An html version is below the pdf.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

By Assist. Prof. Vihra Pavlova, PhD,  Institute of Philosophy and Sociology at Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Department “Social Theories, Strategies and Prognoses.” (See more about the author at the end of the article.)

This article was written on the occasion of the 101th anniversary of Lyndon LaRouche’s birth (Sept. 10, 1922 – February 12, 2019).

Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., Physical Economy and the Schiller Institute Peace Conferences   

Bulgarian: ЛИНДЪН Х. ЛАРУШ, ФИЗИЧЕСКАТА ИКОНОМИКА И КОНФЕРЕНЦИИТЕ ЗА МИР НА ИНСТИТУТА ШИЛЕР 

Abstract: The global transformation currently taking place has already been foreseen with brilliant accuracy even before (for example, P. Kennedy, I. Wallerstein, J. Galtung, G. Arrighi) and immediately after the collapse of the bipolar system by philosophers, macrosociologists and economists, including the Russian academician S. Glazyev and the “prophet of our time,” as Glazyev called him, Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., to whom this text is dedicated, on the occasion of the 101st anniversary of this birthday  – September 8, 1922.   

The name Lyndon LaRouche is not known in Bulgaria, but this eminent American economist is one of the main opponents of the financial oligarchy, and a fighter against the speculative economy, for which he paid with his freedom.  

This article is purely informative, and does not aim to refute criticism of his personality and work. LaRouche’s model has been endorsed and adopted by most countries in Asia, thus becoming the engine of economic growth, and it also currently boldly challenges the postulates of the Washington Consensus and “rules-based order.”  

Keywords: Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., physical economy, stable geopolitical environment 

Abstract in Bulgarian (The English text resumes after that):
Резюме: Настоящата глобалната трансформация бе предвидена с брилятна точност още до (напр. П. Кенеди, И. Уолърстейн, Й. Галтунг, Дж. Ариги) и непосредствено след разпадането на двуполюсната система от философи, макросоциолози и икономисти, сред които руският академик С. Глазев и “пророкът на нашето време”, както Глазев го нарича, Линдън Х. Ларуш младши, на когото е посветена тази статия, по случай 101 годишнината от рождението му – 8 септември 1922 г.   

Името на Линдън Ларуш не е известно в България, но този крупен американски икономист е един от главните опоненти на финансовата олгархия и борец със спекулативната икономика, за което е платил със свободата си.  

Статията има чисто информативен характер и няма за цел да опровергава критиките към неговата личност и творчество. Моделът на Ларуш е приветстван и възприет от повечето страни в Азия, която се превърна в двигател на икономическия растеж и днес смело оспорва постулатите на Вашингтонския консенсус и “редът, основан на правила”.   

Ключови думи: Линдън Х. Ларуш младши, физическа икономика, стабилна геополитическа среда 

Introduction 

In the early 1950s, L. LaRouche rejected the information theory as being inadequate for describing economic processes, and developed his own scientific method of physical economy, which was based on the methods of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Friedrich List, Henry C. Carey and Bernhard Riemann, among others. In the 1960s, he warned of the potentially catastrophic effects of drugs and the sexual revolution on the cognitive potential and, thus, on the long-term productivity of the population. However, his most significant forecast is his assessment of the collapse of the Bretton Woods System through the introduction of flexible exchange rates, and the decoupling of the dollar from the gold standard on August 15, 1971. He warned at that time that if the course change to a purely monetarist financial system aimed at profit maximization were maintained, the world would, inevitably, find itself in a new depression, a new fascism, and the danger of a new world war, unless a completely new and just world economic order were established. Economic justice in LaRouche’s view is based on physical economics. 
 

Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr.’s fulfilled predictions, and his ideas successfully applied in Eurasia   

On June 29, 2001, at the parliamentary hearings “On Measures to Ensure the Development of the Russian Economy in the Context of the Destabilization of the World Financial System,” S. Glazyev warned about the collapse of the financial pyramid, which would also lead to the collapse of those national financial systems that were involved in it. Glazyev called for the diversification of Russian foreign exchange reserves, and the accumulation of real, material reserves, which would allow the Russian economy to function normally during the destabilization of the global financial system. “And here, obviously, it is necessary to speak about the possibilities of switching to the use of national currencies for payments, first of all, among the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) members, with the European Union, with China, with India, i.e., with our major trading partners, with whom our critical imports depend…” (Glazyev, 2001). 

Mr. Lyndon LaRouche (September 8, 1922 – February 12, 2019), in his post-Glazyev speech, stressed the urgent need for policy changes in order to overcome the collapse. According to him, “Nothing can save the present world financial and monetary system in its current form….  The present crisis, unless it is stopped by drastically needed reforms, will also be a demographic collapse more or less comparable to what is called by historians ‘the New Dark Age,’ which dominated Europe following the Fourteenth-Century bankruptcy… 

“Therefore, talking about any economic policy that does not include an early and radical reform of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) system is worse than a waste of time” (LaRouche, 2001).  

Nowadays, the recommendation of L. LaRouche: “A new system of transcontinental cooperation between the sovereign nation-states of continental Eurasia should become the backbone of world economic growth; Continental Eurasia should be the center of such global economic recovery and growth, but the whole world will benefit through participation as partners in that effort” (LaRouche, 2001), is a fact. India, China, the countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have become the engine of economic and technological growth. An Asian geopolitical union is being formed, uniting the countries of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Eurasian Economic Union, ASEAN and some microstates of the South Pacific.  

In addition, following the restoration of the Iranian diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Syria’s return to the Arab League and a ceasefire in Yemen, the countries of the League are gradually being integrated into this Alliance. Among them is Egypt, which has joined the BRICS New Development Bank and is a candidate for membership in the group, along with about 30 other countries, one of which is Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world. There, at the official meeting of the ASEAN Finance Ministers held on March 28, it was decided to reduce dependence on the U.S. Dollar, Euro, Yen, and British Pound in financial transactions, and move to settlements in local currencies. In turn, Malaysia reiterated its call for the establishment of an Asian Monetary Fund, proposed by the Japan’s E. Sakakibara in 1997, but immediately rejected by the U.S. as a threat to the IMF.  

According to LaRouche, the purpose of this fund is not only protection against financial warfare attacks by hedge funds and similar speculators. It is also aimed to promote urgently needed measures in hard-commodity forms of combined trade and long-term capital improvements among those Asian nations. “In this first stage, we might foresee the emergence of regional, somewhat overlapping, groupings of similar outlook and their cooperation among one another, in various regions of the planet” (LaRouche, 2000: 6). 

This is exactly what we are observing in 2023. Recently, the State Duma of the Russian Federation (RF) has adopted a law on Islamic banking, which should give Russia access to the capital of wealthy Islamic countries. Also, Islamic banks in Southeast Asia intend to open branches in the Russian Federation as soon as the legal framework regulating Islamic banking is introduced (Bifolchi, 2023). As is known, Islamic banking implies the implementation of banking activities in accordance with the norms of Islam, according to which interest-bearing transactions are prohibited, and profits are achieved only through investments, leasing, equity financing, etc. of a similar nature. This is a serious challenge to the rentier financial and economic model of the West, from which more and more countries of the world are striving to free themselves. 

ASEAN and its partners China, South Korea, and Japan (ASEAN+3) are building an integrated policy framework for macrofinancial stabilization, with the understanding that economies can best overcome crises when they work closely with each other, exchange data and share experience through political dialogue, not only in turbulent times, but, also, in calmer times, as well as when they develop and deepen financial markets in a concerted manner, and coordinate policies in a regional context (Asian Development Bank, 2021). On July 17, 2023, at the annual China Business Summit held in Auckland, the Southeast Asian countries once again have demonstrated that they want a stable geopolitical environment in order to focus on their economic development, and that they do not want to be forced to “take sides” in any hegemonic rivalry (China Business Summit, 2023). 

Following the adaptation of LaRouche’s ideas [1] for the purposes of regional and national development, over the course of two decades, Eurasia managed to consolidate, and began to build its future in defiance of the Washington consensus. Instead of a free market, deregulation and privatization, the principles of the physical economy have been applied – the protection of vital industries and trade at the regional level, state investment in scientific and technological progress, comprehensive education, the development of basic economic infrastructure, the effective lending to the real, manufacturing sector, and the regulation of economic activity in general.  

The progress made by Asian countries as a result of these economic policies is now attracting more and more countries in Latin America, Africa and the South Pacific. China has demonstrated a new model of large-scale economic development and poverty eradication, and that model is becoming the pivot point for world development. Beijing is challenging Washington’s leading position in international organizations, or, when that does not work, is creating parallel structures in politics and institutions. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) is the new version of the World Bank, while the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the BRICS provide Beijing with great platforms for political influence. BRICS is expanding and is working to create its own international gold-backed currency and a basket of real assets/commodities. This new currency, again, reflects LaRouche’s ideas, especially in his article, “On a Basket of Hard Commodities: Trade without Currency” (LaRouche, 2000). BRICS represents a quarter of the world GDP and 18% of global trade. And this might be enough for their monetary ambition to create a multipolar world that would not be dominated by the United States, given the desire of such large countries as Saudi Arabia, Iran and the UAE, to accelerate the process of de-dollarization. In recent months, the central banks of these countries have shifted most of their foreign exchange reserves from dollars to gold. 

However, the main issue in the process of de-dollarization is not the search for an alternative to the U.S. currency, but the coordinated efforts of the Eurasian countries to move away from the dollar model of the economy. 

As Mathew Burrows recently wrote, “Unfortunately, the split between the West and the Global South is expanding. For many developing countries, the alienation toward the West did not begin with Ukraine; rather, it can be traced to the West’s disregard for their struggle with the COVID-19 pandemic, if not further back.   

“The West runs the risk of losing the Global South altogether if it does not try to understand these countries’ interests, needs, and demands and does not stop striving to impose Western values on them. If the West does not alter its course vis-à-vis the Global South, it is most likely to find itself at odds with a multipolar global order, which will continue to evolve and reflect the rise of emerging powers such as Brazil, India, and South Africa. These countries will strengthen their efforts to reform existing multilateral institutions or to create new ones that will enable them to better exert influence on the international arena. More generally, they will continue to develop parallel networks of diplomatic, economic, cultural, and security partnerships and alliances in which the West will gradually lose influence and predominance.” (Burrows, 2022). 

The Schiller Institute Conferences on “Peace through development” 

To prevent this kind of division, from which the people, and not the elites will suffer, numerous conferences on peace through development are being held worldwide. But the conferences initiated by the Schiller Institute [2] and, personally, the wife of L. LaRouche, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, seem to have the greatest impact. 

Why are they so significant? 

Because other than revealing [3] to the world the true causes of crises and wars (which the media try to cover up), they also offer an alternative to the neoliberal order – which is systematically presented to us as being without alternatives, and, above all, they provide a conceptual basis for peace movements, the geography of which is expanding and attracting more and more scientists and intellectuals, former politicians and military officers, intelligence services officers, working people, but, above all, many young people dreaming of a fairer world.  

For example, the Schiller Institute international conference June 18-19, 2022 titled, “There Can Be No Peace without the Bankruptcy Reorganization of the Dying Trans-Atlantic Financial System,” [4] was attended by 31 speakers, from 12 countries, including Russia, China, Brazil, and Afghanistan. The live-broadcasts of the conference numbered in the thousands at different locations over the two days, and the pre-registration of 1,300 people represented dozens of nations. The conference took place as part of an on-going mobilization process, including an international petition, issued by the Schiller Institute in February 2022 – “Convoke an International Conference to Establish a New Security and Development Architecture for All Nations,” [5] which, as of mid-June, has collected nearly 5,000 signatures from dozens of nations.  

An international conference was held on July 8-9, 2023, titled “On the Verge of a New World War: European Nations Must Cooperate with the Global South!” [6]. This event is in sharp contrast to the “Summit for a New Global Financial Pact” held on June 22 Paris, where leaders of the Global South opposed [7] the hypocrisy of their European counterparts. The organizers were pushing for a global tax of at least 1 trillion U.S. dollars per year to be used in the fight against climate change.  

The conference was also a timely and necessary intervention against Global NATO’s July 11-12 summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, where NATO’s expansion was on top of the agenda: Sweden joining the Alliance, NATO membership for Ukraine, and a proposal to set up a liaison office in Tokyo. An expansion that the dean of America’s Russia experts, George F. Kennan, had called ‘the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era’ (Goldgeier, 1999: 18). 

In Panel 2, titled “The Rise of the Global South against Geopolitical Blocs,” Jacques Cheminade, French politician, former diplomat and the head of the Solidarity and Progress (SP) party, characterized the current historical period as “the battle between the domineering financial oligarchy, and those who believe that the human species has a right to development.” He highlighted the crucial role of L. LaRouche in discovering the principles of physical economy – critical for a New Paradigm of development.  

These principles were recalled by Academician S. Glazyev on Sept. 12, 2022, in his message, On the 100th Anniversary of Lyndon LaRouche’s Birth, in which he stated: “If the leaders of the world’s nations had listened to the voice of Lyndon LaRouche, then perhaps we might have managed to avoid the social upheavals we confront today…  30 or 40 years ago, he proposed a different model of globalization, based on the principles of physical economy: in particular, the famous project, which he and his wife, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, put forward for international discussion – the so-called Eurasian Land-Bridge. This is a splendid and interesting project, which now, after many years, has begun to be implemented through the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative, which we support through linking it with the Eurasian Economic Union…. 

“It is the principles of Physical Economy championed by LaRouche, that today underlie the Chinese economic miracle and are there in the foundations of India’s economic development policy. The supporters of LaRouche in those countries exert a fruitful, very positive, and constructive influence on economic policy-shaping in these leading nations of the new world economic paradigm….  

“Lyndon LaRouche turned out to be right. Today we rely on his work, his writings, in composing proposals for a very rapid transition to a new world economic paradigm. We call it an integrated world economic model, in which finance capital will be subordinated to the tasks of developing the economy, and in which the principles of Physical Economy will come to fruition. As we can see, countries that are taking this path are enjoying success….” [8]. 

Therefore, in the coming decades, we can expect a radical renewal of the physical basis of the world economy – primarily, that all energy, transport, water and communication systems will be fundamentally upgraded through large-scale infrastructure projects using the latest technologies. These projects can be financed independently of the IMF, of the World Bank and of the international capital markets, by the governments of the respective countries themselves, namely through the establishment of government credit lines. The necessary exchange of technological progress through infrastructural and other projects can be organized by means of long-term trade and credit agreements between the participating countries, as suggested by L. LaRouche in his concept of “Trade without currency.” That takes us to, I would call it the strategic conference, which was held in the middle of April, 2023, under the title “Without the Development of All Nations, There Can Be No Lasting Peace for the Planet” [9], which was attended by approx. 40 speakers from all continents.   

In short, LaRouche showed how the creation of stable regional cooperation could be organized when a commodity basket consisting of basic commodities would be used as a standard cost to protect mutual trade and credit agreements from currency volatility. Thus, the foundation for the future new global financial system would be created. In Asia, important efforts have already been made in this direction. An international structure for large-scale infrastructure projects [10] has already been outlined in the concept of the “Eurasian Land-Bridge,” the construction of a colossal network of infrastructure corridors between Europe and Asia, from East to West and from North to South, with high-speed rail links, water channels, pipelines, power supply and communication networks, etc.  

A New Security Architecture and its Philosophical Foundations  

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has now moved the Doomsday Clock to 90 seconds before midnight, the closest it has been to the symbolic time of the annihilation of humanity and the Earth since 1947 [11]. This is alarming, which is why leaders in the Global South have been making the case to halt the warmongering over Ukraine and against China. 

Аt the same time, the largest U.S. mutual funds – which manage the retirement and other savings of tens of millions of Americans – are profiting from investments in nuclear weapons, cluster munitions and other banned or controversial arms [12]. In this case, how could the world believe in the “fight” against the climate crisis and global warming? Aren’t wars one of the causes? 

From the outset of the war in Ukraine, the Schiller Institute has insisted in a number of conferences, beginning on April 9, 2022, that the only solution to this crisis would be the establishment of a new global security and development architecture, which takes into account the security interest of every single country on the planet. This view is shared by more and more forces in the world. There is a “tectonic shift” underway in world politics, in which the nations of the Global South are rising up against the unipolar world order, the attempts to create a Global NATO and a New Global Financial Pact in which they see no opportunities for development, but a threat to their existence and new colonialism.  

Even the Atlantic Council admitted: “What the developing and low-income countries really need are concrete initiatives and the less said about grand strategy the better. Dressing those initiatives up as parts of a “new global financial architecture” risks conflating them with the geopolitical conflict centered around changing or preserving the current world order. That conflation will only make it more difficult to develop the international consensus required to adopt those measures.” (Tran, 2023). 

In this direction, Helga Zepp-LaRouche recalled [13] the political foundation for durable peace, given by L. LaRouche in 1983, which he thinks should be: a) the unconditional sovereignty of each and all nation-states, and b) cooperation among sovereign nation-states to the ef­fect of promoting unlimited opportunities to participate in the benefits of technological progress, to the mutual benefit of each and all.” “That political foundation is now in sight… What remains is for world citizens to create a miracle: to spur the U.S. to sincerely offer to join this new era,” she noted. She suggested ten principles upon which the new era needs to be based. Her formulation of her tenth principle reads: “The basic assumption for the new paradigm is, that man is fundamentally good and capable to infinitely perfect the creativity of his mind and the beauty of his soul… and that all evil is the result of a lack of development, and therefore can be overcome.” [14] 

These principles are embedded in her husband’s overall political-economic philosophy, which views physical economy as the science of applying the creative mind of man in practice, as a process of transforming the universe through man’s socio-economic activity.  

In summary, in contrast to conventional economic theories, physical economy focuses exclusively on the real economy, putting aside financial and monetary measures of economic performance. Researchers in this field identify scientific and technological progress as the main driver of increases in real productivity, and study how economies evolve through an unending series of stages of development and structural transformation, under the impact of scientific and technological progress, and related advances in human knowledge. From the general characteristics or “laws” of this evolutionary process, scientists derive principles for the long-term development of nations, which are of vital importance for economic policy making. 

The intimate relation between physical economic development and human creativity – in the strict sense exemplified by the process of scientific discovery – leads to a further, profound field of investigation. On the one side, human creativity is shown to be an essentially unlimited resource, providing the means for progressively overcoming all conceivable limits to the future expansion of human activity on the Earth and beyond. On the other hand, to the extent the economy of a nation is organized to foster maximum rates of scientific and technological progress, the economy becomes an instrument for realizing the creative potentials of the population, through their involvement in the generation of new knowledge and its assimilation into the economic process as a whole. In this context the problem of alienation is discussed, which is the main barrier standing in the way of involving the masses of the population into scientific activity, and a future direction of economic development leading to the emergence of what we call a “Knowledge Generator Economy” is proposed.  

The essential goal of physical economy is human happiness: Not only freedom from material want, but to create the conditions in which the creative potential of each individual is realized to the maximum extent possible, in an environment of progress and a general expansion of knowledge (LaRouche, 1995, LaRouche, 2001б, Tennenbaum, 2015).   

Conclusion 

LaRouche’s ideas are attractive to that part of the political and economic elite of the countries of the world, and, in particular, Russia, which has placed its hopes on industrial development, instead of the raw material and speculative economy that dominates today.   

Unloved in his homeland, but respected abroad, LaRouche left a rich intellectual legacy from which there is a lot to be appreciated, and implemented, for the purpose of national, regional, and, why not, global development – so as to achieve lasting peace on the planet, rather than a “clash of civilizations.” 

Footnotes: 

[1] In 1975, LaRouche proposed the International Development Bank, a plan to strengthen every currency in the world with long-term, low-interest loans for development projects, and the export of capital goods to the underdeveloped sector. Within a year, the plan was accepted, unconditionally, by the Non-Aligned Movement, a group of 86 countries, mostly from the underdeveloped sector, with LaRouche’s friend, Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, as one of their leading voices. LaRouche also offered the New Bretton Woods plan, as well as detailed accounts of the industrial development of Africa, Mexico, South America, Southwest Asia, India, and the Indian Ocean basin, not to mention the United States and other countries.  

This original proposal is the conceptual origin of the many new international development banks coming into being in 2015 and beyond. In it, LaRouche showed how to bring the world together around the creation of a better future for all. (See LaRouche, L. 2019. How The International Development Bank Will Work: IDB. https://larouchepub.com/lar/2022/4920-how_the_international_developm-lar.html). 

Many world leaders have personally worked with LaRouche to promote a new international financial system based on physical economic development. 

LaRouche’s enemies did not forgive him for this. A federal raid involving 400 agents was carried out on LaRouche’s home and political offices in 1986, after which he was convicted and sent to jail. (See The Battle for Justice: The LaRouche Case https://archive.schillerinstitute.com/exon/exon_toc.html).  

[2] The Schiller Institute is a political and economic think tank founded by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, which is registered in eight countries and has friends in around 40 countries. It is among the principal organizations of the LaRouche movement. The Institute’s stated aim is to apply the ideas of the poet and philosopher Friedrich Schiller to the contemporary world crisis. Their constitution, adopted in 1984, rails against international financial institutions and other supranational bodies, that hinder development, and, thus, lasting peace in the non-Western world.  

The Institute has initiated numerous conferences since its inception in North and South America, Europe, Asia, Africa and Australia, to promote the idea of “peace through development.” The discussion at these conferences centers around LaRouche’s proposals for infrastructure projects such as the “Eurasian Land-Bridge,”, and the “Oasis Plan,” a Middle East peace agreement based on Arab-Israeli collaboration on major water projects, as well as proposals for debt relief, and a sweeping reorganization of the world monetary system. The Institute strongly opposes the “Clash of Civilizations” thesis of Samuel Huntington, and appeals for a dialogue of civilizations.  

[3] See The Schiller Institute. Recent news https://schillerinstitute.com/recent-news/  

[4] Schiller Institute international conference June 18-19, 2022 “There Can Be No Peace without the Bankruptcy Reorganization of the Dying Trans-Atlantic Financial System” https://schillerinstitute.com/?s=There+Can+Be+No+Peace+without+the+Bankruptcy+Reorganization+of+the+Dying+Trans-Atlantic+Financial+System  

[5] PETITION: Convoke an International Conference to Establish a New Security and Development Architecture for All Nations.  https://schillerinstitute.com/blog/2022/02/23/petition-convoke-an-international-conference-to-establish-a-new-security-and-development-architecture-for-all-nations/  

[6] A two-day international conference “On the Verge of a New World War: European Nations Must Cooperate with the Global South!” https://schillerinstitute.com/blog/2023/07/20/conference-on-the-verge-of-a-new-world-war-european-nations-must-cooperate-with-the-global-south/   

[7] See Pres. Ramaphosa addressing the New Global Financing PACT summit in Paris https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMsO6h1buy0;  President William Ruto on The Summit for a New Global Financing Pact in Paris https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPEb5xONN_s;  Rumble, О., Gilder, А. 2023. The Paris Summit for a New Global Financing Pact: Our Takeaways. African Climate Wire, 4 July 2023 https://africanclimatewire.org/2023/07/the-paris-summit-for-a-new-global-financial-pact-our-takeaways/    

[8] Sergey Glazyev, On the 100th Anniversary of Lyndon LaRouche’s Birth. December 9, 2022. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nkLsgz6fU0  

[9] Without the Development of All Nations, There Can Be No Lasting Peace for the Planet. April 15 & 16, 2023.  https://schillerinstitute.nationbuilder.com/conference_20230415  

[10] By the way, оne of the top-priority projects Alexander Grigoryevich Granberg a leading Russian specialist in the area of comprehensive economic development of the regions of Siberia and the Far East, who headed the Council for the Study of Productive Forces (SOPS) under the Ministry of Economics of the Russian Federation (RF), worked on was the construction of a tunnel under the Bering Strait, which would connect the railroad systems of Russia and the USA. This idea is a key one in LaRouche’s program for global economic recovery. In 2027, when the tunnel should unite the two shores of the Bering Strait (according to the plan), the railroad station on the Russian coast would be named after Prof. Menshikov, and the one on the American side would be named after Lyndon LaRouche. Оfficially, in RF, the project to link Russia and the USA by railway across the Bering Strait was incorporated in 2007 in the “Strategy for the Development of Rail Transport in the RF to 2030,” adopted by the Government of the RF. This resulted, to a significant degree, from the efforts of such Russian scientists as Professor Menshikov and Academician Granberg, who sympathized with LaRouche’s ideas (See Russian Website Features LaRouche’s Influence in Post-Soviet Russia. In: Executive Intelligence Review. 2012. 39 (21), pp. 19-20. https://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2012/eirv39n21-20120525/15-22_3921.pdf).   

The idea of such a bridge or tunnel across the Bering Strait to connect North America and Eurasia dates back to the end of the 19th century, but its realization has always been hindered by various circumstances.    

[11] A time of unprecedented danger: It is 90 seconds to midnight. 2023 Doomsday Clock Statement. Science and Security Board, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, January 24, 2023. https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/   

[12]  The largest fund managers are heavily invested in arms manufacturers, nuclear weapons, and controversial weapons. Weapon Free funds, 2023 https://weaponfreefunds.org/fund-managers 

[13] To End Colonialism: A Mission for All Youth. Schiller Institute International Online Youth Conference, Saturday, March 11. https://schillerinstitute.nationbuilder.com/march_11_2023_online_conference  

[14] Ten Principles of a New International Security and Development Architecture. Helga Zepp-LaRouche at the Nov. 22 Schiller Institute conference, “Stop the Danger of Nuclear War Now; Third Seminar of Political and Social Leaders of the World”. https://schillerinstitute.com/blog/2022/11/30/ten-principles-of-a-new-international-security-and-development-architecture/  
 

References  

Asian Development Bank. 2021. Redefining Strategic Routes to Financial Resilience in ASEAN+3. ADB, December 2021 

Bifolchi, G. 2003. Islamic banking in Russia: why does it matter? Special Eurasia [viewed January 18, 2023]. Available from:  https://www.specialeurasia.com/2023/01/18/islamic-banking-in-russia/?fbclid=IwAR3YjChZ-dTR2BozAPKTp64jGM-rXmUZDuEOHXlzgey06plPiEGiho8tL0E  

Burrows, М. 2002. Red Cell: Is the West losing the Global South? Security & Strategy [viewed December 10, 2022]. Available from:  https://www.stimson.org/2022/red-cell-2-is-the-west-losing-the-global-south/  

China Business Summit. 2023. [viewed July 17, 2023]. Available from:  https://chinabusinesssummit.co.nz/    

Glazyev, S. 2001. Russia Is Facing Financial Shocks. Аddress to Duma official hearing “On Measures To Ensure the Development of the Russian Economy Under Conditions of a Destabilization of the World Financial System”, June 29, 2001 [viewed June 15, 2023]. Available from:  https://archive.schillerinstitute.com/duma/duma_glazyez.html  

Goldgeier, J.  1999. The U.S. Decision to Enlarge NATO. // Brookings Review, 1 June 1999, 19-21. Available from: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/goldgeier.pdf  

LaRouche, L. 1995. The meaning of the term ‘physical economy’. // Executive Intelligence Review.  22 (1),  62-63. https://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1995/eirv22n01-19950101/eirv22n01-19950101_074-the_meaning_of_the_term_physical-lar.pdf 

LaRouche, L. 2000. On a Basket of Hard Commodities: Trade Without Currency. // Executive Intelligence Review. 27(30),  4–19. https://larouchepub.com/lar/2000/lar_commodities_2730.html 

LaRouche, L. 2001. Policy Changes Needed To Overcome the Collapse. Testimony to the Russian State Duma’s Economics Committee, in Moscow on June 29, 2001 [viewed June 15, 2023]. Available from:  https://archive.schillerinstitute.com/highlite/highlite_duma_6_29_01.html#LaRouche%20to%20Duma  

LaRouche, L. 2016. The Gravity of Economic Intentions. // Executive Intelligence Review. 28 (13), 20-55. https://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2018/eirv45n11-20180316/26-65_4511-lar.pdf 

Tennenbaum, J. 2015. The Physical Economy of National Development. Berlin, September 27, 2015. https://www.scribd.com/document/370188870/The-Physical-Economy-of-National-Development-Definitivo-Jonathan-Tennenbaum 

Tran, Н. 2023. Lessons from the Paris Summit for a New Global Financing Pact. Atlantic Council [viewed  August 15, 2023 ]. Available from:  https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/econographics/lessons-from-the-paris-summit-for-a-new-global-financing-pact/   

About the author:
Education and degrees awarded
PhD in Political Philosophy, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (BAS), Institute
for the Study of Societies and Knowledge, Sofia, Bulgaria;
Doctoral Dissertation: “Transformations in geopolitics and new methods and practices of geopolitical
forecasts”, 15.06.2018

MA Communication and library management, “St. Cyril and St. Methodius” University of
Veliko Tarnovo
MA thesis: “Children’s book publishing and its presence in the global network”, 2006

Areas of research
Political philosophy, chronopolitics, geopolitics, futurology, global forecasting

Academic positions
10.11.2020 – currently, Assist. Prof., Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Philosophy
and Sociology, Department of Social Theories, Strategies and Prognosis
28.06.2018 – 01.07. 2020, Research Assistant, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Institute for the
Study of Societies and Knowledge, Department of Social Theories, Strategies and Prognosis

Monographs:
Pavlova, V. 2020. The role of the Asia-Pacific region in global geopolitical transformation
In addition, Vihra Pavlova has written many texts in collections of papers and scientific journals listed in her CV below.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Følgende artikel af Lyndon LaRouche (1922-2019) fra 2000 er meget relevant for den aktuelle diskussion om et nyt internationalt kreditsystem for produktive investeringer.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Abonnenterne fik også følgende EIR artikle om den ukrainske sortliste: 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Videoen blev offentliggjort på Schiller Instituttets videokonference den 11. september 2022 i anledning af 100 år efter Lyndon LaRouches (1922-2019) fødsel.

Alle videoer kan ses i deres helhed på LaRouche Biblioteket:
https://larouchelibrary.org/
https://www.larouchelegacyfoundation.org/

Lima, Peru, College of Public Accountants, Feb. 25, 2000

Warsaw, Poland, Schiller Institute Society of Poland, May 24, 2001

New Delhi, India, India International Institute, Dec. 3, 2001

Washington, D.C. EIR Seminar: “The U.S.A.-China Strategic Partnership”
Oct. 22, 1997

Moscow, Russia, Methodological University, April 26, 1996

São Paulo, Brazil, Alumni Association of the Superior War College
June 11, 2002

São Paulo City, Council Chambers
June 12, 2002

Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Zayed Center for Coordination and Follow-Up (Arab League)
June 2, 2002

8. september 2022 (EIRNS)- I dag var det 100 år siden Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr. (1922-2019) blev født. Han var økonom, videnskabsmand og statsmand, og en af historiens største filosoffer og ledere gennem tiderne.

Hans fødselsdag blev fejret over hele verden med gademøder (København, Berlin, Paris, Houston, Washington DC, Boston m.fl.), erklæringer og et heldags-video-maraton med bemærkelsesværdige taler af LaRouche og meddelelser om hyldest og påskønnelse fra folk fra alle aldre og nationer.

Den første udgave af et festskrift til ære for LaRouche blev i dag udgivet af Schiller Instituttet. Det 300 sider lange dokument findes nedenunder.

De danske bidrag kan læses på sider 22-36.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

The English version is below the Danish:

Af Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Schiller Instituttets stifter, som var gift med Lyndon LaRouche, indtil han døde 96 år gammel.

Den 8. september for 100 år siden blev Lyndon LaRouche født. Mange mennesker verden over, herunder jeg selv, betragter ham som den største tænker i sin tid. På den anden side er han den mest hadede, frygtede og udskældte person for de transatlantiske eliter, hvilket vil sige en hel del i en tid med Trump, Putin og Xi Jinping. Jeg har haft den lykke at have været gift med ham i 41 år og at have opbygget en international bevægelse sammen med ham i et halvt århundrede, og jeg kan tilføje min personlige mening, at han i Friedrich Schillers forstand var den smukkeste sjæl, jeg nogensinde har mødt, dvs. for ham faldt frihed og nødvendighed, lidenskab og pligt i ét, og han var præcis den type person, som ifølge Schiller er kendetegnet ved denne karakteristik: et geni. Og det virkeligt bemærkelsesværdige er, at hans idéer lever i dag og fungerer i mange lande i verden.

Lyndon LaRouche havde en uovertruffen viden og en ufejlbarlig sans for filosofiske, epistemologiske, kulturelle og videnskabelige sammenhænge, som gjorde ham i stand til at navigere i disse ideers historie og straks finde ind til deres væsentlige træk. På baggrund af denne evne forkastede han i begyndelsen af 1950’erne informationsteorien og systemanalysen hos folk som Norbert Wiener og John von Neumann som uegnede til at beskrive økonomiske processer og udviklede sin egen økonomiske metode, den fysiske økonomi, baseret på bl.a. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Friedrich List, Henry C. Carey og Bernhard Riemann.

Ud fra dette synspunkt og beriget med et rigt kendskab til to og et halvt tusind års europæisk kultur- og videnskabshistorie og universel historie i almindelighed, erkendte han med større klarhed end nogen anden de potentielt katastrofale virkninger af 1960’ernes rock-drugs-sex-modkultur på befolkningens erkendelsesmæssige potentiale og dermed på befolkningens produktivitet på længere sigt.

Hans nok mest betydningsfulde forudsigelse var imidlertid hans vurdering af konsekvenserne af præsident Nixons afskaffelse af Bretton Woods-ordningen ved indførelsen af fleksible valutakurser og ophævelsen af guldstandarden for dollaren den 15. august 1971. Hvis det dermed forbundne kursskifte til et rent monetaristisk, profitmaksimerende finanssystem blev opretholdt, advarede han dengang, ville verden nødvendigvis bevæge sig mod en ny depression, en ny fascisme og truslen om en ny verdenskrig, medmindre der blev indført en helt ny, retfærdig økonomisk verdensorden.

Desværre lyttede de transatlantiske eliter ikke til ham, og derfor befinder verden sig i dag, 50 år senere, præcis på det punkt, som han forudsagde. I løbet af disse årtier, hver gang det finansielle oligarki på Wall Street og i City of London fremskyndede processen med at deregulere markederne på bekostning af realøkonomien, lagde han fingeren på såret og analyserede konsekvenserne af denne politik. Carter-regeringens politik om ”kontrolleret opløsning af økonomien”, Volckers højrentepolitik, outsourcing til lavtlønslande, just-in-time produktionspolitik, fusions- og opkøbspolitik, Reagonomics og Thatcherisme, ophævelsen af Glass-Steagall loven, aktionærværdiskabelsen, derivatspekulation, den fatale effekt af den mirakuløse pengeforøgelse i form af QE og nulrentepolitikken: Alle disse milepæle i det neoliberale finanssystem fordømte han som grundlæggende fejludviklinger, som i sidste ende kun var mellemstationer på vejen mod systemets sammenbrud.

I stedet for at tage hans analyser som en anledning til en kursændring betragtede finansoligarkiet ham fra starten som en dødbringende trussel mod deres system og iværksatte en årtier lang international kampagne for at undertrykke LaRouches idéer og dermed hans indflydelse. En hel hær af indflydelsesagenter i medier og institutioner af enhver art, herunder diplomater i alle verdenshjørner, blev indsat verden over for at lægge pres på folk, så snart de viste interesse for hans forslag i en eller anden form.

De hundredvis, hvis ikke tusindvis, af knivskarpe analyser og vurderinger, som LaRouche har leveret gennem årene, ville have været absolut tilstrækkelige til at forhindre den nuværende strategiske katastrofe. Men han brugte også altid sine advarsler til at præsentere løsninger.
Da flere statsoverhoveder begyndte at tage hans ideer op og gennemføre dem i begyndelsen af 1980’erne, besluttede det finansielle oligarki, at LaRouche skulle elimineres. Den daværende mexicanske præsident López Portillo havde bedt LaRouche om at skrive et program til forsvar af pesoen og økonomien, som Mexico begyndte at gennemføre den 1. september 1982. Den indiske premierminister Indira Gandhi begyndte i samme periode at gennemføre LaRouches forslag til et 40-årigt program for Indiens økonomiske udvikling. Og den 23. marts 1983 bekendtgjorde præsident Reagan LaRouches forslag til SDI-programmet, som var det mest vidtrækkende forslag til en ny global sikkerhedsarkitektur, som nogen hidtil har udtænkt, og som ville have overskredet NATO- og Warszawapagtblokkene og sat et storstilet udviklingsperspektiv i gang for udviklingssektoren. Reagan var på det tidspunkt klar til en sådan ændring i den strategiske konstellation, mens Arbatov-Ogarkov-Gorbatjov-fraktionen i Sovjetunionen afviste dette forslag og dermed slog ind på en vej, der i høj grad bidrog til Sovjetunionens tidlige undergang.

LaRouche deltog otte gange som kandidat i den amerikanske præsidentvalgkamp, syv af dem i det demokratiske parti. At rapportere alene om alle de sabotageoperationer, der er sat i gang mod LaRouche af partiledelsesapparatet med Al Gore, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton og den nuværende ledelse, ville fylde en hel bog. Da LaRouche-kandidater begyndte at vinde valg i 1986 – i primærvalgene i Illinois til de næst- og tredjehøjeste poster i staten – blev det besluttet at gå imod ham for altid. Den 6. oktober 1986 gennemførte FBI en razzia mod LaRouches bolig og kontorer med 400 tungt bevæbnede sikkerhedsvagter, pansrede køretøjer og helikoptere, en operation, der fik den nylige razzia mod Trumps Mar-a-Lago ejendom med 40 FBI-agenter til at ligne en børnefødselsdag. Formålet med angrebet på LaRouche og mig selv var intet mindre end at eliminere os fysisk, hvilket kun kunne forhindres ved hjælp af Det Hvide Hus’ indgriben.
Derefter fulgte falske anklager, ulovlig brug af skattevæsenet, manipulerede retssager og til sidst fængsling af LaRouche og en række af hans medarbejdere.

Den tidligere justitsminister i Johnson-regeringen, Ramsey Clark, der på eget initiativ greb ind i retssagen, beskrev administrationens handlinger efter LaRouches løsladelse i en international domstol, der var organiseret af borgerrettighedsaktivister og afroamerikanske lovgivere, således:
”Men når det gælder den komplekse og omfattende udnyttelse af politi, anklagere, medier og ikke-statslige organisationer, der fokuserer på at ødelægge en fjende, overgås denne sag næppe af andre. Der er tilfælde, hvor regeringen selv har gjort mere og også gjort mere forkert i tidens løb, men med hensyn til det tætte samspil og den tætte kombination af føderale, statslige og lokale myndigheder, af den udøvende magt og endda nogle af de lovgivende og dømmende magthavere, af store og små lokale medier og af indflydelsesrige lobbyister, især ADL [Anti-Defamation League], står denne sag øverst på listen.

Formålet kan kun ses som værende at ødelægge dem fuldstændigt – ikke blot en politisk bevægelse, eller snarere en politisk figur, der er tale om begge dele, men frem for alt en frugtbar motor for nye ideer, en kollektiv virksomhed, hvor man tænker og studerer og analyserer for at løse problemer, uanset konsekvenserne for status quo eller for ens egne interesser. Der var en bevidst hensigt om at ødelægge dette for enhver pris…”

Jeg deltog selv i denne domstol. Jeg understregede eftertrykkeligt, at den største forbrydelse mod LaRouche ikke var at straffe denne store, vidunderlige ånd med fængselsstraf, men at man gennem den omfattende kampagne for at bagvaske hans navn og dermed hans ideer i høj grad forhindrede det amerikanske og i øvrigt også det internationale samfund i at sætte sig ind i hans ideer og frem for alt i at finde løsninger.

I dag, 27 år efter denne domstol, på Lyndon LaRouches 100-års fødselsdag, kan man studere resultatet af finansoligarkiets forsøg på at ødelægge LaRouche. Det transatlantiske finanssystem står over for sin hyperinflationære afslutning; den ”regelbaserede værdiorden” og NATO er en kolos på lerfødder. Læg dertil det gennemsigtige forsøg på at kontrollere ”fortællingerne” ved at give hele befolkningen mundkurv på og straks bagtale enhver, der udtaler sig om årsagerne til krigen eller inflationen, som en ”Putin-agent”. Hvis Vesten fortsætter på denne måde, går vi under.

På den anden side har LaRouches idéer været en enorm succes. Hans idéer om infrastrukturudvikling i udviklingslandene, som han har fremlagt siden begyndelsen af 1970’erne, hans program om Den nye Silkevej, der bliver til en verdenslandbro, som var hans svar på Sovjetunionens sammenbrud, er nu ved at blive realiseret af Kina og dets BRI/Silkevejsinitiativ. Det nye økonomiske og finansielle system, der i dag realiseres af mange lande og institutioner i det globale syd, er baseret på hans koncept om fysisk økonomi; økonomer i mange lande, især i Asien, studerer LaRouches skrifter og anvender dem til gavn for deres lande.

LaRouche var patriot for det Amerika, der havde udkæmpet den første vellykkede uafhængighedskrig mod det britiske imperium, men han var også verdensborger og satte altid hele menneskehedens interesser i første række. Folk fornemmede dette, og når LaRouche rejste til udviklingslande eller Europa, udtrykte de ofte deres absolutte tillid til ham på en måde, som kun ægte venskab kan det.

Ved at forkaste LaRouches idéer har Vesten ikke gjort sig selv nogen tjeneste ved at afvise dem. At USA behandlede sin største søn på en så uværdig måde, vil forblive en evig plet på USA’s historie. De lande, der anvender hans idéer, har allerede økonomisk succes og vil blive endnu mere succesfulde i fremtiden. Det kan godt være, at Vestens lande har nægtet ham officiel succes i hans lange og uovertruffent produktive liv, men han har haft et rigt, usædvanligt opfyldt og lykkeligt liv, fordi han indadtil var det mest frie og kreative menneske på jorden. Var Sokrates en succes, selv om han blev dræbt? Det er han, mens hans mordere er glemt støv.

Lyndon LaRouche er sine fjenders nemesis og glæden og stoltheden for en fremtidig, bedre menneskehedsepoke. Han vil leve videre som udødelig.

Se videokonferencen:

Schiller Instituttets videokonference i anledning af 100 år efter Lyndon LaRouches fødsel:
d. 10-11. september kl. 16.00 dansk tid eller senere.
Inspiration til menneskeheden for at overleve den største krise i verdenshistorien

—————————————————————–

English version:

100th Anniversary of the Birth of Lyndon LaRouche—The Ideas of Lyndon LaRouche Will Shape the Future of Mankind

Sept. 3, 2022 (EIRNS)—Helga Zepp-LaRouche wrote the following article as the lead of the German weekly newspaper Neue Solidarität, issue 36, for Sept. 8, 2022 (https://www.solidaritaet.com/neuesol/2022/36/hzl.htm):

One hundred years ago, on September 8, Lyndon LaRouche was born, a person whom many people throughout the world, including myself, consider the greatest thinker of our era. For the trans-Atlantic Establishment, on the other hand, he is the most hated, feared and slandered person, and that, in times of Donald Trump, Vladmir Putin and Xi Jinping, speaks volumes. As I was fortunate enough to be married to him for 41 years, and to have worked with him for half a century in building up an international movement, I can add my personal judgment that he was the most beautiful soul, in the sense of Friedrich Schiller, that I have ever met. That means that, for him, freedom and necessity, passion and duty were one, and he was precisely the type of individual who corresponds to the characterization Schiller gave of a genius. And what is truly excellent, is that his ideas are alive today and influential in many countries of the world.

Lyndon LaRouche had unparalleled knowledge and an unfailing sense of the cohesion of philosophical, epistemological, cultural and scientific notions, which allowed him to be at home in the history of such ideas, and to immediately recognize their essential nature. Based on this ability, he rejected in the early 1950s the information theory and systems analysis of people such as Norbert Wiener and John von Neumann as inadequate for describing economic processes, and developed his own scientific method of physical economy, which built upon Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Friedrich List, Henry C. Carey and Bernhard Riemann, among others.

From this point of view and with the benefit of his vast knowledge of two and a half thousand years of the history of European culture and science and of universal history in general, he recognized, much more clearly than anyone else, the potentially catastrophic effects of the drug-sex-rock counterculture of the 1960s on the cognitive potential and, thus, on the long-term productivity of the population. What is likely his most significant forecast, however, was his assessment of President Nixon’s abolition of the Bretton Woods system through the introduction of floating exchange rates and the decoupling of the dollar from the gold reserve standard on August 15, 1971. He warned at that time that if the change in course that assumed, toward a purely monetarist financial system aimed at profit maximization were to be maintained, the world would necessarily head toward a new depression, a new fascism and the danger of a new world war, unless a totally new and just world economic order were established.

Unfortunately, the trans-Atlantic Establishment did not listen to LaRouche. That is why, 50 years later, the world is now precisely at the point he had forecast. Over the course of the ensuing decades, every time Wall Street’s and the City of London’s financial oligarchy promoted the process of market deregulation to the detriment of the real economy, he put his finger on the wound, and analyzed the consequences of this policy. The Carter Administration’s policy of “controlled disintegration of the economy,” Volcker’s high interest rates, outsourcing to cheap labor markets, just-in-time production, the policy of mergers and acquisitions, Reaganomics and Thatcherism, the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, the shareholder value society, derivatives speculation, the fatal consequences of the miraculous monetary expansion under QE and the zero-interest policy—he denounced all these milestones of the neoliberal financial system as fundamental errors, that were ultimately just stations on the way to the systemic crash.

Rather than using his analyses to correct the mistakes, the financial oligarchy regarded LaRouche from the beginning as a deadly danger for their system, and launched a decades-long international crusade to suppress his ideas and thereby his influence. A veritable army of agents of influence in the media and all kinds of institutions, including diplomats around the world, was deployed internationally to pressure anyone who showed interest in whatever form in his proposals.

The hundreds, if not thousands, of razor sharp analyses and assessments that LaRouche provided over the years would have absolutely sufficed to prevent the current strategic catastrophe. But at the same time, he also used his warnings to present concepts for a solution. When several heads of state began in the early 1980s to take up his ideas and implement them, the financial oligarchy basically decided that LaRouche had to be eliminated. Mexico’s then- President José López Portillo had asked LaRouche to write for him a program in defense of the peso and the economy, which he began to implement on September 1, 1982. India’s Prime Minister Indira Gandhi began at the same time to implement LaRouche’s proposed 40-year program for the economic development of India. And on March 23, 1983, President Ronald Reagan announced the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) program he proposed, which was the most extensive proposal for a new global security architecture that anyone had designed up to that time, which would have overcome the NATO and Warsaw Pact blocs and initiated a large-scale development perspective for the developing sector. President Reagan was ready to change the strategic constellation at the time, while the Arbatov-Ogarkov-Gorbachev fraction in the Soviet Union rejected this proposal, and thereby chose a path that significantly contributed to the early demise of the Soviet Union.

LaRouche ran for President of the United States eight times, seven of them in Democratic Party primaries. Just reporting on the sabotage operations run against him by the party leadership apparatus associated with Al Gore, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the current leadership, would fill an entire book. When LaRouche candidates began to win elections in 1986—taking the second and third highest positions in primaries in Illinois—the decision was made to attack him for good. On October 6, 1986, the FBI staged a raid on LaRouche’s home and offices, deploying 400 heavily armed law enforcement officials, armored vehicles, and helicopters, an operation that makes the Aug. 8 raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate by 40 FBI agents look like a child’s birthday party. The objective of the raid on LaRouche and myself was nothing less than to eliminate us physically, which was only prevented by an intervention from the White House.

What followed were trumped-up charges, the illegal use of the IRS, rigged trials, and finally the incarceration of LaRouche and a number of his associates.

At an international tribunal initiated by civil rights activists and African-American state legislators after LaRouche was released from prison, the former Attorney General of the Johnson Administration, Ramsey Clark, who took the initiative of intervening on his own, described the actions of the Administration as follows:

“But in what was a complex and pervasive utilization of law enforcement, prosecution, media, and non-governmental organizations focussed on destroying an enemy, this case must be number one. There are some, where the government itself may have done more and more wrongfully over a period of time; but the very networking and combination of federal, state, and local agencies, of Executive and even some Legislative and Judicial branches, of major media and minor local media, and of influential lobbyist types, the ADL preeminently, this case takes the prize. The purpose can only be seen as destroying—more than a political movement, more than a political figure—it is those two; but it’s a fertile engine of ideas, a common purpose of thinking and studying and analyzing to solve problems, regardless of the impact on the status quo, or on vested interests. It was a deliberate purpose to destroy that at any cost….”

I participated in this tribunal. I insisted emphatically that the greatest crime against LaRouche was not to have unjustly condemned such a great and wonderful mind to prison, but rather that the massive slander campaign of his name and his ideas prevented to a large extent the American population, and beyond that, the international public, from grappling with his ideas and above all with the solutions he proposed.

Today, 27 years after this tribunal, on the 100th anniversary of the birth of Lyndon LaRouche, we can study the result of the financial oligarchy’s attempted campaign to destroy him. The trans-Atlantic financial system is about to end in hyperinflation, the “rules-based order of values” and NATO are a colossus with feet of clay, and there is a transparent attempt to control the “narratives” by muzzling the entire population and immediately slandering anyone who voices an opinion of their own on the causes of the war or inflation as an “agent of Putin.” If the West continues like this, we will fail.

On the other hand, LaRouche’s ideas have had enormous success. His proposals on the development of infrastructure in developing countries, which he has presented since the early 1970s, his program for the New Silk Road, which has become the World Land-Bridge, and was his response to the collapse of the Soviet Union, are now being realized by China and its Belt and Road/Silk Road Initiative. The new economic and financial system being realized today by many countries and institutions in the Global South is based on his concept of physical economy, while economists in many countries, especially in Asia, are studying LaRouche’s writings and implementing them for the benefit of their countries.

LaRouche was a patriot of the America that fought the first successful war of independence against the British Empire, but he was also a world citizen, who always put the interest of mankind as a whole first. People could sense that, and when LaRouche traveled in developing countries or Europe, they often expressed their utmost trust in him, in such a way that only true friendship would allow.

In rejecting LaRouche’s ideas, the West did itself no favor. That the United States treated its greatest son so ignobly will remain a stain on its history forever. The countries that apply his ideas are already economically successful, and will be even more so in the future. Although official success was denied to him by Western countries during his long and incomparably productive life, he led a rich, extraordinarily fulfilling and happy life, because he was inwardly the most free and most creative person on Earth. Was Socrates successful, even though he was murdered? He certainly is, while his murders lie forgotten in dust.

Lyndon LaRouche is the Nemesis of his enemies and the joy and pride of a future, better era for mankind. He will live immortal.

En tale af Renée Sigerson ved en videokonference den 12. februar 2022:

<a href="https://schillerinstitut.dk/si/2022/02/videokonference-paa-treaarsdagen-for-lyndon-larouches-doed-hvorfor-verden-har-brug-for-larouches-opdagelsesmetode-loerdag-den-12-februar-kl-20/" title="Videokonference på treårsdagen for Lyndon LaRouches død:
Hvorfor verden har brug for LaRouches opdagelsesmetode, lørdag den 12. februar kl. 20″>Link: Videokonference på treårsdagen for Lyndon LaRouches død: Hvorfor verden har brug for LaRouches opdagelsesmetode.

Renée Sigersons tale begynder 52.33 ind i videoen.

På engelsk:
I’ve been asked to provide a kind of introductory overview of LaRouche’s lifetime work in the science of economic development. Doing this on the calendar day of his passing and of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, cannot help but evoke a very strong physical sensation of what St. Augustine and Lyndon LaRouche identified in the notion of temporal eternity. It’s a sensation that the past, the present, and the future suddenly become a single thought-object. While what we discuss today at this moment, shapes the world even as we speak.

I was somewhat surprised, because as Dennis indicated, this was not my particular field of collaboration with Lyndon LaRouche, although I did help on some of the economics projects back in the 1980s. I was sort of curious, but I decided that rather than bothering him about why he asked me to do this, to simply agree to walk with him on what is really this sacred ground. I think for all of us who knew Lyn throughout these years, what he instilled within us as the knowledge of what real economic policy is, was the most profound transformative experience that a human being can possibly imagine going through. Having done that, it really becomes under these circumstances to speak about this, a sacred subject.

It’s also the case that everything we do on behalf of disseminating LaRouche’s work on economics impacts the battle we are at this moment waging for solutions to the existential world crisis. LaRouche’s work on economic forecasting was not about betting on the outcome of events, as has become epidemic in today’s culture; but rather, towards pointing mankind in the direction of what he named “successful survival” from one generation to the next.

In 2005, LaRouche stated in an EIR feature entitled “From Kant to Riemann: The Shape of Empty Space”:

“The ability to predict, or, better said, forecast the physical outcome of man’s behavior, is a subject of a higher, more rigorous form of psychology, and of the social psychology of the sovereign individual mind. This idea of”predicting,” as is the presently customary intention expressed by the use of the word, implies a profoundly incompetent view of man’s role and capabilities within organization of the universe. At best, we can foresee certain important consequences of our decisions, or lack of decision. At best, we can foresee the nature of our obligation to warn our fellows, and to act ourselves in ways which correspond to the problem which we can foresee as probable, even almost certain….

“All attempted prediction, or forecast, of social phenomena, such as economic developments, is essentially … a subject of what might be termed the science of physical psychology: mankind’s relative power of mind within, and over, what is regarded as the physical universe. Therefore, we must think of physical psychology as the kernel of the social psychology of the truly sane individual mind.”

So here we already have presentation of the idea of the individual mind. That individual’s relationship to all of humanity, and of humanity’s relationship to the totality of the universe. This is the domain of real economics, as underlined by Helga’s organizing of the Thursday debate, which involved high-level Russian and U.S. officials grappling with how to end the genocide in Afghanistan and launch an economic development strategy that can help to turn the world at large away from general war. This is exactly the battleground on which Lyn’s discoveries in economics are breaking new ground. In fighting for his approach to economics, we are addressing the development of humanity by addressing the mindset of the individuals who lead society and who are thereby defending the sacred of every individual to develop their God-given creative potential.

When LaRouche began to found a movement around his ideas, roughly in the period from 1968-71, he rapidly came to identified as the most fierce critic and opponent of the academic schools of economics, all of which—both left-wing and right-wing—were advocates of what they called monetarism. That is, all the university economics in the United States and most of the trans-Atlantic world, typified by names such as Milton Friedman of the University of Chicago, or John Maynard Keynes of the London School of Economics, had become under British imperial influence, a cult which fixated on the circulation of money and the fluctuation of money prices as the source of economic activity and the root of some kind of mysterious growth.

LaRouche was fierce in his denunciation of this ideology, which he rigorously demonstrated was a justification for imperial policies of genocide, both globally and within the United States itself. In countering this British game with his work on scientific physical economy in the 1970s, LaRouche triggered a rediscovery of the American System of economics, a name originally adopted in the 19th Century to contrast the American method of Hamilton, Quincy Adams, Lincoln, etc. to the British imperial system. The American System, having been developed from the threads of progress created by the European Renaissance through Kepler, through Leibniz, to the discoveries in economic policy design led by Alexander Hamilton. After the World Wars I and II, nearly all knowledge of the American System of economics, which combined concepts of physical economy to the idea of sovereign credit—which is not the same thing as money—had been buried in propaganda about the U.S. special relationship to Britain and habits of consumerism that horribly corrupted the U.S. political leadership.

Through the influence of the military-industrial complex, and the effects of Kennedy assassinations of the 1960s, not just the memory, but the impulse to think in terms of the principles of physical economy had virtually disappeared. LaRouche did not simply revive past knowledge; he developed the cutting edge of a new fundamental discovery in economic forecasting, which is the preparation for economic development and design. Which cut at the very core of the imperial design which uses fetishes about money and popular opinion to lower the level of mental functioning of thinking within populations. The power of LaRouche’s criticism of monetarism rose from this groundbreaking work on economic forecasting.

As he often highlighted, Lyn’s fundamental breakthrough in developing a method of economic forecasting occurred in the period of 1948-52. His relentless work to that end included intensive study of areas of knowledge ignored by so-called economists. That is, LaRouche connected his work on physical economy and how it is planned in such a way as to succeed in practice, he connected this work to studies of Classical art—that is, music, poetry, and painting, which all address the functional level of the human mind. And as Helga always emphasizes, of human emotions. As well as investigating a form of mathematics developed by the 19th Century scientist Bernhard Riemann, which had served as a companion to Riemann’s work in physics. If there are two people who Lyndon frequently spoke of as critical to his fundamental discovery in economics, most mentioned were the composer Ludwig von Beethoven, who we will discuss in detail in the future, and the other was the physicist Bernhard Riemann.

Riemann’s breakthroughs in economics had emerged as one of the stunning effects of a rebirth of a cultural renaissance that centered around the German-speaking area of Europe during the same time as the American Revolution. Riemann’s outlook on mathematics as the companion to scientific advances in man’s knowledge of the physical universe, was a break with the imperial outlook of the imperial system’s chief ideologues—characters such as Sir Isaac Newton or John Locke and David Hume. For LaRouche, work on physical economy and the ability of mankind to consciously create expanding economies that can support and improve the living standards of growing populations, Riemann’s approach to complex physical processes was invaluable. In fact, an economy is a complex physical process, bringing together a vast array of different components that if they interact, are also continuously changing. How, in fact, can this process be measured to see if it is going in the right direction? This is an old question in astrophysics and even in engineering, which is a serious question. How do you measure something which is moving and changing as you are working with it?

The financial centers have always insisted that this problem, as it relates to what is called economy, should be left to the magic of the marketplace. The imperial monetarists have always argued that to know through science and technology how to increase the output or the productivity of the economy is merely a question of wishful thinking. And the greatest problem economies face is that there are too many people. This is a very old idea that there are too many people. The root of this very sick idea is also very old. It goes back to ancient times, but still grips the corridors of universities and media with all kinds of exotic and mystical explanations tossed in. Most recently, the carbon hoax in order to sell this cultural insanity.

In forming his political movement, LaRouche countered that it was time to discard this genocidal ideology, and to get serious about mastering the principles of scientific and technological progress which pave the way for physical growth of the economy and increases in prosperity for all. Riemann was an invaluable companion in the fight LaRouche launched, and we will look in a moment to an example of how their work came together.

LaRouche became famous in the period from 1968 to 1971 because he was the only economist in the United States who forecast that real estate speculation, the lack of investment in capital goods, the neglect of so-called Third World economies, and interference from the Bank of England were leading to a collapse of the U.S. dollar. When Nixon devalued the dollar in May of 1971, and then ended the fixed exchange rate system known as Bretton Woods on August 15th of that year, overnight LaRouche became the center of tremendous controversy and our organization exploded in recruitment. An earlier 1956-7 forecast of a serious U.S. recession triggered by the postwar consumer credit bubble, including in automobile purchases, had been proven accurate, had gotten LaRouche into political trouble, but was less well known. The two forecasts—1956 and 1968-71—convinced LaRouche that his method of economic analysis worked, and was a vital approach that had to be disseminated for the survival of mankind.

Around 1975, LaRouche’s work became renowned internationally as he launched an international campaign to replace the monetarist and genocidal policies of the International Monetary Fund with the founding of an International Development Bank. Dozens of underdeveloped nations around the world backed LaRouche in this endeavor.

In the 1980s, while working with the Reagan administration in the development of the Strategic Defense Initiative, a spin-off of his work on physical economy, LaRouche commissioned associates to produce a sequence of reports demonstrating the effectiveness of what he named the LaRouche-Riemann economic forecasting method. LaRouche’s ability to recognize the potential for war avoidance in the development of defensive high-energy laser devices was a spin-off of his recognition of the importance of Riemann’s work. During this time in 1982, LaRouche produced a two-part article entitled, “What Is an Economic Shockwave?” It was published in the Executive Intelligence Review and examined the implications for economic policymaking of Bernhard Riemann’s discoveries relative to what were called “hydro-dynamic shockwaves.” Physical shockwaves are complex processes which can be seen in something as ordinary as a crest at the top of an ocean wave; but which Riemann recognized were relevant to many more physical processes. Riemann hypothesized that such examinations of shockwaves would lead potentially to discoveries in the atomic domain, which was still completely invisible in his lifetime. Riemann’s ideas on this matter arose before the work on the atom by such people as Albert Einstein and Max Planck. And his hypotheses were proven later to be right. For example, in an 1859 paper, Riemann anticipated that mankind would come to recognize the importance of sonic booms as an example of such simple shockwaves, such as that we see in the ocean. He outlined that concept before air flight, before man could fly in airplanes, which much later proved that he had been right when the airplanes were developed. Because the phenomenon he suggested, he had been able to discern and think about because it was already audible in thunder, but had never been explained.

In 1982, LaRouche wrote:

“In explaining sonic booms to children, for example, we point out that as an object moves through the atmosphere near the speed of sound, the air becomes very much like water in one respect; it become a relatively incompressible medium, relative to the movement of the body. We say, that as a result, the air behaves, in some significant respects as a hydrodynamic medium, generating the shock-wave we identify as the sonic boom cause by a supersonic aircraft’s flight or a supersonic bullet’s trajectory.

“So far, the whole matter might seem quite straightforward. Therefore, why should there have been any controversy among physicists concerning the conclusions projected by Riemann’s 1859 paper, in which the generation of such ‘sonic booms’ was first analyzed and predicted?

“During the 1890s, Lord Rayleigh, Bertrand Russell, and others insisted that Riemann’s physics was absurd. Rayleigh, in particular, insisted that ‘sonic booms’ could not exist. The reason for that hullabaloo is, that if Riemann’s physics is correct, if sonic booms are generated in such a fashion, then there exists a fundamental absurdity in the kinds of mathematical physics associated with figures such as Descartes, Newton, etc…. In other words, the kind of physics Riemann brought to bear upon his 1859 ‘shock-wave’ paper implies a different kind of universe than the Newton-Cauchy-Maxwell school insists to exist. The organization of the universe if not Newtonian, but is, rather hydrodynamic.

“It is my own chief contribution to scientific work to have discovered and demonstrated, beginning 1952, that the ordering of economic processes corresponds uniquely to the implications of Riemannian physics.” [https://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1982/eirv09n47-19821207/eirv09n47-19821207_018-what_is_an_economic_shock_wave-lar.pdf]

This is really such a beautiful idea; it’s just really stunning and moving. So, I just want to note a bond so to speak between LaRouche and Riemann was that both were advocates of the early 18th Century scientist Leibniz, who in many respects was the man who triggered the 18th Century German cultural renaissance, but was also a very positive influence over the circles around Benjamin Franklin. LaRouche and Riemann were impassioned defenders of Leibniz’s idea that mankind, through the use of creative discovery, can unlock the necessary and sufficient reason, as Leibniz put it, for all physical effects in the universe. The oligarchical assembly of scientific hatchet men descending from Sir Isaac Newton and others, hated Leibniz, and never stopped denigrating his work to try to prevent mankind from making these discoveries.

During the 1980s, LaRouche’s associates published four economic forecasts, using a preliminary computerized version of the LaRouche-Riemann Method. The reports, accurately forecasted the early 1980s Federal Reserve-induced recession, plus created quite a stir when exposing how the Federal Reserve (surprise, surprise!) had launched a systematic falsification of the industrial output figures on the U.S. economy.

This work with Riemann and the discussion of shock waves was an embedded feature of how Lyndon LaRouche developed his economic development intervention after the Fall of the Berlin Wall. Since at other times, we had discussed in this forum LaRouche’s role in designing what Ronald Reagan named the Strategic Defense Initiative, we will simply reference that aspect. That work on the SDI was critical in the tectonic, shock-wave-like political shift in the global strategic situation, when the Berlin Wall came down in 1989.

As many of our listeners know, when that happened, LaRouche who had called for the Fall of the Wall a year earlier on U.S. television, was ready to seize the opportunity to the benefit of mankind, but was forced to do so while unjustly imprisoned through the machinations of the very corrupt permanent bureaucracy of the Department of Justice. Please keep in mind the initiative I am describing was designed by him while he was being held in prison as a result of a judicial frameup which it took us five years to physically liberate him from. We still need to win the battle for his exoneration, which the winning of that battle will serve, itself, as a tectonic political shock for the good, when that occurs. It will draw tremendous interest into LaRouche’s ideas.

Despite this intolerable situation, LaRouche communicated to Helga and others, his view of the economic policy approach required to ensure that the reunification of Germany would be beneficial to all of Europe, and mankind, and serve to usher in a new era of economic development.

The very first intervention LaRouche made into the economic development of Europe after the Fall of the Wall, was called “The Productive Triangle.” Here is a picture of a map run in 1992, while LaRouche was still in jail, illustrating the area of the Productive Triangle at that time, the most concentrated area in Europe, in industrial production, wedged between the capital cities of Berlin, Paris and Vienna. And you can see that darkened area is a kind of triangular shape that connects Berlin, Vienna and Paris, and it was an area about the concentration in productive potential and population, let’s say, the nation of Japan, and what’s the highest concentration of industrial capacity. And LaRouche’s idea was, this had to be expanded eastward, into Poland, to show that Germany had the best of intentions toward Poland—maybe a little bit difficult for Americans to fully understand how important that was at the time, as a concept. But then to show to the Soviet Union, which still existed when this was first introduced, that such good intention would also be extended to Moscow. And that this would be generated by building very modern, high-speed rail systems in that entire area, including the Productive Triangle itself, which needed a remake in its transportation systems; but into Eastern Europe as a conveyor belt for bringing much more advanced technologies into Eastern Europe, where the population was generally highly skilled and literate, but extremely poor.

While Lyn was incarcerated, our friends in Europe distributed millions of piece of literature, beginning in eastern Germany, but then in many languages extending into neighboring countries, as the Soviet system was unravelling. As Helga has often noted, the Schiller Institute organized hundreds of events to build a human thread of dialogue and collaboration between the united Germany, the best circles in Western Europe, and those in the East who had been cut off from contact for over two generations. There was a tremendously positive response in Eastern Europe to the idea of importing modern rail transport and higher-grade machine tools, to turn Eastern Europe into a workshop, for example, for industrialization of the third world.

Unfortunately, the bankers had a very different agenda for Eastern Europe, so the progress was slow, but the idea was out.

Please put up the second chart: LaRouche indicated that these areas of modern rail transport would become “development corridors”: That wherever modern rail would be constructed, it would serve as the precursor and the foundation for a full-scale improvement in fuel distribution, electrification, construction of modern cities, educational-cultural center, etc. Here we see an early representation of the idea, confined to Western and Eastern Europe, where canal systems are being built in the same area that the rail systems are being modernized. The view of development corridor was a 20th-21st century realization of how the Lincoln Administration used the Transcontinental Railroad project, during the Civil War, not merely to win the Civil War, but to launch the United States as the largest industrial economy the world had ever seen, viewing the rail system as a corridor for upgrading the interior land surface of the United States. It was a huge blow against the imperial obsession that only coastal regions of nations should be developed, an insane concept which derives from very ancient, pagan-like obsessions within the circles of the financial so-called “elites.”

While the idea for the development corridors, beginning in Eastern Europe, with the intention of spreading the concept of a rail grid to Moscow and into Siberia, by perhaps around 1994, it became clear that leading political circles in China were also thoroughly intrigued by LaRouche’s approach and wanted to discuss it. This became the seed crystal for the policy eventually adopted by China as well, which has become the number-one thorn in the side of the financial oligarchy’s existence: Namely, China has assumed a leadership role in connecting by rail the Eurasian Land-Bridge to Asia’s old Silk Road, or newly modernized Silk Road. It is the idea of the development corridor, not just building rail for trade between partners that are far away from each other, but everywhere along the route, to use the rail system as the foundation for a positive, shock-wave development in power production, agriculture, water management, irrigation, modern city building and so forth; and of course, anybody who doesn’t have a copy of our magnificent 2014 report on this, “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge.” You can find it on the Executive Intelligence Review website: https://store.larouchepub.com/New-Silk-Road-p/eipsp-2014-1.htm

We are applying the lessons of such economic development to the crisis in Afghanistan; also to outflank the games the British have been playing endlessly, really since the 1763 Treaty of Paris, which allowed the British East India Company, the predecessors of the Michael Bloombergs and Mark Carneys of today, when they moved at that time to take top-down control of the British government. This is what we have to stop bowing to.

The mobilization we are spearheading to prevent war through economic cooperation requires tough determination, because the pathology we are determined to cure has existed for a long time. LaRouche has addressed this in a number of articles I will not name, but encourage people to find out about, without blunting the force of hearing him speak on the subject, which he thought about for many decades. I will just make reference here to LaRouche’s insight that mankind has always operated under the influence of various cultural economic platforms. The paradox inherent in this situation, is that in order to survive such as the moment when the ice caps melted and very suddenly scattered civilizations which had largely lived by travelling long distances along low-level ocean beds—we’re talking 20,000 years ago—such civilizations were suddenly forced to inhabit permanent settlements on land. These maritime cultures, LaRouche stated, exhibited a “pattern of social caste division between a maritime population which has the characteristics of those often termed the relatively ancient ‘gods,’ as distinct from the mere mortals.” This division in society were a small, powerful elite that has greater control over some resources and technologies, convinces the mere mortals, that they, the guys with the access to the technology, are the gods who control your life. This is an ancient characteristic, sometimes called by Helga LaRouche a “childhood disease of civilization.”

The reality is that every human being that is born, is a potential genius, and capable of adding to the wealth of knowledge and practical benefit of the totality of humanity. Moreover, as the technologies we require increasingly become related to exploration and habitation of space, and the universe at large, it will become impossible for the bores and pleasure-seeking degenerates from the oligarchic grooms who are leading controlled popular opinion in order to keep their power. The type of knowledge the average person can, and will gain to live in such a civilization which is involved in massive exploration and study of the universe, will crush the authorities of those who say, “mankind is an animal incapable of mastering the principles of the physical universe.”

The current fight to develop Afghanistan to end the campaigns of genocide that have followed in the wake of all of these so-called “endless wars,” provides the needed opportunity to spread LaRouche’s economic method worldwide, thereby, we create the political and moral shock wave, that can restore morality based on love of our fellow man, and respect for the immortal rights of every mortal beings.

I anledning af Lyndon LaRouches død den 12. februar 2019 inviterer vi dig til at møde eller opfriske dit kendskab til en af de sidste 100 års største geniers sind og personlighed. Geni uden skønhed er ikke geni overhovedet. Deltag i vores LaRouche-maraton, og tag dine venner med, både unge og gamle.

24. august (EIRNS) – Da præsident Joe Biden under sine eftermiddagsudtalelser til pressen, efter sit virtuelle møde med G7-nationerne, gjorde det klart, at han holder sig til tidsfristen for tilbagetrækning i Afghanistan den 31. august, sænkede der sig en mørk sky over Downing Street 10, Porton Down og Gee Street i Clerkenwell, hjemsted for Tavistock Instituttet. Den misfornøjede Nigel Kim Darroch, Baron Darroch fra Kew, sagde: "Det kommer til at tage ret lang tid for Vesten som helhed – fordi dette er en vestlig fiasko, en vestlig katastrofe, ikke kun for Storbritannien og USA – at komme sig efter alt dette, at genoprette vores ry". Han, som blev berygtet for sin "oversvømmelse af Trump-zonen" må se den hårde sandhed i øjnene, at de mange forsøg på at stoppe Biden fra at gennemføre den lovede tilbagetrækning fra Afghanistan ikke har virket, og at PR-tricket, kendt som "Global Britain", netop er blevet afsløret i at være et "Windsor-sandslot".
 
Pensioneret admiral Mike Mullen, tidligere chef for forsvarskommandoen fra oktober 2007 til september 2011 – det vil sige under både Bush 43 og "Bush 44" (Barack Obama) – tilstod, at han, Obama, og hele hans administrationen havde taget fejl, og at Joe Biden havde ret i, hvorvidt indsatsen i Afghanistan skulle forøges med 40.000 tropper i 2009. Biden havde modsat sig forøgelsen, og foreslået 10.000 tropper, der ville bekæmpe terrorisme ved grænsen mellem Pakistan og Afghanistan og ellers træne det afghanske militær. Biden "fik det tilbage på sporet dengang… jeg giver ham æren for det", sagde Mullen. Han er den første til at udføre muligheden for, hvad Ray McGovern har kaldt "metanoia." Når Metanoia ("omvendelse") blev personificeret, var det ofte som en gudinde, tildækket og sorgfuld, der inspirerede til både beklagelse og refleksion, hvilket førte til afvisning af usund dømmekraft.
 
Dem der har været ramt af kronisk fejlvurdering af den aktuelle historie i de sidste mange år på grund af den utålelige partipolitik, især efter Lyndon LaRouches konstateringer i september 2012 af det politiske partisystems død i Amerika efter Cheney/Obama-"Bush 43/44", er forvirrede over den nuværende tid. Caitlin Johnstone bemærkede i en artikel den 22. august med titlen "Bush-Era War Criminals Louder Than Ever because They've Lost the Argument", at: "Efter at de amerikanske troppers tilbagetrækning endegyldigt fastslog, at den afghanske 'regering', som de har brugt tyve år på at foregive at opbygge nationen sammen med, i det væsentlige var en skrøne, hvilket beviste for verden, at de hele tiden har løjet for os om fakta i Afghanistan, skulle man forvente, at de, der hjalp med at bane vejen for denne katastrofale besættelse, ville være meget tavse på dette tidspunkt i historien. Men langt fra at være tavse og krybe ind under en sten for at vente på dødens søde omfavnelse, har disse skabninger i stedet været højrøstede og skamløst artikulerede.
 
“Tony Blair Institute for Global Change har udsendt et langt essay af den tidligere premierminister, der førte Storbritannien ind i to af de mest uoverskuelige militære indgreb som kan ihukommes. Blair kritiserer tilbagetrækningen som værende sket ud fra ”troskab mod et tåbeligt politisk slogan om at afslutte ’de evige krige’”. Blair har længe, gennem 'Responsibility to Protect' troet og praktiseret ideen om, at Det globale Storbritannien skal forsvares ihærdigt ned til den sidste amerikaner. Men de, der afviser at forstå det britiske "babylonske præstedømmes særlige forhold" til USA, "kan ikke begribe dette" og er forblevet bevidst uoplyste.
 
En erklæring skrevet af Shanghai Cooperation Organization om situationen udtalte: ”SCO -medlemslandene bekræfter deres intention om at hjælpe Afghanistan med at blive et fredeligt, stabilt og velstående land, fri for terrorisme, krig eller narkotika, og er parate til at deltage i internationale bestræbelser på at stabilisere og udvikle Afghanistan med FN i en central og koordinerende rolle”. Afghanistan, der tilslutter sig Bælte og Vejinitiativet, er vejen frem, og USA, der med udgangspunkt i det helt reelle behov for en verdenssundheds-platform, kan rette opmærksomheden mod at slutte sig til disse nationer, samtidig med at de genopbygger og ruster sin egen nation til denne kamp.
 
Over to tredjedele af det amerikanske folk ønsker, at krigen skal slutte. Præsidentskabet har taget skridt til at honorere dette ønske og for at fuldføre denne politik i Afghanistan. Hvad angår kaosset i forbindelse med evakueringen: har nogen overvejet, at det faktum at fraktioner i USA afslog tilbuddet om at koordinere indsatsen i Afghanistan, herunder evakueringsindsatsen, med russerne og muligvis andre, har bidraget til ustabiliteten? Eller at bekendtgørelse og gennemførelse af et verdenssundhedsmæssigt anti-Covid-19-initiativ, for måneder siden, i retning af hvad Helga Zepp-LaRouche har foreslået på den ene konference efter den anden siden juni 2020, også ville have været med til at forhåndsstabilisere forholdene for tilbagetrækning i Afghanistan før evakuering? Selv nu, og for en lille procentdel af de 2 billioner $, der vides at være brugt i krigen igennem de sidste 20 år, kunne USA hjælpe med at vinde freden i Afghanistan gennem et udviklingsprogram for en verdenssundheds-platform, der involverer alle nationerne i området.
 
Lyndon LaRouche sagde fra fængslet i et interview fra 1991: ”Om jeg forbliver i fængsel eller ej, er i det væsentlige op til præsidenten eller præsidentembedet. De juridiske grunde til at fjerne mig fra fængslet – ved at ophæve dommen, eksisterer… beviserne findes. Om dette bevis og denne procedure vil blive efterlevet, vil være op til det politiske pres, der påvirker præsidentskabet. Jeg er her, fordi præsidenten ønsker mig her, og ikke nogen anden grund. Hvis præsidenten skulle ændre opfattelse, så ville jeg sikkert… lovgivningen ville tillade at løslade mig fra fængslet”. [Dette skete – LaRouche blev fængslet under den ældre George Bush, og løsladt da Clinton blev præsident.] LaRouche, der førte valgkampagne som præsidentkandidat mere end nogen anden person, indså, at det amerikanske præsidentskabs institutionelle beføjelser var af en anden karakter end de kompromitterede kapaciteter af en statsminister. Når USA's præsidentskabs magt indsættes for det gode, er det enormt, det største i verden. Bidens fuldførelse af tilbagetrækningen, som Trump startede, på trods af pres fra det britisk inspirerede Pentagon og udenrigsministeriets til at gøre det modsatte, er, såfremt den fuldføres, et eksempel på dette.
 

Se også panel 2 her:

Resumé:

14. august (EIRNS) – Kan den menneskelige race overleve den krise, der nu truer selve menneskeheden? Vil vi som en race betragtet fortsætte nedgangen til global atomkrig, en pandemi uden for kontrol, en hyperinflationær ødelæggelse af midlerne til livets opretholdelse, et kulturelt sammenbrud i en ny mørk tidsalder? Eller kan denne eksistentielle krise tjene til en genopblussen af menneskelig kreativitet hos tilstrækkeligt mange borgere i verden til både at afslutte det vanvid, der bragte os til dette punkt, og iværksætte et nyt paradigme, der forener verdens nationer i at stræbe efter menneskehedens fælles mål – fred gennem udvikling? Svaret ligger ikke blot i hvad folk tænker, men hvordan de tænker. Kan vi inspirere til kreativitet i en befolkning, der er blevet degraderet gennem videnskabeligt bedrageri, narkotika, pornografi, evindelig krigsførelse og økonomisk forfald?

Dette var temaet for konferencen i dag, den første der er sponsoreret af 'LaRouche Legacy Foundation'. Helga Zepp-LaRouche fik selskab af ledere fra hele verden – politiske ledere, økonomer, musikere, forskere og unge – fra Rusland, Kina, Slovakiet, Tyskland, Frankrig, Østrig, Argentina, Filippinerne, Mexico, Trinidad & Tobago, Peru, Colombia og Ukraine, i en dialog om "LaRouches opdagelser" og om "Jordens næste halvtreds år" under temaet: "Nå, er du så endelig villig til at lære om økonomi?" LaRouche Legacy Foundation er i gang med at udgive 'LaRouches Complete Works', hvoraf del 1 nu er tilgængeligt (se https://www.larouchelegacyfoundation.org/collected-works)

Det var for halvtreds år siden, den 15. august 1971, at Lyndon LaRouche blev ganske berømt, men også blev mål for det, som tidligere statsadvokat Ramsey Clark beskrev som "en kompleks og gennemgribende udnyttelse af retshåndhævelse, retsforfølgning, medier og ikke-statslige organisationer, fokuseret på at ødelægge en fjende… Formålet kan kun ses som ødelæggelsen – af mere end en politisk bevægelse, mere end en politisk skikkelse – det er begge dele; men det er en frugtbar idérig maskine, et fælles formål med at tænke og studere og analysere for at løse problemer, uanset indvirkningen på status quo eller på egeninteresser. Det var et overlagt formål at ødelægge dette for enhver pris”.

På denne dag i 1971 ophævede præsident Richard Nixon Bretton Woods-systemet, som havde opretholdt udviklingen af verden i tiden efter Anden Verdenskrig, ved at afkoble den amerikanske dollar fra dens forankring til guld, hvilket gjorde den til genstand for spekulation og tillod alle verdens valutaer at flyde, så det britiske system for "frie markeder" og deregulering kunne erstatte det hamiltoniske 'Amerikanske System', der er baseret på ideen om målrettet kredit til at forbedre den generelle velfærd og forøge den produktive arbejdskraft.

EIR's økonomiredaktør, Paul Gallagher, forklarede tusindvis af deltagere i konferencen over hele verden (med samtidig oversættelse til spansk, fransk, tysk og russisk), at Bretton Woods, der blev vedtaget efter Franklin Roosevelts død, ikke var det system, der var tiltænkt af FDR. Roosevelt havde snarere insisteret på, at de tidligere europæiske kolonier efter krigen skulle tildeles fuld uafhængighed, og at det amerikanske systems produktion af de kapitalgoder, der var nødvendige for at industrialisere hele verden, ville drive amerikansk produktion og samtidig endegyldigt afslutte kolonitiden. Men Harry Truman, som LaRouche karakteriserede som en 'lille mand, der tjente Wall Street', hjalp europæerne med at genoprette deres kolonier, mens USA blev indadvendt. Det efterfølgende fokus på intern forbrugerkultur gennem gæld, frem for eksport af kapitalgoder, ville – som forudsagt af LaRouche, på enestående vis blandt økonomer – forårsage tilbagegang og sammenbruddet af Bretton Woods. Dette var kun den første af LaRouches prognoser, som alle viste sig at blive fuldstændigt forudseende. En video af en tale af LaRouche i 2001, beskrev hans mange prognoser og understregede, at han "stod alene" blandt økonomer, der var indfanget i britisk monetaristisk ideologi, tænkte på penge, ikke den fysiske transformation af naturen eller livsbetingelserne for den menneskelige race.

Helga Zepp-LaRouches hovedtale gav et stærkt indblik i hendes mand Lyndon LaRouches evne til at inspirere mennesker fra alle forskellige samfundslag, fra statsoverhoveder til peruanske fiskere og italienske skomagere, til at forstå en anden måde at tænke på – at man ikke kan adskille politik, videnskab og kultur, og at alle aspekter af livet falder ind under den centrale rolle af kreativitet, som kendetegnende for forskellen mellem menneske og dyr, og som driver videnskaben om fysisk økonomi som den sande videnskab om menneskelig fremgang. Hun bemærkede senere, at alle, der mødte LaRouche, oplevede en opvågnen af deres egne fornuftsmæssige åndsevner, gennem kreativiteten i LaRouches sind, der ansporede dem.

Zepp-LaRouche afdækkede sin mands gæld til Platon, Leibniz, Kepler og andre af historiens giganter i forbindelse med hans egne opdagelser. Hun gennemgik de nye metrikker til måling af fremskridt, som han skabte – "relativ potentiel befolkningstæthed" og "energi-gennemstrømningstæthed" – og sammenhængen mellem disse afgørende begreber. Hun behandlede Lyns første beslutning om at bekæmpe Norbert Wiener og John von Neumann statistiske metode til systemanalyse, der opfatter sindet som en computer og fremmer kunstig intelligens som en erstatning for sindet. Dette falske begreb om menneskets natur er i dag vokset til vanvid i "modellerne", der driver klimasvindlen, finansielle spekulationer og det oligarkiske samfund. Hun sluttede med at opfordre til "at udskifte idéerne om informationsteoriens kvaksalveri med LaRouches idéer på alle universiteter".

Den førende kinesiske økonom, Ding Yifan, der har skrevet om LaRouches ideer i flere bøger, bemærkede, at LaRouche havde fokus på to forbrydelser fra slutningen af Bretton Woods: Misbruget af valutaer gennem flydende valutakurser, hvilket tillod spekulanter at angribe nationale valutaer; og deregulering af det finansielle system, som gjorde det muligt for spekulanterne at tage over. Han noterede sig to begivenheder i kinesisk historie, første gang under Han-dynastiet for 2000 år siden, og sidenhen i den mongolske æra i 1300-tallet, hvor lignende ignoreren af forskellen mellem penge og realøkonomien førte til dynastiernes sammenbrud. Nutidens QE og anden hyperinflationær pengeudstedelse, sagde han, skaber en kræft i økonomien – en demonstration af LaRouches advarsel om entropi som følge af den manglende udvikling af realøkonomien.

Jozef Miklosko, den tidligere vicepremierminister i Tjekkoslovakiet og tidligere slovakisk ambassadør i Italien, beskrev sin ven LaRouche som den mest veluddannede mand, han nogensinde har kendt, og bemærkede at 80 sider af sin bog handlede om LaRouche og hans organisation. Han beskrev sin rejse for at besøge LaRouche i fængslet, hvor dennes optimisme og agapē (menneskekærlighed, red.) var uforstyrret. Han gennemgik også uretfærdigheden ved LaRouches fængsling, og den verdensomspændende mobilisering af verdensborgere, der forenede sig for at protestere mod denne uretfærdighed. Han beskrev LaRouche som "Amerikas Sakharov" og opfordrede til en ny revolution af kristen agapē. Han anbefalede, at der blev produceret en "kort bog" på alle sprog om LaRouches ideer, hvilket blev hilst velkommen af Helga Zepp-LaRouche og ordstyrer Dennis Small fra LaRouche Legacy Foundation, alt imens han iagttog, at det virkeligt ville være ganske svært at indfange LaRouches ideer i en "kort" bog.

Dr. Natalia Vitrenko, formand for det Progressive socialistiske Parti i Ukraine og tidligere parlamentariker og præsidentkandidat, holdt et lidenskabeligt oplæg med titlen, "Saving Mankind: Is It a Mission-Possible?," om hendes samarbejde med Lyndon og Helga LaRouche. Hun påpegede, at topmødet mellem Biden og Putin korrekt indikerede den farlige strategiske krise, men advarede om at dette møde ikke tog fat på de grundlæggende årsager til krisens systemiske ødelæggelse af verdens økonomiske og finansielle system. Hun gennemgik verdensøkonomiens frygtelige tilstand og de nødvendige løsninger formuleret af LaRouche. Hun kaldte det vestlige banksystems tilstand en "spekulativ kæmpeblæksprutte" der suger rigdommen ud af verden. Hun gennemgik også ødelæggelsen af ​​Ukraine efter kuppet i 2014, som drev landet fra at være en af ​​de ti bedste økonomier i verden til den nu fattigste i Europa med 10 millioner sultne og et befolkningsfald på over 20% siden 1990. Hun afsluttede: "Bliver vi til en kirkegård med vindmøller i stedet for kors?"

Dr. Kirk Meighoo, tidligere senator i Trinidad & Tobago samt forfatter og en politisk aktivist, beskrev hvordan han blev udviklingsøkonom gennem sin uddannelse (i Toronto, Jamaica og Storbritannien), men først efter at have opdaget LaRouche via internettet indså, at hans dybtgående ideer var blevet censureret på alle universiteterne. Han beskrev, hvordan fremkomsten af Kina, Indien og Rusland som store økonomier burde have ført til en ny verdensorden, og at G20 havde gjort en indsats i den retning, men mislykkedes, alt imens BRICS nu er blevet revet fra hinanden. Pandemien ødelagde økonomier rundt om i verden, sagde han, mens penge bliver trykt i uhyrlige mængder for at redde bankerne og "overføre rigdom fra de fattige til de rige". Løsning af denne krise kan kun opnås ved helt at afslutte det neoliberale system, bemærkede han, og roste LaRouche-organisationen for at lede denne indsats.

Universitetslektor Yekaterina Fyodorovna Shamayeva fra Rusland, talte om "Design og ledelse af bæredygtig udvikling samt tværfaglig syntese af de grundlæggende ideer indenfor Lyndon LaRouches og Pobisk Kuznetsovs metodelære." Afdøde Pobisk Kuznetsov var en af ​​Ruslands førende forskere og filosofiske tænkere, der blev en nær ven og samarbejdspartner med Lyndon LaRouche efter Sovjetunionens fald. Han foreslog, at en ny måleenhed for fysiske økonomiers fremgang skulle baseres på LaRouches dobbeltbegreb for relativ potentiel befolkningstæthed og energi-gennemstrømningstæthed, og at enheden skulle kaldes "La" efter LaRouche. Shamayeva beskrev den fortsatte indsats i Rusland for at skabe en syntese af ideerne fra Kuznetsov og LaRouche, og understregede at økonomi ikke kan adskilles fra naturlovene. Hun opfordrede til, at flere af LaRouches værker blev oversat til russisk (et stort antal af LaRouches større skrifter er allerede tilgængelige på russisk).

Det første panel sluttede med videopræsentationer og oplæsninger om LaRouche fra flere mennesker, der er døde siden hen, blandt dem: tidligere statsadvokat Ramsey Clark om justitsmordet i forfølgelsen af LaRouche; Dr. Enéas Carneiro, et tidligere medlem af det brasilianske parlament og præsidentkandidat, om hvorfor LaRouche fik æresborgerskab i byen São Paulo; Mexicos tidligere præsident José López Portillo, der i 1998 opfordrede verden til at "lytte til de kloge ord fra Lyndon LaRouche"; og tidligere udenrigsminister i Guyana, Fred Wills, der i 1976 opfordrede FN's generalforsamling til at vedtage LaRouches idé om en ny international økonomisk orden

Fascinerende dialog under spørgerunden drejede sig om tre spørgsmål fra publikum: 1) Hvad er forskellen mellem "prognoser" og "forudsigelser?" 2) Truer nye teknologier og robotter med at forårsage arbejdsløshed? 3) Hvad er forskellen mellem marxisme, neoliberalisme og kristen socialisme?

Hele konferencen kan ses på https://www.larouchelegacyfoundation.org/news/august-15

HARLEY SCHLANGER: Goddag, jeg er Harley Schlanger. Velkommen til vores ugentlige dialog med Helga Zepp-LaRouche, grundlæggeren og formanden for Schiller Instituttet. 

Vi befinder os blot nogle få dage fra en stor konference, arrangeret af LaRouche Legacy Foundation, der, på 50-årsdagen, vil se på konsekvenserne af begivenhederne omkring den 15. august, 1971, der etablerede Lyndon LaRouche som førende økonom – både hvad angår hans forudsigelse af disse, såvel som hans advarsler bagefter. Helga, dette burde blive en særdeles vigtig begivenhed, og jeg håber, at mange af vores seere ikke blot vil se det, men opmuntre andre til at deltage.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Ja. Jeg tror at denne begivenhed vil understrege det faktum, at Lyndon LaRouche, i det mindste i den transatlantiske sektor, uden tvivl er den førende økonom, som forudså følgevirkningerne af Nixons afskaffelse af Bretton Woods-systemet, ved at erstatte faste valutakurser med flydende valutakurser. Dette påbegyndte retningen mod alle de onder, som vi ser i dag – en pandemi, en disintegration af finanssystemet, et alment kollaps af den kulturelle side af samfundet. Det er muligvis en overraskelse for mange mennesker at se disse situationer som ét komplekst domæne, der hænger sammen, men Lyndon LaRouche forudså hvad dette dramatiske brud betød, som opgav at fokusere på den virkelige økonomi, på fysiske økonomier underlagt de egentlige universelle principper i universet, og erstattede det med systemanalyse, kybernetik, hele informationsteorien, fordi han indså, hvad den grundlæggende fejl i Norbert Wieners og John von Neumanns teorier var. Og der vil være mange eksperter, som vil tale om dette på lørdag.

Så jeg synes at I, vores seere, virkelig burde se det. For hvis I ønsker at forstå, hvorfor verdens økonomer har været ude af stand til at forudse krisen i 2008, hvorfor de er fuldstændig hjælpeløse, når det kommer til at finde blot en analyse, for ikke at snakke om en løsning, til den nuværende krise, så er denne begivenhed på lørdag et absolut ”must see” for jer.

Dette vil være et jordskælv af en begivenhed, og det er ikke at love for meget.

SCHLANGER: (griner) Jo, altså titlen er: ”Nå, så er I endelig villige til at lære økonomi?” Og jeg tror, at det er vigtigt at nævne, at det er sponsoreret af LaRouche Legacy Foundation, som er i gang med at samle Lyndon LaRouches værker. Og når man begynder at kigge igennem disse titler, ser man hvor forbløffende hans livsværk virkelig var.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Ja, vi udgiver min afdøde mands samlede værker. Vi har allerede udgivet én enorm smuk udgave, det første bind. Det andet er på vej. Vi vil digitalisere hele værket, således at det vil være tilgængeligt for alle dem, som ønsker at studere fysisk økonomi seriøst, men også de andre områder af min mands ufatteligt rige livsværk.

Så dette er en meget vigtig begivenhed af mange, mange grunde…

SCHLANGER: Det bringer os tilbage til vigtigheden af lørdagens konference – denne kommende lørdag, den 14. august, klokken 15-20 [kan også ses senere].

Vi oplever i øjeblikket slutfasen af finanssystemet efter 1971, og dette er noget, som Lyn havde advaret om, og endvidere, ikke blot advaret om, men præsenteret alternativer til. Hvordan ville du organisere folk til at se dette og deltage, og bruge det som et springbræt, ikke blot til at forstå økonomi, men til at skabe en genoplivelse af den fysiske økonomis bedste tradition?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Spørgsmålet, som folk burde stille sig selv, er, hvorfor er verden i en så skrækkelig tilstand? Og jeg tror, at Lyndon LaRouches arbejde er den uundværlige nøgle, ikke blot for at forstå dette, men også for at overvinde det. Fordi, hvorfor var Lyndon LaRouche, som praktisk talt den eneste økonom på det tidspunkt, i stand til at identificere, hvad dette brud var, hvad betydningen var af hvad Nixon gjorde? Det var ikke blot en lille økonomisk forandring. Det var et skelsættende brud mellem noget, som var et ufuldkomment system – Bretton Woods-systemet – som aldrig var det som Franklin D. Roosevelt havde til hensigt, fordi Truman og Churchill udvandede det fuldstændigt, og betonede aldrig nøglekomponenten, som var at overvinde underudvikling i udviklingslandene; det var aldrig en del af det egentlige Bretton Woods-system. Men det stabiliserede dog, i omkring to årtier, økonomierne i USA og Europa, fordi det var opmærksomt på nogle grundlæggende fysisk-økonomiske realiteter.

Og Nixon smed dette ud af vinduet ved at introducere en ny form for monetarisme, hvilket var idéen om, at fra nu af ville man blot bruge algoritmer til at beskrive markederne. Hvilket Lyn havde påpeget, var fejlen ved Norbert Wiener og John von Neumann, nemlig den, at de havde anvendt et system, som intet havde med virkeligheden at gøre. Det er en model, og denne model bliver brugt i dag til omtrent alting: Det bruges til — hvis man betragter spekulation, i en tidsskala på nanosekunder, i tempoer af nanosekunder, billioner rejser rundt om planeten i form af spekulation. Disse er baseret på den samme algoritmiske metode i meget hurtige computere, som styrer denne form for spekulation, fuldstændig uafhængigt af fornuft, eller realøkonomiske kriterier.

Det samme er tilfældet for vejret: Det viser sig, at den første person, som udviklede en sådan idé om vejrmodeller, som kunne forudse, eller prognosticere, var Norbert Wiener, og også John von Neumann tror jeg. Så det er grunden til, at IPCC's model er værdiløs. Den har intet med de komplekse årsager for klimaet at gøre, og det er kun en model. Det var det samme møg som Romklubben i 1972! Da de udgav programmet Grænser for Vækst, var det den samme falske model, hvor de udelod det teknologiske fremskridts indflydelse på økonomiens produktivitet. Det var det, som LaRouche havde fastslået som værende nøglen: Menneskelig kreativitet, opfindelser, opdagelser af grundlæggende principper, og måden hvorpå disse opdagelser, når de anvendes via teknologi i produktionsprocessen, hvordan de påvirker produktiviteten. Det er noget, som man ikke kan måle med disse modeller, og det er grunden til at alt dette ikke fungerer.

Men man kan kigge på mange andre områder, og man vil se at den samme idiotiske metode anvendes. For eksempel, i forudsigelsen af forbrydelser har de nu modeller, som forudser på hvilket gadehjørne, hvilken person vil begå et mord fem år ud i fremtiden, og derfor bliver man nødt til at bygge fængsler til at kunne rumme dette – jeg overdriver en lille smule, men ikke særlig meget.

Jeg mener, det her er vanvittigt: Det har intet med virkeligheden at gøre, og jeg mener, at det er en grundlæggende diskussion. Hvis ikke dette genovervejes, og rettes op på gennem videnskab, gennem opdagelser, gennem universelle fysiske principper, er der ingen løsning, fordi der er et helt etablissement, som følger dette, ligesom rotterne følger Rottefængeren fra Hameln, og det vil føre til en afgrund, og folk vil styrte ned i afgrunden i forfølgelsen efter en forkert idé.

Heldigvis er det ikke alle som gør dette: Rusland, for eksempel, gør ikke dette; Kina har ikke den samme vanvittige tilgang. Så, når folk taler om en konkurrence blandt systemer, er man nød til at betragte årsagen til at Vesten slår fejl indenfor så mange områder. Og det er det, som lørdagens diskussion handler om, men også en forhåbningsfuld idé, fordi Lyndon LaRouche har leveret løsninger, som verden har brug for i dag, mere end nogensinde før.

SCHLANGER: Jeg tror, at det er en perfekt måde at afslutte på, for at sørge for at folk stiller ind på lørdag, den 14. august, klokken 15. Som du siger, der er ingen tvivl om, at vi befinder os i et systemisk sammenbrud. Spørgsmålet er, om vi har modet til rent faktisk at lære økonomi og lære fra den største økonom i det sidste århundrede, Lyndon LaRouche.

Se webcastet her

8. august (EIRNS) – I 1993, da der gennem modig ageren fra den israelske premierminister Yitzhak Rabin og PLO-formand Yasser Arafat, blev indgået en aftale om fred mellem Israel og palæstinenserne i Oslo (hvor det omhyggeligt blev undgået, at briterne fik nogen rolle at spille), og underskrevet i Washington af de to ledere, sagde Lyndon LaRouche følgende: ”Det presserende er her, at vi bevæger os hastigt for straks med det samme at få gang i økonomiske udviklingsprojekter, såsom kanalen fra Gaza til Det døde Hav, for hvis vi venter til dette er uddebatteret, vil fremskridtets fjender og fjender af den menneskelige race, igennem mennesker som Ariel Sharons venner, have succes med at gribe ind for at drukne denne aftale i blod og kaos”.

Som i så mange andre potentielle vendepunkter i historien, blev Lyndon LaRouches kloge ord ikke taget til efterretning: Udviklingsprogrammerne blev udskudt, mens finans- og stabilitetsspørgsmål blev debatteret; Oslo-aftalerne blev saboteret; Rabin blev myrdet "af Ariel Sharons venner"; og "blod og kaos" har fulgt efter igennem de forløbne 28 år.

LaRouches ord har givet genlyd gennem årtierne, og er lige så relevante for krisen i Afghanistan i dag, som de var i Palæstina dengang – faktisk er en vellykket løsning i Afghanistan gennem LaRouches tilgang med ”fred gennem udvikling” måske den sidste chance for at opnå en lignende fred i Sydvestasien i den nærmeste fremtid. Konsekvenserne af ikke at følge denne tilgang er mere alvorlige i dag, da verden bliver presset stadig tættere på termonuklear krig..

Men vi kan være optimistiske over, at potentialet for fred gennem udvikling er større i dag end nogen sinde siden 1990'erne, hvor muligheden for global fred efter Sovjetunionens sammenbrud blev spildt. På det tidspunkt foreslog Lyndon og Helga LaRouche 'Den nye Silkevej' for at forene verden i en ny æra af udvikling, fri for den britiske imperialistiske opdeling af verden i blokke. Briterne saboterede denne indsats ved at opretholde og udvide NATO og opretholde "fjendebilledet" af Rusland og Kina. Men Kina omfavnede ideen, og 20 år senere søsatte præsident Xi Jinping Bælte- og Vejinitiativet, og bragte den mirakuløse kinesiske udviklingsproces til resten af verden. Nu har langt størstedelen af verdens nationer deltaget i denne proces som medlemmer af Bæltet og Vejen.

Og det er LaRouche-Organisationen og LaRouches Schiller Institut der nu er i centrum for processen. Schiller Instituttets konferencer i de sidste 15 måneder har samlet operative kræfter til dialog – fra Rusland, Kina, Indien, Sydvestasien, Afrika og Latinamerika sammen med europæere og amerikanere – for at formulere den nødvendige økonomiske og politiske politik for et nyt paradigme for menneskeheden. Den udgave af EIR (Executive Intelligence Review, red.), der offentliggøres den 13. august, vil indeholde afskrifter af dele af den historiske konference i Schiller Instituttet den 31. juli, "Afghanistan: Et vendepunkt i historien – efter den mislykkede periode med regimeskifte", som indeholdt bl.a. dybdegående diskussion af udviklingsprocessen, der en gang for alle må og skal føre til en fredelig løsning af det imperialistiske "Great Game" i Afghanistan. I stedet for at britiske tropper marcherer gennem Khyber-passet, er planen en forlængelse af jernbanelinjen, der løber fra Kina gennem Peshawar til Gwadar-havnen, som en del af den kinesisk-pakistanske økonomiske korridor (CPEC), for gennem Khyber-passet at forbinde sig til Kabul og videre til Usbekistan og Tadsjikistan, der forbinder det indre Centralasien med Det arabiske Hav og genopretter Afghanistans gamle rolle som det velstående knudepunkt for Silkevejen.

Dette storslåede projekt blev formuleret på en konference i februar i Tasjkent og er allerede i gang. Umida Hashimova, en analytiker ved det USA-baserede Center for 'Naval Analyzes', der har specialiseret sig i Centralasiens anliggender, fortalte South China Morning Post, at der er igangværende finansieringsdiskussioner med amerikanske og asiatiske udviklingsagenturer, og at “Konstruktion af den 573 km lange første strækning af jernbanelinjen mellem Kabul og Mazar-i-Sharif, forventes at begynde i næste måned. ”Design og teknisk dokumentation af jernbanen vil blive foretaget af Russian Railways, meddelte usbekiske embedsmænd efter samtaler med den administrerende direktør for Russian Railways Oleg Belozerov i Tasjkent den 19. maj.

USA er engageret i to beslægtede institutioner. "Extended Troika", bestående af USA, Rusland, Kina og Pakistan, blev etableret i 2019 og holdt to møder i år, der fokuserede på at finde en løsning på Afghanistan-situationen efter tilbagetrækning af udenlandske styrker. Der er også et "Quad"-arrangement, der involverer USA, Usbekistan, Pakistan og Afghanistan, som er fokuseret på jernbaneudviklingsprojektet.

Det er afgørende, at USA samarbejder med alle landene i regionen, især Rusland, Kina, Indien og Pakistan, om denne afgørende test af menneskehedens evne til at afslutte geopolitikkens æra og skabe en ny renæssance. Der er magtfulde kræfter i Storbritannien og USA, herunder ledende elementer fra begge politiske partier, som vil gøre alt hvad de kan for at sabotere dette projekt, der modsætter sig det malthusianske vanvid af 'Green New Deal og affolkning', hvilket hurtigt ville føre til flere krige.

Amerikanere og verdens borgere vil få lejlighed til at reflektere over Lyndon LaRouches skelsættende ideer den 14. august, som markerer halvtredsårsdagen siden præsident Nixon afsluttede Bretton Woods-systemet, hvilket bekræftede LaRouches advarsel dengang. Tilmeld dig her til konferencen, "So, Are You Finally Willing To Learn Economics?": Https://www.larouchelegacyfoundation.org/news/august-15/#rsvp

5. august: Kommentarer fra universitets- og finansøkonomer dukker op på 50-årsdagen for "Nixons chok" den 15. august 1971, slutningen på efterkrigstidens guldreservebaserede Bretton Woods-system, hvilket har frembragt et halvt århundrede med industriel tilbagegang, spekulative optøjer, gigantiske gældsbobler og krak, stadigt ringere realløn og levevilkår, kollapsende folkesundhedskapacitet og nu en dødelig global pandemi.

Kommentatorerne har kun et ringe begreb om, hvad der skete den 15. august, bortset fra at de nævner Nixons tarif-, løn og priskontrol, dollardevaluering og angreb på "spekulanter". De vil ikke indse, hvad det har gjort mod amerikanske og europæiske økonomier og udsigterne til udvikling for asiatiske, afrikanske og sydamerikanske nationer; de kan bestemt ikke have forstået, hvad der skete dengang. Den usædvanlige økonom og statsmand Lyndon LaRouche indså det både på daværende tidspunkt og flere år før Nixon blev presset ind i sin fumlende rolle i "chokket".

I disse kommentarer nævnes ikke den afgørende rolle af Harold Wilsons britiske regering og Bank of Englands handlinger, som hamrede løs på FDR's Bretton Woods-system, indtil man pressede Nixon og hans inkompetente team med Arthur Burns, George Shultz og James Baker III til at nedlægge det. Wilson forsøgte og mislykkedes med at få parlamentet til at devaluere pundet i 1966. Derefter, efter at have indført alvorlige nedskæringer, anbefalede hans regering i 1967 igen en devaluering af pundet på 15%, og parlamentet devaluerede det med 14% i november uden at koordinere med andre større nationer igennem Bretton Woods-procedurer. I samme periode åbnede Bank of England to gange et "guldvindue", hvor britiske finansielle virksomheder kunne handle med deres dollars for guld og gøre krav gældende overfor det amerikanske finansministerium.

Det var på baggrund af disse handlinger i London, at LaRouche lavede sine unikke prognoser fra 1967, nemlig at Bretton Woods ville blive brudt op ved "omkring slutningen af årtiet".

Kommentarerne ved 50-året spiller på påstanden om, at "dollaren har bevaret sin forrang" siden da på grund af markeder og finansielle kræfters evne til selv at oprette gældsforpligtelser i dollars, på trods af Nixon-chokket! En kommentar i 'Project Syndicate', af en Princeton-økonom, er meget åbenbar: ”Private finansmarkeders magt til at skabe penge – amerikanske dollars – gjorde 'greenbacken' (dollaren, red.) endnu mere central”.

LaRouche sagde i år 2000 i "Trade Without Currencies", at den amerikanske dollar i perioden 1945-66 var verdens reserve baseret på høj amerikansk arbejdsproduktivitet og en stærk kapacitet til eksport af kapitalgoder; dette var igen basis for Bretton Woods’ relative succes. Efter dette tidspunkt, sagde han, var dollarens styrke som reservevaluta støt faldende, hvilket gjorde et nyt internationalt kreditsystem påtrængende; i år 2000 havde han i årevis efterlyst et nyt Bretton Woods, hvis mål var kreditudstedelse til "store projekter" i udviklingslande.

I historien om Lyndon LaRouches udødelige bidrag til økonomisk videnskab og menneskelige fremskridt har denne dato i 1971 en fremtrædende plads. Ved sin enestående evne til flere år forinden at forudsige "chok"-afslutningen på dollaren baseret på guldreserver – dengang endog anerkendt af amerikanske gennemsnitsborgere som en stor og ildevarslende ændring – udmærkede LaRouche sig, frem for andre økonomer og politiske ledere, ved sine magtfulde ideer.

Allerede i 1967, da han så, hvad der var på vej, foreslog LaRouche i en massecirkuleret pjece en ny politik for udvikling af den 3. verden gennem kredit til finansiering af eksport af kapitalgoder, som det højere mål for den voksende anti-Vietnam-krigsbevægelse. Inden for et årti havde han skaffet de 'alliancefrie' nationers støtte til en international udviklingsbank, med det formål at begynde at genoprette Bretton Woods, i lighed med hvad FDR havde tiltænkt Verdensbankens rolle i udviklingen af sektorprojekter inden for udvikling af ny infrastruktur. Og inden for samme årti havde han tiltrukket sig magtfulde fjender på Wall Street og i London, der fabrikerede vilde bagvaskelser og dannede en "Get-LaRouche Task Force" for at få ham retsforfulgt og fængslet.

Ved at se 50 år frem fra den begivenhed i 1971, der havde bevist hans metode til fysisk økonomi, kunne LaRouche se de kommende alternativer i verden efter Bretton Woods: Stadig mere uhæmmet spekulation, som styrer kollapsende industrier, indførelsen af det, han kaldte "schachtiansk fascisme” Inden for økonomisk politik, depression og en potentiel biologisk holocaust af pandemier; eller et nyt internationalt kreditsystem for eksport kapitalgoder og udvikling.

Halvtreds år senere står valget nu imellem LaRouches opfattelse af et nyt Bretton Woods, eller en malthusiansk affolkning forklædt som "Green New Deal". Schiller Instituttets 50-årsdags-konference, 14. august, 2021, vil præsentere LaRouches tankegang i handling: "So, Are You Finally Willing To Learn Economics?"

Tilmeld dig: https://www.larouchelegacyfoundation.org/news/august-15

Se også panel 2 videoen her:

Se intro videoen her:

Program

Panel 1: “On LaRouche’s Discovery” 15:00 danskt tid

Moderator: Dennis Small (U.S.), LaRouche Legacy Foundation

Helga Zepp-LaRouche (Germany), Board of Directors, LaRouche Legacy Foundation

Ding Yifan (China): Deputy Director of the Research Institute of World Development, China Development Research Center (DRC) “The Importance of Physical Economics in Today’s World”

Jozef Mikloško (Slovak Republic), Former Vice Prime Minister of the first Czechoslovakian government after the fall of Communism

Dr. Natalia Vitrenko (Ukraine), Doctor of Economic Sciences, Chairman of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine, People’s Deputy of Ukraine (MP) 1995-2002: “Saving Mankind Is a ‘Mission—Possible’”

Yekaterina Fyodorovna Shamayeva (Russia): “Design and Management of Sustainable Development and an Interdisciplinary Synthesis of the Fundamental Ideas of the Schools of Lyndon LaRouche and Pobisk Kuznetsov”

Paul Gallagher (U.S.), EIR Editorial Board: “LaRouche’s Early Forecasts”

LaRouche on the World Stage: Through the Words of Ramsey Clark (U.S., former Attorney General); Dr. Enéas Carneiro (Brazil, former member of parliament and presidential candidate); José López Portillo (Mexico, former President)

Discussion Period

Panel 2: “Earth’s Next Fifty Years” 19:30 dansk tid

Moderator: Megan Dobrodt (U.S.), Board of Directors, LaRouche Legacy Foundation

Jacques Cheminade (France), Founder and President of the Solidarité et Progrès Political Party in France, former Presidential Candidate: “Lyndon LaRouche’s Method of Physical Economy in Coincidence with France’s Republican Humanism”

Dr. Kirk Meighoo (Trinidad and Tobago), political analyst, media commentator, author, and former independent Senator in Trinidad and Tobago

Roberto Fritzsche and Eduardo Fernández (Argentina): “Notes on Potential Relative Population Density in Lyndon LaRouche’s Economics”

Harley Schlanger (U.S.) Schiller Institute: “Nixon’s August 1971 Announcement: An Eyewitness Account”

Fred Huenefeld, Jr. (U.S.), Schiller Institute Board member; former President of the Louisiana Association of Soil Districts; former President of NORM (National Association of Raw Materials); former Treasurer of the Louisiana State Democratic Party

Theo Mitchell (U.S.), Former State Senator, South Carolina

LaRouche in the Universities: Gretchen Small (U.S.), LaRouche Legacy Foundation: “LaRouche in the Libraries”; Carlos “Itos” Valdes (The Philippines), The Philippine LaRouche Society; Carolina Dominguez (México) LaRouche Youth Movement; José Vega (U.S.), LaRouche Youth Movement

Discussion Period

To uddrag fra Helga Zepp-LaRouches Schiller Institut-webcast den 11. august om LaRouche-videokonferencen:

(ikke korrekturlæst) HARLEY SCHLANGER: Goddag, jeg er Harley Schlanger. Velkommen til vores ugentlige dialog med Helga Zepp-LaRouche, stifteren og formanden for Schiller Instituttet. 

Vi befinder os blot nogle få dage fra en stor konference, arrangeret af LaRouche Legacy Foundation, der, på 50-årsdagen, vil se på konsekvenserne af begivenhederne omkring den 15. august, 1971, der etablerede Lyndon LaRouche som førende økonom – både hvad hans forudsigelse af dette angår, såvel som hans advarsler bagefter. Helga, dette burde blive en særdeles vigtig begivenhed, og jeg håber, at mange af vores seere ikke blot vil se det, men opmuntre andre til at deltage.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Ja. Jeg tror at denne begivenhed vil understrege det faktum, at Lyndon LaRouche er, i det mindste i den transatlantiske sektor, uden tvivl den førende økonom, som forudså følgevirkningerne af Nixons afskafning af Bretton Woods-systemet, ved at erstatte faste valutakurser med flydende valutakurser. Dette påbegyndte retningen mod alle de onder, som vi ser i dag – en pandemi, en disintegration af finanssystemet, et alment kollaps af den kulturelle side af samfundet. Det er muligvis en overraskelse for mange mennesker, at se disse situationer som ét komplekst domæne, der hænger sammen, men Lyndon LaRouche forudså hvad dette dramatiske brud betød, efter man opgav at fokusere på den virkelige økonomi, på fysiske økonomier underlagt de egentlige universelle principper i universet, og erstattede det med systemanalyse, kybernetik, hele informationsteorien, fordi han indså, hvad den grundlæggende fejl i Norbert Wieners og John von Neumanns teorier var. Og der vil være mange eksperter, som vil tale om dette på lørdag.

Så jeg synes at I, vores seere, virkelig burde se det. For hvis I ønsker at forstå, hvorfor verdens økonomer har været ude af stand til at forudse krisen i 2008, hvorfor de er fuldstændig hjælpeløse, når det kommer til, at finde blot en analyse, for ikke at snakke om en løsning til den nuværende krise, så er denne begivenhed på lørdag et absolut ”must see” for jer.

Dette vil være et jordskælv af en begivenhed, og det er ikke at love for meget.

SCHLANGER: (griner) Jo, altså titlen er ”Så, er I endelig villige til at lære økonomi?” Og jeg tror, at det er vigtigt at nævne, at det er sponsoreret af LaRouche Legacy Foundation, som er i gang med at samle Lyndon LaRouches værker. Og når man begynder at kigge igennem disse titler, ser man hvor forbløffende hans livs arbejde virkelig var.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Ja, vi udgiver min afdøde mands samlede værker. Vi har allerede udgivet én enorm smuk udgave, det første bind. Det andet er på vej. Vi vil digitaliserer hele værket, således at det vil være tilgængeligt for alle dem, som ønsker at studere fysisk økonomi seriøst, men også de andre områder af min mands ufatteligt rige livsværk.

Så dette er en meget vigtig begivenhed af mange, mange grunde.

Senere…

SCHLANGER: Det bringer os tilbage til vigtigheden af lørdagens konference – denne kommende lørdag, den 14. august, klokken 15-20 dansk tid [ – kan også ses senere].

Vi oplever i øjeblikket slutfasen af finanssystemet efter 1971, og dette er noget, som Lyn havde advaret om, og videre, ikke blot advaret om, men præsenteret alternativer. Hvordan ville du organisere folk til at se dette og at deltage, og bruge det som et springbræt, ikke blot til at lære økonomi, men at skabe en genoplivelse af den fysiske økonomis bedste tradition?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Spørgsmålet, som folk burde stille sig selv, er, hvorfor er verden i en så skrækkelig tilstand? Og jeg tror, at Lyndon LaRouches arbejde er den uundværlige nøgle, ikke blot for at forstå dette, men også for at overvinde det. Fordi, hvorfor var Lyndon LaRouche, som praktisk talt den eneste økonom på det tidspunkt, i stand til at identificere, hvad dette brud var, hvad vigtigheden af hvad Nixon gjorde var? Det var ikke blot en lille økonomisk forandring. Det var et skelsættende brud mellem noget, som var et ufuldkomment system – Bretton Woods-systemet – som aldrig var det som Franklin D. Roosevelt havde til hensigt, fordi Truman og Churchill udvandede det fuldstændigt, og betonede aldrig nøglekomponenten, som var, at overvinde underudvikling i udviklingslandene; det var aldrig en del af det egentlige Bretton Woods-system. Men det stabiliserede dog, i omkring to årtier, økonomierne i USA og Europa, fordi det var opmærksom på nogle grundlæggende fysisk-økonomiske realiteter.

Og Nixon smed dette ud af vinduet ved, at introducere en ny form for monetarisme, hvilket var idéen om, at fra nu af, ville man blot bruge algoritmer til at beskrive markederne. Lyn havde påpeget, hvad fejlen ved Norbert Wiener og John von Neumann var, nemlig den, at de havde anvendt et system, som intet havde med virkeligheden at gøre. Det er en model, og denne model bliver brugt i dag til omtrent alting: Det bruges til—hvis man betragter spekulation, i en tidsskala på nanosekunder, i tempoer af nanosekunder, billioner rejser rundt om planeten i form af spekulation. Disse er baseret på den samme algoritmiske metode i meget hurtige computere, som styrer denne form for spekulation, fuldstændig uafhængigt af fornuft, eller real-økonomiske kriterier.

Det samme er tilfældet for vejret: Det viser sig, at den første person, som udviklede en sådan idé om vejrmodeller, som kunne forudse, eller prognosticere, var Norbert Wiener, og også John von Neumann tror jeg. Så det er grunden til, at IPCC's model er værdiløs. Den har intet med de komplekse årsager for klimaet at gøre, og det er kun en model. Det var det samme møg, som Romklubben i 1972! Da de udgav bogen Grænser for Vækst var det den samme falske model, hvor de udelod det teknologiske fremskridts indflydelse på økonomiens produktivitet. Det var det, som LaRouche havde fastslået som værende nøglen: Menneskelig kreativitet, opfindelser, opdagelser af grundlæggende principper og måden hvorpå disse opdagelser, når de anvendes via teknologi i produktionsprocessen, hvordan de påvirker produktiviteten. Det er noget, som man ikke kan måle med disse modeller og det er grunden til at alt dette ikke fungerer.

Men man kan kigge på mange andre områder og man vil se at den samme idiotiske metode anvendes. For eksempel, i forudsigelsen af forbrydelser har de nu modeller, som forudser på hvilket gadehjørne, hvilken person vil begå et mord fem år ud i fremtiden, og derfor bliver man nødt til at bygge fængsler til, at kunne rumme dette – jeg overdriver en lille smule, men ikke særlig meget.

Jeg mener, det her er vanvittigt: Det har intet med virkeligheden at gøre, og jeg mener at det er en grundlæggende diskussion. Hvis ikke dette genovervejes, og rettes op på gennem videnskab, gennem opdagelser, gennem universelle fysiske principper, er der ingen løsning, fordi der er et helt etablissement, som følger dette, ligesom Rottefængeren fra Hameln, og det vil føre ud over en afgrund, og folk vil styrte ned i afgrunden i forfølgelsen efter en forkert idé.

Heldigvis er det ikke alle som gør dette: Rusland, for eksempel, gør ikke dette; Kina har ikke den samme vanvittige tilgang. Så, når folk taler om en konkurrence blandt systemer, er man nød til at betragte årsagen til at Vesten slår fejl indenfor så mange områder. Og det er det, som lørdagens diskussion handler om, men også en forhåbningsfuld idé, fordi Lyndon LaRouche har leveret løsninger, som verden har brug for i dag, mere end nogensinde før.

SCHLANGER: Jeg tror, at det er en perfekt måde, at afslutte på, for at sørge for, at folk stiller ind på lørdag, den 14. august, klokken 15. Som du siger, der er ingen tvivl om, at vi befinder os i et systemisk sammenbrud. Spørgsmålet er, om vi har modet til rent faktisk at lære økonomi og lære fra det største økonom i det sidste århundrede, Lyndon LaRouche.

Invitation:

Det er med glæde, at LaRouche Legacy Foundation inviterer dig til videokonference med førende internationale eksperter, for at undersøge de unikke bidrag af Lyndon LaRouche (1922–2019) til videnskaben om fysisk økonomi [at økonomi ikke er penge, men vores evne til at forbedre menneskehedens levevilkår].

Seminaret afholdes på 50-årsdagen for præsident Richard Nixons skæbnesvangre meddelelse om Bretton Woods-systemets afslutning, den 15. august 1971.

Det er også en påtrængt opfordring til at reflektere over, hvad der gik galt med den økonomiske politik i den transatlantiske sektor i løbet af de sidste fem årtier, for at rette op på de vedvarende politiske fejltagelser og ændre kurs, før vi hævner i en sammenbrudskrise, der kun kan sammenlignes med det 14. århundredes mørke tidsalder.

Se intro videoen til konferencen her

Baggrund:
 
Den 15. august, 1971 gav Nixon en dramatisk 18-minutters national tv-tale, hvor han meddelte:
 
1. Dollaren blev taget af guldstandarden: dollaren ville ikke længere kunne indløses i guld;
2. Et flydende valutakurssystem ville erstatte det eksisterende internationale valutariske fastkurssystem;
3. Der ville blive indført en midlertidig løn- og prisfrysning i USA, som hurtigt blev til fase I, II og III med drastiske stramninger
 
.
Selvom Nixon angiveligt bekendtgjorde disse foranstaltninger for at tøjle finansielle spekulationer mod dollaren, åbnede de i virkeligheden sluserne for den mest massive, langvarige spekulation i menneskehedens historie, kombineret med et fysisk økonomisk kollaps – som fortsætter den dag i dag.
 
Meddelelsen fra 15. august 1971 var den mest vidtrækkende og katastrofale beslutning i den økonomiske politik i det 20. århundrede med hensyn til dens konsekvenser frem til i dag. Èn økonom, og én økonom alene, forudså konsekvenserne. Inden for få timer efter denne meddelelse advarede han om hvad der ville komme, og forklarede, hvad meddelelsen betød.
 
Denne mand var Lyndon LaRouche.
 
LaRouche brugte de næste fem årtier på at advare om, at hvis denne politik blev videreført, ville verden gå ind i en systemisk sammenbrudskrise med sandsynligheden for fascistisk økonomisk politik. Alt imens præsenterede han detaljerede programmer til at vende krisen, baseret på ideen om fred gennem udvikling og på at fremme ethvert menneskes produktive arbejdskraft på jorden.
 
For dette blev LaRouche udskældt og uretmæssigt fængslet i fem år. Hans politik blev ikke gennemført i den transatlantiske sektor, og planeten betaler i dag prisen for den tåbelighed i form af en hyperinflation, en ukontrolleret og dødelig pandemi og faren for termonuklear krig. Som et resultat af kampagnen for at bagvaske LaRouche og tie hans ideer ihjel, har de fleste mennesker i USA og andre steder aldrig studeret hans skrifter.
 
Men visse mennesker, førende videnskabsmænd og politiske ledere i forskellige dele af verden, lyttede til LaRouche og studerede hans værker – såsom den russiske videnskabelige kæmpe Pobisk Kuznetsov og den tidligere mexicanske præsident José López Portillo.
 
Andre specialister og folk, der har studeret LaRouches værker, vil deltage i seminaret den 14. august, og man vil direkte fra dem kunne høre om LaRouches økonomiske gennembrud, om hans uforlignelige historik af prognoser samt om hans programmatiske forslag til at udvikle hvert hjørne af planeten – og solsystemet. Seminaret vil hjælpe til at forstå, hvorfor tiden er inde til at give LaRouches ideer oprejsning, både af hensyn til simpel retfærdighed og for endelig at få gennemført hans politik.
 
Som José López Portillo, den tidligere mexicanske præsident, udtalte i 1998 på et fælles seminar med Helga Zepp-LaRouche: "Det er nødvendigt, at verden nu lytter til Lyndon LaRouches kloge ord".

Tilmelding for at modtage et direkte link, talerlisten og opdateringer: So, Are You Finally Willing to Learn Economics? — LaRouche Legacy Foundation

Ellers kan du se den på forsiden af vores danske hjemmeside.

On the 50th Anniversary of LaRouche’s Stunning Forecast of August 15, 1971:

So, Are You Finally Willing to Learn Economics?

The LaRouche Legacy Foundation is pleased to invite you to an online seminar with leading international experts to examine the unique contributions of Lyndon LaRouche (1922—2019) to the science of physical economy. The seminar will consist of a morning and an afternoon panel, and it will be held on the 50th anniversary of President Richard Nixon’s fateful announcement of the end of the Bretton Woods system on August 15, 1971.

This is also an urgent invitation to reflect on what went wrong with economic policy in the trans-Atlantic sector over the last five decades, in order to correct those persisting policy blunders and change course before we plunge into a breakdown crisis comparable only to the 14th century New Dark Age.

Some background:

On August 15, 1971, Nixon delivered a dramatic 18-minute national television address in which he announced:

1. the dollar was being taken off the gold standard: the dollar would no longer be redeemable in gold;

2. a floating exchange rate system would replace the existing fixed exchange rate international monetary system;

3. a temporary wage and price freeze would be instituted in the U.S., which quickly became Phase I, II and III drastic austerity measures.

Although Nixon announced these measures purportedly to rein in financial speculation against the dollar, they in fact opened the floodgates to the most massive, lengthy speculative binge in the history of mankind, coupled with physical economic collapse— which continues to this day.

The August 15, 1971 announcement was the most far-reaching and catastrophic economic policy decision of the 20th century in terms of its consequences down to the present. One economist, and one economist alone, called it. He warned that it was coming and explained what it meant within hours of its announcement.

That man was Lyndon LaRouche.

LaRouche spent the next five decades warning that, if those policies were continued, the world would head into a systemic breakdown crisis and the likelihood of fascist economic policies. All the while he presented detailed programs to reverse the crisis, based on the idea of peace through development and on fostering the productive powers of labor of every person on the planet.

For this, LaRouche was reviled and unjustly imprisoned for five years. His policies were not implemented in the trans-Atlantic sector, and the planet today is paying the price for that folly in the form of a hyperinflationary blowout, an uncontrolled and deadly pandemic, and the danger of thermonuclear war. As a result of the campaign to defame LaRouche and silence his ideas, most people in the United States and elsewhere have never studied his writings.

But some people, leading scientists and political leaders in different parts of the world, did listen to LaRouche and did study his works— such as the Russian scientific giant Pobisk Kuznetsov and former Mexican President José López Portillo.

Other specialists and students of LaRouche’s works will participate in the Aug. 14 seminar, and you will be able to hear from them directly about LaRouche’s economic breakthroughs, about his unmatched record of forecasts, and about his programmatic proposals to develop every corner of the planet—and the solar system. The seminar will help you understand why it is past time to exonerate LaRouche’s ideas, both for reasons of simple justice and to be able to at last implement his policies.

As José López Portillo, the former President of Mexico, stated in 1998 in a joint seminar with Helga Zepp-LaRouche: “It is now necessary for the world to listen to the wise words of Lyndon LaRouche.”

Sign up here

Want to know LaRouches nine forcasts?