April 10, 2020
  • 5:53 pm Joe Biden to address impeachment and Trump-Ukraine whistleblower call , live stream
  • 5:53 pm President Trump’s 2020 State of the Union address and the Democratic response (FULL LIVE STREAM)
  • 5:53 pm Video – Need help? Call Blue Card Services!
  • 5:53 pm Temple University Student’s Viral Tik Tok Video Calling North Philadelphia ‘The Ghetto’ Causes Outra
  • 4:52 pm @TorontoPolice News Conference Re: Homicide #54/2016 Jarryl Hagley, 17 | Fri Oct 21st, 1pm
Lyndon LaRouche Webcast, April 11th, 2014


MATTHEW OGDEN: Good evening, it’s April 11th,
2014. My name is Matthew Ogden, and I will be hosting this
evening’s broadcast of our weekly Friday webcast on larouchepac.com.
We’re joined, as we always are, by Mr. Lyndon LaRouche tonight,
and also Cody Jones, who will be asking, along with myself,
a series of questions.
Now, right before I begin, I want to just show our viewers
that this week, LaRouche PAC bought a second full-page ad in the
{Washington Times}. This is the April 9th edition. The front page
says: “War of Extinction,” with Barack Obama’s face, and on the
back page is a full-page illustration of a mushroom cloud with
Barack Obama’s face inside, again saying “Extinction War” along
the top. This is reminiscent of an advertisement that Mr.
LaRouche commissioned in 1976, of Jimmy Carter’s face in a
mushroom cloud, during the 1976 Presidential campaign.
Now, our first question today is a very short question. It
comes from an institutional source, and the question reads as
follows: “Mr. LaRouche, we’ve taken note of your recent
writings on the Greek mythological conflict between Prometheus
and Zeus. How would Prometheus approach the Obama Administration?” LYNDON LAROUCHE: Actually, he would destroy
the enemy. The time has come pretty much to do that. We’re
at a point where the possibility of the existence of the human
species depends on some considerations. In fact, what’s happening
is, that contrary to what people are saying in the news reports
and things like that, other scandal sheets and trivial sources,
the fact is we’re headed toward a thermonuclear war. The discussion
that this is a bit of warfare which is going on between Russia
and other nations and Europe, is a lot of nonsense. There’s
no truth to it. The issue here is, there’s no reason for this,
in any ordinary sense. The point is that the British system, the
British imperial system, is coming down, and the collapse of
the British imperial system, which also affects Wall Street very
strongly, that these institutions are coming down. Because what
they’ve gone through a process which is called “bail-out,” and then
“bail-in.” Now, what happens with bail-out, it started
some time ago, when they began to pump out a lot of worthless
assets into Wall Street, and into the comparable institutions
in Europe. And it reached a certain point where it came toward
a bursting-point, where the rate of growth of this worthless
money, worthless credit, was about to pop. And that led them
to the conclusion that they had to go into a bail-{in} process.
Now, a bail-in process is an act of sort of cannibalism. You
eat all your entrails, and when you get down to the entrail,
everything goes “pop,” and they all disappear. So, this point is in process now. The entire
trans-Atlantic system in on the verge of a basis, including
Wall Street in particular, that Wall Street is about to totally
go into a collapse–a complete implosion. You know,
I’ve described this before, saying: Imagine you’re on the 70th
floor of a skyscraper, and imagine the cable broke at that point.
Now, just imagine what the effect would be by the time you reach
the first floor. And that’s what the problem is.
So, therefore, look at how this thing works. The issue is:
Who is going to pay the debts for this worthless money? And the
answer is that, if we go to a war, and the United States and
Britain win the war, then nobody owes anything for the worthless
debts. Eh? However, if the collapse comes {before} the war, then
Wall Street and London go out of existence. So, the issue here is
that: Which end of the bail-out-bail-in process is going to hit
first? Are we going to hit the first floor of a 70-story
structure? Or is the system going to collapse {before} it hits
the basement? And therefore, that’s the rush on the part of the
British Empire, and of Wall Street. Now, there are some idiots out there who will
say this is an issue between Russia and some other parties,
including the United States. That is absolute bunk. That is not
the issue. The issue is the bail-in issue. The point is, take the
Queen’s policy. She’s been very clear about it, especially
from the period of the Copenhagen conference, where she tried to
pull something off there, and it got turned down by various nations.
And therefore, she now is faced with the fact that her system
is now going to collapse–the Wall Street system included.
And therefore, the rush is to have a {war}–a global {thermonuclear}
war–before the first floor hits the ground. And that’s what
the issue is. And so, therefore, that’s why they’re pushing.
That’s why Obama is pushing. That’s why the British are
pushing. They’re pushing for an immediate war, in order not
to be wiped out, because the entire British Empire would go
through a chain-reaction disintegration, if that sequence
were to occur. Now, the problem here is that most people,
including so-called economists, are absolute idiots.
That is, what they {think} they understand, is something which
is actually silly and stupid. First of all, as I’m dealing with
this in something I’ve written recently, which is on this subject,
the actual issue here, that if I were to simply say, “Let’s
shut down Wall Street,” we could shut it down. There’s no
value there. There’s no substantive value. Wall Street should be
simply wiped out. Cancel all its obligations. It has no assets;
there’s nothing there. It’s a balloon, which has been pricked.
And therefore, the question is: What are we going to do
about this? I don’t propose that we just debate this thing, I
propose that we take action. And the action is simply, first of
all, the immediate installation of the Glass-Steagall law. Number
One. That will solve the problem, because that leaves Wall Street
and London barefaced, and bare this and bare other things. That’s
the essential solution. Now we have to have a recovery. And I’ve gone
through this “Build the Real American Party.” First of
all, after having decided we’re going to go with Glass-Steagall
recovery, that does not solve the problem, but it’s the foundation
on which the solution can be brought forward. The next
thing we have to do, having cancelled all the obligations of Wall
Street–say they’re worthless anyway, the bail-out-bail-in process
demonstrates there is no intrinsic value in Wall Street–none!
You can just wipe it off the books, it’s completely fraud, it has
nothing coming to it. {Wall Street has nothing coming to it.}
Now, the assumption is, that Wall Street has a lot of money:
monetary assets, monetary obligations, etc., etc. But I say
that’s nonsense, and I speak on the authority of the U.S.
Constitution, as defined by Alexander Hamilton, and Alexander
Hamilton’s four terms defining a policy of the United States, as
the policy of the U.S. system–under law! No one gets bailed out,
out of Wall Street debt. You got the debt? Wear it, if you can!
Hm? Because what we’re going to do is simply cancel,
recognize that one way or the other, {cancel all Wall
Street obligations}. Now, that doesn’t mean we’re going to shut
down the banking system; that would be a myth. The problem
is, you see, most people are so stupid when it comes to economy,
and most economists, and monetarists generally, are
so stupid, they don’t know the obvious. And as long as they can
kid the average citizen into believing that well, they have assets
there that are worth something, {is a delusion!} Right at any moment,
anybody who walks in who is an incarnation of Alexander
Hamilton, and he’ll say, “You guys are bankrupt! Get outa here!
You’re gone! You {have} no assets!” Because the U.S. system
does not provide for money assets! Our system is the same system
that was used by the Massachusetts Bay Colony–the same principle.
The point is, money has no intrinsic value. That’s the
point. What {has} value is: production of good things, useful
things, the things that increase the productive powers of labor,
and so forth. And we operate on a credit system, exactly the way
Alexander Hamilton, {who designed this system}: This part of the
constitutional system was designed by him. What happened was, however, they assassinated
him. Now, the job was done by a British agent, who assassinated
Alexander Hamilton. But the whole Manhattan Island area
was loaded with Dutch bankers and British bankers, and the
United States was looted, especially in the New York City and
Boston area, they were looted by these guys. And they got by
with it. So, the time has come, when we only have to
recognize–and anyone who wants to go through it, I’ve got
the document here, before me, the document I’ve written. It’s
a document which very few people in the United States have the competence
to know, because they never found out what the truth
is: {Money has no intrinsic value under our system. Our system
is a credit system, not a monetarist system.}
And so these are the issues. So, we’re now at the point
where if we put, first of all, Glass-Steagall. Now, that’s not
the solution; that is an essential {part} of the solution.
The next thing we have to do is something else. We have to
provide a national credit system. And the national credit system
is a means by which the United States simply produces productive
employment, and provides for the needs of people who have no
means to exist, like children and so forth. But we don’t believe in a {money} system.
We don’t believe that money has any intrinsic value. And if
you study what Alexander Hamilton {did} in his four pieces
of legislation on the system, you will understand everything. You
may ask a lot of questions to try to find what all this means,
but I can say there are four specific records, delivered by Alexander
Hamilton within his term in office, which set forth the system
of the United States.
Now, the first thing is: We create credit. So, therefore, we
create credit for employment, for investments in useful things.
And we can do that. But then we have to go beyond that. We have
to go into certain large things which are {not} simply part of
the productive process, as he defines it. We have to go {outside}
that range. And we can do that, too. So, we have to have a system, first of all,
which is a credit system, which makes available the ability
to employ people for production automatically, immediately.
And we try to get as much employment of the right kind as possible.
We try to raise the productive powers of labor, increase the
productive powers of labor, and things of that sort.
Then we do other things, because it’s part of the productive
process. The next thing we have to do, is we have to also, at the
same time, we have to provide for new requirements. For example,
right now, the United States in in terrible condition–most of
the world’s in terrible condition–and we do not have the—
Well, let’s put it this way: The western part of the United States, west
of the Mississippi River, is now going into a very
long-term period of drought–deep and prolonged drought–from
the Mississippi River all the way across the Pacific, so to speak.
So, there’s no future for anybody living west of the Mississippi,
except people like no fracking good people, who are doing
all this fracking operation. So, therefore, how can we, if we
don’t have the water, and we don’t have enough water to maintain
the states west of the Mississippi?
The Sun has gone into a silent period, a quiet period, and
there will never be enough, if we leave it alone, there’ll never
be enough to revive the economy of the United States west of the
Mississippi. That’s what stands {right now}. So therefore, we’re going to have to do something
about that. What are we going to do? We’re going
to actually {cancel the green policy}. We’re going to go into
high technology, high energy-flux density things–you know, power–and
we’re going to actually build thermonuclear fusion programs.
And these thermonuclear fusion programs will give us
the ability to actually produce the moisture we require.
But it requires high-technology development. On that basis,
then, we’ll create a new category of large industries, which are
high-technology industries, {very} high technology, thermonuclear
fusion technologies.
Now, today we have a problem. We have very few people who
are competent at production. Most of our people who are engaged
in production, are absolutely technologically incompetent,
because they have no understanding of what this kind of thing
means, this kind of high technology. And therefore, we have to
create a new category, which includes NAWAPA. The entire western
part of the United States and Canada, and northern Mexico, has to
come under a new water project process, which is the NAWAPA
system. In other words, an amplified NAWAPA system. We will drive
that NAWAPA system, by the aid of a high-technology driver, a
thermonuclear fusion driver technology, which will be the high
level of the input and output that we get for this process.
On that basis, we have it made, because we’re going to be
driving people to high technology. We have to cancel {all
low-technology methods}. In other words, wherever we have
something to produce, we try to produce a high-technology method
of production. We do not allow green policies to be used in the
United States. It’s silly to try to create a green policy in a
desert area, and in fact it’s a fraud to try to do that.
So therefore, there’s actions we have to take, and I’ve
detailed this in this report, identified what the scientific
principles are, and what has to be done. We have now, the
prospect — if we got enough people with enough brains and enough
guts to do it — we have the ability to immediately organize a
massive recovery program. That doesn’t mean that everything is
going to get juicy all at once. It means we’re going start on
the way up, and every day is going to be a better day than the
day before. It’s going to be slow at first, but we have to go to
very high technology. One of the problems is this: What do we think
you have out there? We have a number of scientists, they’re
retiring, they are being retired, they’re being shunted off
someplace, they’re not doing science any more. Why? Well, that
goes back to 1900. In the year 1900, an idiot, a mathematician
said he was a scientist, and he could eliminate all science,
all physical science, by mathematics. Then a greater, more
criminal idiot came in, and he really went at it, and launched
the whole green policy business, demanding reductionist methods
of production. And this evil, by Bertrand Russell, the most
evil man of the 20th century — the person who is most responsible
for destroying the United States, Europe, and other places.
And therefore, we are going to have to go to these methods
which I’ve indicated, and which are some 33 pages in typescript,
so you have to go through the thing. But, in short, the answer
is there. {I know what we can do.} Leading scientists know the
technologies. We’ve got to do it. We’ve got to enter into a
cooperation on a global basis, with China, with other major
nations, with Europe and so forth. We have to start these kinds
of high-technology programs. {They will solve this problem}. But
it’s going to take some time to get these programs cranked up.
We have to eliminate the green policy. We have to eliminate
the kind of technology approaches which are being used now. We
have a bunch of people out there, who’re using computers, and
they think computers can produce scientific results. They’re
crap artists, they don’t know what they’re talking about. We
take our greatest scientists, who are just still around, we put
them on the shelf. We don’t give them any work to do. We don’t
{allow} them to do any work. They may sneak some work in,
because they want to do it, but they’re never given backing.
And what we need is, we need to reactivate the scientific
potential the United States used to have, and that other parts of
the world still have and cherish. We’re going to have to create
a science-driver program. End the green policy, because the
green policy would be the death of humanity. It would be a
mass-murder of humanity. We have to go back to a high-technology program,
which is based on engineering, not arithmetic. You
can not calculate your way into a solution in this matter. You have
to apply a physical-scientific approach to it. And that’s
what the problem is.
We are now at a point, unless we change our ways, we’re on
the verge of, either a thermonuclear war, because that’s where
we’re headed. Right now, if the United States resists the Obama
policy, we’ve really got a mess on our hands, if he tries to do
that. If he gets by with it, you’re going to have a
thermonuclear war. And a thermonuclear war means that very few
people will survive it. So the time has come, you have no more
choice. If you’re green, start running. I’m telling you: Run!
Because either the circumstances will get you out of your own
stupidity, or you’ll be running against the people who hate your
guts. OGDEN: Well, let me pick up on what you just
said about Obama. Maybe this is going from ancient Greece
to ancient Rome. Today, as some people may recognize, marks
a special occasion. Today is April 11th, 2014, and it’s the five-year
anniversary of Mr. LaRouche’s April 11th, 2009 webcast, in
which he first identified Obama as a Nero personality. This
webcast occurred immediately after Obama had made his first
trip to London to meet Her Majesty the Queen. And observing his behavior
there, you said the following. This is in 2009.
” The situation we face, in the United States and worldwide,
is comparable in many respects to Rome under the dictatorship of
the Emperor Nero. The character of the President under these
conditions {is} of that form. … He has a Nero problem. He’s a
contemporary Nero. Famous kind of problem. And if you leave him
in there, you’re going to find out the kind of effect he’s going
to play; he’s going to play the role of a Nero. … [H]is
self-adulation, his manic, euphoric self-adulation, is the
mentality of the worst kind of dictator. Don’t let him get in a
position where he has that kind of power.” That was five years ago today. Now at the
time you said this, Lyn, leading people in the Democratic
Party reacted hysterically, accusing you of being “over
the top.” However, five years later, your warnings have been
more than vindicated, and their denials of reality have brought
the world to the brink of thermonuclear war.
Now, last week, Obama’s Nero personality was put on clear
display, when he showed up in Rome, after having just
participated in nuclear war-games at The Hague, and he was given
a tour of the Coliseum. And the reports are, that he relished
every minute of this hour-long tour, clearly channeling Nero, as
he eagerly listened to the story that the tour guide was telling
him, of how the gladiator Commodus beheaded an ostrich with his
sword, and carried the bleeding head over to where the Roman
Senate was seated, as if to say, “You’re next.” And it was
reported that, upon hearing this story, Obama opened his eyes
widely, and smiling, repeated it to his staff, as if to say, “You
should memorize this.” Perhaps he was envisioning Dianne
Feinstein. And then, when he was shown the view from
the top level, the third tier, of the Coliseum, he commented
to the tour guide, he said, “These must be the best seats in the
house. From here you can see everything, but you’re at a safe distance
from all that blood and gore.” Perhaps a little bit like
a drone-killing. So, he was apparently also very curious to
know if there was a death that occurred during every game, which
is not surprising, considering Obama’s weekly kill-list meetings
every Tuesday, where he gets to be the Emperor Nero, and
give the thumbs-up or the thumbs-down. And people should remember,
when Nero felt that his power was slipping away, he reportedly
ordered the burning of Rome, and afterwards blamed the Christians,
as a pretext for ordering mass crucifixions, sort of a pre-echo
of Hitler’s Reichstag Fire.
And now we have a Nero in the White House. Is the type of
personality that we really want to have controlling the U.S.
nuclear arsenal? And I would recall to people again, the image
that we had on the back of the {Washington Times}, of Obama’s
face in a mushroom cloud. So the question is, Lyn, five years
later, what would you say to those inside the Democratic Party,
who loudly protested at the time, that your diagnosis of Obama as
a Nero, was “over the top”? LAROUCHE: Well, it certainly wasn’t. I think
if you take the scorecards for what happened to people
in their jobs, their conditions of life, and so forth, there is
no doubt: This man is evil, this man is purely evil. He could not
do what he was doing, I mean, like what he did, in the cuts
he did, the things he did in the beginning of this year. This
man is a mass-murderer, and he has no business being
in the Presidency of the United States.
But then, people are playing games. And how idiotic can
people be? You have Republicans now, and they’re saying, “hold
off on Glass-Steagall. Don’t pass Glass-Steagall.” Why? Because
if you pass Glass-Steagall, we won’t be able to get our game,
when it comes to our turn, for our getting the Presidency of the
United States. And that’s what’s happening with these guys.
That’s Wall Street! That’s the Republican Party!
Now, there may be Republicans among them who don’t agree
with this crap. But the majority of the Republicans are actually
basing themselves on pure evil. Now, what’s it based on? Ah!
This is what gets interesting! {It’s Wall Street money!} They
don’t have real money, they have Wall Street bail-out money! In
other words, they printed money which had no value, hmm? And
every time they would turn around, they would turn around they
would say, “well, we have to — quantitative easing! quantitative
easing! quantitative easing!” What was that? It was nothing but
voluntary inflation. And the Wall Street gangsters and the
British gangsters and others in Europe were making money by
printing it — they didn’t even print it, they mentioned it!
[laughter] And they called it “theirs.” Then you take the rate of inflation, which
is going on in Wall Street, look at the trillions of dollars
levels of increase of worthless money, absolutely worthless!
And now, what happens, is even some of my friends in the
Democratic Party say, “But you’ve got to come to a reconciliation,
with Wall Street.” I say, “No! We don’t owe them anything, they
stole it!” How’d they steal it? They got some crooked officials
in the government, in the Treasury Department, elsewhere; these
officials created fraudulent money, they created a crime against
the American people! This money is worthless, it always
was worthless! There’s no value to it at all. All we have
to do, is put through Glass-Steagall, first.
Next, — you put through Glass-Steagall, that does not solve
the problem, it clears the deck for solving the problem. And
Glass-Steagall with no change: Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s
Glass-Steagall law {with no changes whatsoever} in the law
itself. That means, you wipe these guys out, in the much the
same way, but in greater quantity today of what was done to Wall
Street by President Franklin Roosevelt, which {saved} the United
States, by the way, and saved us from some kind of a Hitler-like
dictatorship, which was on the edge of coming around. Wall
Street was prepared to go, and was prevented from acting {by
force}, by a coup d’état, like Hitler’s coup d’état to take power
over the United States. And we had a general, a Marine general,
who intervened and wiped that thing out. That saved our nation
from a Hitler-like dictatorship. And remember, the Hitler-like dictatorships
were made the British Empire. And then, Churchill discovered,
oh, my! This ain’t gonna work out, he said, because they’re
gonna kill us! We thought Hitler was our friend! And, the man
with the umbrella? The man with the bumbershoot? Hmm? And then
the next thing, Churchill said, you guys are too crazy altogether,
I’m firing you.
And so he got on the phone and he called up Franklin
Roosevelt, and Franklin Roosevelt said, “yes,” or in effect,
“yes.” He said, “I need help.” Franklin Roosevelt: “Yes.” “Can
you help me?” “Well, I tell you,” speaking like Franklin
Roosevelt, “we have some destroyers, which are not our best
quality destroyers, but since you have a German submarine fleet
out there trying to sink your merchant marine, I think that perhaps
we can find a way, in which to make things a little bit
easier for you.” And Roosevelt did what he said he was going to
do. Roosevelt took the occasion to organize the
greatest, actually since Abraham Lincoln, the greatest
mobilization of the United States for economic recover from a
disaster. One, was Abraham Lincoln; he had absolutely no money
available, and this is a lesson from guess who? Alexander Hamilton.
No money was available to speak of! The banks in the United
States that were banking were all crooks. And Abraham Lincoln
went to the Treasury Department, and said: Well, I’m the
President of the United States. I’m setting up greenbacks.
And greenbacks are a credit system, warranted by the U.S. government.
What department? The Treasury Department! Alexander
Hamilton’s department, the Treasury Department.
So the Treasury Department, under Lincoln {beat} the British
Empire, for which the British Empire in turn assassinated him!
And that wasn’t the first assassination that’s been done:
Alexander Hamilton was assassinated for the same kind of reasons.
And I remember these things: I wasn’t always there, but I could
whiff something like that coming in my direction. So anyway, this is where we stand. So now,
we need something else: Okay, we’re going to go back
and create a currency like a greenback, which means that
the Treasury Department of the United States, under the
United States Executive branch, will create an act, which
authorizes — cancels all these other kinds of banking system, and
says that the Federal Treasury Department, will issue an
order, under which banks which qualify for banking under Federal
law, we will not only use that as a vehicle for {credit system}
for our people, for employment and things of that sort, but
will also be a means for increasing the productive powers of labor.
And we will create jobs; but we have to have high-technology
jobs! We’re not going to have green jobs, because green jobs
are downward. They actually destroy the economy. If you want
the economy to grow, you’ve got to get non-green jobs, which are
productive jobs, higher-technology jobs.
You upgrade people, {as Franklin Roosevelt did}, in the
1930s. He took people off the streets, made sure they were paid,
not as under Obama! Made sure they were paid, they got some
employment, they got benefits where they needed, emergency
benefits. We pulled the people of the United States off the
streets! We put them back to work; they weren’t doing much good,
but we wanted them back to work as a matter of principle! We did
it! We increased it, we turned these emergency employment
programs, into programs which actually began to build up the
economy. And by the time we went into the war, we created one of
the greatest machines, of economy and warfare, the world had ever
known. And it was done under conditions of despair, in 1932-33.
And we can do that again, by Franklin Roosevelt’s measures.
But we have to understand what the mechanisms are, which very few
people ever understood. They never understood the mechanisms of
our Constitution system! You have all these idiots running
around in the Congress, saying they know what our constitutional
law is. They don’t know what our Constitution law is! Because
the constitutional is not a bunch of ifs and ands, and so forth,
our constitutional law is a {systemic, scientifically defined
systemic system, in which we make no dependency on money as
such!} Money as such is worthless to us! The only
money that we honor, is when we have foreign trade, in which
case we have to make a special provision for foreign trade,
in order to accommodate foreign trade with the United
States. So therefore, the Hamilton tradition is exactly that.
And, if we go back to Hamilton, which very few people in the
United States understand, I doubt that there’s a living
President, a former President who’s still alive today, who
understands what the principle of the U.S. Constitution is. I
think I can prove that, and this article which I’ve just
produced, this 33 pager, will show you exactly why, probably no
President of the United States in recent times, probably except
Jack Kennedy, knows what the meaning of the U.S. Constitution is
on this question, on the question of the credit system.
{Money has no intrinsic value.} That’s the constitutional
principle of the United States: {Money has no intrinsic value.}
Money is supposed to be something that increments to higher and
higher levels of productivity, and Hamilton laid it all out
there, these four letters of his, these four statements of his,
it’s all there. And also the question on the question of
banking, same thing. We accommodate foreign powers, who don’t
fit within our exact economic system, we accommodate them, as a
matter of association, of mutual advantage. But, {money has no
intrinsic value.} The presumption is that the increase of productivity
will come naturally as a result of the employment
and raising of the technology. This applied to agriculture, it
applied to manufactures, and other things. {Money has
no intrinsic value.} In no system, does it have intrinsic value.
To attribute it to have intrinsic value, is simply a presumption,
with no factual, scientific basis for it.
It’s the increase of the productive powers of labor. Now,
look at this, what do we mean by that? Mankind is not a monkey.
Many members of Congress are, I think. Certainly, most Wall
Street people, are certainly monkeys because they don’t earn
anything, they don’t produce anything, they make nasty smears all
over the place, make terrible sounds, and they stink! Oh, they
stink! So, productivity is a result of human increase
in the leveling of the human mind to higher and higher
degrees of power in society, the increase of the productive
powers of labor. The principle used to {ring} through the struggle
of the United States. {The increase of the productive powers
of labor}, that is the Hamiltonian principle.
What do we do now? We go to the green policy! What’s the
principle of the green policy? The green policy is less
productive, than the pre-green policy! In other words, we make
production more costly, and with less benefit, that’s the green
policy. Isn’t that insanity? Fracking, for example, isn’t that
insanity? And so, these are the kinds of considerations
which we have to deal with. And I have, today, right here,
— Boom! — right here, the complete formula, for what the policy
of the United States should be in terms of economy. It’s
the right policy, it’s based on Hamilton, which is the constitutional
policy of the United States, and all we have to do is stick
to it. We don’t need… we need innovation, scientific innovation,
other kinds of innovation, we need those things. We need
to do things we never did before. {But!} in principle, the
idea is, there’s a progression, where mankind is getting better,
and better, and better, in the capability of dealing with
the challenges before us.
And that’s where we are. Everything else is crap. OGDEN: Well, let me premise my next question
by citing a short passage from your new paper. This paper
is called, “Build the Real American Party, The Prospect for
a U.S. Future: Democrats in the Next Election.” And it is
now publicly available. But I think this passage really
lays out the parameters of the next question I’m going
to ask, so I’m just going to read it. You say:
“[T]he result of the assassination of President John F.
Kennedy, created a condition under which there has been no
actually net growth of the per-capita standards of production and
living since the assassination of President John Kennedy, through
to the present date. The growth of Wall Street and related
nominal income-wealth has not been actually productive, but,
rather, essentially parasitical. The collapse of the productive
standard of living in the U.S.A., in physical-productive terms
per capita and unit of energy-flux density, since the
cancellation of the Glass-Steagall Law, has been the greatest
rate of accelerating collapse of the per-capita welfare of the
net physical product of the U.S.A. economy in our history (not
counting the parasites pf Wall Street and comparable mere
parasites).” Now, earlier this week, LaRouche PAC issued
a leaflet, titled “The Cable Has Been Cut, British Empire’s
‘Bail-In’ Driving Thermonuclear World War III.” And
this leaflet featured an updated version of Mr. LaRouche heuristic
“Triple Curve Collapse Function,” which I’m going to display
on the screen here [{{Figure 1}], which shows the transition
from the hyperinflationary bail-out policy, of uncontrolled
money-printing, as you see there, to the implosion policy of
so-called “bail-in,” which Mr. LaRouche has likened to an
elevator in free-fall from the 70th floor, after its cable has
been cut. And as you can see on this diagram, starting right
there, after the Kennedy assassination, the net rate of growth of
the United States economy, has been consistently negative, while
{hundreds of trillions of dollars} in worthless financial assets
have been accumulated by Wall Street, with a rapid explosion of
this worthless money, following what we’ve come to call the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley-Lewinsky Act — and Monica Lewinsky certainly
was caught in the act — but, after the repeal of Glass-Steagall
in 1999, which came out of the setup and the virtual coup that
was run against Bill Clinton. So, let me now display the next graphic, [Figure
2, “World Financial Aggregates”]. In this graphic, you
see this process of hyperinflation taking off in 1999, with the,
at that point, estimated total financial aggregates worldwide,
at a level of around $275 trillion — that’s a lot of money
— in 1999, but surging to $1.7 {quadrillion} by 2013. That’s
a sextupling in a span of only 14 years (and sextupling might
have something to do with Monica Lewinsky, as well). But, what
happens in 2013? You can see, that when the bail-out begins, all
of that fake value, $1.7 {quadrillion} begins to go up in smoke,
just disappear into thin air.
Now, over this past week, there’s been a new resistance to
this British bail-out/bail-in policy, that has surfaced,
ironically from inside Great Britain itself. Mr. Liam Halligan,
who had written a column just over a year ago, right after
Cyprus, denouncing the bail-in policy, as what he called
“undermining the very financial and legal fabric of our system
itself,” and he’s consistently been on recording calling for
Glass-Steagall. Liam Halligan wrote a column this week, in
the {Telegraph}, in which he warns that “massive losses continue
to smolder on bank balance sheets,” and he quotes a City
of London fund manager, who says, and I think an apt comparison,
“QE is like putting a blanket over a dead body. It keeps
the flies away, but it doesn’t solve the problem. And now, we’re
just using bigger and bigger blankets.”
And Liam Halligan concludes his article by citing Lord
Lawson, who’s a member of Parliamentary Banking Commission, who
called last week for a “more radical approach, a full
Glass-Steagall separation,” and Halligan says, “Lord Lawson’s
remarks carry enormous political weight and are likely to reopen
the U.K.’s debate about the need to impose a Glass-Steagall
split.” Now, I want to come back to what you’ve been
discussing earlier this evening, Lyn, with the three-part
approach, premised on Glass-Steagall, but not limited to it:
#1) shutting down Wall Street, by restoring Glass-Steagall, and wiping
out all this fictitious debt that we saw; #2) returning
to Lincoln’s national banking model, in which all banks are accountable
and subservient to the Federal U.S. Treasury system, and then
#3) an FDR-style credit issuance, for large-scale projects,
such as NAWAPA, related measures, driven by a crash program
for thermonuclear fusion.
And if you think about it, it’s clear that these three steps
combined, taken as a unity, as the only solution to the collapse,
the Triple Curve Collapse process that you saw demonstrated here.
Now, in your latest paper, which we cited, “Build the Real
American Party,” you make the point that you made this evening,
that Wall Street’s very existence, is a fraud, according to the
true standards of net physical productivity, and you identify
this as the “Hamilton principle.” Now, you say, ” Hamiltons
Principle is … to be recognized as at the kernel of our Federal
Constitution: the perfectly unifying principle of eternal human
progress.” And this idea of a “unifying principle,” which you
come back to repeatedly, you say was elaborated in these four
reports, especially the {Opinion on the Constitutionality of a
National Bank}. And you say, in that report Hamilton “achieved a
relatively highest point of insight into the nature of the human
species” which you say is “the essential wholeness of that
species, a wholeness which is, in and of itself, the principle
which regulates the process as a whole: the noëtic principle of
the human mind.” So I found that quite provocative, and this
understanding of the Hamiltonian Principle as a principle of
“unity,” I just wanted to ask you to elaborate more on that. LAROUCHE: The problem is, forget money. Just
forget the idea of money as such. Money is simply an
instrument, a negotiating process, but money has no intrinsic
value. The difference is this, is the nature of the human
species, and the problem with all of these Wall Street and
similar types of fakers, and I do say “fakers,” advisedly,
is that they don’t understand the difference between mankind
and a beast. The difference is, mankind voluntarily {increases
its species power}, that’s what mankind does. And if it doesn’t
do that, it’s a failure.
So the point is, history shows in every way, that one thing
— what’s the difference between mankind and monkey? Mankind
cooks his own food at a fire. Monkeys don’t, animals don’t.
Now, human beings use fire. What does fire mean? It means
a conversion of increase of the energy flux density of the
process. So you go to higher and higher forms of temperature
application, and that’s how you do it. Now, this results in the
general principle of chemistry, that mankind goes to higher and
higher orders of chemistry. Now this takes place in the form of
such a thing — the idiots don’t understand this, that is, the
typical idiots who are the accountants, and they are idiots; they
don’t understand anything about this — what happens is, the
ability to raise the temperature of production, to higher levels,
is the upward evolution of mankind’s powers. The history of
mankind is the increase of higher and higher orders of power,
intensity of power. That is creativity. But that is done by whom? It’s done by mankind.
{No monkey can cook its own food.} Only mankind can do
it. So mankind’s acquisition of knowledge, of how to raise
the temperature of production, in effect, which comes into engineering,
use of radiation, reflecting radiation, all kinds
of things which are done to raise the relative energy flux density
of the process, and what mankind’s program is and meaning
is, is the increase of the energy flux density of mankind, in any
unit you want to mention.
And therefore, we are now going on, what? We are now going
beyond anything anybody anticipated to be the periodic table.
We’re out {beyond} the periodic table as such, up to higher
orders of energy flux density. We’re about to move out, into
nearby solar space, not to live there, but to make our arms’
reach effectively out there, to grab satellites out there,
control them, use them, harvest them! And to find ourselves able
to create more power, to control the processes within the Solar
System itself, all being done essentially, by mankind on Earth.
The use of helium-3 as a stimulus, for the higher energy flux
density, of very higher temperature processes. This is another
case! Mankind has the ability to reach out, beyond
space, not to live there, because our conditions of life
as a human species are vulnerable, but {we can reach out, by artificial
means} and exert actions on nearby solar space. We can improve
the neighborhood of nearby solar space, and we can do it by
remote control. We can create, on Earth and on the Moon as such,
we can create the instruments, we can begin to understand what
mankind is, because when we lose dependency on the idea of sense-perception
as such, and realize that we can create — let’s take
one case of this, exemplary case.
You had a gentleman who was the first to discover the Solar
System. He came from a succession of scientists, who made these
discoveries, and he, Kepler, discovered the Solar System. Nobody
else had ever discovered the Solar System! Only Johannes Kepler
had ever discovered the Solar System! All competent science, all
competent European science, depends and has depended, since the
work of people, the greatest scientists, who understood this.
And so, mankind has a noëtic power ability, to create abilities,
intellectual abilities, to create {higher energy flux densities},
controlled by mankind to control the destiny of mankind, and
there is no limit to what mankind can achieve! There may be
specific limits to specific kinds of things. But the idea of
progress, as a human characteristic is something {inherent} in
the human species, and always has been. And therefore, even when mankind can not live
on Mars, or can not live in nearby space, mankind can
{control processes} in nearby space. And we’re at the point where
we no longer are dependent on green policies, we’re no longer
dependent upon these mythologies that we depended upon before;
we’re no longer limited to sense-perception! We have discovered means
by which we can indirectly control the effects we used to
attribute to sense-perception. We can measure things we
never could measure before. We are capable of functioning beyond
the range of any notion of human sense-perception!
And what the idiots want to do, is take that away from us.
But everything I’ve said right now, is true. It’s a
generality in large degree, but it’s true. And {there is no
limit, to what mankind can accomplish}. We don’t know what the
limits might be, but we can not believe that there is any limit,
because if we look at the history of mankind, mankind has come
from a creature, which was barely able to cook his own food, but
no other living creature ever could do that, except mankind.
We’ve seen the history of chemistry, we see how chemistry is
a human creation, it is not something out there which is
so-called “naturally independent,” it’s a human creation. We
voluntarily raised the energy flux density, and what we’re doing
with chemistry is exactly that — that’s why the mathematicians
are such idiots! They’re not chemists. You have all these jerks
out there, who call themselves scientists, they’re not
scientists, what’re they doing? They’re working with calculating
machines! A calculating machine will never give you chemistry,
but they’re doing it! They’re idiots! They’re fools.
And the point is, we have to realize what the human species
is, and what the human mind is. We are not limited to
sense-perception. That’s one of the great fallacies the idea
that the human mind is limited to sense-perception. No: Whatever
effects we can create by will, are products of the human mind,
not of sense-perception. And that’s — I could on and on for that,
for a long time. But that, in brief, sums up the whole matter:
All those poor fellows out there, don’t know what they’re
missing. And I would hope they would come to understand that. CREIGHTON JONES: Okay, well, Lyn, we will
ask you to elaborate a bit more on what you just opened
up. [laughter] Now, as you know, a number of us have been
involved in discussions over the last weeks and months,
with some leading scientists in the field of fusion, the next
platform of increased energy flux density.
The problem we run into, is that — these are not bad
people; they’re committed to science, they’ve given their lives
to the idea of advancing science, of making discoveries, or at
least attempting to make discoveries, making breakthroughs in the
fields of fusion and other areas. But they seem to be lacking
the appropriate method, typically, the method comes down to
taking a number of measurements, codifying those measurements
into some sort of mathematics, putting it into a computer, seeing
what the computer spits out as a forecast of what will happen,
then they run a test. And the physical test doesn’t cohere with
what the mathematics said or what the computer spit
out, so they refine their measurements and they do the process
and. And they just keep doing that over and over and over, seemingly
spinning their wheels, not making the breakthroughs that
are necessary. Now, this seems to be in direct contrast to
what you’ve been discussing with what you’ve called the “two
triads,” the Brunelleschi-Cusa-Kepler triad; and then the
yet-unfinished business of the triad of Planck, Einstein,
and Vernadsky. Where, if you just look at Planck, for example, his
discovery of the quantum did not come about through deduction:
He introduced a new hypothesis to resolve a problem, about
a new type of action, a “quantum of action.” Or Einstein, his discovery
of relativity did not come out of a deduction. He first
asked the question, “what would the universe look like if I was
riding on the front of a wave of light?” And he started with a
very, seemingly abstract question.
So there seems to be a very difference quality of method
involved, when you look at the likes of a Planck or an Einstein,
versus what we see occurring today in the field of science,
despite what might be very well-intentioned minds. So, for those
who would like to see a discovery made, who would like to achieve
a breakthrough towards this next-higher platform, what do you say
should be the proper method of investigation? LAROUCHE: Well, first of all, you have to
drop the whole investigation, and say, “wait a minute, this
seems to be a blind alley. What’s wrong?” Well, I can tell you
what’s wrong, because I know, psychologically know from
my own experience, which, actually before adolescence, but in
adolescence, in particular, became very clear to me, what
this whole business was.
What I saw was a social phenomenon, and the social
phenomenon which I saw, was the classroom. And I realized that
the members of the classroom, were essentially all behaving like
idiots. Because what they were doing, they were given an
assignment, to answer the question in the mind of the teacher, or
whoever was administering this examination, and they would get a
grade based on how well they fit the predetermined presumption,
of the classroom, or of the teacher or whatever else. And I
learned in the course of this in experience, at least by the time
I was 12 or 13 years of age, I recognized that Euclidean geometry
was a great fraud. The whole thing was a fake from beginning to
end. And yet, I was sitting amidst all these classrooms in which
various kinds of geometry, various levels of geometry and so
forth were being taught. And I would sit there in disgust!
And I found this kind of experience, the experience I saw
with the classroom generally, the students were actually being
brainwashed! And that’s not an unfair characterization: Because
they wanted to get a satisfactory grade! They would stereotype
themselves to say, “I’m going to get an A,” and they would find
they would get an A. They would get a B-, a C, a D, or an {E —
or an F!} and they would themselves, the teacher would rate the
students, and the institutions, entirely on the basis of these
assumptions! But the point was, as I discovered, I could
discoveries. And I made discoveries which told me, that
this was nonsense! That the test was a fraud!
Now, the exemplification which solidified that for me
personally, and I was barely a teenager than, was this case of
Euclid. When I was sure, that Euclid was bullshit, and other
things I thought were bullshit, were bullshit, I was free! I was
no longer worried about the grade. If they flunked me, I flunked
them — and I did! [laughter] And the problem is, if you think about it,
if you reflect, I mean, today of course the student is in a
much worse condition than was in in my time. Today, the student
has no fair change at all. And there’s no intention to give the
student a fair chance, there’s no intention. What’s taught in the
classrooms today, is {criminal}! The teaching profession today
is becoming absolutely {criminal}! Destroying the mentality — no
wonder the young kids are on drugs, with the kinds of schools they’re
going to, and the programs they have! Because we have, the green
policy has been a synonym for the destruction of the minds of
our young people! Why are they on drugs? Because of that! Because
of the classroom process! Because they have no self-assured
sense of personal identity: {It doesn’t mean anything!}
For them, there is no such thing as truth! It’s what you like
to lick, or don’t. And that’s what it amounts to.
Now, if we change the subject, a bit, and say, well, all
right, let’s make a requirement, that no teacher can grade a
student on that basis, the teacher is going to say — to a
smaller classroom, actually; because you can’t handle all that.
If you go over 15 students, or even 12 students, you’re going to
have a problem in really conducting a class which is 40 minutes
in duration, you can do little in that period of time. So if the
teacher is smart and actually well-intentioned and understanding,
will say: Okay, this is my objective — my objective, as the
teacher, to stimulate the student, to come up with something.
It’s my responsibility as a teacher to now think about what that
student did, in response to the stimulus. And look for the
geniuses. A great school, looks for geniuses. Not based on
learning what the teachers had told them, but of trying to
stimulate in the student, see which student could make a
discovery which was beyond what the teacher has prescribed.
So you don’t want to teach backwards: You don’t want to
teach the application of the predetermined, predigested idea.
You want to {stimulate} the student to make a discovery. And if
the student fails, that’s all right! That’s not a problem: The
point is, {don’t prejudge the student’s mind!} Analyze what the
student has done, and ask the student to explain, what do he
think he’s done, or she’s done? {That’s} the way to educate!
The idea of this predetermined standard of supplying the right
answers to the right questions , is a destructive process.
Now, what happened, you had a change from Franklin
Roosevelt: The minute that Franklin Roosevelt left office, the
United States was in deep kimchee, because Truman came in, and
the Dulles brothers came in: Evil fellows, indeed. And the FBI
got bad. So therefore, what happened is you had an idea of
tyranny, a British influence upon the United States’ educational
system, which had the effect of tyranny, {to standardize what the
student is supposed to be taught to believe!} And the
implication of the whipping if he doesn’t say the right answer.
So the point is, you don’t want to dictate to children; yes,
you want to control the situation, but you want to control the
situation so the student’s mind can function, the child’s mind
can function. You want the child to suggest to you, what the
child thinks! And you find that mothers, and parents, generally,
will look at that, if they’re intelligent, they going to want to
encourage the student to do some thinking. And you have to
appreciate at what levels of age-group that they can do these
things. But you want to push toward the top, to find out what
level they can achieve. And stimulate them, to try to see if
they can do that. And that’s how all the creative minds worked.
All the great discoverers in science worked that way: Go
to the top the best you can do. Hmm? And it’s better that you
should fail, than that you should swallow some predigested kinds
of nonsense. So you want to {stimulate} people to think! You want
them to think for themselves! Not in some wild way, but you
want to challenge them: “What do you think the answer is, to
this? What’s your opinion about what this is?” And try to evoke
a serious response from the student. And you’ll find out, how,
as I see in my own experience, you often find that some of these
children, who you think were children, can be {very} intelligent!
What you know is you can recognize, {they saw the answer before
the question came.} That was the bright student: The student
always had anticipated the answer, before the question
was delivered. Because the very setting of the classroom,
created that, so that the student would see where this is going
toward. “Hey! Wait a minute, I see where this is going — hey!!
I understand it now!” And that’s what the difference is. I have
the advantage, of being independent enough, so forth, all these
other kinds of things, so I did everything on my own — not
everything, but in general, it was my own idea. {Learn} something!
Don’t learn to be taught: {Discover!} Discover: And find
out when it doesn’t work, and when it does. And learn from those
experiments, what the whole story’s about. OGDEN: That was a very beautiful answer. We’re
going to bring a conclusion to the webcast tonight.
Before I end, I want to just announce that there will be a joint
town hall meeting occurring simultaneously in Texas and California
tomorrow, being hosted by Kesha Rogers, who’s a candidate
for U.S Senate in Texas, and Michael Steger, who’s a candidate
for U.S. Congress in California. This is going to be broadcast
live over the Kesha Rogers website, which is http://www.kesharogers.com/
and viewers can participate. Tune in to that website to
participate live. So that’s a conclusion to our broadcast tonight.
Thanks a lot, Cody, for joining us, and thank you very
much, Lyn. Good night.

Robin Kshlerin

RELATED ARTICLES

9 COMMENTS

  1. GeorgeAlexanderOz Posted on April 12, 2014 at 3:05 pm

    I wish Larouche would disclose at some time where he got that "human energy flux density" from. It's certainly not from Michael J. Fox. However, I have quite a good idea, but I wonder why Larouche doesn't name the man. Look up for an article titled "The Problem of Increasing Human Energy" where the very notion is intelligently summarized. Take a guess: who wrote that article? If Larouche took that man more seriously, he wouldn't look for solutions in the nuclear fusion nonsense, but in other, more viable areas. Please also look up the ThunderboltsProject on YT on that matter.

    Finally, I'd like to see Larouche explain why Euklidian geometry is supposed to be nonsense. Is it because he thinks the Einsteinian concept of bent space is the real deal? Even if that was so, Euklidian geometry is the base of all other geometries. It is geometry of space without distortion and without contained forces. Einsteinian geometry is Euklidian geometry plus the bent space twist. All other geometries contain Euklidian geometry. So according to Larouche, all other geometries would be nonsense too, therefore also Einsteinian geometry. Maybe Larouche is right, but then there's no viable geometry that's no nonsense. For my part, I consider the concept of bent space as nonsensical.

    Reply
  2. pascalduguay32814 Posted on April 13, 2014 at 11:18 am

    the queen of England and few
    illuminati has they agenda to
    reduce the population this also the
    purpose of the female deity
    Memphis belle #17 this is why
    birth rate is low now worldwide
    older people lives longer but they
    have to die first in order to reincarnation there is the carbon
    matter body and the soul the energy being

    Reply
  3. pascalduguay32814 Posted on April 13, 2014 at 11:29 am

    of course the students been brain
    wash all the university system is
    twisted it's to give a fake version
    of the science

    Reply
  4. wzrsk Posted on April 13, 2014 at 10:11 pm

    When you come out against the "GREEN" movement you condemn also local sustainability.  There is no reason why every town shouldn't raise their own chickens instead of most coming half-way across the country in huge mega-factory farms.  That's just one example of what "green" means to me.  Then there are soooooo many chickens in these factory farms that they are raised inhumanly and the chicken poop (normally a good fertilizer) becomes a toxic waste.  Take a look at Coskata – you talk about energy flux density – every town should also convert their own waste streams into recycled products as well as ENERGY!   The factory was fine for building automobiles – but America embraced the factory model too far.  We need to de-centralize many things.

    Reply
  5. OneEye Monster Posted on April 16, 2014 at 1:00 am

    Obviously Zeus punished Prometheus for a good reason. Evidently this current spicy of man totally fucked up the rock playing with fucken fire. Other intelligent life form would simply view man as a virus or disease. A couple million yrs here and there is nothing but a flash. Stars and galaxy die and reborn all the time…we are that insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

    Reply
  6. OneEye Monster Posted on April 16, 2014 at 1:29 am

    There's shit loads of old nuke plants east of the Mississippi and less in the west.
    Wipp had an accident spill and they don't know WTF. Fukushima had been leaking mox fuel into the ocean for over 3 yrs 24/7 and there's no signs of it getting resolved or rectified. This old man is about as crazy as the rest of them. He's on his way out. He don't give a fuck about your health or your family. NOT ONE WORD ABOUT FUKUSHIMA or WIPP…the worst nuclear disaster mankind had faced. We're already in a nuclear holocaust. Yet, he's pushing the idea of making more nuclear power plants that produces nuclear energy that is currently required for space explorations, MORE BULLSHIT..everyone have their own hidden agenda.

    Reply
  7. Chuck Jones Posted on April 22, 2014 at 12:27 am

    Get real! Obama will not be impeached as long as the Democrats control the Senate. No amount of newspaper ads will change that.

    Reply
  8. CHistrue Posted on August 15, 2014 at 7:15 pm

    A lot of what this gentleman says is very valid.  I trust the Wall Street oligarchy as far as I can throw them and a lot of them are very heavy.

    I have heard that he doubts Newton and much of modern physics so I would want clarification on that.  I would also want to know if he would include everyone, black, white, Jewish, Gentile, gay, straight, et al.

    Reply
  9. Willie Daniel Posted on July 17, 2019 at 9:02 pm

    I want to return to Manhattan NYC just to be in your presence Larouche over the top ? Money has no value I do not understand monet does have value Larouche I like you tremendously

    Reply
LEAVE A COMMENT