Kina vil i det nye år afholde to topmøder, hvor konsolideringen af Silkevejsinitiativet bliver temaet, og hvor det bliver klart, at en økonomisk model med win-win-samarbejde er langt den mest attraktive og for længst er blevet magneten i den globale udvikling. Dette globale udviklingsperspektiv er allerede nu det største infrastrukturprogram i menneskehedens historie, som over 100 nationer og internationale organisationer deltager i, allerede berører 4,4 mia. mennesker og for første gang i mindst 50 år repræsenterer et realistisk håb om, at problemer som sult, fattigdom, sygdomme, vi for længst har kunnet behandle og manglende uddannelse, én gang for alle kan overvindes.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Et nytårsbudskab til nyvalgte præsident Trump og det amerikanske folk.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ramasimong Phillip Tsokolibane, 23. december, 2016.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Foto: Statue af Konfucius.     

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

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

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

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

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

LaRouche PAC Webcast, Dec. 23, 2016

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Den 12. december 2016 var Helga Zepp-LaRouche – Lyndon LaRouches hustru, Schiller Instituttets grundlægger og en international nøgleperson i kampen for et nyt globalt udviklingsparadigme – særlig gæstetaler ved et Schiller Institut/EIR-seminar på Frederiksberg med titlen: »Donald Trump og det Nye Internationale Paradigme«. Blandt deltagerne var diplomater, aktivister og repræsentanter for diverse danske og internationale organisationer.

Arrangementet blev indledt med fremførelsen af en kendt traditionel kinesisk sang, Kāngdìng Qínggē (Kangding Kærlighedssang), af Feride Istogu Gillesberg (sopran) og Michelle Rasmussen (klaver). Dernæst introducerede formand for Schiller Instituttet i Danmark, Tom Gillesberg, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, som på smukkeste og mest optimistiske vis førte publikken igennem en tour-de-force af den nuværende politiske situation med såvel befolkningens afvisning af det nuværende paradigme gennem Brexit, Hillary Clintons valgnederlag til Donald Trump og det italienske ”Nej”, som et forsøg på at skabe kaos (og krig) inden Donald Trumps indsættelse den 20. januar. Dertil kom en fremstilling af det nye globale paradigme, som allerede er ved at overtage verden, illustreret ved Kinas politik for Den Nye Silkevej – som den kommende amerikanske administration skal finde sin plads i – og den videre udvikling, der er nødvendig, hvis menneskeheden skal finde sin sande identitet. Hele talen og den efterfølgende diskussion kan ses, høres og læses på: www.schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=16773.

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 18. december, 2016 – Alt imens et ekstraordinært drama udspiller sig i USA, hvor man bruger efterretningstjenester til at forsøge at vælte et præsidentvalg, der er afgjort, har den nyvalgte præsident talt ved en række enorme stævner i hele nationen.

Trumps vælgere har i titusindvis ventet i kulden for atter at lade deres vrede høre, imod de forhadte anslag imod deres liv, som er »globaliseringen« og dens tilhængere. Men, de har presserende brug for noget mere og bedre end vrede.

I verden uden for USA findes der et nyt, økonomisk paradigme, der især kommer fra de asiatiske magter, og som kunne vende amerikanernes held. Men som borgere må de forstå, hvordan de skal koble deres land til dette nye paradigme. Der er nye, fremskudte grænser inden for videnskab, inklusive inden for rumfart og fusionskraft, der kan betyde en højere, menneskelig tilværelse for deres børn. De må forstå, at disse fremskudte grænser i det forgangne blev glemt i Amerika, og de må forstå, hvem de skal samarbejde med for at genoprette dem.

De må se den politiske kamp, der nu forestår, ikke som de ser en Super Bowl, hvor man hylder »dræberslag« og sårede modspillere, men derimod som man ser et Shakespeare-skuespil, der afføder ideer. Ikke som en heavy metal-rockkoncert, men som en opførelse af Beethovens Ode til glæde som Europa holdt, da det kastede Sovjetunionens kommunisme af sig.

Støtterne bag Obama og Hillary kan ikke omstøde valget. Deres mål er at bringe en anden præsident, Ruslands Putin, til fald. De er ubøjelige i deres forfølgelse af evindelig krigsførelse, krige for »regimeskifte«, hvis målskive sluttelig er Rusland og Kina. De har til hensigt at bekæmpe disse nationer, om nødvendigt gennem krig, før de rent økonomisk overgår Obamas økonomisk forfaldne USA.

De amerikanske vælgere, nu borgere, er selv med i dramaet. De må agere for at sikre, at den nye præsident ikke forsøger at fortsætte denne krigspolitik; og at han ikke forsætter Obamas – eller det Republikanske lederskabs – økonomiske og videnskabelige politik.

De kan i stedet igangsætte en mobilisering for at redde økonomien og nationen: for en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall; skabelse af en nationalbank i Hamiltons tradition, til produktiv kredit; byggeri af ny infrastruktur på teknologiens fremskudte grænser – såsom højhastighedsjernbaner og magnetiske svæve-jernbaner – i hele landet; genindførelse af NASA’s missioner til Månen og Mars og det dybe rum, og forfølgelse af gennembrud i fusionsteknologier.

Denne form for kreativitet, hos tusinder eller endda millioner af mennesker, er det, LaRouchePAC og EIR eksisterer for. Amerikanere bruger ikke denne kreativitet, før de indser, at det amerikanske valgchok var en del af et globalt fænomen, der kan føre til et nyt paradigme for menneskets rettigheder og evner.   

Foto: Et nyt vindue, der for nylig blev installeret i målkammeret i National Ignition Facility (NIF), gør det muligt for NIF-teamet og besøgende gæster at kigge ind i kammeret, mens dette er vakuumforseglet til eksperimenter. Marts 2011. (Foto kredit: LLNL)

14. dec., 2016 – Nu, hvor Aleppo er blevet befriet, sagde den kinesiske permanente vicerepræsentant til FN, Wu Haitao, at Kina er rede til at arbejde sammen med det internationale samfund for at opnå en politisk løsning i Syrien.

»I betragtning af de nuværende omstændigheders kompleksitet og følsomhed, er det så meget desto vigtigere, at det internationale samfund holder sig til kursen, uden vaklen, mod vores overordnede mål – at søge en politisk afgørelse«, sagde Wu den 13. dec. i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd. »Enhver indsats fra det internationale samfunds side bør være befordrende for arbejdet på alle fire spor, nemlig genoptagelse af våbenstilstanden, politiske forhandlinger, fælles kontra-terrorisme og humanitær hjælp.«

»Kina er meget bekymret over situationen i nogle dele af Syrien, inklusive Aleppo, og udtrykker vores dybeste sympati for det syriske folk, der har lidt afgrundsdyb elendighed, fremkaldt af den syriske konflikt.« 

Foto: Kinas repræsentant til FN, Wu Haitao.

  

Jeg mener, at vi bør være meget glade, for hvis dette alt sammen går den rigtige vej; og det er for en stor del vores personlige forpligtelse at hjælpe, og jeg beder jer alle sammen om ikke at være passive tilskuere, men gå med i Schiller Instituttet for at være med til at implementere disse visioner og disse ideer, for så vil vi blive meget heldige med, at vi i vores levetid kan leve det nye paradigme. Og det nye paradigme vil blive første gang, menneskets værdighed vil blive virkeliggjort, og jeg mener, at det er en meget, meget vigtig mission, som vi alle bør vedtage.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

(Efterfølgende spørgsmål og svar, engelsk udskrift: Klik her. )

København, 12. december, 2016 – I dag var Helga Zepp-LaRouche særlig gæstetaler ved et Schiller Institut/EIR-seminar i København, med titlen, »Donald Trump og det Nye, Internationale Paradigme«. Otte diplomater fra seks lande deltog, inklusive to ambassadører. Nationer fra Vesteuropa, Sydvestasien, Vest- og Østasien var repræsenteret, samt fra Afrika. Desuden deltog henved 30 af Schiller Instituttets medlemmer og kontakter, såvel som også et par repræsentanter for diverse danske og internationale organisationer.

Arrangementet indledtes af en forestilling, hvor Feride Istogu Gillesberg og Michelle Rasmussen fremførte en kinesisk kærlighedssang. Dernæst introducerede formand for Schiller Instituttet i Danmark, Tom Gillesberg, Schiller Instituttets stifter og internationale præsident, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, ved at beskrive den historiske rolle, hun har spillet i skabelsen af politikken med Den Nye Silkevej.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche indledte sin meget inspirerende og dybtgående tale med den revolution imod globalisering, som Brexit, Trumps valgsejr og Nej-resultatet i den italienske folkeafstemning udgør. Hun kom med en vurdering af potentialet i nogle af Trumps hidtidige erklæringer og udnævnelser og gik dernæst videre med en detaljeret diskussion af de to, modstridende paradigmer, der eksisterer i verden i dag. Dernæst opløftede Helga tilhørerne med Krafft Ehrickes og Nicolaus Cusanus’ skønne ideer. Hun konkluderede med en appel til de tilstedeværende om ikke at handle som tilskuere på historiens scene, men derimod, sammen med os, at gå med i kampen for det nye paradigme.

Herefter fulgte en intens, timelang diskussion, hvor der kom spørgsmål fra alle de forskellige grupper, der var repræsenteret. Helga afsluttede mødet med at udfordre tilhørerne til at beslutte, hvad de ønsker at bruge deres liv til; hvilket mærke, som vil være til gavn for hele menneskeheden langt ud i fremtiden, ønsker de at sætte? Et udskrift af Helgas svar vil ligeledes snarest blive udlagt her på hjemmesiden.

Helgas tale og efterfølgende diskussion havde en dybtgående virkning på alle de tilstedeværende. 

København, 12. december, 2016 – I dag var Helga Zepp-LaRouche særlig gæstetaler ved et Schiller Institut/EIR-seminar i København, med titlen, »Donald Trump og det Nye, Internationale Paradigme«. Otte diplomater fra seks lande deltog, inklusive to ambassadører. Nationer fra Vesteuropa, Sydvestasien, Vest- og Østasien var repræsenteret, samt fra Afrika. Desuden deltog henved 30 af Schiller Instituttets medlemmer og kontakter, såvel som også et par repræsentanter for diverse danske og internationale organisationer.

Arrangementet indledtes af en forestilling, hvor Feride Istogu Gillesberg og Michelle Rasmussen fremførte en kinesisk kærlighedssang. Dernæst introducerede formand for Schiller Instituttet i Danmark, Tom Gillesberg, Schiller Instituttets stifter og internationale præsident, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, ved at beskrive den historiske rolle, hun har spillet i skabelsen af politikken med Den Nye Silkevej.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche indledte sin meget inspirerende og dybtgående tale med den revolution imod globalisering, som Brexit, Trumps valgsejr og Nej-resultatet i den italienske folkeafstemning udgør. Hun kom med en vurdering af potentialet i nogle af Trumps hidtidige erklæringer og udnævnelser og gik dernæst videre med en detaljeret diskussion af de to, modstridende paradigmer, der eksisterer i verden i dag. Dernæst opløftede Helga tilhørerne med Krafft Ehrickes og Nicolaus Cusanus’ skønne ideer. Hun konkluderede med en appel til de tilstedeværende om ikke at handle som tilskuere på historiens scene, men derimod, sammen med os, at gå med i kampen for det nye paradigme.

Helga Zepp-LaRouches tale, der varer omkring 1 time og 20 minutter, kan høres ovenover eller her:

https://soundcloud.com/si_dk/helga-zepp-larouche-in-copenhagen-donald-trump-and-the-new-international-paradigm-1

En dansk oversættelse af talen kommer på torsdag. 

Herefter fulgte en intens, timelang diskussion, hvor der kom spørgsmål fra alle de forskellige grupper, der var repræsenteret. Helga afsluttede mødet med at udfordre tilhørerne til at beslutte, hvad de ønsker at bruge deres liv til; hvilket mærke, som vil være til gavn for hele menneskeheden langt ud i fremtiden, ønsker de at sætte? Et udskrift af Helgas svar vil ligeledes snarest blive udlagt her på hjemmesiden.

Helgas tale og efterfølgende diskussion havde en dybtgående virkning på alle de tilstedeværende. 

Diskussionen findes kun som engelsk udskrift (se nedenfor).

—–

English: Introductory article

Helga Zepp-LaRouche Keynotes Copenhagen Seminar on `Donald Trump and the New International Paradigm'

COPENHAGEN, Dec. 12, 2016 (EIRNS) — Today, Helga Zepp-LaRouche was the special guest speaker at a Schiller Institute/{EIR} seminar in Copenhagen entitled, "Donald Trump and the New International Paradigm." Eight diplomats from six countries attended, including two ambassadors. There were nations from Western Europe, Southwest Asia, Western and Eastern Asia, and Africa. In addition, there were around 30 Schiller Institute members and contacts, as well as a few representatives of various Danish and international institutions.

The event was opened by the presentation of a Chinese love song performed by Feride Istogu Gillesberg and Michelle Rasmussen. Afterwards, Tom Gillesberg, the chairman of The Schiller Institute in Denmark, introduced Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche, describing her historical role in bringing about the New Silk Road policy.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche's very inspiring, in-depth speech began with the revolution against globalization represented by the Brexit, the Trump election, and the Italian No vote. She gave an evaluation of the potential represented by some of the statements and appointments Trump has made so far, and then proceeded with a detailed discussion of the two conflicting paradigms in the world today. Zepp-LaRouche then uplifted the audience with the beautiful ideas of space scientist Krafft Ehricke and Renaissance philosopher Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa. She concluded with an appeal to those present not to act as spectators on the stage of history, but engage in the battle for the new paradigm with us.

Her speech, about 80 minutes long, may be heard above, or at: https://soundcloud.com/si_dk/helga-zepp-larouche-in-copenhagen -donald-trump-and-the-new-international-paradigm-1

Afterwards, there was an intensive hour-long discussion, with questions from all of the different groups represented. Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche ended by challenging the audience to decide what they want to do with their lives, what mark they will make to benefit all humanity, far into the future.  

Zepp-LaRouche's speech and discussion had a profound effect on all present. 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Discussion:

(There is no video or audio of the discussion period, only this transcript.)

Helga Zepp-LaRouche in Copenhagen December 12, 2016
Discussion
(To facilitate free discussion, the questioners are not identified, and the questions are summarized. The answers are complete.)
Question: Can we be optimistic about Trump’s presidency, because he is skeptical about climate change, is for trade war with China and Mexico, opposes the free trade deals, and has called for tearing up the nuclear deal with Iran.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche: I said earlier that the potentialities for change are there, but it depends, to a very large extent, upon us – what we do. When Trump got elected, my first response was, this is what I call the ‘dog pull-tail, let-go feeling.’ What I mean by that is that when you pull the tail of a dog, which you should never do, naturally, and you let go, the pain stops. When you pull, there is pain, and when you stop pulling, the pain goes away.
So, in a certain sense, the election of Trump was the tail let-go feeling, because we were on an immediate course toward WWIII, and that was really the primary point, because if Hillary Clinton would have been elected — unfortunately, Hillary Clinton, when she was in the Obama administration, transformed from being a relatively OK person, she was never great, but in 2008, she was relatively decent, compared to what she became, because she capitulated to Obama, and when she made this terrible statement, for example, in Libya, about the murder of Gadaffi, “We came, we saw, and he died.” This is barbarism.
Her behavior in the Ben Ghazi case. There were so many things where she became worse than Obama, almost. So the immediate thing was that that big danger, that she would have continued the policies of Bush and Obama, in the confrontation with Russia and China, that that was stopped is, already, for the survival of civilization, the most important step.
Now, on these other points. Naturally, there is climate change. There is no question about it. But the question is, what is the cause of it? And the Schiller Institute had several conferences where we invited extremely important scientists who presented, beyond a doubt, that if you look at the last 500 million years in the history of the Earth, you have a continuous cycle of ice ages, of warming periods, of small ice ages, and the man-made component of climate change is absolutely negligible. It’s a big fraud, for example, it’s a big business. To sell CO2 omission quotas, is like selling indulgences in the Middle Ages.
Obviously, there are climate changes, and some countries which have low coasts are very much affected, but then you have to adapt to these climate changes with modern technology, and you cannot solve the problem by going to electric cars, or going to decarbonization of the world economy. This is a big fraud, and I am not saying that Trump is saying this for all the right reasons, but the idea to impose measures implied with the “great transformation” Schellnhuber is talking about – I mean these people do not want development.
We have been on this case for the last — as a matter of fact, we, the LaRouche movement, had a conception about the development of the world really starting at the end of the sixties.
I joined Mr. LaRouche because I went to China, Africa, other Asian countries, and I saw the horrible, horrible underdevelopment. So I came back from this trip, and I said, ‘I have to become political, because I want to change this.’ I could give you a long, long story of the many observations, because I went with a cargo ship, and when you go to these countries with a cargo ship, you get a quite different idea than if you go on a 5-star cruise, and hotels. You see how the poverty affects people in their real lives. And I came back, and I looked at all the political movements, and I saw that LaRouche was the only one who said, ‘We have to have Third World development. We have to have technology transfer. We have to alleviate this poverty.’
And we had a positive conception already in the seventies, and therefore, when the Club of Rome appeared, we immediately said, ‘This is a fraud.’ Because the Club of Rome said, ‘There are limits to growth. We have reached equilibrium. Until the year 1972, you could develop, but now, we have reached equilibrium, and we have to have sustainable development. We have to have appropriate technology.’ These notions did not exist before, because before, you had the idea of a UN Development Decade, where each decade, you would overcome the underdevelopment by qualitative jumps. And when we recognized this propaganda by the Club of Rome, we immediately said, ‘This is a complete fraud,’ and the people who wrote the book “Limits to Growth,” Meadows and Forrester …
Q: A followup about the Paris climate summit.
A: I would like to give you written documentation afterwards of the studies that were made by these geologists, which are, without question, the explanation of climate change is not man-made. The anthropogenic aspect of it is so miniscule. Climate change has to do with the position of the solar system in the galaxy, which goes in cycles around a certain axis, and you can see that over 500 million years, the data confirms that you have these wide changes. Greenland is called Greenland, because it was green. There used to be vineyards. You had ice ages which completely covered the Earth, and the reason why I went into this longer history, is to show how the environmentalist movement was created with the attempt to keep development down, and climate change is just another expression of the same effort.
If you look at which firms which are investing in solar parks, in wind parks, who is controlling the CO2 emission trade, you have all the top hedge funds in London and Wall St. I can give you a lot of documentation about it, which does not mean that climate change is not real, because you have the rise of the oceans, and you have climate change, you have extreme weather, but that has been happening for hundreds of millions of years.
And, on the other points you raised, obviously, from our standpoint, the cancellation of NAFTA, is a good thing, because NAFTA did not allow development for Mexico. As a matter of fact, NAFTA is the incarnation of the cheap labor production model of free trade. What you need is – especially countries which are not developed, you need protective tariffs for their own good. They have to develop a domestic market first. The booklet which I emphasized, which you should please read, “Against the Stream,” is one of many, but it is very condensed, and a very good book.
The question is, ‘What is the source of wealth?’ Is the source of wealth cheap labor, to buy cheap raw materials, produce cheaply, and sell expensive? Is that the cause of wealth? No.
The only cause of wealth is the increase in the creativity of labor power. And a good government is, therefore, investing the maximum amount into education, into sponsoring the creativity of youth, of labor, and the more people in the labor force, by percentage, are engineers, scientists, the more productive the economy becomes.
And the free trade system, of which NAFTA is just one example, did exactly the opposite. China, which was part of this in the beginning — the reason why China today has so many environmental problems, like smog, like a large amount of groundwater being contaminated, is the result of the fact that China, in the beginning of its industrialization, accepted being a cheap labor production place for the U.S. and for Europe. When I was in China, even in 1971, I visited some factories which were horrible. They were absolutely horrible. The working conditions were terrible, the labor force, which produced electrical devices for radios, it was horrible. They worked for 18 hours. No health system. It was just terrible. And that is how China developed in the first phase.
But then China, with Deng Xiaoping, started to recognize that that is the wrong way. So China is now on a completely different track. They are putting the maximum emphasis on science and technology, the increase of excellence. Last year, they produced 1 million scientists. That’s double of what the U.S. produced. Obviously China is a larger country, but still. What will finally be decisive is the number of people who are creative. And that is why China, right now, has the best education system, because they have understood that the source of wealth is not raw materials. Is not trade conditions. It is the creativity of their own people. And that it a good thing. If we go to a system where we have a certain amount of protectionism, to protect the development of the domestic market, it is a good thing.
There is no danger of cutting [countries off from one another], because all of these infrastructure projects are connectivity. The world will be more connected than ever before. But this whole myth of free trade is really a very bad thing. It has been coined by the people who profit from it. That’s why the world is in the condition it is right now, where the rich become richer, and the poor become poorer. The middle class is being destroyed all over the world. And I would really like to communicate with you so that we can deepen this dialogue.
On the Iran thing, I don’t think he will break it, but that is my hope. I don’t know.
So, I’m not saying he’s a – as I said, Baron von Knigge would get a heart attack when he hears Trump’s speeches, but the world was in such a grip of evil, satanic evil, that it is a good thing that there is a break, and the unfortunate thing, is that Europe is still in this grip.
You can see it. Von der Leyen, the German Defense Secretary, had the funniest reaction. The day after the election of Trump, she said ‘I am deeply shocked,’ about this election result, because nobody thought this would happen. Now, this same lady is now parading in Saudi Arabia with Crown Prince Bin Salman Al Saud, and she isn’t shocked. So, I don’t know what’s wrong with her. I think that that would be a good place to be shocked, or not even go there.
So, I have come to the conclusion that a lot of the Europeans who react this way to the defeat of Hillary, are obeying another power in their head, and that power I call The British Empire, which is still in place, and it dominates Europe, and that is why they feel – I was asking myself, how come all of these politicians are so arrogant towards the new president of the U.S.? Because they were the boot-lickers of Washington until yesterday, and they would immediately do everything Washington would say and do, so I asked myself, ‘Where is this sudden self-assertedness coming from?’ And the only explanation I came up with, was to say, they must have an idea that there is another power which is more powerful than Trump, otherwise, they wouldn’t have this sudden arrogance.
And it is the British, because you will see tomorrow, because tomorrow, there will be a federal press conference in Berlin, where a number of people will present their contribution to the German chairmanship of the G-20, which will take place in July in Hamburg. This will be Joachim Schellnhuber, the head of the WBGU (German Advisory Council on Global Change), this is the scientific advisory organization advising the German government. He put out this paper about ‘the great transformation,’ which we wrote about. You can look in the archive. He is the head of the idea of a decarbonization of the world economy.
Now, if you decarbonize the world economy, without having fusion, that would be one thing, to have fusion power in place. Then you can talk about getting rid of fossil fuels, but without having fusion, and being against nuclear energy, fission, it means that you will reduce the world’s population to 1 billion or less, because there is a direct correlation between the energy-flux-density, and the number of people you can maintain. Schellnhuber said that the carrying capacity of the Earth is maximum 1 billion people. He didn’t say that he wants to do with the 6 billion who are already there. If he would be consequent, he should hop away from this planet.
And they will announce a sinister plan, to try to use the fact that many countries have environmental problems, to sneak in their anti-development programs. People should not be naïve, because not everybody thinks that population growth is a good thing. There are many people who think that each human being is a parasite, destroying nature. That is the image of man which many people have. The greenies, for example.
We look at it in a different way. We think that the more people you have, the greater longevity you can have, division of labor, and a modern scientific society needs many people with a long life span. Because if you are in the Third World, and you die, and you have an average life expectancy of 40 years, or less, you cannot have scientists, because the production of a scientist takes 30-35 years, and if people then die right away, then you can’t have a modern society.
So the more creative people you have, the better. Each human being is an incredible addition, because we are creative.
Tom Gillesberg: Schellnhuber, for his services, was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE), and for him, he personally has said, that the highpoint of his existence was that the British Queen, personally, gave him the Order of the British Empire, for his efforts to reduce the possibility for mankind’s survival, you could say, so it is connected with what you said.
Q: This is the best speech I have ever heard in my life.
Is this a second American Revolution, and will the Federal Reserve, which is privately owned, be closed down, and will money be created for the benefit of all people, and not just the private Fed?
A: I don’t know, because, as I said, there are so many unknowns about Trump, and what he will do, and how it will play out. All I can say is, if Trump does not fulfill his promises, the same people who caused his election, will topple him. Because I don’t think that this process, which is now underway, where ordinary people have just had it — If you think about the declaration of Independence, it has this formulation that you will not bring down a government system for light reasons, but, if for a long time, the common good is being violated, I don’t know the exact text, then, people have the right and duty to replace this government with a rightful one, and that idea I call natural law.
It’s the same idea that Friedrich Schiller had in Wilhelm Tell. This is a play he wrote, which takes place in Switzerland. There, the Hapsburg oligarch is also trampling on the rights of the Swiss people, then they unite with the Rütli Oath. There is this beautiful formulation which says, ‘When the rights of people are trampled upon, they have the right to reach out to the stars, and take from the stars those rights which are eternally embedded in these stars. (I am not saying it as beautifully as Schiller does.)
If you compare these two texts, the Declaration of Independence, and the Rütli Oath from Schiller’s play, they are almost identical, and it’s very clear that Schiller was inspired by the American Revolution when he wrote that play, because in his plays, there are many ideas which resonate with the American Revolution, and he actually wanted to immigrate, at one point, to America.
So I think that if Trump turns out to be another fraudster, which we don’t know yet, I think that this process of revolt will continue, because I only mentioned some elements.
I could mention that there are many countries now in realignment. for example, the Philippines, Duterte. This was supposed to be the playground for the conflict with China in the South China Sea. Now Duterte sent his Defense Secretary, Lorenzana, to Russia and China, to buy weapon systems from Russia and China, and to establish a friendship with China, and he said, ‘The Philippines is no longer the colony of the U.S.’
Then you have Japan, which was the junior partner of the U.S. in the Pacific. Abe went to Sochi, meeting with Putin. In three days from now, Putin will go to Japan to have a state visit. They are talking about a peace treaty between Russia and Japan.
All of these are new alignments. There is a shift in the strategic situation, and I don’t think that that shift can be reversed.
Q: About Russia hacking the U.S. election. Why doesn’t the U.S. have anti-hacking measures? Can you explain that?
A: I cannot explain that, for the same reason that I cannot explain why the NSA is surveilling everyone, all their phones, their communications, worldwide. They can observe all of these things, but they don’t know about terrorism. They don’t know about drug trafficking. They don’t know about money laundering. Either their system is not so good, or they are looking in the wrong direction. I can’t answer your question.
Q: Will the result of the Brexit be positive for Europe, to enable continental Europe to become stronger, and to improve cooperation with the eastern parts of Europe?
A: I think that the EU is not functioning, and I think it is not just the Brexit. The “No” in Italy is a reflection of the same dynamic. Now you have Gentiloni, the new prime minister, and they will probably go for new elections. Right now, in the polls, you have the 5 Star Party leading. If they win, and form the new government, they have already said that they would leave the EU, and leave the Euro, and, in a certain sense, it is not functioning.
The reason I was against the introduction of the Euro from the beginning, was because we said that it cannot function. You cannot have a European currency union in something which is not an optimal economic space. You cannot put advanced industry together with an agrarian country, with completely different tax laws, pension laws, and you don’t want a political union, because Europe is not a people. You don’t have a European people. I don’t know what the Danes are saying. I don’t know what is in the Danish newspapers. The people of Slovenia have no inkling of what is happening in Alsace-Lorraine, and so forth, and so on. You don’t have a European people. Esperanto doesn’t function. You have 28 nations, 28 histories, 28 cultures.
That doesn’t mean that you can’t work together. I think that the idea of Charles de Gaulle to work together as an alliance between perfectly sovereign fatherlands, that is a correct idea. And all these fatherlands can adopt a joint mission, like to develop Africa, or other things.
I just think that this European Union is not going to stay forever.
Q: (followup) Will it be easier for Germany and France to promote this development, as the leading countries?
A: Everybody says that Germany is the biggest beneficiary of globalization, the EU, and the Euro, but that’s not really true, because, if you look at it more closely, then you can say that since the introduction of the Euro, the domestic market of Germany has completely stagnated. And the number of people who became poorer has increased.
Q: (followup) What about regarding the dialogue with Russia.
A: Oh yes, that would be much easier.
I do not think that this EU bureaucracy is capable of reform, because by their self-understanding, they are the local pro-consuls of this empire, and I think that it would be much better if Germany, France, and other countries have individual relations. And I don’t think that – this whole idea that you need a European Empire to compete with Russia and China and other emerging countries – The EU, by definition, is an empire. They have said it themselves. Robert Cooper, who has some kind of advisory function [currently serving as EU Special Advisor with regard to Myanmar], he said that the EU is the fastest expanding empire in history. It’s a bad idea.
And the Russians for – I noticed this since the beginning of the year 2000, that the Russians did not make a difference anymore between the EU and NATO. They said that it’s the same thing. And it is the same thing.
Q: You said that the One Belt, One Road was stripped of commercial interests from the Chinese side, as opposed to the IMF, World Bank. On what basis do you say that it is less interest-driven than the Bretton Woods institutions?
A: Well, because, the question is not that I’m saying that China is perfect. I’m not saying that. But when you look at anything, you have to look at the vector of development, is it going upward, or is it going downward? And from that standpoint, I had the advantage that I was in China in 1971, which was in the middle of the Cultural Revolution. This was so different than China today.
The Cultural Revolution was horrible for the people. The Red Guards would take people out of their homes, put them in jail, send them to the countryside, and people were distraught.
And now, people in China are happy. If you talk to students, or to young people, they are optimistic. They say, ‘Oh. I will do this in the future. I have these plans.’ I talked to a group of students in Lanzhou two years ago, and they said, ‘We will go to Africa. We will develop Africa.’ I have never heard a German student say this. Yeah, when I was a student, but that’s a long time ago.
I think that it is very worthwhile to read the speeches of Xi Jinping. There is a book, “The Governance of China,” but that only has about 60 speeches, and there are many, many more. For example, you should read the speeches he gave when he went to France, to Germany, and to India.
For example, when he went to India, he made a speech which was really incredible, because he said that he loved Indian culture from his early youth, and then he gave so many examples of the high points of Indian culture, the Gupta period, the Upanishads, the Vedic writings, Rabindranath Tagore, many predicates which prove that he really knows what he is talking about. He is not just one of these politicians who have a PR advisor about how to make nice bubbles in your speeches, but you could really see that he means it. And the same for Germany. He came to Germany and he emphasized Schubert and Heine, things which I also appreciate about Germany, and he did the same thing in France.
And I don’t think that the Chinese leadership would agree with me when I say this, but I think that they are less communist than Confucians. They probably would not admit that, because they are officially the Communist Party, and that’s OK, but, I come from Trier, and Trier is the birthplace of Karl Marx, so I have studied Karl Marx, and I think that they are still socialist, or communist, or whatever, but they always said that they are communist with Chinese characteristics, and these Chinese characteristics are Confucianism.
And the Confucian idea of man is lifelong learning, lifelong perfection, that everyone should be a Jinzi, a wise man, a noble man, and Confucius said, if the government is bad, then the Jinzi, these wise people, should replace the government. Also the idea that you have to have an harmonious development, starting with the family, continuing in the nation, and then, larger, among the nations.
China is the only country that has not made wars of aggression, colonial wars, in its 5,000 years of history. It was invaded many times, the Opium War, and things like that, but China is not an aggressive nation, at all.
And if you look at what they are doing in practice, the IMF and the World Bank have prevented Third World development, and China is going from one country to the next, building science cities, helping with space cooperation, bringing in developing countries in the most advanced areas of science, in order to not prevent their development. I think this is a completely different approach.
I think that the Chinese have come up with a new model of government, which I have not seen in any place in Europe, the U.S. ever, and it’s a model which is overcoming geopolitics, which is, if you say, ‘I have a win-win for cooperation. Everybody can join.’ Then, if everyone joins, then you have overcome geopolitics.
And geopolitics is the one thing that caused two world wars, and in the age of thermonuclear weapons, we cannot have geopolitics anymore. So I think that these are very important differences.
Sure, China has its own interests. Win-win means that China also has an interest. China has advantages, but, for example, if you ask people from Africa, ‘Would you rather have deals where China gets raw materials for long periods of time, but they build infrastructure for Africans.’ They like that much better than Europeans who come and say, ‘Oh, you should obey democracy,’ and do nothing.
Q: Statement about Chinese infrastructure projects in Morocco. Both are winners, as opposed to projects 20 years ago run by other countries. The Chinese there have learned Arabic. The projects have greatly reduced the travel time. They have a different perspective than the French, and Europeans had.    
Tom Gillesberg: Do you have final remarks?
A: I would just say that people should not just believe, or not believe, what I am saying, but take an active attitude to try to find out what the truth is, for themselves. Because the world is not helped by replacing one ideology by another. The only way you can be certain, is that you become a truth-seeking person yourself. Because the whole question about what went wrong, is that people forgot what it is to be an honest truth-seeking person, taking the truth not as something you reach finally, but something you always improve.
Schiller had this beautiful writing about universal history, where he said that the philosophical mind is the first one to take his own system apart, to put it together more perfectly again.
I think that that quality – and, also, we had two days ago in Berlin, a very important event, which was also about the dialogue of cultures, and every – we had a very important presentation, which you can soon see on our webpage, where we had a double bass player who spoke about the importance of Wilhelm Furtwängler as a conductor, and he gave some musical examples, and he compared the performances of Furtwängler with some modern conductors, and the difference is so unbelievable. The music of Furtwängler is transparent. It is beautiful. It is absolutely overwhelmingly uplifting, and many of the other conductors are just playing along, with no respect for what the composition is.
And he really described, with many quotes from Furtwängler, that what is needed is this inner quality of truthfulness. That you don’t fake it, because if you’re not truthful – for example, you cannot recite poetry, if you’re not truthful. You cannot sing beautifully, if you’re not truthful. Sure, you can sing brilliantly, you can do all kinds of tricks, and it impresses people, but to really produce art, you have to be truthful. You have to try to understand the poetical idea, the musical idea. You have to step back with your ego behind what the composer or the poet wrote. And that’s what is wrong with modern theater. In Regietheater, they just say, ‘I don’t care what Schiller wrote, or what Shakespeare wrote. I just make my modern interpretation. I put Harley Davidson’s into Shakespeare, and it doesn’t matter.’ And that is not art.
And I think the question is, ‘What do you do with your life?’ That is really the question. Are you becoming a creative person, devoted to that with your life, you contribute to enable mankind to move on a little step further, and become better.
Or, are you just eating three tons of caviar, and have 3,000 Porsches. And then, when you die, they write on your gravestone, ‘He/she ate three mons of caviar, and had 3,000 Porsches,’ and that was it.
No, you should try to be an honest person, trying to make human society better with what you do. And, once you do that, you become happy. Then you are free. This inner freedom, is what you should try to find. And that is the only way that we will win that battle. It’s not Trump. It is, can we get enough people to be innerly free.
And then we win.
End of discussion

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 11. december, 2016 – ISIS er på flugt fra de syriske og russiske styrker; det ene valg efter det andet (Brexit, Filippinerne, USA, Frankrig, Italien, Sydkorea) viser, at befolkningerne føler afsky for det britisk/amerikanske bankimperiums økonomiske diktatur og forsøget på at indlede krige med Rusland og Kina; Kina og Rusland opbygger partnerskaber med over 100 nationer for at samarbejde om store udviklingsprojekter for at skabe moderne nationer og eliminere fattigdom, som Kina næsten har opnået.

Alt dette giver grund til optimisme. Men, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche sagde i dag, så må vi ikke blive selvtilfredse. Det sårede dyr, som er Det britiske Imperium og dets marionet-neokonservative, der især omfatter Obama, i USA, vil ikke sky noget middel for at ødelægge fremvæksten af dette nye paradigme, især i USA. I takt med, at ISIS er i færd med at blive besejret i Syrien, går de saudiskskabte terrorister bersærk internationalt med morderiske selvmordsangreb, der blot i løbet af de seneste dage har dræbt over hundrede mennesker og såret mange andre, i Egypten, Tyrkiet, Yemen og Nigeria. Obama og fraktioner i CIA kommer med vilde påstande om, at de ikke tabte valget i USA, men at det var Putin, der stjal det! Det får på en måde 1940’ernes og ’50’ernes Harry Truman/Joe McCarthy-heksejagt på kommunister til at ligne en barneleg, og Obama har krævet, at James Clapper, direktør for den Nationale Efterretningstjeneste, leder et team, der skal undersøge det såkaldte russiske valg-tyveri til fordel for Trump.

Husk på, at det var Clapper, der for den amerikanske Kongres svor på, at der ikke fandt nogen masseovervågning af amerikanske borgere fra efterretningsvæsenets side sted – en løgn, der var en vigtig årsag til, at Edward Snowden besluttede at afsløre, at det var præcist, hvad de gjorde, og mere til, i hele verden. Set i dette lys var det rigtigt af Donald Trump at afvise denne fraktion af efterretningssamfundets »latterlige« påstand om russisk indgriben (andre fraktioner tilbageviser løgnen), og at minde os om, at dette var de samme mennesker, der lancerede ødelæggelsen af Mellemøsten ved hjælp af den overlagte løgn om Saddam Husseins angivelige masseødelæggelsesvåben, selv, da FN’s team i Irak rapporterede, at disse ikke eksisterede.

På den anden side, så må optimisme ikke blive til selvtilfredshed. Trump er en ukendt størrelse. Alt imens han har omgivet sig med ledende generaler, der har udtrykt stærk opposition mod Obamas risikable militæreventyr i Mellemøsten og ønsker at samarbejde med Rusland om at knuse terrorist-svøben, og ligeledes, at han har krævet en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall, så er Trump samtidig omgivet af Goldman Sachs-folk, der har anført udplyndringen af ikke alene USA, men af en stor del af verden, på vegne af finansimperiet i London og New York. Hvilken politik, der vil lede USA og Vesten i de kommende måneder, vil blive afgjort af den grad af mod og beslutsomhed, som mønstres af den amerikanske og europæiske befolkning, der vil gå videre end til at »smide disse uduelige karle ud« og kræve et ægte, nyt paradigme – som vil erstatte City of Londons og Wall Streets herrevælde med Glass-Steagall og Lyndon LaRouches Fire Love samtidig med et krav om, at USA og Europa går med i den Nye Silkevej og samarbejder med Kina og Rusland, snarere end at true med krig mod dem.    

(Se LaRouchePAC-video om LaRouches Fire Love, med fuldt dansk udskrift)

Spørgsmålet om et potentielt Nyt Paradigme, baseret på udvikling snarere end geopolitik, var på programmet i denne uge i Shanghai ved et forum, der var sponsoreret af Shanghai Institut for Internationale Studier og Forskningsinstituttet for Dialog mellem Civilisationer (DOC), hvor man forbereder samarbejde mellem den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union (EAEU), der er lanceret af Rusland, og Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet, lanceret af Kina. Som stifter af DOC, dr. Vladimir Yakunin, formulerede det som et spørgsmål, der skal løses: »Hvordan sikrer vi os, at den samtidige udvikling af disse forskellige vækstcentre fører til synergi, og ikke konflikt? Det Økonomiske Silkevejsbælte og den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union kunne blive det, der viser vejen.«  

Foto: Syrisk militæroperation for at befri de sydlige distrikter af det østlige Aleppo. (30. nov.) (twitter.com/AlalamChannel)

9. dec., 2016 – FN’s Generalforsamling blev enige om at vedtage dokument A/71/9, der opmuntrer alle medlemsstater til at støtte Kinas »Bælt-og-Vej-initiativ« med det formål at styrke udviklingen af økonomien i Afghanistan og i regionen. Desuden opfordrer dokumentet det internationale samfund til at sørge for et sikkert miljø for gennemførelsen af Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet. Det var første gang, at alle 193 medlemmer enedes om at inkorporere Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet i FN-resolutionen efter resolution 2.274, i hvilken FN’s Sikkerhedsråd i marts måned opfordrede alle parter til at deltage i dette initiativ.

Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet er således blevet omsat til en international konsensus. Den udbredte accept og støtte, som initiativet har fået, er ligeledes en indikation af, at programmet er fuldstændig i overensstemmelse med FN’s principper og mål.

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 7. december, 2016 – På 75-års dagen den 7. dec., 1941 – »en dag, som vil blive husket som en skændselsdag«, som FDR erklærede – breder et lignende chok sig i De forenede Stater, og i verden, med Det britiske Imperium, der står over for sin mulige, endelige død. Politisk, økonomisk og strategisk vakler Imperiet, med Olympens bjerg, der smuldrer under dets fødder.

På den politiske side har den italienske befolknings overvældende afvisning af den EU-dikterede folkeafstemning, der skulle overgive magten til Bruxelles-bureaukraterne, som handler på vegne af bankerne i City of London, føjet yderligere et slag til Brexit, Trumps valgsejr, Fillons valgsejr i Frankrig, Dutertes valgsejr i Filippinerne og den allesteds nærværende fornemmelse af, at den britiske »globalisering« af hele verden under bankierernes kontrol er ved at være forbi.

På den økonomiske side bliver det i stigende grad erkendt, at den hektiske bestræbelse for at holde de europæiske banker oven vande gennem mere kvantitativ lempelse (’pengetrykning’), mere bail-in (ekspropriering af bankindskud) og mere bail-out (statslig bankredning) – de samme, mislykkede bestræbelser, som Bush og Obama har brugt i USA – skal dække over ødelæggelsen af folks levebrød, hvor produktiv beskæftigelse og selve produktiviteten bliver lukket ned for at redde spekulanterne. Og så virker det ikke engang, for at redde bankerne!

På den strategiske side, så er krigene for »regimeskifte«, som Bush, Blair, Cameron og Obama har ført i hele Mellemøsten, og som har overgivet land efter land til bestialske terroristbander, ved at blive nedkæmpet på Syriens slagmarker. Aleppo er næsten blevet befriet fra al-Qaeda og ISIS, disse, de britiske og saudiske monarkiers skabelser. Som oberst Pat Lang (pens.) bemærkede på sin blog, Sic Semper Tyrannis:[1] »Det, der er sket i borgerkrigens heksekedel, er, at en ny magt er opstået i Levanten. En ny, syrisk, arabisk hær eksisterer nu, takket være russisk uddannelse, udstyr og rådgivning.«

Som en yderligere konsolidering af denne afvisning af britisk imperiepolitik, erklærede Donald Trump i går aftes i North Carolina med sin hidtil stærkeste formulering:

»Vi vil ophøre med at fare rundt for at vælte udenlandske regimer, som vi intet ved om; som vi ikke bør være indblandet i. Denne destruktive cyklus med intervention og kaos må omsider være slut … Vi søger harmoni og god vilje mellem verdens nationer.«

Grundlaget for denne harmoni er blevet fremlagt i detaljer i EIR’s Specialrapport, »Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«, som nu cirkulerer i hele verden på engelsk, kinesisk og arabisk. I løbet af den forgangne uge fortalte to politiske ledere fra Kina, Patrick Ho, tidligere Hong Kong-indenrigssekretær, og viceudenrigsminister Fu Ying fra Beijing, et amerikansk publikum i Washington og New York, at den nyvalgte præsident Trump har mulighed for at bringe Kina og USA sammen omkring global opbygning af nationer, ved at tilslutte sig Xi Jinpings Silkevejsprojekter, Bælt-og-Vej-programmet, og ved at tage imod det stående tilbud fra præsident Xi om samarbejde, som Obama havde afvist til fordel for militær konfrontation med både Kina og Rusland.

Trump har gjort det ekstremt klart, at han vil arbejde sammen med præsident Putin omkring bekæmpelse af terrorisme, samt inden for andre, endnu ikke afgjorte områder. I dag foretog han endnu en positiv gestus over for Beijing ved at udnævne guvernøren for Iowa, Terry Branstad, som den næste ambassadør til Kina. Branstad er en nær, personlig ven til præsident Xi Jinping, et venskab, der stammer fra Xis mange besøg til Iowa i årenes løb.

For virkelig at bringe Amerika ind i en samarbejdsrelation med Rusland og Kina, må det transatlantiske banksystems bankerot løses, helst før der indtræffer en ukontrollabel sammenbrudskrise. Dette kræver den omgående genindførelse af Franklin Roosevelts Glass/Steagall-lov og afskrivning af boblen med værdiløse derivater, der er i færd med at drive realøkonomien ad Helvede til. I dag er aktivist-teams fra hele USA’s østkyst i Washington, hvor de giver de sædvanligvis totalt idéforladte kongresmedlemmer deres marchordrer om at tilslutte sig den nu på globalt plan gærende revolution, der er i færd med at bringe en afslutning på Det britiske Imperiums finansdiktatur gennem Glass-Steagall og statslig kredit, der, efter Hamiltons principper, dirigeres til opbygning af industri, landbrug, infrastruktur og satsning på fusionskraft og udforskning af rummet. Magten til og muligheden for at gøre dette ligger i dette øjeblik i vore hænder, et øjeblik, der ligeledes vil »huskes som en skændsel«, hvis vi mislykkes. Som i 1941, har alle patrioter i deres respektive nationer, og alle borgere i verden, muligheden for at ændre historiens gang til det bedre, ved at tilslutte sig denne historiske, internationale kamp for at skabe en civilisation, der er i overensstemmelse med alle menneskers værdighed.

Foto: SAA Tigerstyrker og civile i Aleppo, Syrien, 7. december, 2016.  

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 6. december, 2016 – Den formelle overgang til USA’s næste præsidentskab – der er 45 dage til Indvielsesdagen for Donald Trump – får uophørlig opmærksomhed i USA og i andre medier, men, den historisk vigtige overgang i verden som helhed er det følgende: hvor hurtigt og vist vil USA og Europa opgive det geopolitiske, kasino-økonomiske system og gå med i det nye, globale win-win-paradigme? Udfordringen består i at mobilisere folk til at være med til at få dette til at ske. Dette omfatter, at de foretager en personlig ændring og bliver aktive, og ikke længere blot ser passivt og afventende til. Der gives øjeblikke i historien, hvor den subjektive faktor er altafgørende. Vi befinder os ved et sådant øjeblik.

Omstændighederne er dramatiske. Yderligere initiativer for fred og udvikling kommer i denne uge fra Rusland og Kina.

I dag var premierminister Dmitri Medvedev vært for mange møder i Moskva med den tyrkiske premierminister Binali Yildirim, inkl. møder med præsident Vladimir Putin. Sammen med afgørende, økonomiske engagementer, såsom byggeri af kernekraftværker og gasledningen Turkish Stream, bekræftede lederne det, som Yildirim kaldte behovet for en ny, international sikkerhedsarkitektur for at besejre terrorisme, og en ny dialog med vestlige magter på dette grundlag.

I Tokyo fremlagde en kinesisk embedsmand fra den magtfulde Nationale Udviklings- og Reformkommission (NDRC) i går et tilbud om at opkoble Bælt-og-Vej-programmet til Japans og Sydkoreas økonomiske »arbejdsplaner«. Hr. Cao Wenlian, generaldirektør for NDRC’s Internationale Samarbejdscenter, talte om at styrke komplementariteten i de tre nationers økonomiske aktiviteter, der tilsammen allerede udgør 36 procent af verdens BNP. Cao talte i anledning af det Første Forum for Samarbejde om Industrikapacitet mellem de tre lande. Dette fremstød med det kinesiske tilbud tilsidesætter Japans mangeårige underdanighed under transatlantisk, økonomisk og militær, tvivlsom og aggressiv manipulation.  

Selv Henry Kissinger – hvis personlige historie kan siges at indbefatte særdeles uønskede paradigmer – taler offentligt til fordel for samarbejde mellem USA og Kina. Kissinger mødtes den 2. dec. med præsident Xi Jinping i Beijing. I dag mødtes han med Donald Trump i New York City. I går aftes under et Manhattan-arrangement svarede Kissinger på et spørgsmål, der var stillet af LaRouchePAC’s Daniel Burke, som spurgte: »Hr. LaRouche deler stærkt Deres mening om, at USA og Kina må samarbejde. Og han understreger, at USA og Kina kan samarbejde omkring politikken med Ét bælte, én vej; at dette ville være en indlysende vej til at genopbygge USA’s kollapsende økonomi … « Kissinger svarede: »Jeg mener, at konceptet med Én vej, ét bælte [sic] er et vigtigt spørgsmål. Jeg mener, at Kina kan og bør finde en måde at tale om det. Det er et af de spørgsmål, hvor samarbejde sandsynligvis er muligt … «

I denne uge vil LaRouchePAC-aktivister fra flere østkyststater anføre angrebet på Capitol Hill i Washington, D.C., for at lægge pres på virkeligheden og politikken med det formål at få USA til at gå med i det nye paradigmes æra, med start i en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall, der følges op af gennemførelse af de handlinger, der fremlægges i LaRouches Fire Love.

Ved et arrangement i går i Washington, D.C., talte både vicepræsident Joe Biden og Thomas Hoenig, vicepræsident for den amerikanske Statslige Indskudsgarantifond, FDIC, offentligt til fordel for Glass/Steagall-loven. Biden fordømte sin egen stemme til fordel for en ophævelse af Glass-Steagall i 1999 (Gramm-Leach-Bliley-loven) som »den værste stemme, jeg nogensinde har afgivet i hele min tid i USA’s Senat«. Men så vendte han rundt og sagde, det er derfor, vi nu »ikke kan tillade en ophævelse af Dodd-Frank«, fordi vi har brug for »en opmand i marken«.  

Hoenig udtalte imidlertid støtte til genindførelse af Glass-Steagall og forklarede, at ophævelsen af denne lov førte til de risikable omstændigheder, der skabte krisen i 2008.

»Man gav de kommercielle banker, der har et statsgaranteret sikkerhedsnet, lov til« at engagere sig i alle former for aktiviteter, og man »forsynede dem endda med udvidet statsstøtte til at handle … « Hoenig er en potentiel Trump-udnævnelse til viceformand for banktilsynet i Federal Reserve (USA’s centralbank).

Hvis man træder et skridt tilbage og betragter historien, ser man, at visse øjeblikke træder frem som tidspunkter, hvor en afgørende, personlig ændring finder sted. I denne uge tænker vi med alvor tilbage på den 7. december, 1941, Pearl Harbor Day, hvor amerikanske borgere, som nation, gennemgik en ændring over en nat.

Vi skal i dag forstå, at vi alle er kaldede til aktivt at intervenere for at være med til at afgøre det historiske udfald.

3. december, 2016 – At der i dag findes to helt forskellige paradigmer i verden, der bestemmer nationers adfærd, bliver klarere dag for dag. Medens modstanden i den transatlantiske verden mod det mislykkede globaliseringsparadigme bliver stadig stærkere, og etablissementet så meget desto mere sammenbidt søger at fastholde det, så satser de stater, der samarbejder med Den nye Silkevej, stadig tydeligere på deres befolknings kreativitet og samarbejdet om menneskehedens fælles mål.
De vestlige politikere og medier, der er vant til kun at betragte Putin gennem dæmoniseringsbrillerne, ville stå sig vel ved for én gangs skyld at gennemlæse Putins årlige ’Tale til nationen’, som han holdt for den russiske Duma, uden fordomme. Efter fravalget af Obama – for det var også, hvad Hillary Clintons nederlag var – og efter Donald Trumps første telefonsamtaler med Vladimir Putin og Xi Jinping, har der åbnet sig en reel chance for at normalisere forholdet mellem de tre vigtigste nationer her på Jorden. Og kun en selvmorderisk nar ville ønske at vrage en sådan mulighed.
Når man tager den samlede kronologi for alle Putins tilbud til Vesten i betragtning, indbefattet hans forhåbningsfulde tale til den tyske forbundsdag i 2001 og talen til München-sikkerhedskonferencen i 2007, hvor han gav udtryk for stærk skuffelse, så burde man tage hans ord for pålydende, når han siger: »Vi ønsker ikke konfrontation med nogen. Det har vi lige så lidt, som vore partnere i det globale fællesskab, brug for. I modsætning til vore kolleger i udlandet, der betragter Rusland som en fjende, søger vi ikke, og har heller ikke søgt, modstandere. Vi har brug for venner. Men vi vil ikke tillade, at vore interesser skades eller ignorereres.«
Længere fremme i sin tale understregede Putin, at kravet om viden og moral i undervisningssystemet, som forudsætning for samfundets levedygtighed, var en prioritet. De unge menneskers interesse for den nationale klassiske litteratur, kultur og historie må vækkes, og skolerne må fremme kreativitet, samtidig med, at børnene lærer at tænke selvstændigt, såvel som også lærer at arbejde både selvstændigt og som en del af et team, løse stillede opgaver og formulere og realisere målsætninger. Godt nok er kravet om begavelse vigtigt, men grundlæggende set må opdragelsen hvile på det princip, at alle børn og teenagere er begavede og i stand til at opnå resultater inden for videnskab, de kreative områder samt i livet. Det er statens opgave at fremme disse talenter.
Putin understregede også den fundamentale betydning af grundforskning, som basis for økonomisk vækst og sociale fremskridt. Over 200 laboratorier er allerede etableret, som, takket være de store statstilskud, de modtager, må blive i stand til at operere på globalt niveau, og som vil blive ledet af videnskabsfolk, der er med til at bestemme retningen af den globale, videnskabelige udvikling. Det er i denne sammenhæng også vigtigt at overvinde de i Rusland siden zartiden eksisterende flaskehalse for, at disse forskningsresultater også kan komme produktionen af forbrugsvarer til gode.
De mennesker, der aktivt dæmoniserer Putin, burde også studere den tale, som Putin holdt den foregående dag ved Det internationale Forum for Primakov-forelæsninger til ære for den tidligere statsminister og ’store tænker’, Jevgenij Primakov, der døde for 18 måneder siden.
Også her stod de amerikansk-russiske relationer højt på dagsordenen. Putin henviste til Primakovs overbevisning om, at, »uden et oprigtigt partnerskab mellem Rusland og USA«, ville det blive vanskeligt at klare de »store udfordringer« i verden – især i kampen mod terrorismen i Mellemøsten.
Primakov havde, ifølge den russiske præsident, haft en »virkeligt strategisk vision«, der havde gjort det muligt for ham »at kigge ud i fremtiden og se, hvor uholdbar og ensidig« modellen om en unipolær verden var. Det var Primakov, der som den første gik ind for et trilateralt samarbejde mellem Rusland, Kina og Indien, og ud fra hvilket BRIKS, »der nu vinder indflydelse og betydning i verden«, har udviklet sig. Primakovs holden fast ved de tætte relationer med partnerne i Fællesskabet af Uafhængige Stater (CIS) »er rygraden i vores integrationspolitik i Eurasien … Vi håber, at dialog med vore partnere, indbefattet en dialog om sammenkoblingen med Kinas projekt om det Økonomiske Silkevejsbælte, vil sætte os i stand til at opbygge et stort, eurasisk partnerskab«.

Den umistelige ret til udvikling
Et andet dokument, som de vestlige politikere og medier, med deres geopolitiske tankegang, burde studere, er en ny hvidbog fra den kinesiske regering om »Retten til udvikling: Kinas filosofi, praksis og bidrag«, hvor det bekræftes, at der findes en »umistelig rettighed« for alle lande og folkeslag til at udvikle sig. »Retten til udvikling må tilhøre og være fælles for alle folk. Det er alle landes ansvar at virkeliggøre retten til udvikling, og det er ligeledes det internationale fællesskabs pligt«, står der i dokumentet. »Det forpligter regeringerne i alle lande til at formulere udviklingsstrategier og forholdsregler, der passer til deres egen virkelighed, og det fordrer det internationale samfunds koncentrerede anstrengelser som helhed. Kina opfordrer alle lande til at stræbe efter en ligeværdig, åben, omfattende og innovativ, fælles udvikling, og hvidbogen kræver en fælles udvikling og at der skabes betingelser for, at alle folkeslag kan tage del i retten til udvikling.«
Hvidbogen beskriver imidlertid meget mere – nemlig, at Kinas udviklingsmodel og Kinas politiske og sociale struktur har været en udelt succes. Og, alt imens denne model fortsat udvikler sig, så foregår det i et tempo og på en måde, der bestemmes af det kinesiske folk selv. Det påpeges, at Kina allerede har løftet 700 millioner mennesker ud af fattigdom, og at i dag kun 5,7 % af befolkningen lever under fattigdomsgrænsen – hvilket gør Kina til den første nation, som det er lykkedes at nå FN's Millennium-mål for fattigdomsbekæmpelse. Kina er endda fast besluttet på helt at overvinde fattigdom. I marts 2016 offentliggjordes »udkast til den 13. femårsplan for Folkerepublikken Kinas nationale, økonomiske og sociale udvikling«, hvor regeringen fremlægger en strategi for helt at udrydde fattigdom blandt landbefolkningen allerede i år 2020.

»En ny bølge af velstand«
Hvis man ikke ønsker at lytte til Putin eller Kina, kan man også studere en ny hvidbog fra bygge- og anlægsmaskine-producenten Caterpillar om betydningen af »Bælt-og-Vej«-initiativet. Det vil udløse »en ny bølge af velstand« for Kina og den øvrige verden, står der i den. Opbygningen af et infrastrukturnet, som er en prioritet i initiativet, vil muliggøre en fri strøm og en mere effektiv udnyttelse af resurserne, integration af markederne og koordinering af nationernes økonomiske politik.
Opbygningen af infrastruktur vil være med til at sænke transportomkostningerne, øge udviklingslandenes konkurrenceevne og reducere ubalancen landene imellem. Caterpillar betragter »Bælt-og-Vej«- initiativet som en »åben og medinddragende« ramme, der gør det muligt for alle landene langs ruten at tage del i opbygningen af projektet. »Dette bør og kan ikke være en bestræbelse alene fra Kinas side«, står der i dokumentet.
Virksomheden påskønner de forretningsmuligheder, som dette initiativ åbner op for, og håber at kunne deltage endnu mere i projekter langs ruten, forklarede Chen Qihua, vicepræsident for Caterpillar og direktør for Caterpillar Kina.
Og endelig burde de vestlige politikere og medier gøre sig klart, at der i befolkningen er bred opbakning til det internationale samarbejde, netop på områderne for videnskabeligt og teknologisk fremskridt. Den europæiske rumfartsorganisation ESA’s borgerdialog i organisationens 22 lande fastslog, at 88 % af de adspurgte understøttede ledelsens rumprogram, og 96 % følte sig overbeviste om, at verdensrummet frembyder muligheder, der ikke forefindes på Jorden, men som bør udforskes.
I sin rapport om meningsmålingen ved flyvestationen Upjever i Friesland sagde den tidligere ESA-astronaut Thomas Reiter, der nu er ESA’s hovedkoordinator for den internationale rumstations anliggender, at der er grund til optimisme – på trods af den endeløse strid om budgettet på europæisk niveau. De €8 mia., der er blevet brugt i de sidste 5 år, har skabt økonomiske værdier for €14,5 mia. for Europa og dets borgere.
»Det drejer sig også om det politiske aspekt af samarbejdet: Dette fungerer ganske godt, trods konflikterne på Jorden«, sagde Reiter. 95 stater deltager i ISS’ forskningsarbejde, »hvor man deroppe forfølger mål til gavn for alle mennesker«.
Reiter udtalte sig også optimistisk om udsigterne for udforskningen af Månen, især Månens bagside. Herfra vil man senere også kunne udsende missioner til den videre udforskning af verdensaltet.
Bernhard von Weyhe, leder af kommunikationsafdelingen i kontrolcentret (ESOC) i ESA-centeret i Darmstadt, talte i et interview med avisen Allgemeine Zeitung om den »brofunktion«, som rumforskningen har for menneskeheden. »Den fælles bemandede rumfart kræver samarbejde, og gjorde det også under koldkrigstiden. Rumfart har altid været et område, hvor man har haft et intensivt internationalt samarbejde, og brofunktionen består stadig. Rumfart er pr. definition et samarbejdsprojekt.«
Fællesnævneren for alle disse udtalelser er: Menneskehedens fremtid ligger i samarbejdet mellem nationerne om økonomisk udvikling af alle verdens lande og om samarbejdet om menneskehedens fælles mål, især om udviklingen af teknologi og videnskab og menneskenes skabende evner. Det lønner sig stærkt at investere i dette samarbejde. Den, der ikke fatter dette og i stedet blot stræber mod et »sort nul«, kommer i sidste ende til at stå tilbage med tomme hænder.

Foto: I september 2015 blev astronaut Andreas Mogensen den første dansker i rummet, hvor han deltog i forskningsopgaver om bord på den Internationale Rumstation, ISS.

4. dec., 2016 – Kinas Global Times publicerede som kronik den forberedte tale, som Fu Ying, forkvinde for Kinas Nationale Folkekongres’ Komite for Udenrigsanliggender, holdt på New York Universitet den 1. dec. Global Times udgav talen under ovenstående titel.

China Daily USA og China News Services officielle engelsksprogede webside, Ecn.cn, udgav nyhedsrapporteringer om hendes tale og fokuserede på ideen om, at »Infrastruktur kan blive en bro mellem Kina og USA«. Begge nyhedsmedier tager udgangspunkt i udtalelsen om, at »Fu Ying ser infrastruktur som en stor mulighed for samarbejde mellem USA og Kina under Amerikas nyvalgte præsident«.

Som Global Times rapporterer, begyndte Fu sin tale således:

»Efter præsidentvalget i USA talte den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping den 14. nov. i telefon med nyvalgte præsident Donald Trump, hvor han sagde, at det eneste rigtige valg for deres to lande var samarbejde, og at ’de to lande har brug for at styrke koordinationen, fremme deres respektive økonomiske udvikling og globale, økonomiske vækst samt udvide udveksling og samarbejde inden for diverse felter med henblik på at bringe flere fordele til de to befolkninger og promovere en jævn udvikling af relationerne mellem Kina og USA’. Hr. Trump var helt enig med den kinesiske præsident og gav udtrykt for, at han var overbevist om, at ’der vil blive en endnu større udvikling af de amerikansk-kinesiske relationer’. Dette var meget opmuntrende.

»Kina og USA har opbygget en stærk relation i årenes løb, men atmosfæren er ikke altid god. I årenes løb har jeg truffet amerikanere fra forskellige samfundslag, og jeg er undertiden overrasket over manglen på forståelse mellem os. Én årsag er, fik jeg at vide, at nogle mennesker i USA anser, at Kina har et forkert politisk system, og at de har haft forventninger om, at Kina burde ændre sig i den retning, de ønsker, og at de føler sig skuffet, når dette ikke sker.

Nu, hvor nye generationer vokser op i begge lande, vil grundlaget for forståelse da forbedres i takt med, at de unge måske er mere interesseret i at udveksle ideer og forstå hinanden?«

Madame Fu fortsatte med at fortælle om sine oplevelser som diplomat, hvor hun satte udviklinger i Afghanistan i kontrast til dem i Cambodja i de seneste 20 år, som hun så det, og konkluderede dernæst:

»I mit land Kina løftede de seneste tre årtiers succesrige reform og åbenhed over en mia. mennesker op over eksistensniveauet. Dette er først og fremmest muligt, fordi vi har haft generel social stabilitet, og fordi folk er trygge og kan forfølge deres drømme.

Kina må i lang tid fremover koncentrere sig om at modernisere landet, der stadig er langt bagefter de udviklede nationer … Kinas udenrigspolitik bør tjene samme formål, og målet er at sikre et favorabelt, ydre miljø for national udvikling og samarbejde udadtil …

Der er ligeledes i Kina en voksende bevidsthed om behovet for, at Kina spiller en mere aktiv rolle inden for internationale anliggender, samt sørger for offentlige tjenesteydelser. Den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping har foreslået at opbygge et verdenssamfund for en fælles fremtid. Dette repræsenterer på den bedste måde tankegangen i Kina. Det, som Kina kan bidrage til verden med, bliver på linje med de kinesiske værdier og inden for felter, hvor vi ved bedst.

Som en forholdsvis nytilkommen i internationale affærer har Kina behov for at lære og samle erfaringer. Der er nu flere end 300.000 kinesiske studenter i USA, og flere end en million i hele verden. Mange universitetsuddannede vender hjem til Kina, og de kommer til at spille en afgørende rolle i at forbinde Kina med verden. Samtidig må Kina også rekruttere talenter fra hele verden og lære af andre lande, især USA.

I konklusion, så skabes og udøves udenrigspolitik af menneskelige væsener, og ikke af døde maskiner. Og, en succesrig udenrigspolitik må bringe fordele til mennesker. Det, som diplomati har med at gøre, er ikke ’stater’ bag masker, men spørgsmål, der berører mange mennesker som jer og mig. Det, der ligger til grund for nationens interesse, er befolkningens velbefindende. Jeg håber, I forstår, hvad det er, jeg forsøger at sige, og vil erklære jer enige med mig i, at folk i alle lande, især den unge generation, bør tage hinanden i hånden for at sikre, at, i det 21. århundrede, bør beskyttelsen af menneskers ret til at leve i fred og tryghed udgøre en fælles værdi inden for international adfærd.«     

Foto: Fu Ying i diskussion under US-China Forum på NYU, 1. dec., 2016.     

4. dec., 2016 – »Infrastruktur kan blive en bro mellem Kina og USA«, lyder overskriften i China Daily’s dækning af den intervention, som Fu Ying, forkvinde for Kinas Nationale Folkekongres’ Komite for Udenrigsanliggender, leverede på New Yorks Universitet den 1. dec.

Madame Fu talte for et publikum på 300 personer, for det meste studerende fra New Yorks Universitet, ved Kina-USA Forum, sponsoreret af NYU og Instituttet for Kinesisk-amerikansk Udveksling. Sammen med hende på podiet var den tidligere amerikanske ambassadør til Kina, Roy Stapleton. Aktivister fra LaRouchePAC deltog også og tog aktivt del i diskussionsperioden, hvor de rejste spørgsmålet om, hvordan de amerikansk-kinesiske relationer kunne udvikles omkring samarbejdet om Kinas Bælt-og-Vej-projekt, sådan, som LaRouchePAC har skitseret det i sin brochure, »USA må tilslutte sig den Nye Silkevej«.

»Fu Ying ser infrastruktur som en stor mulighed for amerikansk-kinesisk samarbejde under Amerikas nyvalgte præsident«, rapporterede China Daily. Artiklen bemærker Fus diskussion om, hvordan direktøren for COSCO Group, Kinas største skibsreder, for to år siden sagde til den amerikanske Kongres, at Amerika måtte opgradere sine havne for at fremme vækst i eksporten. »Men Amerika ønsker ikke at tage imod investering fra andre lande som Kina, og I investerer ikke selv«, citerede hun direktøren for at have sagt.

Fu fremførte, at valget af Trump kunne føre til en ny fase, eftersom han har lovet at »transformere Amerikas smuldrende infrastruktur«, skrev China Daily med et citat af fr. Fu om, at »USA må være mere åben. Jeg mener, at der kan blive meget, meget godt samarbejde«.

»På et spørgsmål, om hun var bekymret for, at omstændighederne omkring relationer mellem USA og Kina var under forandring under Trump-administrationen, sagde Fu, at det var for tidligt at sige noget om det, men at hun ikke er pessimistisk«, skrev China Daily. »Hun sagde, at telefonsamtalen mellem præsident Xi Jinping og Trump var ’meget opmuntrende’, idet Trump var enig med Xi i, at samarbejde er den eneste valgmulighed for de to lande, og at de vil fremme forbindelserne for at bringe flere fordele til de to landes befolkning.«

China Daily bemærkede, at ambassadør Roy støttede Fu mht. ideen om samarbejde omkring infrastruktur, og sagde, at USA endnu kunne deltage i Kinas Bælt-og-Vej-initiativ, på trods af, at USA havde afvist at tilslutte sig projektet med Asiatisk Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB), hvilket han anser for at være en fejltagelse.

Foto: Fr. Fu Ying.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

2. dec., 2016 – Kina har udgivet en hvidbog, ’Retten til udvikling: Kinas filosofi, praksis og bidrag’. I hvidbogen hævder Kina, at lande og folkeslag har »en umistelig rettighed« til udvikling.

»Retten til udvikling må ejes og deles af alle folkeslag. At virkeliggøre retten til udvikling er alle landes forpligtelse, og er ligeledes det internationale samfunds forpligtelse«, lyder det i dokumentet. »Det kræver, at regeringer i alle lande formulerer udviklingsstrategier og politikker, der er tilpasset deres egen virkelighed, og det kræver det internationale samfunds samlede bestræbelser som helhed. Kina opfordrer alle lande til at forfølge ligeværdig, åben, generel og innovativ, fælles udvikling, promovere inkluderende udvikling og skabe betingelser for, at alle folkeslag kan tage ligelig del i retten til udvikling.«

Men hvidbogen gør mere end det. Den viser tydeligt, at Kinas model for udvikling, og Kinas politiske og sociale struktur, har opnået ubetinget succes. Og alt imens modellen fortsat udvikles, så finder det sted i et tempo og i en form, der afgøres af det kinesiske folk selv. Dokumentet bemærker, at Kina allerede har løftet 700 mio. mennesker ud af fattigdom, hvor nu kun 5,7 % af befolkningen lever under fattigdomsgrænsen – den første nation, bemærker rapporten, der har nået FN’s Millenium-mål for fattigdomsbekæmpelse. Men det stopper ikke her. Kina er fast besluttet på at fjerne fattigdom fuldstændigt. I marts 2016 udgav man »Omrids over den 13. Femårsplan for Folkerepublikken Kinas nationaløkonomiske og sociale udvikling«, hvor Kinas regering skitserede en strategi for at fjerne fattigdom i landbefolkningen ved år 2020.

Dokumentet fremlægger ligeledes andre slående præstationer med hensyn til udviklingen af landets arbejdsstyrke. I 1949 var den gennemsnitlige levealder kun 35 år; i 2015 var den 76,34 år. Andelen af børn i den skolepligtige alder, som gik i skole, var 20 % i 1949; i 2015 var det 99,88 %. Disse parametre reflekteredes også i væksten i BNP og hævelsen af levestandarden siden 1978, ved begyndelsen af reformen og åbenheden. Fra 1978 og til 2015 steg det årlige BNP fra RMB367,9 mia. til RMB68.550,6 mia., og BNP pr. person steg fra lidt mere end US$200 til over US$8.000. I 1978 var den disponible indkomst i husstande i byerne kun RMB343,4, og nettoindkomsten pr. person i husstande på landet var kun RMB133,6. I 2015 nåede den disponible indkomst pr. person for alle indbyggere op på RMB21.966; tallene var RMB31.195 for indbyggere i byerne og RMB11.422 for indbyggere på landet.

Dokumentet fortsætter desuden med at fremlægge de reformer, der er blevet gennemført inden for andre områder, i det juridiske system, reformer for stemmeret på lokal- og landsbyniveau og etableringen af skolepligt og forbedring af faciliteterne inden for uddannelse og sundhedstjenesteydelser på landet, og for de mange minoritetsgrupper i Kina. Et system med sociale ydelser er blevet etableret i hele landet, og et system for sygeforsikring udvides støt. Hvidbogen understreger også de udviklinger, der har fundet sted inden for områderne kultur, dyrkelse af kunst og musik selv i de fjerne egne af landet, åbning af biblioteker og oprettelse af offentlige museer og kulturcentre. Promovering af digitale museer og udvidelse af internettet i landdistrikterne, samt en national kampagne for at opmuntre folk til at læse.

Dokumentet påpeger også, hvordan landet bidrager til udviklingen i sine nabolande og lande i udviklingssektoren gennem Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet og gennem de »100 Programmer«, hvis målgruppe er udviklingslande, gennem etableringen af 100 programmer for fattigdomsreduktion, 100 programmer for samarbejde inden for landbrug, 100 hospitaler og klinikker og 100 skoler og erhvervsuddannelsescentre i udviklingslande. Desuden vil der blive stillet 120.000 uddannelsespladser og 150.000 studielegater i Kina til rådighed for udviklingslande, og man vil uddanne 500.000 erhvervsteknisk personale. Kina vil også etablere et Syd-syd Akademi for Samarbejde og Udvikling. 

Matthew Ogden: Både Diane Sare og Kesha Rogers har skrevet en artikel i denne uges The Hamiltonian; jeg mener, deres artikler meget fint tjener til at skabe en ramme omkring aftenens diskussion. Diane Sares artikel hedder "President Putin's Purloined Letter; the Poetic Principle in Political Affairs" (Præsident Putins stjålne brev; det poetiske princip i politiske affærer) – jeg kan godt lide bogstavrimet her. Kesha Rogers skrev en artikel, "Mankind Is Taking a Leap! You Should Ask 'How High?'" (Menneskeheden foretager et spring! Man bør spørge, ‘Hvor højt?’”)

Begge disse artikler tjener virkelig til at definere det, som hr. LaRouche pointerede mht. den nødvendige tankegang, når vi går frem i den nuværende situation i verden. Man må ikke blive fanget i lokal tankegang; man bør ikke tænke ud fra den laveste fællesnævner, eller tænke på alle de forskellige politiske taktikker, der plaskes ud over forsiden af New York Times eller Washington Post og de forskellige nyhedsmedier. Man må i stedet tænke som en leder; og man må tænke ud fra standpunktet om, hvad der er drivkraften bag den hastigt skiftende dynamik i globale anliggender.

Ganske kort: vi så dette meget direkte i denne uge fra et par forskellige standpunkter. For det første, så var der en aktionsdag fra LaRouchePAC-aktivister i Washington, D.C. i onsdags. Jeg havde den store glæde at deltage. Vi havde aktivister, der kom fra hele østkysten, inkl. fra ’Manhattan-projektet’ i New York City; og vi var dér for at sætte hr. LaRouches principper, i form af de Fire Økonomiske Love, på dagsordenen. At der ikke er noget alternativ til en omgående genindførelse af Glass-Steagall og en omgående renæssance af Alexander Hamiltons principper. Disse er: et nationalbanksystem; direkte kredit til forøget energi-gennemstrømningstæthed og produktivitet i arbejdsstyrken; og princippet om videnskab som [økonomisk] drivkraft, som Kesha Rogers diskuterer i sin artikel i The Hamiltonian. Et aggressivt program for udforskning og udvikling af rummet, og for at opnå fusionskraft og en højere energigennemstrømningstæthed i produktionsprocessen.

Og jeg mener, dette kan ses meget klart ud fra det, der finder sted internationalt, og som hovedsagligt kommer fra Rusland og Kina. Der var for det første et meget vigtigt dokument, som netop er blevet offentliggjort, fra Kina, som vi kan diskutere lidt mere omkring. Dette dokument hedder »Retten til udvikling: Kinas filosofi, praksis og bidrag«. Denne hvidbog erklærer, at udvikling er den fundamentale, umistelige rettighed. Og for det andet, så er der nu en ny, strategisk doktrin fra Rusland, som blev annonceret i summarisk form af den russiske præsident Putin i sin årlige ’Tale til nationen’, hvor han sagde, at verdensdynamikken nu er forandret. Vi er nu villige til at samarbejde med USA som ligeværdige partnere omkring fælles interesser – inklusive endelig at besejre de falske, konstruerede fjender, som vi har hørt om fra Obama-administrationen gennem de seneste otte år.

Så med denne form for geometrisk strategi har vi et meget rigt felt, vi kan intervenere i, og en meget rig mulighed.

Så der er mange detaljer, som jeg gerne vil have, vi kommer ind på under diskussionen af alle disse spørgsmål. Lad det være nok som introduktion, og lad os høre Kesha og Diane.

(Herefter følger udskrift af diskussionen på engelsk.)

DIANE SARE:  OK, I'll just go ahead.  I'm really glad with
what you said, Matt; because there really is a transformation,
and I think we tend to miss it.  Or you catch a glimmer of it
like the real joy that I certainly felt watching all the vote
totals come in; and these poor silly reporters not having a clue
what had hit them.  But then, you get bombarded with the real
fake news, which is what comes from the so-called mainstream news
media; which has absolutely zero about developments in the world
which are being created by billions of people.  So, you have the
most extraordinary, most gigantic Earth-changing events occurring
under the leadership of Vladimir Putin, under the leadership of
Xi Jinping, and their collaboration with leaders in South
America, leaders in Africa.  Not one word of it here, and then
we're treated to some miniscule detail of a misplaced wart that a
politician has somewhere or whatever.  I think we would do well
to bear in mind a little bit of what I tried to capture in that
article.  There is a poetic principle; there is a world
revolution underway.  These things are not separate, discrete
events.  The Brexit vote — contrary to the stupid media spin —
was not a bunch of white racists who hate immigrants.  Maybe
there are some of those, but the real factor was that the whole
euro system is bankrupt.  It didn't work and it wasn't designed
to work; and people were rejecting it.  Similarly, you had these
recent votes:  the winner in the French Republican Party
nominations, François Fillon, who does not want a war with
Russia.  I think most people on the planet actually recognize
that a nuclear war between superpowers is not a desirable policy
or outcome; and it's not necessary because what President Putin
is doing is leading a fight to eradicate terrorism.  He has been
very direct about this; especially after September of 2015, at
his speech at the United Nations.  He's reiterating again the
call for a coalition to wipe out this terrorist scourge.  So what
you see in this election process here in the United States, is we
have a potential now to join with the New Paradigm.
        Therefore, the most significant aspect of what we know about
the incoming administration perhaps, are the two phone calls that
Trump had with Xi Jinping and with President Vladimir Putin; and
this is absolutely not missed by people of the world.  I just
wanted to give a little bit of a report on an event last night at
New York University with this extraordinary woman, who is the
second only I think woman in history to be the chairwoman of the
Foreign Relations committee in the Chinese national assembly.
Her name is Madame Fu Ying; she is extraordinarily dignified,
calm and very confident.  She began her remarks at this forum at
New York University by referring to the phone call between Xi
Jinping and Trump.  She made a point of saying the Chinese are
always being accused of not contributing to good in the world, of
not working with the world.  So, we figured when we started the
Belt and Road and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, that
the United States — which is always accusing us of not wanting
to work with anyone else — would have been the first in line to
join.  Instead, our invitation to participate in these
extraordinary projects was rejected.  Now, clearly there is a
potential for this opportunity to be taken.
        This is really very big.  Similarly, the decision that Trump
has made to have retired General Michael Flynn as one of his
advisors; who has called for collaboration with Russia in Syria.
And Trump's reiterations of the necessity of that kind of
collaboration — these things are very important.  And the fact
that Flynn has come out calling for a Marshall Plan for the
region; which is similar to the Chinese; Xi Jinping made a tour
of several of those nations not so long ago.  The only way you
are going to secure peace is through economic development — not
on a low level, not on repairing the decrepit, aging, out-of-date
infrastructure we have; but by leaping into a new domain.  So, I
think I'll stop there for a minute; because I think Kesha
probably has a lot to add in that regard.

        KESHA ROGERS:  Yes.  Just taking from that, we really have
to advance mankind; we really have to have a leap forward for
mankind.  This is what Mr. LaRouche is committed to; this is what
you see Russia and China committed to.  I was greatly inspired by
the discussion and some of the developments that came out of the
President of Russia; President Putin's State of the Union
address.  The leap for mankind really requires putting the
commitment to the future.  This was really expressed very
beautifully in his remarks, which captured in essence the
conception that the responsibility of the nation is to foster
creativity in science, and foster creativity in the youth of your
nation.  The best expression to doing this, in terms of
scientific and technological development.  In his speech he says,
"Our schools must promote creativity, but children must learn to
think independently, work both on their own and as part of a
team, address usual tasks and formulate and achieve goals; which
will help them have an interesting and prosperous life.  You must
promote the culture of research and engineering work.  The number
of cutting edge science parks for children will increase to 40
within two years; they will serve as the basis for development of
a network of technical project groups across the country.
Companies, universities, and research institutes would contribute
to this, so our children will see clearly that all of them have
equal opportunity and an equal start in life.  That Russia needs
their ideas and knowledge and they can prove their mettle in
Russian companies and laboratories…."  And he goes to say, "Our
education system must be based on the principle that all children
and teenagers are gifted and can succeed in science, in creative
areas, in sports, in career, and in life."
        That should be the model for every single nation.  That is
the model for our space program, and it really starts with the
question of what is human nature?  If we're going to advance
mankind and have leaps forward?  As a part of this paper that
Matt mentioned, from China they're expressing the same expression
for their nation; and for mankind as a whole.  It's not just "our
nation is better than yours, and we're going to have our people
pulled out of poverty and your people can stay in poverty.
They're not thinking like imperialists or wanting to keep nations
backwards; they want nations to move forward.  So, China has
pulled 700 million people out of poverty; you can't do that by
taking baby steps and going with a few infrastructure projects.
You have to have creative leaps.  This has really been expressed
for their Silk Road development offer of win-win cooperation and
their commitment to space and space as the potential for opening
for mankind across the planet and across the galaxy.
        I think if people look at the very exciting developments
that we're seeing coming from Russia and China, that has to be
the model.  We have that potential right now, because I think
what Diane pointed out — that when President-elect Trump was
elected, this was a mandate.  This was a repudiation of the
Bush/Obama destruction of this type of potential for a future; a
repudiation of Hillary Clinton's commitment to continuing war.
The American people said, we're not going to condone this any
longer.
        The question is, what is the positive aspect that you're
going to fight for?  We've put that on the table with LaRouche's
Four Laws and our commitment to a future perspective for mankind,
based on this very identity that has been clearly laid out by
what we could be doing if we decide to make the commitment and
collaborate on the basis that Russia and China have laid out.

        OGDEN:  Yeah, China really is an inspiration in that regard.
Let me just read a very quick quote from that paper that you
referenced, Kesha. The title of this white paper, again, is "The
Right to Development: China's Philosophy, Practice and
Contribution"; and they start by saying, "The right to
development must be enjoyed and shared by all peoples. Realizing
the right to development is the responsibility of all countries
and also the obligation of the international community." If you
just juxtapose that to the Malthusian philosophy of the British
Royal Family and others in the so-called "West" today, where they
say, "Well, no, you know, the right to development — it's not a
right. All peoples do not have an equal right to the same living
standard, and, plus, if we were to pursue that — as Obama said
when he went to Africa — 'the planet would boil over.'" I mean,
give me a break!
        So, China's white paper is laying out the opposite
philosophy, view, of man. I think, in accordance with what Putin
said in that State of the Union, that, yes, every human being is
a creative human being. That is the fundamental right of every
human being — is to develop that creativity and to contribute it
to his or her nation and to the future of mankind.
        In the China white paper, they go on to state some really
stunning statistics. You, Kesha, cited the lifting 700 million
people out of poverty; which is just an incredible achievement in
and of itself. Now only a little bit under 6%, 5.7% of the
population of China, are officially under the poverty line. And
in the white paper they were very proud to point out that China
was actually the first to achieve this UN Millennium goal —
which is a goal to lift such and such a percentage of people out
of poverty. But they refuse to stop there! They say, "That's not
enough. We have a goal, that we are going to eliminate poverty
altogether!"
        The statistics are amazing. If you compare China in 1949 to
China in 2015, only a 70-year difference, the average longevity
in China in 1949 was 35 years. Today it's 76 years. The
enrollment of school-age children in school in 1949 was 20%.
Today it's almost 100%; 99.8% of all school-age children are
enrolled in schools in China. The difference between 1978 and
2015: the GDP was at RMB767 billion in 1978. Today their GDP is
RMB68,000 billion! So, that growth is unbelievable. And then
there's, obviously, much less tangible things that you can
measure, but which are clear to see, including the spread of art,
classical culture, classical musical training among the children
of China.  So this is really a model for the rest of the world,
an inspiration. As Xi Jinping has said, "We invite the United
States, we invite the West to become a part of the New Silk Road,
and to become a part of the One Belt, One Road initiative."
        One event that was happening in Washington, D.C.,
simultaneously with this Day of Action that the LaRouche PAC
activists had on Capitol Hill, was really an unprecedented event
that was sponsored by the Asia Society. It was an all-day event
that was hosted by a scholar named Dr. Patrick Ho, who's the
Secretary General of the China Energy Fund Committee. One of my
colleagues who was there, said about the event that "This was one
of those days in Washington, D.C. when all of the principles that
you've been talking about as a LaRouche PAC activist for years
and years and years, all of a sudden are being echoed by the
person standing at the podium." We've had those experiences
periodically, but this entire event was about the right to
development, the One Belt, One Road Initiative, the Eurasian
Land-Bridge, the World Land-Bridge, the New Paradigm, win-win
cooperation, the United States joining the Silk Road — quite
literally, in those terms.
        Dr. Ho actually laid out five points of advice to the new
incoming [Trump] administration on how to integrate the United
States into the One Belt, One Road program. His five steps are as
follows:
        1) Consider One Belt, One Road a platform to spearhead
initiatives and programs to bring closer cooperation between the
United States and China;
        2) Realign trade agreements with Asia-Pacific nations to
accommodate the One Belt, One Road;
        3) Adjust the U.S. posture towards the international
development banks — that's the AIIB, the New Silk Road Fund, the
New Development Bank of the BRICS, and so forth — and promote
their capacity to assist in support for infrastructure
development;
        4) Help secure security along the One Belt, One Road;
        5) Get the international institutions to work with the One
Belt, One Road.
        So, I think that's actually a very clearly stated way to, as
we say in this pamphlet that we've published from LaRouche PAC,
have the United States join this new Silk Road.
        These ideas, as Diane was saying, this is an active
principle, this is the dynamic {elsewhere}, and our
responsibility is to ensure that {this} is the dynamic shaping
policy in the United States.

        SARE: Along these lines — because I know there's discussion
and there's an article about Sen. Schumer saying he will work
with Trump on a $1 trillion infrastructure package (something
like that) — I think the idea of Hamilton and the ideas of
people like Krafft Ehricke and what China is doing, really need
to be understood by our activists, so that people can reflect.
For example, there's discussion about one of the things that was
promoted in the New York Times for Trump to do with his
infrastructures, that there should be a tunnel under the Hudson
River, from New Jersey to New York. Right now I think the trains
go, I don't know, every 90 seconds, or every three minutes, or
something like that. There's an enormous amount of traffic. The
Port Authority Bus Terminal is very old and decrepit. It's going
to have to be rebuilt and relocated. The tunnels are very old.
        So, this is something that has needed to be done for a long
time. As everyone might imagine, there's an absolutely enormous
amount of traffic between Manhattan and New Jersey across the
Hudson River. So, you say, "What's wrong with a new tunnel
between New Jersey and New York?" Well, in a sense, if you were
to do that, it would be a sin of omission. Obviously we need a
tunnel, but if the idea were to connect this tunnel to a tunnel
under the Bering Strait, so that you could travel from Manhattan
to Moscow, that would be a completely different idea. And I think
what…

        OGDEN: [cross talk] …Manhattan to Jersey City; that's for
sure! [both laugh]

        SARE: Yeah! Or even, you know, for people who don't want to
go to Moscow, for whatever reason. They could go to Paris, but
they could travel through Siberia. All kinds of exotic, really
wonderful places. It would be quite a ride. Although, I suppose,
if we get the magnetically-levitated vacuum trains, you wouldn't
really get to see much. On the other hand, you'd arrive at your
destination before you left, by the clock.
        Anyway, all of these things would completely transform the
way we think of everything. If you could take a train from New
Jersey to San Francisco. Supposing even that it wasn't three
hours — it was a normal high-speed train — so you got there in
a day-and-a-half, that's a completely different phenomenon. It
changes the United States: what you can ship; whom you can work
with; the exchange of ideas; the exchange of goods.  The ability
for people to find the very most brilliant individual, whether
they're in China or Somalia or India, who has expertise in a
particular area, and you want to bring them in to collaborate
with a team of scientists in your local laboratory. All these
things become thinkable.
        So, when Mr. LaRouche a few years ago had made the point
that he doesn't like the term "infrastructure" anymore, because
it doesn't really get at what is actually necessary; which is the
question of how do you increase the productivity of every person.
And that requires thinking in terms of a platform. The
difference between not having electricity, for example, and
having electricity, is not simply night and day. You just can't
even compare it. It's incommensurate. Therefore, I think we
have to be both open-minded, but we also have to set {really
high} standards for what we think we should be doing. It would be
absolutely criminal, even if it did employ millions of people, to
fill in every pothole in every major city in the United States.
That would not lift the standard of living or the productivity of
the nation as a whole; whereas a high-speed rail link that went
from Manhattan to Moscow would actually have a completely
transformative effect.

        OGDEN: Yeah, it's these {leaps} in progress that are
unquantifiable, because it's a completely different measuring
rod, from one leap to the next. Last week on the webcast here on
Friday night, Ben Deniston gave an excellent presentation on
what's necessary for a real space colonization and exploration
program. I thought one example that he used during that
presentation, was really interesting. Just think about what's the
difference between Lewis and Clark's Expedition to explore the
Louisiana Purchase Territory and to cross the continental United
States vs. what we were able to do with the trans-continental
railroad. That's a different universe vs. what we would able to
do with what you're talking about, Diane, with a
magnetically-levitated train that goes from New York, to Los
Angeles, all the way up to Anchorage, Alaska, and across the
Bering Strait, into the Eurasian landmass. Those are just
quantifiably and qualitatively different modes of action. And so,
yes, it's "setting the bar" incredibly high.
        Kesha, in your article, you said, "You should ask: How high?
We should leap, we should jump. Mankind should take a leap. How
high?" It's these kinds of insights that Krafft Ehricke, that
others, were able to discuss from the terms that now Mr. LaRouche
has {scientifically} defined, in terms of energy-flux density,
how much more productivity are you able to achieve, with less
effort, with less energy applied, because of these qualitative
leaps in technology and in the principle that you're employing.
        Before we get into a little bit more of that, I do want to
bring up, though, because you mentioned it, Diane, this article,
this interview with Sen. Chuck Schumer. Mr. LaRouche was told
about this earlier today when we had a discussion with him. He
placed some importance on it and said, "You know, Chuck Schumer
does play a significant role in the Democratic Party." He is now
Minority Leader in the U.S. Senate, and, very significantly, led
the fight against Obama's veto of the JASTA bill; very publicly
broke with the Obama administration, in favor of the 9/11
families, in overturning the Obama veto of the JASTA bill. I'd
like to say something about that later.
        This article is an interview that's published on
syracuse.com. It starts by saying, "U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer
said Wednesday that he's optimistic Congress will strike a deal
with President-elect Donald Trump, to pass a $1 trillion
infrastructure bill within the first 100 days of the
administration." However, he warned, "the bill cannot rely on
what he called 'gimmicks' or tax breaks." He said "any
infrastructure bill must be paid for through substantial and
direct federal funding." He said, "The bill needs to be stronger
and bolder than ever before. Simple tax credits will not work."
He also said that the so-called public-private partnership that
Trump's infrastructure plan and other incentives to build
projects that would be privately owned, would not function. He
said that he had personally told Trump in a private meeting, that
such a plan would lead to investment only in the most profitable
projects — people who are just trying to make a buck; and could
lead to significantly higher tolls on privately owned roads and
bridges.  Instead, Schumer said, "The $1 trillion could flow into
the U.S. Treasury to be used for rebuilding the nation's
infrastructure."  So, this is a direct Federal financing, not a
scheme, not a gimmick, not tax breaks, not PPPs [public-private
partnerships].  That is a significant development.
        I do not think it is a coincidence that that interview comes
directly in the wake of a two-week mobilization by LaRouche PAC
activists on Capitol Hill to force the issue of Hamiltonian
national banking, direct Federal credit.  I know that there were
countless meetings from activists; there were several dozen
meetings that Paul Gallagher personally had with staffers and
Congress people on Capitol Hill to discuss the details of what
Hamiltonian economics and Hamiltonian national banking actually
means.  If you haven't seen it yet, I would highly recommend
going back and listening to the recorded Fireside Chat that Paul
Gallagher did last night; that was on this question of what
Hamiltonian national banking really means.
        So this is significant; but, indeed, we have to have the
view that {we} are setting the agenda.  This nation and the
leadership of the country need a very intensive course in what
Hamiltonian economics really means.

        ROGERS:  Yes, and I think that the title of our publication
which we are continuing to get out en masse, The Hamiltonian
Vision for an Economic Renaissance is absolutely imperative to
be understood as just that.  We're not just talking about
developing infrastructure or increasing manufacturing; because
that's not what Hamilton understood in the increasing of the
productivity of society.  It was starting with advancing the
creative powers of mankind; and Lyndon LaRouche has taken that to
a very high level and conception, as you said.  His work over the
past 40-50 years looking at this conception of leaps in
productivity of society based on this conception of the potential
for mankind to advance in ways that had not been thought of
before; to advance in ways where the creative leaps in mankind
take the development scientifically and technologically to higher
and higher states.  Mr. LaRouche's understanding of this and
Krafft Ehricke's were very synonymous; they worked hand-in-hand
together.  The German space pioneer Krafft Ehricke — the
rejection of his ideas by the "limits to growth" imperialist
budget-cutters, who didn't want to see mankind advance in this
way, was as direct as the opposition to Lyndon LaRouche.  If Mr.
LaRouche's policies had been put through — along with Krafft
Ehricke's — on the development of LaRouche's perspective in the
'80s for a vibrant space program, setting the agenda of the space
program to heights that had not been thought of up until that
point, and continuing what John F Kennedy had laid out as a
national mission for advancing not just in the moment for space
development; but looking far into the future.  It's interesting
to go back and look at what the vision was at that time, and how
far we have been set back because we've had people who decided
that it's not the place of human beings to develop.
        Krafft Ehricke, as Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche have continued to
say, represented a quality of genius.  It wasn't just that he
understood aeronautics and was one of the best in terms of field
of technology.  He was a real philosopher; his conception of
space development started from the standpoint of the development
of mankind as a whole.  That we on this planet, have a
responsibility for the development of each and every human being
on the planet; but the way we're going to achieve is — as he
said on many occasions — that you have to leave the confines of
one small planet. The idea that there are only limited resources
here for a limited number of people is not true.  There's a very
beautiful conception of that drawn out by Krafft Ehricke in a
very short writing that he wrote called "The Extra-Terrestrial
Imperative; Growth and Life"; that's the model that he worked on.
I just want to read something quickly from that, because I think
it's very indicative of what we're talking about here.  People
have to get these ideas in a very advanced understanding of it
when we're going into Congress right now.  It's not just about
getting them to pass a piece of legislation.  It has to be, and
we're seeing, a total shift in the thinking of the population.
He says:
        "There was a time when the human mind was slow to accept
growing evidence that Earth is not a flat center of the universe.
Now the concept of a closed, isolated world must be overcome.
Viewing our Earth from space should make it obvious that the
world into which we now can grow is no longer closed.  By
ignoring this new reality, current predictive world dynamic
models fail.  Adhering to an obsolete, closed worldview, they
despair of the future growth prospects.  The extra-terrestrial
imperative enjoins us to grow and live through open world
development which contains all the futures the human mind can
hold."
        So, that's what we're talking about.  How far can the human
mind advance?  How far can the human mind see into the future?
That's what we're talking about right now, and we have a
potential to really bring that perspective into focus if we have
a revolutionary change in the way we think about society, and we
think about the responsibility of the growth in society which we
have to now bring on, because it's long overdue.  LaRouche's
solutions really put forth exactly how we bring that into being.

        OGDEN:  This the moment of opportunity.  If you look at, as
Diane covered in the beginning of our discussion, this wave of
unexpected and completely dramatic electoral results and
otherwise; from Brexit to the Presidential election.  We've got
the Italian referendum coming up this weekend; we could see some
very dramatic results out of there.  Hollande has now declared
that he will not be running for President of France.  This is a
very dramatic and uncharted period; and the potential is there,
the doors are wide open.  I think we have repeatedly gone back to
this point, but I think we should return to it again.  It should
have been seen that this was not business as usual at the point
that the entirety of the United States Senate and a vast majority
of the U.S. House — not along party lines — rejected Obama's
treasonous veto of the JASTA bill.  That was in no small part the
result of the activation and the leadership of the LaRouche
Political Action Committee in the United States.  I think we who
are on this discussion right now, can say that we know directly
that the role that LaRouche PAC played was central and primary in
leading that fight for years.  Direct collaboration with the 9/11
Families; direct collaboration with the members of the U.S. House
and Senate in forcing this through.  That was not something that
Obama — despite all of his bluster — and the Saudi government
— despite all of their millions of dollars; they just could not
handle that.  That was something that overcame everything that
they tried to throw up against it.
        Now you have a pathetic effort by McCain and by Lindsey
Graham to try and gut the JASTA bill in the last days of the lame
duck session; but this is not going anywhere.  There was a very
good statement put out by Terry Strada and the 9/11 Families
United for Justice Against Terrorism, where they said in their
press release, "We wish to state our firm opposition to the
proposed legislative language offered by U.S. Senators Lindsey
Graham and John McCain that would effectively gut the JASTA bill;
which was overwhelmingly passed by Congress in September."  Later
they say, "Notably, Graham's and McCain's efforts come in the
wake of a massive lobbying campaign by the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia, which is now employing roughly a dozen lobbying firms at
a cost of more than $1.3 million per month."  And then Terry
Strada herself is quoted saying "In April of this year, Senator
Graham met with 9/11 family members and told them that he
supported our cause 100%.  Senator Graham is now stabbing the
9/11 Families in the back.  He and Senator McCain are seeking to
torpedo JASTA by imposing changes demanded by Saudi Arabia's
lobbyists.  We have reviewed the language, and it is an absolute
betrayal."  She says, "We, the 9/11 Families, are fortunate to
have Senators John Cornyn and Chuck Schumer to block this action
in the Senate."  I can tell you that Senator Schumer told me
personally on Wednesday night that this effort is going nowhere;
this thing is not going to fly.  So, they are holding the line
very firmly.  But really, they have no choice; because this
victory on the JASTA bill and then everything that has come since
then, including this Presidential election, was a statement that
this is not business as usual among the American people anymore.
There is a mood of revolt among the American people.
        I just want to read one very short excerpt from an article
in The Hill which I think excellently gets to that very point
and I think is more generally applicable.  The article was
titled, "Note to Allies: Don't Underestimate Overwhelming Popular
Support for JASTA."  The author, Alexander Nicholson, says in
this article, "[O]n this particular issue…, no amount of money
or insider Washington connections will be able to overturn the
overwhelming will of the American people. Indeed," he says, "the
highly unexpected but highly populist-inspired election of Donald
Trump to the White House should serve as an indicator that no
amount of inside-the-beltway inside baseball can achieve results
when it comes to certain issues at certain times. And this, too,
is one of those issues and times."  And then he concludes the
article, "The current arguments are as ineffective as the
synthetic inside-the-beltway strategy it has thus far employed.
But the new era of empowerment of the American electorate is not
to be underestimated."  So, I think that is absolutely the case;
and people should take heart to that.  This is, indeed, a new
political era for the United States; it's the "empowerment of the
American electorate."
        Now's the time to take that empowerment and just keep the
momentum going; but it has to be from the standpoint of educating
ourselves, as Kesha said, on the principles of Alexander Hamilton
and the principles of the science of physical economy, and
saying, "We now are committing ourselves to what the Chinese have
called 'the inalienable right to development'; and we will not
let go of our demand for that inalienable right."

        SARE:  Just on that, I think on the one hand it's sort of
obvious; although I guess it shouldn't be, because we've
tolerated such criminality for the last 16 years since 9/11
occurred.  Droning people, torture, and so on.  The NSA spying on
every detail of everything of everyone.  But there's a certain
limit where people just said, "No, we're not intimidated."  We
saw that particularly strongly in Manhattan among first
responders and others who died, who are still dying as
after-effects, or who had loved ones who died, or colleagues who
died.  There's a certain sort of sacred commitment that "We are
not going back on this," and they're not afraid.  The challenge
now again is to raise the standard; in other words, can we fight
with the same fearless passion for those things that are
necessary for mankind to progress?  Could we get a situation
where the population just says, "Absolutely not!  We're not
shutting down our nuclear power plants.  Are you crazy?  This is
unacceptable.  You're saying we're not going to go back to the
Moon and build the means to get onto Mars from the Moon?  This is
crazy!"  Where no one even gives it a second thought that it's so
obvious.  I think that is where the two areas which Einstein
excelled in both: the music — his violin as a certain source of
inspiration and thought; and the science come together.  When one
is conscious of what it means to be truly human and creative,
then anything on a lower standard than that, is the same kind of
affront as the Saudi Foreign Minister traipsing through the halls
of Congress in his robes lined with money.  You just say, "Oh,
this is beneath us."  We saw that effect here when the Schiller
Institute Community Chorus participated in this series of
performances of the Mozart Requiem; and there's more music
coming up — again sponsored by the Foundation for the Revival of
Classical Culture — on December 17th in Brooklyn.  A unity
concert with the conception of, what does it mean: to be human?
Because human beings are not animals, no matter how many
environmentalist barbarians want to try and impose that on us.
When you've located your identity in a realm which is truly
beautiful, then a lot of these things that seem so difficult now
— like the difficulty of these politicians standing up to Wall
Street on Glass-Steagall.  Why are they afraid?  Why do they find
that difficult?  Because their own identities are right now on
too low of a level; but if they began to look at the world from a
higher standpoint — which is I'm convinced where people like
this woman from China, the Vice Foreign Minister Fu Ying — you
just get a sense among some of these people that where they're
coming from is a much higher level and that such a thing would be
beneath them.  I imagine this was the effect of someone like
President Abraham Lincoln, who was described when he was seen
visiting the soldiers; because his identity was placed in a
different location in a higher realm.  Therefore, it wasn't just
that he was fighting against fear; there wasn't fear because
there was such a firm commitment to what is right.
        So, I think the next phase in this process is to have a
similar, almost ease; a soaring quality of mankind, even in the
United States, to get ourselves into the realm where we actually
should be living.

        ROGERS:  Diane, you keep getting them to sing; bringing more
inspiration and optimism.  So, we can get more singing and get
more space development, then we can really succeed.

        OGDEN:  President Modi of India called it a mass movement
for development; and I know Helga LaRouche has echoed that call
repeatedly since he said that.  And we really do see a mass
movement for development among some of these Eurasian countries
especially, but also with them reaching out to African and South
and Central American countries, you have a majority of the
world's population now getting in on this mass movement for
development.  But that's what we need demanded from the American
people right now; and I think we can turn this new era of
empowerment of the American electorate into a mass movement for
development.  But we have to do it from the standpoint of a
Hamiltonian renaissance in the United States.  We have the
materials for that, as we've said before.  The new book,
Hamilton's Vision is available on Amazon; and people can read
those four reports that he wrote to the United States Congress as
Treasury Security.  We also have the Four Laws from Mr. LaRouche
which are available on the LaRouche PAC website, and the related
pamphlet, "The United States Joins the New Silk Road."
        So, I implore people to become as active as you can. If you
haven't yet become an activist with the LaRouche PAC, now is the
time to take that step. Support us in every way you can, and
make yourself into a world historical individual by acting on
this current, very brief window of opportunity for mankind.  You
can sign up on the LaRouche PAC website; you can subscribe to our
YouTube channel; you can become an activist through the LaRouche
PAC Action Center; and you can share this video as widely as you
possibly can. Let's make this a mass movement for development!
        Thank you very much for joining us here today. Thank you to
both Kesha and to Diane. And please stay tuned to larouchepac.com.

          

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 1. december, 2016 – Kinas Xi Jinping og Ruslands Vladimir Putin fortsætter med at komme med tilbud efter tilbud til USA – og andre nationer, der stadig sidder fast i det transatlantiske systems dødbringende kviksand – om at gå med i opbygningen af det nye, globale paradigme, der er i færd med at erstatte geopolitiske krige og fascistiske nulsumsspil-økonomier, med den Nye Silkevejspolitiks win-win-resultater.

Den kinesiske regering har netop udgivet en hvidbog, »Retten til udvikling: Kinas filosofi, praksis og bidrag«, som dokumenterer det forbløffende fremskridt, Kina har præsteret i løbet af de seneste årtier inden for områderne fattigdomsreduktion, levetid, uddannelse og så videre, og dernæst fortsætter med at forklare, at deres Bælt-og-Vej-initiativ har til formål at hjælpe andre nationer med at opnå lignende resultater. Retten til udvikling, proklamerer hvidbogen, er hele menneskehedens umistelige rettighed.       

Den russiske præsident Putin gentog i sin »Tale til nationen« for den russiske Duma, det føderale parlament, at han var indstillet på at samarbejde med den tiltrædende Trump-administration i USA for at »sikre international stabilitet og sikkerhed«. Putin gjorde det ligeledes til fulde klart, at Ruslands fremtid ligger i at nære kreativitet, videnskab og evnen til at løse problemer hos den unge generation: »Vore skoler må fremme kreativitet … Vore børn vil klart se, at Rusland har brug for deres ideer og viden.«

Dette er præcis den form for tankegang, som engang dominerede Franklin Roosevelts, og endda John Kennedys, USA, men det er blevet næsten uforståeligt for de fleste amerikanere i dag, i et USA, der er blevet transformeret af de seneste 16 års mareridt med Bush og Obama.

Og dog, så er genopvækkelsen af denne ånd selve nøglen til en strategisk sejr imod det døende, Britiske Imperium. For at opnå dette kræver det, at vi lever op til udfordringen med at få den amerikanske befolkning, og dens repræsentanter i Washington, til at tænke på det højere niveau, som er det sande potentiale, der er fremlagt for os, og ikke på niveauet for de kontrollerede ’trivielle selskabslege’, som karakteriserer politikken i Washington og i lokale anliggender.

I en diskussion tidligere på dagen med medlemmer af LPAC’s Politiske Komite og Videnskabsteam, samt Helga Zepp-LaRouche, understregede Lyndon LaRouche den afgørende rolle, som et fornyet rumprogram spiller for atter at tænde gnisten for optimisme og inspiration omkring spørgsmålet om, hvad menneskets formål i universet er. Den store, tyske rumforsker Krafft Ehricke er en vigtig prøvesten i denne bestræbelse, sagde LaRouche, for kampen for at bringe fremskridt inden for videnskab, kultur og økonomi tilbage, som en forenet, indbyrdes forbundet præstation.

»Hele formålet er at forstå, hvad fremtiden bringer, eller kan bringe, og fastholde udviklingen på denne basis«, sagde Larouche. »Det er ligesom hele tiden at holde trit; hele tiden forsøge at gøre noget, der er vigtigere, at opnå det, og dernæst nyde det … Der må være et element af overraskelse, et element af denne form for udtryk. Det er det, der får det til at virke. Det er ikke noget tomt; det er noget, man skal få til at virke.«

LaRouche fortsatte: »Vi lever i vort intellekt. Hvis vi kan tænke kvalificeret, så opererer vi i rummet. Vi bør håbe, at vi vil frigøre os og således bringe menneskeheden til et nyt niveau af præstationer.«

Foto: Den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping mødes med Ruslands præsident Putin, Chiles præsident Bachelet, Indiens præsident Modi og Kasahkstans præsident Nazarbayev i sine bestræbelser på at rekruttere nationer til den Nye Silkevejs økonomiske politik. 

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 30. november, 2016 – I denne uge kom delegationer fra Manhattan og flere stater i det østlige USA til Washington, D.C., for personligt at inddrage kongresmedlemmer i nødvendigheden af at tage skridt til at genindføre Glass-Steagall og gennemføre LaRouches »Fire Love«, for at håndtere den aktuelle, strategiske krise. Dette politiske initiativ – sammen med pres på kongressen over hele landet – kommer på et tidspunkt med nonstop mediefiksering på nyvalgte præsident Donald Trumps seneste og eventuelle udnævnelser til regeringsposter. ’Hvem er de?… Hvor dårlige er de?’, osv. Mediernes spærreild, og selv selve udnævnelserne, tjener til at forvirre og demobilisere enhver, der lytter.

Det er vigtigt at modstå alle sådanne, »bottom-up« karakteriseringer, der fremhæver lokale interesser, af det, der foregår. Der er intet lokalt her: »Trump«-valgoverraskelser finder sted i hele verden, og flere vil finde sted i de kommende uger. Vælgere over hele verden afviser nu hele »globaliseringsæraen« til fordel for et nyt paradigme, der fortsat er under udformning. EIR’s stiftende redaktør, Lyndon LaRouche, understregede dagen efter præsidentvalgene, at valget af Trump ikke var en »lokal« begivenhed. Afvisningen af Hillary Clinton gik længere end til et spørgsmål om selve personen; den var en del af et globalt, dynamisk skifte. LaRouche manede i dag til forsigtighed: »Det er farligt at gøre det muligt for dette [forvirringen som følge af lokalt fokus] at opstå. Man må frigøre sig fra det. Det ødelægger ens evne til at tænke og løse problemer.«

Undgå derfor vrede over enkeltpersoner; tænk på det mulige.

Dette er virkeligheden. Der er en dynamik i gang på internationalt plan, for et nyt paradigme for hele menneskeheden, og som er legemliggjort i den eurasiske Nye Silkevej. Præsident Vladimir Putin og præsident Xi Jinping leverer et stærkt lederskab for vejen frem, en vej, som i årtier er blevet fremlagt af Lyndon og Helga LaRouche.

I dag holdt Putin en tale i Moskva fra dette udsigtspunkt. Han talte om den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union, »der sammenkobles med Kinas projekt for det Økonomiske Silkevejsbælte, som vil gøre det muligt for os at bygge et eurasisk partnerskab«. Han talte i anledning af det andet, årlige »Primakov Readings International Forum« i Moskva, for at mindes eftermælet af Jevgenij Primakovs lederskab. Putin sagde: »Hr. Primakov var ligeledes af den mening, at det ville være meget vanskeligt at håndtere nutidens store udfordringer på tilfredsstillende vis uden et seriøst partnerskab mellem Rusland og USA. Ulykkeligvis er de russisk-amerikanske relationer blevet meget forværret i løbet af de seneste år, men dette er ikke vores skyld. Nu, hvor valgkampen er ovre i USA, og en ny præsident snart vil indtage Det Hvide Hus, håber vi, at dette vil skabe en mulighed for at forbedre disse relationer, der er så vigtige, ikke alene for vore to folkeslag, men også for at sikre international stabilitet og sikkerhed … «

Ideen om nye relationer runger over hele Latinamerika, efter Xis seks dages rundrejse i forbindelse med APEC-topmødet tidligere på måneden. Den mexicanske seniordiplomat Sergio Ley har krævet, at Mexico nu »diversificerer« sine relationer inden for udenrigshandel og ikke længere har 80 % af sin handel, der finder sted med USA. Han sagde, at der nu finder »en ekstraordinær dialog på højeste niveau« sted mellem Mexico og Kina.

I opposition til dette aktive, nye paradigme for internationale, gensidigt gavnlige relationer, kommer de sidste, fortvivlede bestræbelser fra geopolitikkens afdankede repræsentanter, på at forårsage mere skade og død. Især Frankrig, Storbritannien og Obama-administrationen mobiliserer imod Rusland over Syrien. I dag meddelte Frankrig, at det vil være vært for et møde den 10. december, som vil omfatte ledere fra UK, USA, Tyskland, Italien, Saudi-Arabien og andre, om, hvordan man skal modsætte sig »den totale krigs tankegang«, som de hævder, Rusland og Syrien forfølger.

Virkeligheden er den, at den syriske regering i Aleppo med held driver terroristerne tilbage; og Rusland er i færd med at mobilisere støtte og nødhjælpsforsyninger – inklusive felthospitaler – til de tusinder af mennesker, der nu er befriet og nødlidende.

Foto: Udsigt over Capitol fra toppen af Washington-monumentet.

28. nov., 2016 – I dag mødtes den tiltrædende FN-generalsekretær, Antonio Guterres, med hhv. præsident Xi Jinping og premierminister Li Keqiang, hver for sig. Dette besøg i Beijing kommer i tæt rækkefølge efter Guterres’ møde i Moskva i fredags med præsident Vladimir Putin, og nogle af de samme temaer blev anslået af lederne i begge nationer, nemlig, at FN har en afgørende rolle at spille i at skabe global fred og stabilitet.

Xi henviste til det faktum, at de principper, der er nedfældet i FN’s charter, inkluderer ansvaret for at bevare verdensfreden. Han sagde, at Kina vil støtte FN i denne rolle, og, iflg. dagens dækning i CCTV, har til hensigt »at øge kommunikation og pragmatisk samarbejde med organisationen«. Xi roste FN som den mest fremtrædende, globale, multinationale organisation.

Under Guterres’ møde i Moskva understregede Putin, ligesom Xi, Ruslands støtte til en styrkelse af FN’s »ledende og centrale rolle inden for internationale anliggender, konfliktløsning og i kampen for menneskerettigheder«. Til gengæld understregede Guterres, i sine bemærkninger til Putin, at »vi lever i en verden med multiple trusler fra mangedoblingen af nye konflikter … Jeg er en stærk tilhænger at, at globale problemer kun kan have globale løsninger, og en ensidig fremgangsmåde kan umuligt løse disse, og jeg er en stærk tilhænger af den rolle, multilateralisme spiller.«

CCTC rapporterer, at, under Guterres separate møde med Li Keqiang, »udvekslede de to ledere synspunkter mht. måder, hvorpå økonomisk globalisering kan styrkes og inkluderende, global udvikling kan realiseres.« Kina har taget den ledende rolle mht. at følge op på FN’s mandat fra 2015, om at arbejde for at opnå en reduktion af global fattigdom i året 2030.

Guterres tiltræder embedet i FN den 1. jan., 2017. Han har betydelige førstehåndserfaringer om konsekvenserne af konflikt, især, mens han var FN-flygtningehøjkommissær. Guterres, der er portugiser, var premierminister i Portugal fra 1995-2002.

Foto: Mødet mellem Guterres og Xi Jinping.

Indsat foto: Guterres mødes med Li Keqiang.     

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nErmBgXVNE