Lyndon LaRouche

Lyndon_LaRoucheLyndon LaRouche is one of the strangest people in the world.    Having the ear of various presidents and senior people worldwide, especially in China and Iran, one wonders what his game is.

The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, wrote that LaRouche leads “what may well be one of the strangest political groups in American history.”[170] According to the Foundation, LaRouche believes that a super elite (the “oligarchy”) is in control of world events, a group that includes the Rockefellers, the London financial center, the British royal family, the Anti-Defamation League, the KGB, and the Heritage Foundation itself.

Others include Nazis, Jesuits, Freemasons, Communists, Trilateralists, international bankers, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Socialist International—all supposedly controlled by the British—as well as Hitler, H.G. Wells, Voltaire, and the Beatles as representatives of the 1960s counterculture.

George Johnson in Architects of Fear (1983) compares the view to the Illuminati conspiracy theory; after he wrote about LaRouche in The New York Times, LaRouche’s followers denounced Johnson as part of a conspiracy of elitists that began in ancient Egypt.[171]

On the public record, he’s a “national communist”:

LaRouche briefly joined the rival Spartacist League before announcing his intention to build a new “Fifth International.” [13]   In 1967 LaRouche began teaching classes on Marx’s dialectical materialism at New York City’s Free School, and attracted a group of students from Columbia University and the City College of New York, recommending that they read Das Kapital, as well as Hegel, Kant, and Leibniz.

And that global influence:

Norman Bailey, formerly with the National Security Council, said in 1984 that LaRouche’s staff comprised “one of the best private intelligence services in the world”; he said, “They do know a lot of people around the world. They do get to talk to prime ministers and presidents.” Several government officials feared a security leak from the government’s ties with the movement.[23]

According to critics, the supposed behind-the-scenes processes, were more often flights of fancy than inside information. Douglas Foster wrote in Mother Jones in 1982 that the briefings consisted of disinformation, “hate-filled” material about enemies, phony letters, intimidation, fake newspaper articles, and dirty tricks campaigns. Opponents were accused of being gay or Nazis, or were linked to murders, which the movement called “psywar techniques.”[24]

The anti-semitic charge was levelled:

From the mid-1970s onwards, allegations appeared that LaRouche had fascist and anti-Semitic tendencies.[174] Paul Montgomery wrote in The New York Times that the charges dated to around 1976, when LaRouche’s U.S. Labor Party began to include Zionist and Jewish groups in its stories about conspiracies.

In an interview with Newsnight, Chip Berlet of Political Research Associates, an American research group that tracks right-wing movements, said:

The antisemitism at a meeting of the Schiller Institute would not be obvious at first. You would have to listen over time to a … set of patterns, and you would begin to hear the echoes of the classic antisemitic conspiracy theories, in the way that Israel is talked about, in the way that Jews are talked about, in the way that the idea is put forward that the wars of America are somehow manipulated by Jewish lobbies and Israeli interests, and this really is an echo of the old classic antisemitic conspiracy theories. It’s not that every criticism of Israel or American-Jewish lobby groups is antisemitic, but over time this pattern emerges.”[32]

LaRouche maintained that he was anti-Zionist, not anti-Semitic.[175] When the ADL accused him of anti-Semitism in 1979, he filed a $26-million libel suit; Justice Michael Dontzin of the New York Supreme Court ruled that it was fair comment, and that the facts “reasonably give rise” to that description.[176] LaRouche said in 1986 that descriptions of him as a neo-fascist or anti-Semite stemmed from “the drug lobby or the Soviet operation—which is sometimes the same thing,” and in 2006 wrote that “religious and racial hatred, such as anti-Semitism, or hatred against Islam, or, hatred of Christians, is, on record of known history, the most evil expression of criminality to be seen on the planet today.”[177]

Frankly, there is a distinction between someone who is Jewish in background and Zionism, a political movement.

Coercion and cult:

LaRouche began writing in 1973 about the use of certain psychological techniques on recruits. In an article called “Beyond Psychoanalysis”, he wrote that a worker’s persona had to be stripped away to arrive at a state he called “little me,” from which it would be possible to “rebuild their personalities around a new socialist identity,” according to The Washington Post.[39]

Interesting that the NYT and WP took such an interest.   For someone garnering few votes in elections, he sure gets the attention of the PTB.

There are the allegations of torture techniques on members, that they must sign over their assets and take loans on behalf of the Schiller Institute.

There was the Verdi pitch controversy where hundreds of opera people, including stars, supported his tuning fork pitched differently and according to musical people, more correctly for Verdi and others.

The Schiller Institute initiative attracted support from more than 300 opera stars, including Joan Sutherland, Plácido Domingo and Luciano Pavarotti, who according to Opera Fanatic may or may not have been aware of LaRouche’s politics.

However, this allegedly translated into the “pitch police” where at concerts, his henchmen would coerce musicians to use the new forks and threatened those who wouldn’t.

He began a youth movement and said he admired FDR’s ways.  He began the US Labor Party, with a black power salute as logo but Farrakhan and others are bitterly opposed to him.

Yet economists on all sides say he is perceptive:

On October 13, 1999, during a press conference to announce his plans to run for president, he predicted the collapse of the world’s financial system, stating, “There’s nothing like it in this century…. it is systematic, and therefore, inevitable.” He said the U.S. and other nations had built the “biggest financial bubble in all history,” which was close to bankruptcy.[151]

Perhaps being allegedly part of the move himself, he might well be perceptive.  Perhaps he’s just another Buffet or Soros … or even Koch.

In 2002 LaRouche’s Executive Intelligence Review argued that the September 11, 2001 attacks had been an “inside job” and “attempted coup d’etat,” and that Iran was the first country to question it.

That in itself, along with his communist antecedents and ready acceptance by oppressive regimes is cause for concern to the U.S. PTB.

LaRouche and his followers denied that human civilization had harmed the environment through DDT, chluorofluorocarbons, or carbon dioxide. According to Chip Berlet, “Pro-LaRouche publications have been at the forefront of denying the reality of global warming”.[155]

Ah, now that puts him into our own camp.   There was actually sense in this too:

During 2007 he proposed a “Homeowners and Bank Protection Act”. This called for the establishment of a federal agency that would “place federal- and state-chartered banks under protection, freeze all existing home mortgages for a period of time, adjust mortgage values to fair prices, restructure existing mortgages at appropriate interest rates, and write off speculative debt obligations of mortgage-backed securities”.

The bill envisioned a foreclosure moratorium, allowing homeowners to make the equivalent of rental payments for an interim period, and an end to bank bail-outs, forcing banks to reorganize under bankruptcy laws.[160]

The problem is that so many things come thick and fast with him that there’s barely time to pause and analyze:

LaRouche believes that a super elite (the “oligarchy”) is in control of world events, a group that includes the Rockefellers, the London financial center, the British royal family, the Anti-Defamation League, the KGB, and the Heritage Foundation itself. Others include Nazis, Jesuits, Freemasons, Communists, Trilateralists, international bankers, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Socialist International—all supposedly controlled by the British—as well as Hitler, H.G. Wells, Voltaire, and the Beatles as representatives of the 1960s counterculture.

George Johnson in Architects of Fear (1983) compares the view to the Illuminati conspiracy theory; after he wrote about LaRouche in The New York Times, LaRouche’s followers denounced Johnson as part of a conspiracy of elitists that began in ancient Egypt.[171]

Going through those, the Egyptian thing is what the Masons themselves are into, according to their own literature.  He includes communists and yet he was one, he has a “Labour” party with black power salute.  The enemies listed are mostly those we also oppose on the centre-right.   The mention of Illuminati is just another term for the global elite.   Give it that “I” name and people get hysterical, for and against.

He mentions Voltaire – read the French Revolution and Voltaire’s provocation was very much a major factor in what went on – he was the thinktank of the day.

So he gets so much right, including the Venetians and the Frankfurt School and yet it is mixed in with all this other guff.   Thus to quote the Schiller Institute on anything is like quoting Alex Jones or Jesse Ventura, even though Jones or Ventura might actually have got onto something.   Many people stumble on the truth and then go off the rails in following it.

It’s one thing showing a direct link between the Frankfurt School and the drug beatniks of the 60s, such as Leary and quite another to put it all down to men from mars, not that he does that but that’s the general principle here.

According to Christopher Toumey, LaRouche’s charismatic authority within the movement is grounded on members’ belief that he possesses a unique level of insight and expertise. He identifies an emotionally charged issue, conducts in-depth research into it, then proposes a simplistic solution, usually involving restructuring of the economy or national security apparatus.

Which is a worry because this blog “identifies an emotionally charged issue, conducts in-depth research into it, then proposes a simplistic solution” quite often and quite often, Occam’s Razor is sufficient.

LaRouche has been widely praised for perspicacity, particularly on matters economic and yet he also goes for all the other things which severely undercut his authority on matters political, even though he gets much of it right.

Strange man indeed.   Global shill or fighter for humanity?

4 comments for “Lyndon LaRouche

  1. September 12, 2013 at 11:00

    The Illuminati, the PTB, the ‘Elites’ etc etc get to include more and more people every day. Soon they may reach majority status.

  2. Nixon Scraypes
    September 12, 2013 at 13:23

    He gets some things right and some things wrong,just like James Higham,Nixon Scraypes and ,you know, everybody..I was alerted to the banking swindle by Icke,researched it and found he was correct.Unfortunately my reptilian researches got no further than London Zoo! No problem 1 out of 2 is a good result.It’s following great leaders that’s the problem,those people with a “unique level of insight and expertise.”As far as I can see,if you follow Ghandi you could just as easily follow Stalin.

  3. Harry J
    September 12, 2013 at 13:56

    On balance my thoughts are global shill. Ditto Icke.

  4. September 12, 2013 at 20:35

    Some of his research is first class. Defo worth a perusal of his material in the American Almanac in my opinion.

Comments are closed.