1

»En dialog om tre præsidentskaber:
Bøj universets moralske bue mod retfærdighed«
Hovedtale af Helga Zepp-LaRouche på
Schiller Institut Konference i New York, 7. april, 2018
(Video og engelsk udskrift)

Introduktion:

Den amerikanske præsident Donald Trump, den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping og den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin kunne, i løbet af de næste par måneder, sammen træffe en række af de absolut vigtigste beslutninger, som ville indvirke på menneskeheden, siden renæssancen i det 15. århundrede. Den mulige løsning på Korea-spørgsmålet er blot et enkelt eksempel. De rette beslutninger, truffet af disse tre nationer og deres allierede i de næste par uger, kunne, i den nærmeste fremtid, begynde at fjerne fattigdom, kolonialisme og krig fra planeten. Løsningerne for at fjerne dette tredobbelte onde ligger både i stjernerne og i os selv.

Britiske imperiekræfter har midlertidigt mistet kontrollen over den svigtende transatlantiske, geopolitiske proces. Nu forsøger de at genvinde fordelen. Ligesom med den britiske efterretningsagent Christopher Steeles Russiagate-svindel, er det nu svindlen med »Rusland forgiftede Sergei Skripal og hans datter«, der efter planen skal drive en kile ind mellem præsident Trump og Vladimir Putin. Hvis denne bestræbelse lykkes, vil alt det arbejde, der er udført af Devin Nunes’ Husets Efterretningskomite og andre, for at afsløre den korrupte rolle, som FBI, Justitsministeriet, Udenrigsministeriet og andre har spillet i det britiskkørte kup imod det amerikanske præsidentskab i 2016, have været forgæves.

Evindelig krig, som de amerikanske administrationer Bush 41, Bush 43 og Obama var fortalere for, kan nu erstattes med en ny økonomisk platform og en ny kulturel platform.

Lørdag, 7. april, er Schiller Instituttets stifter Helga Zepp-LaRouche hovedtaler på denne konference, der skal samle amerikanerne omkring dette optimistiske perspektiv. En vedtagelse af de økonomiske forholdsregler og standpunkter, der kendes som LaRouches Fire Love[1] samtidig med en accept af det stående, kinesiske forslag [om USA’s deltagelse i den Nye Silkevej] ville give grundlaget for at skabe en hurtig forøgelse i amerikansk, produktiv beskæftigelse, levestandarder og uddannelse af ungdommen i USA.

Grundlaget for en dialog mellem de »tre store« præsidentskaber er indeholdt i et dokument af Lyndon LaRouche fra marts, 1984, med titlen, »Udkast til aftalememorandum mellem USA og U.S.S.R.«[2]

Indledningen lyder således:

»Det politiske fundament for varig fred må være: a) Alle nationalstaters ubetingede suverænitet, og b) Samarbejde mellem suveræne nationalstater med det formål at fremme ubegrænsede muligheder for at blive delagtig i fordelene ved teknologisk fremskridt, til gensidig fordel for enhver nationalstat, og alle nationalstater.

Det mest afgørende aspekt ved en aktuel implementering af en sådan politik for varig fred er en dybtgående ændring i de monetære, økonomiske og politiske relationer mellem de dominerende magter og de relativt underordnede nationer, som ofte klassificeres som »udviklingslande«. Med mindre de uligheder, der stadig dvæler i kølvandet på moderne kolonialisme, gradvist afhjælpes, kan der ikke være nogen varig fred på denne planet.«

Sidstnævnte tema vil blive behandlet på mødet 7. april i en præsentation af Jason Ross, medforfatter af Schiller Instituttets Specialrapport, »Forlæng den Nye Silkevej til Vestasien og Afrika: En vision for en økonomisk renæssance«.[3] Med en befolkning på størrelse med Indiens og med den yngste befolkning i noget kontinent i verden, ville Afrikas fysisk-økonomiske udvikling gennem fælles arbejde, udført af USA sammen med Kina, gøre de gamle koloniregimers racister tavse for altid. Verdens to største økonomier kunne, ved hjælp af Sun Yat-sens og Abraham Lincolns »Tre principper for folket«[4], udgøre spydspidsen for en anti-koloniudvikling og fjerne den fattigdom, som er udløser af racisme og krig.

Her følger engelsk udskrift af Helga Zepp-LaRouches tale:

 

 Schiller Institute Conference with Helga Zepp-LaRouche
        New York City, April 7, 2018

A DIALOGUE OF THREE PRESIDENCIES:

BENDING THE ARC OF THE MORAL UNIVERSE TOWARD JUSTICE 

DIANE SARE: Good afternoon.  I’m Diane Sare with the
Schiller Institute here in Manhattan and at the conference
called “The Dialogue of Three Presidencies:  Bending the Arc of
the Moral Universe toward Justice.”
Fifty years ago this year, our nation suffered two major
assassinations:  The first, on April 4th, 1968, was that of
Martin Luther King, Jr.,[5] who was gunned down while he was
participating in organizing for a sanitation workers’ strike in
Memphis, Tennessee; then, on June 6th, Robert Kennedy — the
second Kennedy to be assassinated — who was likely on a
trajectory to become the President of the United States.  I think
it’s very important to reflect on that change in the United
States 50 years ago.  I was very struck a few weeks ago, having
heard about a speech by Chinese President Xi Jinping, where he
spoke in China of the Century of Humiliation.  Starting in 1840,
the Opium Wars against China, which were absolutely devastating
and destructive, run by the British Empire — which is still the
enemy of civilization today; to the Japanese occupation in the
1940s, under which 35 million or more people died.  What
President Xi said to these young people is that, in effect, we
have to take this as a source of strength; that our sacred honor
is that we will never allow ourselves to be humiliated in such a
way again.  And that we will never impose such humiliation upon
any other human being.
So, I was reflecting on the last 50 years in this country,
what we have tolerated.  And before I came here today, I was
reading a little bit from Martin Luther King’s book about the
process leading into his leadership of what became the Montgomery
Bus Boycott.  He described that the unity of the people —
because people may know, it wasn’t just that Rosa Parks refused
to move to the back of the bus and got arrested and somehow there
were demonstrations.  People went on for nearly a year, refusing
to ride the bus.  That meant that people with the postal service
were organizing all these elaborate carpools; and people in their
60s and 70s were walking 12 miles a day to not take the bus.  And
I was thinking to myself, how many Americans today would be
prepared to walk 12 miles a day until we got the Manhattan subway
system fixed, for example?  Or until we found out who actually
was behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks?  Or until the torture of
people, which is completely degrading to man as in the image of
God?  How many Americans would be prepared to do that kind of
hard work over an extended time?  I began to think that this is
the — when Lyndon LaRouche a few years ago, we did a series of
memorial concerts on the 15th anniversary of 9/11; and he talked
about the humiliation of Americans not having done anything.  I
thought that’s kind of an odd term; what does he mean
“humiliation”?  When I was reading what Dr. King had to say this
morning, I thought, “Well, of course.  We should be humiliated.”
In a sense, we should be ashamed that we have allowed our nation
to be in the shape that it is, and not have acted sooner.  If we
would take this opportunity this year, to come to that conclusion
firmly as strongly as Xi Jinping means it in China, then there is
absolutely nothing that can stop us.
The person whom I am about to introduce, has been a very
important leader for 40+ years, 50+ years, in that fight.  It is
a very challenging world right now.  The American people clearly
rejected a continuation of British imperial perpetual war and
Wall Street bail-out policies when they rejected the election of
Hillary Clinton.  Because President Trump represents an
opportunity, as this conference is called “Three Presidencies:
Trump, Putin, and Xi Jinping.”  Because there is a potential
represented by this administration to end the long reign of the
evil British Empire; everything is going a bit crazy.  I heard
this morning, apparently there was a car that plowed into a crowd
in Muenster, Germany, killing several people and injuring many
others, today while we’re here.  In the United States, we are
bombarded; the American news media is violent in its coverage,
because what it does to you is, it causes whipsaw.  You’re
reading one thing one day, another thing the other day. President
Trump says he wants to get the troops out of Syria; and then we
hear, “The White House says the troops must remain in Syria.”
Well, who is the White House?  It’s apparently not the same thing
as President Trump.  So, this causes a great deal of confusion
and anxiety among the American people.
Mrs. LaRouche, who not only is the founder and chairwoman of
the international Schiller Institute, is also a brilliant writer
and scholar.  She is an expert on Nicholas of Cusa, who wrote a
very important paper called “The Coincidence of Opposites.”  So,
I am confident that her address to us here today, will help all
of us to make sense of the situation and give us an idea of how
we can conduct ourselves to end this 50 years of humiliation in
the United States.  So, with that, I’d like to introduce Helga
Zepp-LaRouche.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I want to say “Hello” to you, and I’m
very happy to talk to you, at least via video, so I can share
with you my ideas.
I think in the recent weeks, many people in many countries
have been very distraught about the so-called Skripal affair.
This was the assassination attempt, the poison gas attack on the
former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter. Immediately,
the Theresa May government accused Russia that they did it.  I
think that this particular situation has demonstrated in a way we
have not seen it ever, what is the role of the British Empire,
the British government, British policies in the present
escalation against Russia, and in a certain sense against China.
This affair was immediately made an issue of NATO, of the
European Union.  Many EU members immediately declared
unconditional solidarity with Theresa May, and they agreed on the
formulation that there is no other plausible explanation than
Russia did it.  I think this reaction is very telling, because it
shows on the one side, the degree of British control in NATO, and
in part in the European Union.  Fortunately, about half of the
European Union members did not agree.  But it also demonstrated
the incredible Orwellian character of the present Western
democracies of the so-called “liberal” Western system.  Because
the idea that you immediately abandon the principle that {in
dubio pro reo}, that the innocence is relevant until proven
guilty; that this was abandoned and that truth was replaced by a
consensus among countries.  If that is the principle of
international policy, then we are all in very bad shape.
The immediate danger is naturally that this thing is not
just leading to mass expulsions of diplomats.  The United States
expelled 60 diplomats; the British expelled a similar number, and
Germany four.  Altogether, I think 23 diplomats in the other
European countries.  But obviously, this has the implication of
leading to a broader escalation of confrontation with Russia and
possibly even war; because this is a prewar propaganda.  If you
look at the timing of this affair, first of all the two Skripals
fortunately seem to be in much better condition.  That raises a
whole bunch of questions because if it was Novichok nerve gas,
then the question is, how did the British have so quickly an
antidote that they are now happily surviving?  Or, maybe it was
not Novichok.  How could they come so quickly to the conclusion
that it was Russia, when Scotland Yard said it would take several
weeks to find out what really was the nerve gas agent used in
this attack.
The timing was at a point where, in the United States, the
whole focus of Congressional investigations of the House
Intelligence Committee, the House Judiciary Committee, similar
committees in the Senate, was about the role of the British
Empire in the Russia-gate affair, or the Trump-gate, or the
Mueller-gate, depending on how you want to call it.  The focus of
several committees started to really put into the limelight the
role of Christopher Steele, the so-called “former” MI6 agent, the
role of the British government, the collusion not with Russia but
with the British in the whole attempt to make a coup against
President Trump.  So, that was very convenient, because all of a
sudden, it was the Russia issue again.  May, in these days, you
could always say that the days of Theresa May seemed to be
numbered; because she was in such an unstable position.
Now, cui bono?  Who has the motive?  In whose interest
would be such an affair?  Well, Russia really has no motive; why
would this occur just weeks before the Presidential election in
Russia?  Would Putin really want to have such notoriety just
before the election, and just before the World Soccer World Cup?
So, also Russia would have had many opportunities to kill
Skripal; he was, for many years, in a Russian jail, he lived for
many years in Great Britain without any problem.  Nevertheless,
despite that, Merkel and Macron, half of the EU immediately came
out saying, “No, it is the only plausible explanation that it was
Russia.”  Boris Johnson gave an interview to a German radio
called Deutsche Welle, where he said that he had absolute
scientific proof from the scientists of the Porton Down
laboratory, who had definitely said that they had 100 % proof that
it was Russia.  In the meantime, the scientists refused to
provide the after-the-fact evidence, and the head of the lab, Mr.
Aitkenhead, said that they could identify that it was Novichok;
but that they absolutely could not identify the source of the
origin of this poison gas.  This was a very lamentable situation,
so the Foreign Office immediately deleted the tweet in which this
was stated; which now has Boris Johnson’s stand there as a liar.
That does not prevent the Theresa May government from continuing
to push the lie that Russia did it.
Many officials in Russia — Foreign Minister [Sergey] Lavrov; Foreign
Ministry spokeswoman [Maria] Zakharova, the head of foreign intelligence
[Sergey] Naryshkin — the all pointed to the fact that the {cui bono} and
the likelihood, and who has the capacity and motive, actually
points to British intelligence.  This whole operation — and this
was pointed out by many experts and commentators — this
absolutely parallels what the British did in the Iraq case in
2003; where also MI6 produced a dossier supposedly proving that
Saddam Hussein was in the possession of weapons of mass
destruction which could reach every city within 45 minutes around
the globe.  That Saddam Hussein supposedly had absolute
connections with al-Qaeda; which was a blatant lie, because
Saddam Hussein used to throw al-Qaeda people into jail and other
things.  But this was then used as a pretext.  So, Colin Powell
gave the famous speech in the United Nations motivating U.S.
participation in the Iraq War.  Then, the war against Iraq
occurred, with many hundreds of thousands of people losing their
lives as a result.
This is what some people in Russia in the meantime have
called “Goebbels” propaganda.  Why is there such a demonization
of Russia?  Why is there a demonization of President Putin coming
essentially from the same people who are also demonizing
President Trump and President Xi Jinping?  This is the same
foolishness which already led to the Second World War and which
could easily trigger a Third World War.  There is the danger that
these war-mongers are repeating the same methodological mistake,
stupidity, which led to two world wars.
What is behind that is a mixture of desperation because the
financial powers of the City of London and their Wall Street
backers and collaborators see clearly that their system is
failing.  Obviously, they have a complete fear that this would go
with a complete loss of their political and financial power.  But
it is also an obsession that their schemes will function, and if
they just have enough containment and escalation then their
system will be proven superior.  They are confronted with their
system not succeeding, but failing; they don’t have the intended
unipolar world, but they are confronted with the emergence of a
completely New Paradigm in the world.
If you want to understand why Russia is such a focus of
Russophobia right now, you have to take the situation back to the
end of the Soviet Union.  Because in the United States, at a
point when the Soviet Union started to disintegrate and there
would have actually been the possibility for a peace order for
the 21st Century, you had in the United States the consolidation
of the neo-cons.  They revived the American Century doctrine,
which originally was formulated by Walter Lippmann in 1943, when
he published a book with that name which then became the entire
basis for the post-war order; the legitimacy of NATO, the whole
Cold War.  It was the idea to revive that with the project for a
new American Century and the idea that you would replace the two
superpower system with an unipolar world based on the
Anglo-American special relationship, and a neo-liberal monetarist
system.  This was essentially a continuation of the idea that you
would control the developing countries, keep them in relative
backwardness, and deregulate the financial system in order to
bring back the power of Wall Street and the City of London, and
basically control the world that way.
In 1989, when the German reunification happened, this was
actually combined with the promise that NATO would never expand
eastward.  You have to remember that the Soviet Union agreed to
the dissolution of the GDR and German reunification without the
use of force.  You could say, in light of the history of the
Second World War, where the Soviet Union had suffered tremendous
losses of life and naturally had a very terrible memory of Nazi
Germany that it was extremely generous of the Soviet Union to
agree to that.  The promise was clearly given not to expand NATO
eastward; this was emphasized many times by the former American
ambassador in Moscow at that time, John Matlock.  In the recent
publications of the archives from George Washington University,
it was also clear that this was, indeed, a promise made.
In 1990, the General Secretary of NATO at that time, Manfred
Wörner, made a speech in Brussels which is worth remembering.  He
at that time said, “The goal for the next decade is the creation
of a European security structure, including the Soviet Union and
the states of the Warsaw Pact,” and that the Soviet Union would
play an important role in the construction of such a security
system, and that he would understand the wish of the Soviet Union
not to be excluded from Europe.  “The West cannot answer to the
erosion of the Warsaw Pact with a weakening or dissolution of
[NATO]”; and therefore, “the only answer is the creation of a
security framework which includes both alliances” and which
includes the “Soviet Union into a cooperating Europe….  The
very fact that we are ready not to deploy NATO troops beyond the
territory of the Federal Republic [of Germany] gives the Soviet
Union firm security guarantees,” Wörner said.
This is all proven by these new documents which have been
published that the West obviously, or the neo-cons and their
British partners, were clearly promoting a different policy and
making fake promises.  On the surface, the offer to the Soviet
Union continued.  Still in 1994, President Clinton said the NATO
expansion is not anti-Russian; it means inclusion instead of
exclusion.  But then, things became more dramatic.  In 1999,
there was the famous Tony Blair speech in Chicago, which was the
definite elimination of whatever relic of the Peace of Westphalia
system existed; and by that, also the elimination of the
principles of the UN Charter — namely, guaranteeing the
sovereignty of every country.  This was clearly a foreshadowing
of what Blair did later in 2003 with the Iraq War.  What replaced
the idea of respect for the sovereignty of countries was the idea
of “humanitarian” interventions.  Naturally, then in 2001 with
the September 11th attack, which was a complete assault on all
civil liberties and civil rights which had been fought for, for
decades.  And it imposed an international regime with the pretext
of the war against terrorism.
What followed then was regime change, color revolution.  You
had the Orange Revolution in 2004 in Ukraine; you had the Rose
Revolution in Georgia.  In the meantime, both the Russian and
Chinese militaries respectively stated that they regarded color
revolution as an absolute total form of warfare.  Naturally, the
Maidan coup against the Ukraine government belongs in this chain.
Also, already in 2002, the United States abandoned
unilaterally the ABM [Anti-Ballistic Missile] Treaty, and
proceeded to build up a global ABM system, which Russia had said
at the very beginning, they could not tolerate the Phase 3 and
Phase 4 of it to be implemented, because it would completely
undermine the strategic stability and therefore be a threat to
the security interests of Russia.
In the 16 years of Bush, Jr. and Obama, these
interventionist wars continued.  Bush declared the “Axis of
Evil,” and the various wars in the Middle East and northern
Africa started to eliminate governments which were not agreeable
to this idea of a unipolar world.  The world was slowly and
steadily going to more Hell, more refugee crises, more misery;
millions of people dying in the Middle East and northern Africa.
Then, in 2013, the world suddenly changed for the better.
President Xi Jinping announced a new model of international
relationships in Kazakhstan — the New Silk Road.  In the
tradition of the ancient Silk Road, which was an incredible
exchange not only of goods, technologies, cultures, ideas, but
also laid the foundation of a dialogue among nations; this New
Silk Road took on a development which is unprecedented I think in
all of history.  In the last 4.5 years, this new Spirit of the
New Silk Road started to catch on, so that by now, more than 140
countries are cooperating in Asia, in Latin America, in Africa,
even in Europe, with the New Silk Road.  You have a tremendous
sense of optimism in Latin America, where practically all Latin
American countries are now building and planning to build
bi-oceanic projects; bi-oceanic railway between Brazil and Peru,
bi-oceanic tunnels between Argentina and Chile, and many other
projects.  So, the Spirit of the New Silk Road has definitely
caught on in the Caribbean and Latin American countries.  It is
for sure the case in the Asian countries, and many corridors are
being built.  Africa has completely changed with the building of
railways from Djibouti to Addis Ababa; all along the eastern
African countries, the western African countries.  If you look at
the map of Chinese investments in railway systems and industry
parks and hydropower in many other agricultural projects, there
is a completely new spirit and self confidence among the Africa
nations that they can now overcome poverty and under-development
for the first time, in the near future.  Even in Europe, where
the EU has been absolutely blocking any cooperation, the New Silk
Road Spirit has absolutely caught on.  You have the 16+1 Eastern
and Central European countries; you have the Balkan countries.
Italy is now engaged together with China in a major project
called Transaqua, which will change the lives of 12 African
nations and bring industrialization into the heart of Africa. But
also, Portugal and Spain want to be the hubs not only for the
western end of the Eurasian part of the New Silk Road, but to be
also a hub for the Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking countries in
Africa and Asia and Latin America.  So, the New Silk Road Spirit
is absolutely on the agenda.  Also in Switzerland, in Austria,
and even in Holland, Belgium, and some of the Scandinavian
countries.
This is based on the idea of a win-win cooperation of
respect for the sovereignty of the other country and respect for
the other social system.  This has been an incredible
development.  It’s already 12 times larger than the Marshall Plan
was, but the amazing thing is that for 4.5 years where this
project is now progressing, the Western mainstream media and
Western politicians have virtually ignored it; they have not
reported it, and only in the recent period have they suddenly
realized this is unstoppable.  What is now occurring is a flood
of attacks from the main think tanks, saying this is just an
authoritarian effort by the Chinese to replace the Anglo-American
imperialism with a Chinese one, and they want to take over the
world.  It was quite a sudden change in the coverage and in the
comments.
A similar shock happened when they realized that Russia was
absolutely not a regional power as Obama had told, but that
basically it was about to become, under the leadership of
President Putin, a major power again.  So therefore, when Trump
suddenly won the election, the same apparatus which is now behind
the Skripal affair — British intelligence in collusion with the
intelligence heads of the Obama administration — started a
policy of a coup against President Trump.  There was an article
in January 2017 by the British paper {The Spectator}, which said
that President Trump would be gotten out of the White House
either through a coup, impeachment, or an assassination attempt.
That was obviously the policy which these people followed, and
the aim clearly was to prevent President Trump — who had
promised in the election campaign to improve relations with
Russia and bring it back on a stable and good basis — to prevent
Trump from doing it by saying, “If you dare to speak to President
Putin, that just proves you are a Russian agent.”  It took indeed
until the G-20 meeting in Hamburg last year, before Putin and
Trump had a personal meeting and actually hit it off very well.
Also, between President Trump and President Xi Jinping,
contrary to what Trump had said in the election campaign where he
was actually on a quite strong China-bashing mode, he received
President Xi Jinping in April last year at his private residence
in Mar-a-Lago.  And they established a very good positive
relationship between the two of them.  Then, when President Trump
went to Beijing for a visit in October last year, President Xi
Jinping returned this and gave Trump what they called a “state
visit plus.”  President Xi Jinping had the Forbidden City closed
down to visitors for an entire day, and gave a huge long history
lecture on Chinese history to President Trump and his wife.  They
established and deepened their relationship.
In the meantime, also Russia and China established the
deepest strategic partnership in their history.  Putin gave a
speech on March 3, 2018 to the Federal Assembly, where he
announced new weapons systems; basically, a long-range missile
which does not follow the ballistic curve, but is highly
maneuverable. Then also, a nuclear-powered cruise missile which
the West absolutely does not have, and a nuclear-powered
underwater drone which is quicker than above-water ships, and
laser weapons.  This combination of these and other weapons means
that all of sudden, the entire global ABM system the United
States had proceeded to build is obsolete.  President Putin said,
well, the West refused to even respond to all the offers made by
Russia since 2002; but now, they have to respond.  It is quite
amazing that, except the demand of four American ambassadors,
they have not yet responded.  Western media tended to belittle
these new weapons systems, or ignore them for the most part.
[Chinese Foreign Minister] Wang Yi and the Chinese Defense
Minister Wei Fenghe just attended the very large 7th Moscow
International Security Conference, which was attended by 900
guests and 700 media.  Wang Yi said that Russia can pursue its
own interests and play a larger role in the international and
regional stages.  The Chinese Defense Minister Wei Fenghe said he
came in order to send a signal to Washington that the
Russian-Chinese alliance is absolutely the strongest and that
there is a very close cooperation between the Russian and the
Chinese armed forces.
All of these things have to be seen as a dynamic process,
where we are now on the verge also of a full-fledged trade war.
Admittedly, the trade deficit of the United States with China is
untenable; but when President Trump said that he wants to impose
tariffs first on $60 billion trade deficit, and then on another
$100 billion trade deficit, this was met by an unusually sharp
response from the Chinese.  Global Times wrote yesterday that
China will not submit to the U.S. trade intimidation; that China
is prepared to react with a full list of their own tariffs on
American imports; that the trade war will cause pain for China,
but the Chinese society will rally and unite around the
government and the Party; and that they will also present a
detailed plan to respond, and then the Americans would have to
choose if they back their President in doing so, or if they hold
him accountable for the consequences.  China Daily even
mentioned that the Chinese countermeasures could include the
dumping of U.S. Treasuries, of which they have $1.4 trillion as
securities.
All of this comes at a moment where, at any moment, we could
have a new financial crash much worse than that of 2008, because
all the central banks did absolutely nothing to remove the root
causes of the crisis of 2008.  They just did quantitative easing,
zero interest rates, and naturally many corporations took that
gratis money to buy back their own stocks so that their stock
exchange values would go up, but the corporate debt would
increase.  Now, as the Federal Reserve is trying to increase the
interest rate, the blow-out of these corporate debt situations
could trigger a complete systemic collapse.  That is just one of
the many facets of this crisis.
An insider in the banking system, a well-placed one, told us
very recently that there is actually the possibility that some of
the financial forces could even deliberately trigger a crash
which they know is inevitable to come, as a deliberate plan to
pull the rug out from underneath President Trump; to bring back
the neo-cons, and that way to solve the problem which they could
not solve with the failed Russia-gate attempt. One thing is very
clear.  If that would happen and the neo-cons would get fully
back in the United States, World War III is as good as secure and
certain.
In the middle of this Skripal affair, President Trump and
President Putin telephoned; and President Trump absolutely
refused to send out tweets on this affair or otherwise join in
the present Russia bashing.
I want to make the strong point that there is a solution to
all of the problems I just mentioned.  That is, that there are
many possibilities.  For example, when Presidents Trump and Putin
will have a summit in the near future, they could discuss this.
Also, the Chinese Prime Minister Li Keqiang had recently pointed
to the fact that there is actually another way to solve the trade
deficit; namely, by massively increasing the trade.  President Xi
Jinping has offered to the whole world, including all the
European nations and the United States, that they should
cooperate with the Belt and Road Initiative.  China could decide
and choose not to dump U.S. Treasuries as a punishment for the
U.S. trade measures, but they could invest the $1.4 trillion in
U.S. Treasuries in infrastructure in the United States.  Diane
mentioned the Manhattan subway system in her remarks, and if you
look at the infrastructure — not only in Manhattan, but in all
of the United States — the condition of the highways, the
absolute absence of a fast train system; it is very clear that
the United States urgently needs investment in infrastructure.
President Trump had promised in the election campaign that he
would invest $1 trillion in infrastructure build-up; but so far,
he has not been able to find any financing, because the private
investors want an 11 % to 12 % return and a complete return of
their capital within 10 years.  Which means it is not possible to
finance it through private investment.  The neo-cons in the
Senate and in the Congress do not want to spend it in the Federal
budget.  The idea to distribute it to the regional and state
governments is just not practical.
So, if on the other side, China, which has a fantastic fast
train system of I think 25,000 km of fast train, and is planning
to connect every major Chinese city with a fast train system and
build 40,000 km of fast train systems by 2020; China could help
to build such a fast train system in the United States and
connect every major city with a fast train system going 350 mph
and in that way, completely transform the infrastructure of the
United States.  This would help not only to overcome the trade
deficit, but it would open the way for joint ventures between the
United States and China in third countries.  In Latin America
where, contrary to what former Secretary of State Tillerson had
said, China is not trying to build an imperial system in Latin
America.  But China and the United States could join hands in
building up the industries of the Southern Hemisphere.  Also, the
same could happen in Asian countries along the Belt and Road; and
also naturally in Africa.  It could happen in the reconstruction
and economic build-up of the war-torn region of Southwest Asia,
and naturally of Africa in general.
This could even include Great Britain eventually, if they
change their government and if they get their crimes cleared up
which they clearly have committed.  But it would mean absolutely
the necessity to reform the financial system of the United States
and Western Europe.
My husband, Lyndon LaRouche, has already developed several
years ago a package which together would absolutely remedy the
situation.  It would mean that the United States should go back
to a Hamiltonian banking policy, to a banking system in the
tradition of Alexander Hamilton; including the Glass-Steagall
banking separation of Franklin D Roosevelt.  Then, have a
national bank, a credit system, then have a crash program for
thermonuclear fusion and joint space cooperation with other
countries in order to increase the productivity of the economy in
a qualitative way.
What people really don’t realize, or most people don’t
realize, is that the present Chinese model of economy and the
early U.S. republic model are very similar.  They’re based on
Hamiltonian principles.  In China, they have now made a huge
effort to eliminate the speculative area, to forbid Chinese
investors abroad to invest in speculation.  It is very clear that
China, even if they don’t call it way, is actually very close to
the American System.  And it is no coincidence that the most
popular economist in China is Friedrich List, the German
economist who was sort of the predecessor to Henry C. Carey, and
who wrote important writings about the different between the
British and the American systems.  Germany also has a tradition
of that; namely, the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, the Credit
Bank for Reconstruction, which was based on the Roosevelt
Reconstruction Finance Corporation and was the basis for the
German economic miracle in the post-war reconstruction.  So, also
in Europe, you have some relevance and memory of this system.
Now after Xi Jinping had announced the New Silk Road, the
Schiller Institute and our organization published a study which
we had worked on for 26 years with the name “The New Silk Road
Becomes the World Land-Bridge,” which is actually the absolute
blueprint and outline for an international economic cooperation
of all nations overcoming geopolitics.
Now just imagine if we could mobilize the American people to
exert pressure on President Trump and give him backing, and he
would accept the offer of Xi Jinping to cooperate with the New
Silk Road in this way and also the European countries would
eventually recognize — most of them are doing it already — but
even the remaining ones would recognize that the cooperation with
Russia, with China and the other nations who already have jointed
the Belt and Road initiative–that this would be much more in
their self-interest, than the present course of the British
confrontation with Russia and with China.
If such an international economic cooperation could be
realized, it would also be the realistic basis for a global
security architecture which would include among others also
Russia and China.  It would then require that we do exactly what
Xi Jinping has said many times, that mankind needs to move in a
new phase of international cooperation, what he calls the “shared
community of the future of mankind” or a “community of destiny,”
then we could start to focus on the real problems, the common
aims of mankind.  We could build a system to make nuclear weapons
obsolete, a new form of the SDI, what my husband had proposed, in
the end of the 1970s and then it was in the works for several
years; and then on March 23, 1983, President Regan had announced
the SDI as a way for both superpowers to cooperate to make
nuclear weapons obsolete. I think in light of the present danger
of a new arms race and the already-existing arms race and the
danger that this gets out of control, we need such an approach as
a new SDI; and also a new SDE [Strategic Defense of the Earth],
because the planet as a whole is threatened by dangers from
space, from asteroids, from comets, which could really extinguish
life on this Earth.
We should instead concentrate on the common aims of
mankind–the alleviation of poverty, the creation of a living
standard for a decent life for every human being on this planet,
and a system of earthquake precursors and joint space research
and travel.  We should concentrate on space colonization as the
necessary and possible next phase of the evolution of the human
species. I think that if we combine that with a dialogue of
cultures where each nation would emphasize and revive the best
traditions of its own culture, and then have a dialogue among all
of these nations and cultures, we could absolutely create the
basis for a new Renaissance.
Skeptics would say that this is completely unrealistic.  But
I’m saying that the fact that you have these three
Presidents–President Putin, who is obviously recognized and
loved by the Russian people, and has just been reelected with an
overwhelming majority; with Xi Jinping, who is an exceptional
leader who obviously is equally loved by the Chinese population,
and basically they decided to eliminate the limits to his term in
office so that he can guide China in these very, very important
coming years; and President Trump, who is absolutely not what the
media are making out of him, but who has shown again and again
that he has outflanked a pretty difficult factional situation in
his own party, and naturally with a Congress and a Senate which
are very obstructive for the most part.  I think that if the
three Presidents join hands and do what they clearly did very
successfully so far, in the attempt to solve the crisis of the
Korean Peninsula, I absolutely think this is a realistic option.
However, we should not sit on our hands, but we should
really get into an international mobilization to propose this
agenda, and do everything in our means to make it possible.  It
is the life of civilization which depends on it.
Thank you. [Applause]

SARE:  Thank you. We can now take questions from the
audience here. Please say your name, and if you represent an
institution or a press agency, please state what you’re
representing as well.

Q:  I would like to ask you a question on behalf of Weiwei
TV. As you may know, President Donald Trump has already
instituted trade policies on China and China made a serious
response.  So I would like to know how you see the relationship
between the United States and China? And what direction do you
think this relationship is going to?  Thank you.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think that we have a very serious danger,
because if it comes to this trade war, as I mentioned, you have
already a collapsing financial system of the trans-Atlantic
region.  And a trade war could easily be one of the elements
triggering a complete meltdown of the financial system and that
would obviously be much worse for the West than for China, which
has taken certain measures to eliminate speculation and put the
whole Chinese economy on a solid ground.  Nevertheless, the
consequences of a financial crash would be potentially extremely
dangerous.  As I said, if the neo-cons would come back and Trump
would be ousted in this context, we would be back to Hell in no
time.
On the other side, the trade war has not yet started.  So
far, it’s just lists, and there is room to put on the agenda a
different proposal.  I think Prime Minister Li Keqiang already
pointed to it, to increase the trade in joint ventures in third
countries.  I think that the more people talk about this idea of
U.S. investments in infrastructure and, for example, Xi Jinping
could reiterate the proposal for the United States to join the
Belt and Road Initiative, I think the trade war can still be
avoided. But it does need determined action.
And I think that the possibility exists simply because the
relationship between Xi Jinping and Trump has so far lasted over
a year, and they have telephoned around many crises; and
basically the Korea situation is on a very good course.  There
will be a summit between [Shinzo] Abe and Trump, who also wants
to play a positive role.  There will be a meeting between Putin
and Trump, hopefully very soon; and Kim Jong-Un and Trump. So I
think there is a diplomatic framework where many initiatives can
be made, and I think the New Silk Road is definitely the answer
to solve all of these problems.

Q:  Hello.  I think what you have said today is just
enlightening.  My name is Alan S.  I’m a screenwriter and
producer of a World War I mini-series, called “The 42nd Rainbow
Division.”  I think history is our greatest weapon and if we
start actually thinking back to what Russia actually did, for not
only World War II, but also World War I.  We would have lost both
world wars. And actually the United States wouldn’t have even
been in World War I, because we would have lost it before we even
got in.  They were a huge ally.
I think history needs to be taught to the young and that’s
why I’m doing this series, is because the younger generations
don’t realize that Russia has been an ally. And now we’re
vilifying Russia and making them into a villain when it should be
the opposite.  How do we actually teach this to the young?  The
younger generations are our hope and they’re our future.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think we need to change the narrative of
the neo-cons. Because when the Ukraine crisis started to develop,
President Putin said if it would not have been Ukraine, they
would have found another way to escalate the confrontation with
Russia. And I think that this is absolutely the case.
I think to change the narrative of the Ukraine, because this
is really when the total escalation against Putin as the demon
started, is a very urgent matter because right now President
Poroshenko has announced that he wants to basically have a
military solution for the east Ukraine, which could easily
provoke a war with Russia.
I think the narrative has to be replaced by the truth.  The
truth is that Victoria Nuland bragged that she and the State
Department spent $5 billion in building up NGOs to cause regime
change in Ukraine.  The former Chancellor Helmut Schmidt–even he
admitted that the Ukraine crisis started with the EU expansion
summit of Maastricht in 1992, when the eastward expansion of the
EU was decided, and the crisis was triggered when the EU wanted
to have the association of Ukraine (basically at the end of 2013,
which was the point when President Yanukovych decided he couldn’t
do it because it would have given NATO access to the Black Sea;
it would have flooded Russia with EU products.  This then
triggered the Maidan, which was immediately supported by these
NGOs financed by Nuland and the West, supported by neo-Nazis
which were then causing the violence, and finally the coup in
February 2014, imposing a fascist government as a reaction to
that. And the threat to forbid the Russian language, the people
in the Crimea decided to hold a referendum and they voted to be
part of Russia, so Crimea was not annexed, but it was a vote for
self-determination of the Crimean people.
I’m telling you all of this because part of the demonization
of Putin, is the Ukraine story and what he supposedly did with
Crimea, and all of this is not true.  I think we have to really
make an effort, to maybe produce many more movies and maybe we
can work together to this effect because we have documented many
of these wrong narratives and we must make them known. Because if
the mass media are just portraying this idea that Russia is about
to do everything, and behind every —  it is worse than the
McCarthy period and people are just hyped up which can only be
characterized as a prewar propaganda. Because why do you build up
an enemy image, because you want to make war against this nation.
This is a mortal danger in which the whole world is. And I think
this Skripal affair–the fact that it backfired, the fact that
the British were caught lying, is really also a chance.
I would suggest that we work together on making more movies.
We have already put out a lot of them, but I think we need and
call upon all of you to help to distribute them, and make them
known to as many young, middle-aged, and old people as we can.

Q:  Mrs. LaRouche.  Thank you very much for your speech.  I
think everyone here–we’re very pleased to hear what you said. My
name is Amber J. I’m political activist right now working with
several groups for supporting Trump and also for the midterm
election.  And also, I’m working for fighting for
Chinese-American minority civil rights kind of thing.
I have a question — I believe everybody came to this
conference understands your speech and understands the principle
of three countries cooperating with each other.  But there are
some Trump supporters, they stand for Trump because Trump is
starting a trade war right now.  How would you persuade those
Trump supporters to understand this win-win cooperation between
these three countries, to maximize the effort for these three
countries to cooperate together?
And also I believe a while ago, I heard India and Japan and
probably the U.S.A. talking about starting another kind of
international cooperation in terms of the infrastructure.  That
is the kind of thing similar to the Silk Road, the One Belt, One
Road.  How would you like to define that, or could you say about
something about it?  Thank you.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think this is again another narrative
which needs to be replaced by truth. And that is, what is
actually the Chinese policy?  Part of this problem is that for a
long period of time the Western media and certain political
circles in the United States have also painted a very negative
picture about China.  I think Chinese-Americans, and you yourself
could help to correct that.
I must say, my image of China is incredibly positive;

because I was there for the first time in 1971.  This was in the
Cultural Revolution.  And this was an unbelievable experience
because at that time, the country was completely distraught.
People there were unhappy.  The Red Guards took people out of
their homes in the night.  They painted all the cultural
buildings, the Summer Palace and other places in Beijing, with
red paint.
Anyway, I’m just reporting that to say that when I returned
to China after 25 years, in 1996, already with the idea of the
Eurasian Land-Bridge, the idea of the New Silk Road, where I
attended a major conference on that subject in Beijing as a
speaker, the country had already been completely transformed as a
result of the policies of Deng Xiaoping.
But if you now go to China, it is unbelievable.  The country
is prosperous; there is a large well-to-do middle class.  People
are optimistic about the future.  They have an absolute vision, a
self-confidence about China, about eliminating poverty by 2020.
President Xi Jinping has a hands-on policy, going to the
villages, talking to individuals; finding out what measures must
be taken to eliminate poverty.
It’s just such an incredibly optimistic situation–where
also, culturally, China is pursuing the revival of Confucianism.
Xi Jinping personally has made a big emphasis that Confucian
philosophy is being taught on all levels of society.
I think that if people, especially in the Chinese-American
community would amplify our efforts to show the real, true
picture of China, I think the Trump supporters would absolutely
understand, that it {is} in the best interest for the United
States and China to cooperate.  If you think about it, if the two
largest economies in the world cannot cooperate, the danger of
world war is very big.
Many people have talked about the Thucydides trap.  This
refers to the rivalry between ancient Athens and Sparta, which
led to the Peloponnesian War, and the final disappearance of
Classical, ancient Greece.  If there would be a Thucydides trap
between the United States and China; if the United States would
react to the rise of China by a military confrontation, the world
as a whole would not survive it.
China has (especially the Chinese ambassador in Washington,
Cui Tiankai stressed that it is not the intention to replace the
U.S. as the strongest power, but to have a special great power
relationship, where both of them respect the sovereignty of the
other, respect the different social system of the other, and then
join hands and cooperate in all strategic matters.
I think there must be a very big mobilization where the
image of China in the United States is being straightened out,
because once people know the beauty of Chinese culture, the
optimism of the Chinese population, everything will change.
It is right now that the United States has a big moral and
cultural crisis.  You have for the first time the life-expectancy
going down.  For two years in a row, you have the life-expectancy
of all categories of life in the United States shrinking.  If
there is any parameter for a collapsing economy, it is the
life-expectancy. And that is naturally due to the new opium
epidemic, the rate of suicides because of depression, alcoholism,
and the terrible culture of death, which expresses itself in the
youth culture, violence of the video games, in the whole
entertainment industry, which is contributing to these many
school shootings.
You do have a cultural problem.  And I think you have to go
back to the philosophy of Benjamin Franklin, the founder and
father of America, who used to be a complete Confucian
philosopher.  He recognized the wonderful aspects of the moral
philosophy of Confucius and modeled his own moral system on the
basis of Confucius.  There are many parallels.  You have the
Confucius tradition with Benjamin Franklin, and in China, you
have the American System of Alexander Hamilton in the early phase
of the American republic, and now, in the Chinese model.  And you
have many similarities which, once you see, you can see that
there are universal principles uniting these two countries, which
are much more deep and much more important than the superficial
conflicts.
I would say the best thing one can do to intervene in this
situation is, we have proposed the project for the China
investment in infrastructure.  This has been picked up by a
Chinese professor recently, John Gong.  It has been covered by
CGTN TV.  There is a very famous Trump supporter in California,
who just made a similar proposal.  I think that has to be talked
up. I think we have to talk up the idea of overcoming the danger
of a trade war, by putting instead on the table Chinese
investment in infrastructure, U.S. and China joining in joint
ventures in third countries, and start a real cultural dialogue,
so that the two people start to know each other and know the best
of each other. And that way we can overcome this crisis.

SARE:  Helga, I have a question which I think is related.
You may want to say more.  It comes from Sr. Pat C., of the
Dominican Sisters of Peace who is also a member of the alto
section of the Schiller Institute chorus.
She writes, “In your view, what concrete actions now will
help catalyze the transition from a competition of nations to
cooperation and mutual respect?”
I think you largely have addressed that, but there may be
more that you want to say.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think that the knowledge about the
incredible dynamic of the Belt and Road Initiative, once people
know that, it changes there view.  For example, take the case of
Austria.  Austria is a small country, but they want to take a
leading role in becoming a hub for the New Silk Road.  They just
had a conference planning to broaden the gauge of the railway
from Vienna all the way to Moscow, so that they can be better
integrated in the container trains and similar things.  All the
Balkan countries are completely on board.  The Eastern European
countries, the Central European countries are all planning to be
hubs and bridges.
The excitement in Africa– I mean, if people would know,
there is a completely different spirit!  No longer do the
Africans want to be receivers of donations.  They want to be
treated as equal partners. They want to have investments, and the
spirit of the New Silk Road has absolutely changed the
self-esteem and self-confidence of all the African leaders and
many of the people.
Just take this case of the Transaqua project.  Transaqua is
a project which was originally proposed by Bonifica, an Italian
engineering firm, already more than 30 years ago. And the
Schiller Institute and the LaRouche movement were campaigning for
that for decades, because it is one of the key projects for the
entire continent.  What it would essentially mean is that you
would take about 3-4% of the water from the tributaries of the
Congo River, at a 500 meter height, and then by gravitation, you
can bring this water through a system of canals all the way to
Lake Chad, which is now dried out to less than 10% of its
original volume.  This affects the live immediately of 40 million
people in the Lake Chad Basin.  When you bring this water back
into Lake Chad, not only do you fill up this lake again, and
create large volumes of water for irrigation for agriculture; you
also create an inland shipping system for 12 countries in the
heart of Africa; you create hydropower; you create a system of
industry parks, of industrialization. So you bring in the
industrialization in the middle of Africa, and that with all the
other infrastructure projects, will mean Africa has a future.
By the year 2040, there will be 2 billion people living in
Africa, and they need these jobs, they need education, they need
the kinds of projects, so that people are no longer marching
through the Sahara and dying of thirst, which is happening now
more than people even dying in the Mediterranean–it’s just not
being reported.  These young people would instead help in the
building up of the African continent.
This is such a fantastic development, and if the Americans
would know about it — I mean, I’m only talking about the tip of
the iceberg — but if people would see the sheer volume of change
and the magnitude of change which is already happening, they
would become absolutely optimistic and change their view, and
recognize that in the history of mankind, geopolitics is
something that absolutely has to be overcome, if we are supposed
to survive as a human species.  In the age of thermonuclear
weapons, if you do not overcome geopolitics, we are going to be
the destruction of our own species; and nobody in their right
mind can really want that because even those warmongers, who are
pushing it, would be eliminated themselves, too.
I think that the moment has absolutely arrived.  If we go
into a mass advertising campaign, a mass education campaign,
about the existence of this New Paradigm, I think it can
absolutely inspire the Americans and make the change which is
necessary in the short term.

Q: Hi, I am an American citizen and a Confucian, I believe
in Confucianism.  I’m an independent scholar of language and
civilization.  I was an instructor of Chinese at Harvard
University, in the Department of Eastern Language and
Civilization.
I have the same idea as you that America needs to join
China’s One Belt and One Road plan.  I grew up 10 years ago,
during the age of reform of China. I worked as at the FESCO, the
Foreign Enterprise Service Corporation.  I think more than 20
years ago, many American, European and Japanese companies
invested in China, and gave us was a better economy, and I think
it was very important.
Now, I think in the 21st century, China’s economy is much
improved.  It’s time to bring China’s investments into America
and to help America’s economy.  That’s why in 2016, I was for
Donald Trump.  I want to work with American people; I want to be
the bridge to connect China and America, to bring China’s
investment into America, to best help America’s economy.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Very good!  So many you can join with the
Schiller Institute to help us, to get this message out widely.
Because you know, already now the states which are doing large
business with China, see the advantage.  When President Donald
Trump was in China last November, he had with him delegations
from several states — West Virginia, Alaska, and some others.
And in the case of West Virginia, he brought back trade deals
and investment deals worth $83 billion!  And the governor of West
Virginia is completely optimistic that this will give back hope
to all the people in West Virginia.
And there are many projects, for example, one very exciting
idea is that Beijing, and the region of Hebei province and
Tianjin, this is a region of about 130 million people, and there
is a now a huge project whereby this region will be changed,
where the heavy industry, which still has some environmental
problems, causing smog and pollution is now being outsourced into
Hebei province and modernized; a new city is being built, I think
its name is Xiong’an, which is in the middle between Beijing,
Tianjin and Hebei, and it’s completely modernized.  Beijing on
the other side, will have lots of research and development, which
is much cleaner for the environment, and all of this is supposed
to be connected through an infra-urban modern transport system,
including modern maglev.  And the recent “Two Sessions”
conference and the National People’s Congress in China, the party
discussed building a new maglev system of 600 kph speed, for the
connection between the cities, and an inter-urban slow maglev
system of 160 kph.
This is very good for urban transportation, because the
beauty of the maglev system is that it accelerates immediately:
You are in a few seconds at full speed, with the slow maglev
you’re only going 160 kph, which is enough for inner city
transport; and they want to connect this entire region with this
modern transport system, so that essentially no job will be more
than 20 minutes away from the home of the working person.  So you
save all this commuting time.
And my idea is that this model of the Tianjin-Hebei-Beijing
region could be a model for the modernization of New York, New
Jersey, San Francisco, Los Angeles, the Midwest, and you actually
do something like that inside the United States.  And I think
President Trump is a developer; he knows about infrastructure,
and I think we just have to make sure that the Trump supporters
know about these plans, and that we create an environment where
this is actually intersecting the present crisis and danger of a
trade war.
If you move quickly enough, and get the Trump voters all
inspired with this idea, I think we can do a miracle. And I
definitely believe in miracles, as long as we do them ourselves.

Q: [follow-up] Thank you very much.  I totally agree with
you.  I believe that to bring China’s investment and enterprise
is more important in the trade market.  And secondly, I was a
professional Chinese instructor:  I want to educate more
Americans and Chinese people to understand each other, and make a
friendship to develop together.

Q: I’m José V.: I’m here from New York City.  Earlier you
touched upon the youth culture and the culture of death, and I
was hoping you could touch more upon that, because in my
experience — and I’m only 19 myself, too — but from what I see
of people around me, but also my nephew who will be turning 15
this year, I see he’s more interested in violent video games and
yelling into the microphone to imaginary people who aren’t there,
and spending a lot of money on things that will never really help
him out in life: for example, he brought a $300 belt buckle,
because it said somebody’s name on it, I think it’s Gucci. He’s
more interested in reading violent comic books that display gore
and showing people’s insides — I don’t have to go into that, you
know about that.
My question is, how do we overcome this violence?  How do we
overcome this culture of death, and how do we overcome this
culture of violence?  And more importantly, how do we stop
getting young people wanting to escape from reality by taking
drugs and whatnot?  So that’s my question.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think what we need for that is a mass
movement for development.  Because, first of all, I studied this
question some years ago, when we had some guests and the children
who came with the guests asked me if I knew about Pokémon, and
naturally I had never heard about Pokémon.  And they said:  Oh,
it’s beautiful, it’s violent, it’s fighting.  So I was so shocked,

I started to look into it, and I discovered Pokémon as a sort of

introduction drug to video games, and then naturally, the
evolution, where these video games come from.
Well, they were developed by the military in the postwar
period, because people had recognized in the Second World War,
only 15% of the soldiers were ready to shoot the enemy, because
human beings have a sort of natural barrier inside them, which
they don’t want to overcome, and when they kill somebody it goes
against that.  So many people have a healthy block, — or had a
healthy block. So the military developed these quickly changing
targets, like in target practice, not having just one target but
having many, and they change and move, so that you would learn to
shoot quickly — shooting, shooting, one shot after the other —
in order to train people to overcome the normal adrenalin shock
which happens if you shoot at another person; if you are not
brainwashed, then you have an adrenalin reaction and you start
shaking and so on.  So they wanted to get away from this, by
having these video simulations, where people would learn to
shoot, to increase the killer ratio of the soldiers.
So this is the basis for these video games which then became
commercial.  And while, in the military, and obviously it’s a
terrible thing in the military also, but at least you have an
officer, you have some guidance, you have military discipline;
but when these video games, which have become more insane over
the decades, if they are accessible to young children, and these
young children have not had any kind of an inoculation through a
humanist education, through the recognition of beauty in
Classical culture, through moral guidelines given to them by
their parents, but where you have a culture where everything is
allowed, everything goes — movies become more violent, more
perverse, more pornographic; even snuff movies, where killing is
being filmed, or at least the illusion that people are killed is
being filmed, this is really deadly stuff!  This destroys the
cognition of anybody, but especially of young people.
And when young people, then, children, pupils, students,
become autistic because they are only living in their social
media, and have completely lost the ability to relate to each
other, this is the death of a culture.  And I think this is
what’s happening in the United States.  You would not have these
unbelievable numbers of mass school shootings:  Like after
Columbine in 1999, there were 38 mass shootings. And after the
Parkland shooting, you had 50 alarms in the schools per day,
where pupils would see another pupil having a weapon, or having
crazy messages.
Now, obviously, this brings us to the question of, who is
promoting this?  President Trump had a meeting in the White
House, where he met with the pupils of the school in Parkland,
and the producers of these videos.  So obviously, President Trump
is aware of it, and I think we have to strengthen his resolve to
move against it.  And it happens to be that the Parkland
incident, in particular, was also the work of the FBI, because
they established a system which is run by some uneducated call
center, and so, many of the hints which were clearly given
before, were missed.  And it now turns out that in the Orlando
case, the father of the shooter was a longtime FBI informant.  So
there is a lot of these things to be pursued.
But I think the key thing is a mass movement for
development.  Because, if young people have no hope for the
future, and have no perspective, because it’s now the common view
that the coming generations will be worse off than the present
one — this is the first time ever this has happened; because
it used to be a moral standard for families, for everybody, that
you work so that your children will have a better life than
yourself.  And this has been abandoned for the first time.  So
what will young people have as a perspective?  Well, they have no
future.  And that is a huge difference!  And I can assure you,
I have seen it in all cases: There is a gigantic difference
between the optimism of the youth in China, and the pessimism of
the young people and the population in general in the United
States, and in countries like Germany, for example.
So the absence of a vision, where the future of a nation, of
the world will be, is what is feeding this kind of culture of
death, because then it doesn’t matter, life doesn’t matter, life
is worth nothing, whether you shoot somebody or not it makes no
big difference.
So I think a mass movement for the kind of economic
development which we were talking about before, is an absolute
ingredient, so that people have a reason to study, to develop
their minds, to develop their cognitive powers, to be productive.
If you have the feeling that you can be an astronaut, that you
can be a scientist in the realm of a thermonuclear fusion
economy; that you will travel to the Moon Village in your
lifetime, you have a motivation to study!  And I think without
such a motivation, it is very, very difficult.
So I would not look at it as a separate issue:  I would look
at it as an integral question to the whole discussion we are
having here.

Q: Thank you for your work, today, and throughout all your
time.
I’m Father Richard D., Franciscan Servants of God’s Grace.
My question to you, is we know that the President has written a
book showing that his way of dealing with a problem is to take an
{extreme} view, so he has room to compromise, to come back to
what he actually wants.  Do you believe he’s doing this with the
international trade situation?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I don’t know; it may be.  Because I think
President Trump has said of himself many times, that he knows how
to make deals, that he would get better agreements that most
other people.  And it may very well be that such an idea exists,
that he makes big announcements of tariffs and so forth, and then
in reality, he’s negotiating and has his ambassador and other
people, trade negotiators, making such a discussion.
I don’t know.  I find it a little bit risky, because I saw
some Chinese articles where they said that some people may think
that they can get a better result this way, but that China will
not be intimidated into making compromises and basically will
answer back.
I don’t know.  I think it is not necessary.  I think this
particular idea that you make a huge attack, and then you go for
something less, is still, in my view, — and as you probably have
realized, I’m very positive about the potential of President
Trump; I’ve stuck my neck out a year ago, when I said that if
Trump is able to put the relationship with Russia and China on a
positive basis, he will go into history as one of the greatest
American Presidents, and I stuck my neck out.  And I’m repeating
this, here.  So, as you can see, I’m very optimistic and positive
that it could happen.
But I also think that this particular style of negotiation
is very dangerous, especially in an environment which is fraught
with dangers as I touched upon in my earlier remarks.  A much
better way, in my view, would be to just say, “We want the United
States and China to work together on a New Paradigm.” There is
already the Belt and Road Initiative. The United States could
have some program, they could call it the American Silk Road, or
the American FDR Revival, or the American Founding Fathers
Celebration, if they don’t want to be part of something which
already has been put out by China, it doesn’t matter, as long as
the content of the policy is the same on.
And I think the potential for things to grow into a higher
level of reason — I mean, here we are talking about the one
humanity.  I mean, I think the spiritual dimension, if you want,
has to be brought into this matter, because man is different from
all creatures, because we are gifted by God with creative reason.
And you don’t have to be a Christian, you can be a Confucian
philosopher, you can be a Buddhist, you can be just a good
person, to understand that we have reached a point in human
history, where we either recognize that we are all part of the one
humanity, or we will not make it as a species.
Since Diane mentioned earlier Nicholas of Cusa, I can only
say, that Nicholas developed a way of thinking which  — she
mentioned in the Docta Ignorantia, the “coincidence of
opposites,” which is the idea that because we are capable of
creative reason, we can think the One as having a higher quality
and a higher power than the Many: The one humanity being first,
and then the many nations being also important, but being not in
contradiction to the progress and wellbeing of the one humanity.
So I think if we understand that it is really the question
of addressing that in us, which makes us human, the creative
potential, then I think we can just find a way of shaping a New
Paradigm where mankind is defined from a common future, how do we
want to be existing as a human species, in 100 years from now, in
1,000 years from now, or even in 10,000 years from now?  Because
we can think the future!  No dog, no donkey, not goose can
think the future.  If you tell a dog, “Let’s have a walk
tomorrow,” the dog will hear the word “walk,” which the dog
probably knows, and jump to the door and wag its tail, and be
happy.  But if you say “tomorrow,” it doesn’t mean anything to
the dog!
But I think we need to raise the level of our communication,
and just really do our duty as a human species, and prolong our
existence indefinitely, by working together.

Q: My name is J.  I’m the author of two books, Evidence Not
Destroyed
, and Spread Real Love.  I want to thank Mrs.
LaRouche; I want to thank this organization.  You’re some fine
people.  As I travel around America, I see many things:  I just
had to buy a new car, because the one I had had over 205,000
miles on it; and the one before that had 186,000 miles on it. But
I’m going around the countryside, and other countries, also,
spreading, putting this literature out for so many years.  And
I’m impacted with this organization.  It has some very find,
smart brains, that are sitting here in this auditorium today, and
I just thank God for you.
And when we come to a situation like we have today, I want
to know how we can go forward?  How we can promote civilization?
How we can carry on?  But if we have learned anything from our
history, we have to look back and look at our history, and look
at our results.  We have something that’s so profound here
today; we don’t get this kind of information on the TV no more. I
used to watch so much news, but now, they say the news is not
absolutely real! They say something about “fake” — I heard that
over and over again, so I turned my television off from the news.
And when I can come and get this type of real information, in a
setting like this, it makes one want to go forward.
So I’m here to help anyway I can.  I’ll put another 100 and
some thousands miles on the car I just bought, to get this
information out to the people, because if you don’t get it, the
news is not going to give it to you correctly, the way it should
be given.  So, I’m just thanking each one, and all of you that’s
working — just as I am;  Matt Guice, I’ve been working with him
since the ’90s; Lynne Speed and Dennis Speed, I’ve been working
with these people since the early ’90s.  And I’m so proud.
One thing, let me say, I think the reverend right before me,
a religious man — I sit in a church now, and I’m the only deacon
there!  Why is this?  Look where we’re going?  Why is that? We’re
reforming, we’re conforming, we’re complying to every situation
that’s not good.  And I think we have some real strength here,
and we can do some great things.  The main thing is, keep going
forward.  Thank you.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Well, I think people have to be courageous,
because the paradigm shift which occurred in the United States,
which you, Diane, referenced in the beginning, which really
started with the murder of John F. Kennedy and then the murder of
Martin Luther King, and the assassination of Robert Kennedy, you
know, we had several years ago, a Mozart Requiem performance in
Vienna, in the suburbs of Washington, and also in the Boston
Cathedral, commemorating the paradigm shift which has occurred in
the last 50 years of America, where, the fact that the Kennedy
murder, and also the murder of Martin Luther King, was really not
avenged — or,  not avenged, but not even investigated, and the
real culprits made known and punished, which has led to people
becoming depressed.  I said many times, the Americans almost have
become like the Germans, because if you ask a German person to do
something, 99 % of the people say “Oh, you can’t do anything,
anyway,” so people are really depressed, and feel that they are
powerless in the face of what is happening.
And that has happened to America as a result of these
unclarified murders.  And since we have this event today, because
of the 50th anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther
King, I think it’s a very good moment in history, to say, we will
not allow the murderers of King to be successful in eliminating
the hope which he represented.  I mean, Martin Luther King was
murdered at a moment when he had started to pick up many of the
same issues which are now being, in reality, changed by China.
Because he had started not only to take up the question of
economic justice inside the United States, but also he had
started to take on the question of jobs and overcoming poverty in
developing countries.  And that is what China is doing, exactly
today. And in the same way as the Schiller Institute has been
campaigning for, and LaRouche and his movement have been working
for, for almost half a century, is now becoming a reality.
So there is reason for optimism.  And I think that the best
thing we can do in a moment like this, thinking about the memory
of Martin Luther King, is to say, we will pick up the torch, we
will not allow the American people to be passive and desperate
and ignorant and all of these things, but we will all turn into
active members of the Schiller Institute, help to spread the
message; make the Schiller Institute a Renaissance movement, a
moment fighting not only for the economic buildup of the United
States, but also for a cultural Renaissance.  I think the two
things absolutely have to go together.
So I would encourage all of you to absolutely work with us,
because I think the solution to all of these problems are
absolutely within reach.

SARE:  As the next person is coming up I would just tell
everybody, during the break you will have the opportunity to do
exactly what Mrs. LaRouche has said, which is to become a member
of the Schiller Institute at our literature table.  And to
purchase copies of these very important, world-changing reports:
This is the one she mentioned, “The New Silk Road Becomes the
World Land-Bridge,”  which we produced right after Xi Jinping
announced it. And this report, of which Jason Ross is a coauthor
on “Extending the New Silk Road to West Asia and Africa: A Vision
of an Economic Renaissance.”

Q:  Hi, I’m Donald C.  My quick question is about the
liberals.  How are they teaching curriculums to our kids, and
they’re not giving them the chance to learn the right stuff, and
they’re just forcing the kids what their beliefs are?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yes, that is a big problem, because it
started with John Dewey, to basically develop this liberal
pragmatic idea of education.  And unfortunately, you have
generations of people who have gone through different phases of
such elimination of Classical literature, of natural science, so
it is a real problem.  And I would think that the best way to
proceed on that, is if you look at the kind of materials which we
present in the present [What Is the New Paradigm?] class series,
which you can find on the LaRouche PAC site, and you can register
to be part of it, this is the kind of curriculum which was
developed especially with the ideas of my husband, Mr. LaRouche,
who did an incredible job, because he revived the best traditions
of the 2,500 years of European civilization, the traditions in
science which were the source of qualitative progress, the great
Classical arts; and this is something which is not taught in
American schools, for the most part.
And I think we have to form, basically, educated people, who
then hopefully, we can influence this present administration to
change that.  I think President Trump has repeatedly shown, at
least for certain areas, an understanding; he talked about the
American System of economy; he talked about Lincoln and Carey, he
talked about Hamilton. So in the economic field there is
definitely something there, which we can build on.  I think there
are many other people are equally concerned about the condition
of the school system.  But I think the best thing is that you
register for these classes [http://discover.larouchepac.com/]. And
if you haven’t already done it, you can also watch some of the
previous classes in the series.[6]  Get yourself absolutely a firm
grip on universal history, of the great advances in science and
culture, and then, you know, basically help us to organize
change.
Because it will come from many places.  There are many
people are realizing that at this point it is the scientists, the
engineers and such people, who will be much more important in the
shaping of things, than many politicians who are part of a party
system and partisan, and therefore, don’t really regard these
issues are the important ones.
But the best advice I can give you right now, is if you join
with our efforts, we find ways to address all of these issues,
and build a growing movement to demand such a change.

Q: Thank you very much.  Your comments were very insightful.
I believe in the paradigm where the United States, Russia and
China, essentially a triumvirate is essentially going to lead the
world, hopefully forward and out of the morass that we’ve been
in. Especially over the prior eight years before this current
President came into office.
The question, I want to ask is, what do you perceive would be
the case — because I don’t believe this economy in this country
would have lasted another year, under the current policies.  We
would have had a significant economic drop which would have led
to, since this country’s GDP is 25 % of the world’s, would have
had a worldwide, negative impact.  Having said that, what do you
perceive would be the consequences in this country, or the for
that matter the world, on the movement forward that has occurred,
if President Trump did not have the position he has?  He may be
President, but he may have a weakened political system, in the
sense of a House and the Senate: Would we be able to move
forward?  And what would be the consequences, and under what
conditions could we move forward?  Could this economy continue to
grow if he can’t implement his policies?  What would be the
international consequences of that, from your perspective?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think the strongest situation is Trump’s
relation with his voters.  That despite all of the attacks by the
FBI, by the British, by the heads of the intelligence services
from the Obama administration, — I mean, he had a pretty tough
environment, and nevertheless, he goes back to his voters, he
holds a rally, and the support for him is actually growing in the
polls.  So I think that that is for sure, a very strong point
which we should build on, because if we keep strengthening that,
and if we keep informing the Trump voters on all the issues we
are discussing here, that can actually help to outdo the Congress
and the Senate.
And since there is a midterm election, there is actually a
very good moment to do that.  I mean, the danger is naturally
that Trump could be convinced that to take an anti-China stance
would help him in the midterm election.  I mean, I’m not sure;
I’m not close enough to the situation to make a judgment on that.
But I think the strong point is, Trump is close to his
voters, the voters still recognize what a change he means, and I
think that we need to have a mass mobilization — I think there
is no shortcut from that; because the danger is very acute. What
I said in my initial remarks, when we talk to some really
well-placed figure in Europe, who said that there is a discussion
to pull the rug out from under Trump with a new financial crash,
and if you think that this is a conspiracy theory — well, maybe
before the Skripal case, you also thought that such things are
conspiracies, but we have just seen a classic example of how you
can manipulate a whole international community of nations to go
into an attack on Russia, based on a lie!  So these things do
happen and they can happen.
Now, there are also many warnings.  Just today, I think some
representative of the firm of Guggenheim put out a warning on
this corporate debt question that a financial crash can happen
at any moment.  And basically, you have the European banking
system, the Italian banks are in terrible shape, you have a
policy where the trigger point of a collapse of the financial
system is many-fold.  It’s also like a minefield where it’s not
clear which mine will trigger the explosion, but once it happens,
you could have a systemic blowout, much worse than that of 2008.
Because the central banks have done absolutely zero, to eliminate
the root causes of the crash of 2008.  They have, instead, used
the so-called tools and instruments — namely quantitative
easing, negative interest rate, money pumping — but this has
reached the point where now the Fed is forced, or think they are
forced, to increase the interest rate, because a negative
interest rate is very bad for the real economy, it’s bad for the
savings of the people, it’s bad for life insurance, it’s bad for
real investment; and the hyperinflationary consequence of such
money-pumping is already visible on the horizon in the form of
the totally overvalued stock market, in the form of real estate
prices, in the form of many other such phenomena.  So the Fed
needs to increase the interest rate, but that is already bringing
the immediate potential for a new crash.
If that happens, I think we are in {real} trouble: So our
whole point, is we need the implementation of Glass-Steagall, and
the Four Laws developed by Lyndon LaRouche, before the crash
happens.  I think this is also a subject — there are these four
dialogues which have been established between President Xi
Jinping and Trump; one of them concerns the dialogue on economic
matters; China has put a lot of emphasis on the dangers to the
international financial system, at the G20 meeting in Hangzhou
[in 2016] and on other occasions.  So I think that this question
needs to be urgently addressed, also between the United States
and China in these negotiations.
And then, if you put the whole package together, the Four
Laws — Glass-Steagall, a National Bank, a credit system in the
tradition of Hamilton, a crash program for the increase in the
productivity of the labor force, and then joining hands in the
Belt and Road Initiative — all of these measures together are a
very, very practical and realistic way to overcome these dangers.
But it is very urgent, because we are sitting on a powder keg,
and I think it can be done, but we need a lot of people of good
will to become active with us.

SARE:  Helga, we’re just about up on time. We have two more
questions.  Do you want to take both, or one, or?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Well, maybe both together, and then I’ll
answer both.

Q: Hi Mrs. LaRouche.  My question to you is, is that right
after the shooting at Parkland, [Broward County] Sheriff Israel
was all over the news speaking about going to all members of
Congress to use the Baker Act, to detain and profile people that
have experienced some sort of depression.  And that’s of great
concern to me, because there are many people who have experienced
that, and I feel this country is becoming more like Germany back
in World War II.  So I’m kind of scared, and I’d like to know,
what’s your opinion on it?  Thank you.

SARE:  OK, next question.

Q:  Hello, my name is Steve S.  I would just like to ask,
how much of a role do you think that psychological warfare plays
in everything that’s going on?  And how can we counter it?  Are
there people out there who specialize in psychological warfare? I
hear people talk about history being erased; you know, the
projection of violence through videos and commercials and that
matter.
So, a lot of people are very confused, as well as myself,
even when you find something that you believe in sometimes, it’s
presented in a way that you accept it in the beginning, and then
it comes out to be a lie. And right now, clearly, lie is just
pounding on the truth.  I mean, you have one truth, but you have
so many lies that it seems too overwhelming to survive.

SARE: Thank you.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think the concerns that both of you
expressed is very real.  I mean, it is the fact that the West is
already living in a police-state.  Just take the recent example
of the Facebook firm, Cambridge Analytica — they sold data on 50
million people for commercial purposes, for election manipulation
and who knows for what else?  If you go on the internet and you
go on any website, you immediately have the advertisement for the
next years of your life of whatever you looked at.
So we are already in a completely surveillance state, where
the NSA and the British equivalent, the GCHQ, are monitoring
everything — your phone, your smart TV, your laptop — it’s
omnipresent.  And obviously this needs to be reversed.
In the time when I was growing up, being a young person, we
had a big concern about data protection.  It was a civil right to
make sure that your privacy was protected.  All of this has gone
out of the window!  And also, naturally, the big change came on
September 11th.  Because September 11th was the pretext for a lot
of the elimination of civil rights which used to be a
constitutional right up to that moment.
And therefore, I think the inquiry of what really happened
on September 11th, is still one of the big tasks to be solved,
because it led to police-state measures inside the United States.
It led to a similar kind of change internationally. And right
now, you have the ongoing trial of the families of the victims of
the World Trade Center suing the government of Saudi Arabia for
their role in the September 11th attacks.  And the Saudi
government tried to appeal against the lawsuit, and a court in
New York overruled that, so the court case can go ahead.
Now, this goes very slowly, but this is a very important
aspect; because eventually, we have to go back to a
constitutional state.  So you are quite right to be concerned,
because there is a lot of this going on.
Again, I think there is no shortcut:  We need more people
taking an active role, and force the coming Congress to pass laws
to protect the rights of the people again. This is absolutely
possible.  The whole argument, for example, that you cannot
control these things, or not control the internet, is absolutely
not true:  You can block certain things, you can prevent things,
you can make laws which prohibit the profiling; you can make laws
which it a criminal act to do all of these things you are worried
about.  So it’s not a self-evident development.
But I think it does require that more people become state
citizens:  A state citizen, I would define a somebody who takes
responsibility not only for his life, his family, his country,
but for the outcome of human history.  And I think to be such a
world historical individual in a moment like that, where the
options are so rich, and so beautiful that there is no reason to
despair, but it is really the individual decision, to be part of
the solution which can and will make the difference. [applause]

SARE:  Thank you.  That was very beautiful and appropriate.
Do you wish to say anything else to us?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Well, just be happy, and be productive, and
feisty, and courageous, and then you can do everything you plan
to do.

SARE: Thank you very much! [applause]

 

[1] http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/category/nyheder/alle-kategorier/oekonomi/larouches-fire-love-feature/

[2] Kan læses på engelsk her: http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2018/eirv45n06-20180209/22-28_4506.pdf  Dansk oversættelse er undervejs.

[3] Læs en dansk introduktion til rapporten af de to forfattere, Jason Ross og Husein Askary, her: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=23600

[4] Abraham Lincolns Gettysburg-tale: » – and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth«.

[5] Martin Luther Kings berømte tale ’I have been to the mountain top’ fra 3. April, 1968, kan læses her: http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkivebeentothemountaintop.htm

[6] Se lektionerne i dansk oversættelse her: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/category/lpac-new-paradigme/




Skripal-affæren giver nu bagslag mod
Det britiske Imperium i et globalt
paradigmeskifte

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 3. april, 2018 – Forgiftningen af to russiske borgere i England i sidste måned, der fra UK’s May-regerings side på så bombastisk vis tilsigtede at isolere Ruslands præsident Vladimir Putin og indfange det ligeledes britiske mål, præsident Donald Trump, i en fælde, kan ende med at efterlade May og udenrigsminister Boris Johnson med æg i ansigtet.

Situationen er ved at vende. Den nye virkelighed med de store fordele for nationer i hele verden ved Kinas Nye Silkevej, og fordelene ved samarbejde mellem stormagterne for fred sådan, som præsident Trump har forstået det, får nu Mays totalangreb til at give bagslag. Briterne blev allerede stukket, da det viste sig, at kun halvdelen af EU’s lande gik med til at udvise russiske diplomater og andet kaos mod Rusland, og nu er de dybt krænkede over præsident Trumps »mindre end fulde støtte«, som deres medier udtrykker det.

Faktisk har Trumps pressesekretær igen 2. april bekræftet, at Trump har inviteret præsident Putin til et topmøde »på flere forskellige lokaliteter, inkl. Det Hvide Hus«. Præsident Trump har nu tre afgørende topmøder i sigte – med Japans premierminister Shinzo Abe, med Vladimir Putin og med den nordkoreanske leder Kim Jong-un – hvilket kunne vende verdenssituationen til det bedre. Det andet og tredje topmøde imødegås rasende af briterne og alle slags amerikanske og europæiske neokonservative og liberale imperialister. Men også dette giver nu bagslag.

Nu, med dagens rapport fra UK’s eget Forsvarsvidenskabelige og Teknologiske Laboratorium i Porton Down om, at det ikke har fastslået bevis for fr. Mayhems (fr. ’Kaos’) russiske forgiftningssag, er morgendagens (4. april) sammentræde af lederne i Organisationen for forbud mod kemiske våben (OPCW) – hvis regler UK har ladet hånt om, for at skynde sig at »føre an i angrebet« mod Rusland – stillet i et nyt lys. Et par modige briter har sagt, at forskerne ikke var tilfredse med at blive afkrævet at »producere« til en politisk heksejagt, og de havde ret.

Desuden »udvikler Kina og Rusland tættere bånd«, ikke mindst, fordi »vestlige lande lægger politisk pres på Rusland [i Skripal-sagen], og USA provokerer Kina ind i en handelskrig«, skrev Global Times i går. Kina har været fuldstændig upartisk og ønsket, at OPCW’s procedurer blev fulgt, men har sendt en officiel delegation til den Syvende Moskva-konference om International Sikkerhed, der starter 4. april, sammen med 95 andre nationer.

Vi har set, at det forsøgte »Russiagate«-kup mod præsident Trump står til at give bagslag, et bagslag, der er frembragt af den samme, nye virkelighed i kombination med en lang mobilisering fra Lyndon LaRouches bevægelse i USA’s side. Nu bliver FBI, endelig langt om længe, efterforsket og udrenset i toppen.

Men, vi må ikke glemme, at de transatlantiske finanssystemer endnu engang er klar til at krakke. Og, siddende på denne vulkan, kan vi ikke lave langsomme og langsigtede planer for realisering af den Eurasiske Nye Silkevejs nye paradigme. Det skal ligge på bordet, for såvel USA som for Europa, nu. Det starter med at vedtage eller genindføre Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling – som Kina allerede gør med sine kommercielle banker – for at bryde Wall Streets og City of Londons kolosser op, før de trækker os ind i endnu et mareridtskollaps.

Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche i dag advarede, så udgør de regeringer, der allerede fuldt og helt har bakket op omkring Storbritanniens marts-kaos mod Rusland, en fare for deres egne befolkninger, og for verdensfreden. At præsident Trump går frem med topmøderne, inkl. med præsident Putin, er afgørende og må støttes.

Men de projekter, han har lovet amerikanerne, inkl. nye store infrastrukturprojekter og kolonisering af rummet, kræver, at Lyndon LaRouches forslag for »Fire Nye Love til Nationens Redning«, bliver gennemført.

Foto: Den britiske PM Theresa May besøger Salisbury, stedet for det angivelige »russiske giftangreb«. 16. maj, 2018. (Number 10 / Flickr)




Perfide Albion delenda est

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 21. marts, 2018 – Det britiske Imperium har, med truslen om sin endelige død, udløst et desperat kneb i denne måned og uden nogen beviser hævdet, at Rusland havde brugt nervegas til at angribe Sergei og Yulia Skripal på britisk jord. London opfordrede sine betroede allierede – og først og fremmest, USA – til at støtte op omkring dets onde, geopolitiske planer for krig mod Rusland, og sandsynligvis også Kina, og hvis formål er at bevare deres imperieopdeling af verden i Øst og Vest. Dette kneb har trods alt virket så ofte i fortiden. Som the Lord’s elsker at sige: Britisk hjerne og amerikansk råstyrke kan bevare Imperiet, selv om den tid, hvor Britannia herskede over bølgerne, for længst er forbi.

Men, verden har ændret sig. Snarere end pligtskyldigt at følge den »særlige relation« med Moderlandet, ringede præsident Donald Trump i stedet tirsdag, 20. marts, til præsident Vladimir Putin. Lederne af USA og Rusland holdt en værdig, langvarig diskussion om nødvendigheden af, at disse to store nationer, sammen med Kina under Xi Jinpings kompetente lederskab, kan og må gå i gang med at løse de mange eksistentielle kriser, som menneskeheden står overfor. Voksne mennesker, der diskuterer den virkelige verden og præsterer reelt lederskab for en verden, der er bragt ud på randen af et atomart holocaust og globalt, økonomisk kaos af det fejlagtige lederskab, der præsteres af Londons Lord’s og deres satrapper i Europa og Amerika.

Sammen har præsidenterne Trump, Putin og Xi allerede demonstreret, at terrorisme kan besejres, og at verdensøkonomien, gennem økonomisksamarbejde i den Nye Silkevejsånd, kan bringe alle folkeslag ind i et fremgangsrigt og harmonisk paradigme for menneskelig udvikling.

For en gangs skyld må Perfide Albion stå alene, og det bliver i stigende grad åbenlyst for hele verden, at de intet ståsted har. I halvtreds år har Lyndon LaRouche advaret amerikanerne om, at britisk geopolitik og britiske monetære politikker var i færd med at drive USA og verden mod økonomisk ødelæggelse, alt imens USA fører kolonikrige på vegne af Imperiet. Den kendsgerning, at præsident Trump har helliget sig genindførelsen af det Amerikanske System, som Lyndon LaRouche (stort set alene) har været fortaler for i det forgangne halve århundrede samtidig med, at han erklærer, at stormagterne Rusland, Kina og USA må være venner, betyder, at Det britiske Imperium står over for den endelige død.

Dette er selvfølgelig grunden til, at britisk efterretning lancerede Russiagate-kupforsøget mod præsident Trump. Denne kampagne kollapser nu, og dens gerningsmænd afsløres som forrædere, sammen med de korrupte medieselskaber, der har fået et apoplektisk anfald over Trumps opringning til Putin. Med et stærkt svækket Russiagate har præsident Trump vundet styrken til at gennemføre sine oprindelige, diplomatiske planer, som verden så det tirsdag, 20. marts, en dag, som vil gå over i historien. Gennemførelsen af det Amerikanske Systems økonomiske politikker, som fremlægges i LaRouches Fire Love, haster ligeledes, med det forestående kollaps af finansboblen, som kan underminere det nye paradigme.

Tiden er inde til at handle. Verden ser nu Det britiske Imperium for det, det er, og ligeledes alternativet til det, i form af den Nye Silkevej, som skaber en fælles bestemmelse for fremskridt og samarbejde for alle nationer. Fokusér alle bestræbelser på dette strategiske mål. Tillad ingen afledninger. Sejren er for hånden.

Foto: US Marines øver dekontamineringsprocedurer, april 2013. (arkivfoto, US DoD)




Det britiske Imperium er nu totalt afsløret;
Det må knuses! Helga Zepp-LaRouche
i Nyt Paradigme Webcast, 15. marts 2018

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

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

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

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

 




Der er gode udsigter forude; Spræng det bort, som ligger i vejen!

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, USA, 12. marts, 2018 – Netop nu finder der udviklinger sted inden for sikkerhed og økonomi, som giver verden dramatisk gode udsigter, mens der på samme tid stadig er operationer imod menneskeheden, om det så skyldes ondskab eller fej uvidenhed. Tiden er inde til at sprænge det bort, som ligger i vejen.

Der er fortsat fremskridt mht. Nordkorea. I dag og i morgen besøger sydkoreanske topudsendinge Kina, Japan og Rusland med førstehåndsbriefinger fra deres møde i Pyongyang for 10 dage siden, og fra deres møde med præsident Trump den 8. marts, hvor han annoncerede sin aftale om at mødes med den nordkoreanske leder, Kim Jong-un. I dag mødtes præsident Xi Jinping i Beijing med Chung Eui-yong, direktør for Sydkoreas Nationale Sikkerhedsafdeling. Xi takkede for Sydkoreas og det internationale samfunds arbejde og for deres fremtidige indsats. I morgen vil Chung være i Moskva til briefinger; og i Tokyo vil Sydkoreas direktør for National Efterretning briefe premierminister Shinzo Abe.

I dag sagde den sydkoreanske præsident Moon Jae-in, »Vi har nu en dyrebar chance for at atomafruste Koreahalvøen, etablere en permanent fredsorden og bygge en kurs for fælles fremgang for Syd- og Nordkorea. Hvis det lykkes os, vil der komme dramatiske forandringer i verdenshistorien, og Republikken Korea vil have spillet den ledende rolle«.

Den økonomiske sammenhæng for dette initiativ for fred i Østasien og globalt blev fremlagt i denne weekend i Beijing på de To Sessioners konvent (Folkekongressen og det Kinesiske Folks Konference for Politisk Konsultation) af handelsminister Zhong Shan i dennes arbejdsrapport og pressekonference. Han talte om den enorme indvirkning, som Bælte & Vej Initiativet (BVI) har haft, og på hvilket 140 lande har responderet, og især om udsigterne for Afrika. Blandt de særlige punkter, som Zhong fremlagde, var, at BVI nu frembringer en ny, global infrastrukturplatform. Dette vil blive forstærket gennem Kinas Internationale Importudstilling, den første nogensinde, i Shanghai til november. Zhang talte også om, hvordan nye innovationscentre vil blive etableret under BVI, som »skinnende perler« i Silkevejens perlekæde.

I Afrika vil BVI søge overensstemmelse med den Afrikanske Union og regionale multinationale programmer og bidrage til Afrikas evne til selvforstærkende vækst. I mellemtiden bliver der koordinering blandt nationale regeringsministerier, plus private og offentlige tredjepartskilder for resurser til jobskabelse og fattigdomsreduktion. Særlige kinesiske projekter omfatter »Happy Home«, »Anti-fattigdomsprojekterne« og »Sundheds-genrejsnings-projekterne«.

Dette kommer alt sammen på et tidspunkt, hvor præsident Vladimir Putin har opfordret til diskussioner om en ny sikkerhedsarkitektur. De nye, strategiske våben, han annoncerede den 1. marts, repræsenter spring inden for videnskab og teknologi for udvikling, såvel som drabskapacitet, som gør geopolitisk, »begrænset krig« umulig.

Det er en ny æra. Hvem kan modsætte sig forhandlinger om sikkerhed, økonomisk samarbejde og fred? Kun det mest depraverede, undermenneskelige væsen. Et eksempel er de 68 afdankede medlemmer af Obama-administrationen, der dannede deres gruppe »National Security Action« i sidste måned, for at arbejde for at afsætte Trump, verbalt angribe Kina og Rusland og forevige krig og ødelæggelse i demokratiets navn.

»Latterliggørelse« er, hvad de fortjener, anbefalede Helga Zepp-LaRouche i dag, der ligeledes opfordrede til at sprænge alle de Demokrater, som begår krigsmagervirksomhed, usandfærdighed og elementær inkompetence. »Vi befinder os ved et bemærkelsesværdigt vendepunkt«, sagde Zepp-LaRouche, »og disse mennesker enten reagerer ikke, eller også forsøger de at dække over det«. Det samme gælder deres modparter, de neokonservative Republikanere. Diane Sare, medlem af LaRouchePAC Policy Committee, udtrykte det således, »De rørte pulversaften sammen; så drak de den selv«.

Tiden er for længst overskredet for Mueller-operationen til at stoppe, og for Trump til at blive frigjort til at gøre det job, præsidenten blev valgt til at gøre. Der er ingen sikkerhed uden økonomiske aftaler, og vi kan få dette med LaRouches Fire Love og med den transatlantiske sektor, der omsider slutter sig til den Nye Silkevej.

Foto: Mødet mellem den nordkoreanske leder og højtplacerede regeringsfolk og Sydkoreas særlige delegation fandt sted i det Koreanske Arbejderpartis hovedbygning i Pyongyang den 5. marts, 2018. Kilde: KOCIS (korea.net) 




Det iboende strategiske skifte i Putins
»Sputnik-chok«. Helga Zepp-LaRouche
i Nyt Paradigme Webcast, 9. marts, 2018

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

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

 




Hvorfor geopolitik fører til krig
– Og en sejr i Abuja, Afrika.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche i Nyt Paradigme
Webcast, 1. marts, 2018 (pdf, dansk, og video)

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

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

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

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

 

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Tiden er inde til at fjerne fattigdom
og give vore børn en fremtid

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 28. feb., 2018 – I dag anfører New York Times den flok hyæner i det vestlige pressekorps, som misbilliger den kinesiske beslutning om at fjerne tidsbegrænsning for deres præsidenter og vicepræsidenter. »Xi sætter Kina på kollisionskurs med historien«, hyler Times’ overskrift og citerer ingen anden en taberen Hillary Clinton, der udtalte, at Kina er på »en taberkurs og forsøger at opretholde et regeringssystem, der ikke kan overleve i den moderne verden«.

Kesha Rogers, den uafhængige kandidat til Kongressen for Texas (9. Kongresdistrikt), og som støttes af LaRouche Politiske Aktionskomite, responderede til dette hysteri imod Kina ved at minde vore borgere om Martin Luther Kings ord (som, ulig Hillary, var kvalificeret til at være præsident), der sagde: »Tiden er inde for os at blive civiliserede ved totalt, direkte og omgående at afskaffe fattigdom.« Det er selvfølgelig det, Kina er ved at opnå, både for sine egne borgere (frem til år 2020) og for verden, gennem sit historiske Bælte & Vej Initiativ. Hvilken nation eksemplificerer den »civiliserede verden« i dag?

Global Times, det Kinesiske Kommunistpartis avis, skriver i dag, at »de vestlige medier begyndte at tale dårligt om Kina på deres sædvanlige og forskellige måder« efter meddelelsen om, at Kina ville afslutte begrænsede embedsperioder. »Den vigtigste grund til alt dette«, fortsætter lederartiklen, »er, at Kinas fremvækst har nået et afgørende punkt, hvor nogle vesterlændinge rent psykologisk ikke kan holde det ud længere. De ønsker at se en ulykke ramme landet. Selv, hvis det skulle skade deres egne interesser, så er de villige til først at se Kina smuldre«. De skriver fortsat, »I årenes løb er både Kinas Kommunistiske Partis Centralkomites myndighed og vort kinesiske samfunds fremgang vokset. Centralkomiteens myndighed er den mest fremragende del af Kinas konkurrencedygtighed. Den er kilden til landets effektivitet og evne til at mobilisere folk og foretage tilpasninger. Det er den ting, som den omgivende verden mest misunder Kina, og det er målet for vestlig, antikinesisk retorik.«

Mange i Vesten responderer, at, på trods af det store fremskridt i Kina, er det kinesiske folk ikke frit, har ikke basale menneskerettigheder, som om retten til et anstændigt levebrød, frihed fra fattigdom og frihed til at bidrage til nationens og menneskehedens fremtid, ikke skulle være den mest fundamentale af menneskerettighederne.

Men vi må også stille spørgsmålet, hvad er tilstanden for menneskerettighederne i USA? Hvad gør man mod vore børn, af hvilke millioner er blevet nægtet ethvert håb om en produktiv fremtid, og som i stedet tilbydes »friheden« til at tage narkotiske stoffer, til at blive »underholdt« af film og videospil og popmusik, der lærer dem at umenneskeliggøre deres medmennesker gennem vold og pornografi, og som nægtes enhver uddannelse med hensyn til den klassiske, vestlige kulturs skønhed, for slet ikke at tale om den klassiske kinesiske kulturs skønhed, eller skønheden i nogen af de andre, store kulturer i menneskets historie? Der bør ikke herske tvivl om, hvorfor hundredevis af vore børn bliver forvandlet til mordere. Der bør heller ikke herske nogen tvivl om, at hele økonomien og hele kulturen må transformeres for at denne rædsel skal stoppe, og for at verden kan gå ind i et nyt paradigme, baseret på menneskeligt fremskridt og menneskelig værdighed.

Præsident Trump vækkede et håb i det amerikanske folk, hvor han lovede at genopbygge nationens industrielle grundlag og den kollapsende infrastruktur, at afslutte narkosvøben, mindede folk om Alexander Hamiltons »Amerikanske System« og lovede at afslutte den nytteløse og farlige konfrontation med Rusland og Kina. Det er de spørgsmål, som Lyndon LaRouche har kæmpet for i et halvt århundrede, alt imens det politiske lederskab har været i færd med at transformere nationen til en postindustriel skrotbunke og en permanent krigsmaskine på vegne af Det britiske Imperium.

Håbet om at genoprette Amerikas storhed må nu fuldbyrdes på den eneste, mulige måde – ikke stykkevist, ikke med små skridt, men gennem den fulde og hele genindførelse af det Amerikanske System gennem LaRouches program, og ved fuldt og helt at vedtage den Nye Silkevejsånd, som Kinas Bælte & Vej har lanceret. Det er, hvad et civiliseret samfund må gøre.

Foto: Præsident Donald J. Trump og præsident Xi Jinping møder børn, der vifter med kinesiske og amerikanske flag under velkomstceremonier uden for Folkets Store Hal, 9. nov., 2017, i Beijing, Folkerepublikken Kina. (WH Photo Shealah Craighead)




Helga Zepp-LaRouche:
Hvad er det Nye Paradigme?
LaRouche PAC’s Nyt Paradigme
Undervisningsserie 2018; pdf og video

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Dagens emne er det Nye Paradigme for menneskelig civilisation. Jeg har ofte fremført, at, hvis man ser på tilstanden i især den vestlige verden i dag, dvs. USA, tilstanden i Europa, den tyske regering, der er selvdestruktiv mens den forsøger at bygge en ny regering; vi har tydeligvis en situation, hvor verden er i voldsom uorden. Jeg har fremført den pointe, at vi må have et Nyt Paradigme, der er lige så forskelligt i forhold til de nuværende antagelser og aksiomer, som de moderne tider var forskellige i forhold til middelalderen. Hvor alle middelalderens antagelser med skolastik, Aristoteles, overtro og lignende rod blev erstattet af et helt andet billede af mennesket og et nyt begreb om samfundet.

Dette er nødvendigt for at sikre den menneskelige arts evne til at overleve på lang sigt. Og spørgsmålet er, om vi kan give os selv et system for at styre os selv, der garanterer, at den menneskelige art vil eksistere i kommende århundreder eller endda årtusinder? Min mand, Lyndon LaRouche, helligede hele sit livsværk til dette spørgsmål, med andre ord, til at spore de aspekter af det nuværende system, som var forkerte, og hvordan de skulle erstattes med et bedre, mere fuldendt system. Hvis man ser på de nuværende, såkaldte liberale demokratier i Vesten, så benægter de, at man kan have et sådant nødvendigt billede af mennesket, og nødvendigt [kan ikke høres]. For det er selve liberalismens natur, at alt er tilladt, alt er gyldigt; men virkeligheden er, at dette vestlige liberale demokrati ikke er den eneste situation i verden. En del, et aspekt af dette Nye Paradigme er allerede ved at vokse frem. Det er ved at vokse frem i form af den Nye Silkevej, der for ca. 4,5 år siden blev sat på dagsordenen af Kina. Den såkaldte Ny Silkevejsånd, altså ideen om, at man kan samarbejde på win-win-basis til alles gensidige fordel; denne idé har allerede mange lande – faktisk hele kontinenter – taget til sig. Den Nye Silkevejsånd stormer allerede frem i store dele af Asien, endda visse dele af Europa, Afrika og Latinamerika.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 




Seneste fupnummer fra Mueller,
trængt op i en krog:
Opgylpet Nothingburger

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 17. feb., 2018 – Sidste fredag så vi det seneste udslag af spil for galleriet fra den særlige anklager Robert Muellers side, med dennes annoncering af, at der var indgivet anklageskrifter mod 13 russiske borgere og tre enheder, inklusive Internet Research Agency, for angivelig »indblanding« i de amerikanske valg i 2016.

Men hele denne episode, der har domineret overskrifterne i de fleste vestlige medier, er en eneste, stor, genopgylpet Nothingburger, som man siger i folkeligt sprogbrug.

For det første, så blev hele denne angivelige sag bredt dækket i medierne for år tilbage. Der er intet nyt i anklagerne, som i sig selv er skrevet og formuleret som en pressemeddelelse snarere end et juridisk dokument. Vi anbefaler vore læsere at læse artiklen i det kommende EIR-nummer, »Robert Mueller II Indicates Some Russian Social Media Trolls: Indictment Scams the American People«, af Barbara Boyd, forfatter af LaRouche PAC’s nu berømte Mueller-dossier. 

For det andet, så befinder de anklagede personer sig i Rusland, der ikke har nogen udvisningsaftale med USA, og de vil derfor aldrig blive retsforfulgt i USA. Dette er meget belejligt for hr. Mueller, eftersom han ikke behøver fremlægge nogen kendsgerning for at styrke sin sag – eftersom det er mere end sandsynligt, at han ikke har nogen sag.

For det tredje, og det vigtigste, så er hele dette cirkus beregnet på at skulle fjerne opmærksomheden fra den kendsgerning, at det er Mueller, hans FBI- og DOJ-medsammensvorne, samt Obamas Hvide Hus (i.e., Obamaregeringens folk) der alle agerer under marchordrer og overvågning fra britisk efterretning, der er blevet taget på fersk gerning i et statskupforsøg imod USA’s valgte præsident, Donald Trump, på vegne af en fremmed magt. Deres kriminelle team, såsom »pit bull« Andy Weissmann, bliver yderligere afsløret med hver dag, der går. Og den amerikanske befolkning er i stigende grad oprørte over det faktum, at FBI har haft for travlt med at iscenesætte et kup til at følge op på ledetråde, som de var i besiddelse af, for at stoppe skolemassakrer såsom den, der netop fandt sted i Florida.

Den russiske regering er klar over, hvordan landet ligger i Washington, D.C. Udenrigsminister Sergei Lavrov sagde til Euronews den 16. feb., at »Demokraterne kan ikke forlige sig med nederlaget [i 2016], som fuldstændigt tog dem på sengen, og nu går de af deres vej for at forpeste tilværelsen for præsident Trump … eftersom han er en leder, der kommer fra uden for systemet … og som mere end en gang har bekræftet sin oprigtige hensigt« om at have respektfulde og produktive relationer med Rusland. Lavrov afviste selvfølgelig Muellers seneste anklageskifter imod de 13 russere og bemærkede, at de, der arbejder på hele Russiagate-operationen, »har trængt sig selv op i en krog gennem erklæringer om præcise data om russisk indblanding«, der ikke eksisterer.

Mueller og briterne er virkelig trængt op i en krog, men de er endnu ikke helt besejret, og som et resultat udgør strategiske provokationer – såsom forsøget på at dele Syrien og direkte militære trusler imod Rusland og Kina – fortsat en meget reel fare.

Denne fortsatte fare understreger den strategiske betydning af den åbning, der er skabt i USA af den nationale debat over præsident Trumps infrastrukturplan, hvor Lyndon LaRouches »Fire Love« for økonomisk og videnskabelig udvikling kan placeres i centrum for en diskussion om politikken i hele den bankerotte, transatlantiske sektor.




Genopbyg Amerikas infrastruktur: Optrap kampagnen for LaRouche-planen
Webcast, 16. feb., 2018

 

Gæst Paul Gallagher.

Vært Matthew Ogden: Titlen på vores show i dag er »Genopbyg Amerikas infrastruktur: Optrap kampagnen for LaRouche-planen«. Jeg har inviteret Paul Gallagher, økonomiredaktør for Executive Intelligence Review, på showet i dag, og vi er glade for at du tager dig tid til at komme, Paul. Vi har nu mulighed for at få en meget seriøs og nøgtern diskussion om LaRouches økonomiske program: De »Fire Love«, og lige nu er dørene vidt åbne.

Med udgivelsen af den såkaldte »Udkast til Lovgivning for Genopbygning af Amerikas Infrastruktur« – Dette er programmet fra Trumps Hvide Hus, som blev sendt over til Kongressen. Det blev udgivet mandag. Alt imens indholdet af denne rapport er, for at sige det mildt, uheldigt – det har Wall Streets fingeraftryk over det hele, alene det, at dette forslag er kommet frem; men det er rent ud sagt en total taber, der har galvaniseret diskussionen nationalt, og det er virkelig begyndt at katalysere kongresmedlemmer på begge sider midtergangen til at begynde at tænke over spørgsmålet på en meget mere seriøs måde: Hvordan finansierer man infrastruktur?  Hvis vi taler om $1,5 billion, hvor skal de komme fra?

(Her følger engelsk udskrift):

And this includes, frankly, Trump himself.  As President
Trump said in the Letter of Transmission, that was sent over as
the opening to this legislative proposal, he said: “Our nation’s
infrastructure is in an unacceptable state of disrepair, which
damages our country’s competitiveness and our citizens’ quality
of life.  For too long, lawmakers have invested in infrastructure
inefficiently, ignored critical needs, and allowed it to
deteriorate.  As a result, the United States has fallen further
and further behind other countries.  It is time to give Americans
the working, modern infrastructure they deserve…. My
administration is committed to working with the Congress to enact
a law that will enable America’s builders to construct the new,
modern, and efficient infrastructure throughout our beautiful
land.”
Now, on Tuesday, President Trump held an open, televised
roundtable with different Senators and Representatives, both
Democrats and Republicans, and this was ostensibly to discuss the
aluminum, steel industries and trade policy around that, but
during that roundtable, which was televised, the discussion of
the infrastructure program came up.  And I’d like to just play a
short clip from that roundtable; this is an exchange between
President Trump and Sen. Sherrod Brown [D] from Ohio, and then
Senator Blumenthal [D-CT] also gets in on this.  And what you
hear is that President Trump says, look, I want to have a
bipartisan plan.  Come back to me with a counterproposal.  What
we put out was an opening bid, but I really want a bipartisan
plan.  I’m ready, willing and able.
So, here’s a clip from that roundtable:

[start video]
PRESIDENT TRUMP:  I actually think that we can go bipartisan
on infrastructure, maybe even more so, than we can on DACA. …
On infrastructure which is the purpose of what we’re doing
tonight, come back with a proposal.  We put in our bid — come
back with a proposal. We have a lot of people that are great
Republicans that want something to happen.  We have to rebuild
our country.  I said yesterday, we’ve spent {$7 trillion} — when
I say “spent,” and I mean wasted — not to mention all of the
lives, most importantly and everything else — but we’ve spent $7
trillion as of about two months ago, in the Middle East — $7
trillion.  And if you want to borrow two dollars to build a road
someplace, including your state, the great state of Ohio, if you
want to build a road, if you want to build a tunnel, or a bridge,
or fix a bridge because so many of them are in bad shape, you
can’t do it.  And yet, we spent $7 trillion in the Middle East.
Explain that one. [crosstalk]

SEN. SHERROD BROWN: I’ve love a bipartisan — we have a
bipartisan proposal.  We can [crosstalk] dollars on it in
infrastructure.  We’re glad to work together on a real
infrastructure bill with real dollars, plus what you can leverage
in the communities and private sector.

PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Do a combination.

SENATOR BROWN:  It needs real dollars.

President Trump:  I would love to have you get back to us
quickly, ’cause we can do this quickly and we have to rebuild our
country.  We have to rebuild our roads and our bridges and our
tunnels, so the faster you get back, the faster we can move.
Focus on document this week, if you don’t mind, right?  But the
faster you get back, the faster we move.

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL:  I come back to Senator Brown’s
point, I think there’s a opportunity for real bipartisanship
here, in these two areas.

PRESIDENT TRUMP:  I agree, and I’d like you to come back
with a suggestion on infrastructure in the plan, and I think
that’s a bipartisan plan.  I really would like to see you come
back with a counterproposal on the infrastructure.  I think we’re
going to get that done.  I really believe that’s  — we’re going
to get a lot of Democrats, we’re going to get a lot of
Republicans. We’re going to get it done.  It’s something we
should do.  We have to fix our country:  We have to fix our roads
and our tunnels and bridges and everything, so, if you can work
together on that, and I am ready, willing and able, on
infrastructure — that is such a natural for us to get done.  And
I think we could probably do it.
Thank you all very much.  [End video]

OGDEN:  So as you can see, asking them to come back with a
counterproposal, he said, this is our opening bid, but the point
is clear:  Now is the time for us to mobilize like never before,
to put the LaRouche plan on the table.  {This} is the
counterproposal.
Let me put on the screen here:  first we’ve got our Campaign
To Win the Future.  This is obviously the national statement of
intent for the elections in 2018.  LaRouche PAC is mobilizing a
national movement and galvanizing discussion around this program.
And then the content of that campaign can be seen on the next
slide, this is “The Four Laws To Save the United States:  The
Economics Principles Necessary for a Recovery — Why the United
States Must Join the New Silk Road” and this contains full
elaboration of Lyndon LaRouche’s four economic laws.
So, I know that Paul is very short on time, and I would just
like to ask you: Please address what the situation is now in
Washington.  What’s coming out of this release of this so-called
legislative proposal? And what actually has to be done?

PAUL GALLAGHER:  Thanks, Matt.  My first reaction, when the
White House plan was released — I call it the “White House
plan,” not the Trump plan, but the White House plan — when it
was released, was that closed a certain door of people in elected
offices around the country and in Washington, constantly saying
“what is the White House going to come up with?  what is the
White House going to come up with?  what are they going to give
us in the way of what they can get started towards infrastructure
investments? because we desperately need it?”   And when it
finally came out, and it was very, very, very lacking — as you
said, a Wall Street plan — that closed a certain door, and
immediately, thus, opened another one.
OK, now they have come out with that.  Now, we have to come
out with something.  It’s up to the rest of us, particularly
those in elected office, but all of us who are active in fighting
for this:  It’s up to us now to shape the alternative, because
this one just isn’t going to work.  And it’s good to see that
that definitely includes the President — that view.  He, on
another occasion, immediately after the plan was rolled out on
Monday, he said that compared to the tax legislation and the
military spending increases and so forth, that this
infrastructure plan that the White House has put out, was really
quite unimportant.  A rather surprising thing for him to say.
But it indicated, when it was followed the very next day by the
comment you just saw, “give me an alternative,” and then the very
day after that, in another meeting with members of Congress,
when, as soon as he was prompted in any way by any of them, he
came out very strongly for increasing the Federal gasoline tax by
25 cents a gallon, and applying that through the Highway Trust
Fund, to infrastructure investment — not at all something which
is part of the White House plan, so-called; and not part of the
Republican leadership’s plan at all.
But when he was asked, he went with that.  He hasn’t said
this publicly, but a number of senators and representatives who
were at that second meeting, have reported it publicly in the
same way.  It’s clear that he did say that he was for that
increase in the gas tax, and as he said, he would take the
political heat for backing it as President, if they would go
forward with it.
So you’ve had, in rapid succession,  a number of indications
that this plan, as poor as it was that came out from the White
House, is not in fact the President’s plan, and it simply closes
the door on all this waiting, and now says, where are the
alternatives?
And that is very definitely what is in the LaRouche Four
Laws, is the one alternative to this that will work.
Let me get into this in another way, unless you want to
break it up, Matt.  And if you have questions, please, interrupt.
But I wanted to read a piece that was written just two days
ago by a Chinese scholar John Gong; he’s a very prominent
professor University of International Business and Economics in
Beijing; and he’s a former executive editor of the {Journal of
Chinese Economic and Foreign Trade Studies}.

OGDEN:  We actually have a slide with the title of that
article which was written for China Global Television Network
(CGTN), “Make America Great Again — With Chinese Money.”   And I
can read some of the quotes that people can see on the screen,
and then maybe you can address what the content is.
This is what he had to say:  “Trump is absolutely right that
Americas crippled bridges, potholed highways, and crooked
railways cannot wait any longer. America needs to be great again.
The only question is, where is the money coming from?”  And then
later in the article he said, “I have a great idea. Bank of China
and other major banks from China are now flush with dollar cash
and other dollar-denominated liquid assets, totaling over $3
trillion, mostly in the form of holdings in U.S. Treasury bills
and bonds. This money can be readily used for Chinese investors
to participate in America’s infrastructure boom. By that I mean
Chinese investors can participate in those infrastructure
projects as active equity investors, and maybe contractors or
suppliers at the same time.
“Call it the Belt and Road. Call it
America-belt-America-road. I don’t care, as long as Chinas current
account trade surplus can be somehow transformed into a capital
account stock, in the form of money invested in America as
permanent equity shareholders, and more importantly permanent
stakeholders of a stable and prosperous Sino-U.S. economic
relationship. This could be a win-win mode for both countries.”
[https://news.cgtn.com/news/79596a4d33677a6333566d54/
share_p.html]
So that’s Dr. John Gong.

GALLAGHER:  Now, that’s very important, in the way it is
formulated, in the precision of it.  He’s talking about Treasury
holdings, — he’s not the first Chinese official to do this.  In
fact, a year ago, in late January of 2017, Ding Xuedong, the
then-chairman of the Chinese Investment Corp., which is one of
their two big sovereign wealth funds, made essentially the same
proposal.  He said, we have such and such a volume of long-term
U.S. Treasury holdings, they’re not earners, their interest rates
are very low, their return is very low; we would like to trade
them for a long-term investment in a U.S. infrastructure bill, as
he put it. And he, at the time, estimated that really, the need
for investment in the United States for new infrastructure, was
{$8 trillion}, a figure which may seem impossibly large to many,
but actually isn’t.
[http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2017/170116_chinese_invest.html]
Nonetheless, Helga Zepp-LaRouche has written in articles
which have been published in the Chinese press, she’s frequently
interviewed and quoted there, — she has written exactly this
proposal in articles which have been published there.  I have
presented exactly this idea to Chinese officials in Washington.
This is part of LaRouche’s Four Laws.
But to start with, the first action implied by his four
actions that have to be taken legislatively and from an executive
standpoint, is the restoration of the Glass-Steagall Act and the
breakup of the Wall Street banks and the hiving off of all of the
casino speculative investment vehicles, special purpose vehicles
and all of that, in order to protect and use the commercial
banking system for investments.
You cannot get to real, major infrastructure renewal without
doing that, and you could see this in the meeting that you played
the clip from. There was at least one representative from
Missouri, who brought up the issue, when the discussion was about
trade, and specifically whether there might be tariffs against
aluminum imports from China, he brought up the fact that there is
a grave lack of capacity to produce sufficient aluminum for
industry in the United States, and where is that lack coming
from?  The lack of power supplies.  So that, this is an
infrastructure question, although if you ask the simple question,
“Is there an apparent sufficient amount of kilowatt-hours per
year per capita in the United States?”  Yes, there is. But is
there sufficient, reliable electrical power supply — constantly
online, reliable, electrical power supply — for an expansion of
industry?  The answer would in many cases be, “no.” And that was
what he was bringing up, in particular with respect to more
aluminum plants in the United States.  You have a grave inability
to produce enough power, particularly since the fiasco of
electricity deregulation out on the West Coast 15 years ago: That
deprived the aluminum industry and shut down a very significant
amount of it.
Now, if there’s going to be that kind of investment in
infrastructure across the country, it’s not going to be one, or
two, or three, or four, very famous big projects, like the
renovation of the whole Northeast rail corridor of Amtrak, and
the bridges and the tunnels in New York and so forth.  It’s not
going to be simply those things.  It’s going to be, at many, many
levels around the country, the production of enough clean water
supplies, the production of enough electrical power supplies; the
replacement and renovation — mostly replacement — of the river
navigation systems, locks and dams, and many of these things.
And for those, the commercial banks have to be ready to lend,
because it takes a lot of employment, a lot of contracting, a lot
of local borrowing:  The banks have to be ready to lend and if
you allow them to stay the big commercial banks, and the mid-size
regional banks — if you allow them to stay in the Wall Street
casino, that’s where they’ll stay.  If you say, “no, your
business as a commercial bank is lending,” then you have a credit
channel through the banking system through which national credit
can flow, and cooperate in this kind of thing.
So it starts with restoring bank separation under
Glass-Steagall.  We’re going to have a group of elected officials
from Italy in a couple of months come over and help us organize
in Washington on this, because they’re fighting for it in Italy
at the national and also the local level.
Then, the specific second law of LaRouche, a national credit
institution, which is able to produce large volumes of productive
credit for productive employment of the people, and for increased
productivity.  And that is where not only the White House plan,
but many other plans that have been put forward, are really
completely inadequate, where we do have to talk about several
trillions of dollars at least of investment,  and the way to do
that, is exactly the way that was reflected in that comment by
Dr. Gong: That is, there is a lot of long-term Treasury debt held
out there; three major holders of this long-term Treasury debt,
which totals $7.5-$8 trillion, are the commercial banks of the
United States, again, which hold it in their reserves and all
their excess reserves which are very large right now;  second,
Japan, which holds more than $1 trillion in primarily long-term
U.S. Treasury debt; thirdly, China, which actually holds now
somewhat more than Japan; about $1.2 trillion of the same kind of
debt.  Those are potential shareholders, equity holders,
subscribers of that Treasury debt into a new bank created by
Congress for the purpose of generating this kind of credit.
That is exactly how we have proposed and circulated and
organized that this is the way to form — without a tremendous
amount of new borrowing — to form a sufficiently large national
bank for infrastructure; essentially by swapping existing
long-term Treasury debt holdings for equity in such a new
national bank created by Congress with a guarantee from the
Treasury for the payment of the dividends on that equity.  And
with taxes — this is not free; it’s never free, — but with
taxes assigned to make sure that those dividends can be paid.
That’s where the increase in the Federal gasoline tax and
potentially the use of other what you would call infrastructure
excise taxes, like the port excise tax and the navigation tax on
the locks and dams, that’s where these would come in.  Because if
you simply go and raise the gas tax by 25 cents and spend the
money for infrastructure projects, it will not produce nearly,
nearly enough.  But if you use it in this way as leverage to
guarantee the equity in a new national bank in exactly the way
that we’re seeing reflected in that proposal, that article from
Dr. Gong, then it’ll work.  As I said, he’s not the only person,
not only among leading Chinese thinkers about this, but also from
Japan, there’s the same kind of positive view of this idea.
Potentially, there you have it — an infrastructure bank.
Then you have to go on and what are you going to use that
credit for?  It can’t be used simply to repair roads and repair
bridges.  There are entirely new areas of technological and
scientific breakthroughs which will raise productivity in the
economy to a far greater extent.  One of them that we identify is
that a crash program is necessary to develop not only
thermonuclear fusion electric energy, but the plasma technologies
of infrastructure, which will probably come from such a crash
program even before commercial nuclear fusion electricity
arrives.  We will have plasma technologies being spun off from
that crash program, which will address themselves exactly to the
production of the kinds of capacities that have died out in
deindustrialization in the United States.  But they’ll do it at a
higher level of technology.  Those kinds of investments, are one
of the Four Laws that LaRouche has called for.  Also, a big
increase in NASA’s capabilities, going back to the Apollo Project
level of effort by NASA to really go back to the Moon;
industrialize, develop the Moon, develop the raw materials there,
including for fusion energy production.  And from there, go
deeper into the Solar System and ultimately into the galaxy.
This is the kind of science driver which leads up-shifts in
productivity in industry.  And infrastructure is really the way
that these up-shifts get introduced to the economy.  For example,
in a high-speed rail system of cars using magnetic levitation and
similar technologies, this is the way it gets introduced.
So, that opening from the President is very important.
Yesterday you had comments which I think are very significant
from the two leaders of the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee — the Republican chairman William
Shuster of Pennsylvania, the Democratic ranking member Peter
DeFazio — they are normally quite a bit at odds.  But in
interviews yesterday which were reported today, they were
reporting that they are already jointly working on a legislative
alternative to exactly what you saw the President asking for
there.  A legislative alternative again, with real Federal
dollars; the language which Senator Brown used — actually it was
Senator Wyden was the other Senator — real Federal dollars.  An
alternative to present which the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee is where legislation along these lines
will have to start.  So, you’re seeing that; you’re seeing the
gas tax being discussed very widely, including by those same two
leaders of that committee.  You’re already seeing an
infrastructure bank act in the House — HR547 — of
Representative Rosa DeLauro, Democrat from Connecticut, which has
the backing of fully half of the Democratic Caucus in the House
and is not a national infrastructure bank which would operate in
the way that we’ve described and therefore would not be as large
or as capable.  But nonetheless, it’s legislation which in my
view is quite similar to the Reconstruction Finance Corporation
which operated under Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s administration
and did so much to recover the country and then to lead the
mobilization for the war and through the war in the 1940s.  So
that is also something definitely within the purview of
LaRouche’s Four Laws.

OGDEN:  The idea of national banking is, I think, really the
critical idea; and it takes us obviously directly back to
Alexander Hamilton.  If you look at Hamilton’s view on
infrastructure, the idea of public infrastructure is very much an
American idea, and is a major pillar of the American System.
Hamilton’s emphasis on the necessity for the rapid upgrading of
the national infrastructure, the ports and dredging the harbors
and things like this, what was called “internal improvements.”
But this idea of public infrastructure has an American idea to
it.  In fact, it was written directly into the Constitution in
the form of the General Welfare.  There were huge fights,
including Hamilton’s defense of the Constitutionality of a
national bank against Thomas Jefferson around this idea of the
General Welfare.  I know you have to go, so maybe one more aspect
that you can address before you leave, and then I can conclude
the remaining portions of the show on my own.  But just on this
subject of the idea of the public good, the United States used to
be the world’s gold standard, in great modern infrastructure,
public infrastructure.  You can see that obviously by what
Franklin Roosevelt did during the New Deal.  Nations around the
world were banging on our door to try to imitate what we
accomplished with the Tennessee Valley Authority and so forth and
so on.  But now, the gold standard is swiftly being set by China
and what China has done in an unparalleled way.  Create this
amazing public infrastructure in a very rapid and swift manner.
Two things I think maybe could be addressed in what we need to
now learn from China or relearn in terms of what we used to be
committed to, is: 1) the policy approach that has made this
possible in China; but also, 2) the philosophy that China is
clearly committed to when it comes to this idea of the public
good, the common good, or what we call in American Constitutional
language, the General Welfare.  Maybe you can address that just
briefly before you leave, Paul.

GALLAGHER:  There was, in the 19th Century, the American
Whig and then Republican leaders were all very conscious
Hamiltonians.  They realized that they were attempting to develop
the country, and they were doing it — at least a lot of the time
— extraordinarily successfully with a commitment to the
“internal improvements” what we call infrastructure, but the
internal improvements, the national credit provision, the
protection of industry; which came from Alexander Hamilton.
But his overriding premise was actually none of those
particular policies, but rather his stating against the tide of
opinion in the 1790s when he was Treasury Secretary and the
decade before and after.  He definitely took on the tide of
opinion that the United States was going to be an agricultural
country, a country of yeoman farmers with all of their well-known
virtues and so on and so forth.  He said that the wealth of a
country is found in the inventive qualities of its people, and in
the freedom and opportunity that they have to turn their
inventive qualities into enterprise.  And he really was
responsible for the emergence of the first banks of the United
States; not only the First Bank of the United States, the first
national bank, but also the first private banks of the United
States, of which there were very few at that time.  He saw the
creation of a national bank as essentially the necessary link or
liaison between the actions of the government to assist the
economy and the actions of the private banks; that this was the
necessary way, in which they should be related.  But his principle
was that the mind of the individual and the freedom of the
individual and opportunity to make that into enterprise, that
that was what defined the ability to produce the wealth of a
country and that the wealth of a country was produced within it;
it was not gained by trading with other countries — fairly,
freely or otherwise.  It was gained primarily by producing the
wealth which the inventiveness of the people and the resources of
the country made possible.  And that was the function of
protection when it was used, but of course, Hamilton favored more
what we would call industrial subsidies than he did what we call
tariffs.  So that, right through Abraham Lincoln, was the creed
of the great leaders of the United States in the 19th Century and
considerably thereafter.  We became the greatest industrial
nation on Earth that way.
Franklin Roosevelt revived that general outlook, although he
did so without the creation of a national bank, really because of
what he was working with in Congress.  Otherwise, he might have
preferred to do that.  But he did it through such institutions as
the Reconstruction Finance Corporation and the TVA, which became
wonders of the world.  We have not really improved on that much
in the 70-80 years since.  But that idea, Hamilton’s ideas spread
very rapidly through Friedrich List, who spent a lot of time in
the United States and was a leading Hamiltonian in the 1820s and
1830s, and then was in the middle of the unification of Germany
for the first time in the Customs Union of Germany in the middle
of the 19th Century.  This spread through Bismarck’s policies,
who knew that he was a Hamiltonian, later in the 19th Century.
They spread through the Japanese adopting and learning a lot of
the works of Hamilton; late in the 19th Century inviting
Hamiltonian economists from the United States to come over and
advise them.  This kept being repeated in Korea again.  China has
taken this far beyond, because as you said, they’re not only
applying those policies, but they’re also as they always say
doing them with Chinese characteristics.  Particularly now with
Xi Jinping as the President of China, he has really defined and
enshrined in their Constitution the principle of what a country’s
leadership is judged for is its ability to strive for the common
welfare, the common aims of the population; what we call in the
Constitution, the General Welfare.  That has really had a very
distinctive effect on Chinese policy in the country and also on
the policy of the Belt and Road Initiative which Xi Jinping
launched, but was really already underway before he made the
formal speech three and a half years ago.  Already the
investments by big Chinese commercial banks outside China, in
these projects of energy, mining, but also a lot of
infrastructure projects.  These big investments were already
underway in 2011, 2012; then he made the announcement in 2013,
which was so very close to the policy of the World Land-Bridge
which had been promoted by Lyndon and Helga LaRouche since the
later 1980s.  And since that time, that has really been
recognized in China; they call Helga the Silk Road Lady.  This
policy of the common welfare is clearly one reflected in the way
that they’ve eliminated almost entirely down to the last few tens
of millions of people, they’ve almost entirely eradicated extreme
poverty in China.  I just heard the World Bank chairman the day
before yesterday praising that to the skies and saying it’s the
one model for the world.  He said the World Bank has been trying
to do this for so many decades, to eradicate poverty, without
making too much progress.  China has done it, and now they are
seeking to help do it in Africa and other places.  They want to
invest in the Middle East in reconstruction.  But this is really
the test that you are acting for the general good, for the common
welfare, which is what our Constitution commits us to.
So, in that sense, they’ve gone beyond, and in the process,
really developed a lot of technological breakthroughs in
infrastructure; and that’s where you find them.  That’s where
Roosevelt found them.  The projects of the 1930s, which many
people think of as just creating a lot of work for people, and
building a lot of airports and roads and bridges and things like
that; those projects — especially the hydro-electric projects
and especially the Tennessee Valley Authority — were
technological breakthroughs at the time.  They built dams,
navigation systems, hydropower systems technologically in ways
which not only hadn’t been done, but had been denied that they
could be done even right up to that time.  John F Kennedy spoke
about this later, that experts were saying that you couldn’t
build dams that were simultaneously for water management, for
navigation, and for hydropower.  The TVA did 57 such dams.  So,
they completely transformed an area of the country.  These
breakthroughs were made in all of this infrastructure building in
such a way, that the productivity of the U.S. economy leaped up in
the 1930s at the fastest rate of the last 150 years.  A close
second was the 1940s, including the war mobilization.
So that’s what China is experiencing now, as they make these
kinds of investments; and they’re doing it with a very common
welfare orientation.

OGDEN:  Wonderful!  So, thank you very much, Paul.  I’m
going to let you go before we finish the remainder of our show.
But I think you’ve made it very clear that we are uniquely
positioned to inform and ultimately shape this counterproposal
and what must ultimately become the infrastructure and general
economic policy of this Presidency.  So, I know we have a lot of
work to do.  Thank you for joining us, Paul.

GALLAGHER:  Thank you.  I’m sure you’ll talk about the
necessity to bring this up from the bottom as well; from the
local elected officials, from the state legislatures in
particular and apply it to the election campaign.  I think it’s
probably true what Chairman Shuster said, which is that work on
this legislation will be going on until the summer.  I think
that’s definitely true.  It will become a part of the election
campaign, no question.  If we can get candidates out there and
local elected officials out there who are for the Four Laws,
we’re going to shape this.  So, thanks for the opportunity and
having me on, and have a good time.

OGDEN:  Thank you, and we’ll talk to you again soon.  What
Paul said is absolutely correct.  This is the ultimate principle
or thought behind the campaign to win the future.  This is the
LaRouche PAC election mobilization in 2018.  We’ve already had a
number of state legislators endorse this campaign.  We’re really
on the ground in various places, including in West Virginia;
doing some very significant meetings with people who are involved
in the China-West Virginia deals.  We’ve also mobilized in a very
big way in the Midwest, which was key to the Trump election
victory.  We know that these former industrial states really are
the most significant in swinging these elections and creating the
constituency blocs around this idea of the LaRouche Four Economic
Laws and everything that you just heard Paul go through.  This is
the urgent necessity as we mobilize around this kind of program.
I think everything that you just heard from Paul, makes it very
clear that we are uniquely well-positioned to shape this entire
discussion.  I think the opportunity is even greater now than it
was previously.
Now, let me just go over a few things that I think will make
it very clear to you that there is an opportunity for a moment of
awakening, you could say, among people who have recognized that
everything that we’ve been committed to for the last several
decades up to this point has completely failed.  There were two
very informative or entertaining articles over the last week and
a half, which point to exactly this; indicate exactly this
opportunity for people to perhaps open their minds and begin a
more sober and serious discussion around the true principles of
economics.  One of these is an article which appeared in
Bloomberg, this was {Bloomberg Business Week} I believe.  The
title of this article was “What if China Is Exempt from the Laws
of Economics?”  This is by a fellow named Michael Schuman, but
the subtitle is “Beijing’s policymakers seem to be doing a lot of
things right — and that may upend much of basic economic
thinking, especially our faith in the power of free markets.”
So, here are a couple of excerpts from that article.  He
says:
“Over my two decades of writing about economics, I’ve
devised a list of simple maxims that I’ve found generally hold
true….
“But recently, my faith in this corpus of collected wisdom
has been badly shaken. By China.
“The more I apply my rules of economics to China, the more
they seem to go awry. China should be mired in meager growth,
even gripped by financial crisis, according to my maxims. But
obviously it’s not. In fact, much of what’s going on right now in
that country runs counter to what we know — or think we know —
about economics. Simply, if Beijing’s policymakers are right,
then a lot of basic economic thinking is wrong — especially our
certainty in the power of free markets, our ingrained bias
against state intervention, and our ideas about fostering
innovation and entrepreneurship.
“On the surface, that probably sounds ridiculous. How could
one country possibly defy the laws that have governed economies
everywhere else?…
“Yet as China marches forward, we can no longer dismiss the
possibility that it’s rewriting the rulebook. Beijing’s
policymakers are just plain ignoring what most economists would
recommend at this point in its development. And, so far, they’re
getting away with it….
“… Perhaps China really is refashioning capitalism.
“Perhaps. I, for one, am still clinging to my maxims….
“… Maybe my rules of economics will hold firm after all.
But thanks to China, I’m prepared to edit them.”
Now, it’s not that China is rewriting the rule book.  I
think that what you just heard from Paul is that it’s the West,
it’s the United States under the influence of British free market
ideology; this free-market school economics.  It’s the United
States and the West which have been playing by the wrong rulebook
for decades, if not generations.  We’ve neglected the rulebook
that we originally wrote.  It was Alexander Hamilton, it was our
first Treasury Secretary; that’s why it’s called the American
System of economics.  Other countries have applied these
principles of Hamiltonian economics and experienced the same
phenomenal growth that we experienced under the influence of
Hamiltonian policy.  That is exactly what China is experiencing
right now.  It’s leaving these economists scratching their heads,
but perhaps they merely have to open a few history books.
I think as you can tell from that Bloomberg article, it’s
beginning to dawn on people.  “Gee!  Maybe we’ve been wrong.
Maybe we’ve been duped by this British free trade, free market
ideology.  Perhaps that’s why our economies are in shambles right
now.”
Here’s another article.  This is in the {New York Times
Magazine}.  It came out earlier this week.  This one is very
interesting and goes through a lot of the history you just heard
Paul elaborate on.  This is called “The Rise of China and the
Fall of the ‘Free Trade’ Myth.”  The subhead is “China’s economic
success lays bare an uncomfortable historical truth.  No one who
preaches free trade really practices it.”  So, here’s an excerpt
from the article:
“[T]o grasp China’s economic achievement, and its
ramifications, it is imperative to ask: Why has a market economy
directed by a Communist state become the world’s second-largest?
Or, to rephrase the question: Why shouldn’t it have? Why
shouldn’t China’s rise have happened the way it did, with
state-led economic planning, industrial subsidies and little or
no regard for the rules of ‘free trade’?…
“Indeed, economic history reveals that great economic powers
have always become great because of activist states. Regardless
of the mystical properties claimed for it, the invisible hand of
self-interest depends on the visible and often heavy hand of
government. To take only one instance, British gunboats helped
impose free trade on 19th-century China — a lesson not lost on
the Chinese…. The philosophical father of economic
protectionism is, in fact, Alexander Hamilton, the founder of the
American financial system, whose pupils included the Germans, the
Japanese and, indirectly, the Chinese.”
After some history, he lays out the case of Germany, and
this one is interesting to focus on.  He says:
“… Unified in 1871, Germany was scrambling to catch up
with industrialized Britain. To do so, it borrowed from recipes
of national development proposed by Hamilton soon after the
Americans broke free of their British overlords. In his ‘Report
on the Subject of Manufactures’, submitted to Congress in 1791,
Hamilton used the potent term ‘infant’ industries to argue for
economic protectionism.
“… In his view, infant nations needed room to maneuver
before they could compete with established industrial powers. The
United States embraced many of Hamilton’s recommendations; the
beneficiaries were, first, the textile and iron industries and
then steel.
“It was Hamilton’s formula, rather than free trade, that
made the United States the world’s fastest-growing economy in the
19th century and into the 1920s. And that formula was embraced by
other nations coming late to international economic competition.
Hamilton’s most influential student was a German economist named
Friedrich List, who lived in the United States from 1825 until
the 1830s and wrote a book titled {Outlines of American Political
Economy}. On his return to Germany, List attacked the free-market
gospel preached by Britain as sheer opportunism…. Applying
List’s lessons, Germany moved with spectacular speed from an
agrarian to an industrial economy.
“… Closely following Germany’s example, Japan heavily
subsidized its first factories ….
“… South Korea, too, found solutions for its problems in
Friedrich List rather than Adam Smith. The country’s leader, Park
Chung-hee … was also deeply familiar with German theories of
protectionism. (The economist Robert Wade reported coming across
whole shelves of books by List in Seoul bookstores in the
1970s.)…
“But little did I know that Hamilton (and List) would
achieve their greatest influence in post-Mao China. ‘The rise of
China resembles that of the United States a century ago,’ the
Chinese scholar Hu Angang writes. He is not exaggerating.”
Now, that’s a very interesting article to appear at this
moment.  I’m not saying that everything the author says in his
analysis is entirely accurate, or that all of the conclusions
that he draws are necessarily correct.  But what he does make
clear is that what made America great was the policies of
Alexander Hamilton.  And what’s making China great today are
those very same Hamiltonian policies.  This realization shows you
that we have a very fertile field for the reception of our
so-called Four Laws campaign — Lyndon LaRouche’s revival of
Hamiltonian policies.  The fight which Lyndon LaRouche has led
for decades to liberate the United States from this imposed free
market, free trade hoax; this British ideology.  To return us to
the principles of Alexander Hamilton.  What he did simultaneously
abroad to educate these other nations on the policies of the
American System and Hamiltonian economic policies.  That’s where
China got this from; that’s where you can credit the great
Chinese economic miracle of the last 15 years.  Do not write out
of the equation the role that Lyndon and Helga LaRouche have
played as spokesmen for this great Hamiltonian tradition, and
urgently with updates and a profound scientific depth that Lyndon
LaRouche has brought to this discussion.  But the time is now,
and the field is very fertile for the reception of this idea that
the time has come for a Hamiltonian coalition of nations.  We
must join hand-in-hand with China to do exactly that; to bring
development to all the nations on the planet using these
American, but universal, economic principles.
Now, let me just play a very short clip from a broadcast
that Helga Zepp-LaRouche had yesterday.  Because the biggest
problem that you run into — and I think this is something that
you run into as an organizer or as an activist — is that people
fail to make the necessary leap in terms of understanding these
principles because they have an axiomatic problem.  There’s a
disconnect.  The biggest problem that we have when it comes to
economics today is that money is essentially God.  Money has
achieved this status in economics where it is everything to
everyone.  It’s the Genesis of economics; it’s the root, it’s the
prime mover; it’s the measuring rod, it’s the purpose, it’s the
medium.  Money is everything.  And Helga Zepp-LaRouche addressed
exactly this pathology in her webcast yesterday.  And she called
for a public debate on this.  She said, as it begins to dawn on
people who have believed that everything that they had believed
about economics may perhaps have been wrong, we need to question
some of the most basic economic assumptions that we hold dear,
and ask ourselves the question, “What is the ultimate purpose of
an economy and what is the true source of true economic wealth?”
So, here’s Helga LaRouche:

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE

:  I think there is something
fundamentally wrong with the system of the free market, which
after all is not that free, given the fact that all central banks
did was to bail out the banks and keep money pumping for the
benefit of the speculators, so that the rich become richer, and
the poor become more poor, and the middle class is shrinking.
This article by Bloomberg which you referenced earlier, is
very interesting, because the author admits that according to his
theory, China should be collapsing, it should have meager
economic growth, but obviously the contrary is the case.  And he
says that China is doing everything which according to his theory
are terrible, like state intervention, party control, — things
like that — and China is prospering. And actually, he says,
he’s not yet ready to completely overturn his theory, but he’s
willing to make corrections.
There will be a lot more corrections, because I think we
need a public debate, what are the economic criteria for a
functioning economy?  And obviously, the works of my husband,
Lyndon LaRouche, and his development of physical economy, going
back to Leibniz, to Friedrich List, to Henry C. Carey, to Wilhelm
von Kardorff, who was the economic advisor of Bismarck and was
one of the key influences to bring about the industrial
revolution in Germany; as compared to the so-called free market
model, I think we have to have a real debate, what is the cause
of wealth?  Is it money, or is it the idea of the creativity of
the individual, which then leads to scientific and technological
discoveries, which applied in the production process leads to an
increase in productivity, which then leads to more wealth,
longevity, and all of these things.
We need a discussion about that, because the notion of what
is economy, equating that with money, has really become one of
the axiomatic assumptions of a failing system. So we need a
debate about that. [end video]

OGDEN:  So the time has come.  As I said, it’s a very
fertile field, and this is one of the most important reasons why
we’ve now launched a new LaRouche PAC class series, which gets
directly at these principles; not only of economics, but this is
what drives global policy.  What is the purpose of economy?  What
is the true identity of man?  And what should be the
collaborative between peoples and between nations, to what end?
So, I’ll take that as an opportunity before concluding, to remind
our viewers that tomorrow we will have the second class in our
2018 class series.  This class will be titled “The End of
Geopolitics, Part I:  The History of Geopolitics.”  The guest
speaker will be Harley Schlanger.  Again, you can register for
this entire class series, which is called “The End of
Geopolitics.  What Is the New Paradigm?”  The registration is now
open.  If you have not registered for this class series, I
strongly encourage you to.  The link is available on the screen
— lpac.co/np2018.  You can also visit discover.larouchepac.com
which will be the central hub of all of the material for this
class series.  Again, if you’re a registered participant, not
only do you have the opportunity to participate in the live
public forums, such as the inaugural class that was delivered
last Saturday by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, but you also have the
opportunity for an in-depth engagement around the syllabus, the
required reading materials, the homework assignments, the live
feedback from the teachers and from the leaders of the LaRouche
PAC class series, and also some discussion periods which are only
open to registered participants.  Registration has continued to
increase.  We have a large number of registered participants from
all across the United States and elsewhere around the world, too.
So, we’re putting together the educated grouping, the cadre which
will be able to lead this discussion for a new economics, a New
Paradigm.  The field is wide open.  The door is there, and all we
have to do is walk through it.  We are in a unique position to
inform this discussion today; and it is a very urgent debate
which needs to take place as Helga Zepp-LaRouche just said.
So, thank you for joining me here today.  I thank Paul for
joining me.  Please stay tuned to larouchepac.com; we have a lot
of work to do, and we’ll see you next week.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 




’Demokrati’: Betyder det princippet om
det Almene Vel eller partipolitisk lammelse
og krige for regimeskifte?

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 14. feb., 2018 – Senatets Efterretningskomites høring i går med lederne af de amerikanske efterretningstjenester, var anti-russiske, anti-kinesiske optøjer fra både senatorer og vidner. Den nye ’politiske korrekthed’ i ånden fra McCarthy dominerede enhver diskussion af det faktiske emne, »trusler mod Amerikas nationale sikkerhed«. Hvis der hersker noget tvivlsspørgsmål om, hvorfor, det er mislykkedes præsident Trump at forfølge sine hensigter – stormagtssamarbejde med både Rusland og Kina om bekæmpelse af terrorisme og regionale krige – så blev de besvaret af forestillingen i Senatet i går, og som også omgiver ham i Det Hvide Hus.

De ledende folkevalgte i USA og Europa har, med deres skrigeri om, at Kina og Rusland er en trussel mod »demokratiske værdier«, demonstreret deres totalt manglende evne til at praktisere demokrati succesfuldt. Deres partier gør dem ude af stand til at regere – eller, som vi ser det i Tyskland, blot at danne en regering og forsøge at regere. De kan ikke reducere fattigdom, hvor Kina er ved at fjerne det; de kan ikke stoppe en epidemi af narkoafhængighed og selvmord. De ser et neokonservativt militær/Wall Street-kompleks føre krige for regimeskifte »imod autoritære regimer, og for demokrati«; disse krige er årsag til katastrofale menneskelige lidelser og død, og ødelæggelse af rigdomme, spreder international terrorisme og massive flygtningestrømme. De står nu over for et nyt finanskrak, der er under udvikling, og lammes af Wall Street i at agere for at stoppe det sådan, som Kinas myndigheder har gjort. I stedet skriger de år efter år, at »Kina vil krakke«, mens Kinas bidrag til verdensøkonomiens vækst faktisk konstant stiger.

Det kræver samarbejde med Kina og Rusland at løse disse problemer, hvilket tydeligvis var, hvad Trump havde i sinde, da han indtog embedet. Men selv om gerningsmændene til »Russiagate«, som startede kupforsøget imod ham, nu er godt og grundigt miskrediterede, fortsætter processen med at tvinge præsidenten til at indtage en anti-russisk, anti-kinesisk holdning selv i hans egen administration.

To kronikker i de seneste par dage i en af Kinas førende aviser, Global Times, sætter Kinas evne til at tjene sit folks almene vel – regering ved og for folket – i kontrast til USA’s ekstreme partipolitiske lammelse og forfølgelse af »demokrati« i fremmede lande ved hjælp af krige. Den anden kronik tog et spørgsmål op, der nu er centralt i denne amerikanske, partipolitiske lammelse: økonomisk infrastruktur.

Som præsidenten gentagne gange har erkendt: USA behandler ikke problemet med sin smuldrende infrastruktur, forsvarer ikke sine borgere mod tilbagevendende oversvømmelser under orkaner, fatale sammenbrud i transportsystemet, broer og dæmninger, der kollapser, inficeret drikkevand – og forbedrer da slet ikke deres liv med nye infrastrukturplatforme, som Kina, der har udbygget 15.000 mil moderne højhastighedsjernbaner og revolutioneret sit folks bevægelighed. Hvis USA insisterer på, at Kina er dets konkurrent, skrev Global Times, »så er infrastrukturbyggeri også en form for konkurrence«.

Dette er en konkurrence om at tjene det almene velfærd. Præsident Trumps infrastrukturplan, påtvunget ham af Goldman Sachs bank, vil ikke gøre det; men der er heller ikke kommet noget tilbud fra nogen af de politiske partier om et brugbart alternativ – til at rette op på mere end et halvt århundredes forfald og sammenbrud.

Det eneste alternativ, der vil virke, er det, der som sit mål har det amerikanske folks og hele menneskehedens generelle velfærd. Dette alternativ begynder med at bryde Wall Street bankerne op – med en genindførelse af Glass/Steagall-loven – og udstede for billioner af dollars ny, produktiv kredit gennem en ny nationalbank eller Reconstruction Finance Corporation, for at bygge en ny, højteknologisk infrastrukturplatform for USA. Denne fremgangsmåde er en del af Lyndon LaRouches nu berømte Fire Love, der også specificerer NASA’s tilbagevenden til et niveau af rumforskning, der svarer til Apolloprojektet, samt at genoplive forskning og udvikling af teknologier til fusionskraft gennem et forceret program.

Infrastrukturspørgsmålet bliver nu en del af de partipolitiske valg i 2018. Lad menneskehedens fælles mål og fælles velfærd dømme i denne konkurrence, som de vil dømme Kina, Amerika og »demokratiet«.

Foto: State of the Union 2018




Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Lad os konsolidere
det Nye Paradigme, Nu, hvor Det britiske
Imperies kup mod Trump er afsløret.
pdf og video

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

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

 




Britisk efterretning nu afsløret som anfører af
kuppet imod Trump; Vi kan overvinde dem

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 7. feb., 2018 – Brochuren fra LaRouche PAC Action Committee, der afslører historien bag Robert Mueller, den »umoralske, juridiske lejemorder«, som er deployeret for at fjerne Donald Trump fra præsidentskabet, har nu cirkuleret i seks måneder og haft en enorm indvirkning.

Med dele af »Få ram på Trump«-specialstyrken, der nu er totalt miskrediteret, er det muligt at gå efter selve uhyrets hoved – britisk efterretning og britisk geopolitik, som Trump truer med at vælte.

Brochuren erklærer dristigt lige fra begyndelsen, at Mueller og hele fremstødet for at stoppe Trump siden 2015, kom fra britisk efterretning og det britiske »imperieoligarki«.

I de seneste 48 timer er det, af det Britiske Udenrigsministerium i en sag for retten i London, og ligeledes af Washington Post i en lang artikel, blevet afsløret, at ikke kun »tidligere« MI6-agent Christopher Steeles dossier, men derimod mange britiske efterretningsagenter er involveret – som f.eks. i Udenrigsministeriet – og fra toppen er deployeret til at få ram på Trump. Og hvem deployerer dem fra toppen? »Tidligere« chef for MI6, sir Richard Dearlove. Samme Dearlove, der kommissionerede sit eget, berygtede »dossier« for Tony Blair, som »beviste«, at Saddam Hussein havde atomvåben og kemiske våben!

Dette dossier vanærede udenrigsminister Colin Powell og lancerede den katastrofale Cheney-Bush-invasion af Irak 2003-2011. Den nuværende, britiske kampagne havde, gennem at bruge »Steele-dossieret«, til formål at diktere USA, at det ikke havde lov at have en præsident, der ønsker samarbejdsrelationer med Rusland eller Kina.

Det var britiske efterretningstjenester, der blandede sig i vore valg i 2016. Londons MI6, den hemmelige efterretningstjeneste, kolporterede britisk skidt om Trump og Rusland gennem Obamas efterretningsfolk og Clinton-kampagnen, med det formål at ødelægge Trumps kampagne, og hans præsidentskab.

Rusland og USA har været reelle eller potentielle allierede i århundreder, gående helt tilbage til det væbnede neutralitetsforbund (First League of Armed Neutrality), der var med til at vinde vores Revolutionskrig, og til den russiske flådes indgriben mod britisk støtte til slavemagten i vores Borgerkrig, frem til det amerikansk-russiske samarbejde mod Hitler, som Sir Winston Churchill arbejdede på at ødelægge.

Det samme er sandt om USA’s relationer med Kina, under Anden Verdenskrig og tidligere. Nu inviterer Kina USA til at gå med i forlængelsen af Bælte & Vej Initiativet, et projekt for økonomisk genopbygning og udslettelse af fattigdom i langt større skala end Marshallplanen.

Vi har brug for internationale aftaler for at bygge den mest afgørende, nye infrastruktur på verdensplan og brug for at acceptere Kinas lederskab i dets Bælte & Vej Initiativ. Selve Amerika har enorme underskud med hensyn til ny, økonomisk infrastruktur og må skabe en national (statslig) kreditinstitution for at deltage; en ny Reconstruction Finance Corporation i Roosevelts tradition, eller en nationalbank i Hamiltons tradition.

Vi må have en koordineret genindførelse af Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling i hele USA og Europa, før City of London og Wall Street bringer vore økonomier ind i et nyt, denne gang langt værre, krak.

USA ville ikke præstere disse ting, hvis det gav lov til, at en præsident med overlæg blev fjernet for at være i overensstemmelse med den britiske, geopolitiske doktrin for krige for regimeskifte og konfrontation mellem stormagter.

De memoer, der nu er kommet frem fra Husets Efterretningskomite og Senatets Justitskomite, har sprængt Steele-dossieret vidt åbent, med samt dets anvendelse imod præsident Trump. De, der er blevet afsløret af disse memoer, er ret utilfredse og vil forsøge at genvinde fremstødet for at fjerne præsidenten, med mindre de besejres.

Foto: Sir Richard Billing Dearlove, KCMG (født 23. jan., 1945) var chef for den Britiske Hemmelige Efterretningstjeneste (MI6) fra 1999 og til 6. maj, 2004. (Domusrulez / Wikimedia) 




Helga Zepp-LaRouche:
Global politik formes i stigende grad
af Kinas Nye Silkevej;
Tiden er inde for USA at tilslutte sig.
pdf og video

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 




Russiagate-kupforsøget smuldrer hastigt,
med den amerikanske befolkning,
der ønsker, Trump skal lykkes

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 31. jan., 2018 – Præsident Donald Trumps første State of the Union-tale tirsdag aften, har fået en overvældende positiv respons. CBS News, der generelt spiller en førende rolle i »fake news« angrebene på Trump, rapporterede en 75 % ’s støtte til Trumps tale fra sine seere, og selv CNN indrømmede, at 70 % af deres seere var »meget positive« eller »noget positive«.

Trump annoncerede ingen nye, vigtige politikker, men understregede, at optimismen i befolkningen og i erhvervssamfundet, som følge af hans indgåede forpligtelse til at genopbygge den amerikanske økonomi og hans skattelettelser, havde produceret 2,2 million jobs, med 200.000 af disse inden for vareproduktion, »endelig« var begyndt at forøge indkomster og havde stimuleret til løfter fra sådanne som Apple og Exxon om at investere milliarder i den amerikanske økonomi.

Han tog et etisk udgangspunkt ved ikke at sige noget om det faktum, at Mueller-kuppet er ved at falde fra hindanden, og at mange af folkene i efterretningsteamet fra Obamas tid næsten med sikkerhed vil blive anklaget for deres officielle løgne og kriminelle handlinger. Det Demokratiske lederskab, især Husets minoritetsleder Nancy Pelosi, befandt sig i en tilstand af chok under talen og skulede og skar tænder og nægtede at applaudere selv, når Trump opfordrede til tværpolitisk samarbejde for at behandle spørgsmålene om immigration og infrastruktur. Det demokratiske kongresmedlem Joe Manchin fra Vest Virginia fordømte, som et voksende antal demokrater, der er rasende over, at deres lederskab absolut ikke har nogen politik ud over at være anti-Trump, sine demokratiske kolleger for at »sidde mut hen«.

Men »Mueller-gate« var ikke fraværende til trods for, at det ikke blev nævnt i hans tale. På vej ud af Kongressen blev Trump spurgt, om han ville godkende offentliggørelsen af Nunes-memoerne, der afslører FBI’s forbrydelser med deres overvågning af Trumps kampagneteam på falske forudsætninger. Han svarede, »Ja, 100 %«. Stabschef John Kelly gik i dag på radioen for at annoncere, at memoet »vil blive offentliggjort her temmelig snart, tror jeg, og hele verden kan se det«.

Russiagate-korsfarerne skummer ligeledes over det faktum, at Trump i bund og grund ignorerede den falske McCarthy-heksejagt imod Rusland og intet sagde om hverken Rusland eller Kina ud over, at de var »rivaler«. Dette kom 24 timer efter Trumps afvisning af at udstede sanktioner mod Rusland, eller nogen andre, som det var blevet krævet af Kongressen for seks måneder siden, med en frist på seks måneder. Fristen udløb i mandags, med administrationen, der simpelt hen konstaterede, at sanktionerne »ikke var nødvendige«.

»Fake news«-New York Times og det neokonservative Atlantic Council (amerikansk tænketank) kom med hysteriske udfald imod præsidenten med Times, der anklagede Trump for at »stikke en finger i øjet på Kongressen« ved ikke at gennemtvinge sanktionerne, alt imens Atlantic Councils Anders Aslund sagde, at Trump »generelt hånede de amerikanske sanktioner mod Rusland«.

I hele verden viser virkeligheden sig, med bogstavelig talt nye, daglige udviklinger i den igangværende Nye Silkevejstransformation af civilisationen. Alene i løbet af de seneste 24 timer: En kinesisk delegation i Oslo planlægger en højhastigheds-jernbanelinje fra Oslo til Stockholm; et kinesiske ingeniørselskab påbegyndte arbejdet på en ny dybvandshavn i Nigeria; det Amerikanske Handelskammer udgav en rapport, der viser, at amerikanske foretagender er optimistiske med hensyn til amerikansk-kinesiske relationer; Mexicos udenrigsminister sagde til sin kongres, at præsident Peña Nietos største præstation var at hæve de mexicansk-kinesiske relationer; Kinas finansminister er i Argentina, hvor han diskuterer G20-mødet, der skal afholdes dér i november, men også enorme argentinsk-kinesiske infrastrukturprojekter, inkl. tunneller, kernkraftværker og samarbejde om rummet.

En potentielt set betydningsfuld udvikling – Trump-administrationen annoncerede, at navnet Victor Cha var blevet fjernet fra listen over folk, der kom i betragtning som USA’s nye ambassadør til Sydkorea. Cha, en ledende neokonservativ, der nu er i CSIS (Center for Strategic and International Studies), var Bush-administrationens repræsentant i Sekspartforhandlingerne, hvor han spillede en førende rolle på vegne af Dick Cheney i at forhindre ethvert fremskridt. Hvis præsident Trump kan udpege en person med samme fremragende kvalifikationer, som han fandt til at repræsentere Amerika i Rusland og Kina – ambassadørerne Jon Huntsman og Terry Branstad – vil det være et stort skridt på vejen til at muliggøre en fredelig løsning på Koreakrisen. Alt imens mange ledende personer i Washington og i Pentagon, inklusive nogle internt i Trumps administration, puster til flammerne for konflikt og krig med Rusland og Kina, så taler Huntsman og Branstad i sandhed for Trumps hensigt om, at USA skal være venner og partnere med Rusland og med Kina.

Med Russiagate-kuppet, der nu er i færd med at smuldre, og med Trumps højere position efter hans State of the Union-tale, er tidspunktet nu opportunt og nødvendigt for ham til at tilslutte USA den Nye Silkevej og vedtage Glass-Steagall og det komplette program, der er indeholdt i LaRouches Fire Love.

Foto: Præsident Donald Trump forlader Repræsentanternes Hus efter sin State of the Union-tale tirsdag, 30. januar, 2018.




Det nye paradigme eksisterer allerede;
Tiden er inde til at handle på optimisme!

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 30. jan., 2018 – Vi befinder os ved et punkt, hvor det Nye Paradigme for global udvikling allerede eksisterer. Folk i Vesteuropa og USA ved det måske ikke; men det Gamle Paradigme er forsvundet. Den Nye Silkevej er nu den fremtrædende politik internationalt og giver solid grund til optimisme og handling.

Alle andre steder end i de transatlantiske nationer er der strategiske alliancer i gang. I Østasien arbejder den japanske premierminister Shinzo Abe aktivt sammen med Rusland og Kina om økonomiske projekter og projekter for fred. I Afrika er Bælte & Vej Initiativets fremskridt dramatisk og blev yderligere fremmet med den kinesiske udenrigsministers årlige, afrikanske turne her først på året. Selv i Europa er nationer nu fuldt og helt engageret i Silkevejshandel og infrastrukturbyggeri. I de amerikanske lande, syd for USA, udstedte nationerne i Sammenslutningen af Latinamerikanske og Caribiske Stater (CELAC) på topmødet i denne måned, en formel erklæring om forpligtelse til at arbejde sammen med Kina om Bælte & Vej Initiativet. I sidste uge anerkendte selv præsident Michel Temer fra Brasilien BVI’s momentum under sin deltagelse i Davos Forum.

»Det Nye Paradigme går frem på en meget dramatisk måde«, understregede Helga Zepp-LaRouche i dag. »Amerikanere bør være optimistiske med hensyn til, at USA kan bevæges.« Med sin »Kampagne for at vinde fremtiden« 2018 Platform for de amerikanske midtvejsvalg, fremlægger LaRouche PAC Political Action Committee de eneste løsninger til USA’s manifeste problemer: LaRouches Fire Love for økonomisk genrejsning, og USA’s tilknytning til BVI. Det forholder sig således, uanset, hvad præsident Donald Trump siger eller ikke siger i sin State of the Union-tale tirsdag aften.

Zepp-LaRouche påpegede et parallelt tilfælde, hvor annoncering af et politisk skift kom i sin tid: nemlig det Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ, SDI. Udarbejdet af Lyndon LaRouche, hvis medarbejdere, inklusiv i republikanske kredse, i årevis arbejdede for vedtagelse af en ny politik for laserforsvar og økonomi, i samarbejde med Sovjetunionen, blev dette LaRouche-koncept slet ikke anerkendt af præsident Ronald Reagan i dennes State of the Union-taler. Og så, lige pludselig, den 23. marts 1983, indkaldte Reagan til en særlig tv-transmitteret tale om national sikkerhed og annoncerede SDI, og hvor han, som LaRouche havde specificeret, foreslog, at USA og Sovjetunionen arbejdede sammen for at udvikle teknologi, baseret på nye, fysiske principper for forsvar mod ballistiske missiler, og som understregede de heraf følgende fordele på økonomi- og fredsområdet, for hele menneskeheden.

I dag står det frygteligt klart, at alternativet til LaRouche-programmet for de »Fire Love«, er kaos, hvis ikke krig. Der kommer nu alle mulige advarsler frem om det umiddelbart forestående, finansielle blow-out. Selv Goldman Sachs har udstedt advarsler til sine kunder. Faldet på Dow Jones Index på 400 points i dag er et varsel og tegn for dem, der tilbeder »markederne«.

Vi befinder os i en periode med tumult, i enhver henseende, men, hvis tilstrækkeligt mange mennesker handler med beslutsomhed og mod, kan det transatlantiske område vindes for det Nye Paradigme. I dag tilskyndede seniorstatsmand Lyndon LaRouche: »Lad os så gøre det!«

Foto: Kina i rødt; medlemmerne af Asiatisk Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank i orange. De 6 foreslåede korridorer i sort. (Lommes / Wikimedia)




Hvad lærte Trump af Davos?

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 28. jan., 2018 – Med præsident Trump, der forbereder sin State of the Union-tale til kommende tirsdag – og som angiveligt skal fokusere på den nationale økonomi og infrastruktur – er det spørgsmål, der må stilles, hvorvidt han tænker over temaet på Davos Økonomiske Verdensforum. Trumps tale i Davos var begrænset til en hyldest til det, han beskrev som et stort, økonomisk boom, som finder sted i USA, men hvor han desværre peger på den massive aktiemarkedsboble som et tegn på dette fremskridt, snarere end som et enormt advarselstegn på det forestående krak.

Selv Wall Street Journal advarede for nylig præsidenten og sagde, han burde ophøre med at bruge aktiemarkedet som målestok for økonomisk fremskridt – Wall Street-drengene ved ganske udmærket, at krakket er umiddelbart forestående. Men, hvad der er mere væsentligt, så har, som EIR har understreget, William White, den indsigtsfulde, tidligere cheføkonom for Den internationale Betalingsbank, BIS, den 25. jan. advaret om, at det vestlige banksystem ikke har nogen som helst mulighed for at undfly et sådant krak, eftersom den »fælde«, som de har skabt for sig selv med deres politik for ’pengetrykningsorgie’ gennem QE (kvantitativ lempelse), der dækkede over 2008-krakket, ikke efterlader dem nogen monetære løsninger på den nuværende, langt større boble, vi i dag konfronteres med.

Ingen monetær løsning – men der findes en løsning i form af en kreditpolitik, og som er blevet anbragt i hænderne på hvert eneste kongresmedlem og indtil flere folk i Trumps kreds, i form af brochuren, »LaRouches Fire Love: De fysisk-økonomiske principper for USA’s økonomiske genrejsning – Amerikas fremtid på den Nye Silkevej«.[1]

Heraf kommer det ovenstående spørgsmål: Tog præsidenten til sig, at temaet på Davos Forum i år var »Skab en fælles fremtid i en opsplittet verden«, et koncept, der er taget direkte fra Xi Jinpings tale for Davos Forum 2017? Ikke alene blev dette tema hentet fra Kina, men, som New York Times i dag anerkendte i en artikel med overskriften, »I Davos var Kina, og ikke USA, måske den store stjerne«, så var hovedtalen af Liu He, Xi Jinpings førende økonom, én af dem, der trak flest deltagere, alt imens »nationale ledere syntes at konkurrere med hinanden i Davos med hensyn til at kræve tættere samarbejde med Kina«.

For at Trump kan træffe beslutning om fuldt og helt at genindføre en politik i det Amerikanske Systems tradition – Hamilton-systemet, der ligger til grund for LaRouches Fire Love – og fuldt og helt tilslutte USA den Nye Silkevej, må britisk efterretnings og deres amerikanske lakajers forræderiske kupforsøg imod ham knuses, og gerningsmændene til deres »Russiagate«-svindelnummer må selv stilles for retten.

Senator Chuck Grassley, med tilslutning fra senator Lindsey Graham, tog endnu et stort skridt i denne retning den 25. januar, hvor de sendte breve til flere topledere i Obamaæraens Demokratiske Parti og her krævede, at alle dokumenter vedrørende Fusion GPS’ og Christopher Steeles miskrediterede dossier blev afsløret for hans senatsretsudvalg – hvordan og hvornår, de hver især fik det forevist, hvordan det fandt vej til Justitsministeriet og FBI, alle deres diskussioner og ordvekslinger med disse retshåndhævende myndigheder, samt alle deres kontakter med Steele selv og med hans britiske agentkolleger.

Interessant nok er navnet Victoria Nuland (tidl. viceudenrigsminister for europæiske og eurasiske anliggender i Obamas regering, -red.) med på denne liste; husk, at Fusion GPS også sammensatte rapporter om Ukraine til Victoria Nuland, da hun kørte Obama-administrationens opbakning af de nazi-bander, der kørte kuppet i 2014 imod den valgte regering i Kiev.

Skriften på væggen er tydelig for alle at se. Det britiske Imperium og dets dødbringende, geopolitiske krige har ingen plads i det Nye Paradigme, der nu bliver virkeliggjort i hele verden. Trump har forpligtet sig til Amerikas venskab med Rusland og Kina, for at opnå dette ædle mål, baseret på en fælles skæbne for alle nationer. Alle verdensborgere må arbejde på at bringe denne plan til udfoldelse.

(Præsident Donald Trumps fulde tale i Davos kan høres her eller læs talen her)

Foto: USA’s præsident Donald J. Trump taler for Davos Økonomiske Verdensforum, 26. jan., 2018.

[1] Se også vores danske banner, »Vedtag LaRouches Fire Love«




NYHEDSORIENTERING JANUAR 2018:
Macron tilslutter Frankrig den Nye Silkevej

Nu må Danmark på banen af formand Tom Gillesberg:
Den franske præsident Emmanuel Macrons besøg i Kina 8.-10. januar, hvor han annoncerede, at Frankrig vil samarbejde tæt med Kina om Xi Jinpings Bælte og Vej-Initiativ, er et glædeligt og dramatisk skifte i international politik. For første gang markerede en vestlig stormagt, tilmed et af de fem permanente medlemmer af FN’s sikkerhedsråd, at man vil forlade det fejlslagne, gamle, vestlige paradigme, hvor man har insisteret på en unipolær verdensorden med USA som verdens politibetjent, der sikrer, at private finansielle interesser med centrum i London og New York kan diktere, hvad der foregår i verdensøkonomien. Hvem, der kan få udvikling og hvem, der skal leve på tredje klasse. Kina har de seneste årtier formået at løfte 700 mio. kinesere ud af dyb fattigdom og ønsker med Bælte & Vej-Initiativet at gøre det samme muligt for resten af verdens nationer. Det anerkendte Macron og erklærede, at Frankrig vil deltage i denne proces, særligt i Afrika, hvor Kina er i gang med at udvirke infrastrukturelle mirakler, og hvor Frankrig har en lang kolonihistorie og (mener Macron) en forståelse for, hvad der rører sig blandt afrikanerne. Han fremhævede, at man ikke må gentage kolonialismens fejltagelser, som han mente, at Frankrig har sin del af ansvaret for, men have en inkluderende investeringspolitik, hvor alle kan være med. …

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)




»Forlæng den Nye Silkevej til Vestasien
og Afrika« LaRouche PAC Internationale
Webcast 19. jan., 2018, med
Hussein Askary og Jason Ross, forfatterne
af Schiller Instituttets nye rapport

Vi har et helt særligt program i dag; med mig i studiet har jeg Jason Ross, og via video fra Sverige har jeg Hussein Askary. Jason og Hussein er begge medforfattere af en ny rapport, der netop er udgivet, med titlen, »Forlæng den Nye Silkevej til Vestasien og Afrika: En vision for en økonomisk renæssance«.

(OBS! Se invitation til seminar i København 5. febr. med Hussein Askary)

[Bemærk: Der er mange billeder, der hver er separat nummererede af de forskellige talere; det er selvfølgelig bedst at se videoen, -red.]

Vært Matthew Ogden: Det er 19. januar, og dette er vores ugentlige fredags-webcast fra larouchepac.com.

Vi har et helt særligt program i dag; med mig i studiet har jeg Jason Ross, og via video fra Sverige har jeg Hussein Askary. Jason og Hussein er begge medforfattere af en ny rapport, der netop er udgivet, med titlen, »Forlæng den Nye Silkevej til Vestasien og Afrika: En vision for en økonomisk renæssance«.

Det bliver emnet for aftenens udsendelse; men før vi kommer til det, vil jeg gerne lægge ud med at sige, at LaRouche Political Action Committee har indledt en national kampagne for at sætte betingelserne for valgene 2018. Som I ser her, er titlen for vores kampagne »Kampagnen for at vinde fremtiden«, og det er titlen på en erklæring, der nu cirkuleres i hele landet. Erklæringens indhold fremlægger de politiske prioriteter, der vil bestemme udfaldet af valgene her i USA i år, med hensyn til dette lands overlevelse. Vi er i det indledende stadie for at indsamle underskrifter på denne erklæring, og vi opfordrer seerne, især her i USA, til at underskrive denne kampagne. URL ses her på skærmen, og I kan også få organisationer i valgkredsene, medlemmer af delstatskongresserne, siddende medlemmer af USA’s Kongres og i særdeleshed kandidater til offentligt (føderalt) embede, til at underskrive denne kampagne.

Indholdet af denne programerklæring er meget signifikant. Den kræver, at USA vedtager Lyndon LaRouches Fire Økonomiske Love, dvs.: Vedtag Glass-Steagall for at rejse en brandmur mellem kommerciel, produktiv bankaktivitet og spekulativ bankaktivitet på Wall Street; for det andet, at indføre et nationalbanksystem (statsligt banksystem) i Alexander Hamiltons tradition; for det tredje, brug billioner af dollar i føderal (statslig) kredit til at løfte det amerikanske folk og for at skabe produktiv beskæftigelse på det højeste og mest avancerede teknologiske niveau; og for det fjerde, sæt et forceret program i gang, der går i retning af udvikling af fusionskraft og udvidelsen af bemandet rumfart.

Det er meget, meget vigtigt, at vi har indledt denne kampagne nu, for vi går nu ind i de sidste 11-dages nedtælling fra nu og frem til præsident Trumps State of the Union-tale den 30. jan. Indholdet af dette politiske programforslag må være bestemmende for præsidentskabets politiske program her i USA. Som I ser, er vore to punkter på dagsordenen 1) Vedtag Lyndon LaRouches Fire Love, og 2) Gå med i den Nye Silkevej.

Det bliver emnet for vores diskussion i dag. For de seere, der evt. ikke ved det, så blev ideen om den Nye Silkevej først udarbejdet af Lyndon og Helga LaRouche i 1980’erne. Det var den daværende Eurasiske Landbro for at udvikle det eurasiske kontinents indlandsområder, som forbinder Øst og Vest. Det blev til den Nye Silkevej og blev kaldt således af præsident Xi Jinping i Kina, da han i 2013 vedtog dette. Det udviklede sig så til Bælte & Vej Initiativet, som var en forbindelse mellem den landbaserede Silkevej og udviklingen af en Maritim Silkevej.

Gennem LaRouche-bevægelsens lederskab udvides dette nu til ikke blot en eurasisk Ny Silkevej, men en Verdenslandbro, der omfatter alle Jordens kontinenter, inklusive Vesteuropa, Central- og Sydamerika, Nordamerika og for vores udsendelse her i dag i særdeleshed, Afrika.

Udviklingen af Afrika har ligesom været en slags lakmusprøve for menneskeheden i dag: Kina har taget denne udfordring op og har bestået prøven og sat standarden, som resten af verden må følge. Vi har set dette inspirere andre nationer, og for nylig har vi haft et meget signifikant gennembrud med den franske præsident Emmanuel Macrons besøg i Kina, hvor han mødtes med præsident Xi Jinping og erklærede, at Frankrig favner billedet af udvikling af verden gennem den Nye Silkevej, inklusive, at Frankrig ønsker at arbejde sammen med Kina om Afrikas udvikling. Dette er måske en bodsgang for Frankrigs kolonialistiske imperiefortid, men det, præsident Macron havde at sige, var meget signifikant.

Som I ser, så holdt han en meget signifikant tale i Xi’an, og i denne tale diskuterede han, hvad Kina har gjort for at udvikle Afrika og for at løfte 700 millioner af sin egen befolkning ud af fattigdom, og at Frankrig nu må imødekomme opfordringen til at deltage i denne udvikling, især udviklingen i Afrika, i partnerskab med Kina. Her følger et par citater af, hvad præsident Macron havde at sige:

»Det er lykkedes Kina i de seneste par årtier at løfte 700 millioner mennesker ud af fattigdom … Men jeg tænker også på Afrika. Kina har i de seneste par år investeret stort i infrastruktur og råmaterialer med en finansiel styrke, som europæiske lande ikke har. Samtidig har Frankrig historisk og kulturel viden om Afrika, som giver det mange aktiver for fremtiden.

Vi må ikke gentage fortidens fejltagelser, med at skabe politisk og finansiel afhængighed under påskud af udvikling … det turde være unødvendigt at sige, at denne udvikling kun vil ske i fællesskab … Frankrig har erfaringen med en ensidig imperialisme i Afrika, der undertiden har ført til det værste, og i dag, med disse nye Silkeveje, der åbner op … Jeg mener, at partnerskabet mellem Frankrig og Kina kan gøre det muligt at undgå en gentagelse af disse fejltagelser … Det er en moralsk udfordring, og jeg håber oprigtigt, at vi kan imødekomme den sammen … Det enorme arbejde, der gøres med infrastruktur og økonomisk udvikling, vil give et nyt ansigt til disse nye Silkeveje på det afrikanske kontinent.«

Som præsident Macron sagde, »det er en moralsk udfordring«; og nu får Afrika, der har været et af de mest underudviklede, fejlernærede, forarmede og tilbagestående steder på planeten, muligheden for en renæssance og for at blive et knudepunkt for udvikling for hele dette område af planeten.

Som jeg sagde, så er titlen på aftenens udsendelse »Forlæng den Nye Silkevej til Vestasien og Afrika«, og jeg vil lade Jason Ross introducere jer til Hussein Askary, og vi kan diskutere indholdet af denne specialrapport, der netop er udgivet.

Jason Ross: Jeg tror, vi skal gå direkte til Hussein nu. Hussein Askary har arbejdet i området i mange år. Han er den, der oversatte EIR’s Specialrapport, »Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen« til arabisk og lancerede denne oversættelse i Kairo på et møde med den egyptiske transportminister.

Hussein har arbejdet meget på dette. Sammen har vi skrevet denne 274-siders rapport, I ser her. I kan få en kopi af denne rapport på Amazon og direkte gennem vores site også, [LPAC.CO/ExtendedSilkRoad], I ser linket her for neden, for at få en kopi.

Og hermed, lad os høre fra Hussein.

 

(Her følger et engelsk udskrift af resten af udsendelsen).

HUSSEIN ASKARY:  Thank you, Jason and Matt.  I’m very happy
to be on this show.  The writing of this report, actually, which
took us several months last year, together with you, Jason, and a
great team of collaborators in the Schiller Institute, it was a
bit of a paradox, because we were writing this report from the
standpoint of the future, and therefore the tone is optimism in
the report.   But at the same time, when you look at the news
from Southwest Asia, which people wrongly call the “Middle East,”
and Africa,  the news that these regions are, you know,
hell-holes and people are fleeing from there by tens of
thousands, there’s famines, there’s wars, and all kinds of
things.  But, if you keep digging your feet into that so-called
“reality,” which is artificially created by geopolitics, you will
never come out and you will never be able to think clearly to
solve the problem.
And therefore, as Lyndon LaRouche always says, it’s the
future that determines the present.  It’s our vision of the
future which gives us the inspiration and the means of thinking
to change our behavior today.  And this is something which we
hope that with this report, too, and all the other campaigns we
are having, to change the minds of people, and of leadership,
whether it’s in the United States or Europe, or Southwest Asia,
or Africa — anywhere.
At the same time, we are not naïve, we are not in the ivory
tower, sitting and drawing nice baths, but this is a very
scientific study, based on LaRouche’s idea of physical economy,
but also they are philosophical and humanist principles
throughout this whole report and the project we are designing,
which goes both humanist Christian tradition and also the
Confucian humanist Chinese tradition.  We have provided for the
readers of this report, a complete picture of what are the tools
needed, whether physically, or intellectually, scientifically and
morally, to be able to reach this future we are outlining in the
report.
And we are not simply just reporting on “great things” that
have already happened, that China is doing, but we are drawing a
map towards the future: A future which Lyndon LaRouche already,
more than 30 years ago, when the African Union published the
Lagos Plan of Action for the development of Africa, he criticized
the reaction to that policy by saying that you cannot adhere to
the existing financial and economic and moral policies of the
existing order, and at the same time achieve the development
goals of Africa.  You have to have a complete shift.  And that
shift is what Helga Zepp-LaRouche, the president of the Schiller
Institute now says is the New Paradigm, the New Paradigm which
has been launched by China and its partners in the BRICS, Russia
and other nations, and many more nations are joining.
Now, if we look at the first slide, the Silk Road, this is
what Matt said in terms of our development of the idea — the
LaRouches’ development of the idea of the World Land-Bridge, to
bring all the continents together.  Now, the New Silk Road is
already reaching West Asia and Africa.  Egypt has been building
the new Suez Canal to adapt to the Maritime Silk Road, and the
other nations, like Ethiopia, Kenya, and others are already in
collaboration and new railway systems have been built.  So
already on the ground, that’s taking place.
But what is needed is a larger vision which we provide.
Now, also we have to reverse many of the old policies which have
been followed, which have kept Africa impoverished, such as, for
more than 200 years, Africa has been considered by the European
colonialists and their partners across the Atlantic, as a looting
ground — whether it is slavery, whether it is raw materials,
plantations, and so on.  And unfortunately, after World War II,
the vision of Franklin Roosevelt was not implemented, because he
died before the end of the war, and a wholly new type of
creatures took over in the United States.  And the United States
also, with the “special relationship” with the British Empire
became a partner in the looting of Africa. And companies we have,
like Anglo American, which is a corporation called Anglo
American, very active in mining in Africa — I mean, the name
tells you all about it.
But we just take a look at what has been happening in Africa
in at least the last 10-15 years, the attitude,  — that’s what
is fascinating with the New Paradigm — the attitude of Europe
and the United States toward Africa has always been that “Africa
is a problem,” while the Chinese see Africa as an “opportunity.”
Therefore, the focus by Europe and the United States, while they
were looting the continent, were just pushing aid programs.  Now,
the slide we have, number 2, here, is the “Foreign Direct
Investments in Africa,” where we see the United States is the
blue line on the top, and China is the red line, which is
increasing steadily.  The United States, something funny happened
in 2008 — there was the financial/economic crisis — then you
have a dip in investments in Africa, but also what happens in the
United States is that the first African-American President is
elected.  And you see, from 2009, U.S. investments in Africa
completely collapsed and came down to zero by 2015, while the
Chinese investments increased.
Now, there’s a flip side to this argument, is because most
of the U.S. investments in Africa are in the oil and mining
sector. And with the collapse of the oil and mining prices, there
was no more interest; and Mr. Obama also launched the largest
fracking operation on Earth in the United States, to make the
United States the biggest producers of fossil fuels in the world.
But China’s investments continued all the same.
In the next slide, number 3, we see the level of investments
by the Export Import Banks of the United States on the one hand,
which is the blue line which is completely dead, on the bottom;
the United States does not issue credit for exports any more to
Africa.  But then we have the China Exim Bank increasing its
investments, and more interestingly, is that the World Bank,
which is the top, and you see where the failure of Western policy
in Africa has been: The World Bank has been investing more than
China in Africa, but it’s a completely misdirected investment.
It’s on tiny, tiny, small programs, there is no financing of
large-scale infrastructure as China does; there are no
transformative projects, and no new technology.
In the next slide, we can see we have a lot of hypocrisy,
saying that the Chinese want to come into Africa to loot African
natural resources, and this image, number 4, shows a very clear
picture that it is actually the United States and the Western
countries, but with the United States, the investments in Africa
have been mostly in the mining sector and the Chinese investments
have been very diversified, in construction, manufacturing,
mining, and others, such as agriculture, for example.
We can see also, the next slide, is Britain.  Now, China is
the largest, and people think, is not the largest investor in
Africa, yet.  It’s the United States and Britain which have been
the biggest investors in Africa.  But as we showed the United
States is mostly interested in mining, energy, and metals; and
here we have Britain, you can see the last 10 years of
investments. [“U.K. Foreign Direct Investment Positions in
Africa, 2005-2014”]  And the last two columns in the breakdown
into types of investments: The red one is mining, and the light
blue is in the financial sector, which is also looting Africa’s
financial resources.
So that’s really the picture. And in the final slide in this
group, number 5, we have where the investments of the Import
Export Banks have gone:  The United States has 71% of all loans
from the Exim Bank, although it has been very, very little, but
70% of it is in the mining sector; while China, the greatest
chunk of the Exim Bank investments has been in the transportation
sector.  And of course, there’s mining and energy,
communications, water, and other — very, very important sectors
for Africa’s development.
Now, what we have, in addition to this looting of Africa, we
have the hypocrisy which is very rampant in the West, like in
Europe and the United States, that “we have to help Africa.” Now,
when they talk about “helping Africa” is simply very small relief
projects to keep things as they are.  And they usually talk about
“sustainable development.”  Now, “sustainable development” does
not mean that you build modern technology, technologies that we
have in the United States or in Europe, whether it’s in transport
or power generation; it is absolutely forbidden to support roads,
railways, nuclear power, hydropower — there is nothing like
that.  What they are proposing is simply, as President Obama, as
we show in one of the slides, when he went to Africa, his idea,
he had projects called “Power Africa,” for power generation in
Africa, and we looked at the numbers and you know, the goal of
Obama’s Power Africa is to keep Africa exactly as it is, with
very, very slight changes here and there.  And also what was
being proposed was this idea of using solar energy, which
everybody knows is not efficient to have a modern, industrialized
economy.
So this has been a real problem in dealing with Africa.  And
as we have seen, that China has completely different idea about
Africa —

ROSS:  Hussein, why don’t we switch over to a clip we have
of President Obama explaining what he thinks about African energy
development?

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA:  It’s going to be your generation
that suffers the most.  Ultimately, if you think about all the
youth that everybody’s mentioned here in Africa, if everybody’s
raising living standards to the point where everybody’s got a
car, and everybody’s got air conditioning and everybody’s got a
big house, well, the planet will boil over. [end video]

ROSS:  That was President Obama in South Africa.

ASKARY:  And in fact, that’s really revealing, because
that’s his soul speaking, because they consider human beings as a
burden.  Now, the United Nations statistics say that by 2050, the
bulk of the world’s population growth will take place in Africa.
And of the additional 2.5 billion new people, projected to be
born between 2015 and 2050, 1.3 billion will be added in Africa,
which means Africa’s population will reach about 3 billion
people.  Now, for Obama and the Malthusians this is a huge
problem.  But for China, this is a great opportunity!
And if we look, in 2015, which is very interesting, a
complete contrast with what Obama’s saying, when President Xi
Jinping went to South Africa, the same place where Obama was
speaking, in December 2015 at the Forum on China-Africa
Cooperation (FOCAC), this is slide number 10, President Xi
Jinping said something very interesting, which is really the
spirit of the New Paradigm: What he told the African leaders is,
I quote, “Industrialization is an inevitable path to a country’s
economic success.  Within a short span of several decades, China
has accomplished what took developed countries hundreds of years
to accomplish and put in place a complete industrial system with
an enormous productive capacity.” And then he continues and says,
“It is entirely possible for Africa, as the world’s most
promising region in terms of development potential, to bring into
play its advantages and achieve great success.  The achievement
of inclusive and sustainable development within Africa, hinges on
industrialization, which holds the key to creating jobs,
eradicating poverty, and improving people’s living standards.”
Now, wow!  What a contrast!  President Xi Jinping said that
by using modern technology as scientific development, we have
achieved miracles in China and this really applies to Africa,
too, as developing nations.  And he means it.  So the Chinese now
have turned the whole idea of :sustainable development” upside
down.  What people think in Europe and the United States about
sustainable development means, pumps for water, the small solar
panels — no!  China’s talking about [industrialization] and it’s
also the latest, the state-of-the-art technology available.
Because this is also interesting from a economic-scientific
standpoint, because what China experienced that instead of going
back to square one, going back to the industrialization process
where the United States and Europe started, with the steam engine
— no, you start not with that, you start with the best
technology available today, and that’s high-speed railway for
example.  The same thing applies to Africa.

ROSS:  You know, Hussein, you and I were both at a
conference in November in Germany, in Bad Soden, and one of the
speakers there was a Chinese professor He Wenping, who gave some
talks about Chinese approach towards Africa.  And since you’re
bringing up what China’s policy is, why don’t run a short clip of
what she had to say, to hear it from a Chinese person directly?

DR. HE WINPING:  But now, I think One Belt, One Road is
entering 2.0 version–that is, now facing all the countries in
the world. As President Xi Jinping mentioned to the Latin
American countries, “you are all welcome to join the Belt and
Road.” In the Chinese “40 Minutes,” Xi said, all the African
continent is now on the map of the One Belt, One Road, the whole
African continent, especially after the May Belt and Road Summit
in Beijing had taken place. …
China’s One Belt, One Road initiative is relevant to
countries, their own development strategy. For example, Ethiopia.
Ethiopia has now been named as the “next China” on the African
continent. It’s not my invention, these words–many scholars have
been published talking about which country in Africa is going to
be the China in Africa, which means, developing faster! Faster
and leading other countries forward. Most of them refer to
Ethiopia.
Ethiopia has now reached an GDP growth rate, last year, as
high as 8%…
So very quickly, let’s move to Africa. In Africa, we have
commitment, that is the FOCAC, the full name is the Forum on
China-Africa Cooperation. This forum was established in 2000, and
every three years there is a FOCAC meeting. The FOCAC meeting in
2015 took place in Johannesburg, South Africa. In that meeting,
President Xi Jinping joined the meeting, put forward ten
cooperation plans, and pledged the money–as high as $60
billion–to cover all ten areas: industrialization, agriculture,
infrastructure, finance, environmental protection, and more.
The Belt and Road is very good for Africa’s job creation. A
lot of money has been earmarked to use for the industrialization
of Africa. Let me just highlight in my last two minutes, the two
areas, like two engines–like in an airplane, if you want to take
off, you need two engines: One is industrialization, another is
infrastructure. Without good infrastructure, there’s no basis for
industrialization–short of electricity, short of power, short of
roads, and then it’s very hard to make industry take off.
We have done a lot. Africa now is rising. Before, Africa was
regarded as a hopeless continent, more than 15 years ago. But
now, with kite flying over, now it’s Africa’s rising time….
Just to show you another infrastructure map: the Mombasa to
Nairobi railway that was just finished at the end of May. We are
going to build the second phase, from Nairobi all the way to
Malaba in Uganda, and then that’s an East African Community
network. When this railway was finished–this is President Uhuru
Kenyatta, saying this laid the foundation for industrialization.
This shows people celebrating this railway connection, and this
shows a man holding a paper saying “Comfortable, convenient, very
soft, safe, and very beautiful.” And here, very beautiful at 100
years old, a grandmother. [applause] [end video]

ASKARY:  Yes, that’s the spirit, that’s the spirit of things
that are happening in Africa, which is fantastic.  But it’s also
a certain projection of the happiness of the Chinese people and
their leadership in what they have achieved in their own country.
So China’s saying, we have done this ourselves, you can do it,
and we are committed to offering you everything we have achieved,
so you can also achieve yours.  It’s a win-win policy:  It’s good
for you, it’s good for us.
It’s completely different from what we have seen in the
Western policy, which hopefully will change — what we mentioned
about President Macron, what he had said is really shocking for
me, too. And you see that the New Paradigm, it changes people’s
souls.  And this is very, very important that we are becoming
more human than before, with these great achievements
So in any case, what we do in this report is, we took for
example, if you look at slide 12, this is a map which the African
Union put together in the Lagos Plan of Action in 1982.  But
nothing has been done.  This is for highways.  Now, we don’t
prefer to have trucks travelling 10,000km from north to south; we
prefer more high-speed railway, standard gauge railways, and so
on.  But this is the kind of vision which existed, but it was
never implemented.
Our vision of connecting the whole African continent, and
also with the so-called Middle East, that this could be done now.
We also believe that the Chinese intention is the same: To
integrate all of the African nations, the populations and the
natural resources of these nations, and utilize them for the
development of Africa itself.  Now, in 2014, which is my next
slide [slide 13], the Prime Minister of China, Li Keqiang, went
on a tour in Africa.  This picture is his meeting with the
leaders of the East African Community, which Professor He Wenping
just mentioned in her speech in the video you showed.  He told
the African leaders that China’s intention is to help connect all
the African capitals with high-speed railway.  One interesting
thing which the Africans themselves say, is that when the Chinese
want to do something here economically, when they want to help,
they are not like the Europeans.  The President of Uganda said,
they don’t come here with lessons in democracy; they come here to
build things, they are not lecturing us.  This is very
interesting because China is not imposing anything on any nation.
It’s inviting others and offering its capabilities.  This was in
May 2014, and in just three years, we have the first standard
gauge railway which is in the next slide [slide 14]; Uhuru
Kenyatta, very proud, inaugurating the railway from Mombasa to
Kenya.  There was a British line which was called the Lunatic
train, which was very slow, but it was designed to loot African
wealth.  And also the Djibouti to Addis Ababa railway was built,
also in three years in record time, and so on and so forth.  So,
China is winning African hearts and minds by doing these
investments, but doing them in record time and with no
conditionalities involved.
In addition of course, some of the mega-projects which we
are demanding be built and encouraging being built in Africa with
China’s help, for example we have in slide 15 the Transaqua
Project, which is an Italian-designed project to both refill Lake
Chad, which is drying up and threatening 30 million people’s
lives with drought.  To bring just 5% of the water of the
tributaries of the Congo River to Lake Chad through an artificial
canal.  But at the same time, connect East and West Africa with
railway and roads to open these countries, which are Rwanda,
Burundi, and Eastern Congo, the Central African Republic, Chad,
and so on.  These nations need outlets to world markets and also
to import useful machines and so on.  So, we have been
propagating, as the Schiller Institute, for many years and trying
to get the European Union and the United States to support this
project; but they rejected it.  Now China is proposing to start
looking at this project, and a Memorandum of Understanding was
signed with the Lake Chad Commission to have a feasibility study
of this project; which is a huge project, but it will transform
large parts of Africa, not because of the water itself, but
because of the old infrastructure involved in the central part of
Africa.  The next slide [slide 15] outlines the impact area of
this whole project.  It will create massive agro-industrial
centers in that part of Africa which is suffering the most.  The
biggest migration from Africa is from these regions into Europe.
But instead of having all those young people drowning in the
Mediterranean, trying to flee to Europe looking for a decent
life, they can stay in their countries now and build their
countries by giving them the tools to do that.
Of course, there are also other projects, but what’s
interesting about the Belt and Road is that it’s also inspiring,
not just helping countries, but inspiring countries to undertake
plans which have been dormant for many years.  But now the time
has come; for example, the new Suez Canal project.  There is also
connecting to Europe from Morocco, which is the next slide [slide
16]; building a tunnel under the Strait of Gibraltar, connecting
Morocco and Spain; and building a high-speed railway, the first
high-speed railway in Africa is being built now in Morocco.
There are new ports being built, and also a scientific,
industrial city being built in cooperation with China.  We have
another connection between Africa and Europe; we have still not
given up on Europe.  We want Europe to its and technological
potential to contribute to this project and help itself by
contributing to Africa’s development.  We have the Sicily to
Tunis tunnel and bridge connection to connect North Africa also
to Europe; this is a mega-project, and so on and so forth.  We
have also the Grand Inga Dam which China is now interested in
building on the Congo River, which will produce a huge amount of
hydropower — 40,000MW of power — which is twice as big as the
biggest dam in the world which the Chinese built in China; the
Three Gorges Dam.  The Inga Dam, or series of dams, will be twice
as big as the Chinese Three Gorges Dam, and a Chinese company has
made an offer to the government of the Democratic Republic of
Congo; and there’s also a counterbid by a Spanish company.
People should read the report; they should look at all the
content and try to understand it with a completely new eye.  The
eye of the New Paradigm, which I think is very important.  In
conclusion, what I wanted to say initially, is that as we have in
the last slide [slide 19] is this region which people call the
Middle East; we call is Southwest Asia.  It has been a horrific
scene for the worst results of geopolitics and power politics.
Regime change in Libya; regime change in Iraq; attempted regime
change in Syria supporting terrorist groups.  We have a horrible
war in Yemen which should end immediately.  It’s the worst
humanitarian catastrophe in the world right now, taking place in
Yemen.  You look at this region and say “How could this region
get out of this Hell?”  This is what Helga Zepp-LaRouche said:
This year we should kill geopolitics.  We should end geopolitics.
The idea that nations have to undermine other nations; that
nations are in competition with each other; that you have to
weaken your adversaries; you have to undermine them, you have to
kill them, you have to ruin their economy, destroy their
infrastructure, so you can become a winner.  That ideology is not
really human.  This has to end now and be replaced by the
“win-win” idea, which is the more human kind of idea.  The
potential for enormous development exists in this region.  It’s
the crossroads of the continents.  Both the Belt and the Road
pass through there.  Forty percent of world trade passes through
there.  You have natural resources, you have human resources, you
have rivers; you have every element necessary to have a massive
development process in this region, which will be the basis for
establishing peace among the nations of this region and also the
big powers.  If the United States joins Russia and China in
developing this region, this would be the biggest test for
mankind.  Of course, Africa is very important, but we have things
happening in Africa.  But, we still have a horrible situation in
Southwest Asia, which can lead into new and maybe bigger wars
than before.  Therefore, I think what Helga is saying that if we
use the Belt and Road idea, the idea of “win-win”, to crush
geopolitics, this would be victory not only for the countries of
this region; this will be a victory for all humankind.

ROSS:  Absolutely!  It’s a victory for a concept of mankind.
One example that comes to mind is Yemen.  Yemen is under constant
Saudi bombardment; they’ve been victims of a war by the Saudis
for some time now.  Yemen has a very powerful movement within it
for integration with the BRICS; a real sense of “Hey!  Even
though our conditions right now are what they are, this is our
future; and we’ve got to have that future in mind.  That’s what
we’re going to make happen.”
You think about the economic potential of Africa, and as you
said, it’s so clear, it’s so obvious the economic potential in
West Asia and Africa.  Geopolitics is what has prevented this
development.  It’s not that Africa didn’t get the help that it
needed; China is showing that it’s an obvious thing to do.  It
was a deliberate decision to prevent development and to hold
Africa back for the purposes — as you described — of looting.
A couple of examples that you brought up, just to bring out the
contrast a little bit more: You brought up the Grand Inga Dam
which would be located in the Democratic Republic of Congo; one
of the poorest, most energy-poor per capita, very low energy
availability.  It’s got the perfect site for a hydroelectric dam
complex, making enough electricity for tens of millions of
people.  The World Bank pulls out funding on it, because it’s a
big project which of course, they’re not going to touch because
it would have a major development impact.
What I’d like to actually show is another voice from Africa.
Professor He Wenping had mentioned that Ethiopia is sort of the
China of Africa, and other African diplomats will say this as
well; that Addis Ababa is sort of the unofficial capital of
Africa.  I don’t know if everyone in Africa agrees with that.
But I’d like to hear from Dr. Alexander Demissie, who also spoke
at the Schiller Institute conference in November, and hear from
him from a direct African perspective, what the impact of Chinese
investment has been and what the future can be in Africa.
DR. ALEXANDER DEMISSIE:  So today, what I’m trying to
discuss with you, or to present to you, is what is actually this
Belt and Road Initiative and how is that connected to Africa?
What kind of long-term impacts when we talk about the Belt and
Road Initiative and Africa?
So, this is a map [Fig. 1] I always present when I do
presentations, and I ask people, “What do you see here?”  It’s a
very simple question.  But what do you see here?  Yes, you should
see something.  So, it’s a rhetorical question; I’m not expecting
you to answer me.  But it takes usually several minutes until
people realize what they see here.  You see the absence of the
American continent; that’s what you see here.  The absence of the
American continent.  By saying this, you see that the Belt and
Road Initiative, the Chinese version of the Belt and Road
Initiative, is absolutely Eurasian-oriented; meaning that
starting in China, it is primarily Eurasian-oriented.  The idea
of the Belt and Road Initiative — probably even your idea back
in the ’70s — is the Land-Bridge that we have been discussing
yesterday and today.  Within this picture or map, you will see
also Africa.  Africa is prominent, Africa is not entirely in the
center, but on the left side; and it should be part of the Belt
and Road idea.  It’s primarily an infrastructural undertaking, so
the Belt and Road Initiative we don’t have yet political
institutionalization.  We have infrastructural ideas, we have
corridors; but we don’t have yet political institutions.  If we
talk about the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank or the Silk
Road Bank, these are just connected to infrastructure; they are
not political ideas.  And interestingly, this idea fits perfectly
into the current African needs.  What are the current African
needs?  The current Africa need is infrastructure development.
Africa wants infrastructure and the aspiration — I’m going back
here to the Agenda 2063, that has also coincidentally been coming
up 2013 together with the Belt and Road Initiative.  Africa wants
a good infrastructure connection, a good internal
interconnectivity.  So, the idea coming from China is perfectly
fitting into the idea actually happening or discussed within the
Africa continent.
We see now an actor coming in.  China is an actor coming in
and literally taking or doing part of those needed works.  This
is a huge — at least from the African perspective — this is a
huge plus for many African countries.  The idea of the Belt and
Road Initiative, which is actually coming only in 2013; we see
that it is helping what has been taking place on the continent
between China and African countries since the year 2000.  We see
this that China has clearly declared that they would like to see
Chinese-African cooperation moving into development of highways,
regional aviation networks, or industrialization.  Also we see
that China has been given a lot of clarity to the African Union’s
infrastructure development for Africa.  This program has
approximately 51 different programs, and this is translated into
400 different physical projects.  I speak about ports, and
streets, and telecommunication lines, whatever you require for a
nation to function, or for a continent to function.
What we see in Africa now is that since at least two years,
there is a growing corridorization in the China-Africa
relationship.  As corridorization, I mean that not single
countries are any more important, but entire regions are becoming
more important for China.  This is a huge departure from a
single, bilateral country-based approach towards corridor
development.  If you look at Africa corridors, the map on the
right [Fig. 2], we see right now as we speak today, there are
around 33 different corridors that have either been developed, or
are under development, or are thought out and need to be
developed.  Corridors do nothing else than combine two different
areas, and by doing so also creating a development initiative, a
development paradigm.
Let’s go to East Africa.  So now, this is Africa; I’m aware
that the plans for these things have been in the drawer for a
long time.  We know also that a lot of American research
institutes played a very good role in creating those plans in the
’50s and ’60s, especially in Ethiopia.  The Grand Renaissance Dam
that is being built in Ethiopia, goes back to American scientists
that have been creating those ideas in the ’60s.  It’s being
built already now.  So, a lot of ideas in East Africa have been
already on the table for decades, but no one was able or willing
to pay for it.  But now a lot of money is coming out of China, so
these infrastructure — and how this can change the life of the
people is easily described.  The transportation of cargo from the
Djibouti port to Addis Ababa used to take three days.  Now, with
the train, it’s already 10 hours.  So now we can imagine what
kind of economic activity will happen to this one corridor
development, or one infrastructure within this community. [end
video]

ROSS:  I just wanted to read another short excerpt from
Alexander Demissie.  Towards the end of his presentation, he
said, “The problem as I see it, is that the traditional partners
are still in the old paradigm of thinking.  They still think with
traditional assumptions.  Africa is seen as an aid-dependent
continent; not a continent full of opportunities.  It is still
seen with the wrong mindset.  This is one of the biggest
problems, and it has to change.”
So, I think our report does a very thorough job of
addressing the whole gamut of issues here.  What the historical
errors have been, or not errors, but cruelties or injustices that
have occurred towards Africa, towards Southwest Asia with the use
of geopolitics, with the use of looting rather than development.
As well as what some of the ideas are today that hold back the
potential for development.  The ways that environmentalism is
used; the ways that there shouldn’t be any net growth of the
human species are used.  This is the basis, for example, for the
World Bank refusing any loans to coal or to large hydro plants.
But you’re not going to develop a continent with solar panels, as
much as Obama might have wanted to have done that.
The other issues are in regards to economics.  That there is
this prevailing and totally wrong view about economics that looks
for financial returns as being the metric; as opposed to going
beyond GDP and saying how are we changing life expectancies?  How
are we changing productive potential?  What’s the long-term value
of helping a nation to develop in a partnership?  This is the
sort of thing.  So, the report goes through all of this; it goes
through what the specific projects are that are needed.  It goes
through something that’s very important for policymakers — how
to finance it.  How the hopes of trying to get investment, of
trying to get loans from private banks for these big projects;
it’s simply not going to fly.  The use of national banking, as
China has done both domestically as well as with its ExIm Bank
with these two large rail projects in Africa in particular in
Kenya and the Addis Ababa to Djibouti railroad.
So, I think we’ve heard from China, we’ve heard from
Southwest Asia, we’ve heard from Africa.  Let me ask you,
Hussein, if you have any words that you would like to direct
towards our American viewers.  What would you tell Americans?
What should we be doing?

ASKARY:  Exactly!  I had also in mind to say that, because
we need to hear from Americans.  I don’t think it’s a good idea
that the United States is not on the map of the Belt and Road;
but I think a different United States should be involved.  I’m
very sure that if President Franklin Roosevelt, President
Kennedy, Dr. Martin Luther King must be very happy now for what
is now already starting to happen in Africa.  They might feel
sorry for the lost time, but I’m sure they are happy.  Americans
should look back at that best of American tradition and work with
ideas of Lyndon LaRouche and the LaRouche PAC and LaRouche’s
associates, because the United States will not become great again
with the team that President Trump has.  America will be great
again with the ideas that the LaRouche PAC, the ideas of Franklin
Roosevelt, the Hamiltonian idea of a national credit system,
rather than depending on Wall Street.  These things will make
America great again, but it also will help the United States to
have a completely different policy in the world; which will make
the people around the world see the United States with completely
different eyes.  Right now, the United States is not so liked
around the world; not because of Trump, but because of previous
administrations’ war policies, their hypocrisy.  As you showed in
Obama’s case, their policies would lead to genocide.  So, the
United States is not really a popular country around the world,
but this can shift.  In order for that shift to happen, there
should be a shift inside the United States in the mind and the
soul of the American people.  I’m sure the kind of work you are
doing in LaRouche PAC would help greatly.

OGDEN:  And that’s exactly what we are doing with this
campaign to win the future statement.  As I said in the beginning
of the show, we’re initiating a national mobilization to bring
together all of the constituent layers — regardless of party,
political orientation — around a vision of economic development
for the United States and for the world.  If you just imagine the
kind of way that the world could be transformed in the next 15 or
20 years with what China has begun doing in Africa; something
that people thought was impossible.  They just disregarded Africa
and said well, this is just where you’re going to have
impoverishment and backwardness.  Now, this could seriously
become a hub of development for the planet.  But take that and
extend it across the Bering Strait into the Americas; have a rail
link between Eurasia and North America.  Then imagine an entire
development corridor down through the central part of North
America, through the heartland, the farm country in the Midwest;
down through Mexico, across the Darien Gap into Central and South
America.  Then also, extend the Maritime Silk Road to the
Caribbean.  That vision of what could happen in the Western
Hemisphere is the extension of the sort of optimism that you now
see China bringing to Africa.
So, as I said, I think it’s the great moral test.  Emmanuel
Macron was absolutely right; he said it’s a moral challenge what
the nations of the world do to collaborate to bring development
to the African continent.  I think we can be very happy that it’s
because of the leadership over decades of the LaRouche movement,
of you Hussein.  What you’ve been doing; what you did to
collaborate with Jason to put together this extraordinary Special
Report.  I know that this is being listened to in the highest
levels of power across the African continent and in Southwest
Asia; we have evidence of that.  The invitation that you
received, Hussein, from the Egyptian Transportation Ministry, and
other examples.  So, we have to proceed with that kind of
confidence that we are, indeed, shaping the policy for the
future.
So, let me put on the screen one more time; this is the
vision of an economic renaissance — this is the Special Report
that Jason and Hussein collaborated in authoring.  That is
available; you can find the link to that on the screen here —
LPAC.CO/ExtendedSilkRoad.  It’s a very thorough, book-length
Special Report.  This is something that is not just important for
the African leaders and for China.  This is something that is
very important for the United States.  This is something that we
should be considering when we talk about what is US foreign
policy, and those disgraceful graphics about the plummeting of US
investment into Africa over the course of the last eight years
during the Obama administration.  That needs to be reversed; and
it needs to be reversed by bringing the United States and China
into a “win-win” collaboration for the development of these
areas.
We are going to proceed with this campaign to win the
future.  And we’re asking you to endorse this, to join our
mobilization, and to make sure that this becomes the policy
parameter for the 2018 election.  None of the melodrama, not the
soap operas, not all of the secondary and tertiary issues.  These
are the questions which will determine the future of the United
States and the survival of our country and what our role is in
respect to this New Paradigm that we’ve just been discussing on
the show today.
So, again, we have 11 days between now and President Trump’s
State of the Union address.  We are putting these two items on
the agenda.  The United States must adopt LaRouche’s Four
Economic Laws, and the United States must join the New Silk Road.
So, Hussein, is there anything that you want to say in
conclusion before we end this show today?  Any special messages
for our viewers, both in the United States and internationally?

ASKARY:  I think it’s a great opportunity for people now to
get this report, take to themselves the scientific, even
philosophical and other ideas that are in the report which are
necessary.  As you said, it’s for everyone; it’s not only for
Africans.  I think the main target of the report should be
Europeans and Americans, because we need these kinds of ideas
more than at any time before.  We have problems here in Europe
with the infrastructure, with unemployment.  You have massive
problems in the United States.  You need to have these ideas for
your own sake, too; but there is enormous potential that exists
in Europe and the United States that could be revived.  But that
has to be done in the right way; and the right way was outlined
by Mr. LaRouche, but we put it in very clear terms in this
report.  I hope people will get the report and learn something
and push the policymakers in the United States to also do the
same.

OGDEN:  Wonderful.  Thank you very much, Hussein, for
joining us.  And thank you to Jason for joining me here.  I think
we have a lot more to come.  So, a very exciting report here
today.  Help us circulate this video; send it out to everybody
that you know; share it on social media.  Let’s get these ideas
to permeate the United States.  Thank you very much and please
stay tuned to larouchepac.com.




»Tiden er inde til at lukke britiske
imperieoperationer ned«
Helga Zepp-LaRouche i ugentlig
international webcast. pdf og video

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

Jeg mener, at dette er menneskets natur.

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

 




Amerikas udbytte af at gå med i den Nye Silkevej: Optimisme

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 17. jan., 2018 – Inkarnerede medieseere i USA er relativt sikre på, hvad der vil ske i den nærmeste fremtid: Regeringen går af; millioner af lovende, unge mennesker bliver deporteret; en epidemi af mere og mere potente opiater vil slå et voksende antal millioner amerikanere ihjel, elektronisk overvågning af alle, hele tiden, vil fortsætte i det uendelige; præsident Trumps planlagte $1 bio. store initiativ for at bygge ny infrastruktur vil ikke ske; krige vil fortsætte i Afghanistan, Mellemøsten og Afrika, og vi vil sandsynligvis gå i krig med Rusland i Europa eller over Nordkorea i Asien.

Erhvervsfolk har deres egen version: De kan ikke finde faglært arbejdskraft til at besætte deres ledige jobs; men de hæver alligevel ikke lønnen, fordi de er usikre på, hvad der sker, når aktie- og låneboblen brister.

Sammen med masseskyderier og periodiske terrorangreb er dette blev amerikaneres, og europæeres, »informerede forventninger«. Tingene er gået virkelig galt siden århundredeskiftet – og især siden finanskrakket i 2007-08 – og pessimisme er således dagens orden.

Schiller Instituttets stifter Helga Zepp-LaRouche, som har stor erfaring med Kina og er en intellektuel ophavsmand til instituttets politik for den »Nye Silkevej«, påpeger, at forventningerne i Kina er helt anderledes. Forventningerne her er økonomisk vækst, afslutning af fattigdom, ikke alene dér, men også i meget fattige lande, at se teknologiske vidundere og ny infrastruktur, at opleve kulturelt samarbejde med andre lande og mulighederne for fred; og endda – husker I, da millioner af amerikanere drømte om dette? – udforskning af Månen og Solsystemet.

Hun påpeger, at den voksende indflydelse, som Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ har – og som senest har tiltrukket den franske præsident Emmanuel Macron – er en indflydelse for optimisme og en fornemmelse af at have en mission, og ikke blot »praktiske« aftaler om at bygge højhastigheds-jernbaner, selv om disse også kan sprede en kulturel optimisme med hensyn til fremtiden.

Denne mission er afgørende for at være optimistisk. Et finanskrak af »alting-boblen« er rent faktisk på vej, og det med sikkerhed. Men, ved at genindføre Glass/Steagall-bankopdelingsloven, kan vi med lethed bringe banksystemet og økonomien igennem det og øge kredit til at udvide reel økonomisk produktivitet. Der findes metoder, som har stået deres prøve i amerikansk historie, til at få kredit dirigeret til de store infrastrukturprojekter og de banebrydende teknologier, vi behøver, og endda et forceret program for opnåelse af fusionskraft.

Det, der er vigtigt, er at erkende, at Kinas mission for Bælte & Vej Initiativet for stormagter, vendt mod verden, er en succesfuld mission, og at gå med i den. Kernen, som er præsidenterne Donald Trumps, Xi Jinpings og Vladimir Putins samarbejde for at afslutte 20 års permanent krig, findes stadig.

LaRouche PAC og Schiller Instituttet har lagt en klar plan for en mission. For det første, stop briternes og amerikanske imperiefraktioners og efterretningsvæseners planlagte kup mod Trump. Efter at have påført dette kup et tilbageslag gennem massecirkulation af vores »Mueller-dossier«, så cirkulér dernæst Lyndon LaRouches økonomiske politikker med de »Fire Love«, for at genoprette amerikansk produktivitet og få Amerika klar til at gå med i en ny Marshallplan i Bælte & Vej Initiativet.

Dette er de reelt informerede forventninger for landets nærmeste fremtid.

Foto: Præsident Donald J. Trump deltager i ceremonier i marken i 2018 College Football Playoff National Championship. 8. januar, 2018. (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)




Vi går frem fra et fordelagtigt udgangspunkt:
LaRouche PAC’s 2018 Platform
– »Valgkampagnen for at vinde fremtiden«

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 16. jan., 2018 – Vi bliver presset fra alle sider, i USA og i den transatlantiske sektor, til at synke ned på et lavpunkt, med hensyn til økonomi, kultur og moral. Under angreb fra dem, der forsvarer City of Londons/Wall Streets døende, monetaristiske system, presses vi til at fiksere på spørgsmål og »emner«, der har til formål at holde vores tankegang fangen, som i en fælde: »Hvad sagde Trump, eller hvad sagde han ikke?« Alt imens kendsgerningerne står klart: Vi må gå med i den Nye Silkevejs impuls for udvikling. USA skal med om bord. LaRouche PAC’s 2018 Platform; »Kampagnen for at vinde fremtiden«, blev udgivet i går for at mobilisere en styrke, der kan få dette til at ske.

En ny erklæring er nu under udarbejdelse, om at bringe den Nye Silkevej til de amerikanske kontinenter. Se på størrelsesordenen af krisen i Caribien og Mellemamerika! Fejlernæring af børn er f.eks. på over 17 % i Caribien. I Haiti er 47 % af børn fejlernærede; 80 % lever i fattigdom. I dele af Mellemamerika ser vi samme billede. Dette er de rene helveder på vores halvkugle.

Der findes ingen måde, hvorpå vi kan »løse« de »dagens spørgsmål«, der er åbenbare i USA – dvs., narkoepidemien, »migranter«, grænsesikkerhed, mistede jobs osv. – uden samtidig også at styrke Caribien, Mellemamerika og Mexico; samt de amerikanske kontinenter i deres helhed.

Det samme kan siges om Afrika, Sydvestasien og Europa. I Subsahara-Afrika har vi en fejlernæringsprocent på 22. Lægehjælp er en sjældenhed. De kampe, der er en følge af den onde politik for »regimeskifte«, har gjort millioner af mennesker fra Nordafrika og Sydvestasien, i Libyen, Irak, Syrien og Yemen, hjemløse. Godt og vel 1 million mennesker har søgt tilflugt i Europa siden 2015. I 2017 druknede flere end 3.000 mennesker, mens de forsøgte at krydse Middelhavet.

Se så på, hvad Kina gør i samarbejde med nationer i Afrika. Foreløbig har man bygget 6.200 km moderne jernbaner, eller de er under konstruktion, sammen med også kraftværker, dæmninger og andre projekter. Den kinesiske udenrigsminister Wang Yi har netop afsluttet en turne til fire afrikanske nationer, hvor flere projekter blev planlagt. Præsident for Asiatisk Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB), Jin Liqun, udtalte i denne uge, på toårsdagen for bankens oprettelse, at den vil udvide lån til Afrika og også til Sydamerika. (Se Schiller Instituttets Specialrapport: »Forlæng den Nye Silkevej til Vestasien og Afrika: En vision for en økonomisk renæssance«,  af Hussein Askary[1] og Jason Ross.)

Se så på de amerikanske lande, og på, hvad Kina gør dér. Den 19.-22. jan. vil Wang Li deltage i Sammenslutningen af Latinamerikanske og Caribiske Staters (CELAC) møde for at diskutere udviklingsplaner og øge det strategiske samarbejde mellem de to områder »til et højere niveau«, hvorefter han vil tage på statsbesøg til Chile og Uruguay, der begge er entusiastiske tilhængere af Bælte & Vej Initiativet.

Forestil jer en »rygrad«, der består af en udviklingskorridor, som løber fra Sydamerikas sydligste spids mod nord gennem Darién-gabet (en sump- og skovafbrydelse af den panamerikanske hovedvej mellem Panama og Columbia, -red.) og Mellemamerika, fortsætter mod nord over USA’s og Canadas højsletter og ind i Alaska og videre til Beringstræde-tunnelforbindelsen til Asien og Europa. I USA ville denne nye korridor skabe en vej til at »genbefolke« (med nye byer, industri og landbrug) landbrugsamterne i de centrale, amerikanske stater, som i de seneste år har haft de højeste rater af udvandring, narkomisbrug og selvmord i nationen.

At virkeliggøre udvikling på en sådan skala kan ikke simpelt hen gøres »fra bunden og op«, men kræver derimod prioriterede forsknings- og udviklingsprojekter og lokaliteter, der har evnen til at hæve produktiviteten med en kvantespringsvirkning. Blandt de vigtige centre er centrene for rumraketopsendelse i det ækvatoriale, nordøstlige Sydamerika. I Puerto Rico – som stadig er hjemsøgt efter orkanerne Irma og Maria, samt af manglen på genopbygning – er der mulighed for en »Indfaldshavn til de amerikanske lande« på øens sydkyst ved Ponce, som vil være et knudepunkt på den Nye Silkevej.

Dette storslåede perspektiv for de amerikanske kontinenter blev i dag beskrevet af Helga Zepp-LaRouche, der pointerede, at vi må arbejde ud fra et fordelagtigt udgangspunkt. Fra et økonomisk perspektiv, fra et moralsk perspektiv: positionér jer fra et fordelagtigt udgangspunkt.

[1] Se Husseins Askarys tale (dansk) over samme emne




Regn ikke med Wall Street!
Hvad præsident Trump har
brug for at forstå om økonomi.
pdf og video

Den fremgangsmåde, der er nødvendig, er at opgive denne idé om økonomi; at sige, glem ’tilføjet værdi’, glem ’penge’. Ægte rigdom kommer af at forøge vores magt over naturen, af at forbedre vores levestandard og at opdage mere om universet og om os selv, gennem udvikling af videnskab og udvikling af en skøn kultur. Vi kan få en sådan økonomisk genrejsning; vi kan gå med i dette nye paradigme for økonomisk tankegang, som, baseret på årtiers organisering af LaRouche-parret, nu i vid udstrækning er Kinas politik gennem dets Bælte & Vej Initiativ. Vi kan gå med i dette. Vi kan få en økonomisk genrejsning; men vi bliver nødt til at fortælle præsident Trump: Se ikke hen til Wall Street for en økonomisk genrejsning. Forvent ikke, at $200 mia. i statslig finansiering vil blive imødekommet af en entusiastisk strøm af $1 bio., der strømmer ud fra Wall Street for at genopbygge vandsystemet i Flint, Michigan, blandt andet, eller til oversvømmelseskontrol efter orkaner i Texas; det vil ikke ske. Den eneste måde, vi kan gøre det på, er som en national prioritet, og det er ikke muligt at opnå nogen af disse LaRouches fire politikker uafhængigt af hinanden. De følges ad: Glass-Steagall; statslig bankpraksis; teknologiske snarere end monetære målemetoder til at udfordre økonomisk vækst; og forcerede programmer for at skabe dette næste niveau, som er det sande nettoresultat, den sande, økonomiske aktivitet. Vi har brug for det som et samlet hele, som et nyt koncept for, hvordan økonomi fungerer; i modsat fald vil vi ikke få en økonomisk genrejsning i USA.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

 




Trump skal have mulighed for at styre USA’s
politik over for Rusland: Vi må knuse
Muellers Russiagate- svindel

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 15. jan., 2018 – Præsident Trump har vedvarende og gentagent erklæret, at Robert Muellers Russiagate er en svindel; et forsøg på at vælte nationens vilje i præsidentvalget og i flere aspekter et direkte forræderi. Han har ligeledes, i hele sin kampagne og som præsident, om og om igen gentaget, at det, at have venskabelige relationer med Rusland, er en »god ting« og afgørende for en succesfuld amerikansk politik i verden.

Men politikken over for Rusland køres fortsat af andre. Præsident Putin og udenrigsminister Lavrov siger næsten altid, i forbindelse med diverse protester over amerikanske politikker, der er skadelig for Rusland og amerikansk-russiske relationer, at præsident Trump har forpligtet sig til at forbedre relationerne, men at bestræbelserne på at få ham fjernet holder ham tilbage. Dette er sandt, og må hurtigt ændres.

En gennemgang af den russiske udenrigsminister Lavrovs bemærkninger på sin pressekonference ved årets afslutning i dag demonstrerer, hvor meget det haster med, at LaRouche PAC’s kampagne for at afsløre og ødelægge Robert Muellers britiskdirigerede kupforsøg mod Trump og mod Rusland, lykkes.

Idet han pegede på USA’s ulovlige beslaglæggelse af russisk, diplomatisk ejendom i USA; på truslen om, at det succesfulde samarbejde i Syrien for at besejre ISIS nu forvandles til en opdeling af Syrien eller et fuldskala regimeskifte; på udvidelsen af NATO-militærstyrker til Ruslands grænser; på ensidige sanktioner og ensidig anvendelse af militærstyrke – kom Lavrov med en streng advarsel:

»Vi er vidne til en devaluering af international lov og de multilaterale institutioners svindende rolle.« USA og dets allierede »ønsker stadig at tackle anliggender udelukkende på basis af diktater og udstedelse af ultimatummer. [De] ønsker ikke at høre andre globale politiske centres synspunkter og ønsker i realiteten ikke at anerkende kendsgerningen med den fremvoksende, multipolære verden. De metoder, de tyer til for at begrænse deres rivaler, er for det meste snarere tvivlsomme og skruppelløse. De spænder vidt i deres metoder – fra deployering af et globalt missilforsvarssystem til ensidige sanktioner, ekstraterritorial anvendelse af deres lovgivning og trusler om at tackle alle internationale spørgsmål udelukkende i overensstemmelse med deres eget scenarie, hvor de ikke viger tilbage for noget, inklusive anvendelsen af brutal militærmagt.«

Disse ting er sande – men, det er af yderste vigtighed at understrege, at vi befinder os ved et punkt i historien, hvor denne globale krise kan ændres, at USA kan befries fra den britiske politiks indflydelse og fra britisk ideologi. Geopolitik kan og må tilintetgøres – denne darwinistiske hund-æder-hund-mentalitet med nulsums-konflikter og konfrontation – til fordel for det win-win-koncept, der ligger til grund for den Nye Silkevej. Dette er, hvad Trump favnede på sin rejse til Kina i november. Det er det, som den franske præsident Macron ligeledes favnede på sin rejse til Kina tidligere på måneden. Og det er det, som Lyndon LaRouche igangsatte for halvtreds år siden ved at skabe de nye ideer, der kræves for at løfte menneskehedens tankegang op til et højere niveau: til niveauet for lovene for det fysiske univers og se halvtreds eller tusinde år frem for at opdage, hvad det er, vi i dag må gøre.

Kupmagerne mod Trump er i store vanskeligheder. Den Amerikanske Kongres har nu i sine hænder de dokumenterede beviser på, at hele kampagnen for at dæmonisere Rusland og fjerne Trump fra embedet har været bygget på løgne, på fabrikationer af MI6-agent Christopher Steele og hans medskyldige. Meget af det er klassificeret og kan endnu ikke offentliggøres, men nøglepersoner i Kongressen har haft mod til at gøre det kendt, at alvorlige forbrydelser er blevet begået af FBI, Justitsministeriet og CIA-ledere fra Bush/Obama-æraen, og som i dag opererer som en kriminel klike uden for regeringen.

Bestræbelsen på at redde deres kup ved at erklære, at præsidenten er racist og en galning, udtrykker en tilstand af hysteri og panik fra netop de personers side, der er ansvarlige for de racistiske og sindssyge politikker, der har holdt verden nede i fattigdom og evindelige krige i de seneste to årtier.

Der er ingen tid at spilde. Den Nye Silkevej er vejen til at forene verden bag et højere niveau af tænkning og samarbejde. Det vil kun virke med en hermed parallel kampagne for at omorganisere det korrupte, vestlige finanssystem, gennem Glass-Steagall og de hermed forbundne »Fire Love«, som LaRouche har fremlagt. Det ligger i vore hænder.

Foto: Præsident Donald J. Trump afholder video-telekonference med medlemmer af USA’s militær. 24. dec., 2017.  (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)