14. juni 2015 – Lørdag morgen begyndte Schiller Instituttets internationale konference i Paris under ovenstående tema, med omkring 400 deltagere fra ca. 30 lande. Som Christine Bierre sagde i sine velkomstbemærkninger til forsamlingen, så er det meningen, at denne begivenhed skal være et alarmopkald for at få folk aktiveret til at ændre verden snarere, end det skal være en akademisk begivenhed, hvor man blot udveksler mange ord. Schiller Instituttets præsident Helga Zepp-LaRouche holdt hovedtalen og gav først en rapport om det oprør, der fandt sted i den amerikanske Kongres i går, da den med et overvældende flertal stemte imod præsident Obamas TTIP-projekt. Dette oprør er på linje med BRIKS-nationernes udfordring imod den samme fjende: Wall Street og det internationale oligarki, som det sås på G7-topmødet sidste weekend. Dette oligarki føler sig berettiget truet, og det kunne hellere lancere en ny verdenskrig, end det kunne transformere sig – bemærk blot den anti-russiske retorik på G7-topmødet. Faren for en global atomkrig er til stede, og man må være opmærksom på det.

Alternativet er en ny relation, der er fri for geopolitik, mellem nationer, der arbejder sammen for menneskehedens fælles mål som helhed, og det, som prominente tyskere, der kritiserede G7-topmødet, gjorde, må optrappes, især tidligere tyske kansler Helmut Schmidt, der sagde, at man ikke alene skulle invitere Putin, men også lederne af de fire andre BRIKS-lande. Den tyske kansler Merkel må udskiftes, sanktionerne mod Rusland må afsluttes, den bedrageriske hjælp, der ikke går til grækerne, men til bankerne, må stoppe, og tilhængere af folkemord, såsom David Attenborough, der mødtes med Obama i det Hvide Hus umiddelbart før G7-topmødet, og som ønsker at dekabonisere verden og eliminere det meste af verdens befolkning, må stoppes.

BRIKS-alternativet er blevet opbygget siden topmødet i Fortaleza i Brasilien for et år siden; hundreder af aftaler er blevet indgået mellem disse fem lande, men også mellem andre lande, som det ses af de enorme projekter, Nicaragua Kanalen og den transkontinentale Brasilien-Peru-jernbane mellem Atlanterhavet og Stillehavet, som Kina går i gang med. Der er BRIKS’ Nye Udviklingsbank og Asiatisk Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank, de nye institutioner, der er forpligtende engageret til at finansiere sådanne projekter.

Den Nye Silkevej er, siden Schiller Instituttet foreslog den for 25 år siden, aldrig kun blevet anskuet som et eksklusivt, økonomisk program, men som et fundament for stabilitet og fred på global skala, sagde Helga. Siden den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping annoncerede den Nye Silkevej i 2013, er den blevet virkeliggjort i det praktiske liv, og den er udtrykkeligt blevet defineret som værende imod enhver geopolitik. Med hensyn til det kinesiske input, så er det i sit koncept drevet af konfucianisme og dennes princip om venskabelige relationer, der udvikler sig til harmoni – meget lig Nicolaus Cusanus’ indbyrdes forbindelse mellem mikrokosmos og makrokosmos.

Helga genkaldte også Schillers forslag om at højne den menneskelige sjæl gennem skønhedens princip, der er identisk med frihed, den samme idé om harmoni, der fremmes gennem en stat, der blot er et middel til at opnå menneskehedens mål, snarere end et middel for eliten til at bevare sin magt. Det, vi behøver for fremtiden, er ægte statskundskab, der arbejder for det sande, det gode og det skønne, og ikke for det falske, det onde og det hæslige, sagde Helga.

Men under diskussionsperioden, der efterfulgte hendes hovedtale, advarede hun også om ikke at forblive i søvngængeriet, men blive aktiv og vække befolkningen til bevidstheden om den akutte fare for krig og få den mobiliseret til fordel for et paradigme for en massebevægelse, for det er nødvendigt i Europa og USA, så man kan få smidt geopolitik ud, og en verden for menneskeheden kan blive skabt.

»Vi befinder os ved en afgørende skillevej, hvor vi her, ved udgangen af juni måned, ikke ved, om vi har et internationalt finanssystem, eller om det falder fra hinanden. Vi befinder os i en situation, hvor vi ikke ved, om man i desperation over, at det nuværende system har spillet fallit, vil starte en atomkrig, vil fortsætte med provokationerne mod Rusland, mod BRIKS-landene, og dermed sætte dagsordenen for, at man kan starte en atomkrig med Rusland.«

2.49.50

SPØRGSMÅL (parafrase): … man ser vores ungdoms uvidenhed, det samfundsmæssige forfald, som vi er vidne til … jeg læste, at, i nogle områder underviser de, at vi får vores rettigheder fra regeringen; skræmmende ting. Jeg spekulerer på, hvordan vi skal vende noget af omfanget af dette omkring. Jeg mener, at dagsordenen for at vende tilbage til de grundlæggende principper er så magtfuld og vidunderlig, men det virker som en hård række at hakke, med den uvidenhed og det samfundsmæssige forfald, vi ser i dag. Hillsdale College har talt om de grundlæggende fædre og landets grundlæggelse, og jeg undrer på, om LaRouche-bevægelsen arbejder sammen med Hillsdale, som ikke vil modtage statstilskud, så de er uafhængige af den politiske proces og regeringen. Har De nogen tanker omkring dette?

(Helga besvarer spørgsmålet generelt):

2.52.00

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Idéer er en sjov ting, for man kan ikke købe dem i en forretning, man kan ikke veje dem, de har ingen dimensioner; de er immaterielle. Men de er alligevel det mest magtfulde, der findes i universet. For de kan ændre historiens gang; og hvis de krydser historiske korsveje, hvor det er de rigtige idéer for netop det øjeblik, så kan de flytte bjerge. De kan fuldstændigt ændre paradigmer, og det er sket mange gange i historiens løb.

Og jeg mener, at vi netop nu befinder os i en utrolig afslutning på en epoke, og folk, der under normale omstændigheder ikke tænker så meget på historie, og det er grunden til, at vi ønsker at gå tilbage til historiske kampe, for at lære af dem. Men folk lever som regel deres liv, de ser på, hvad deres plan er, men de tænker ikke rigtigt på tidsepokernes lange buer. Men hvis man ser på universel historie fra dette synspunkt, så kan man faktisk se, at der i historiens løb har været et par gange, hvor paradigmerne blev fuldstændigt udskiftet. Mit yndlingseksempel er: Hvordan kom vi fra det 14. århundredes Mørke Tidsalder til Italiens Gyldne Renæssance, som dernæst kom til at udgøre grundlaget for de næsten 600 års efterfølgende historie? Og det var, fordi man havde et sammenfald: For det første brød det gamle paradigme sammen; man havde den Sorte Død, man havde flagellanter, heksebrændinger – virkeligt et samfund i forfald. Men så kom der en genoplivelse, fordi der var en håndfuld mennesker – Dante, Petrark, Padua-skolen, Jeanne d’Arc, Nikolaus af Kues, [kardinal] Bessarion, Plethon – det var virkeligt en håndfuld mennesker, der passede, og der kom en renæssance, der gik tilbage til den store, klassiske, græske periode, som kom i form af den delegation, som Nikolaus af Kues bragte ud af Konstantinopel, efter at byen var faldet i hænderne på muslimerne på den tid; og han førte en delegation fra den græsk-ortodokse kirke til Koncilerne i Firenze og (Cirenza?), og de medbragte Platons værker, der havde været glemt i Europa i 1700 år; der var ingen, der vidste noget om Platon længere. Og dette samt et par andre indflydelser medførte en sådan forandring, at den nye tid, der i realiteten defineredes af især Nikolaus af Kues, fuldstændigt ændrede paradigmet. Nikolaus af Kues sagde helt bevidst, at vi må afvise skolastikken, vi må afvise peripatetikerne, eleverne af Aristoteles’ tænkemåde, og alt, der har med det at gøre, og han udviklede en ny metode for tænkning. Han sagde helt bevidst, nu siger jeg noget, som hidtil i historien aldrig har været sagt af noget menneske. Dette var De Docta Ignorantia (Om Lærd Uvidenhed), og der var især tænkningen med Coincidentia Oppositorum (modsætningernes sammenfald), idéen om, at det Ene er af en højere kvalitet, en højere orden, end de Mange. Det er en metode til konfliktløsning, for når ens sind først er i stand til at tænke på fornuftens niveau; ikke kun på niveauet for at forstå, eller ratio, intellektets niveau, hvor man altid er fanget i konflikter, modsigelser, paradokser, man ikke kan løse, men at man kan lære at tænke på et højere niveau, ved at hoppe op til fornuftens niveau. På denne måde kan man udvikle en helt anden måde at tænke på, og det er, hvad vi prøver at gøre, for det er tydeligt, at hvis vi forbliver i området for geopolitik, såkaldte nationale interesser, såkaldt gruppeinteresse, så vil vi få Tredje Verdenskrig, og vi vil ikke alle sammen være her til at reflektere på det. Dette er blevet forstået blandt et voksende antal nationer omkring BRIKS, omkring det kinesiske lederskab, hele »win-win«-idéen. Dette er blevet mere attraktivt. Hvorfor tror man, at så mange lande allierer sig med BRIKS netop nu – hele Latinamerika er med BRIKS, hele Asien er med BRIKS; Afrika ser kun hen til Kina og Indien for at få hjælp, ikke til Europa eller USA.

Man kan se sådan på det: der er to modeller. Den ene er at have krige, konflikter, og det er USA-NATO-Europa-modellen; og så er der modellen med at gå med i store projekter, at få gavn af samarbejde om teknologi, videnskab, rumforskning. Overrasker det jer virkeligt, når de fleste lande siger, vi ønsker at være en del af den anden model?

Så jeg ser ikke bare på forandringen internt i USA, internt i Europa, for der er mange forskellige dynamikker, der kommer ind på nuværende tidspunkt. Jeg ser på dette som en periode med meget, meget pludselige forandringer, med pludselige skift. Hvis det europæiske system kollapser, så vil det omgående bringe spørgsmålet om Glass/Steagall på banen. Og derfor er hele spørgsmålet om et nyt præsidentskab [i USA] ikke blot et spørgsmål om 2016 eller 17, men spørgsmålet om, hvilken opsætning kan der blive mellem O’Malley – der er mange organisationer, der netop nu kæmper for aspekter af det. TPP – der er mange spørgsmål, som folk mobiliserer omkring, for folk indser, at, nu er det slutspillet.

Vores fremgangsmåde er ikke blot at fokusere på eksisterende netværk, selv om det alt sammen er vigtigt og bør være inkluderet, men man må have en slags forudanelse om, hvor historien vil være om et par uger, en måned, et par år eller et hundrede år fra nu af. Og hvis man har de rigtige idéer, der kan komme ind i disse dramatiske forandringer, kan man fuldstændigt ændre begivenhedernes gang.

(Spørgeren: Tak, De har inspireret mig.)

3.13.10

SPØRGSMÅL: Godaften, hvordan har De det? Jeg har et par spørgsmål. De har nævnt noget om højhastighedstog (eksprestog), som er en god idé. Hvordan ville De fremme dette spørgsmål, og hvor vil De få pengene fra? Det er et spørgsmål.

Mit andet spørgsmål: Jeg er enig med Dem i spørgsmålet om den måde, vores børn opdrages på, om medierne og det, vores børn ser på Tv. Noget af det, der kommer ud af radioen, er oprørende. Hvad er Deres dagsorden mht. at øge kendskabet/bevidstheden og forbedre præsidentskabet og øge bevidstheden omkring den måde, forældre opdrager deres børn på og det, der vises i Tv!

3.14.25

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Jeg har ikke noget Tv-apparat, men i går så jeg lidt amerikansk Tv – jeg zappede rundt på kanalerne, og jeg var fuldstændigt forfærdet! Når man ikke har set Tv længe, og man så tænder for det, kan man næsten ikke tro, at det kunne blive værre i forhold til for 10 år siden. Jeg må lige korrigere: Jeg ser tysk Tv, russisk Tv, kinesisk Tv og andre programmer, der har dokumentarer; men jeg mente især de almindelige, amerikanske, populære kanaler. Det er rædselsvækkende; det er så dumt, så banalt, så fuldstændigt designet til at gøre folk frygteligt dumme, og det har en metode. For nogle år siden sagde min mand, vi burde smide fjenden ud af vores stue ved at sparke deres Tv ud af vinduet på lossepladsen; det er måske det bedste, man kan gøre.

Jeg kan kun være enig med Confucius i, at man ikke kan regere ved dekret, men kun ved sit eksempel. I øjeblikket befinder vi os ved en sådan korsvej. For at sige meget klart, hvad jeg mener: Jeg mener, at vi inden for de næste par uger sandsynligvis vil se det transatlantiske finanssystem bryde sammen. Vi vil se en forhøjet fare for krig. Vi vil sandsynligvis se forandringer i USA’s regering. Min mand har mange gange sagt, at, med mindre Obama fjernes fra embedet, ved forfatningsmæssige metoder, så vil denne verdenskrig komme, simpelt hen, fordi Obama er et redskab for denne imperiefraktion. Og hvor det er vanskeligt at se, hvor dette skulle komme fra – historien forløber ikke, som aviserne siger det. Hvis man ser på Første og Anden Verdenskrig, kan man se, at det, der stod i aviserne, blot var 1 %, lige som et isbjerg, hvor man ser 1 % over vandet, og resten er under. Der er i øjeblikket et oprør i institutionerne. Walter Jones [kongresmedlem, R] talte om de 28 sider [hemmeligstemplede, fra den officielle Kongresrapport om begivenhederne omkring 11. september, 2001], og det er utroligt, at man mørklægger begivenhederne omkring 11. september – alene det er utroligt! Men så har DIA for nyligt offentliggjort disse dokumenter, som gør det meget klart, at regeringen løj om Benghasi. De fortalte en historie, som de vidste ikke var sand, om, hvem der dræbte ambassadør Jack Stevens; de vidste, at de libyske våben skulle til de syriske oprørere; de vidste, at disse oprørere ville bygge et kalifat, hvilket er ISIS netop nu i Irak og Syrien. Disse dokumenter var kendt af Benghasi-komiteen, men nu er de deklassificeret, og de kan bruge dem. Der var også Hersh-afsløringerne og mange andre spørgsmål, som er en forfatningsmæssig grund til at undersøge, om denne præsident bør forblive i embedet.

På den anden side er O’Malley fortaler for Glass/Steagall, og Glass/Steagall er første skridt; men derefter må man have et kreditsystem. Måden, hvorpå vi får maglev-tog eller eksprestog eller andre højteknologiske højhastighedstog er ved at anvende Alexander Hamiltons principper, for at fjerne kasinoøkonomien, vende tilbage til et kreditsystem, vende tilbage til en Nationalbank, udstede kreditlinjer. Hver gang, man i historien har anvendt dette Amerikanske Økonomiske System, såsom under Meiji-genoprettelsen, Tysklands genopbygning efter Anden Verdenskrig, hvor Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau brugte samme metode, som Roosevelts Reconstruction Finance Corporation til finansiering. Det var sådan, Tyskland blev genopbygget fra en ruinhob og til det tyske, økonomiske mirakel. Så finansieringen er ikke noget problem, for man kan bevise, at i hvert eneste tilfælde, hvor dette blev anvendt, var fordelen større, selv skatteindkomsten var større end den oprindelige kredit, der blev udstedt, simpelt hen fordi det er hemmeligheden ved menneskelig arbejdskraft, at den skaber mere, end den bruger til at arbejde med. Den skaber en merværdi i forhold til det, som råmaterialerne, værktøjet osv. oprindeligt repræsenterede. Så hemmeligheden ved et kreditsystem er, at det betaler sig selv. Man betaler ikke noget for det, man anvender bare den rigtige metode. Hvis dette sker, tror jeg, at der vil komme en opstand i hele verden, og folk vil kræve bedre uddannelse. De vil se tilbage på perioder i historien, hvor USA var storslået. Det er derfor, det er så vigtigt at gå tilbage til USA’s oprindelse og studere, hvordan republikken rent faktisk blev dannet; men også at se på andre lande. Jeg har længe sagt, at vi kun vil komme ud af denne krise, når vi får en ægte dialog mellem civilisationerne, hvor hver kultur og hver nation relaterer til den bedste tradition i den andens kultur. Tyskland er ikke 12 års nationalsocialisme; Tyskland har sandsynligvis også det største antal store videnskabsmænd, opfindere, digtere. Hvis man genopliver dem, og dernæst relaterer til Kina, den fem tusinde år gamle nation med Konfucius, Mencius; med mange perioder, hvor Kina var verdens førende nation, faktisk helt frem til det 15. århundrede. Vi relaterer til Indien, ikke ud fra standpunktet om den nuværende fattigdom i nogle egne af Indien, men som en at de største civilisationer; de vediske skrifter, Upanishaderne, Gupta-perioden, den indiske renæssance i slutningen af det 19. og begyndelsen af det 20. århundrede, Tagore. Det samme med Rusland. Rusland har en storslået historie, med ikke blot Pusjkin og andre store digtere, men også med videnskab. Vi må simpelt hen fokusere på hele menneskehedens store præstationer, og så kommunikere dette og bygge en ny renæssance ud fra det. Jeg mener, at det er lige så meget inden for rækkevidde, som at den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen. Hvis vi kommer igennem den kommende periode, som altså er krakket, genindføre Glass/Steagall, vende tilbage til politik efter Hamiltons principper, gå med i BRIKS, få en gældskonference for Grækenland og hele Europa, og så gå med i den Nye Silkevej; hvis vi gør det, så vil vi, om et par år, se tilbage på denne periode og sige, hvor var vi dumme, at vi ikke foretog dette spring noget før. Nu læser folk, de studerer, de nyder at være skabende, de distribuerer det og viderekommunikerer det til deres børn.

Det beror alt sammen på den aktuelle periode, det er ligesom en prøve for civilisationen; vi kunne miste alt, det kunne ske, at vi ikke mere vil eksistere. Men hvis vi arbejder sammen for denne eksisterende plan, der allerede er i færd med at blive virkeliggjort af mere end halvdelen af menneskeheden, kunne vi få en ny renæssance, der er skønnere end nogen af fortidens renæssancer. Og jeg ønsker, at I virkelig skal have forestillingsevne; hvordan ønsker I, at verden skal se ud om hundrede år? Og så hjælpe os med at kæmpe for at virkeliggøre det.

SPØRGEREN: Blot et tillægsspørgsmål: er det korrekt at sige, at vi er i krig inden for et år?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Faren er der lige nu. Det er derfor, min mand bliver ved med at sige, at Obama må fjernes fra embedet ved forfatningsmæssige midler. Grunden til, at jeg nævnte isbjerget, at man kun ser den øverste del, og ikke den nederste; hvis man ser tilbage på historien, og man skriver Anden Verdenskrigs historie, så ser man, at der var en stor del, der lå under vandet, som var diplomati, efterretninger, hemmelige efterretningstjenester, alle mulige processer, som man ikke ser; og jeg har en klar mistanke om, at der bag alle disse skandaler, der nu rammer Obamaregeringen, er et engagement fra nogle institutionelle kræfter i USA, der ønsker at stoppe 3. verdenskrig. Det er min [overbevisning] – jeg har ikke bevis for det, men jeg tror, at hvis man ser tilbage på, hvordan historien fungerer, så bruger folk undertiden en skandale til at standse noget, som de ikke har modet til at sige højt og ligeud. Jeg ser i øjeblikket en stor uro – f.eks. pressekonferencen om de 28 sider, som Rand Paul afholdt sammen med kongresmedlemmerne Walter Jones, Massey og Lynch, og familierne til ofrene for 11. september, og så Bob Graham, senatoren, den tidligere leder af Kongresundersøgelseskomiteen for 11. september var der også; det fik pressedækning over hele USA og internationalt. Når det først begynder at ske, så kan det ikke stoppes. Hvorfor er det så vigtigt? Fordi man så kommer frem til de virkelige årsager til terror, finansieringen af terror. Man må genoverveje hele den aktuelle politik, som f.eks. Irak, baseret på løgne; Afghanistan, baseret på løgne; Libyen, totalt løgn; Syrien, totalt løgn. Alt dette vil blive undersøgt, og folk vil sige: Vent lige et øjeblik. Var disse krige, baseret på løgne, virkeligt fremmende for amerikanske interesser? Eller var de det modsatte? Forårsagede halshugningen af én terrorist ved magt ikke, at der opstod 30 nye? Burde vi ikke have en helt anden fremgangsmåde, og hvis USA ville gå med i BRIKS og den Nye Silkevej, kunne vi gå sammen med Rusland, Kina, Indien, Iran, Egypten, Syrien, og så kunne vi udvikle Mellemøsten, og så ville man udtørre terroren. Hvis man blot fortsætter med at bombe, vil det skabe mere kaos og mere … Så man må have et komplet overblik over det hele, og det kunne ske i de næste uger og måneder.

SPØRGER: Om sandsynligheden for 3. Verdenskrig: USA sendte en militærenhed ind i Ukraine for at være rådgivere for de ukrainske nazister, der har magten, og denne militærenhed var 173. Luftbårne, ’De skrigende ørne’. Rent historisk sender man ikke ’De skrigende ørne’ ind, med mindre man har til hensigt at kæmpe. Sidst, de blev sat ind, var i den sydvietnamesiske republik for at rådgive dem, og I ved, hvad det førte til. Dette er blot en kommentar til sandsynligheden for 3. Verdenskrig; det er en reel trussel.

3.35.15

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Jeg mener, at denne idé med en win-win-strategi, som Kina har sat på dagsordenen, virkeligt er måden at overvinde det på, for når man først har – det er derfor Schiller Instituttet og EIR udgav denne nye rapport, »Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«, som virkeligt er idéen om den fælles interesse for alle. Det er sådan, man overvinder geopolitik, og jeg mener, at det faktisk er konceptet, at hvis man begynder med menneskehedens fælles interesser, kan man reorganisere alle institutioner til at tilpasse sig til det. Når man først har en Verdenslandbro, vil man få en ny sikkerhedsarkitektur, som slutteligt vil have til følge, at forsvar bliver unødvendigt. For hvis man arbejder sammen – vi skulle være i stand til at blive atomvåbnene kvit ved enten at fjerne dem eller gennem våben, der bygger på nye, fysiske principper, hvilket var SDI (Strategisk Forsvarsinitiativ), som Lyndon LaRouche promoverede, og næsten fik gennemført, for nogle og tredive år siden.

Jeg er fuldt og fast overbevist om, at vi har nået et punkt i menneskehedens historie, hvor vi enten foretager dette spring, eller også vil vi ikke eksistere. Der bliver ikke endnu en lille krig … jeg tror, at vi er ved et punkt, hvor vi enten foretager et evolutionært spring til det nye paradigme for menneskehedens fælles mål, eller også er det efter al sandsynlighed ikke værd at diskutere, hvad der bliver tilbage.

…

(Helga om princippet om én menneskehed)

Jeg taler faktisk ikke om en ny organisation; jeg taler om et nyt princip. Et princip, som på en vis måde er idéen om, at man har nationale interesser imod andre nationers, eller grupper af nationers, interesser. Det er en udlevet idé. Vi må gå over til den idé, at der kun er én menneskehed, og at denne ene menneskehed kun har én interesse. Vi må se på det, lige som astronauterne, som den blå planet ude fra rummet, uden for planeten, og de siger alle det samme, kosmonauter, taigonauter, astronauter; de kommer alle sammen hjem med den samme oplevelse, de siger: Min Gud, vores planet er så lille i det enorme Solsystem, i en endnu større galakse, og der er milliarder af galakser der ude, som vi næsten intet ved om. Så hvorfor ikke arbejde som én civilisation og forsvare denne blå planet i dette ekstremt store univers og forsøge at forstå, hvordan vi som art kan overleve? For den menneskelige civilisation er skrøbelig. Geofysikere fortæller os, at, i universets historie opstod mennesket blot ét sekund før midnat, og det vil forsvinde ét sekund efter midnat. For når Solen ophører med at fungere, om to milliarder år, eller vi rammes af asteroidenedslag, så er det farer, der kunne eliminere os pga. farer fra rummet. Vi fastholder, at dette er en tåbelig idé, for argumentet imod disse mennesker er, at det ville betyde, at Beethoven har komponeret forgæves, eller Schubert eller Schumann, Bach, Mozart; og det er en uacceptabel idé. For hvordan kan man have en sådan skønhed i musik, der forsvinder? Så vi må tænke på, at vi skal være den udødelige art. Vi skal være den første art – og vi ved jo ikke, om der er andre arter et sted, vi har ikke mødt dem – men på nuværende tidspunkt er vi den eneste, skabende art. Vi må sørge for, at vi nu gør det rigtige, så vi kan eksistere om to milliarder år, ti milliarder år, eller i al evighed. At tænke sådan; tænk ikke på små spørgsmål, tænk på store spørgsmål. Det er det, der gør os til mennesker; intet dyr har nogen som helst idé om fremtiden. Hvis man siger til sin hund, at i morgen vil vi gå en tur, så vil hunden løbe hen til døren og ’sige’ gå en tur! Den har intet begreb om, at, i morgen er i morgen. Den hører ’gå tur’, og så vil den gå tur nu. Hvis man siger til sin hund, at man vil give den en dejlig steg til dens fødselsdag om tre måneder; det er bare ærgerligt!

…

(Helga om en positiv bevægelse for fremtiden)

3.44.00

Jeg vil gerne sige, at det, vi har brug for i USA, og de fleste andre steder i verden, er en massebevægelse for udvikling.  De fleste mennesker har et spørgsmål, som de kan lide at kæmpe IMOD – det er nyttigt, og det bør ske – men jeg mener, at det, vi virkeligt har brug for, er en massebevægelse for fremtiden. En massebevægelse for en kulturel renæssance, for en global genopbygning af økonomien, for kun, hvis man har en positiv løsning, at man kan løse kriminaliteten, ungdomskriminalitet, pornografi, alle mulige perversioner; man må have en positiv idé.

…

(Helga om betydningen af historie som videnskab)

3.51.20

Jeg vil gøre det ganske kort: Det, der er så fascinerende ved historie, er, at det er en videnskab. De fleste mennesker mener ikke, at historie er videnskabelig. Beviset er, at f.eks. at Friedrich Schiller var i stand til at gennemskue Habsburg-imperiets forkerte rapporter om Wallenstein og uden historiske optegnelser kunne nå frem til en korrekt vurdering af, hvem Wallenstein var, hvilket først blev bevist af historikere 150 år senere. Med andre ord, så var han i stand til at erkende den nødvendige idé, baseret på den idé, at han allerede havde mistanke om, at kildematerialet var forkert, baseret på, hvem der havde videregivet det. Det er for mig et meget godt eksempel på en evne til forudanelse, som gør Lyn i stand til hele tiden at give et begreb et navn, en ny udvikling, hvor han siger, det er dette, og så siger folk flere måneder senere, nå ja, LaRouche var den første til at give det et navn. Der er en enestående overensstemmelse med sindets skabende evner, og så, hvordan historien udvikler sig, hvilket er en videnskab. For mig er der en stor overensstemmelse med Friedrich Schillers skrifter, ’Hvorfor bør vi studere universalhistorie’, som jeg virkeligt vil anbefale alle at gå hjem og læse, ’Hvorfor, og til hvilket formål, studerer vi universalhistorie?’. I slutningen siger han, at hvis man forstår den rigdom, vi har arvet fra tidligere generationer, bør det opmuntre og inspirere os alle til at bidrage med noget, således, at når vi forlader livets scene, har vi tilført en rigdom til de kommende generationer. Og det kan vi alle sammen gøre. Det inspirerer os. Det forbinder os med den kæde af generationer før os, der er døde, og det er forbindelsen og broen til fremtidens generationer, hvis vi organiserer vores liv på en rig måde, så vi bidrager til civilisationens fremskridt. Det er i realiteten meningen med historie på en ikke-akademisk måde.

…

Det glæder mig at tale med jer i dag, på denne særlige dag, som er D-dag, og det bør fylde os alle med håbet om, at faren for en ny fascisme, der er ved at vokse frem i verden, kan besejres – men forhåbentlig med færre tab. Jeg siger dette, fordi vi netop nu befinder os på randen af Tredje Verdenskrig, og det gør vi af nøjagtigt de samme grunde, der forårsagede Første Verdenskrig og Anden Verdenskrig: en imperiemagts interesser imod nationers velfærd og almene vel.

Se hele konference-videoen med den fantastisk spændende diskussion:

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Mit dilemma stammer fra den kendsgerning, at jeg … med det samme må fortælle jer … , at verden er langt tættere på en ny, global krig, end de fleste mennesker har nogen anelse om. Denne nye politik for Den nye Silkevej … , er den eneste politik til at undgå krig, der er til rådighed.  

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Med Tom Gillesberg

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE ADDRESSES “CHINA’S ‘ONE BELT, ONE ROAD’
POLICY’ SEMINAR IN COPENHAGEN, April 27, 2015

Here is the transcript of Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s address to the
Schiller Institute seminar in Copenhagen, which was held
Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, Copenhagen Business
School. Click her for the audio and video from Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s speech and the other speeches from the seminar.

TOM GILLESBERG: I have the great honor of introducing Helga
Zepp-LaRouche, who has come here from a rather busy schedule both
in Germany and the United States, but also the whole world she’s
intervening to. Just as a short introduction, Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche
has been since 1977 the wife and very close collaborator of
Lyndon LaRouche in the United States, the economist, philosopher,
statesman who is giving leadership in the U.S., for the U.S. to
return to the intentions of its founders, to be a promoter of
sovereign nations that can collaborate on an equal footing to
secure the benefits for all nations and peoples.
And Helga has a very, I think, close connection to China.
As a young journalist she traveled to China in 1971, in the
height of the Cultural Revolution as one of the first Western
journalists and actually saw on the spot what was going on. She
then became politically active with the LaRouche movement and
embarked on a life-long battle for a new just world economic
order, for the possibilities of development for all nations and
peoples.
She then founded, among many other things, the Schiller
Institute, in 1984. She is presently the chairwoman of the
German political party, the BüSo — the Bürgerrechtsbewegung
Solidarität, or Civil Rights Soliarity Movement. She was vry
active after the Fall of the Berlin Wall and one of the authors
of the Schiller Institute program for the development of the
world after the Iron Curtain had fallen of the program the
Paris-Berlin-Vienna Productive Triangle, a Locomotive for the
World Economy. And when that did not materialize, she was very
active in extending that program to the program for the Eurasian
Land-Bridge, going from China and Asia to Europe and having a
development of the whole region. And as part of that, she then
became a visitor many times to China to speak on the need for a
New Silk Road and actually earned her nickname in China as the
“Silk Road Lady,” for her efforts to have China embark on this
policy.
And since then, she has been also the driving force in
holding many scores of conferences in Europe and the United
States on the need for creating a paradigm shift, to get the
Western world out of its long-term economic, strategic, and
cultural crisis. And, over the last couple of years, she has
been one of the architects of this report, “The New Silk Road
Becomes the World Land-Bridge.” She has also been leading the
campaign to stop the present geopolitical games that threaten to
detonate thermonuclear war and instead get the United States and
Europe to accept the offer of the BRICS countries to join forces
in an inclusive world order, where all nations of the world, on
an equal footing, collaborate to secure the peace and development
of all nations.
So I think it’s very appropriate that you are here to
directly lay what’s going on, so please, welcome. [applause]

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Thank you, Tom, for these kind words of
introduction.
Well I have a certain dilemma, because I want to present to
you the potential, which lies in this program, and given the fact
that the Western media have reported very little about it, I have
a dilemma, that I need to tell you, that this is {the} most
important political initiative on the planet right now. The
dilemma comes from the fact that, by introducing this idea, have
to tell you immediately why this is the case, and that is the
reality, that the world is much more close to a new global war,
than most people have an inkling of. And this New Silk Road
initiative, which comes from China, but which in the meantime has
been joined by many countries, is the only available
war-avoidance policy.
Now there was just on the April 18- 19 in Moscow the Fourth
Moscow International Security Conference, and the main subject of
this conference was the danger of nuclear war. And this is a
reaction to the fact that NATO has been expanding eastward, up to
the borders of Russia. You have a whole bunch of strategic
doctrines which Russia regards as a threat to their security
interests, and naturally you have the horrendous situation in
Ukraine, which contrary to what the Western media have been
reporting on — or not reporting actually — is it’s really
something which the West must make up. I just participated in the
last two days, or Friday and Saturday in a conference in
Baden-Baden in Germany, the German-Russian Cultural Days. It’s an
annual conference, and there was a large gathering of German
industrialists and Russian speakers and Russian people. And we
had the fortune to have a videoconference connected to this
conference, which brought in a live program from the former Prime
Minister of Ukraine, Mr. [Mykola] Azarov. And he gave an
absolutely hair-raising report about the conditions in Ukraine,
the fact that the country is being torn apart. Political leaders
are either forced to go into exile or are threatened to be
assassinated; journalists are being killed openly in the street;
trenches are being built; and, as you know, American soldiers are
now training the National Guard, which has a lot of Nazi
components in it. And for the Russians this is extremely severe,
because we are shortly before the 70th anniversary of the end of
Nazism and the end of the Second World War, and the mood of the
people were really horrified to see this endorsement of Nazis 70
years after the Second World War.
Now, I don’t want to go into this in depth, we can do that
in the discussion if people have questions about it, but I think
this crisis, in Ukraine in particular, I could also point to the
Middle East, which is in a similar horrible condition, makes
very, very clear, that if we as humanity cannot move away from
geopolitics — geopolitics was the reason for two world wars in
the 20th century, and right now the continuation of geopolitics
is threatening a new global war. I just want to mention an
article in {New York Times} from 19th April, where two generals,
Gen. James Cartwright, who is former head of the U.S. Strategic
Command, and Gen. Vladimir Dvorkin, who is the chief of
intelligence of the Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces, they penned
together an article, In which they said that the world has never
been so close to the danger of nuclear war globally, and
therefore extinction, as right now. And the reason is obviously
that even the normal code of behavior among nations, which
existed in the Cold War, that you had a red telephone between
Kennedy and Khrushchev, this no longer exists; and you have the
two nuclear forces, from NATO and the West and Russia, all the
time on launch on warning. And launch on warning means there are
only a few minutes time, if one side perceives a launch, either
by intention or by accident, they have a few minutes, actually
it’s estimated three minutes’ time, to respond or be eliminated.
So that shows you how extremely close we are to the danger
of a global extinction of civilization. Because if this would
happen, we would not exist as humanity. And I’m saying it with
that gravity, to say that this calls all the more urgently, for a
different approach. And the different approach must be to move
away from geopolitics and move in the direction of the common
aims of mankind.
And it just happens to be, that the policies which are
proposed by President Xi Jinping, which he calls a “win-win”
policy, is exactly that. It’s the idea, that with the New Silk
Road, you have a policy where every country which participates in
it, will have a benefit for it. The New Silk Road, Maritime Silk
Road policy by China is {not} a new imperial policy replacing the
Anglo-American imperial policy, but it is a completely new model
of the nations among nations, where the enormous example of the
Chinese economic miracle, which China was able to develop in the
last 30 years — you know, where China in {30 years}, developed
as much as most industrial nations needed 100 or 200 years to
develop — and China is now offering to export that model and
have other countries benefit in a similar way from that kind of
economic miracle, which China did.
Can you move to the first slide?
So the world has changed since July last year, the summit of
the BRICS countries in Fortaleza in Brazil. And this is a
picture which was made at this occasion, showing the leaders of
Russia, India, Brazil, China and South Africa. And they basically
concluded a new strategic alliance — economic alliance, which
Prime Minister Modi characterized in the following way: He said,
“This is the first alliance of nations, which are not defined by
their current capacity, but by their future potential of
development.” And at another occasion, Modi said that the biggest
potential of India is, that 60% of its people are below 30 years
of age, and therefore, if they are well-educated and developed,
they can come to the help of other nations, which has demographic
problems, like Germany, for example.
What these countries did, is they concluded an enormous
amount of economic treaties, of economic cooperation, including
peaceful development of inherently safe nuclear energy, the
development of fusion energy, joint space projects, space travel,
and numerous other high-tech cooperation areas.
Then, the next day, they met with the leaders of South
America, the organizations of CELAC [Community of Latin American
and Caribbean States] and Unasur [Union of South American
Nations]. Then a little bit later they also had meetings with
countries of ASEAN [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] and
actually you have now a completely parallel system of economics,
which is really going to be the infrastructure development of the
world.
Now this here is an official picture of the New Silk Road
and the Maritime Silk Road, which shows you the old Silk Road
from Xi’an, actually it goes even farther to the west,
Lianyungang, where the end of that Silk Road is on the China Sea,
all the way through Urumqi, then Central Asia into Europe; and
then Maritime Silk Road is actually connecting even Africa and
much of the Pacific also into Europe. And this is modelled on the
famous Maritime Silk Road of the 15th century, which connected
the nations of the world already at that time.
Now, I want to very quickly say that this made us very
happy, when Xi Jinping announced the New Silk Road in Kazakhstan
in 2013, we jumped that high — you know, in the Schiller
Institute — because we had promoted this idea. This was our
proposal when the Berlin Wall came down, in ’89, and the wall no
longer was there. So we said let’s connect Paris with Berlin and
Vienna, which is a triangular area of the size of Japan, and has
the highest concentration of industrial capacity in the world;
and let’s make corridors to Warsaw, to Kiev, to the Balkans. And
it would have been a perfect way to intervene.
Unfortunately at that time, despite the fact there was a
very good resonance, you had Bush Sr., you had Margaret
Thatcher, and they had completely different ideas: They wanted to
reduce Russia from a superpower to at Third World, raw
materials-exporting country, and therefore they introduced the
shock-therapy, instead, which dismantled the Russian industrial
potential between ’91-’94, to only 30% left.
But then, when in ’91, the Soviet Union collapsed, we
connected this triangle, Paris-Berlin-Vienna, and we said: OK,
now the Iron Curtain is gone, now we can have development
corridors connecting the population and industrial centers of
Europe with those of Asia, through corridors. And then we looked
at the best geographical conditions. I should say, we were
inspired very much by the railway program of Sun Yat-sen, the
founder of modern China, who had developed a whole network of
Chinese railways, and that went into this program. So, at that
time we said let’s look at the best geographical preconditions,
and we found, not so accidentally, that the old Trans-Siberian
Railroad and the old Silk Road, the ancient Silk Road, had the
best geographical conditions to build such infrastructure.
So at that point the shock therapy started to destroy
Russia’s economy, but we kept holding seminars — we had hundreds
of seminars, in Europe, in United States, and then, eventually,
in Warsaw, in Budapest, in Moscow. And in ’96 even in Beijing,
where the Chinese government had responded to our proposal to all
the governments, to hold a big conference promoting the regions
along the Silk Road. And I was there as a speaker, but then came
the Asia Crisis in ’97, and China, at that conference said, that
this will be the long-term strategy for China until 2010. But
then the Asia crisis brought chaos and then the Russian GKO
crisis [in ’98].
So in the mean time we kept working on this initial proposal
which grew. And the latest of this, is this report: It’s a
370-page study which is really the idea of connecting the world
through infrastructure corridors.
Now, here you see some of these projects, which are already
being built, by the BRICS, by some of the other countries — for
example China is now building a transcontinental railroad from
Brazil to Peru, this is letter A [on the map]. This has already
started — you know, Latin America does not have an
infrastructure network! It is still in the colonial condition,
where you have little railroads from the iron ore mountain to the
coast, but if you want to travel from Peru to Brazil, you have to
go via Miami. So this is the idea, to develop a continental
railroad system.
Then number 1 there is the canal built in Nicaragua, it will
be the second Panama Canal, which obviously is an extremely
important project, which will mean that Nicaragua has a very good
chance to become an industrial country, with improving living
standards of its population. Naturally the Greenies are going
crazy and they say there are two fishermen who have to be
resettled. But, first of all, these people will be compensated,
and secondly without infrastructure, there is {no} industrial
development; without infrastructure there is not even
agriculture, because without infrastructure you cannot transport
and process food.
So then, naturally you have the Bering Strait, this number
2. This has been recently announced by Vladimir Yakunin, who is
the head of Russian Railways. And he proposed (I don’t think I
have that slide), a fast train connection from London all the way
through the Bering Strait to New York. A couple of years ago, Mr.
LaRouche and I participated in a conference in Moscow where the
fathers of the Bering Strait Project were present. These were all
older men over 80, and they said: “Oh, in 20 years, we can go
with a maglev train from Acapulco through the Bering Strait to
Mumbai, and this will be much faster than you can go by ship
today,” and they had a very pioneering spirit.
So this is very important because this connection not only
would connect the transport lines of North America with those of
Eurasia, but it would be absolutely crucial to open up the Arctic
Region. In the Far East of Russia you have all the raw materials
which are in the periodic table of Mendeleyev, and they represent
for the next 100 years a very important raw-material potential
which will be important not only for Russia, but for Europe, for
the United States, for China, for Japan, for Korea. So this will
be the way to develop it, because these raw-material are in
permafrost conditions, and you have to build, you have to build
cities, which have a dome, because people have to live — you
cannot live in permanfrost conditions like that, you have to have
a special way of developing it.
Now, I could go into many other projects — the Seikan
tunnel between the Japanese islands does already exist, it
connects the two important islands in Japan. Then the Bohai
Tunnel will connect two Chinese cities and shorten the transport.
The brown line there, this is the actual Silk Road [Silk Road
Economic Belt], which is now being promoted by China; this larger
gray line is the [21st-Century] Maritime Silk Road; but as you
can see, it stretches all the way to Europe and into Africa.
Prime Minister Li Keqiang was several times last year in Africa,
and he proposed to connect all African capitals through a fast
train system. And I know from many Africans, leaders and leading
politicians, they are very happy about that, because Africa right
now urgently needs development. And I think, if you look at the
horrendous refugee crisis, the people drowning by the thousands
in the Mediterranean, it makes it {so} clear that to bring
development to Africa is the only way how you can overcome this
unbelievable tragedy. And if Europe would have a right mind, they
would join! You know, rather than sending the Triton boats to
chase the refugees back, which is a complete moral bankruptcy of
Europe.
Now this is very interesting, because the big question
always comes, “who should finance all of this?” As you know,
already at the Brazil Fortaleza summit, the BRICS countries
agreed, together with some of the other countries, to create new
financial institutions: the New Development Bank of the BRICS,
the AIIB [Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank] was already
founded in last October, but also a whole set of other banks.
And it came from the idea, that when the Asia crisis happened in
’97, in which speculators like George Soros speculated against
the currencies of countries like Korea, Philippines, Thailand, in
one week up to 60-80% downward, and these countries had no
defense; so they concluded, “OK, we have to protect ourselves,”
so they created the Contingency Reserve Arrangement [CRA], which
is a pool of currencies of a $100 billion, which will defend all
of the participating countries against speculative attacks.
Now, the AIIB, the New Development Bank, the New Silk Road
Fund, the Maritime Silk Road Fund, the bank of the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization [SCO Development Bank], and the SAARC
[South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation] Development
Fund, are all new banks which follow a completely different
principle than Wall Street and the City of London, or Frankfurt,
for that matter. They say, we do not participate in speculation,
but we will use these funds only for investment in the real
economy, into these projects. And this is urgently needed,
because as you know, despite all of the quantitative easing of
the Federal Reserve, and now [ECB President] Mr. Draghi, who are
printing money as if there would be no tomorrow, the money does
not arrive at the industries! Because the banks, the speculators
prefer to keep the casino going, and this is actually reaching a
point where at the IMF annual spring meeting which just took
place in Washington, the IMF itself put out a report saying that
we are facing a collapse {bigger} than 2008 with the collapse of
Lehman Brothers. And several economists from J.P. Morgan and
other banks warned that you could have a simultaneous stock and
bond crisis, causing a meltdown of the system; or, if the Federal
Reserve would increase the interest rate only by a tiny, tiny
amount it could blow up the whole derivatives bubble of $2
trillion. And if the Troika and the ECB are pushing Greece out
of the Eurozone, that could also trigger a collapse, because it
would not so much hurt Greece, but it would blow up the European
banks.
So therefore, the existence of these banks are de facto a
lifeboat in the face of the immediate danger of a collapse.
Now, as you probably have noticed, when the question came,
who would be a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure
Investment Bank, which was already constituted last October, but
the date until which countries could join as founding members was
end of March [2015]. And the United States put a lot of pressure
on the allies, not to join; they didn’t want Korea to join;
naturally, they didn’t want Europe to join, and they put maximum
pressure on Asian countries not to join. But then, it just so
happened, that the best ally of the United States, Great Britain,
was the first European country to join, and that caused a kind of
a dam break, and then Germany, France, Italy, Switzerland,
Austria, and all the Scandinavian countries joined. And the
actual founding members included 57 countries. And they
basically participate in different degrees in this new bank,
which obviously people realize that what China is offering with
the economic cooperation in these projects, is much, much more
attractive than to participate in more speculative bubbles which
eventually will pop. So, this was from the founding meeting in
October, already, but in the meantime, it become many more
states.
Now, this is also very interesting, because this is a
proposal which my husband made in 1975. It was called the
International Development Bank, and it was basically the same
idea as the AIIB, today, saying that the IMF and the World Bank
do not provide enough credit for Third World development. This
was a proposal he made in ’75, and it went into the final
resolution of the Non-Aligned Movement in 1976 in Colombo, Sri
Lanka, and it had the same idea as the AIIB.
The World Bank only spends per year $24 billion for
projects. But the actual requirement of the developing
countries, is about $8 trillion in the next years! So there is
no way the World Bank can manage that, and this bank, on the
other side, the AIIB, and the other banks will grow and will
become more productive.
Now, this is very important because what the AIIB and the
New Development Bank and this new economic system which is
emerging represent, is something completely different than
monetarism. Monetarism is the idea that you have to have maximum
profit, the real economy doesn’t count; as a matter of fact, you
all know, that if you have an industrial firm which lays of
10,000, the stock goes up! It doesn’t make any sense. In the
realm of monetarism, this is explained by the idea that the firm
becomes “more productive” because fewer workers work more, and
therefore the profit is greater; but from the standpoint of the
real economy this makes no sense at all.
And it is exactly that philosophy which has caused the
Troika to destroy Greece. What they managed to do is to reduce
the Greek economy by one-third, to increase the youth
unemployment to 65%, and people are extremely unhappy, not only
in Greece, but also in Italy, in Spain, Portugal and so forth.
What we propose, both the IDB and these new banks, is really
going back to a completely different model. It’s based on the
idea of this man, whom you all recognize, I’m sure — he is
Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury of the
United States. And he created, actually, the United States, by
creating the National Bank and the credit system, because, what
he did, was after the War of Independence, the different states
in the United States were totally indebted. So he unified the
United States by taking over the debt obligations of these
states, and basically saying, it’s no longer your business, we’ll
take these debts as a Federal state, as a national state, and we
will transform that into a credit mechanism, only aimed at areal
production.
And that was really the actual founding of the United
States. And this idea of a credit system which is not
monetarism, but it is the idea that credit can only be given for
future production in the real economy, not for speculation, that
model was what made the United States a great industrial power.
Because, despite the fact that some following Presidents then
tried to dismantle it, the United States went back to it, again
and again. It was the policies of John Quincy Adams; it was the
policy of Abraham Lincoln with the greenbacks; it was the policy
of Franklin D. Roosevelt. This is how Roosevelt brought the
United States out of the Depression of the ’30s by building the
Reconstruction Finance Corp. which financed the New Deal, and
that’s how America got out of the Depression. And, also, it was
the basis for the German Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, the
state bank, which help to finance the reconstruction and the
economic miracle of Germany in the postwar period — which was
modeled on the Reconstruction Finance Corp.
So this is therefore, not something new. It’s a tested
model, it has always been the basis when there was progress in
the real economy, as compared to the financial markets. I’m not
talking about the financial markets, I’m talking about real
production for the livelihood and the common good of the people.
So the first step there, we have called for — Tom
mentioned it — that we think it is an absolute matter, actually
of war and peace, if we succeed to get the European nations {and}
America to join with this “win-win,” all-inclusive,
non-geopolitical system. And, as I said, the financial system of
Wall Street and the City of London {is} about to blow up, bigger
than 2008, and the only way how that can be avoided from leading
to a chaotic collapse, is by going back to the Glass-Steagall
legislation which was introduced by Franklin D. Roosevelt in
1933, which was his answer to the collapse of ’29-’33 period.
And he separated the banks, by making the commercial banks
separate from the investment banks, so that the investment bank
could not have access to assets of the commercial banks.
And this exist from 1933 until 1999 in the United States,
and in Europe you had practically the same thing, because you had
a very regulated banking sector. But the Wall Street forces did
not like it, because naturally it reduced their profit, so they
worked very hard to eliminate it, which they were able to do in
1999, and the whole super-expansion of the speculative area only
occurred after this law was eliminated. And the good news, is
that there is a right now a Presidential candidate in the United
States, who has said that his first act if he would move into the
White House, would be to reintroduce this Glass-Steagall law: And
that is the former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, about whom many
papers are writing that he has a very good chance to take the
Democratic nomination, because many people think Hillary Clinton
has made too many compromises with bad policies, when she was
Secretary of State. But, O’Malley is not alone, but you have a
whole bunch of people around him, who say the United States must
go back to being a Republic; it must go back to putting the
common good above the interests of Wall Street. And that is
really the “to be or not to be” question of the whole world.
Now, if this reorganization would take place, then, the
United States could easily join with the BRICS countries in such
efforts as the AIIB and other such things. And, as you know, the
Greek government has also demanded that there is no way how they
can pay their debt, because as you know, of all the rescue
packages which went to Greece, only 3% of that money remained in
Greece, while all the rest really went to the European banks.
And therefore, to demand that Greece should pay back these debts,
it’s just impossible! And the Greek government has made the
point that they want to have a European Debt Conference, like
Germany in 1953, without which the German economic miracle would
never have taken place. So if this all happens, and that could
happen in the short term, Europe could easily participate in
that.
Now, I just want to say, the ancient Silk Road was not only
an exchange of silk, and porcelain, and paper, printing,
gunpowder, and many, many other goods, but much more important
than that, it was an exchange of ideas and technologies: Silk
making is more important than silk; how to print books is more
important than the book. So the ancient Silk Road was an
extremely important exchange of goods and culture, and ideas, and
understanding among people — and so will be the New Silk Road,
just with modern means.
Now, if you go back to the picture, this is why we have
said, “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge” where we
have the camels, sort of symbolizing the old Silk Road, and here
you see a maglev train, and here you see a rover on the Moon, to
give you an idea that the exchange of technologies and goods in
the modern world will be the most advanced technologies to the
benefit of all of mankind.
So going back to the problem here, is, obviously, if you
look at that map, you see, these are the deserts of the world: A
very broad desert band which goes from the Atlantic coast of
Africa, through the Sahara-Sahel zone, the Arab Peninsula, the
Middle East, all the way to China. And that desert is growing.
It’s expanding. And then you have the desert in the West of the
United States, which is right now ruined by a big drought in
California, in Texas, in all the states west of the Mississippi;
and naturally, Brazil has a drought.
In the United States this is very severe. Here you have a
global water scarcity map; here you have the water stress
indicator. In the United States, just to mention that, Governor
Brown of California has just announced that the water consumption
will be cut by 25% up to 36%! Now that is the death to
Californian agriculture; in the south of California, for example,
in the Central Valley, in this region, 40% of the entire
agriculture of the United States is produced, and this is now
being completely destroyed. Here you see, this is a former
reservoir, which is almost dried up. This is the snowpack: in
2013, it was relatively, a lot of snow, and last year, no snow,
so the drought is expanding, and obviously, to cut consumption
means you kill people. I mean, you cannot cut water — where
should these people go? There are already cities and towns where
people are — it’s not just not watering their lawn — it’s
taking public showers, of getting water rations, and then
eventually people have to move away, because if there is no water
there is no life. There were already herds being transformed, of
hundreds of thousands of head of cattle, and the idea to just
accept that, and as Governor Brown said, “California historically
has only a carrying potential of 400,000 people,” is ridiculous,
because there are presently 39 million people living in
California! And the idea to say there’s only room for 400,000 is
completely ahistorical about what is the role of human beings,
who differentiate themselves from animals by being able to
increase the living capability for more people by improving
productivity, by transforming the industry, the infrastructure,
and in that way, developing the planet.
So obviously, China has taken a completely different
approach. Here you see, China is actually the only country which
has taken a very big water diversification: There is on the one
side, the Three Gorges Dam, which is now producing, I think 22
gigawatts of electricity per year, and it has eliminated flooding
which killed many thousands of people in the past; and even more
important, is the water diversification project from the southern
area of the Yangtze River through a Northern Route into the
Yellow River and the desert area of China; and the Middle Route
to the region around Beijing.
So this is actually a model which is now being followed by
Narendra Modi for India, who just agreed to make gigantic water
projects to tame the water coming down from the Himalayas, and
also making canals out of 101 Indian rivers.
Now, what most people don’t consider is, that water is not a
natural resource like iron ore, or gold, or whatever: You can’t
use up, because water is organized in global cycles, where 90% of
the precipitation rains down over the ocean, only 10% rains down
over the land. And that water, the Sun causes evaporation, this
leads to cloud formation, and then the water rains down, and it
is human activity, which can make these cycles more efficient.
It’s not just, that it rains down over land and then flows back
into the ocean. You can use it in agriculture, you can use it in
industrial production, you can use it in other urban activities,
and it is actually the ability of man to make that more
efficient.
Here you see a very interesting comparison — you see here
the water diversion of the United States. Even though the water
diversion of China has started much more recently, it’s almost
double, which shows you the completely different philosophy.
This is a very important project, which is part of the
approach to fight the desert, and this is the Lake Chad Transaqua
project, which is the idea, that you could eliminate a lot of the
drought in the Sahel zone and around Lake Chad by bringing some
of the surplus water from the headwaters region of the Congo on
the one side, through rivers and canals into Lake Chad, which has
been reduced to less than 10% right now; and also through a
second canal along the Nile to increase the agricultural land in
Africa tremendously. And also now to bring real development to
these countries, without which you will have more people running
away from Boko Haram, which is now at Lake Chad and Nigeria. And
without a real development perspective, there is no way how you
can contain these projects.
Human beings are the only species, which can improve the
conditions of mankind again and again and again, and the last
10,000 years, or 20,000 years since the last Ice Age, just think,
what an enormous development mankind has made. We have increased
the population potential of the Earth from about 5 million at
most, to presently around 7 billion. This is due to the fact that
man, unlike animals, can make new discoveries, discovers the
universal principles of our physical universe, and think things,
which have never been thought before.
Therefore, the attack on the water crisis is not just a
question of using the aquifers, because the aquifers can — they
replenish, but this goes much too slowly. It’s not only
re-diverting the rivers, dams, but it’s especially influencing
the global cyclical process of water. There is a relationship
between what happens in our Solar System and the rain. Because
the Sun, which shines on the oceans, causes evaporation, but the
Sun is not the only solar impact on the weather; it’s also the
cosmic radiation, which comes from our galaxy, which leads to
cloud formation, ionization of moisture, and therefore to rain.
That is not just something where we have to wait passively until
it happens, but we can study, for example, what is happening in
our galaxy, which influences the weather, and then understand
better, how we can create more water.
Here, you see our Solar System in a 32 million year cycle,
moving along the Milky Way. The Milky Way is basically a flat
plateau, in which our Solar System is moving up and down in
cycles, and you have a complete change in the weather patterns,
which comes from the position of our Solar System in our galaxy.
I’m not saying, that we know everything about that yet. We
know, that there is a lot of connection between the Solar System,
the galaxy and the weather patterns on our Earth, and I can
assure you, that if you look at the long-term changes in our
weather patterns, then {these} things are a lot more important,
than whatever you use in your little car as CO2 production.
Because these are forces, which are of a completely different
magnitude, and naturally, the climate is changing, but galactic
processes are really what is the cause of it.
Anyway, the idea of using cosmic rays and ionization of
moisture is already successfully being done by Israel and by some
of the Gulf States; Russia is doing a lot of research on this,
and this is, what we have to do. The reason, why I’m saying this,
is, the Silk Road is not just building railways from Dunhuang to
Lisbon or wherever; it’s not just building roads, it’s not just
building canals. The modern Silk Road, the New Silk Road is,
exactly as the old Silk Road was, {an exchange of ideas, of
technology, for the common good of all.}
Obviously, today the big challenges are world poverty, are
the danger of war, are the danger of water scarcity, which could
become the reason for new wars. So the New Silk Road — and this
is what we understand with it, and I’m sure that our Chinese
friend will show his perspective — but that is the philosophy,
which we have taken as a basis in our approach, that the New Silk
Road is {a vision}, of how humanity can move away from
geopolitics and the stupid idea that we have to fight over scarce
resources, that we have to create wars because we don’t like
another system, that we have to eventually self-destruct, but
that we have to make the evolutionary jump to the idea of the
common aims of mankind and to define the next phase of evolution
in the interest of all.
If you look at this, the Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry
Rogozin of Russia just two days ago, pointed to the fact, that
the BRICS countries are all space travelling nations. China is
the leader in space travel. When China in December 2013 landed
the Yutu rover on the Moon, with was the idea, that in a few
missions later, I think it was in 2017, this Yutu — “Jade
Rabbit” — that they will bring back helium-3. Helium-3 is an
isotope, which is actually a fuel for fusion power. It’s much
more efficient than deuterium or tritium, because with this heavy
deuterium and tritium in the fusion process, you are still using
turbines, and you use turbines to create electricity in the old
way. But with helium-3 you can directly gain electricity from the
physical process of fusion power, and therefore, naturally, the
energy efficiency is much, much higher. And once we have fusion
power, for example, this will create for the first time energy
and raw materials security for the Earth. Energy security,
because on the Moon, you have several tons of helium-3, which
will be sufficient for many tens of thousands of years of energy
security on the Earth; and raw materials security, because with
the high heat of the plasma torch, you can take any waste,
including nuclear waste, including waste in your household, and
turn it back into isotopes, which you then can reconstruct and
make new raw materials.
So this is the vanguard of where mankind must go, and China
has made that its national pride. And China, contrary to Germany,
which is very stupid with respect to energy — you know, this
stupid exit from nuclear energy without having an alternative, is
completely crazy — but China has basically created a situation,
where they are in the right position to solve this problem, and
Rogozin, the Deputy Prime Minister of Russia, has said, that the
BRICS countries will cooperate in space to solve these problems.
So this is extremely important, because if mankind makes
that jump to not have war as a conflict resolution, which in a
time of nuclear energy, it should be obvious that we must move to
a different regime, that we must define the common aims of
mankind, that which is, — if you have seen these pictures with
astronauts and cosmonauts and taikonauts, they all report the
same: When they are in space and look at our little planet, this
blue planet, they realize that there are no borders. They also
realize that our planet is extremely small in a very big Solar
System, in an even bigger galaxy, and there are {billions} of
galaxies. So, there are dangers from space, like cosmic
radiation, like asteroids; there are all kinds of dangers, which
we don’t manage right now. But if we don’t want to have the same
fate as the dinosaurs, who became eliminated 65 million years
ago, because probably a meteorite hit the Earth and created so
much cloud cover, that all the vegetation stopped, and then the
dinosaurs, and 96% of all other species were eliminated; if we
as a creative species, {are} really the creative species, we
should put our efforts together and defend against common dangers
to our planet, common dangers to our civilization, and unite.
And there is no better image for that than space collaboration.
This whole question also has a philosophical dimension.
Because people think, China is just doing an imperial expansion,
they want to have their interests. Well, I have the deepest
conviction that what is working in China right now, especially
with President Xi Jinping, {is} the 2,500-year-old Confucian
tradition in China. And I go even so far to say the Chinese
people have Confucius in their genes. Confucius was a
philosopher, who reacted to a historical period in China, which
was characterized by war, by great unrest, by turmoil. And he
developed the Confucian philosophy, which is beautiful. I can
only advise you, in case you are not doing it, study Confucius.
Because Confucius has this idea that there must be harmony in the
world, on the planet. And that, for example, the best way to
have harmony is, there is one key notion, which is {li}, which is
the idea, that each person, each nation, should take its proper
place, and develop in the best possible way, and then you have
harmony. Because if everybody develops their creative potential
and their best maximum capacity, and takes the development of the
other as their own interest, and vice versa, then you have peace.
And that should also be based on the other notion of {ren}.
{Ren} basically means the same thing as love, or {agapë}, or the
Christian idea of charity.
And it happens to be that these ideas are also in the
European best tradition. There is a very important philosopher of
the 15th century, called Nicolaus of Cusa, who was the founder of
modern science, the founder of the modern nation-state, and he
was very important: He broke through the barrier from the Middle
Ages to modern times. Because he was actually the person, who
brought the Council of Florence into being by first finding
handwritings in Byzantium, which were then the basis for the
unification of the Orthodox Church with the Roman Church; but
when he brought the Orthodox delegation in 1453 to the Council of
Florence, he had a stroke of genius: He said, now, I am thinking
something, which no human being has ever thought before. He then
wrote his {De Docta Ignorantia}, and he developed this notion of
the coincidence of opposites, the {coincidentia oppositorum},
which was the idea, that the One has a higher quality than the
Many, and that the human mind is capable of synthesizing some
hypothesis, which gives you a deeper insight into the laws of the
universe, into Classical art — in other words, it’s the
creativity of the human mind, which is the driving force in the
development of the universe. And that’s for example, what the
Russian philosopher Vladimir Vernadsky called, that the
creativity of man is a geophysical force in the universe. Now,
what he did basically, is to say — he didn’t say it in this way,
but the effect of it was — that in order to move away from the
Middle Ages, from the Scholasticism, from the Neo-Peripatetics
and the Aristotelean ideas, you had to basically break with the
axioms of the Middle Ages thinking, and that you had to create
something basically completely new, a new method of thinking.
And I’m saying, that with the New Silk Road, we have to do
exactly that: We have to break away from money, greed,
monetarism, all of these things, which really are a decaying
culture. If you look at the European, American, Western culture,
it {is} a decaying culture. Just look at the youth culture. Look
at what our young people watch in terms of pop music, video
games, the violence, just the popular entertainment has become
really degenerate. And we have to break with that, and we have to
combine the New Silk Road economic model — which I did not go
into so much today, because I already spoke about it two months
ago here in Copenhagen — but we have to break with the whole
axiomatic of globalization and basically go for a New
Renaissance, a new cultural renaissance of thinking, which will
build on the best traditions of each country: on Confucianism,
on Vedic tradition of India, on Avicenna [Ibn Sina], and other
thinkers, Al-Farabi, Abu Al-Kindi in the Arab world; in Europe,
the great Classical music tradition, the Italian Renaissance, the
German Classical music. We just have to take the high points of
all civilizations, and study that, and start to love the culture
of the other countries, and then we will create out of this a
completely New Renaissance, which will bring mankind into a
completely new phase of evolution.
Because I do not believe, that the present condition of
mankind is, what we are here for! We are not here to kill each
other; we are not here to eat caviar, until we have it coming out
of our ears. We are here to be creative! We are here to discover
the laws of the universe, to write beautiful poems, to write
beautiful music, to celebrate the creativity of civilization. And
I think, that the idea of man in space, man going into the next
phase of the evolution of man, is really what will get us out of
this crisis. So that is, what the New Silk Road is all about.
[ovation]

Titelbillede: Dr. Liu Chunrong og Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Schiller Instituttets seminar fandt sted på Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute under Copenhagen Business School.

The Schiller Institute seminar was held at the Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, Copenhagen Business School.

Hr. Li Xiaoguang, kinesisk meddirektør for Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, holdt en velkomsttale.

Mr. Li Xiaoguang,  the Chinese co-director of the Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, welcomed the participants to the Institute.

H.E. Ambassador Liu Biwei (right)

HE hr. Liu Biwei, Den kinesiske Folkerepubliks ambassadør til Kongeriget Danmark holdt åbningstalen.

His Excellency Mr. Liu Biwei, Ambassador of the People’s Republic of  China to the Kingdom of Denmark delivered opening greetings to the seminar.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, stifter og formand for det Internationale Schiller Institut, holdt en tale om ‘Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen, med introduktion v/Tom Gillesberg, formand for Schiller Instituttet i Danmark.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder and president of the international Schiller Institute spoke about The New Silk Road becomes The World Land-bridge. Introduced by Tom Gillesberg, chairman of The Schiller Institute in Denmark:

Video af Zepp-LaRouches tale, med dia-billeder; en dansk oversættelse følger lige under videoen.

(Video of Zepp-LaRouches speach, with the slides included. An english transcript can be found further down the page)

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Audio:

Hr. Liu Chunrong, PhD., associeret professor, School of International Public Affairs, Fundan Universitetet; eksekutiv vicedirektør for Fundan-European Centre for China Studies, Københavns Universitet, præsenterede Kinas “En Bælte, En Vej” politik.

Dr. Liu Chunrong, PhD, Associate Professor, School of International Relations and Public Affairs, Fudan University, and Executive Vice Director Fudan-European Centre for China Studies, NIAS,  University of Copenhagen, presented China’s One Belt, One Road policy.

Video:

Audio:

Discussion period:

Video:

Audio:

(See English report below.)

Stor succes for Københavner-seminar om Kinas politik for »Et Bælte, En Vej«

København, 27. april 2015 – Omkring 80 mennesker deltog i dag i et seminar, som blev holdt på Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute under Copenhagen Business School.

Følgende personer var talere på seminaret:

Velkomsttale: Hr. Li Xiaoguang, kinesisk meddirektør for Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute.

HE hr. Liu Biwei, Den kinesiske Folkerepubliks ambassadør til Kongeriget Danmark – åbningstale.

Fr. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, grundlægger af og international præsident for Schiller Instituttet og en betydningsfuld medforfatter af »Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«; mangeårig leder i LaRouche-bevægelsen og gift med den amerikanske statsmand, økonom og filosof Lyndon LaRouche; forkvinde for det tyske politiske parti Bürgerrechtsbewegung Solidarität (Borgerrettighedsbevægelsen Solidaritet), BüSo. Introduktion v/Tom Gillesberg, formand for Schiller Instituttet i Danmark.

Hr. Liu Chunrong, PhD., associeret professor, School of International Public Affairs, Fundan Universitetet; eksekutiv vicedirektør for Fundan-European Centre for China Studies, Københavns Universitet.

De ca. 80 deltagere inkluderede fem ambassadører samt diplomater fra seks andre ambassader, mange medlemmer og kontakter af Schiller Instituttet, og andre interesserede som har specielle tilknutning til Kina.

Denne konference er den tredje i rækken af ’Manhattan-projekt’-konferencer i København siden januar, som Schiller Instituttet har arrangeret. En mere udførlig rapport vil følge, inkl. links til video- og audiooptagelser.

English:

Very Successful Copenhagen Seminar on “China’s ‘One Belt,
One Road’ Policy”

The Schiller Institute in Denmark held a very successful seminar about China’s “One Belt, One Road” policy, at the Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, attended by approximately 80 people. Video and audio recordings can be found at:  http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=6387

Li Xiaoguang, the Chinese co-director of the Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, welcomed the speakers and attendees.

The seminar participants had the honor to have opening remarks by His Excellency Mr. Liu Biwei, Ambassador of the People’s Republic of China to the Kingdom of Denmark.

The next speaker was Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder and president of The Schiller Institute, and a major author of the EIR Report “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge.” She was introduced by Tom Gillesberg, chairman of The Schiller Institute in Denmark. Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche presented the world land-bridge policy and the new BRICS paradigm, as the alternative to the danger of economic and financial collapse, and nuclear war. One area of special emphasis was the growing crisis of fresh water scarcity, counterposing the lack of action in the U.S., with the great infrastructure project approach in China.

The Chinese point of view of the “One Belt, One Road” policy was presented by Dr. Liu Chunrong, PhD, Associate Professor, School of International Relations and Public Affairs, Fudan University, and Executive Vice Director Fudan-European Centre for China Studies, NIAS, University of Copenhagen.

Among the audience were: five ambassadors, plus diplomats from another six other embassies; people who have a special connection to China representing a Danish think tank, academia and businesses; plus many Schiller Institute members and contacts.

This seminar was the third in a series of Manhattan project-style Schiller Institute conferences held in Copenhagen since January.

English transcript of Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s speech, and Tom Gillesberg’s introduction:

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE ADDRESSES “CHINA’S ‘ONE BELT, ONE ROAD’
POLICY’ SEMINAR IN COPENHAGEN, April 27, 2015

Here is the transcript of Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s address to the
Schiller Institute seminar in Copenhagen, which was held
Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, Copenhagen Business
School. Click her for the audio and video from Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s speech and the other speeches from the seminar.

TOM GILLESBERG: I have the great honor of introducing Helga
Zepp-LaRouche, who has come here from a rather busy schedule both
in Germany and the United States, but also the whole world she’s
intervening to. Just as a short introduction, Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche
has been since 1977 the wife and very close collaborator of
Lyndon LaRouche in the United States, the economist, philosopher,
statesman who is giving leadership in the U.S., for the U.S. to
return to the intentions of its founders, to be a promoter of
sovereign nations that can collaborate on an equal footing to
secure the benefits for all nations and peoples.
And Helga has a very, I think, close connection to China.
As a young journalist she traveled to China in 1971, in the
height of the Cultural Revolution as one of the first Western
journalists and actually saw on the spot what was going on. She
then became politically active with the LaRouche movement and
embarked on a life-long battle for a new just world economic
order, for the possibilities of development for all nations and
peoples.
She then founded, among many other things, the Schiller
Institute, in 1984. She is presently the chairwoman of the
German political party, the BüSo — the Bürgerrechtsbewegung
Solidarität, or Civil Rights Soliarity Movement. She was vry
active after the Fall of the Berlin Wall and one of the authors
of the Schiller Institute program for the development of the
world after the Iron Curtain had fallen of the program the
Paris-Berlin-Vienna Productive Triangle, a Locomotive for the
World Economy. And when that did not materialize, she was very
active in extending that program to the program for the Eurasian
Land-Bridge, going from China and Asia to Europe and having a
development of the whole region. And as part of that, she then
became a visitor many times to China to speak on the need for a
New Silk Road and actually earned her nickname in China as the
“Silk Road Lady,” for her efforts to have China embark on this
policy.
And since then, she has been also the driving force in
holding many scores of conferences in Europe and the United
States on the need for creating a paradigm shift, to get the
Western world out of its long-term economic, strategic, and
cultural crisis. And, over the last couple of years, she has
been one of the architects of this report, “The New Silk Road
Becomes the World Land-Bridge.” She has also been leading the
campaign to stop the present geopolitical games that threaten to
detonate thermonuclear war and instead get the United States and
Europe to accept the offer of the BRICS countries to join forces
in an inclusive world order, where all nations of the world, on
an equal footing, collaborate to secure the peace and development
of all nations.
So I think it’s very appropriate that you are here to
directly lay what’s going on, so please, welcome. [applause]

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Thank you, Tom, for these kind words of
introduction.
Well I have a certain dilemma, because I want to present to
you the potential, which lies in this program, and given the fact
that the Western media have reported very little about it, I have
a dilemma, that I need to tell you, that this is {the} most
important political initiative on the planet right now. The
dilemma comes from the fact that, by introducing this idea, have
to tell you immediately why this is the case, and that is the
reality, that the world is much more close to a new global war,
than most people have an inkling of. And this New Silk Road
initiative, which comes from China, but which in the meantime has
been joined by many countries, is the only available
war-avoidance policy.
Now there was just on the April 18- 19 in Moscow the Fourth
Moscow International Security Conference, and the main subject of
this conference was the danger of nuclear war. And this is a
reaction to the fact that NATO has been expanding eastward, up to
the borders of Russia. You have a whole bunch of strategic
doctrines which Russia regards as a threat to their security
interests, and naturally you have the horrendous situation in
Ukraine, which contrary to what the Western media have been
reporting on — or not reporting actually — is it’s really
something which the West must make up. I just participated in the
last two days, or Friday and Saturday in a conference in
Baden-Baden in Germany, the German-Russian Cultural Days. It’s an
annual conference, and there was a large gathering of German
industrialists and Russian speakers and Russian people. And we
had the fortune to have a videoconference connected to this
conference, which brought in a live program from the former Prime
Minister of Ukraine, Mr. [Mykola] Azarov. And he gave an
absolutely hair-raising report about the conditions in Ukraine,
the fact that the country is being torn apart. Political leaders
are either forced to go into exile or are threatened to be
assassinated; journalists are being killed openly in the street;
trenches are being built; and, as you know, American soldiers are
now training the National Guard, which has a lot of Nazi
components in it. And for the Russians this is extremely severe,
because we are shortly before the 70th anniversary of the end of
Nazism and the end of the Second World War, and the mood of the
people were really horrified to see this endorsement of Nazis 70
years after the Second World War.
Now, I don’t want to go into this in depth, we can do that
in the discussion if people have questions about it, but I think
this crisis, in Ukraine in particular, I could also point to the
Middle East, which is in a similar horrible condition, makes
very, very clear, that if we as humanity cannot move away from
geopolitics — geopolitics was the reason for two world wars in
the 20th century, and right now the continuation of geopolitics
is threatening a new global war. I just want to mention an
article in {New York Times} from 19th April, where two generals,
Gen. James Cartwright, who is former head of the U.S. Strategic
Command, and Gen. Vladimir Dvorkin, who is the chief of
intelligence of the Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces, they penned
together an article, In which they said that the world has never
been so close to the danger of nuclear war globally, and
therefore extinction, as right now. And the reason is obviously
that even the normal code of behavior among nations, which
existed in the Cold War, that you had a red telephone between
Kennedy and Khrushchev, this no longer exists; and you have the
two nuclear forces, from NATO and the West and Russia, all the
time on launch on warning. And launch on warning means there are
only a few minutes time, if one side perceives a launch, either
by intention or by accident, they have a few minutes, actually
it’s estimated three minutes’ time, to respond or be eliminated.
So that shows you how extremely close we are to the danger
of a global extinction of civilization. Because if this would
happen, we would not exist as humanity. And I’m saying it with
that gravity, to say that this calls all the more urgently, for a
different approach. And the different approach must be to move
away from geopolitics and move in the direction of the common
aims of mankind.
And it just happens to be, that the policies which are
proposed by President Xi Jinping, which he calls a “win-win”
policy, is exactly that. It’s the idea, that with the New Silk
Road, you have a policy where every country which participates in
it, will have a benefit for it. The New Silk Road, Maritime Silk
Road policy by China is {not} a new imperial policy replacing the
Anglo-American imperial policy, but it is a completely new model
of the nations among nations, where the enormous example of the
Chinese economic miracle, which China was able to develop in the
last 30 years — you know, where China in {30 years}, developed
as much as most industrial nations needed 100 or 200 years to
develop — and China is now offering to export that model and
have other countries benefit in a similar way from that kind of
economic miracle, which China did.
Can you move to the first slide?
So the world has changed since July last year, the summit of
the BRICS countries in Fortaleza in Brazil. And this is a
picture which was made at this occasion, showing the leaders of
Russia, India, Brazil, China and South Africa. And they basically
concluded a new strategic alliance — economic alliance, which
Prime Minister Modi characterized in the following way: He said,
“This is the first alliance of nations, which are not defined by
their current capacity, but by their future potential of
development.” And at another occasion, Modi said that the biggest
potential of India is, that 60% of its people are below 30 years
of age, and therefore, if they are well-educated and developed,
they can come to the help of other nations, which has demographic
problems, like Germany, for example.
What these countries did, is they concluded an enormous
amount of economic treaties, of economic cooperation, including
peaceful development of inherently safe nuclear energy, the
development of fusion energy, joint space projects, space travel,
and numerous other high-tech cooperation areas.
Then, the next day, they met with the leaders of South
America, the organizations of CELAC [Community of Latin American
and Caribbean States] and Unasur [Union of South American
Nations]. Then a little bit later they also had meetings with
countries of ASEAN [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] and
actually you have now a completely parallel system of economics,
which is really going to be the infrastructure development of the
world.
Now this here is an official picture of the New Silk Road
and the Maritime Silk Road, which shows you the old Silk Road
from Xi’an, actually it goes even farther to the west,
Lianyungang, where the end of that Silk Road is on the China Sea,
all the way through Urumqi, then Central Asia into Europe; and
then Maritime Silk Road is actually connecting even Africa and
much of the Pacific also into Europe. And this is modelled on the
famous Maritime Silk Road of the 15th century, which connected
the nations of the world already at that time.
Now, I want to very quickly say that this made us very
happy, when Xi Jinping announced the New Silk Road in Kazakhstan
in 2013, we jumped that high — you know, in the Schiller
Institute — because we had promoted this idea. This was our
proposal when the Berlin Wall came down, in ’89, and the wall no
longer was there. So we said let’s connect Paris with Berlin and
Vienna, which is a triangular area of the size of Japan, and has
the highest concentration of industrial capacity in the world;
and let’s make corridors to Warsaw, to Kiev, to the Balkans. And
it would have been a perfect way to intervene.
Unfortunately at that time, despite the fact there was a
very good resonance, you had Bush Sr., you had Margaret
Thatcher, and they had completely different ideas: They wanted to
reduce Russia from a superpower to at Third World, raw
materials-exporting country, and therefore they introduced the
shock-therapy, instead, which dismantled the Russian industrial
potential between ’91-’94, to only 30% left.
But then, when in ’91, the Soviet Union collapsed, we
connected this triangle, Paris-Berlin-Vienna, and we said: OK,
now the Iron Curtain is gone, now we can have development
corridors connecting the population and industrial centers of
Europe with those of Asia, through corridors. And then we looked
at the best geographical conditions. I should say, we were
inspired very much by the railway program of Sun Yat-sen, the
founder of modern China, who had developed a whole network of
Chinese railways, and that went into this program. So, at that
time we said let’s look at the best geographical preconditions,
and we found, not so accidentally, that the old Trans-Siberian
Railroad and the old Silk Road, the ancient Silk Road, had the
best geographical conditions to build such infrastructure.
So at that point the shock therapy started to destroy
Russia’s economy, but we kept holding seminars — we had hundreds
of seminars, in Europe, in United States, and then, eventually,
in Warsaw, in Budapest, in Moscow. And in ’96 even in Beijing,
where the Chinese government had responded to our proposal to all
the governments, to hold a big conference promoting the regions
along the Silk Road. And I was there as a speaker, but then came
the Asia Crisis in ’97, and China, at that conference said, that
this will be the long-term strategy for China until 2010. But
then the Asia crisis brought chaos and then the Russian GKO
crisis [in ’98].
So in the mean time we kept working on this initial proposal
which grew. And the latest of this, is this report: It’s a
370-page study which is really the idea of connecting the world
through infrastructure corridors.
Now, here you see some of these projects, which are already
being built, by the BRICS, by some of the other countries — for
example China is now building a transcontinental railroad from
Brazil to Peru, this is letter A [on the map]. This has already
started — you know, Latin America does not have an
infrastructure network! It is still in the colonial condition,
where you have little railroads from the iron ore mountain to the
coast, but if you want to travel from Peru to Brazil, you have to
go via Miami. So this is the idea, to develop a continental
railroad system.
Then number 1 there is the canal built in Nicaragua, it will
be the second Panama Canal, which obviously is an extremely
important project, which will mean that Nicaragua has a very good
chance to become an industrial country, with improving living
standards of its population. Naturally the Greenies are going
crazy and they say there are two fishermen who have to be
resettled. But, first of all, these people will be compensated,
and secondly without infrastructure, there is {no} industrial
development; without infrastructure there is not even
agriculture, because without infrastructure you cannot transport
and process food.
So then, naturally you have the Bering Strait, this number
2. This has been recently announced by Vladimir Yakunin, who is
the head of Russian Railways. And he proposed (I don’t think I
have that slide), a fast train connection from London all the way
through the Bering Strait to New York. A couple of years ago, Mr.
LaRouche and I participated in a conference in Moscow where the
fathers of the Bering Strait Project were present. These were all
older men over 80, and they said: “Oh, in 20 years, we can go
with a maglev train from Acapulco through the Bering Strait to
Mumbai, and this will be much faster than you can go by ship
today,” and they had a very pioneering spirit.
So this is very important because this connection not only
would connect the transport lines of North America with those of
Eurasia, but it would be absolutely crucial to open up the Arctic
Region. In the Far East of Russia you have all the raw materials
which are in the periodic table of Mendeleyev, and they represent
for the next 100 years a very important raw-material potential
which will be important not only for Russia, but for Europe, for
the United States, for China, for Japan, for Korea. So this will
be the way to develop it, because these raw-material are in
permafrost conditions, and you have to build, you have to build
cities, which have a dome, because people have to live — you
cannot live in permanfrost conditions like that, you have to have
a special way of developing it.
Now, I could go into many other projects — the Seikan
tunnel between the Japanese islands does already exist, it
connects the two important islands in Japan. Then the Bohai
Tunnel will connect two Chinese cities and shorten the transport.
The brown line there, this is the actual Silk Road [Silk Road
Economic Belt], which is now being promoted by China; this larger
gray line is the [21st-Century] Maritime Silk Road; but as you
can see, it stretches all the way to Europe and into Africa.
Prime Minister Li Keqiang was several times last year in Africa,
and he proposed to connect all African capitals through a fast
train system. And I know from many Africans, leaders and leading
politicians, they are very happy about that, because Africa right
now urgently needs development. And I think, if you look at the
horrendous refugee crisis, the people drowning by the thousands
in the Mediterranean, it makes it {so} clear that to bring
development to Africa is the only way how you can overcome this
unbelievable tragedy. And if Europe would have a right mind, they
would join! You know, rather than sending the Triton boats to
chase the refugees back, which is a complete moral bankruptcy of
Europe.
Now this is very interesting, because the big question
always comes, “who should finance all of this?” As you know,
already at the Brazil Fortaleza summit, the BRICS countries
agreed, together with some of the other countries, to create new
financial institutions: the New Development Bank of the BRICS,
the AIIB [Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank] was already
founded in last October, but also a whole set of other banks.
And it came from the idea, that when the Asia crisis happened in
’97, in which speculators like George Soros speculated against
the currencies of countries like Korea, Philippines, Thailand, in
one week up to 60-80% downward, and these countries had no
defense; so they concluded, “OK, we have to protect ourselves,”
so they created the Contingency Reserve Arrangement [CRA], which
is a pool of currencies of a $100 billion, which will defend all
of the participating countries against speculative attacks.
Now, the AIIB, the New Development Bank, the New Silk Road
Fund, the Maritime Silk Road Fund, the bank of the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization [SCO Development Bank], and the SAARC
[South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation] Development
Fund, are all new banks which follow a completely different
principle than Wall Street and the City of London, or Frankfurt,
for that matter. They say, we do not participate in speculation,
but we will use these funds only for investment in the real
economy, into these projects. And this is urgently needed,
because as you know, despite all of the quantitative easing of
the Federal Reserve, and now [ECB President] Mr. Draghi, who are
printing money as if there would be no tomorrow, the money does
not arrive at the industries! Because the banks, the speculators
prefer to keep the casino going, and this is actually reaching a
point where at the IMF annual spring meeting which just took
place in Washington, the IMF itself put out a report saying that
we are facing a collapse {bigger} than 2008 with the collapse of
Lehman Brothers. And several economists from J.P. Morgan and
other banks warned that you could have a simultaneous stock and
bond crisis, causing a meltdown of the system; or, if the Federal
Reserve would increase the interest rate only by a tiny, tiny
amount it could blow up the whole derivatives bubble of $2
trillion. And if the Troika and the ECB are pushing Greece out
of the Eurozone, that could also trigger a collapse, because it
would not so much hurt Greece, but it would blow up the European
banks.
So therefore, the existence of these banks are de facto a
lifeboat in the face of the immediate danger of a collapse.
Now, as you probably have noticed, when the question came,
who would be a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure
Investment Bank, which was already constituted last October, but
the date until which countries could join as founding members was
end of March [2015]. And the United States put a lot of pressure
on the allies, not to join; they didn’t want Korea to join;
naturally, they didn’t want Europe to join, and they put maximum
pressure on Asian countries not to join. But then, it just so
happened, that the best ally of the United States, Great Britain,
was the first European country to join, and that caused a kind of
a dam break, and then Germany, France, Italy, Switzerland,
Austria, and all the Scandinavian countries joined. And the
actual founding members included 57 countries. And they
basically participate in different degrees in this new bank,
which obviously people realize that what China is offering with
the economic cooperation in these projects, is much, much more
attractive than to participate in more speculative bubbles which
eventually will pop. So, this was from the founding meeting in
October, already, but in the meantime, it become many more
states.
Now, this is also very interesting, because this is a
proposal which my husband made in 1975. It was called the
International Development Bank, and it was basically the same
idea as the AIIB, today, saying that the IMF and the World Bank
do not provide enough credit for Third World development. This
was a proposal he made in ’75, and it went into the final
resolution of the Non-Aligned Movement in 1976 in Colombo, Sri
Lanka, and it had the same idea as the AIIB.
The World Bank only spends per year $24 billion for
projects. But the actual requirement of the developing
countries, is about $8 trillion in the next years! So there is
no way the World Bank can manage that, and this bank, on the
other side, the AIIB, and the other banks will grow and will
become more productive.
Now, this is very important because what the AIIB and the
New Development Bank and this new economic system which is
emerging represent, is something completely different than
monetarism. Monetarism is the idea that you have to have maximum
profit, the real economy doesn’t count; as a matter of fact, you
all know, that if you have an industrial firm which lays of
10,000, the stock goes up! It doesn’t make any sense. In the
realm of monetarism, this is explained by the idea that the firm
becomes “more productive” because fewer workers work more, and
therefore the profit is greater; but from the standpoint of the
real economy this makes no sense at all.
And it is exactly that philosophy which has caused the
Troika to destroy Greece. What they managed to do is to reduce
the Greek economy by one-third, to increase the youth
unemployment to 65%, and people are extremely unhappy, not only
in Greece, but also in Italy, in Spain, Portugal and so forth.
What we propose, both the IDB and these new banks, is really
going back to a completely different model. It’s based on the
idea of this man, whom you all recognize, I’m sure — he is
Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury of the
United States. And he created, actually, the United States, by
creating the National Bank and the credit system, because, what
he did, was after the War of Independence, the different states
in the United States were totally indebted. So he unified the
United States by taking over the debt obligations of these
states, and basically saying, it’s no longer your business, we’ll
take these debts as a Federal state, as a national state, and we
will transform that into a credit mechanism, only aimed at areal
production.
And that was really the actual founding of the United
States. And this idea of a credit system which is not
monetarism, but it is the idea that credit can only be given for
future production in the real economy, not for speculation, that
model was what made the United States a great industrial power.
Because, despite the fact that some following Presidents then
tried to dismantle it, the United States went back to it, again
and again. It was the policies of John Quincy Adams; it was the
policy of Abraham Lincoln with the greenbacks; it was the policy
of Franklin D. Roosevelt. This is how Roosevelt brought the
United States out of the Depression of the ’30s by building the
Reconstruction Finance Corp. which financed the New Deal, and
that’s how America got out of the Depression. And, also, it was
the basis for the German Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, the
state bank, which help to finance the reconstruction and the
economic miracle of Germany in the postwar period — which was
modeled on the Reconstruction Finance Corp.
So this is therefore, not something new. It’s a tested
model, it has always been the basis when there was progress in
the real economy, as compared to the financial markets. I’m not
talking about the financial markets, I’m talking about real
production for the livelihood and the common good of the people.
So the first step there, we have called for — Tom
mentioned it — that we think it is an absolute matter, actually
of war and peace, if we succeed to get the European nations {and}
America to join with this “win-win,” all-inclusive,
non-geopolitical system. And, as I said, the financial system of
Wall Street and the City of London {is} about to blow up, bigger
than 2008, and the only way how that can be avoided from leading
to a chaotic collapse, is by going back to the Glass-Steagall
legislation which was introduced by Franklin D. Roosevelt in
1933, which was his answer to the collapse of ’29-’33 period.
And he separated the banks, by making the commercial banks
separate from the investment banks, so that the investment bank
could not have access to assets of the commercial banks.
And this exist from 1933 until 1999 in the United States,
and in Europe you had practically the same thing, because you had
a very regulated banking sector. But the Wall Street forces did
not like it, because naturally it reduced their profit, so they
worked very hard to eliminate it, which they were able to do in
1999, and the whole super-expansion of the speculative area only
occurred after this law was eliminated. And the good news, is
that there is a right now a Presidential candidate in the United
States, who has said that his first act if he would move into the
White House, would be to reintroduce this Glass-Steagall law: And
that is the former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, about whom many
papers are writing that he has a very good chance to take the
Democratic nomination, because many people think Hillary Clinton
has made too many compromises with bad policies, when she was
Secretary of State. But, O’Malley is not alone, but you have a
whole bunch of people around him, who say the United States must
go back to being a Republic; it must go back to putting the
common good above the interests of Wall Street. And that is
really the “to be or not to be” question of the whole world.
Now, if this reorganization would take place, then, the
United States could easily join with the BRICS countries in such
efforts as the AIIB and other such things. And, as you know, the
Greek government has also demanded that there is no way how they
can pay their debt, because as you know, of all the rescue
packages which went to Greece, only 3% of that money remained in
Greece, while all the rest really went to the European banks.
And therefore, to demand that Greece should pay back these debts,
it’s just impossible! And the Greek government has made the
point that they want to have a European Debt Conference, like
Germany in 1953, without which the German economic miracle would
never have taken place. So if this all happens, and that could
happen in the short term, Europe could easily participate in
that.
Now, I just want to say, the ancient Silk Road was not only
an exchange of silk, and porcelain, and paper, printing,
gunpowder, and many, many other goods, but much more important
than that, it was an exchange of ideas and technologies: Silk
making is more important than silk; how to print books is more
important than the book. So the ancient Silk Road was an
extremely important exchange of goods and culture, and ideas, and
understanding among people — and so will be the New Silk Road,
just with modern means.
Now, if you go back to the picture, this is why we have
said, “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge” where we
have the camels, sort of symbolizing the old Silk Road, and here
you see a maglev train, and here you see a rover on the Moon, to
give you an idea that the exchange of technologies and goods in
the modern world will be the most advanced technologies to the
benefit of all of mankind.
So going back to the problem here, is, obviously, if you
look at that map, you see, these are the deserts of the world: A
very broad desert band which goes from the Atlantic coast of
Africa, through the Sahara-Sahel zone, the Arab Peninsula, the
Middle East, all the way to China. And that desert is growing.
It’s expanding. And then you have the desert in the West of the
United States, which is right now ruined by a big drought in
California, in Texas, in all the states west of the Mississippi;
and naturally, Brazil has a drought.
In the United States this is very severe. Here you have a
global water scarcity map; here you have the water stress
indicator. In the United States, just to mention that, Governor
Brown of California has just announced that the water consumption
will be cut by 25% up to 36%! Now that is the death to
Californian agriculture; in the south of California, for example,
in the Central Valley, in this region, 40% of the entire
agriculture of the United States is produced, and this is now
being completely destroyed. Here you see, this is a former
reservoir, which is almost dried up. This is the snowpack: in
2013, it was relatively, a lot of snow, and last year, no snow,
so the drought is expanding, and obviously, to cut consumption
means you kill people. I mean, you cannot cut water — where
should these people go? There are already cities and towns where
people are — it’s not just not watering their lawn — it’s
taking public showers, of getting water rations, and then
eventually people have to move away, because if there is no water
there is no life. There were already herds being transformed, of
hundreds of thousands of head of cattle, and the idea to just
accept that, and as Governor Brown said, “California historically
has only a carrying potential of 400,000 people,” is ridiculous,
because there are presently 39 million people living in
California! And the idea to say there’s only room for 400,000 is
completely ahistorical about what is the role of human beings,
who differentiate themselves from animals by being able to
increase the living capability for more people by improving
productivity, by transforming the industry, the infrastructure,
and in that way, developing the planet.
So obviously, China has taken a completely different
approach. Here you see, China is actually the only country which
has taken a very big water diversification: There is on the one
side, the Three Gorges Dam, which is now producing, I think 22
gigawatts of electricity per year, and it has eliminated flooding
which killed many thousands of people in the past; and even more
important, is the water diversification project from the southern
area of the Yangtze River through a Northern Route into the
Yellow River and the desert area of China; and the Middle Route
to the region around Beijing.
So this is actually a model which is now being followed by
Narendra Modi for India, who just agreed to make gigantic water
projects to tame the water coming down from the Himalayas, and
also making canals out of 101 Indian rivers.
Now, what most people don’t consider is, that water is not a
natural resource like iron ore, or gold, or whatever: You can’t
use up, because water is organized in global cycles, where 90% of
the precipitation rains down over the ocean, only 10% rains down
over the land. And that water, the Sun causes evaporation, this
leads to cloud formation, and then the water rains down, and it
is human activity, which can make these cycles more efficient.
It’s not just, that it rains down over land and then flows back
into the ocean. You can use it in agriculture, you can use it in
industrial production, you can use it in other urban activities,
and it is actually the ability of man to make that more
efficient.
Here you see a very interesting comparison — you see here
the water diversion of the United States. Even though the water
diversion of China has started much more recently, it’s almost
double, which shows you the completely different philosophy.
This is a very important project, which is part of the
approach to fight the desert, and this is the Lake Chad Transaqua
project, which is the idea, that you could eliminate a lot of the
drought in the Sahel zone and around Lake Chad by bringing some
of the surplus water from the headwaters region of the Congo on
the one side, through rivers and canals into Lake Chad, which has
been reduced to less than 10% right now; and also through a
second canal along the Nile to increase the agricultural land in
Africa tremendously. And also now to bring real development to
these countries, without which you will have more people running
away from Boko Haram, which is now at Lake Chad and Nigeria. And
without a real development perspective, there is no way how you
can contain these projects.
Human beings are the only species, which can improve the
conditions of mankind again and again and again, and the last
10,000 years, or 20,000 years since the last Ice Age, just think,
what an enormous development mankind has made. We have increased
the population potential of the Earth from about 5 million at
most, to presently around 7 billion. This is due to the fact that
man, unlike animals, can make new discoveries, discovers the
universal principles of our physical universe, and think things,
which have never been thought before.
Therefore, the attack on the water crisis is not just a
question of using the aquifers, because the aquifers can — they
replenish, but this goes much too slowly. It’s not only
re-diverting the rivers, dams, but it’s especially influencing
the global cyclical process of water. There is a relationship
between what happens in our Solar System and the rain. Because
the Sun, which shines on the oceans, causes evaporation, but the
Sun is not the only solar impact on the weather; it’s also the
cosmic radiation, which comes from our galaxy, which leads to
cloud formation, ionization of moisture, and therefore to rain.
That is not just something where we have to wait passively until
it happens, but we can study, for example, what is happening in
our galaxy, which influences the weather, and then understand
better, how we can create more water.
Here, you see our Solar System in a 32 million year cycle,
moving along the Milky Way. The Milky Way is basically a flat
plateau, in which our Solar System is moving up and down in
cycles, and you have a complete change in the weather patterns,
which comes from the position of our Solar System in our galaxy.
I’m not saying, that we know everything about that yet. We
know, that there is a lot of connection between the Solar System,
the galaxy and the weather patterns on our Earth, and I can
assure you, that if you look at the long-term changes in our
weather patterns, then {these} things are a lot more important,
than whatever you use in your little car as CO2 production.
Because these are forces, which are of a completely different
magnitude, and naturally, the climate is changing, but galactic
processes are really what is the cause of it.
Anyway, the idea of using cosmic rays and ionization of
moisture is already successfully being done by Israel and by some
of the Gulf States; Russia is doing a lot of research on this,
and this is, what we have to do. The reason, why I’m saying this,
is, the Silk Road is not just building railways from Dunhuang to
Lisbon or wherever; it’s not just building roads, it’s not just
building canals. The modern Silk Road, the New Silk Road is,
exactly as the old Silk Road was, {an exchange of ideas, of
technology, for the common good of all.}
Obviously, today the big challenges are world poverty, are
the danger of war, are the danger of water scarcity, which could
become the reason for new wars. So the New Silk Road — and this
is what we understand with it, and I’m sure that our Chinese
friend will show his perspective — but that is the philosophy,
which we have taken as a basis in our approach, that the New Silk
Road is {a vision}, of how humanity can move away from
geopolitics and the stupid idea that we have to fight over scarce
resources, that we have to create wars because we don’t like
another system, that we have to eventually self-destruct, but
that we have to make the evolutionary jump to the idea of the
common aims of mankind and to define the next phase of evolution
in the interest of all.
If you look at this, the Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry
Rogozin of Russia just two days ago, pointed to the fact, that
the BRICS countries are all space travelling nations. China is
the leader in space travel. When China in December 2013 landed
the Yutu rover on the Moon, with was the idea, that in a few
missions later, I think it was in 2017, this Yutu — “Jade
Rabbit” — that they will bring back helium-3. Helium-3 is an
isotope, which is actually a fuel for fusion power. It’s much
more efficient than deuterium or tritium, because with this heavy
deuterium and tritium in the fusion process, you are still using
turbines, and you use turbines to create electricity in the old
way. But with helium-3 you can directly gain electricity from the
physical process of fusion power, and therefore, naturally, the
energy efficiency is much, much higher. And once we have fusion
power, for example, this will create for the first time energy
and raw materials security for the Earth. Energy security,
because on the Moon, you have several tons of helium-3, which
will be sufficient for many tens of thousands of years of energy
security on the Earth; and raw materials security, because with
the high heat of the plasma torch, you can take any waste,
including nuclear waste, including waste in your household, and
turn it back into isotopes, which you then can reconstruct and
make new raw materials.
So this is the vanguard of where mankind must go, and China
has made that its national pride. And China, contrary to Germany,
which is very stupid with respect to energy — you know, this
stupid exit from nuclear energy without having an alternative, is
completely crazy — but China has basically created a situation,
where they are in the right position to solve this problem, and
Rogozin, the Deputy Prime Minister of Russia, has said, that the
BRICS countries will cooperate in space to solve these problems.
So this is extremely important, because if mankind makes
that jump to not have war as a conflict resolution, which in a
time of nuclear energy, it should be obvious that we must move to
a different regime, that we must define the common aims of
mankind, that which is, — if you have seen these pictures with
astronauts and cosmonauts and taikonauts, they all report the
same: When they are in space and look at our little planet, this
blue planet, they realize that there are no borders. They also
realize that our planet is extremely small in a very big Solar
System, in an even bigger galaxy, and there are {billions} of
galaxies. So, there are dangers from space, like cosmic
radiation, like asteroids; there are all kinds of dangers, which
we don’t manage right now. But if we don’t want to have the same
fate as the dinosaurs, who became eliminated 65 million years
ago, because probably a meteorite hit the Earth and created so
much cloud cover, that all the vegetation stopped, and then the
dinosaurs, and 96% of all other species were eliminated; if we
as a creative species, {are} really the creative species, we
should put our efforts together and defend against common dangers
to our planet, common dangers to our civilization, and unite.
And there is no better image for that than space collaboration.
This whole question also has a philosophical dimension.
Because people think, China is just doing an imperial expansion,
they want to have their interests. Well, I have the deepest
conviction that what is working in China right now, especially
with President Xi Jinping, {is} the 2,500-year-old Confucian
tradition in China. And I go even so far to say the Chinese
people have Confucius in their genes. Confucius was a
philosopher, who reacted to a historical period in China, which
was characterized by war, by great unrest, by turmoil. And he
developed the Confucian philosophy, which is beautiful. I can
only advise you, in case you are not doing it, study Confucius.
Because Confucius has this idea that there must be harmony in the
world, on the planet. And that, for example, the best way to
have harmony is, there is one key notion, which is {li}, which is
the idea, that each person, each nation, should take its proper
place, and develop in the best possible way, and then you have
harmony. Because if everybody develops their creative potential
and their best maximum capacity, and takes the development of the
other as their own interest, and vice versa, then you have peace.
And that should also be based on the other notion of {ren}.
{Ren} basically means the same thing as love, or {agapë}, or the
Christian idea of charity.
And it happens to be that these ideas are also in the
European best tradition. There is a very important philosopher of
the 15th century, called Nicolaus of Cusa, who was the founder of
modern science, the founder of the modern nation-state, and he
was very important: He broke through the barrier from the Middle
Ages to modern times. Because he was actually the person, who
brought the Council of Florence into being by first finding
handwritings in Byzantium, which were then the basis for the
unification of the Orthodox Church with the Roman Church; but
when he brought the Orthodox delegation in 1453 to the Council of
Florence, he had a stroke of genius: He said, now, I am thinking
something, which no human being has ever thought before. He then
wrote his {De Docta Ignorantia}, and he developed this notion of
the coincidence of opposites, the {coincidentia oppositorum},
which was the idea, that the One has a higher quality than the
Many, and that the human mind is capable of synthesizing some
hypothesis, which gives you a deeper insight into the laws of the
universe, into Classical art — in other words, it’s the
creativity of the human mind, which is the driving force in the
development of the universe. And that’s for example, what the
Russian philosopher Vladimir Vernadsky called, that the
creativity of man is a geophysical force in the universe. Now,
what he did basically, is to say — he didn’t say it in this way,
but the effect of it was — that in order to move away from the
Middle Ages, from the Scholasticism, from the Neo-Peripatetics
and the Aristotelean ideas, you had to basically break with the
axioms of the Middle Ages thinking, and that you had to create
something basically completely new, a new method of thinking.
And I’m saying, that with the New Silk Road, we have to do
exactly that: We have to break away from money, greed,
monetarism, all of these things, which really are a decaying
culture. If you look at the European, American, Western culture,
it {is} a decaying culture. Just look at the youth culture. Look
at what our young people watch in terms of pop music, video
games, the violence, just the popular entertainment has become
really degenerate. And we have to break with that, and we have to
combine the New Silk Road economic model — which I did not go
into so much today, because I already spoke about it two months
ago here in Copenhagen — but we have to break with the whole
axiomatic of globalization and basically go for a New
Renaissance, a new cultural renaissance of thinking, which will
build on the best traditions of each country: on Confucianism,
on Vedic tradition of India, on Avicenna [Ibn Sina], and other
thinkers, Al-Farabi, Abu Al-Kindi in the Arab world; in Europe,
the great Classical music tradition, the Italian Renaissance, the
German Classical music. We just have to take the high points of
all civilizations, and study that, and start to love the culture
of the other countries, and then we will create out of this a
completely New Renaissance, which will bring mankind into a
completely new phase of evolution.
Because I do not believe, that the present condition of
mankind is, what we are here for! We are not here to kill each
other; we are not here to eat caviar, until we have it coming out
of our ears. We are here to be creative! We are here to discover
the laws of the universe, to write beautiful poems, to write
beautiful music, to celebrate the creativity of civilization. And
I think, that the idea of man in space, man going into the next
phase of the evolution of man, is really what will get us out of
this crisis. So that is, what the New Silk Road is all about.
[ovation]

Slides from the presentation (click to enlarge):

17. apr. 2015 – Ved et EIR-arrangement i New York City i går, udstedte Helga Zepp-LaRouche, stifter og forkvinde for Schiller Instituttet, en opfordring til, at USA og Europa allierer sig med BRIKS for udvikling på verdensplan. Hendes budskab blev rapporteret i dag af Xinhua nyhedstjeneste og er blevet udsendt over hele verden. I dagens udgave af China Daily har Xinhuas artikel titlen: »Amerika og Europa får besked på at arbejde sammen med BRIKS«.

Xinhua-artiklen er bevet bragt i Indien af Hindustan Times Syndicate og Asia Pacific Daily News India; i Afrika af Namibias Presseagentur (NAMPA) og mange andre steder. Den cirkulerer på fransk. Den blev bragt på russisk i on-line-publikationen Ftimes, der har base i Kazan. Artiklen havde et fotografi fra et møde den 16. april i Washington, D.C. mellem officielle repræsentanter fra BRIKS, med titlen, »Finansministre fra BRIKS og Centralbankchefer mødes«.

Gårsdagens EIR-seminar på Manhattan med titlen »BRIKS-processen skrider frem: Dannelsen af en ny, international orden for menneskeheden«, sammenbragte repræsentanter fra erhverv og fagforeninger, universiteter i området og de skønne kunster, og fra 13 konsulater og missioner fra mange kontinenter. Foruden hovedtalen af Helga Zepp-LaRouche talte også Benjamin Deniston om videnskaben om at løse ferskvandskrisen i verden.

Teksten til Xinhuas artikel fra 17. april lyder i sin helhed:

Amerika og Europa fik besked på at arbejde sammen med BRIKS

Et fuldstændigt nyt økonomisk system, initieret af BRIKS, er ved at vokse frem med ekstrem høj fart, sagde en international tænketank torsdag og tilskyndede indtrængende USA og Europa til at skrotte geopolitik og arbejde sammen med dem.

»BRIKS-nationerne, nemlig Brasilien, Rusland, Indien, Kina og Sydafrika, er gået sammen for at forfølge en politik med økonomisk udvikling, ikke alene for deres individuelle lande, men til gavn for folk i alle nationer«, sagde Schiller Instituttet, en tænketank, der har hovedkvarter i både Tyskland og USA, i en rapport, der blev udgivet her på et seminar.

I modsætning til Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), som Obamaregeringen er fortaler for, og som ekskluderer Rusland og Kina, så er de BRIKS-relaterede initiativer, inklusive det kinesiske forslag om et Frihandelsområde for Asien og Stillehavsområdet, inkluderende, sagde tænketanken.

På seminaret talte Helga Zepp-LaRouche, tænketankens stifter, i meget rosende vendinger om BRIKS og sagde, at den markedsblok, der var ved at vokse frem, »har initieret et helt nyt, økonomisk system«, der i sin natur er et win-win-system.

Ved vidt og bredt at udbrede en rute for opbygning af den nye, økonomiske verdensorden arbejder BRIKS-nationerne hen imod reel, økonomisk udvikling, komplet med nye kreditinstitutioner og store, højteknologiske projekter for at hæve alle de deltagende landes velfærd, sagde stifteren.

Hun brugte også sin magt og indflydelse til støtte for andre initiativer, som Kina har foreslået, inklusive Asiatisk Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB) og oprettelsen af en Silkevejs-Udviklingsfond. Disse initiativer tilsigter at søge resultater, der er til gensidig gavn, og er ikke af geopolitisk natur, sagde hun.

I stedet vil de skabe et opsving i realøkonomien gennem at finansiere opbygning af infrastruktur, som er af særlig stor betydning i betragtning af, at den nuværende kasinoøkonomi skaber en masse bobler og øger svælget mellem de rige og fattige i hele verden, anså hun.

»Den amerikanske regering foretog et enormt fejlskøn og lagde pres på allierede og udviklingslande for under ingen omstændigheder at blive en del af AIIB«, sagde hun.

Tænketanken opfordrede USA og Europa til at forlade fortidens destruktive politik, der førte til de to Verdenskrige, og gå med i det win-win-perspektiv, som BRIKS præsenterer. »Det er et spørgsmål om liv og død«, sagde Zepp-LaRouche.

Executive Intelligence Reviews 370 sider lange rapport med titlen »Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen« blev i mellemtiden også præsenteret på seminaret, sponsoreret af EIR.

Jeg håber inderligt, at fredelige initiativer vil sejre. Jeg håber inderligt, at dette mareridt i Ukraine kan standses, og at Ukraine vil få mulighed for at bruge sit enorme potentiale, sine intellektuelle, industrielle og videnskabelige kapaciteter. De findes stadig væk. Menneskene er stadig i live. Jeg håber, at Ukraine kan vende sig mod opbygning af ting, og, sammen med Rusland, og Europa, og Kina, bygge nye landbroer, og den Nye Silkevej, og programmet for at udvikle Månen, og så videre.

Natalia Vitrenko, parlamentsmedlem (1994-2002), leder af Ukraines Progressive Socialistparti, havde følgende videoindslag på Citizens Electoral Council (CEC) (LaRouche-bevægelsen i Australien), konference 28.-29. marts 2015, Melbourne, med titlen: »Verdenslandbroen: Fred på Jord, og i mennesker en velbehagelighed«.

Video af alle konferencens indslag kan ses her: http://cecaust.com.au/2015conference/

(Optaget 19. marts, Kiev)

»Kære deltagere på konferencen! Det er mig en stor glæde at sende jer mine hilsner. I er samlet i dag i Australien, der ligger meget langt væk fra vores eurasiske kontinent, og I har et vidunderligt emne for jeres konference: helliget fred. I diskuterer nye, unikke investeringsprojekter, den Nye Silkevej, Verdenslandbroen. Og I er overbevist om, at der vil komme fred på Jord, og I har dedikeret jeres håb og forhåbninger til dette. Dette er vidunderligt! Og tro mig, det er, hvad alle, mentalt raske personer i verden ønsker.

Det er med stor beklagelse at jeg må sige, at mit land Ukraine i dag ikke er en del af denne proces. I mit land er der en borgerkrig i gang. Mit land er underkastet en overlagt, vedvarende og brutal ødelæggelse.

For ikke så længe siden, kun femogtyve år siden, var Ukraine at finde blandt de ti mest udviklede lande i verden, målt ud fra BNP pr. person. Ukraine producerede 2 % af verdens BNP på daværende tidspunkt. Ukraines BNP pr. person lå 11 % over verdensgennemsnittet. Ukraine havde flere end 360 større industrianlæg. Ukraine var et avanceret, agro-industrielt land. Vi havde fabrikker, der byggede raketter, vi havde skibsbyggeri og produktion af fly, biler og lokomotiver. Ukraine har mere end 20 % af verdens reserver af løssjord. Vi havde fremragende høstudbytte, og der var ingen, der sultede. Vi havde gratis uddannelse og gratis sundhedsydelser. Vi kunne have børn og give dem en opvækst i fuld tillid til, hvad morgendagen ville bringe.

Men Sovjetunionen blev ødelagt. Det blev ødelagt af Kommunistpartiets elite, der degenererede og ønskede at tage det i eje, der i realiteten var nationens fælles rigdom. De ønskede kun at sørge for deres egne børn og børnebørn.

Ukraine har eksisteret som uafhængig nation i 24 år. Hvad har mit land så fået ud af denne såkaldte uafhængighed? I dag repræsenterer Ukraines BNP kun 0,5 % af verdens BNP. Det var på 2 %, nu er det 0,5 %. Pr. person er Ukraines BNP US$ 4.000, mod verdensgennemsnittet på US$ 10.500. Det ligger således nu 60 % under verdensgennemsnittet. Vi lå på 11 % over verdensgennemsnittet, og nu ligger vi på 60 % under det.

Hvad skyldes dette? Det skyldes, at de økonomiske bånd til de fabrikker og regioner, sammen med hvilke vores økonomi var blevet udviklet i årtier, blev brudt. Det vil først og fremmest sige Rusland, Belarus og de tidligere Sovjetrepublikker. Tallene fortæller historien. Den forventede, gennemsnitlige levealder i vores land er faldet med to år i løbet af disse femogtyve år. Den var 72, nu er den 70. Mænd i Ukraine bliver i gennemsnit 62 år. Befolkningen er ved at uddø. I 1990 havde Ukraine en befolkning på 52 millioner mennesker. Nu er der 43 millioner tilbage, eksklusive Krim. Ukraine har mistet Krim.

Den primære årsag er den reformpolitik, der blev gennemtvunget af Den internationale Valutafond (IMF). Denne reformpolitik betød en privatisering af statslig ejendom, der overgik på hænderne af et nyt oligarki. Dette oligarki trives rigtig godt. Deres familier lider ikke under fattigdom. Reformpolitikken afsluttede statslig, lovmæssig regulering af eksport og import. Kommerciel bankvirksomhed bredte sig hurtigt, og bankmafiaen begyndte at tjene penge på Ukraines problemer. Bankmafiaen er heller ikke forarmet. Den lever ganske godt. IMF’s reformpolitik foreskrev en økonomisk model med billig arbejdskraft. Niveauet for eksistensminimum, mindsteløn og pensioner blev holdt nede, og det er grunden til, at det overvejende flertal af befolkningen er forarmet. Ifølge ombudsmanden for menneskerettigheder levede 80 % af den ukrainske befolkning i 2011 under den fattigdomsgrænse, som FN fastsætter for Central- og Østeuropa, samt lande i Fællesskabet af Uafhængige Stater. Denne fattigdomsgrænse udgør US$ 4,30 pr. dag. 80 % af den ukrainske befolkning modtog mindre end det, på daværende tidspunkt. Hvordan ser det så ud nu? Jeg vil fortælle jer, hvordan det står til nu.

Ukraine blev konfronteret med valget mellem enten at integrere sig med Rusland, Belarus og Kasakhstan – Toldunionen, eller med Den europæiske Union. Det, man måtte gøre, var at afveje og analysere disse forskellige valgmuligheder. Og de blev analyseret. En særlig arbejdsgruppe blev etableret, der inkluderede specialister fra Det Russiske Videnskabsakademis Institut for Økonomiske Prognoser og Det Ukrainske Nationalakademis Institut for Økonomiske Prognoser. Denne arbejdsgruppe beregnede omhyggeligt, hvad der ville være til størst fordel for Ukraine. Deres klare svar var, at integration i Øst med medlemmerne af Toldunionen ville være fordelagtigt og lovende, og rent faktisk ville kunne redde Ukraine. De viste, at hvis Ukraine gik med i Toldunionen, ville landet få en stigning i BNP på 18 % i løbet af ti år. Det ville udgøre den største stigning blandt noget medlem af Toldunionen. Rusland ville få en stigning på 16,8 % inden for denne tidsramme; Belarus, 16,1 %; Kasakhstan 14,7 %. Men Ukraine ville få en stigning i BNP på 18 %. Hvorfor? Fordi forhindringerne for salg af ukrainske varer i Rusland, Belarus og Kasakhstan ville blive fjernet. Priserne for disse produkter ville falde, og de ville blive mere konkurrencedygtige pga. de lavere omkostninger forbundet med at bringe dem ud på markedet. Desuden ville Ukraine modtage meget nødvendige investeringer i modernisering af sin industri.

Antager I, at dette blot var projektioner? Nej, det var det sandelig ikke. Lad mig give jer nogle præcise tal. I 2010 blev Janukovitj valgt til præsident for Ukraine. Hans image var, at han skulle være prorussisk og ville genetablere tætte kontakter med Rusland. I april 2010 blev Kharkovaftalen underskrevet, hvorved Rusland gav Ukraine en discount på prisen for naturgas. Alle håbede virkeligt, at der ville komme en intensiv, økonomisk integrationsproces mellem Rusland og Ukraine. Hvad skete der generelt i 2010? I 2010 voksede Ukraines handel med Rusland med 60,7 %, til et niveau på US$ 41,9 mia. Den russisk-ukrainske handel voksede, og Ukraine fik et kæmpestort marked for sine produkter. Ukraines industriproduktion steg med 11 % i 2010. Jeg taler om industriproduktion, der var kernen i den ukrainske økonomi. Det er grunden til, at Ukraines BNP voksede med 4 % i 2010. Det handlede ikke kun om, at bruttoeksporten til Rusland steg, men også om, at sammensætningen af Ruslands import fra Ukraine for 40 % ’s vedkommende bestod af højteknologiske produkter, og for 45 % ’s vedkommende af mellemteknologiske produkter. Med andre ord, så skabte dette en efterspørgsel af højt specialiseret arbejdskraft i Ukraine, så når vore børn gik ud af skolen og universitetet, var der en efterspørgsel efter deres kundskaber i økonomien. Det viste året 2010 meget klart.

Men ak, det selv samme år besluttede Janukovitj, efter sin indsættelse i embedet, at forråde alle. Han forrådte sine vælgere, der havde troet, at han ville sikre økonomisk integration med Rusland. Han bedrog Vesten, hvor han begyndte at eksportere sin hastigt voksende, personlige rigdom. Han begyndte at forsikre Vesten om, at han ville få Ukraines integration i Europa til at ske. Det er grunden til, at, i juli 2010, Janukovitj’ Regionspartiet, sammen med Kommunistpartiet og Litvin-blokken, som tilsammen udgjorde et koalitionsflertal i parlamentet, stemte for Ukraines europæiske integration. Dette blev vedtaget af Ukraines parlament, men det skete imod vort folks vilje. Det skete endog imod de løfter, som disse politiske kræfter havde givet. Hverken Regionspartiet eller Kommunisterne havde ført valgkampagne på en platform for at bryde båndene til Rusland og gøre fremstød mod Den europæiske Union.

Tværtimod havde vort folk i to folkeafstemninger, tilbage i 1991, stemt for at være sammen med Rusland og Belarus, og for at opbygge en ny, forbedret alliance. Men så trampede præsidenterne Kravchuk, Kutjma og Jusjtjenko, efterfulgt af Janukovitj, på det, som befolkningen havde stemt for. Janukovitj og Regionspartiet begyndte at opbygge den myte, at Europa ønsker Ukraine, og at Ukraine burde orientere sig mod Europa og integrere sig med EU.

I mellemtiden beregnede vore akademiske økonomer, hvis resultater i forbindelse med relationer med Rusland jeg allerede har nævnt, hvad Ukraine ville få ud af at integrere sig med Vesten. Det, de nåede frem til, det samme Ukrainske Videnskabsakademis Institut for Nationaløkonomiske Prognoser, var rædselsvækkende. For at integrere sig i EU, bare ind i den frihandelszone, der var påbudt i en Associeringsaftale, ville det koste 160 mia. euro at modernisere den ukrainske økonomi. Hvor skulle penge i denne størrelsesorden komme fra?

Da disse kalkuler, der viste, hvad Ukraine ville få ud af associeringen med EU, blev fremlagt for premierminister Azarov i efteråret 2013 og for præsident Janukovitj, så begyndte de også at rive sig i håret over, hvad der ville ske med den ukrainske økonomi. Det var selvfølgelig sent, at de begyndte at rive sig i håret. I tre år havde de cirkuleret myter om den økonomiske fremgang, som Ukraine ville opleve, hvis landet associerede sig med EU. De havde spredt reklame for denne euro-psykose i tre år. Men da den ukrainske regering, den 21. november, 2013, besluttede at udsætte underskrivelsen af Associeringsaftalen, så gik hele den operation, der var planlagt i forvejen, forberedt og betalt for af Vesten, og som involverede en temmelig betydelig del af den ukrainske befolkning, der havde satset på en orientering mod Vesten, i gang. Euromaidan gik i gang.

Den 29. november 2013 i Vilnius nægtede Janukovitj at underskrive Associeringsaftalen med EU. Den nat, 29.-30. november, 2013, ophørte det fredelige Euromaidan med at være fredeligt. I dag forstår vi alle, at dette scenario var planlagt forud, på vegne af, og betalt af, USA, og det blev udført af [Ukraines] præsidentielle stabchef, Lyovochkin. Pludselig brugte Berkut-specialstyrkerne upassende magt mod studenterne, der protesterede på den centrale plads. Selv om, ud fra hvad jeg ser om begivenhederne i Frankfurt den 18. marts 2015, så brød politiet på en meget hård måde optøjerne, hvor demonstranterne ligeledes havde brosten og Molotovcocktails og brændte bildæk af. Og hvad med Ferguson, Missouri? I USA tog man også hårdt fat på demonstranter, der protesterede over nedskydningen af en sort mand. Men i Kiev greb demonstranterne den 1. december 2013 køller, kæder, Molotovcocktails og brosten, og de gik til angreb mod folk fra politiet, fra Berkut-specialstyrkerne, der denne gang var ubevæbnede. De havde ikke engang politistave. Vesten, især USA, forbød Janukovitj at bruge magt. De forbød det.

Det var dernæst, den 21. februar 2014, de vestlige lande – udenrigsministrene fra Tyskland, Frankrig og Polen – der, sammen med Janukovitj og oppositionens ledere Jatsenjuk, Klitjko og Tjagnibok, tog ansvaret for at underskrive en aftale om, at Janukovitj skulle gå af, og der skulle komme en ny regering i Ukraine. De påtog sig ansvaret for at gøre det til en fredelig overgang.

Men hvad skete der så i vores land? Selv før den 20. februar var der våben på Maidan. Der var nedskydning af både demonstranter og Berkut-folk, udført af mystiske snigskytter, hvis identitet endnu i dag ikke er fastslået. Således fremkom de »Himmelske Hundrede« skudofre.

Hvad var så det næste, der skete i Ukraine? Så de vestlige lande ikke, i løbet af vinteren 2014, at nazister havde overtaget magten på Euromaidan i Kiev? Det var partier og politiske kræfter, der åbenlyst prædiker en nazistisk ideologi. De skjuler det ikke og proklamerer »Ukraine frem for alt!«, »Ukraine for ukrainere!«. De bruger Bandera-slogans. Stepan Bandera var agent for Hitlers efterretningstjeneste, Abwehr. Han samarbejdede med nazisterne og organiserede sine folk til at yde Hitler hjælp. Ved den Internationale Militærdomstol i Nürnberg, hvor de tyske fascister blev retsforfulgt, blev deres hjælpere også dømt. Artikel 6 i Nürnbergdomstolens charter sagde, at de medskyldige skulle dømmes og straffes. Men i dette tilfælde kom tilhængerne af Bandera og Shukhevych med deres sorte-og-røde, pronazistiske flag, og deres svastikaer – enten ligefrem det nazistiske hagekors, eller Wolfsangel, et andet nazi-symbol – og med portrætter af Bandera, Konovaletes og Shukhevych, der også var agenter for Abwehr; og med slogans, som opfordrede til at »gi’ Moskali’erne kniven«, hvilket er en nedsættende, ukrainsk term for russere, og »hæng kommunisterne«. Det var sloganet for dem, der marcherede på Maidan. Disse symboler kunne ses, ikke blot i Kiev, men både før og efter kuppet bredte de sig i hele Ukraine. Og de vestlige lande bemærkede dem ikke.

Fra den 23. februar til den 5. marts 2013 blev det muligt for vores delegation af ledende repræsentanter for nogle ukrainske venstrepartier at turnere i Europa, hvor de besøgte Frankrig, Tyskland og Italien. Dette blev arrangeret af vore kolleger fra LaRouche-bevægelsen. Jeg er meget taknemmelig over, at de gav os mulighed for at holde dusinvis af møder, pressekonferencer og interviews. Takket være medlemmer af Europaparlamentet fra det italienske Liga Nord blev det muligt for mig at afholde en pressekonference den 26. februar i Europaparlamentet. Allerede på dette tidspunkt forklarede vi, hvad det var, der skete i Ukraine. Allerede dengang advarede vi om truslen om borgerkrig og opløsning af landet, der kunne føre til Tredje Verdenskrig. Og jeg opfordrede dengang Berlin, Moskva og Paris til at forene deres indsats: især disse tre centre – Berlin Moskva og Paris – til at forene deres indsats og forhindre nazisterne i at overtage Ukraine. At hjælpe med at forbyde alle neonazistiske partier og bevægelser i Ukraine.

Hvis det var sket på dette tidspunkt, ville de efterfølgende rædsler i Ukraine ikke være sket: hvor dusinvis af mennesker brændte ihjel levende i Fagforeningsbygningen i Odessa den 2. maj, 2014. Da man åbnede ild mod en fredelig demonstration i Mariupol den 9. maj. Da Krim, efter at set dette nazistiske kup, forlod Ukraine. Da Donbass rejste sig til modstand, og hvor blodet stadig flyder. Endnu i dag. Der er 50.000 døde, hundreder tusinder af invaliderede, og to millioner flygtninge, inklusive dem, der har forladt landet af politiske grunde. Det er ikke en lille pris, man har betalt for dette forfatningsstridige, neonazistiske kup i Ukraine!

Dette er en tragedie for hele nationen; det er ikke kun Donbass, der lider. Ukraine som helhed er blevet tappet for sin styrke. I 2014 faldt Ukraines BNP med 7 %. Industriproduktionen faldt med 10,7 %. Alene i januar 2015 faldt industriproduktionen med yderligere 21 %. Den nationale valuta er blevet devalueret med to tredjedele. I dag er Ukraines reserver af guld og fremmedvaluta kun US$ 5,5 mia. For et år siden var de US$ 24 mia. Der er ikke engang nok til at dække tre måneders import, hvilket er standard-mindsteniveauet. For Ukraine er det US$ 9 mia., men landet har ikke reserverne til at dække det.

I mellemtiden tigger Ukraine om den seneste almisse fra IMF. Den 11. marts besluttede de at udlåne US$ 17,5 mia. Men ikke det hele på en gang, snarere hen over tre år. I 2015 kommer der US$ 5 mia., som allerede var opbrugt den 13. marts, og yderligere US$ 5 mia. ved årets slutning. I alt US$ 10 mia. Men i 2015 har Ukraine betalinger til udenlandsgæld på US$ 11 mia.! Så lånet fra IMF dækker ikke engang afbetalingerne på gælden.

Og hvad er så lånebetingelserne? De er absolut monstrøse! Ukraine gik ud af året 2014 med den største nedgang i sin naturlige befolkning i verden. Vi har verdens næst værste dødsrate. Men for den naturliglige befolkningstilvækst, der defineres som forskellen mellem dødsraten og fødselsraten, har vi den værste nedgangsrate i verden. Og det var for sidste år. Hvad vil der ske i år, under IMF’s drakoniske betingelser? Tænk over det: for at opnå disse elendige milliarder af dollars gik Jatsenjuk-regeringen, det ukrainske parlament og Ukraines præsident med til en pludselig, brutal stigning i forbrugsafgifterne. Prisen for naturgas vil stige med 3,3 gange. Elektricitet vil blive 3,5 gange så dyrt. Varme – 72 % i år. Varmt vand – 55 %. Koldt vand – 15 %. Hvordan skal folk betale det? Jeg vil gerne have, at I forstår, hvad mindsteeksistensniveauet for indkomst i Ukraine er, for lønninger og pensioner, fastsat ved lov. Disse niveauer blev fastsat i december 2013 for 2014-statsbudgettet, der forudsatte, at de ville blive indeksreguleret for inflation. Men det gjorde den nye regering ikke, de indeksregulerede ikke betalingerne, selv om inflationen i 2014 var 24,9 %, den højeste inflationsrate i verden. Mindsteeksistensniveauet for indkomst, fastsat for Ukraine i december 2013 og stadig i kraft, modsvarede, på det tidspunkt, $ 152 pr. måned for en person. Men med devalueringen af den nationale valuta med to tredjedele siden da, modsvarer mindsteeksistens-indkomsten nu $ 49 pr. måned. Mindstelønnen er $ 51. Mindstepensionen er $ 40. Det er, hvad statsbudgettet giver en pensionist pr. måned –$ 40.

Den gennemsnitlige, månedlige pension i Ukraine modsvarer $ 60. Hertil kommer, at det er en del af IMF-pakken, at pensioner skal pålægges en skat for at finansiere forsvarsudgifterne.

Den tid, som en person skal have arbejdet inden for tungt, fysisk arbejde, for at være kvalificeret til at få pension, er blevet sat op med 5 år. Ancienniteten for professionelle, før de kan modtage pension, er sat op. Det er et stort anslag mod vore pensionister! Jeg erkender, hvilken byrde de er for IMF. Vi har 14 millioner pensionister, en tredjedel af befolkningen. IMF ser frem til, at Ukraines pensionister dør, så hurtigt som muligt. Og ikke kun pensionisterne! Også arbejdende mennesker. Se på lønningerne. Den gennemsnitlige timeløn i Ukraine i dag er 0,2 euro, dvs. tyve eurocents i timen. Den gennemsnitlige timeløn i EU er 23 euro. Kan man overhovedet kalde det en løn? Det er derfor, vort folk bliver syge og dør.

Fødevarepriserne stiger så meget, at folk ikke kan spise ordentligt. Og oveni alt dette kommer så de planlagte stigninger i forbrugsafgifterne. IMF kræver nedskæringer i omkostningerne til uddannelse. Antallet af højere læreanstalter i Ukraine er blevet skåret ned med 60 %. Antallet af skoler bliver skåret ned med 5 %.

IMF krævede stop for subsidier til den agro-industrielle sektor. Hvordan skal landmændene overleve? Hvordan skal de så afgrøderne? Beregningen går ud på, at de vil blive tvunget til at sælge deres jord. Landbrugsministeriet har sat tre fjerdedele af landbrugsejendommene i Ukraine til salg under privatisering. De vil blive opkøbt af DuPont, Monsanto og deslige, billigt, så de kan dyrke deres genetisk modificerede afgrøder her, og oversvømme Europa og verden med dem.

Dette er, hvad man gør mod Ukraine: krig, død, sult og fattigdom. Hvad vil Europa få ud af det? Hvad står Europa til at vinde? Forstår europæerne virkelig ikke, at krigens flammer nu vil blusse endnu mere op, og at den tilsyneladende lokale krig i Ukraine så vil føre til en verdenskrig – til en konflikt med Rusland? Hvorfor vil man gøre dette?

Jeg håber inderligt, at fredelige initiativer vil sejre. Jeg håber inderligt, at dette mareridt i Ukraine kan standses, og at Ukraine vil få mulighed for at bruge sit enorme potentiale, sine intellektuelle, industrielle og videnskabelige kapaciteter. De findes stadig væk. Menneskene er stadig i live. Jeg håber, at Ukraine kan vende sig mod opbygning af ting, og, sammen med Rusland, og Europa, og Kina, bygge nye landbroer, og den Nye Silkevej, og programmet for at udvikle Månen, og så videre.

Det er, hvad jeg ønsker for mit land, og for hele menneskeheden.

Sluttelig vil jeg gerne sige noget – for jeg er ikke fysisk til stede i Australien, men der er en person der, der ligner mig meget, og som derfor er blevet kaldt min søster: [medlem af CEC’s Eksekutive Komite] Gabrielle Peut. Jeg vil gerne sige dette til hende:

’Min kære Gabby, jeg er glad for at tale til dig. Jeg tror, vi vil mødes mange flere gange i fremtiden.’

Det tror jeg på.«

Hovedtale af Helga Zepp-LaRouche.

Lyder det ikke som sund fornuft? Giver det ikke mening, at alle disse lande slutter sig sammen, overvinder fattigdom, overvinder sygdom, har en fælles fremtid … at forsvare vores menneskehed imod alle farer og definere den næste fase og epoke i menneskets evolution …?

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Vi bringer her den danske oversættelse af den åndrige invitation til Schiller Instituttets konference i New York i går. Noteapparat tilføjet af redaktionen.

Kære ven af Schiller Instituttet,

Der findes i øjeblikket to systemer i verden. Det første lover kaos, økonomisk fattigdom, slaveri og krig; det andet lover harmoni, økonomisk velstand, frihed og fred. Det første er Londons og Wall Streets system; det andet er det system, der nu foreslås af BRIKS-nationerne – Brasilien, Rusland, Indien, Kina og Sydafrika. Den eneste sikre vej for at standse det aktuelle, accelererende mudderskred ind i global krig, inklusive atomkrig, er, at De forenede Stater tilslutter sig BRIKS-udviklingen.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Se også: Video af hele konferencen

Foto: Jeanne d’Arc, glasmosaik

Helga Zepp-LaRouches hovedtale starter ca. 25 min. inde i videoen.

En oversættelse af Helgas tale kommer senere på ugen.

Se invitationen til konferencen her 

God fornøjelse.

Vi bringer her en dansk oversættelse af den meget åndrige invitationstekst. Noteapparat er tilføjet af redaktionen.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

For English, see the bottom of the page.

København, den 28. marts 2015 – Henved 85 personer deltog i gårsdagens debatmøde, der blev arrangeret i fællesskab med Russisk Selskab i Danmark og Schiller Instituttet, om spørgsmålet om krig eller samarbejde med Rusland og BRIKS-landene. Talerne ved mødet var:

Jens Jørgen Nielsen, journalist, Ruslandsekspert, foredragsholder og forfatter. Tidligere journalist for Politiken i Rusland, og forfatter til bogen: »På egne præmisser; Putin og det nye Rusland« (2013, forlaget Frydenlund).

Tom Gillesberg, formand for Schiller Instituttet og LaRouche-bevægelsen i Danmark, og uafhængig Folketingskandidat.

De vigtigste elementer i Jens Jørgen Nielsens foredrag var:

1. Hvorfor vi muligvis står over for atomkrig pga. Vestens fejltagelser, inklusive udvidelsen af NATO og EU, planenerne om at opbygge et missilforsvarssystem rettet mod Rusland; samt resultaterne af kuppet i Ukraine, og
2. En af-dæmonisering af Putin ved at beskrive Ruslands bankerotte tilstand, som Putin arvede efter Jeltsins udplyndringspolitik, og Putins bestræbelser for at genrejse Rusland til atter at blive en stor nation, der ønskede at samarbejde med USA, EU og NATO, men som nu føler, at det må trække en streg.

Tom Gillesberg beskrev de enorme muligheder, som BRIKS-landenes lederskab præsenterer, de europæiske landes flugt for at tilslutte sig den Asiatiske Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB), samt Schiller Instituttets kampagne for at få Europa og USA til at samarbejde med BRIKS og opnå fred gennem udvikling.

Diskussionsperioden var meget spændende med spørgsmål og kommentarer fra tilhørerne, der blev besvaret af begge talere, og som skabte en virkelig god dialog mellem de forskellige synspunkter hos både talere og blandt tilhørerne.

Mødets betydning blev markant forstærket efter, at spørgsmålet om atomkrig blev sat på dagsordenen i Danmark af erklæringer fra den russiske ambassadør til Danmark for en uge siden. I et interview erklærede han, at hvis Danmark aktivt tager del i missilforsvarssystemet, vil landets skibe blive mål for russiske atomstyrker. Faktisk ringede en af de nationale Tv-kanaler i Danmark til Schiller Instituttet på selve dagen for mødet for at sige, at de sandsynligvis ville sende en reporter for at lave et 10 minutters direkte indslag med interviews af de to talere, men umiddelbart før mødet skulle begynde, sendte de besked om, at det alligevel ikke var muligt for dem at komme.

Seks diplomater fra fire europæiske og asiatiske lande deltog i mødet, inklusive en ambassadør, henved 40 medlemmer eller venner af Schiller Instituttet, medlemmer og venner af Russisk Selskab, samt øvrige interesserede.

Schiller Instituttet i Danmark vil, i ånden fra Manhattanprojektet, nu begynde planlægningen af den næste, store begivenhed.

Flere detaljer om talernes indhold vil følge senere.

Se optagelserne fra Mødet Her

English:

VERY SUCCESSFUL JOINT EVENT IN COPENHAGEN: Are We Headed for
Nuclear War with Russia, or Cooperation with the BRICS?

COPENHAGEN, March 28 — Around 85 people attended
yesterday’s debate meeting on the question of war or cooperation
with Russia and the BRICS countries, which was arranged jointly
by the Russian Community in Denmark, and the Schiller Institute.
The speakers were:
Jens Jørgen Nielsen, journalist, Russia expert, lecturer and
author. Former journalist for the Copenhagen newspaper
{Politiken} in Russia, and author of the book, {Based on His Own
Premises, Putin and the New Russia} (in Danish)

Tom Gillesberg, chairman of The Schiller Institute and the
LaRouche movement in Denmark, and independent candidate for the
Danish parliament.
The most important elements of Jens Jørgen Nielsen’s speech
were:
1. Why we are possibly facing nuclear war because of the
mistakes of the West, including the expansion of NATO and the EU,
the intention to build up a missile defense system directed
against Russia; and the results of the coup in Ukraine, and
2. De-demonizing Putin by describing the bankrupt state of
Russia which Putin inherited after the looting policy under
Yeltsin, and his efforts to raise Russia up to be a great nation
again which wanted to cooperate with the U.S., EU and NATO, but
now feels that it has to draw the line.
Tom Gillesberg described the tremendous opportunities
presented by the leadership of the BRICS countries, the flight of
European countries to join the AIIB, and the campaign of the
Schiller Institute to get Europe and the U.S. to cooperate with
the BRICS and achieve peace through development.
The discussion period was very exciting with questions and
comments from the audience addressed by both of the speakers,
which made for an extremely good dialogue between the different
vantage points of both the speakers and members of the audience.
The importance of the meeting was significantly heightened
after the question of nuclear war was put on the agenda in
Denmark statements by the Russian ambassador to Denmark a week
ago. He stated in an interview that if Denmark actively joined
the missile defense system, its ships would be targets of the
Russian nuclear forces. In fact, the one national TV news network
had called in on the day of the meeting to say that they would
probably send a reporter to make a 10-minute live interview with
the speakers, but then, just before the start of the meeting,
sent a message that they would not be able to come after all.
There were six diplomats from four European and Asian
countries in attendance, including one Ambassador, about 40
Schiller Institute members or friends, plus members and friends
of the Russian Community group, and other interested people.
The Schiller Institute in Denmark, following the Manhattan
project spirit, will now commence planning for the next big
event. More details on the content of the speeches will come
later.

Lydfil:

Video 1. del (Tom Gillesbergs tale begynder 55 min. inde i optagelsen.)

2. del:

Omdel gerne invitationen.

Farvet version:

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Sort/hvid version:

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Russisk Samfund i Danmark – www.russam.dk
Schiller Instituttet – www.schillerintitut.dk – 35 43 00 33, 53 57 00 51

Russisk Samfund i Danmark og Schiller Instituttet inviterer til debatmøde:

På vej mod atomkrig med Rusland?
Eller samarbejde med BRIKS-landene om økonomisk udvikling?

Fredag den 27. marts kl. 19:00

Salen, Medborgerhuset på Biblioteket, Danasvej 30 B, Frederiksberg

Talere:
Jens Jørgen Nielsen, journalist, ruslandsekspert, underviser og forfatter. Tidligere journalist for Politiken i Rusland og forfatter til bogen ”På egne præmisser, Putin og det nye Rusland”.

Tom Gillesberg, formand for Schiller Instituttet og LaRouche-bevægelsen i Danmark, og kandidat uden for partierne til Folketinget.

Gratis adgang

For 25 år siden var verden i en tilstand af eufori. Den kolde Krig var slut, og russerne ønskede at opbygge et fælles europæisk hus sammen med vesteuropæerne. I dag er vi måske tættere på en atomkrig end under Den kolde Krig. Hvordan og hvorfor er vi endt der? Og hvilken rolle har både NATO’s og EU’s udvidelse spillet i den udvikling? Jens Jørgen Nielsen kommer med sin vurdering af baggrunden for den eskalerende og farlige udvikling.

Drivkraften i den strategiske krise er spændingen mellem det voksende kollaps af det vestlige, transatlantiske finanssystem og fremvæksten af en ny global magtfaktor i form af BRIKS-landene (Brasilien, Rusland, Indien, Kina og Sydafrika), som er blevet omdrejningspunktet for etableringen af en ny retfærdig økonomisk verdensorden. Tom Gillesberg vil fremlægge et alternativ til konfrontation og krig. Danmark, Europa og USA bør samarbejde med BRIKS, der allerede er i færd med at etablere en Ny Udviklingsbank og en monetær fond.
Kina er med sin politik for Den nye Silkevej i gang med at bygge infrastrukturprojekter og etablere nye kreditinstitutioner, som Danmark og resten af verdens nationer er blevet inviteret til at deltage i, og som vil muliggøre økonomisk udvikling og samarbejde mellem alle verdens lande.

Kom til mødet og vær med i netop den diskussion, der vil afgøre vores fremtid.

Invitér venligst andre og videresend denne invitation til dine kontakter.

The following article was published in the March 20, 2015 issue of Executive Intelligence Review. www.larouchepub.com/eiw

Download (PDF, Unknown)

China’s “Economic Belt along the Silk Road” and

“Maritime Silk Road of the 21st Century.”

Speech by a Chinese diplomat.

This speech was held at the EIR and Schiller Institute’s diplomatic seminar in Copenhagen on January 30, 2015. The Russian Cultural Center was the venue for the seminar entitled, “Economic development, and cooperation among nations, or, economic collapse, war and terror? The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land Bridge.” Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche held the keynote speech [see http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=4818 ], and diplomats from two other BRICS countries, Mr. Alexey Kolesnikov from Russia, and Mr. Machiel Renier van Niekerk from South Africa [see EIR…], also gave speeches.

In 2013, President Xi Jinping of China called for joint development of an “Economic Belt along the Silk Road” and a “Maritime Silk Road of the 21st Century.” The “Belt” and the “Road” are two major initiatives that China has made to deepen reform, and open up and advance its neighborhood diplomacy. They have been written into the documents of the Third Plenum of the 18th CPC Central Committee, the Meeting on Neighborhood Diplomacy, and the Central Economic Work Conference, and have been enthusiastically received both at home and abroad.

1. The “Belt” and the “Road” initiatives are the continuation and development of the spirit of the ancient Silk Road.

Over 2000 years ago, the industrious and brave people on the Eurasian continent opened several trade routes connecting major civilizations across Asia, Europe and Africa. Together, they are referred to as the “Silk Road” by succeeding generations. Despite repeated strife and wars in Eurasia, traffic on the Silk Road never completely stopped. Such links of mutual emulation via the Silk Road made exchanges of goods, know how, people and ideas possible, promoted the economic, cultural and social progress in the various countries, facilitated dialogue and integration of different civilizations, and left behind brilliant pages in human history.

Moving into the 21st century, an era that is dominated by the themes of peace, development and cooperation, but continues to feature a complex international and regional landscape, the Silk Road has become all the more important and precious as a symbol of peace, cooperation, openness, inclusiveness, mutual learning and resilience.

2. Working jointly for the “Belt” and the “Road” initiatives meets the trend of the times for regional cooperation.

Asia, known as the engine of global growth, and a key driver for world multi-polarization and economic globalization, plays a critical and increasing role in the shaping of the international landscape. Meanwhile, Asia faces multiple challenges, old and new, including mounting pressures to stay vibrant. The “Belt” and the “Road” initiatives linking the past with the present, and covering China and other countries, have a highly inclusive scope that bears witness to the history of great glory in Asia, provide an important source from which Asians draw confidence and pride for their history and cultures, and stand as a banner of Asian unity and commitment to cooperation.

Regional integration is an unavoidable phase towards economic globalization. The flourishing cooperation in Asia has boosted peace and development in the region. The “Belt” and the “Road” initiatives, by linking Central Asia, South Asia, Southeast Asia and West Asia, will contribute to greater connectivity and complementarity across the sub-regions, and help the establishment and improvement of Asia’s supply chain, industrial chain and value chain, thus bringing Pan-Asian and Eurasian regional cooperation to a new level.

The “Belt” and the “Road” initiatives foresee infrastructure development and systemic innovation, which is conducive to an improved business environment in relevant countries and the region as a whole, to an orderly and unimpeded flow of production factors and their improved distribution, to the development of landlocked countries and the remote areas of various countries, to lowering costs and trade and investment barriers, and to providing greater drive for reform and opening-up in the various countries.

3. The “Belt” and the “Road” initiatives are for open and inclusive economic cooperation.

Both the “Belt” and the “Road” initiatives have been anchored on economic cooperation, and built on cultural and people-to-people exchanges. They foresee no interference in the internal affairs of the countries involved, nor do they seek to dominate the regional affairs or secure spheres of influence in the region.

The “Belt” and the “Road” initiatives look at ideas and suggestions for cooperation and development. They are not about building an entity or creating new mechanisms. The initiatives will rely on existing bilateral and multilateral mechanisms between China and other countries, and use existing platforms of regional cooperation that have proven effective. They will not overlap or compete with existing cooperation mechanisms of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Eurasian Economic Community or ASEAN plus China. If anything, they will enrich and enliven those mechanisms. We should open our mind and heart for the various cooperation initiatives and mechanisms, take a more pragmatic approach, and make them more effective and mutually reinforcing.

The “Belt” and the “Road” initiatives foresee complete openness in geographical and country-specific reference. They may trace, but not be limited, to the past Silk Road, and all countries along the land and the maritime Silk Roads, as well as all friendly neighbors of China, can get involved. Central Asia, Russia, South Asia and Southeast Asia will be the priority direction. So will the Middle East and East Africa, since they are where the Belt and Road join. Countries in Europe, CIS and Africa may also be included in the long run. What is more, the initiatives, as they make progress in the future, may involve a lot more projects, countries or entities, which can only ensure their increasing openness.

4. The “Belt” and the “Road” initiatives feature “links” and focus on result-oriented and project-based cooperation, all aimed at bringing tangible benefits to the people in the region.

The first of the “five links” is policy. Countries can discuss strategies and policies on economic development and in the spirit of seeking common ground while shelving differences, harmonizing their positions through consultation, formulate corresponding plans and measures for cooperation, and give regional economic integration their policy and legal “green light”.

The second Link is road. We have a saying in China that goes “if you want to get rich, start by building roads.” There is need for China and its neighboring countries to improve their cross-border transportation infrastructure, put in place a transportation network linking Asia’s sub-regions and connecting Asia with Europe and Africa, and effectively address the existing inadequacies of connectivity and transportation in regions targeted by the project.

The third Link is trade. We should study issues of trade and investment facilitation while making proper arrangements accordingly, remove trade and investment barriers, promote economic circulation and improvement in the region, unleash still greater trade and investment potential of participating countries and make the regional cooperation “pie” still bigger.

The fourth Link is currency. We should promote greater trade settlement in local currencies and more currency swap schemes, strengthen bilateral and multilateral financial cooperation, set up financial arms for regional development, bring down transaction costs, enhance capacity to fend off financial risks through regional arrangements that make the region’s economy more competitive globally.

The fifth Link is people. Amity between peoples holds the key to sound relations between states. China and the neighboring countries need to shore up popular support for their state-to-state relations, promote inter-civilization dialogue, enhance exchanges, understanding and friendship among different peoples, especially those at the grassroots level.

Throughout this process, China will follow the right approach of upholding justice first and pursuing justice and interests simultaneously, providing developing countries and friendly neighbors with assistance as their abilities permit, and earnestly help them to achieve speedier growth. China will step up its input in the neighborhood, actively enhance connectivity there, explore the establishment of a regional infrastructure investment and financing platform, and strive to turn the neighboring land and sea areas into those of peace, friendship and harmony. Not only will China upgrade its own economy, it will go for an upgraded version of opening-up through such schemes as the “Belt” and the “Road” initiatives, and expand its mutually-beneficial cooperation with all countries, neighboring countries in particular.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche var taler ved et seminar for diplomater, der blev afholdt i Det russiske Kulturcenter i København den 30. januar 2015, med titlen:  »Økonomisk udvikling og samarbejde mellem nationer, eller økonomisk kollaps, krig og terror? Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«. Nyhedsorientering febr. 2015.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Specialrapport juli 2013: Grunden til, at denne særlige mand er så usædvanlig vigtig, er, at det var hans idéer, der gav den skønne, Italienske Renæssance, Firenzes Gyldne Renæssance, et endnu mere ophøjet udtryk, fordi han var det største af alle de genier, der fandt sammen på den tid. Det var denne utrolige, fantastiske eksplosion af menneskelig kreativitet, der kom frem i denne Renæssance, der formåede at besejre det fjortende århundredes mørke tidsalder. Og mere end nogen sinde tidligere er det presserende nødvendigt at studere dette eksempel fra Den gyldne Renæssance for at finde nøglen til at besejre nutidens mørke tidsalder. 

HZL En Hyldest til Nicolaus af Cusa pdf

Af vore europæiske afdelinger

2. feb. 2015 – Mens Det britiske Imperium og dets hovedredskaber – Barack Obama og NATO – optrapper provokationerne imod Rusland, der kun kan ende med Tredje Verdenskrig, har Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Schiller Instituttets stifter, indledt en rundrejse til de europæiske hovedstæder, ikke blot for at slå alarm over den umiddelbart overhængende fare for atomkrig, men også for at vise alternativet, der er skitseret i EIR’s Specialrapport, »Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«, der blev udgivet i december 2014.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche var hovedtaler ved tre EIR-arrangementer i sidste uge, hvor hun præsenterede et omfattende billede af den kendsgerning, at en ny, retfærdig, økonomisk verdensorden er ved at vokse frem, og som etableres af BRIKS (Brasilien, Rusland, Indien, Kina og Sydafrika). Det er Wall Streets/Londons finansimperiums reaktion over for deres egen bankerot og erstatning, der skaber faren for krig, sagde hun. Den eneste, fornuftige respons – der blev gjort endnu mere mærkbar af de græske valgresultater – er, at de europæiske nationer og USA begraver Wall Street og City of London og tilslutter sig BRIKS i en forceret indsats for at skabe en videnskabelig og økonomisk renæssance.

Berlin

Fr. Zepp-LaRouches foredragsturne begyndte den 27. jan. i Berlin, Europas politiske nervecenter, med et seminar, der havde et par dusin deltagere, hvoraf mange havde tilknytning til politiske eller økonomiske institutioner. Dette arrangement, der blev filmet af det kinesiske Xinhua, vil utvivlsomt give genlyd i den kamp, der raser i Tyskland over kansler Merkels konfrontationskurs over for Rusland.

Under sin præsentation i Berlin den 27. jan. sagde Helga Zepp-Larouche, at kun, hvis Vesten opgiver sin geopolitiske konfrontation mod Rusland og Kina og accepterer tilbuddet om at samarbejde med BRIKS, er der en løsning på truslen om krig og finansiel disintegration.

Ledende politiske og militære personer pyntede ikke på ordene i deres fordømmelse af balancekunsten over for Rusland og i deres påpegning af, at det kun kan føre til en udslettelseskrig. Pensionerede general Harald Kujat, tidligere chef for NATO’s Militærkomite (2002-05), har ført en kampagne for at overbevise NATO om, at de skal opgive en militærkonflikt i Ukraine. Han har fået tilslutning fra så fremtrædende personer som Horst Teltschik, en af arkitekterne af kansler Helmut Kohls diplomati, der gjorde den fredelige genforening af Tyskland mulig, og Gernot Erler, Tysklands aktuelle koordinator for russisk politik (se EIR 23. jan.). (Se også vores rapport om krisen i Ukraine).

Til forskel fra Helga Zepp-LaRouche, der er formand for det tyske parti Borgerrettighedsbevægelsen Solidaritet (BüSo), har disse kræfter imidlertid ikke identificeret en strategi, der kan vinde freden.

Ved arrangementet i Berlin fik Helga Zepp-LaRouche tilslutning fra en repræsentant fra Det kinesiske Kulturcenter i Berlin, Chen Jianyang, der rapporterede om, hvor vigtig Den nye Silkevej er, som betyder den samme mekanisme med at bygge bro mellem Europa og Asien, som den antikke Silkevej betød. Dengang, som nu, er det ikke bare materielle, men også kulturelle, videnskabelige og religiøse ’varer’ og idéer, der udveksles, sagde han. Kamelen er blevet udskiftet med højhastighedsjernbaner, og dette udviklingsperspektiv bringer nu 40 lande, med i alt 4 mia. mennesker, sammen i et samarbejde. Tyskland og Kina, konkluderede Chen, kunne, gennem et strategisk partnerskab, blive en drivkraft i genoplivningen af den globale økonomi.

Frankfurt

Frankfurt am Main, det tyske finanscenter, var stedet for fr. Zepp-LaRouches næste seminar om Den nye Silkevejs-rapport. Blandt deltagerne var repræsentanter fra Kina, Rusland, Egypten, Tchad og Iran, såvel som også tyskere, der arbejder i og med disse lande.

Efter at fr. Zepp-LaRouche havde givet en briefing om faren for krig, og udviklingen i BRIKS, var der en livlig diskussion. Mange af deltagerne fordømte den ’grønne’ ideologi, som Den europæiske Union har vedtaget, men den mest lidenskabelige diskussion drejede sig om nødvendigheden af at ændre uddannelsessystemet, væk fra perspektivet om massemord, der er fremherskende i det grønne paradigme, og tilbage til den klassiske, humanistiske tradition, som Tyskland engang var legemliggørelsen af. Dette perspektiv blev forsvaret af deltagere, både tyskere og udlændinge, inklusive især deltagere fra Afrika.

København

Fr. Zepp-LaRouches næste stop var i København den 30. december. Her var hun hovedtaler ved et seminar for diplomater, der afholdtes i Det russiske Kulturcenter, der tiltrak repræsentanter fra 13 ambassader, samt danske erhvervsfolk og Schiller Instituttets organisatorer.

Efter hendes præsentation af både krigsfaren og BRIKS-alternativet, talte ligeledes talsmænd fra tre af de fem BRIKS-nationer – Alexey Koleshnikov, Rusland; Hu Yi, Kina, og Machiel Renier van Niekerk, Sydafrika. Fra salen var der også deltagelse fra den brasilianske repræsentant. Den sydafrikanske repræsentants indlæg blev clearet til offentliggørelse, og findes omstående. (EIR, 6. februar, 2015).

Der kommer mere

Der er planlagt flere arrangementer om Den nye Silkevej-rapport i Europa i de kommende uger, idet det er hensigten at slå på trommer for BRIKS, for hermed at drukne krigstrommerne – og for at støtte et afgørende skift i USA, der har samme perspektiv.

Denne artikel publiceredes første gang i EIR, 6. feb. 2015, og er ikke tidligere udgivet på dansk.

See the English and русский язык versions below.

3. feb. 2015 – Det københavnske TASS-bureau, det officielle nyhedsagentur for Den russiske Føderation, udgav i dag et interview med lederen af Schiller Instituttet, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, som hun gav under sit besøg i Danmark i anledning af et seminar for diplomater, der afholdtes den 30. januar. Det russisksprogede telegram har indtil videre optrådt på nyhedssiden ru.euronews.com.

(Nedenstående danske oversættelse er baseret på den engelske oversættelse som var foretaget af EIR ved anvendelse af den originale, engelske tekst med Zepp-LaRouches svar, ud fra hvilken den publicerede russiske form blev udvalgt.)

Schiller Instituttets leder Helga Zepp-LaRouche udsender en opfordring

om at forene indsatsen mellem Den europæiske Union, USA og BRIKS.

København, 3. feb. 2015, Nikolai Morozov, TASS – Behovet for en ny, økonomisk verdensorden og nye internationale relationer er den centrale idé i de taler, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche, stifter og formand for Schiller Instituttet, holdt under hendes aktuelle rundrejse til flere europæiske hovedstæder. I København talte hun for en workshop for diplomater, der blev holdt i Russisk Center for Videnskab og Kultur.

Zepp-LaRouche er overbevist om, at verden nu befinder sig på en kurs, der fører ind i en blindgyde, med truslen om økonomisk kollaps og atomkrig. For at undgå sådanne katastrofer, må verdensbegivenhederne ændre kurs. Til dette formål mener hun, at EU og USA må gå med i BRIKS-nationernes opbygning af Den eurasiske Landbro, der blev indledt af den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping – Den nye Silkevej. Zepp-LaRouche foreslår også, at Grækenland nu muligvis kunne blive en bro mellem Vesten og BRIKS.

»Ingen af de løfter, man gav til Rusland, da Sovjetunionen opløstes, blev holdt, og ingen af Ruslands tilbud om samarbejde blev besvaret«, sagde Helga Zepp-LaRouche til TASS under et interview. »Dette skyldtes, at de amerikanske neokonservative i Bush senior-regeringen på det tidspunkt satsede på politikken med Projekt for et Nyt Amerikansk Århundrede (PNAC), der indeholdt idéen om, at USA skulle herske over verden som et verdensimperium.«

»Alle de politiske udspil, der fulgte, såsom regimeskift ved hjælp af de såkaldte ’farvede revolutioner’, opbygningen af et globalt, ballistisk missilforsvarssystem og NATO’s og EU’s udvidelse mod Øst, frem til Ruslands grænser, var ganske enkelt en udarbejdelse af dette strategiske mål«, sagde hun. »Samtidigt blev NATO-doktrinen med Gensidigt Garanteret Ødelæggelse, MAD, erstattet af konceptet om en Førsteangrebs-doktrin. Det er grunden til, at der netop nu er et voksende kor af fremragende strateger i Vesten, der advarer om den umiddelbart overhængende fare for en Tredje Verdenskrig.«

»Siden ophævelsen af Glass/Steagall-loven i 1999, der fjernede enhver lovregulering af bankerne«, fortsatte Schiller Instituttets leder, »er verden faldet i rovgriske klør, der beriger de få på bekostning af, og med, milliarder af menneskers lidelser, gennem et finanssystem, der grundlæggende set er blevet et kæmpe kasino. Der er en enorm derivatgæld, der ikke kan betales, hvilket er den virkelige årsag til krigsfaren.«

»Der foregår i øjeblikket en stor kamp om USA’s sande identitet«, rapporterede Zepp-LaRouche. Hun sagde, at kampen står mellem imperiefraktionen, der ønsker verdensherredømmet, og så de kræfter, der ønsker at genrejse Amerika som en republik, som det var de grundlæggende fædres hensigt.

Der foregår også en alvorlig kamp for at afslutte Wall Streets diktatoriske magt over Kongressen, med en genfremstilling af et lovforslag for Glass-Steagall. Hvis USA vendte tilbage til sit oprindelige, økonomiske system, kunne det samarbejde meget godt med BRIKS-nationernes nye kreditinstitutioner, såsom den Nye Udviklingsbank og AIIB (Asiatisk Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank)«, fortalte hun TASS. »Så kunne USA vende tilbage til John Quincy Adams’ udenrigspolitik … og det er præcis Xi Jinpings koncept for udenrigspolitik, med hans win-win-fremgangsmåde med at bygge den Nye Silkevej, og ligeledes Narendra Modis eller Vladimir Putins.«

Zepp-LaRouche hævder, at »Alt vil afhænge af vores evne til at sætte alternativet med et nyt paradigme med samarbejde på dagsordenen i tide. Menneskeheden er nået til en skillevej; vi kan enten definere vores fælles interesse ud fra et standpunkt om fremtiden, eller også vil vi måske ikke længere eksistere. Det er grunden til, at Schiller Instituttet i øjeblikket er engageret i en international kampagne for at overbevise flere og flere individer og institutioner om, at det eneste, fornuftige alternativ til Tredje Verdenskrig er at tage hinanden i hånden til gavn for menneskehedens fælles mål.«

Helga Zepp-LaRouche stiftede Schiller Instituttet i 1984 i sammenhæng med krisen med mellemdistanceraketterne i begyndelsen af 1980’erne. Formålet med Instituttet var at lægge et andet koncept for relationer med udlandet på bordet, og det fik navn efter Friedrich Schiller (1759-1805), fordi det var stifterens synspunkt, at en ny, retfærdig verdensorden kun kan lykkes, hvis den ledsages af en renæssance inden for klassisk kultur.

English:

TASS Interviews Zepp-LaRouche on War-Avoidance and the BRICS
Process

Feb. 3, 2015 (EIRNS)–The Copenhagen bureau of TASS, official
news agency of the Russian Federation, today released an
interview with Schiller Institute leader Helga Zepp-LaRouche,
done during her visit to Denmark for an event with diplomats on
Jan. 30. The Russian-language wire has appeared, so far, on the
news site ru.euronews.com. The English translation below was done
by EIR, using the original English text of Zepp-LaRouche’s
replies, from which the published form was excerpted. [RBD]

Schiller Institute Leader Helga Zepp-LaRouche Calls for Uniting
the Efforts of the European Union, the United States, and the
BRICS

COPENHAGEN, February 3. /Nikolai Morozov, TASS/. The need for a
new world economic order and new international relations is the
central idea in the speeches being given by German politician
Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder and president of the Schiller
Institute, during her current tour of several European capitals.
In Copenhagen she addressed a workshop for diplomats, held at the
Russian Center for Science and Culture.
Zepp-LaRouche believes that the world is now on a pathway
leading to a dead end, with the threat of economic collapse and
nuclear war. In order to avoid such catastrophes, the direction
of world events must be changed. For this purpose, she thinks,
the European Union and the United States should join the BRICS
nations in building the Eurasian land-bridge initiated by Chinese
President Xi Jinping–the new Silk Road. Zepp-LaRouche also
suggests that Greece could now become a bridge between the West
and the BRICS.
“None of the promises given to Russia at the time of the
disintegration of the Soviet Union were kept, and none of her
offers for cooperation responded to,” Helga Zepp-LaRouche told
TASS in an interview. “This was because the U.S. neocons of the
Bush, Sr. administration, at that moment, went for the policy of
the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), which embodied the
idea of the USA ruling the world as a world empire.”
“All the policies which followed, such as regime change with
the help of the so-called `color revolutions,’ the construction
of a global Ballistic Missile Defense system, and the eastward
expansion of NATO and the EU up to the borders of Russia, were
simply an elaboration of that strategic goal,” she said. “At the
same time, the NATO doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction, MAD,
was replaced by the conception of a First Strike Doctrine. This
is why there is, right now, a growing chorus of eminent
strategists in the West, who are warning of the immediate danger
of a Third World War.”
“Since the repeal of the Glass Steagall Act in 1999, which
eliminated any banking regulation,” continued the Schiller
Institute leader, “the world has fallen into the hands of
predators, who enrich the few, at the expense and suffering of
billions of human beings, with the help of a financial system,
that has essentially become a big casino. There is an enormous
unpayable derivatives debt, which is the real cause of the war
danger.”
“There is, right now, a big fight for the true identity of
the United States,” Zepp-LaRouche reported. She said that the
fight is between the imperial faction, which wants world
domination, and the forces who want to restore America as a
republic, as it was intended by the founding fathers.
“There is also a serious fight to end the dictatorial power
of Wall Street over the Congress, with the reintroduction of the
Glass Steagall law. If the USA went back to its original economic
system, it could cooperate very well with the new credit
institutions of the BRICS nations, such as the New Development
Bank, and the AIIB (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank),” she
told TASS. “Then the United States could return to the foreign
policy of John Quincy Adams, … and that is exactly the foreign
policy concept of Xi Jinping, with his win-win approach of
building the new Silk Road, or Narendra Modi or Vladimir Putin.”
Zepp-LaRouche holds that, “Everything will depend on our
ability to put the alternative of a new paradigm of collaboration
on the agenda in time. Mankind has reached a branching point:
either we can define our common interest from the standpoint of
the future, or we may not exist. That is why the Schiller
Institute is presently involved in an international campaign, to
convince more and more individuals and institutions, that joining
hands for the common aims of mankind, is the only reasonable
alternative to World War III.”
Helga Zepp-LaRouche founded the Schiller Institute in 1984,
in the context of the middle-range missile crisis of the early
80s. Its main aim was to put a different conception of foreign
relations on the table, and it was named after Friedrich Schiller
(1759-1805) because it was the founders’ view, that a new just
world economic order can only succeed, if it is accompanied by a
renaissance of classical culture.

Russian:

ОБЩЕСТВО: МИР-ПОРЯДОК-МНЕНИЕ

Глава “Института Шиллера” Хельга Цепп-Ларуш призывает к объединению Евросоюза, США и БРИКС

КОПЕНГАГЕН, 3 февраля. /Корр. ТАСС Николай Морозов/. Необходимость нового мирового экономического порядка и новых международных отношений – ключевая идея выступлений германского политика, основателя и президента “Института Шиллера” Хельги Цепп-Ларуш в ходе поездки по ряду европейских столиц. В частности, в Копенгагене она провела семинар для дипломатического корпуса в Российском центре науки и культуры /РЦНК/.

Цепп-Ларуш убеждена, что путь, которым идет в настоящее время мир, ведет в тупик, угрожает экономическим коллапсом и ядерной войной. Для того, чтобы избежать катастрофы, необходимо изменить направление мирового развития. Для этого, считает она, Евросоюз и США должны присоединиться к странам БРИКС для строительства по инициативе председателя КНР Си Цзиньпина евразийского континентального моста – нового Шелкового пути. Цепп-Ларуш полагает, что связующим звеном между западными странами и БРИКС сейчас могла бы стать Греция.

“Ни одно из обещаний, данных России в период распада Советского Союза, не было выполнено, и ни одно из ее предложений по сотрудничеству не получило ответа, – сказала Хельга Цепп-Ларуш в интервью корр. ТАСС. – Дело в том, что американские неоконсерваторы из администрации Буша-старшего взяли тогда на вооружение “Проект для нового американского века”, который воплотил идею управления США всей планетой как мировой империей”.

“Проводившаяся после этого политика – устранение неугодных режимов в ходе так называемых “цветных революций”, создание глобальной системы ПРО, расширение НАТО и ЕС на восток, к границам России, была лишь конкретизацией этой стратегической цели, – отметила она. – Одновременно натовская доктрина “гарантированного взаимного уничтожения” была заменена “доктриной первого удара”. Вот почему сейчас нарастает хор видных стратегов Запада, которые предупреждают о непосредственной опасности третьей мировой войны”.

“С отменой в 1999 году закона Гласса-Стиголла в США было устранено регулирование банков, – продолжала глава “Института Шиллера”. – Мир попал в руки хищников, которые обогащают немногих за счет страданий миллиардов людей с помощью финансовой системы, которая, по сути, стала большим казино. При помощи производных финансовых инструментов создан огромный неоплатный долг, который также является реальной причиной угрозы войны”.

В настоящее время в США развернулось сражение за подлинную идентичность Америки, отметила Цепп-Ларуш. Оно идет между имперской фракцией, которая стремится к господству в мире, и силами, которые хотят восстановить республиканскую Америку, какой ее видели отцы-основатели. Также ведется борьба за то, чтобы положить конец диктаторской власти Уолл-стрита над Конгрессом путем восстановления закона Гласса-Стиголла.

“Возвращение США к исходной экономической системе открыло бы путь к сотрудничеству с новыми кредитными организациями стран БРИКС – Банком развития и Азиатским банком инфраструктурных инвестиций, – утверждает собеседник агентства. – Тогда США могли бы вернуться к внешней политике Джона Куинси Адамса /…/, а это как раз – внешнеполитическая концепция Си Цзиньпина с ее выгодным для всех подходом к строительству нового Шелкового пути, или Нарендры Моди, или Владимира Путина”.

“Все будет зависеть от нашей способности вовремя вынести на повестку дня новую парадигму сотрудничества, – считает Цепп-Ларуш. – Человечество достигло поворотного пункта: либо мы определим наши общие интересы в перспективе будущего, либо, возможно, перестанем существовать”. “Поэтому “Институт Шиллера” сейчас ведет международную кампанию, чтобы убедить как можно больше людей и организаций, что только объединение во имя общих целей человечества может быть разумной альтернативой третьей мировой войне”.

Международный “Институт Шиллера” был основан Хельгой Цепп-Ларуш в 1984 году в контексте кризиса вокруг ракет средней дальности в начале 1980-х годов. Он ставил целью обновить международные отношения и был назван в честь Фридриха Шиллера /1759-1805 годы/, так как его создатели убеждены, что новый мировой экономический порядок возобладать, только если будет сопровождаться возрождением классической культуры. –0–

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

København, 30. jan. 2015 – Helga Zepp-LaRouche var taler ved et seminar for diplomater, der blev afholdt i Det russiske Kulturcenter i København i dag, med titlen, »Økonomisk udvikling og samarbejde mellem nationer, eller økonomisk kollaps, krig og terror? Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«.

Efter fr. LaRouches kraftfulde tale, talte repræsentanter fra tre af ambassaderne fra BRIKS-nationerne – Rusland, Kina og Sydafrika. Desuden stillede repræsentanten for Brasilien et spørgsmål under den efterfølgende diskussion.

Videoerne og lydfilerne af fr. LaRouches tale, og den tale, som hr. Machiel Renier van Niekerk, repræsentanten fra Sydafrikas ambassade i Danmark, holdt, kan høres på http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=4818

I seminaret deltog repræsentanter fra 14 ambassader fra Europa, Asien, Afrika og Sydamerika, sammen med nogle danske erhvervsfolk og Schiller Instituttets aktivister.

Fr. LaRouche indledte sin tale med udviklingen i Grækenland, og hvordan landet kan blive et forbindelsesled mellem Europa og BRIKS. Hun talte om, hvor tæt vi er på en total nedsmeltning af finanssystemet, hvor tæt vi er på en atomkrig, og hvad forbindelsen mellem de to er. Hun understregede, at den fare, der repræsenteres af skiftet i USA’s strategi for atomkrig, til en førsteangrebsdoktrin, sammen med afbrydelsen af kommunikationen mellem USA og Rusland, der rent faktisk var intakt under den cubanske missilkrise, betyder, at vi er tættere på atomkrig i dag, end nogen sinde før. Ja, der er et alternativ: Hvis vi får Europa og USA til at acceptere Xi Jinpings tilbud om at gå med i deres økonomiske alliance for udvikling.
Fr. LaRouche fremlagde det momentum, der er for BRIKS’ økonomiske udvikling, og det perspektiv, der er skitseret i den nye EIR-rapport »Den Nye Silkevej er blevet til Verdenslandbroen«, som hendes mand Lyndon LaRouche og hun selv, så vel som Schiller Instituttet, har kæmpet for i årtier.

Hun appellerede til deltagerne om at sætte dette alternativ på verdensdagsordenen ved at cirkulere idéerne i vores nye rapport gennem at arrangere interviews, kommentarer, kontakte folk fra erhvervslivet, der ville få gavn af Verdenslandbroen, cirkulere vores resolution og generelt ved at arbejde sammen med os i fremtiden.

Kontakt venligst EIR og Schiller Instituttet for at få rapporten »Den Nye Silkeveje er blevet til Verdenslandbroen« og brochuren »Hvorfor USA og Europa må gå med i BRIKS – En ny, international orden for menneskeheden« og andet materiale, og for deltagelse i fremtidige møder.

Schiller Instituttet: + 45 35 43 00 33, 51 21 72 06.

si@schillerinstitut.dk, www.schillerinstitut.dk

EIR: + 45 35 43 60 40

——————————————————————

Læs også (hvis du ikke allerede har!):

      Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Introduktion: Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen

N.B.: The above video ends 18 minutes into the discussion. The complete version of the discussion is found below.

The music can only be heard from the audio file.

Den russiske nyhedsbureau TASS interviewer Zepp-LaRouche i København om at undgå krig og BRIKS-processen

1. Introduction by Tom Gillesberg, chairman of The Schiller Institute in Denmark

2. Music:

Ach! zu kurz, double fugue by Mozart
Ave Verum by Mozart
The Hans Christian Andersen vocal quartet

Vender sig Lykken fra dig, (C. Hauch, Carl Nielsen)
Vittoria, mio core!
Feride Istogu Gillesberg, sopran
Michelle Rasmussen, piano

3. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, international president of The Schiller Institute

How has the election in Greece changed the world
The international financial collapse
The danger of nuclear war
The New Silk Road Becomes The World Land Bridge

4. Discussion

Dias fra mødet:

We discovered that Mr. Van Niekerk’s speech was cut off before its completion in the first video. The full version is in the second video.

See below for the texts of the speeches by a diplomat from the Embassy of China, and Mr. Van Niekerk from the Embassy of South Africa, and the slides Mrs. LaRouche used in her presentation.

<a title="TASS interviewer Zepp-LaRouche i København
om at undgå krig og BRIKS-processen
på dansk, in English, русский язык” href=”http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/2015/02/tass-interviewer-zepp-larouche-i-koebenhavnom-at-undgaa-krig-og-briks-processen/”>TASS interviews Zepp-LaRouche in Copenhagen on war avoidance and the BRICS process: på dansk, in English, русский язык

Successful BRICS/World Land Bridge diplomatic seminar today in Copenhagen

Dias fra mødet:

Hovedtale, komplet, ved Schiller Instituttets konference 17. januar i New York.

»Jeg er her for at tale om en skøn vision om en verden uden krig og terrorisme.

Det lyder jo som et meget usandsynligt forslag på dette tidspunkt, hvor vi befinder os på randen af Tredje Verdenskrig. … Men det er inden for rækkevidde. Og potentialet til at få verden på fode igen, få verden i orden, eksisterer.«

Se Også: Lyndon LaRouches budskab til konferencen: En mobilisering af ånden og hensigten med vores republik

Download (PDF, Unknown)