterium Cosmographicum} and {The New
Astronomy}. The proper term for astronomical-like cycles in
history is again, Riemannian. The notion of a Riemannian rather
than a statistical conception of forecasting of economy is of
crucial importance for those among us engaged in providing a
genuine physical economic recovery from those quicksands of
misery which the alleged reforms of the 1971 to 2006" — or you
could say now, 2016 — "interval have dumped upon especially the
lower eighty percentile of our income brackets today." Then he
adds: "Hey, Congress! Tell us; tell the lower eighty percentile
of our citizens what have you done to the U.S. Constitutional
General Welfare principle's superior role in the making of our
law? Without a fair comprehension of the issues associated with
that distinction, no competent legislation could be crafted for
the presently onrushing crisis."
So, I think it's true; we have to look to LaRouche's history
and ideas for this period. Just on that, we were in Congress
this week, discussing Glass-Steagall; and the current Congress
does not view Glass-Steagall as a priority. Many Congressmen are
exactly what LaRouche refers to here — still thinking in
statistical modes or basically looking at economy the same way a
Wall Street banker does. They say they're against Wall Street,
or trying to rein it in, but they're doing the exact same thing,
in effect. There's no change. It is going to be up to us and
the population to demand this idea of a resurgence of the U.S.
Constitutional principle of the General Welfare. The only way
that can be done, is with Glass-Steagall.
This system is absolutely ready to go. There are two
components of that. One is the level of bankruptcy, of the
derivative debt and the leverage ratio; and the second is the
interconnection of the system, of U.S. banks to European banks,
and different sectors of the economy all tied in together also.
Insurance with hedge funds, with banks, with commercial banks;
it's all interconnected. The system can't be saved in its
current form; it has to be Glass-Steagall joined with the rest of
LaRouche's Four Laws. So, that's the urgent call to put this
legislation on Trump's desk; it's what we have to do.
DENISTON: Absolutely. The point is, we have to make clear
with people that this is what Glass-Steagall opens up. Just
clean out the system; cut out the speculation; and use money and
credit in the financial system for what its intended purpose is
— to facilitate this kind of process. Some of the difficulty
comes when people compartmentalize these laws as distinct things.
But money doesn't mean anything outside of the context of the
physical economy. The Four Laws are really one entity and I
think making that point, if people want a recovery, if they want
living wages, if they want their infrastructure rebuilt, if they
want water that's not going to kill them and make them sick; you
need Glass-Steagall so you have a system that can facilitate the
kind of long-term investment and growth that will enable these
things to happen. I think breaking this totally ridiculous idea
of market economics and the way people think about these things
today, shattering that with this real physical conception is
critical.
Just to come back to the global picture also, the world is
moving in this direction; you have a potential now. That's
what's so exciting about this period, the potential. A lot is
not decided, a lot is unclear; but we have an opening that hasn't
existed for — you could say the past 16 years, you could say
back to Truman coming in and completely overthrowing the Franklin
Roosevelt vision and orientation for the post-war world. All of
that is now up in the air; and you have now the openness where
serious people in power are honestly thinking, "What do we do to
move mankind forward?" Instead of people like Prince Phillip,
who are saying "What can I do to kill as many people today before
I go out for lunch?" This is the time when you need to have this
full outreach orientation and make these ideas the dominant
conception in the American population today.
So, I think what's been referenced in terms of this call to
action is really critical. Everyone watching this should be
taking to heart the responsibility we all have right now at this
current historical moment to make this a reality. This is not
something that comes and goes frequently, these kinds of
opportunities.
OGDEN: Yeah, and I just want to reiterate that. The
responsibility lies on the citizens of the United States that
decide to take that responsibility on. Nobody should be under
any impression that somehow everything is just going to fall into
place, or that even this administration is necessarily positive
on its own merits. Everything that has been created as an
opening has been forced as such by years and years of activism
among people in the United States and a shifting global dynamic;
something that the LaRouches have been right in the middle of.
It's true that Trump has definitely overturned a bunch of chess
boards and has made a lot of enemies among the neo-cons and the
anti-Russia crowd and so forth. But on economics, it is our
responsibility to set the agenda. It's very unclear what that
policy is going to be. The only thing that is clear is that
there is a core group of people among the activist-citizens in
the United States who have made a decision to say, "We are going
to hold him to Glass-Steagall; and we are going to force the
agenda around this policy." That's why we are highlighting this
initiative that's been taken by the group of activists out of
Ohio and others who are now coming in on that.
But people do have to have a sense of a broader sweep of
history. What is it that makes a President great? In the
history of the United States, especially, you can actually go
back to every great President and associate with them a
seriousness about moving mankind to the next level of economic
achievement. What Hamilton did for the Washington
administration, creating the ability to have the United States
become a manufacturing country; a lot of that was done through
inland navigation, canals. Water power was a major aspect of
what we were able to accomplish in the first few decades of our
existence as a country. John Quincy Adams built more of those
canals, but also initiated the age of the railroad in the United
States. And of course, Abraham Lincoln took that to its logical
next step through the construction of the Transcontinental
Railroad in the midst of the Civil War; but he understood this
was the next economic platform for the United States. Franklin
Roosevelt — I mean, this was the age of mass power generation.
At that time, it was hydroelectric power; look at the Grand
Cooley Dam, look at the TVA. But also, Franklin Roosevelt
understood that electrification was not just something for the
urban areas; even though it was not something that you were not
going to get a monetary return from immediately, Roosevelt
understood that you needed electrification for the whole country.
The Rural Electrification Administration used the power of the
Federal government to extend that financing, to extend that
credit, to do something that was not immediately profitable in
monetary terms, but was necessary to move the country to the next
level economically. Then, of course, that was the time of the
exploration of the harnessing of the power of the atom with the
Manhattan Project. Then, John F Kennedy, in his very short time
in office, became the champion of the space program, which was
the next step. What is it that makes a Presidency great? It's
moving the country and the world to that next platform in terms
of economic achievement; and that's what Lyndon LaRouche has been
defining for 30 years. The breakthrough in fusion, the
breakthrough in space exploration, and technologies that we don't
even know exist yet. But forcing the mind of man to push the
envelope in terms what we know and what we are able to imagine.
DENISTON: Sounds like a fun year to me.
ROGERS: Yes, and I think that what you just laid out, Matt,
has to be seen with all of these breakthroughs and continued
developments, is that the impact that it had on increasing the
level of productivity not just of the United States, but of the
entire world economy. What Franklin Roosevelt did with his
programs around the TVA, the rural electrification, wasn't just a
project for a certain southern part of the United States. People
came from all over the world to be inspired and to come to
understand the science and the metrics that went into this
development and the understanding of the policies of Franklin
Roosevelt. Today, the question still remains; what are going to
be the unique contributions of the United States working in
collaboration and cooperation with other nations to increase the
productivity of the world economy? We are in a global system,
where the question right now is really to find an increase in a
new paradigm which is going to effect the common aims of all
mankind. The best expression of that is some of the beautiful
expressions that we're getting back from the space program.
Those in cooperation with participating in the International
Space Station from all over the world right now, and the
continued idea is that the nature of man goes beyond any kind of
war, conflict, or borders. The identity of the increasing of the
productivity of society is really the basis for all human
progress. I think that continues to be the point right now. We
have a unique shift that's happening globally, which honestly is
freaking the oligarchy and the empire out. They don't know what
to do about the fact that they have lost all control; that's what
you're dealing with right now.
As we were discussing before the show a little bit, this is
not necessarily about attacks on President-elect Trump himself;
this is not Trump vs. those forces who want to go against him —
such as the intelligence community and so forth — because they
don't like the way he's talking to them. It goes a little bit
deeper than that, because you now have the emergence of a new
system coming into being right now, of cooperation that the
British Empire and financial oligarchy and Wall Street interests
have been trying to keep separated and keep tabs on for a long
time. They've lost control and they've lost power. As we
continue to say, with 60-plus nations joining with the New Silk
Road and the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, this is what
we're talking about bringing the United States into; and
Glass-Steagall will be the first step in bringing the United
States into this global alliance and international cooperation
that breaks the back of the financial oligarchy and destroys this
Wall Street control. That is what people have to look forward to
— their role in the galactic system of the Universe in creating
something more profound.
OGDEN: Helga LaRouche, when we were speaking with her
earlier, cited the fact that President Xi Jinping of China always
talks about this in terms of a future of shared destiny among
mankind as a whole. This is the same thing that Dr. Edward
Teller talked about in the 1980s, and Mr. LaRouche has cited, as
the common aims of mankind. This is how you have to think about
international cooperation; nations have their own self-interests,
but it's in the interest of all mankind to achieve this future of
shared destiny, or these common aims of mankind. That doesn't
mean that there aren't differences between nations, and that
there aren't different policies; but the higher principle which
unites the contradictions through which you can resolve these
conflicts or contradictions among peoples is through this idea of
a vision for the future. This has to be what defines our
relationship with China; this has to be what defines our
relationship with Russia. Some of the more sober people have
begun to realize that the only way we can defeat terrorism — as
can be seen in Syria — is through collaboration with Russia.
But there are other positive programs that have to be
pursued; and you can see a lot of potential right underneath the
surface. Last week we talked about how the memorial to the
Alexandrov Russian choir, many of whom died in the tragic plane
crash on their way to Syria, the Schiller Institute went to the
Russian consulate in New York City and sang a memorial for these
individuals. This has become an overnight sensation on the
internet, on YouTube; this video already has over half a million
views. This is the kind of relationship among peoples that we
have to pursue. On that subject, there will be another memorial
by the Schiller Institute Chorus in New York City, who will be
visiting the 9/11 Teardrop Memorial in Bayonne, New Jersey; which
is right across the Hudson River, looking at downtown Manhattan.
This memorial to the victims of 9/11 was contributed by the
Russian people to the people of the United States. This is being
highly anticipated; the press release has been circulated widely.
The Committee for East-West Accord has posted the announcement of
this on their website. The very beginning of this press release
is as follows, and we're going to be watching this tomorrow.
"Christmas Remembrance of the Alexandrov Ensemble of the
Victims of 9/11. On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 10AM, the
Schiller Institute New York City Chorus will be singing the
'Star-Spangled Banner' and the Russian national anthem at a
wreath-laying ceremony at the Teardrop 9/11 Memorial in Bayonne,
New Jersey. The chorus will be joined by: the NYPD Ceremonial
Unit Color Guard, as well as FDNY representatives; Ms. Terry
Strada, the chairman of the 9/11 Families United for Justice
Against Terror, and others will make brief remarks."
I think this is just one of many initiatives that can guide
us into this New Paradigm as we begin the new year. We have to
realize that a lot has changed; this is not business as usual. A
lot of the ideas of what was possible and what was pragmatic
under the former rules of the game, and so forth, have got to be
changed. Members of Congress who might have supported
Glass-Steagall in the past, but said, "Oh, there's too much
opposition; the Republicans won't let it pass"; or "The Wall
Street bankers are too powerful." All of those parameters have
changed now; and it's up to us to tell people, "This is a changed
world; this is not business as usual. You have to renew your
commitment to what you think what must be done, and you have to
change your concept of what is possible."
So, I think with that said, I'll go back and cite that
petition we presented earlier in the show. This is obviously the
initiative over the next few days. We have 14 days until the
inauguration; the countdown of this transition to a new
Presidency. The only thing that is assured is what you decide to
do; the mobilization that you engage in, and the responsibility
that you take over the coming days, in order to set the agenda
for the future of the United States.
Thank you for tuning in today. Please sign up to the
LaRouche PAC email list if you haven't already. Over the next
two weeks, you will receive daily emails which will be essential
in terms of marching orders in this mobilization. And subscribe
to the LaRouche PAC YouTube channel if you haven't already.
Thank you for joining us, and thank you to Ben, Kesha, and
Rachel. Happy New Year to you. Please stay tuned to
larouchepac.com.
7. jan., 2017 – »At etablere relationer mellem Rusland og USA er den vigtigste forudsætning for løsningen af alle andre problemer i verden. Hvis der ikke er fred mellem USA og Rusland, og mere end fred, nemlig også venskab og en samarbejdets ånd, så befinder verden sig i en eksistentiel fare. Det håbefulde potentiale for at gå i denne retning, som eksisterer med den tiltrædende amerikanske præsident, er således den vigtigste forudsætning for alt andet. Begivenheden i dag i Bayonne, New Jersey, som Schiller Instituttet er stolt over at bidrage til, er ment som et første skridt for at demonstrere denne ånd af solidaritet, venskab og menneskelighed.«
Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 31. december, 2016 – På vegne af det Internationale Schiller Institut ønsker jeg at overbringe vores dybeste kondolence i anledning af det tragiske tab af 92 menneskeliv, der døde i flystyrtet på vej til Syrien. Denne ulykke er så meget desto mere årsag til sorg, fordi musikken og den patriotiske ånd hos Alexandrov Ensemblets medlemmer ville have overbragt et budskab om håb til det syriske folk. Dette er en befolkning, der i fem år har været ofre for den kriminelle politik for regimeskifte og behandlet som bondebrikker i et geopolitisk skakspil, i en total overtrædelse af deres suverænitet.