Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 24. feb., 2018 – Den 24, feb. udgav Demokraterne i Kongressen deres respons til den ødelæggende afsløring, som FBI, Justitsministeriet og deres kriminelle partnere har været udsat for som et resultat af Nunes-memoet og relaterede rapporter – og som i særdeleshed inkluderer EIR’s dossier, som totalt afslører Storbritanniens Mueller-operation. Det 10 sider lange Demokratiske memo var intet andet end et skamløst forsvar for FBI, Justitsministeriet og den særlige anklager Robert Mueller, baseret på skamløse løgne og sofisteri, der ville have gjort Trasymachos og Kallikles stolte.

Men husk, hvem og hvad det er, som Mueller et al. faktisk forsvarer gennem deres kampagne for at vælte USA’s valgte præsident: Det britiske Imperiums gamle, døende paradigme. Dette paradigme er baseret på alle-mod-alle krigsførelse; brutal økonomisk udplyndring af underkastede befolkninger (inklusive den amerikanske befolkning); og, frem for alt, et bestialsk menneskebillede, der er blevet omhyggeligt næret og spredt over hele planeten.

Dette – og ikke en eller anden profileret debat omkring våbenloven – er det spørgsmål, som den nylige massakre på skoleelever i Florida stiller, og de dusinvis og atter dusinvis af lignende hændelser, der har fundet sted i hele landet i løbet af de seneste år. Som guvernør for Kentucky Matt Bevin understregede i et nyligt videointerview, der cirkuleres bredt på internettet, så er problemet, at hele nutidens amerikanske kultur har hærget vores ungdom. »Vi har en kultur, der er desensibiliseret over for døden, over for værdien af liv, og vi fejrer død gennem vore musikalske tekster, vi fejrer døden gennem videospil, der bogstavelig talt belønner dig med ekstra points for at gå tilbage og gøre det af med folk.«

Selv om Bevin ikke påpegede dem, der er ansvarlige for krisen, og heller ikke foreslog en positiv løsning til den, så opfordrede han til en presserende nødvendig, national debat. I dag understregede Helga Zepp-LaRouche, at Bevins bemærkninger er et meget vigtigt bidrag til denne debat, der også må omfatte de nødvendige, økonomiske politikker, som Lyndon LaRouche unikt har specificeret. Hun satte det kulturelle forfald og lammelsen med hensyn til nødvendige, økonomiske politikker, som gennemsyrer USA og Europa, op imod Kinas optimistiske fremstød for udvikling – som det reflekteres i deres annoncering i går af investeringer på over $1,5 billion i »en masse store projekter« inklusive infrastruktur og ny, hightech industrisektorer.

Hvis vi vitterligt skal gøre 2018 til året, hvor geopolitik endelig lægges i graven, sådan, som Zepp-LaRouche har opfordret til, så må dette også være året, hvor Det britiske Imperiums bankerotte finanssystem begraves, sammen med dets bestialske menneskebegreb. Som fr. Zepp-LaRouche understregede mod slutningen af sit webcast den 22. feb.:[1]

»Vi må blot gå tilbage til det højeste, kulturelle niveau i hver nation. I USA ville det selvfølgelig sige Benjamin Franklin, de grundlæggende fædre, John Quincy Adams, Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Kennedy – disse perioder, hvor USA havde en positiv vision af sin rolle. Jeg mener, John Quincy Adams havde f.eks. en tilgang til udenrigspolitik, der ligner meget det, Kina gør i dag. Benjamin Franklin var en absolut entusiastisk elev af Konfutse, og han brugte Konfutses filosofi til at udvikle sit eget moralsystem! Det er denne form for diskussioner, der virkelig ville hjælpe …

I Tyskland er vi velsignet med en meget rig kultur: Vi har haft mange, mange tænkere, fra Nikolaus von Kues, Kepler og til Leibniz. Vi har haft mange klassiske komponister, fra Bach til Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann og mange andre. Vi har haft fantastiske digtere, som Schiller, Lessing, Heine, Möricke og endnu mange flere. I Italien havde vi den Gyldne Renæssance, i Spanien havde vi den Andalusiske Renæssance. Vi havde Kalifatet i Bagdad – i en bestemt periode under Abbaside-dynastiet var Bagdad verdens mest udviklede by! Så var der de forskellige århundreder, hvor Kina var den førende nation med hensyn til videnskab og kultur. Så det, vi må gøre, er, at vi må aktivere det bedste potentiale i hver enkelt nation. For dette er ved at gå tabt …

Vi må skille os af med en masse af den nuværende, populistiske kultur. Vi må komme af med denne idé om, at ’penge skaber penge’, vi må holde op med at spilde vores tid på spekulation, på videospil, eller – folk er virkelig ved at miste deres kreative potentiale! Men man kan genvinde det ved at studere klassisk musik, klassisk poesi, ved at læse filosofferne, Platon, Cusanus, Leibniz, originalværkerne … jeg mener, det ville være meget let at skabe en ny renæssance for tankegang. Og jeg mener, at den nye, økonomiske verdensorden, den Nye Silkevej, Bælte & Vej Initiativet, sluttelig kun vil kunne lykkes, hvis den ledsages af en renæssance for klassisk kultur …

Dette er et presserende spørgsmål, hvis vi ikke ønsker at se flere rædselsforestillinger som skoleskyderierne, som jeg mener – selvfølgelig er diskussionen om våbenloven vigtig – men det er i realiteten vigtigere at give mennesker en indre styrke, fornemmelsen af indre skønhed, så de ikke går i denne retning. Der er mange forstyrrede mennesker, der absolut kunne blive reddet, hvis der var en seriøs indsats for en æstetisk uddannelse eller opdragelse, en opdragelse af deres karakters moralske skønhed, hvilket er grunden til, at man har brug for klassisk kultur og ikke en moderne version af poesi og drama. For kun, hvis man har det højeste ideal om mennesket, mennesket som en skøn sjæl, som en skøn karakter, kan uddannelsessystemet vaccinere folk imod sådanne rædselsforestillinger. Og jeg ville virkelig ønske, at folk ville slutte sig til os i denne bestræbelse.«

Foto: Barack Obama modtager Dronning Elizabeth II og Prins Philip, hertug af Edinburgh, før en middag til ære for dronningen i Winfield House i London, 25. maj, 2011. (Official White House Photo)                      

[1] Læs hele webcastet her (dansk): http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=23890

22. feb., 2018 – Aktivisten Andrew Dobbs fra Austin, Texas, har bidraget med en inspirerende, entusiastisk og grundigt researchet og velinformeret undersøgelse af Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ til online publikationen War is Boring i dag.

»For mindst 60 lande, der spænder over det meste af verden, er initiativet en enorm mulighed for vækst og udvikling af deres økonomier under en ny, global orden – en orden, der ikke har de samme bånd tilknyttet, som det amerikanskledede system, der i dag er ved magten.

Hvis initiativet skrider frem iht. planen – og hvis der er en ting, som Folkerepublikken Kina har vist evner for, så er det gennemførelse af veludviklede planer – vil det få verdenshistoriske konsekvenser for amerikansk magt.

Alle bomber og støvler på jorden, som vi har lanceret i det seneste århundrede, til trods, så er Kina tæt ved at besejre verden uden at affyre et eneste skud, og det ville du intet ane om, hvis du blot følger med i amerikansk presse.

I de kinesiske medier var Bælte & Vej Initiativet på den anden side det mest omtalte emne i nyhederne sidste år. Dette reflekterer planens historiske betydning. Hvis den bliver fuldført, vil den sandsynligvis repræsentere det største projekt i fredstid nogensinde og skønnes at ville koste mellem $4 billion og $8 billion.

Projektet ville genoplive oldtidens Silkevej og forbinde Kina, Centralasien, Mellemøsten, Afrika og Europa med veje, jernbaner, pipelines, kommunikationsnetværk, elektriske net og anden infrastruktur over land, samt en maritim vej, der ville forbinde havne fra det Sydkinesiske Hav, det Indiske Hav, det Arabiske Hav, den Persiske Golf og Middelhavet.

Alt i alt ville det forbinde det meste af verdens befolkning i et eneste, økonomisk netværk, og det ville integrere lidt under halvdelen af verdens BNP. Når det er færdigt, kunne den blotte proces med at bygge det meget vel betyde, at det ville bringe det meste af verdens økonomiske output sammen.«

Tro det eller ej, men Dobbs har en masse andet at sige, der både er sandt og desværre også næsten ukendt i USA, inklusive hans egen undersøgelse af Bælte & Vej som en videreførelse af de seneste 40 års kinesiske politik. Værd at læse. https://warisboring.com/50317-2/

Foto: Vægmaleri fra det centrale Kina. Foto David Axe.

22. feb., 2018 – Den 14. feb. godkendte Estlands Ministerium for Offentlig Administration planen for Rail Baltica (RB) højhastigheds-jernbanelinjen, som vil fuldføre den endelige rute og det foreløbige design for hele jernbanen i de tre baltiske stater, rapporterede International Railway Journal den 16. feb.

Rail Baltica-projektet omfatter byggeriet af 870 km elektrisk normalsporsjernbane, der forbinder de tre baltiske hovedstæder Tallinn, Estland; Riga, Letland og Vilnius, Litauen, med en forbindelse til det europæiske normalsporsnetværk i Polen. Jernbanen designes til at operere med 240 km/t for passagertog og 120 km/t for fragttog, og vil udgøre en del af EU’s Nordsøen/Baltikum TEN-T-korridor (Transeuropæiske Transportnetværk ).

Fr. Baiba Rubesa, adm. dir. og forkvinde for RB Rail, sagde til International Railway Journal, at »Vi har nu færdiggjort planlægningsstadiet for Rail Baltica. Næste skridt er at fokusere på det konsoliderede foreløbige tekniske design og detaljerede tekniske design for Rail Baltica infrastrukturen i alle tre lande.«

Billede: Rail Baltica vækstkorridor, som en del af Nordsøen/Baltikum-korridoren.

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)

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.

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.

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

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)

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) 

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 6. feb., 2018 – Mandag intervenerede det britiske Udenrigsministerium i en høring i Højesteret i London i sagen om tidligere MI6-medarbejder, Christopher Steele. Steeles advokat forsøger at omstøde en tidligere retskendelse om, at Steele skal fremstille sig til afhøring i forbindelse med en af de mange løgne i det nu berømte dossier, han udarbejdede med det formål at bringe USA’s præsident til fald. Sagen er blevet anlagt af en russisk borger, Aleksej Gubarev, hvem Steele løgnagtigt har anklaget for at have hacket ind i det amerikanske Demokratiske Partis computere (hvilket, som tidligere tekniske ekspert i NSA, Bill Binney, har vist, aldrig fandt sted). Detaljerne kan læses nedenstående – men det afgørende er, at Udenrigsministeriet, der fører tilsyn med MI6, sendte en advokat til retten »for det tilfældes skyld, at regeringen fandt det nødvendigt at kræve, at Steeles vidneforklaring blev begrænset, for at beskytte statshemmeligheder«, som det rapporteredes af BBC.

Hvorfor er briterne så interesseret i at forhindre sandheden om Steeles rolle, og briternes rolle generelt, i kupforsøget mod præsident Trump, i at komme frem? Kendsgerningen er, at hele »Russiagate«-sagen mod Trump er ved at nedsmelte, alt imens senator Chuck Grassley og kongresmedlem David Nunes har fokuseret på den primære rolle, som den britiske efterretningsagent Steele har spillet som den kriminelle hovedmedsammensvorne. Briternes desperate bestræbelse for at genvinde kontrollen over deres tidligere koloni, er i alvorlig fare.

Og dette er ikke en isoleret udvikling. Verden er gået ind i en kombineret krise, som ikke kan opretholdes i ret mange måneder, eller endda dage. Finanssystemet er oppustet og står ikke til at redde, med udstedelse af fiktiv gæld for at dække over spekulationsboblen med endnu flere spekulative ’værdi’-papirer. De krav, der kommer fra Wall Streets og City of Londons herrer, om, at verdens nationer skal acceptere nedskæringspolitikker og følge IMF’s diktater, finder nu kun døve øren, med næsten hele verdens udviklingssektor, der nu tilslutter sig det nye paradigme, som Kina tilbyder dem gennem den Nye Silkevej, og som bringer jernbaner, vandprojekter, industri og – håb – til verdens tidligere koloninationer.

Og i USA har præsident Trump forsvaret sig mod de korrupte efterretningschefer fra Obamatiden, fordømt denne heksejagt og endda inviteret de russiske efterretningschefer til Washington (til regimeskifte-slængets absolutte rædsel), med det formål at samarbejde om at løse de vigtige spørgsmål i reelle, globale problemer.

Dette er et gunstigt øjeblik for præsidenten. I løbet af de seneste to uger har han ikke alene arrangeret de russiske efterretningschefers besøg, på trods af de sanktioner, som Kongressen har påtvunget dem, men han har også afvist Kongressens krav om nye sanktioner mod Rusland. Han godkendte offentliggørelsen af »Nunes-memoet«, der afslører de forbrydelser, der er begået af Steele og oversidderne fra Obama-tiden i FBI og Justitsministeriet. Han holdt en State of the Union-tale, der fik 70 % eller mere støtte fra det amerikanske folk, netop, fordi han har inspireret til håb om en genrejsning af den forfaldne, amerikanske økonomi, en afslutning af epidemien med opiater og andre narkotiske stoffer, samt en genrejsning af Amerikas tidligere storhed.

Præsident Trump befinder sig således i en relativ favorabel situation til at konfrontere det overhængende kollaps af finansboblen i aktie- og lånemarkederne. Der findes kun én måde, hvorpå de vestlige økonomier kan reddes fra dette uundgåelige sammenbrud – en proces, der har sit fortilfælde i de politikker, som Franklin D. Roosevelt gennemførte i 1930’erne, og som reddede USA fra depressionen og verden fra fascisme. De fiktive kapitaler må fjernes gennem en Glass/Steagall-reform af banksystemet således, at regeringen kan bruge den magt, den er givet af USA’s Forfatning, til at etablere en nationalbank, som kan udstede kredit, der dirigeres ind i realøkonomien og igangsætte en proces for massiv videnskabelig forskning og udvikling, for at udforme en optimistisk fremtid for menneskeheden.

Det er dette, LaRouche har kaldt de Fire Love. Resolutioner til støtte for de Fire Love bliver nu introduceret i de lovgivende grene (delstatskongresser) over hele landet. Præsident Trump, der tidligere officielt har krævet en tilbagevenden til en politik for dette »Amerikanske Økonomiske System« i Hamitons tradition, befinder sig nu i en position, hvor han kan gennemføre det, til trods for den kendsgerning, at han er omgivet af agenter for Wall Street, som er modstandere af det, og som kræver nationens underkastelse under den værdiløse spekulationsgæld selv, hvis det betyder økonomisk kaos og global krig. Den aktuelle ustabilitet på aktiemarkedet er blot en antydning af, at et krak i denne boble er overhængende.

Men, hvis gode mennesker i USA og Europa mobiliserer sig selv, og andre, til at gå sammen med LaRouche for at gennemføre de Fire Love og gå med i den Nye Silkevej, som LaRouche har været fortaler for og har promoveret i de seneste halvtreds år, så er et Nyt Paradigme for Menneskeheden inden for rækkevidde.

Foto: SIS-bygningen, eller MI6-bygningen, eller ’Legoland’, eller ’Babylon-ved-Themsen’; den britiske hemmelige efterretningstjenestes hovedkvarter ved Vauxhall Cross på Themsens sydlige bred. Designet af Terry Farrell og færdigbygget i 1994. (Photo flickr.com/photos/duncanh1/)

Videoen fra diplomatseminaret om eftermiddagen:
Video from the diplomatic seminar in the afternoon:

Lyd fra diplomatseminaret om eftermiddagen:
Audio from the diplomatic seminar in the afternoon:
Audio from the diplomatic seminar in the afternoon:

Videoen fra aftenseminar for Schiller Instituttets medlemmer:
Video from the evening meeting for Schiller Institute members:

Lyd fra aftenseminar for Schiller Instituttets medlemmer:

Stor succes for diplomatseminar: Forlæng den Nye Silkevej til Vestasien og Afrika

København, 6. feb., 2018 – Hussein Askary, medforfatter af Schiller Instituttets nye Specialrapport, »Forlæng den Nye Silkevej til Vestasien og Afrika: En vision for en økonomisk renæssance«, var gæstetaler på et seminar for diplomater, der blev holdt i København i går. De andre talere var Ghanas ambassadør til Danmark, H.E., fr. Amerley Ollennu Awva-Ashmoa, og formand for Schiller Instituttet i Danmark, Tom Gillesberg.

Seminaret indledtes med en kinesisk folkesang, fremført af Feride Istogu Gillesberg og Michelle Rasmussen. Arrangementet så deltagelse af fire ambassadører fra Afrika, Sydasien og det tidligere Sovjetunionen, samt andre diplomater fra Sydvestasien og Østasien.

Desuden deltog en repræsentant fra et betydningsfuldt, dansk ministerium, en tidligere dansk ambassadør, en tidligere østeuropæisk ambassadør til Danmark, en professor fra et FN-relateret universitet, og en professor/parlamentsmedlem, der rejste hele vejen fra et østeuropæisk land særligt for at deltage i dette seminar. En afrikansk, politisk leder, en pensioneret selskabsøkonom, der har mobiliseret danske politiske kredse for den Nye Silkevej, præsidenten for en international fredsorganisation, en forsker ved et dansk universitet og en seniorakademiker, der er ruslandsekspert, deltog ligeledes, så vel som også Schiller Instituttets kernemedlemmer i København og Jylland.

Her følger nogle af de ideer, der blev præsenteret på seminaret. Tom gennemgik kort Schiller Instituttets forslag, som udgjorde grundlaget for Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ. Vi må opgive det dyriske, geopolitiske paradigme og i stedet samarbejde om at virkeliggøre det nye paradigme for menneskehedens fælles skæbne. Tom diskuterede betydningen af den franske præsident Macrons besøg til Kina, og stillede spørgsmålet: Hvad med USA? Gillesberg briefede desuden de forsamlede om betydningen af det netop offentliggjorte Nunes-memo, som pegede på briternes, og ikke russernes, indblanding i det amerikanske valg. Dette kan være med til at befri Donald Trump til at bryde med det gamle paradigme. I skrivende stund udviser finansmarkederne stor nervøsitet, og det er absolut nødvendigt, at vore politikker bliver vedtaget. Dernæst introducerede Gillesberg Hussein Askary ved at fortælle om hans baggrund.

Hussein Askary: Hussein, der lagde ud med at fremvise og forklare LaRouches Trippelkurve, gennemgik de væsentligste punkter i specialrapporten og understregede, at Vestasien og Afrika kan og må foretage spring frem til de mest avancerede, og ikke nøjes med de mest primitive, teknologier. Han brugte tidl. præsident Obama som eksempel på det gamle paradigme, som havde forhindret Afrikas økonomiske udvikling, ved at citere fra Obamas tale, da han var i Sydafrika. Obama sagde her, at, hvis alle unge afrikanere fik et stort hus og en høj levestandard, »ville planeten koge over«. Hussein viste dernæst et billede af Obamas hus til 8 million dollars. Det er helt fint, at han har så fint et hus; men det er kriminelt at forhindre andre i at gøre ligeså.

Hussein citerede fra Xi Jinpings tale, hvor denne sagde, at nøglen til at bekæmpe fattigdom i Afrika var at fremme industrialisering, det vil sige, fysisk økonomi. Schiller Instituttet promoverer ikke Kina som sådan, men vore egne principper. Med en gennemgang af rapportens anbefalinger sagde Hussein til seminarets deltagere, der repræsenterede mange nationer, at Schiller Instituttet kunne være med til at udarbejde udviklingsbanker for ethvert land, der ønsker at skabe sin egen kredit. (Han kom også ind på, hvordan Egypten havde gennemført en intern finansiering af den nylige udvidelse af Suezkanalen.) Moderne infrastruktur vil gøre Afrika ’mindre’. Afrika og Vestasien bør ikke blot eksportere råmaterialer, men derimod forarbejdede, værdiforøgede industri- og landbrugsprodukter. Kina ønsker at gå i retning af eksport af højteknologi og er med til at skabe optimisme i Afrika mht., at »Vi kan også gøre det«. Hussein anbefalede læsning af Xi Jinpings tale på den seneste, 19. partikongres.

Den Nye Silkevej handler ikke blot om jernbaner, men om transformation gennem videnskabelig opdagelse og kultur i form af udviklingskorridorer, hvor Hussein refererede til sin undersøgelse af, hvordan kinesernes opfindelse af papir havde gjort det muligt for den muslimske, videnskabelige renæssance at blomstre.

Se engang på omstændighederne i Afrika i dag, med langt flere, internt fordrevne end det antal flygtninge, det lykkes at nå frem til Europa. Ghanas præsident opfordrede ungdommen til at blive og opbygge deres lande. I takt med, at vi øger levestandarden, vil dette fordre en ny økonomisk platform med højere energigennemstrømningstæthed – kernekraft. Hussein afsluttede sit foredrag ved at vise et natfoto af Afrika i året 2015, og så Chance McGees vision af, hvordan det ville se ud i 2050, under LaRouche-overskriften, »Det er fremtiden, der bestemmer nutiden«.

Dernæst holdt Ghanas ambassadør en kort tale og bemærkede med glæde denne understregning af Afrikas industrialisering og erklærede, at hun var meget imponeret over det, kineserne nu gør i Afrika, og over det, vi her fremlagde på vores seminar. Et udskrift af hendes tale vil senere være tilgængeligt.

Herefter fulgte en livlig diskussion, som ikke blev optaget, men vi vil senere skitsere de spørgsmål, der blev diskuteret.

Om aftenen blev der afholdt et sekundært seminar for Schiller Instituttets medlemmer. Her kom Hussein med den vigtige bemærkning, at han vidste, at russernes intervention ville transformere situationen i Syrien og føre til, at vore ideer fik mulighed for at blive udbredt i området, hvilket var grunden til, at han tog initiativ til, at denne nye rapport blev udarbejdet. Diskussionsperioden er inkluderet i optagelsen (udlægges snarest).

De to seminarer var resultat af en stor kampagne, der har udbredt invitationen om specialrapporten, Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ og Schiller Instituttets rolle, præsident Macrons tale og LaRouches Fire Love, samt den danske oversættelse af en særlig introduktion til rapporten, vidt og bredt til alle ambassader og regeringer, akademiske-, erhvervs- og fagforeningskredse og offentligheden, og som omfattede kontakt til professoren/parlamentsmedlemmet, der kom fra Østeuropa, og opkald til ambassader. Interventionen i mødet i Dansk Institut for Internationale Studier/Udenrigsministeriet, der er rapporteret andetsteds, var ligeledes end del af mobiliseringen.

På begge seminarerne blev LaRouchePAC’s video-undervisningsserier i henholdsvis LaRouches Økonomi (på dansk her)  og den kommende undervisningsserie om Det Nye Paradigme annonceret for alle deltagere.

Vi vil se på hr. LaRouches omdefinering af, hvad infrastruktur virkelig betyder. Dette er afgørende på det aktuelle tidspunkt, for infrastruktur er blevet et meget populært spørgsmål, på både gode og dårlige måder. Så det er meget vigtigt, at vi behandler dette nu; på det globale plan har vi Kina, der fører an med Bælte & Vej Initiativet – vi ser her hovedkorridorerne i Bælte & Vej, der viser den massive udvidelse af infrastruktur i hele Asien og ind i Afrika, og som begynder at sprede sig til hele verden, under Kinas anførelse [Fig. 1]. Så infrastruktur er altså kommet til live igen, der er en infrastrukturrenæssance på en meget god måde.

Infrastruktur er også et varmt emne for diskussion i USA, men noget af det finder desværre ikke altid sted på højeste niveau. På den gode side har vi præsident Trump, der har rejst spørgsmålet om nødvendigheden af at genopbygge USA’s infrastruktur. Det er mange mennesker enige med ham i. Han har fremsat ideen om en investering på $1 billion i ny infrastruktur. Men selve ordet ’infrastruktur’ er også blot blevet en del af mange andre folks narrativ, fortælling, og det er blot et ord, der ikke rigtig har den hensigtsmæssige betydning i den måde, ordet bruges på af mange mennesker. For et par år siden lykkedes det Arnold Schwarzenegger mere eller mindre at udtale ordet i en af sine taler, og selv han taler om, I ved, denne mand, der beundrer Hitler og de degenererede ’greenies’ (miljøaktivister) og endda taler om betydningen af at genopbygge infrastruktur. Men det er blot et slagord, der ikke har den samme betydning, som det bør have i en fysisk-økonomisk betydning.

Så vi vil behandle hr. LaRouches omdefinering og højere forståelse af, hvad infrastruktur rent faktisk betyder. Han definerede denne nye betegnelse med den fysisk-økonomiske platform, som bliver emnet for vores diskussion i dag.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Schiller Instituttets medlemmer og partnere stiller spørgsmål om den positive rolle, Kina spiller i Vestasien og Afrika, med den Nye Silkevej (Bælte & Vej Initiativet) d. 31. januar 2018 ved et møde, arrangeret af Dansk Institut for Internationale Studier (DIIS) og Udenrigsministeriet, med titlen “Magt og politik i Mellemøsten og Nordafrika”. Se video:

Schiller Institute in Denmark intervention at Middle East/North Africa conference

COPENHAGEN, Feb. 2, 2018 (EIRNS) – Members of the Schiller Institute Denmark went to an event hosted by the Danish Institute for International Studies and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on “New Trends in Power and Politics in the Middle East and North Africa” on Jan. 31. The conference speakers included the Danish foreign minister (who didn’t take questions) and international and Danish think tank analysts. About 200 people attended the event, and it was live-streamed. The main theme of the conference was that now there is an unstable political vacuum in the area due to the end of the neo-liberal world order. The Schiller Institute intervention was to bring the potential of new paradigm into the discussion. Two of the Schiller Institute members asked questions calling for the USA and Europe to join the New Silk Road, as Lyndon LaRouche has been calling for, and together with China build up Africa and West Asia with a win-win spirit as opposed to geopolitics, as French president Macron lately called for. Our upcoming seminar on Extending the New Silk Road to West Asia and Africa was also mentioned. (A woman from the German Marshall Fund in the U.S. Said that the Chinese investments were a great potential, but we have to see if we can go along with what the political price tag may be, another woman from the Carnegie Institute in Washington said that the U.S. should not join the Silk Road, which was just to benefit Chinese interests, but pick and choose what to participate in.) One question was about why there was not more support in the U.S. for Trump’s policy to cooperate with Russia and China, (a man from the Atlantic Council said that the problem is that Russia is on a different page on Syria), and the last question was about our campaign to end geopolitics, and which group of investors attached most conditions to their investments, the Transatlantisists or the Chinese. Mehran Kamrava answered, that the Chinese investments in the MENA region were purely economically oriented.

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)

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.

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)

Vi introducerer her Schiller Instituttets nye, danske  specialrapport,  “Forlæng den Nye Silkevej til Vestasien og Afrika; en vision for en økonomisk renæssance”, som er en grundig  indføring i den 246 sider lange, engelske rapport, af rapportens forfattere, Hussein Askary og Jason Ross.

Glæd dig til en optimistisk og konstruktiv løsning på det forfærdelige fattigdoms- og underudviklingsproblem, som denne verdensdel er så hårdt ramt af, og, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche så ofte har nævnt, den eneste humane og retfærdige løsning på det umenneskelige flygtningeproblem, der nu også har ramt Europa.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 29. jan., 2018 – Præsident Donald Trump kunne faktisk ikke have overset det på Davos Økonomiske Verdensforum. Alt imens han var anfører for en hyldest til investering i USA med dets nyligt indførte lavbeskatning og billige dollar, og herved glædede nogle multinationale administrerende direktører, så så konferencen hen til Kina og dets Bælte & Vej Initiativ som den afgørende faktor for at føre verdensøkonomien ud af den krise, der har varet siden 2008. Den kinesiske præsident Xi Xinpings økonomiske rådgiver Liu He var den taler, man lyttede mest intenst til. Kinas politik for udvikling af højteknologisk, økonomisk infrastruktur som fortrop frem mod målet med at udslette fattigdom – nu sammen med mange nationale partnere i Asien, Afrika og Latinamerika – blev anerkendt som et nyt »win-win«-paradigme, der kan overvinde både årsagerne til og de blivende virkninger af det transatlantiske, økonomiske kollaps, der fandt sted for et årti siden.

Selv Bloomberg News, i en angivelig nyhedsartikel her til morgen, sagde, »Med tilføjelsen i sidste uge af det arktiske område og Latinamerika, er den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinpings signaturpolitik, Bælte & Vej Initiativet, i sandhed blevet global. Kun USA, dets nabo Canada og dets allieret Japan mangler endnu at blive inkluderet i planen, der søger at bygge eller opgradere et netværk af hovedveje, jernbaner, havne og pipelines«. Senere anerkender det, at Japan faktisk samarbejder i Bælte & Vej Initiativet, og at præsident Xi gentagne gange har inviteret USA til at gå med i det.

I sin State of the Union-tale tirsdag aften er den eneste måde, hvorpå præsidenten kan transformere sin administrations udsigter, at tilslutte sig den Nye Silkevej, i hvert fald som en overordnet forpligtelse, der følger tråden i hans nylige besøg til Kina, Japan og andre asiatiske økonomiske ledere.

Selv om han appellerer til det, venter der ingen »tværpolitisk overensstemmelse« i den splittede og miskrediterede Kongres, af hvilken flere end 50 af dets medlemmer er fratrådt i løbet af blot én kongressamling.

Det to år lange fremstød fra britiske og amerikanske efterretningstjenesters side for at ødelægge Trumps kandidatur og præsidentskab, har trukket et stort antal demokratiske opportunister ind. Dette må enten nedkæmpes, eller også må vi overlade USA til at være en Ny Kold Krig-politistat, hvor alle præsidenter kontrolleres af efterretningsfolk gennem hemmelige skandaler. Udviklinger, der har fundet sted i løbet af de seneste 24 timer, giver håb om, at det ikke vil lykkes, men, hvis det ikke knuses, vil disse personer, der følger en ny McCarthy-tradition, ikke acceptere noget mindre end en intenst antirussisk, antikinesisk præsident Pence.

Der findes ikke engang nogen »tværpolitisk overensstemmelse« at appellere til: Hvis Trump fremlægger sit totalt utilstrækkelige program for infrastrukturbyggeri og baserer den lille, statslige finansiering i dette på en forhøjet benzinskat, vil de vildledte, republikanske kongresmedlemmer i kammeret modsætte sig det. USA vil fortsætte med afindustrialiseringen; amerikanere vil fortsætte med at dø af opiat-overdosis; deres forventede levealder vil fortsætte med at falde. Byer og delstater, der er ambitiøse omkring udvikling, vil fortsætte med at sende delegationer til Kina.

Der findes et nyt paradigme at appellere til og gå med i, og som kan involvere den form for økonomisk genopbygning, rumforskning og teknologisk fremskridt, som Trumps vælgere stemte for. Præsidenten må tænke på verdensøkonomien fra toppen og ned, og gå med i den Nye Silkevej.

Foto: Præsident Trump taler for den samlede Kongres i februar, 2017. (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)

29. jan., 2018 – »Det afrikanske kontinent var en del af den gamle, maritime Silkevej og er nu i en god position til at blive Kinas naturlige partner«, sagde He Wenping, dirktør for afrikastudier ved det Kinesiske Akademi for Samfundsvidenskaber, med en fremstilling af Bælte & Vejs aktiviteter i Afrika på sidelinjen af det netop afsluttede topmøde i den Afrikanske Union.

He Wenping var en af hovedtalerne på Schiller Instituttets internationale konference i Bad Soden nær Frankfurt, Tyskland, der fandt sted 25.-26. nov., 2017.

Alene i Sydafrika er der flere end 300 kinesiske foretagender, af hvilke halvdelen er store og mellemstore virksomheder, der investerer $13 mia. i elektronik, biler, infrastruktur til finansiel informationsnetværk og konstruktionsteknologi, lyder en rapport, der er sammensat af den Sydafrikansk-kinesiske Økonomi- og Handelssammenslutning i 2016.

På trods af bekymringer, frustrationer og udfordringer, der kommer fra uventede besværligheder, misforståelser og kulturelle konflikter, så accelererer Kina fremgangen i sit generelle samarbejde med Afrika, fortsatte He Wenping. Det forventes at skabe et godt eksempel på intensiveret, regionalt samarbejde for de hidtil modstræbende, vestlige lande. »BVI fortjener at blive en platform for de overordnede udvekslinger og det intensiverede samarbejde mellem Kina og verden«, fremsatte hun.

(He Wenpings tale på Schiller Instituttets konference kan høres / læses (engelsk) her: http://newparadigm.schillerinstitute.com/media/president-xis-perspective-year-2050-perspective-african-development/)

Foto: He Wenping (venstre) sammen med Schiller Instituttets stifter og præsident, Helga Zepp-LaRouche (højre); i midten Jason Ross fra Schiller Institute i USA, på konferencen i Bad Soden, Tyskland, 25.-26. nov., 2017.

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«

25. jan., 2018 – Verdens største konference om det arktiske område nogensinde, med 3.000-3.500 deltagere fra hele planeten, er nu i gang i Tromsø, Norge, mere end 200 mil (321 km) nord for den nordlige polarcirkel. Tromsø er berømt som udgangspunktet for store missioner til arktisk udforskning og centrum for arktisk jagt i det 19. og 20. århundrede.

Fokus for Arctic Frontiers 2018 Conference, der finder sted 21.-26. jan., er den nordlige sejlrute, eller den arktiske rute, som en alternativ sejlrute mellem Europa og Asien. Den igangværende smeltning af polarisen – et fænomen i det nordlige område, der ikke skal forveksles med den ikkeeksisterende globale opvarmning – gør denne sejlrute mulig allerede i dag. Som vi har rapporteret, så er Rusland i færd med at bygge en række at verdens største isbrydere med det formål at udvide anvendelsen af denne rute. Kina inkluderede officielt den arktiske rute som en del af den Maritime Silkevej i sin »Vision for maritimt samarbejde under Bælte & Vej Initiativet« 20. juni, 2017. (Se http://www.china.org.cn/world/2017-06/20/content_41063286.htm)

I et interview med TASS på konferencen sagde Keiji Ide, Japans ambassadør for internationale økonomiske anliggender; ambassadør for Japanåret i Rusland og ambassadør med ansvar for arktiske anliggender, at Japan var enormt interesseret i udviklingen af den nordlige sejlrute, gasprojekter i Yamal og langsigtet samarbejde med Rusland.

»Der er ubetinget en enorm interesse i den nordlige sejlrute. Erhvervsfolk fra Hokkaido talte om det på dagens konference«, sagde ambassadøren, der taler flydende russisk. »Dette er selvfølgelig kun begyndelsen. Folk vurderer risici og beregner, hvad der profitabelt, og hvad, der ikke er. De overvejer dem meget nøje.«

Ide sagde, der var stor interesse for Yamal LNG-projektet (Liquified Natural Gas), der indledtes sidste år (og som også nyder betydelig kinesisk investering), såvel som også ideen om at bygge infrastruktur til LNG-produktion i Ruslands Kamtjatka-halvø, der ligger i Stillehavet nær Japan.

»Vi ønsker at samarbejde med vore russiske venner i forfølgelse af et langsigtet mål«, tilføjede diplomaten. »Uanset en flænge mellem vore lande inden for politik, kan vi ikke sige, at vi ikke ønsker at udvikle vore relationer. Tværtimod; hvis vi støder på enten vanskeligheder eller uoverensstemmelser, så må de overvindes.«

»Gud ske lov har jeres præsident [Vladimir] Putin og vores premierminister [Shinzo] Abe varme, gode relationer, så vi vil udvikle økonomisk samarbejde med Rusland«, sagde han.

Den uafhængige russiske naturgasgigant, Novatek, var repræsenteret i Tromsø af nordmanden Bjørn Gundersen, vicedirektør for dets Kontor for LNG-projekter. Novateks Yamal- og associerede Murmansk-projekter er de største konstruktionsprojekter, der er i gang i Rusland, og muligvis i verden. Novateks partner Total (fra Frankrig) bemærker på sin webside, at »Ved projektets start var der ingen adgangsveje til stedet over land eller vand. For at fremme transporten af udstyr og stab, begyndte man i 2011konstruktion af et regionalt knudepunkt for transport med stor kapacitet, som omfatter Sabetta-havnen og en international lufthavn.«

»Forsendelse af LNG under sådanne ekstreme betingelser krævede også Total og dets partnere til at designe et nyt slags fartøj: LNG-isbrydertankskibet. Denne innovative løsning gør det muligt for LNG at blive transporteret hele året uden assistance fra isbrydere. Med en længde på 300 meter og en kapacitet på ikke mindre end 172.600 m³, kan dette skib sejle i is på op til 2,1 m tyk. Alt i alt vil 15 LNG-isbrydere gradvist blive kommissioneret mellem nu og 2019, og af hvilke den første er ’Christophe de Margerie’.«

»For at åbne op for adgang til de enorme gasresurser i det russiske fjerne norden, har Yamal LNG-projektet indviet en ny, LNG-skibsforsendelsesrute. Kendt som den Nordlige Sejlrute gør den det muligt for fartøjer at nå Asien på 15 dage via Beringstrædet, sammenlignet med 30 dage ad den konventionelle rute, der går gennem Suezkanalen. Turen kan gennemføres mellem maj og november, hvor isen er tilstrækkelig tynd til, at man kan sejle. Denne bedrift er kun mulig takket være en ny art af tilpasningsdygtige LNG-tankskibe, der har isbryderteknologi.«

Yamal-projektets totale LNG-produktion på sluttelig 34 million tons om året vil blive fragtet til kunder både i Asien og Europa via den nordlige sejlrute.

https://www.arcticfrontiers.com/

Vært Matthew Ogden: I dag har jeg en særlig gæst, Bill Roberts, som er med fra Detroit, Michigan. Bill Roberts er LaRouche PAC’s kampagnekoordinator for Midtvesten, og vi har også set hans succes mht. at være kandidat til kongressen, hvor han vandt 41 % af stemmerne i det demokratiske primærvalg i Michigan.

Titlen på vores udsendelse i dag er »Genopbyg Amerikas hjerteland: Fra ’Rustbæltet’ til ’Bælte & Vej’«. Vores tema i dag er at se på kampagneplatformen til 2018-valget, som LaRouche PAC har udgivet og nu mobiliserer for på nationalt plan, og se på dette gennem Midtvestens linser, det såkaldte ’Rustbælte’, der engang var motor for økonomisk vækst i hele USA. Dette er vort lands produktive hjerteland, og dette har været epicentret for kollapset i vareproduktion og den specialiserede arbejdsstyrke i USA. Dette udgør kernen i vores evne til at bringe USA ind i en ny æra for store projekter og økonomisk udvikling, der typificeres af Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ; heraf titlen på vores udsendelse, »Genopbyg Amerikas hjerteland: Fra ’Rustbæltet’ til ’Bælte & Vej’«.

Kerneindholdet i LaRouche PAC’s valgplatform 2018 er, at USA’s præsidentskab omgående må vedtage Lyndon LaRouches fire økonomiske love og gå ind i en win-win-relation med Kinas Nye Silkevej. LaRouches fire økonomiske love er præcis det, der er nødvendigt lige nu, hvis vi ønsker at få midlet til at gå ud af det, der synes at være en »ingen udgang«-situation. Vi er nu i en nedtælling på fire dage til præsident Trumps State of the Union-tale på tirsdag. I takt med denne nedtælling, har vi optrappet vores kampagne nationalt for at sætte dette på dagsordenen: LaRouches fire økonomiske love, og USA må gå med i den Nye Silkevej.

At dømme umiddelbart ud fra præsident Trumps tale her til morgen på Davos Økonomiske Verdensforum, så vil han få brug for en ’omvendelse på vejen til Damaskus’ i løbet af weekenden for at komme til at forstå, at, nej – at tale om en aktiemarkedsboble og $7 billion i såkaldt »tilføjet værdi« eller merværdi på Wall Street, udgør ikke en økonomisk genrejsning! Faktisk udgør det selve problemet. Dette er præcis, hvad William White, tidligere cheføkonom for Den internationale Betalingsbank (BIS), advarede om i et interview, han gav i Davos til Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, og hvor han diskuterede det faktum, at vi praktisk taget uundgåeligt har kurs mod det transatlantiske finanssystems kollaps, af præcis denne grund: de billige penge, nulrente-politikken, der er blevet gennemført af Federal Reserve og den Europæiske Centralbank (ECB), har skabt det, som William White kaldte et »Catch-22«, et Punkt 22. Hvis disse rentesatser forbliver lave, vil vi have kurs mod en hyperinflationseksplosion af penge i systemet, og det vil føre os til en Weimar-stil hyperinflation, som vi så det i 1923. Men hvis ECB og Fed beslutter at hæve renten, vil »zombie-bankerne« og »zombieselskaberne«, der i de seneste flere år har eksisteret, baseret på denne politik med nulrente, billige penge og kvantitativ lempelse, kollapse indad, og vi vil få et kollaps af systemet i denne retning.

Ud fra William Whites standpunkt, så har denne advarsel »ingen udgang«.

Der er faktisk en udgang, og vi ved nøjagtig, hvad det er, og dette er, hvad præsident Trump omgående må vedtage. Udgangen består i Lyndon LaRouches fire økonomiske love: Rejs en brandmur i form af Glass-Steagall mellem kommerciel bankvirksomhed og de produktive investeringer, og så alt det møg, vi har i form af spekulativ værdi på Wall Street og City of London. Lad dette møg tørre ud og blæse væk; men beskyt de nødvendige, produktive, kommercielle bankvirksomhedsaspekter af vores økonomi. Erstat den spekulative økonomi med et kreditsystem i Hamiltons tradition, hvor man tager billioner af dollars i statslig kredit, via en ny Nationalbank, og dirigerer det, ikke til spekulation, men derimod til reel, fysisk værdi: til storskala infrastrukturprojekter, store projekter, nye industrier, vareproduktion og til en forøgelse af arbejdskraftens produktive evne i USA’s arbejdsstyrke; og især – som vi skal diskutere her i dag – i Midtvestens tidligere produktive arbejdsstyrke, og ligeledes bringe USA ind i dette store nye projekts Nye Silkevej.

Dette er, hvad præsident Trump må forstå om økonomi, og vi er i en nedtælling på fire dage til State of the Union, til at sætte dette på dagsordenen. Vores job slutter på ingen måde her; men formålet med denne 2018-valgplatform, som LaRouche PAC har udgivet, er tværtimod at vinde en kampagne, essentielt, for USA’s præsidentskab. Vi er naturligvis ikke i et præsidentvalgår, og præsident Trump er den behørigt valgte præsident og vil være vores præsident for de næste tre år, mindst, på trods af bestræbelserne fra Russiagate-kuppets side og hans opponenter, der forsøger at vælte hans præsidentskab; men den kampagne, vi kører, er en kampagne for USA’s præsidentskabs politik: Det er en kampagen for at vinde kampen om præsidentskabets politik.

I dag skal vi diskutere strategien, og Midtvesten, eller USA’s industrielle hjerteland, er et af de afgørende elementer i denne strategi. Om lidt vil I få at se, at præsident Trumps sejr i 2016-valgene, i realiteten skyldtes hans sejr i Midtvesten. Han var i stand til at bryde det, der kaldes den »Demokratiske blå brandmur«, og han vendte fire store, tidligere industrielle rustbæltestater, der havde stemt demokratisk, siden valget af FDR i præsidentielle valg; og han vendte dem og vandt disse stater: Pennsylvania, Michigan og Wisconsin, for ikke at tale om hans sejre i Ohio.

Hvordan gjorde han det? Han adresserede selve det faktum, at både det Republikanske og det Demokratiske Parti havde indgået en ’aftale med djævelen’ om en konsensus om, begge at være partiet for frihandel og post-industrialisering. Kandidat Trump sprængte hele denne konsensus i stykker, gik ind og sagde, »Jeg er imod frihandel, vi vil nedlukke NAFTA«, og han sagde i særdeleshed, »vi vil bringe industri tilbage til hjertelandet«. Vi vil få ny vareproduktion, nye jobs, og han krævede endda en »ny industriel revolution«.

Jeg vil gerne give lidt baggrund, før vi kommer til diskussionen, om, hvad det var, præsident Trump fik adgang til, hvad enten, han helt var klar over det eller ej. Men dette er i produktivitetens ånd, og jeg vil faktisk hævde, at dette ikke er Trump-vælgerskaren, men at det er »LaRouche-vælgerskaren«. Og det, vi vil gøre med denne kampagne for at lægge 2018 LaRouche PAC-platformen på bordet, er, at vi vil organisere denne vælgerskare omkring denne vision, de Fire Loves økonomiske program, og vi vil bruge denne indflydelse til at skabe en revolution i USA’s præsidentskabs økonomiske politik.

Lad os gå lidt tilbage i tiden, til det industrielle kraftcenter, som Midtvesten var kendt som, før det fik lov at sygne hen og blive til ’rustbæltet’. Dette skete pga. Franklin Roosevelts mobilisering under Anden Verdenskrig, med at tage det, som var bilindustriens maskinværktøj til biler – i Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin og i det vestlige Pennsylvania – og at tilpasse disse bilfabrikker og bruge den specialiserede arbejdsstyrke til at lancere det, der blev kaldt »Demokratiets arsenal«.

Så lad os nu gå lidt tilbage i tiden og se på denne nyhedsfilm fra Anden Verdenskrig, og I vil få at se, hvad vi mener, når vi taler om Franklin Roosevelts Demokratiets arsenal.

(Engelsk udskrift af resten af udsendelsen:)

[Video]
FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT:  We must be the great arsenal of
democracy.

NARRATOR:  President Roosevelt makes an unprecedented 9,000
mile tour of the United States, to see for himself the nation at
war.  Visiting armament plants from coast to coast, he stops at
the giant Chrysler tank arsenal, where he sees the Army’s latest
mechanized monsters, tested as they come from assembly lines.
Then, on to one of Henry Ford’s great bomber plants, where
the President and First Lady are greeted by Mr. Ford and General
Manager Sorensen.
Plane workers, delighted with the surprise visit, show the
President that wartime production is meeting the goal set, many
plants exceeding their quotas.

PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT:  We shall send you, in ever-increasing
numbers, ships, planes, tanks, guns:  That is our purpose and our
pledge!

NARRATOR:  And the President’s words meant action.  America
became the Arsenal of Democracy. …
Working 24 hours a day, seven days a week, where General
Motors is undertaking to produce more than 10% of all war
matériel fabricated from metal.  Thousands of workmen in four GM
divisions turn out machineguns in a mass-production basis.
Output is months ahead of schedule….
General Motors has pioneered in applying mass production
methods to the manufacture of aircraft.  Work goes on day and
night under the adept fingers of General Motors men and women.
They are producing an avalanche of weapons for victory in General
Motors manufacturing centers all over America.  Machine tools,
the master tools of industry and of victory are made at a
constantly increasing rate…. [end video]

OGDEN:  So “machine tools, the master tools of industry and
victory” are made at an ever-increasing rate.  That was the
Arsenal of Democracy.  That was Franklin Roosevelt’s economic
program.
Now, what happened?  President Trump, in the 2016 election
did what all other candidates have refused to do:  He refused to
take what he called the “forgotten men and women” of the United
States, very much so, these formerly industrial, skilled labor
force, and he said, you will be the forgotten men and women no
more.
Contrast that to what Hillary Clinton did, where she took
these states — Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin — took them
for granted, and in fact, never even went to Wisconsin for a
campaign event — and lo and behold, on Election Night, surprise,
surprise, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, all went for
Trump. And in fact, that was the key to his winning the U.S.
Presidency.
How did he do it?  Well, let me play this clip for you from
President Trump’s going to Ypsilanti, Michigan to the Willow Run
auto factory, and where he discusses the Arsenal of Democracy,
and calls for the creation of new industrial revolution.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Great Americans of all backgrounds
built the Arsenal of Democracy, including the legendary Rosie the
Riveter, who worked here at Willow Run. You know that. [cheers]
Seventy-five years ago, during the Second World War, thousands of
American workers filled this very building, to build the great
new airplanes, the B-24 Liberator, at peak production — listen
to this — it’s not the country that we’ve been watching over the
last 20 years: They were building one B-24 every single hour.
[cheers]  We don’t hear that, we don’t hear that any more, do we?
We’ll be back, we’ll be back, soon.  The most amazing
people.
And while that’s incredible, it’s a tribute, really, to the
teamwork, determination and patriotism that lives on today, in
each and every one of you.  Great people — you’re great people.
Now, these hundreds of acres that defended our democracy are
going to help build the cars and cities of the future.  So I ask
you,  — that’s fine, ’cause you’re rushed — so I ask you today
to join me in daring to believe that this facility, this city,
and this nation, will once again shine with industrial might.
[cheers]
I’m asking you to place your faith in the American worker
and these great American companies. [applause]  I’m also asking
you, to respect, and place your faith in companies from foreign
lands that come here to build their product.  We love them, too.
Right?  We love them, too. [applause]
I’m asking all of the companies here, today, to join us, in
this new industrial revolution:  Let us put American workers,
American families, and American dreams first, once again.  May
God bless the American worker.  May God bless the Motor City.
And may God bless the United States of America.  Thank you, thank
you. [cheers]
[end video]

OGDEN:  And there you have it. So let’s put on the screen
here, the electoral map, and this is a very interesting map [Fig.
1] and I’m actually going to ask Bill Roberts to discuss it with
us a little bit.  But this was published by the Washington Post
immediately after the election victory by President Trump. And
you’ll see here, the title is “The Former Obama Strongholds
Sealed the Election for Trump.”   And I’ll let Bill describe what
we’re looking at, but you’ll see there, the concentration is in
the rust belt, in the former industrial heartland, there, and
that’s the region of the country we’re talking about here, right
now.
So Bill, tell us what we’re looking at in that map and
explain to us exactly what the strategy for victory here, has to
be.

BILL ROBERTS:  Sure.  Matt, let me just start out by saying
that there was recently an article published by a local
representative, representing Macomb County [Michigan],  I think
one of those counties that was an Obama-voting county, probably
voted for Obama twice, and then shifted and voted for Trump.
What this local elected official was arguing for a decent
high-wage, what’s called a prevailing wage, for union employees.
And he made the point in that document that this policy actually
started with Henry Ford; it started with Henry Ford’s decision
that he was going to pay his workers $5 a day to produce cars,
and this wage would allow them to be able to buy the car that
they were producing.  So this is the coalition of producers which
we now have to mobilize to define, the standard of competence on
which national elected officials are going to run their
campaigns.
Now, let me bring back up this map, here:  What you’re
looking at, these are the districts across the country that voted
for Obama twice, as in the dark yellow; and in the light yellow
are districts that voted for Obama once.  But all of these shaded
areas then were the counties that switched, that swung and voted
for Donald Trump in 2018.  So these are traditionally Democratic
areas, where Trump went in and campaigned, where Hillary Clinton
did not, and he really made his focus the “forgotten men and
women,” who were part of this very advanced — I think “rust
belt” is a kind of derogatory term, because in fact, the labor
forces associated with these regions, whether they be farmers or
skilled workers, produce extremely advanced products, to the
tolerances of a thousandth of an inch, or even smaller.  And
Trump tapped into something that Lyndon LaRouche identified
later, which is that, this was part of actually a global process
of voters rejecting the failures, the failed policies of the
trans-Atlantic financial system, the destruction of the skilled
workforce; the overrunning of these areas with an epidemic of
drugs, of opiates; the failed regime-change wars.  And they voted
for the policy, and not the party.
And so, these are obviously going to be areas in which both
the parties are going to be looking in the election to try to
swing the vote.  The problem is, neither party has the policies
that can address the dire situation that these forgotten men and
women find themselves in.   Neither party’s leadership has a
competent program to be able to directly address these blue
collar and rural districts in the upper Midwest, in terms of the
kind of economic destruction they’ve seen.
So, it really falls upon the campaign of the LaRouche
Political Action Committee, and what we have to find is the
standard of competent that can actually rebuild these areas.  The
LaRouche Four Laws, the identification of the necessity of the
United States cooperating with China and countries that we can
align our credit systems with, in order to actually capitalize a
national infrastructure bank and a full economic recovery.
I would just say that, you know, you have Democrats on the
one hand, who continue to push the fraud of the Russiagate
investigation, as if this hasn’t been disproven, and moved to
other slanders against Trump, such as the Durbin fraud of the
racist remarks that Trump allegedly said.  None of the voters in
these swing areas, they absolutely hate this kind of stuff.  And
then, on the Republican site, Trump has really got to be able to
break with this GOP/Wall Street backed leadership orientation
within his own party, in order to be able to address, similarly,
this voting base.  Because Wall Street- backed policies are not
going to finance an economic recovery.  Trump has already said
that the public-private partnerships are not going to function to
build the vast amount of infrastructure that’s required.
So the LaRouche Political Action Committee and our team here
in the Midwest, are looking at races of interest, not necessarily
ones that are going to come down to Republicans versus Democrat,
but maybe even ones where there’s an interesting difference in
the party primary first — in other words, in the immediate
period, in the immediate campaigns, is there an Obama-backed
candidate, for example, who is running against someone who has
the support of building trades, of engineering societies?  Has a
real interest in the revival of the productive economy, and this
is our domain to shape.
As you said Matt, this is really a LaRouche constituency.
And I’ve been in these areas:  I mean, these are people, that
voted Democrat in every election in their entire life, and then
they voted for Donald Trump.  And it was the question of the
“fair trade not free trade,” it was the issue of bringing back
manufacturing; it was the commitment to seeking solutions beyond
geopolitics, beyond the regime-change wars that have been, really
disproportionately hitting these post-industrial and urban
communities that have made up a disproportionate number in the
Armed Forces recruitment.
So, if you look, there is 53% of these communities that
shifted over and voted for Trump after having voted for Obama:
This is an interesting demographics of producers who are
clamoring for real leadership.  There is a profound, profound
vacuum of leadership, that I know from our forays into the state
legislatures in the recent weeks, are really demanding a way in
which — and they have not found this solution outside of what we
have presented to them — but a way in which you can actually
capitalize, a sustained and thorough, scientific-driven,
infrastructure-driven economic recovery over the next 10, 15, 20
years.  And what strikes these local elected officials more than
anything, is that they have not been presented with any other
plan at all that even identifies an approach to amassing the kind
of investment that you will get with the LaRouche plan and that
you will get with the cooperation of the United States with China
and with countries like Japan.
So, I think it’s an extremely fertile situation if we
intervene with a kind of vigor now to define the only competent
solution which exists for candidates and for constituency groups
to demand that those candidates campaign on.

OGDEN:  And that’s exactly the declared intention of this
2018 Platform from LaRouche PAC, is to seek out those
constituency groups, but more so to create those constituency
groups that are going to, through leadership and organization,
will demand this scientifically informed economic agenda; what
LaRouche has laid out.  Glass-Steagall to erect a firewall;
reorganize the financial system; national banking as Alexander
Hamilton did it; trillions of dollars in Federal credit for
infrastructure, new industries, productive employment; and then
all under a driver.  Like the same kind of driver you saw there
for the Arsenal of Democracy; that was a mission orientation.
The kind of mission orientation that we need today is the space
program and for fusion power.  These are the kinds of drivers
that create the top-down organization that economic activity can
participate in, and then will feed into and have a
self-reproducing kind of increase in productivity.
Now what happened in Detroit, and what happened in Michigan,
and what happened in the Midwest, was not something that was just
a crisis of the last few years.  This has been decades and
decades in the making, and it goes back even before NAFTA.  What
occurred was a loss of that commitment that Franklin Roosevelt
had to productivity and to productive employment.  We actually,
Bill, you and I worked together to produce a video several years
ago, around the time that Detroit was forced to declare
bankruptcy.  It was called “Detroit: A Test Case for Genocide”.
In that video, we put together an animated graphic that showed
the population increase in Detroit due to the mobilization around
the Arsenal of Democracy; but then following that, and with the
abandonment of that commitment to industrial production, the
population decrease which has occurred for several decades, and
which has now gotten to a critical point.  So, this is actually
an animated population graphic, and I would like to just put this
on the screen.  You can listen to the narration there.  This is
from the original video, “Detroit: A Test Case for Genocide”.

VIDEO:  The population of Detroit began to explode around
the turn of the 20th Century; increasing exponentially around
1910.  However, with the crash of 1929 and the onset of the Great
Depression, the population of Detroit began to level off and even
decline for the first time in its history.  It wasn’t until
Franklin Roosevelt’s Arsenal of Democracy that the population
began to grow again, surging to its maximum in 1950 with a
population of over 1.8 million people; making Detroit the fifth
largest city in the United States at the time.
However, after 1950, the population began to drop once
again, slowly at first, but accelerating over time.  By the year
2000, the population had collapsed to under a million, and by
2010 to 713,000; less than the population was a century before.
A more than 60% drop from its peak in 1950; a loss of over 1
million people.  This will only continue to accelerate at an
ever-increasing rate under the bankers’ dictatorship now
controlling the city. [END VIDEO]

OGDEN:  That was the despair and the crisis which really has
been many generations in the making in Michigan, in Detroit, that
Lyndon LaRouche was seeking to resolve when he called for a new
re-tooling of the auto industry back in 2012 to 2013, and even
prior to that around the bankruptcy of the Big Three
[automakers].  What he was calling for at that time, was to say
“Let’s re-tool the auto industry, and let’s use this machine tool
capability — the ‘make anything’ industry — to build the kinds
of lock and dams, the bridges, the high-speed rail, the
components for nuclear power plants; the kind of materiel that
you would need to mobilize an emergency economic recovery of the
United States.  The fact that that wasn’t done, has created even
worse conditions of impoverishment and despair.  As you pointed
out, Bill, some of the pockets of the worst opioid epidemic are
in these former industrial, former skilled labor communities.
This is the constituency which elected President Trump, but what
has to happen if President Trump is going to deliver on the
promises that he made?  How is this going to mobilized?  What
kind of economic recovery, what form is that going to take now
from the standpoint of the Midwest?

ROBERTS:  Well, if the news media had actually reported what
Trump did when he was in China, Trump secured $254 billion in
direct investment into these various states you’re talking about.
West Virginia, which has been decimated by Obama and by the drug
epidemic, West Virginia is set up to receive $84 billion in
direct investments from a Chinese company, as a result of the
trip that Donald Trump took to China and the friendly cooperation
of China and the United States, facilitated through these two
leaders — the President of China and President Trump.  Now,
that’s more money than any known proposal proposes to have the
Federal portion, the Federally-funded, matched portion of
investment in U.S. infrastructure.  You look at any plan coming
from Democrats, that’s more money than the Federal government is
going to capitalize in an infrastructure program.  So, the first
question on anyone’s mind who now knows that — if you tell that
to them — since the media is not readily reporting that is, “How
is China able to invest so much in infrastructure?”  Of course,
the answer is that China has an American System policy bank;
that’s how China is able to capitalize these vast development
programs across the continent of Asia into Africa.
Now of course, China and Japan are both willing to put
probably a total of about $1 trillion or more into capitalizing a
policy bank in the United States.  It doesn’t have to be a direct
investment.  A number of direct investments by China were
rejected on the basis of supposed security concerns.  So, they
don’t have to be direct investments, but we can simply capitalize
a national bank and then utilize the approach we have in the
past, such as a new gas tax, to finance such debt, such a
national banking structure.  I think this is something that used
to be very commonplace; this is how Franklin Roosevelt did
things, this is how Abraham Lincoln did things, and it’s a kind
of forgotten method.  If this would have been reported that, in
fact, this is the dynamic that exists in the world that is
driving massive development throughout the planet, then everyone
would be talking about this already.  Everyone would be wanting
to know how China is able to do this.  They would be demanding
that the very Henry C Carey system that the Chinese love to study
so much is exactly the basis on which we now unleash a 10-15 year
process of massive infrastructure investment; and that the way
that you pay for this, is through massive revolutionary
breakthroughs in technology keyed off of breakthroughs in the
manned space mission and the expansion of NASA, and in fusion
power.  That it’s the revolutionary scientific advancements, not
money per se, which actually is what pays for this process.  The
Chinese understand this, too; which you can see in their fusion
program and in their highly developed and growing space program.
The media has certainly been aiding and abetting an
unfortunate process in this country; where the elections will
tend to be very partisan, low level, least common denominator
kinds of discussions; hot-button topics.  But it doesn’t have to
be.  Everything that we’ve just gone through here in terms of the
history of how the United States has been a productive country
and has been a scientifically revolutionary country driven by the
machine tool sector, and has had institutions that make it
possible to finance such revolutionary developments; that these
are not only available to the United States, but that this is
already a process driving most of the world.  In fact, the
President of the United States has been the most open President,
and is very open to working with these other countries within
this very sort of dynamic.  So again, our objective — we have to
sort of evangelize; because there are so many people out there
who, if they simply knew what was happening in the world and if
they had the LaRouche Four Laws solution at their fingertips,
they would gladly demand it.  They would gladly reach across the
aisle to work — Republicans working with Democrats on mobilizing
big Federal expenditures for infrastructure; Democrats gladly
dropping the insane anti-Trump tirades, and instead urging him to
break with Wall Street, and reach across the aisle and work with
Republicans who are willing to collaborate on an anti-Wall Street
policy, an American System policy along with Trump.  So, we found
tremendous openness.
But we don’t want to just go to the candidates for the
endorsement and for them to campaign on these policies — on the
New Silk Road, on ending the coup against the President, and on
LaRouche’s Four Laws.  But rather, we want to get to their base
of support — the skilled labor unions, the professional
organizations, the engineers, the voting blocs in general and the
state legislatures, the super constituents.  We have to have an
accelerated process of educating these individuals on the unique
LaRouche solution that you are not going to get from the party
leadership at this point, who are really too much stuck in the
old paradigm.  But if we introduce these constituents to the New
Paradigm, sure, of course, gladly they will take that instead of
this lame discussion that you’ll otherwise get at these
candidates’ debates.

OGDEN:  And LaRouche PAC is uniquely positioned to do that;
that’s why it’s so necessary that we put out this platform, this
statement of intent and that we’re conducting a national
mobilization.  LaRouche PAC, especially there in the Midwest with
the productive labor force, the working class constituency,
LaRouche PAC has an extraordinary amount of authority on the
ground among those kinds of labor organizations and productive
workers.  I would say also Bill, you personally have an
extraordinary amount of authority because of what you have been
engaged in there for years; including, as I mentioned at the
beginning, a Congressional campaign that you ran in 2012 there.
You got 41% of the vote in the 11th Congressional District there
in the 2012 Democratic primary.
Now, I’d actually like to play a clip for our viewers of
testimony that you gave in front of the Detroit City Council in
2012, when this entire rigging of the LIBOR rate came up and the
city was dealing with “Oh my gosh!  How are we going to repay
these debts and are we going to have to declare bankruptcy?”
Here’s the intervention that you made around Glass-Steagall and
the necessity of immediately instituting this kind of Franklin
Roosevelt policy.  So, this is testimony from July 24, 2012 at
the Detroit City Council.

ROBERTS

:  My name is Bill Roberts.  I am running for
U.S. Congress, and I do so for the same reason I’m here today,
which is that if I were not here to say what I’m saying today, no
one would say it.  I’m calling on the Detroit City Council to
reject any cuts that endanger the lives of human beings, and
instead to publicly call for and fight for the reinstatement of
House Resolution 1489, the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall; which
both Congressmen from Detroit are co-sponsors of, to break up the
too-big-to-fail banks.  The reason why I bring this up today is
because it is clear that 75% of major cities enter into interest
rate swaps.  These interest rate swaps were rigged against cities
at the highest level; at the LIBOR — the London Inter-Bank
Offered Rate.  This is murder.  This is not insider trading; this
is murder.  It has resulted in cuts to departments that have
killed people.  There are people at the highest level involved in
this.  I call upon the Detroit City Council to stand up and have
the guts to tell the private bankers that they are going to jail.

OGDEN:  Now, within the next year, Detroit was forced to
declare bankruptcy under Rick Snyder and financial manager Kevyn
Orr.  And exactly one year later, in July of 2013, Lyndon
LaRouche went on record and was asked what has to be done to save
the city of Detroit, to save the entire industrial heartland, and
what kinds of solutions are on the table?  He talked about
Glass-Steagall, but he talked about an expanded Glass-Steagall
solution.  So, I’d like to just play this clip from Lyndon
LaRouche for you.

LYNDON LAROUCHE:  What is the situation of the United States
in terms of its economic development over the period, say the
last really effective Presidency went down?  What happened,
particularly with two terms of the Bush family and this latest
phenomenon, is that the economy of the United States virtually
does not exist.  And that’s true in the case of the auto industry
in particular, which is the center of this whole thing with
Detroit, is the auto industry.  It’s not just the auto industry
in Michigan, nor is it in the northern states around Michigan.
It goes all the way through the entire system — north, south,
east and west.  The U.S. economy does no longer function!  And
there is no hope for this nation under the present conditions,
unless we change those conditions radically.  Therefore, we have
lost the auto industry.  Do you know how important the auto
industry was?  Do you know how important back in 2005 and so
forth when we fought to save the auto industry?  And I was
playing a leading part in that fight.  Do you realize what
happened when the auto industry went down?  Do you realize that
we no longer are a nation capable of meeting our own needs?  Look
at the food supply.  What’s the food supply of the United States?
How do parts of the farm area work?  Nothing works!  Especially
since George W Bush became President.  Since that point, there
has been a disintegration throughout Europe and throughout the
United States and other parts of the world.  We no longer have a
sustainable economy.  What we have is the possibility, with
special efforts, to revive the economy.
Now, what we’re going to have to do — we’ve got some people
in Detroit, for example.  They’re unemployed, essentially.  There
are few of them left in the other odd industries that they fled
into as machine tool specialists and so forth.  What we’re going
to do is create a new industry, based on the core of the skilled
people who can play a key leading part in assembling a
replacement for what used to be called the auto industry.  The
real name for the auto industry as it was since World War II, is
the machine tool industry; that’s its character.  So, our job is,
in the case of Detroit, you cannot solve this economic problem by
sitting there or by following some politician’s recipes.  What we
can do is seize control of the situation.  Only through
Glass-Steagall can we save the United States; otherwise the
United States is doomed without Glass-Steagall.  Because there is
no agriculture, there is no machine tool system, there is no
labor production of any significance; that’s it.  So therefore,
unless we get Glass-Steagall in, we will not be able to make an
immediate change from the kind of economy on which you’re
operating now, which is a hopeless failure.  By changing quickly
to bring agriculture back, to build up the water systems that we
need for feeding our people; all these things depend upon
Glass-Steagall.  Not just Glass-Steagall itself, but an expanded
version of Glass-Steagall.
Therefore, the issue is, unless we can seize the hands of
power in the United States and organize the government to behave
like the government, not like it’s been doing recently; and go in
there and put Glass-Steagall into effect quickly.  Having done
that, we’re going to have to — in addition to Glass-Steagall —
we’re going to have to create a credit system to supplement
Glass-Steagall in order to finance the things that have to be
built up in terms of production which are needed to restore this
nation.  Without those actions, there’s no hope.  You don’t have
a chance; there is no other option.  Grab the United States; put
it back to business as best you can, and use some innovation.
But above all, apply Glass-Steagall as I know how to do it; and
some other people also know.  The very fact that we restore the
confidence of the people in their own nation — that is, the
United States — by taking immediate action; which means large
amounts of fundraising and fund contributions to get farming and
industry back going immediately.  We have to have — just as
Roosevelt did during the period of the onset of the Depression,
his first years.  We had people; we put them to work.  They
weren’t really producing anything; they were stuck in there with
shovels and picks and so forth out in the streets.  They weren’t
really producing things, but they were there; and they had a job.
And they had the beginnings of a family income, and they had a
future.  That’s what Roosevelt gave them, and that’s what we now
have to give the people of the United States.  We cannot give
them much, because the friends of the Bush family have stolen so
much there’s not much left for real people.  But we can restart
the process of production; restart that; and that we can do.  And
that we {must} do.  Without Glass-Steagall, we cannot do it.
So, the lives of the people of the United States depend upon
Glass-Steagall.  And Glass-Steagall can only be delivered by
Glass-Steagall Plus.  Glass-Steagall Plus means that we’re going
to take the junk that is junk, and we’re going to cancel it.
Most of this banking crap is worthless; there’s no value in it.
So why are we continuing to bail it out in a hyperinflationary
rate?  We don’t need it.  Put the thing through processing, and
you will find that when you go through the paperwork, all these
banking systems, the Wall Street crowd, all of them; how much of
these things they claim they own are actually real?  I don’t know
if they could come out with a penny of it for a giant.  So
therefore the point is, we have to restore the United States; get
rid of this crap, and do what Franklin Roosevelt did.  It’s going
to be more difficult than what Franklin Roosevelt faced in his
time, but the principle is, we’ve got to do it.  That’s the
answer; we’ve got to do it and get the message across to the
people.  That’s the only thing; there is no other chance.  Forget
this Republican nonsense; they’re just wolves trying to find a
place to bark in.  But that’s the answer, and there is no other
answer.

OGDEN:  So, that was from 2013, but as you can see, that’s
the core of Lyndon LaRouche’s Four Economic Laws; that’s the
entirety of the program.  That’s the kind of voice of authority
that we have to come into the scene with, and speak with that
kind of forcefulness, that kind of authority.  That’s exactly the
voice of Lyndon LaRouche that this constituency bloc can be
formed around.  As I said, what Trump tapped into — whether he
knew it or not — is indeed the LaRouche constituency there in
the heartland, in the industrial Midwest.
So, Bill, I just wanted to let you make some concluding
points, but this is the theme.  We can very rapidly take this
so-called Rust Belt and bring it into the Belt and Road
Initiative; and bring the New Paradigm of great projects into the
Midwest and awaken that kind of optimism.  So, Bill, I invite you
to just go ahead.

ROBERTS:  Well, I think what Lyn said right there is
absolutely key; that’s it.  People got brainwashed into thinking
that money is the key to wealth; that money is economy.  And Lyn
said “No. Cancel a lot of that money.  We don’t need the money.”
People said, “Cancel the money?  How can we do that?”  The point
is, you don’t need it, and what you need is, you need the machine
tool capability, you need the advanced farming, and you need the
things that go along with that.  I wish we would have had a
graphic in terms of where the funding goes in a national credit
system, because that’s really what he was addressing here.  But
the key is, you need the credit.  We can build everything we need
to.  The people, the “toolies” in these areas as they call them,
in these counties where people switched profile and voted for
Trump; they understand this.  They understand how what is central
to an economy; what is essential to a productive workforce.  The
issue is credit.  You don’t need Wall Street trying to make
11%-12% off of any money that they loose from their hands.  What
you need is to organize the credit; then the people can build the
economy.  You don’t need the straitjacket of this monetary
system.  In fact, if Trump doesn’t move against this Wall Street
financial bubble, this will bring the country down.  It’s a
ticking time bomb right now, waiting to go off; as William White
and others have said.  This thing is ready to go.  If this is not
moved against with the Glass-Steagall policy, we’re looking at a
complete and utter disaster.  But the good news is, we don’t need
it.  It’s simply that the American citizenry, the people watching
this today, have to take it as a personal challenge that we have
to create among these constituencies of the country, the notion
that there is a standard of competence for Federal office.  That
standard of competence is the comprehension of this principle;
this non-monetarist credit system principle that we have been
discussing today.
I guarantee that if you do that, people will listen.

OGDEN:  Well, let me put on the screen one more time “A
Campaign for Victory: The Campaign to Win the Future”.  This is
the electoral platform that LaRouche PAC has put out for 2018.
And Bill, you’re right in the middle of mobilizing the
constituencies there in the Midwest.  We need a national
mobilization to endorse this platform; not only candidates for
office, but Bill, as you said, the building trades, the labor
unions, the productive workers, the agricultural organizations.
These are the constituency bases that need to come to understand
this as principle.  The link is there on the screen:
LPAC.CO/YT2018.  This is the LaRouche PAC election platform for
2018.
We’ve got a lot of work to do, because it is our
responsibility to communicate what you just said, Bill.  This is
a non-monetarist principle; it means that you have to raise your
level of comprehension of what economics is really all about.
This is not monetarism, this is not Wall Street; this is a
question of what makes mankind a unique creative species, and how
is that reflected in national economic policy.  So, that’s what
is contained in the LaRouche PAC 2018 Campaign to Win the Future.
We ask you to join our mobilization; endorse this, and become a
part of what we’re doing nationally.  This is our strategy for
victory.
So Bill, thank you very much for joining me here today.
It’s good to hear from you; it’s good to hear what’s happening
out there in the Midwest, and we look forward to being in touch a
lot more.  I think we can look forward to a real mobilization.
So, thank you very much.
And thank you for tuning in to larouchepac.com.  Please stay
tuned; we have a lot of work to do, and we’ll see you next week.
Thank you.  Signing off, this is Matthew Ogden.  Good night.

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 24. jan., 2018 – Sandheden siver ud om Russiagate-svindelen, og om, at den særlige anklager Robert Mueller blev sat ind for at være en »juridisk lejemorder«. Næsten hver dag kommer der nye afsløringer om dette, som åbner op for muligheden for at en optrapning for at besejre hele den britiske kupoperation kan finde sted i takt med den voksende fare for et finansielt blow-out og en krig, der drives frem af de neokonservative.

Blandt de seneste bekræftelser på kuppets modus operandi er tidligere topmedarbejder i den Nationale Sikkerhedstjeneste (NSA) Bill Binneys vurdering, at FBI’s påstand om at have »mistet« fem måneders tekstbeskeder mellem to anti-Trump topagenter i FBI, Peter Strzok og Lisa Page, »stinker langt væk«. Binney har i løbet af denne uge i flere interviews forklaret, hvilke NSA-kapaciteter, der er involveret, til at opfange, sikre og spore kommunikationer.

Én af tekstbeskederne mellem Strzok og Page, der rent faktisk er offentliggjort, og som er fra dagen efter valget 8. nov., 2016, henviser til deres plan om at ty til et møde i et »hemmeligt selskab« nu, da Trump har vundet. I går sagde senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), formand for Komiteen for Indenlandske Sikkerheds- og Regeringsanliggender, at han har en meddeler, der ved, at sådanne private samtaler i et »hemmeligt selskab« faktisk fandt sted, på lokaliteter uden for FBI. Han og senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), formand for Retsudvalget, sendte et brev i går til Justitsministeriets generalinspektør, og som med frist til 29. jan. krævede at vide alt om disse »mistede« tekstbeskeder, inklusiv, hvorfor Justitsministeriet/FBI med hensyn til dem svarede Kongressen undvigende.

Med hensyn til Robert Mueller selv, så kommer afsløringer af hans forbrydelser i forbindelse med 11. september, 2001, nu i stigende grad frem i offentligheden, med rapporten fra Florida Bulldog fra 18. jan., der siger, at Mueller, som en FBI-topembedsmand, med sin underskrift godkendte FBI’s mørklægning af saudiarabere i Sarasota, der havde forbindelse til angrebene 11. september, en rapport, der nu tages op i andre medier.

Kravet om at få disse forbrydelser og alle andre løgne og tilsløringer frem i dagens lys, og dernæst gøre en ende på dem, vokser. I dag kom kongresmedlem Walter Jones (R-NC) med en erklæring, der støttede det nye memorandum fra formanden for Husets Efterretningskomite, kongresmedlem David Nunes (R-CA), om FBI/FISA’s meddelagtighed i 2016. Jones brugte historiske vendinger: Jeg har altid været stærk tilhænger af gennemskuelighed og åben regering. Jeg ledede de succesfulde initiativer for at afklassificere de ’28 sider’ af rapporten om 11. september og afklassificere tidligere ikke-frigivne statslige filer om mordet på præsident John F. Kennedy …«

I dag gentog senator Grassley sin anmodning til Justitsministeriet om at åbne en kriminel efterforskning af den »forhenværende« britiske efterretningsagent Christopher Steele. Både Grassley og Nunes har et memorandum, som de arbejder for, skal afklassificeres og offentliggøres.

Netop, som Russiagate synker, foregår der en optrapning for et fremstød for regulær krig, og som er anstiftet af den samme hoben britiske kupmagere, gennem neokonservative og neoliberale aktiver. Det seneste udtryk herfor er en ny, multinational enhed, der blev dannet i Paris den 23. jan. og brugt som platform for at angribe Rusland: »Internationalt Partnerskab imod Straffrihed for Anvendelse af Kemiske Våben«. Den syriske regering anklages for at bruge kloringas i denne uge. Desværre gik USA’s udenrigsminister Rex Tillerson med på sagen og sagde, at Rusland er »ultimativt ansvarligt« for angreb med kemiske våben i Syrien. Han sagde desuden, »Ruslands fiasko mht. at løse spørgsmålet om kemiske våben i Syrien sætter spørgsmålstegn ved Ruslands relevans i løsningen af den overordnede krise«.

Det bør bemærkes, at Tillerson kom til Paris direkte fra London, hvor han i sidste weekend mødtes med geopolitikkens inderste kredse. Man ser den britiske hånd i Det Hvide Hus mht. Syrien; og ligeledes i den historiske udredning af den berygtede, britiske efterretningsagent Christopher Steeles involvering i Ukraine, og senere, i Russiagate.

Bagtæppet for alt dette er det monetaristiske finanssystems forestående undergang, som den kendte BIS- og OECD-økonom William White i denne uge identificerede som et »Catch-22«, et Punkt 22, hvor politikken med den kvantitative lempelse (QE) ikke kan fortsætte uden, at der kommet et blow-out; men at stoppe det vil også indebære et blow-out.

Op over alt dette hævede de rapporter sig, der blev aflagt på Davos Økonomiske Verdensforum i dag, på panelet, »Bælte & Vejs indvirkning på verden.

Præsident Xi Jinpings topøkonom, Liu He, talte om, hvad Kina gør på den hjemlige og den internationale front for fælles udvikling. Der er rent konkret et nyt momentum for dette på den vestlige halvkugle, hvor der i denne uge blev lagt planer for Bælte & Vej Initiativet i Syd- og Mellemamerika og Mexico, af Kina og Sammenslutningen af Latinamerikanske og Caribiske Stater (CELAC).

Ved at bryde det britiske kup, kan dens modstandere, USA, blive befriet til at deltage i den Nye Silkevej i alle de amerikanske kontinenter og videre endnu, til fordel for verden.

Foto: FBI-direktør modtager applaus under præsident Barack Obamas bemærkninger i Det Hvide Hus’ Rosenhave, 21. juni, 2013. Præsidenten annoncerede James Comey, højre, som sin nominerede kandidat til at efterfølge Mueller. (Official White House Photo)

25. jan., 2018 – Alt imens den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping ikke var til stede på dette års Økonomiske Verdensforum i Davos, så var meget af arrangementets fokus ikke desto mindre på Kina. Den kinesiske delegation, der bestod af både kinesiske regeringsfolk og en stor erhvervsdelegation, blev ledet af økonom Liu He, der, om end forholdsvis ukendt, har været økonomisk chefrådgiver til præsident Xi i en hel del år, men først i år blev valgt til Politbureauet, det Kinesiske Kommunistpartis højeste organ. Det er en almindelig antagelse, at de betydningsfulde forandringer i Kina hen over de seneste fem år, i en vis udstrækning skyldes Lius råd. Liu, der er en førende økonom, har skrevet vidtgående om krisen i 2008 og dens efterspil. I hans tale i Davos kom han med det, der kun kan anses for at være den største udfordring, som verdenssamfundet står overfor, nemlig at gennemføre fundamentale ændringer i det nuværende, globale finanssystem.

Med en fremlæggelse af det overordnede perspektiv for, hvor kinesisk politik er på vej hen efter den 19. Partikongres, identificerede Liu ét stort krav, én stor opgave, samt tre store kampe. Det store krav er at transformere økonomien fra vækst i højt tempo, til udvikling af høj kvalitet, hvor man, som Liu sagde, går fra en økonomi for »er det nok?« til én, der er baseret på »er det godt nok?«. Målet på kort sigt er at gå fra en indkomst pr. person på $8.000 til $10.000, og højere, frem til 2020. Hovedopgaven er at anvende en økonomisk reform for udbudssiden i økonomien. Dette omfatter en reduktion af overskydende kapacitet, reduktion af inventar i boliger og nedbringelse af gældens gearingsgrad. De tre kampe er forebyggelse af risici, især finansielle risici, nedbringelse af fattigdom og fjernelse af forurening.

Formålet er, sagde han, »at bringe finanssystemet ind i bedre overensstemmelse, forebygge finansielle risici og gøre finanssystemet mere tilpasningsdygtigt til at kunne tjene realøkonomien«. Liu observerede, at det internationale samfund nøje fulgte de kinesiske bestræbelser.

Dernæst trak Liu forbindelser til det globale finanssystem:

»Hertil kommer, at styrkelse af risikobevidsthed og ændring af forventninger til markedet, og implicit garantier mht. moralfare, har skabt vigtige psykologiske betingelser for os til at forebygge og kontrollere finansielle risici. Jeg vil gerne fremhæve, at opbygningen af Kinas finansielle risici og vores respons til dem er nært relateret til det skiftende, globale marked. Det er grunden til, at vi hilser velkommen det internationale samfunds deltagelse i og samarbejde om Kinas bestræbelse på at adressere finansielle risici, da dette er uløseligt forbundet med globale bestræbelser for at opretholde økonomisk stabilitet.«

Han gentog betydningen af Bælte & Vej Initiativet, og at det er åbent for alle nationer, og vendte dernæst tilbage til finanskrisen. Alt imens han refererede til de første tegn på økonomisk genrejsning sidste år og muligheden for et cyklisk opsving, så kom han også med en advarsel: »På et sådant afgørende tidspunkt må vi fokusere på afsmitningen fra den monetære politik fra verdens store økonomier og på ændringer i markeder for lån, egenkapital og råvarer på kort sigt. På mellemlangt sigt må vi være opmærksomme på spørgsmålet om arbejdskraftens produktivitet og på de skiftende opsparingsgrader i de store økonomier … I mellemtiden står dybt rodfæstede problemer i verdensøkonomien endnu tilbage at rette op på. Mange risici og betydelige usikkerhedsfaktorer kommer i form af stor gæld, værdipapirsbobler, protektionisme og en eskalering af globale og regionale brændpunkter. For at forvandle cykliske, økonomiske genrejsninger til bæredygtig vækst har vi brug for samordnede, globale bestræbelser.«

Andre vigtige statistikker fra Kina, der er værd at bemærke i hans tale: forbrugets bidrag til økonomisk vækst har nu nået 58 %, en stigning på 4 % over de foregående fem år; andelen af serviceindustrien i forhold til BNP har nået 60 %; og hen over de seneste fem år er 80 millioner mennesker blevet flyttet til byområder, med en urbanisering, der nu ligger på 58,52 %.

Liu refererede til præsident Xis appel sidste år om et fællesskab for menneskehedens fælles fremtid – der flere gange blev hyldet af Karl Schwab, præsident for det Økonomiske Verdensforum, som introducerede Liu He, og som var ordstyrer for diskussionen, der fulgte hans tale. Liu sluttede: »Så længe, vi etablerer en ferm bevidsthed om fællesskabet for den menneskelige skæbne og arbejder sammen for at hjælpe hinanden og for at overvinde vanskeligheder, vil vi helt bestemt kunne gøre verden til et bedre sted.«

(Hele Liu Hes tale kan læses her https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/01/pursue-high-quality-development-work-together-for-global-economic-prosperity-and-stability/)

Foto: Økonomske chefrådgiver til Kinas præsident Xi Jinping, Liu He, taler på Davos Økonomiske Verdensforum, 2018.