30 LaRouche’s 90th Birthday EIR September 21, 2012
Lyndon LaRouche gave this address on Sept. 9, the day
after his 90th birthday, to a large gathering of friends,
who joined him to celebrate this milestone.
As you would expect from me, you will get the best
possible quality of bad news. And the advantage of that
is that it’s truthful. You can have confidence in that.
There are actually a number of subjects which are of
solemn importance on this occasion, and I shall outline
these subjects, state a few things about them, so they are
clearly identified, and then, I presume somewhere in
the process, if there’s discussion of some of these subjects
by me, you’ll find some way of dealing with that.
The problem here is that, we have two candidates,
neither of which is fit to run for office as President. And
we are faced with the most dangerous situation in the
history of mankind. The danger is explicitly that of
thermonuclear war. We are at the brink of thermonuclear
war. That doesn’t mean we’re going to have it; it
means that some people are organizing for it, and it
would tend to happen under certain conditions.
Such a war, if launched, would not necessarily kill
everybody at once, but it would create conditions lasting
years, which would generally eliminate the human
species. If there’s no food supply for several years, and
similar kinds of problems, the human race can be rendered
extinct. This has been the concern of responsible
people, for many years, actually since, shall we say,
about the 1950s, when, in the middle of the 1950s, we
had reached the point that thermonuclear weapons, or
weapons systems, existed. And if nuclear weapons, nuclear
fusion weapons, are used for purposes of general
warfare, what will happen in these days, is that it will
take about one and a half hours, at most, to produce an
effect which virtually eliminates the human species.
That is the intention associated with Barack Obama,
the current President, and the one who has just been renominated
for election as President. This is the ugly reality
of the situation.
Now, this has implications which are, shall we say,
more interesting: that first of all, the deployment, in say,
the space of an hour and a half, until the U.S. submarines
which deploy these missiles have done their job;
the British have done their job; and Russia and China
have responded to the launch—the result will be within
that very short period of time, that it may not kill everybody
on the planet, but it will condemn everyone to
death.
This has been understood, and known in principle,
since the middle of the 1950s, and was certainly clear
by the 1960s. And now, the fact is, that the President of
the United States has engaged himself in a commitment
to warfare, which must inevitably lead to that deadly
hour and a half, in which most of the human species is
exterminated. And therefore, the issue here, the leading
issue above all others, is that Obama must not become
EIR LaRouche’s 90th Birthday
September 21, 2012 EIR LaRouche’s 90th Birthday 31
President again! Should he become President again,
except as in a prison, then the existence of mankind is
in jeopardy.
Any War Will Be Thernonuclear War
What’s the implication of this? Because this is not
just a fact, and it is a fact. It’s known to everyone who’s
competent. We have, for example, the Joint Chiefs of
Staff of the United States, not in alliance with Russia,
but in agreement with Russia, in a certain kind of agreement,
together with China and other nations that are involved—
that if the war starts, it starts, and the ending
within about an hour and a half, is either the extinction
of the human population, or of a great part of it, and the
consequent death of all.
Now, the implication is, what does that have to do
with war? Is there a legitimate war? Well, in general, no.
Because the nature of war is such that there is no real
solution for wars, especially now, since the standard of
warfare is thermonuclear war, done largely with ‘submarines,
and everybody’s in a rush to get their weapons
deployed, within immediately a half-hour, and then, certainly
by an hour and a half, all of these weapons that are
presently in the possession of the relevant parties will be
used up. And so will the human species.
So it means that the time has come, when the idea of
warfare, as we’ve understood it traditionally, is no
longer allowed. Well, why should it be allowed? Because
the ratio of kill involved in the very commitment
to warfare is such, that it means the extinction of the
human species. Now, how can the human species agree
to its own extinction? Except by madness.
So therefore, we’ve come to a time where the issues
of warfare, as warfare, must be addressed in a different
way, and this means an examination of the motives for
warfare. People decide to use force to impose their will
upon others, or to prevent others from imposing their
will by the same means. It means that the question of
government, self-government of the human species,
will have to undergo a change.
Now, there are some very good changes to be made.
We had recently the wonderful landing on Mars. There
had been other landings on Mars, which were relatively
wonderful in their time. They were genuine achievements,
and some of these elements are still floating
around and being used. But the most recent one was a
qualitatively great uptick in the whole process.
Asteroids: Another Deadly Weapon
And what we should be doing, essentially, is we
should be going to that, because we have another
weapon in this, another deadly weapon in this Solar
System. It’s called asteroids! And it is known to us, although
there are many uncertainties involved, that asteroids
are very dangerous, particularly if they hit Earth.
Many of the asteroid hits, which have happened on
Earth, and which could happen, or which are about to
happen, somewhere along the line, are very deadly.
Whole city areas are easily wiped out on a minimum by
these kinds of things; or several of them.
Therefore, the question is—we have another physical
enemy of humanity, apart from warfare among human
beings—and that is: How do we defend Earth from asteroids?
Now, the area is full of asteroids! We don’t even
know where most of them are; we know the general order
of magnitude of quantity of these asteroids. We also have
EIRNS/Stuart Lewis
The landing of Curiosity on Mars was wonderful, LaRouche
stated, a “great uptick” in man’s exploration of space. Here, he
examines a globe of Mars, presented to him as a birthday gift.
32 LaRouche’s 90th Birthday EIR September 21, 2012
intimations that the rate of these asteroid
passages, as our Solar System goes
through its routines into different parts of
the galactic system, the indications are
now, or the hints, are that they are going to
increase. And we know where some of the
things are, but we don’t know where most
of them are! We suspect certain ones
might hit Earth, but we’re not quite sure
whether they will.
Some we know about, and we understand
that there are ways in which they
can be diverted, so that the asteroid
passes by, without striking Earth, like
what happened last year, where an asteroid
got in, floating between the Moon
and Earth. And it didn’t actually hurt
anybody, as far as we know. But we’re
living under that kind of threat, which is
not the same thing as the military threat,
but it’s also the idea of what defense is.
How do we defend the Earth from
these things? And some of them, as in the past, have hit
Earth, in the ancient past, and they’re totally destructive.
Others have been more limited in what they destroyed,
and as we’ve discussed among ourselves, you
could take out the Los Angeles area, or the San Francisco
area; other comparable territories of the planet are
subject to this kind of thing from time to time, from the
relatively smaller asteroids.
So therefore, we’ve come to the point, as Dr. Edward
Teller launched this in the aftermath of his opposition to
thermonuclear war. And he was a key part of the operation
which I was a participant in, in the defense of Earth,
against the nuclear war. And he continued to go on this
question of defense of Earth against asteroids and similar
kinds of problems. And that is being continued
today.
And what happened is the SDI, which is something
which I had the privilege of initiating, back in the late
1970s and early ’80s. The SDI has now been upgraded:
It’s called the Defense of Earth, and that’s our commitment,
on military questions: the defense of Earth, the
defense of its people, the defense of its future. And the
problem is one which, by its nature, lends itself, at least
to the suggestion, that we could take the means which
we otherwise would have used in the past for warfare—
but these means could be used in various ways to defend
the population of Earth.
So now, the war we have is the war against those
asteroids, which might eliminate the human population,
or at least a large part of it. This is the new war.
This is the new policy of defense. And the policy of
defense is negative, in the sense of trying to defend the
Earth against an attacking problem; and also positive,
in the sense of using our exploration of space, in our
defense of Earth from space, and use that to increase the
benefits and power of the human species.
I’m not pushing now for large-scale colonization on
Mars. However, I do not prohibit mankind from developing
Mars as a place of occupation. I simply insist
there are other means, which are more appropriate right
now, for the defense of Earth against asteroids and
things of that sort; that we had a recent achievement in
the launching of this Curiosity, which is the greatest
achievement so far, of this type.
Mankind Will Have To Move On
And this is another reason you have to get rid of
Obama. You have to get rid of all of his policies, because
we need every bit of these things that Obama was
shutting down, for the defense of Earth, and the defense
of humanity. We’ve got to get those satellites out there
around Earth and other kinds of things; we’ve got to
improve our abilities to forecast the problems of these
asteroids threatening Earth.
U.S. Navy/Petty Officer 2nd Class James Kimber
The standard of warfare is thermonuclear war, done largely with submarines,
LaRouche stated, “and everybody’s in a rush to get their weapons deployed; and
then, by an hour and a half, all of these weapons will be used up. And so will the
human species.” Shown: the ballistic missile submarine USS Alaska, January
2012.
September 21, 2012 EIR LaRouche’s 90th Birthday 33
We’ve got to think in the long term of going beyond
that, because sooner or later, the Sun’s going to be gone,
and long before the Sun is gone, it’s going to be a very
unpleasant neighbor, or neighborhood. So mankind is
going to have to continue our existence in other places.
We’re going to have to move on, as a human species, by
increasing the power at our disposal. Because we know
the creative powers of the human being, which, insofar
as we know, are unique to the human species! No other
living species known to us has ever demonstrated the
capability of creativity. The only willful creativity that
has ever occurred, by any species, is by mankind.
And we have to change the policies of mankind, and
instead of trying to keep people down as cheap labor,
we’ve got to go in exactly the opposite direction. We’ve
got to go to a perspective that we’re going to manage
nearby space! We’re going to deal and negotiate with
this system that we live under. We’re going to make it
habitable. Because mankind, unlike any other species,
has genuine creativity, the ability to make discoveries,
and apply these discoveries, that no other living species
known to us can do.
And our destiny is not just to be the same ol’, same
ol’, as we are now. Our destiny lies in the fact of the
human mind, not necessarily the brain as such but the
human mind, the creative powers that the human being
represents, and which, for us, is also called, the power
to do good. The prevention of doing harm, and the
means of doing good.
There’s no shame in mankind’s advancing to living
in a condition, way beyond anything we can imagine
today. But we have to think in that direction now, not to
say it’s something of the distant future—it may be
something of the distant future, in part—but we can not
limit ourselves, by our nature as human beings, when
we think like human beings, rather than animals; when
we think, actually, like human beings as creative beings,
the only ones we know of in the universe so far, that
means that it’s not just defending us, negatively, selfishly:
It’s the point, because we, as a human species
have a mission in this universe.
We don’t know a lot of things about that, but we
know we have this power, which is very poorly developed
among us, because our educational systems stink,
our outlooks stink! We are not living up to what mankind
is: Mankind has a special destiny in the universe as
we know it. And our job is to live up to that destiny. Not
to demand that everything be limited to what we can do,
and what we know today. We must not deprive those
who succeed us, from realizing the greater good that
they will be able to do, if we lay the basis for their
achievement of that capability.
And therefore, our whole view of politics must now
change! It must change on the negative side, because
we can no longer have major war on this planet. It can
not exist! It can not be tolerated. Obama must be taken
out of office, and heads of state and government like
that must be removed from office. They must not have
the power to utilize these kinds of weapons systems and
means. And it would be the greatest of all crimes to
allow any President of the United States, or similar
heads of state, to have the authority to launch thermonuclear
war.
And that’s an absolute: There’s no room on this
planet for any President, or any other major head of
state, who seeks to launch thermonuclearAnd if major
war comes, it is thermonuclear war. And within an hour
and a half, the destiny of the human species can be all
over.
And therefore, this President and what he represents,
and similar kinds of people, must be removed
from power! It’s not because we’re pacifists. We’re
against killing of human beings, because we’re for the
realization of what a human being is, the only known
creative species, in existence, as far as we know. And
that is sacred.
Human beings, as a species, must be defended, because
of the creativity that we represent. Which means
that we must defend that creativity, but we must also
promote it. Our mission to Mars, for example, is a
complicated question, but it’s also, obviously, for
many of us—or some of us, anyway—it’s a feasible
proposition. And it means that mankind has within its
power, the power to do things which are beyond the
imagination.
We can explore the universe. We can explore, particularly,
the Solar System. We know that we have the
potential ability, innate in the nature of things, that
mankind can actually begin to take over the Solar
System. Whether we’re going to inhabit it or not, is not
the question; we’re going to take it over. Because if we
use the power of the speed of light, which is what we
call communications systems now—electronic communication—
we can actually control this Solar System;
at first, the inner part, which includes Mars, and gradually,
at a later point, we’ll have greater power, and we
can reach further.
We can also do explorations earlier which give us
34 LaRouche’s 90th Birthday EIR September 21, 2012
knowledge. These things are innate in the nature of mankind,
the nature of mankind which many politicians have
no sense of whatsoever! But we, as we live and die, as
persons, must have the right to access to a meaningful
course of life, to the ability to do something with our
lives, which we can rest upon as we die, and know has
something to do of permanent value for the human species.
And that is what must be protected and defended.
The Parties Are Over
Now, that said, look at what some people would call
the “practical problems” of this particular occasion—
the politics of Earth, the politics of the United States:
Well, from the beginning of the development of our
Presidency, our system of government, a very bad mistake,
crept in. It was called “the party system.” And the
party system was a travesty, which has corrupted, and
in part, destroyed the United States, by itself—by
means of itself—over much of our nation’s history. As
in other nations, as well.
But the idea of the party system is a form of degeneration
which must be eliminated, if we’re going to able
to cope with the real challenges which mankind should
be occupied with, now. We do not need a party system.
What happens with a party system? You’ve got two
jerks running for President now, official jerks; one Republican
jerk, the other a Democratic Party jerk!
These guys—one, Obama, is the one you must not
have as President! He must be eliminated from the
Presidency, because he inherently is a danger to mankind.
A danger to mankind! And the Republican Presidential
nominee, while he has not shown any of the
sheer evil that this Democratic President has done, I
wouldn’t trust him a bit! And I wouldn’t trust the crew
around him, at all!
So therefore, we can not accept either of these two
proposed Presidencies! So, what are we going to do
about it? One Presidency is almost as bad as the other;
and we know the Democratic nominee is the absolute
worst! But we don’t know about some of the underlings
of the Republican Party—we’ve got some very strong
suspicions about some of them! And we don’t want a
Republican President to bring that crew along with him,
into power!
So what are we going to do about it?
The nominations have been placed. The campaign
propaganda is in full sweep, more or less: What are you
going to do about it? Are you going to say, “Well, we
have to give up; we’re human beings. We have to give
up everything to sacrifice ourselves for the existence of
one of these two Presidents?”
I don’t think that’s a very good idea! I think the occasion
demands that we pay some attention to doing
something about that. And I would suggest that some of
us assembled here, might be able to do something in
that direction, which would inspire some other people,
in other places, to take a similar course of action! That’s
my inclination anyway. Some people do know I have
these inclinations. I think we ought to have human
Presidents, frankly! I mean, there ought to be a law that
says, the President has to be human! And a birth certificate—
sometimes, it’s not the birth that’s questioned,
but sometimes, it’s more complicated: We don’t know
whether he’s a citizen, we don’t know if he’s from
Mars; we have to ask the Martians about that.
But we know that this President in power, has shown
a commitment, to commit thermonuclear war. This
President is a fanatical, chronic, mass-murderer! And
he should not have been even nominated again. He
should have been expelled from office for the crimes he
is known to have committed! The violations of our Constitution!
He must be ousted; he must be put in some
place where he can do no harm to mankind.
But the other case is not promising either, as I’ve
indicated.
Well, how can we attack this problem, within the
law of our system, as it stands today? I would suggest
there is a remedy. The problem is, the party system.
President George Washington and others, at the
founding of our republic, as an independent republic,
tried to prevent the formation of a party system. And I
think the time has come to eliminate the party system.
At this time, it’s the only way, formally, through the
legal process, that we could eliminate the possibility of
these two kinds of Presidents.
What’s wrong? Why should we have party systems?
We have a Constitution, which is defined; the Constitution
is fine, if it’s carried through as intended; it is our
system. But why do we have to have parties intervening
between the process of selecting Presidential leadership
in national government? Why do we do that? What
screwball invented this kind of nonsense? Because
that’s what happened. People become partisan, and say,
“whichever party wins is going to determine the fate of
the nation!”
No party has that kind of right. There can not be a
party that has the right to oversee and control the destiny
of the nation. You can have a President; there’s
September 21, 2012 EIR LaRouche’s 90th Birthday 35
nothing wrong with that. But you can’t have a
President as the President of a party. Or, you can
not have a conniving between two Presidential teams,
or two party teams, by special agreement among themselves,
to create the composition of a national government!
These things are obscenities, which leaders of
our nation, beginning from the George Washington Administration,
recognized as evils!
Go Back to the Constitution
And the idea of going to a European kind of government,
which is inherently corrupt—by its very nature,
not necessarily by the intention of the people, or the
intention of the politicians—they just don’t know any
better.
And the only way this can be done, is if we infect the
population with the realization, we do not want a party
system. We have state governments, don’t we? Under
our Constitution. We have local governments, within
state governments, under our Constitution. We have
bodies which the nation creates, to perform functions of
the Federal government, the military and the rest of it.
So we don’t need parties. They don’t do any damned
good.
If Franklin Roosevelt had just been the President,
and didn’t have to deal with these damned parties, we
wouldn’t have the mess we’ve got into. We don’t need
to have a contention, over which party is going to win,
when the party was not inherent in the conception of
nation. What we need is a Federal republic, with its
state composition, and other local compositions playing
their role.
We don’t need this party system, which is a system
of inherent corruption. What we need, is the due process
election of a composition of government. And we
don’t want people diverting the attention of the population
from the issues of the nation, over the issues of
partisanship! That’s where the problem lies!
When you rely on parties, as such, you set up a kind
of controversy, or competition, for power, between or
among party systems. These party systems then excite
the passions of the foolish voters, who now are concerned
about voting for the party, first, and the nation,
second, when it must be the nation first, and the not the
party.
The voluntary part of the system, that’s fine. The
citizens have a right to make formations, to make agreements
among themselves, and to cast their votes accordingly,
and to discuss these matters accordingly. But
we don’t want the top-down rule of a party system,
which is controlled by the money sent to them, by financial
interests which control the money which gives
EIRNS/Stuart Lewis
Creative Commons/Gage Skidmore
“What happens with a party system? You’ve got two
jerks running for President now. . . . There ought to be
a law that says the President has to be human!”
36 LaRouche’s 90th Birthday EIR September 21, 2012
one party advantage over the other! You want the bare
citizen, as a citizen, to have an equal right, and independence
of this party system.
This has been said, again and again, in the course of
the history of the United States: People with insight realize
that the essence of the corruption in the United
States is based on, and derived from, the use of the party
system. And you see it right now: The nation is now
mortgaged for the selection of its government, its national
government, to the party system. Everything is
stopped, except which party is going to win! And one is
almost as bad as the other.
And why should we be spending our time selecting
a government of two parties, neither of which is fit to be
our government. Why don’t we have a national government
selected in the way that George Washington, for
example, President George Washington, had intended?
We would not have that mess! And the citizen would be
called upon, not to decide who’s butt he wants to kiss,
but rather what the issues and programs are that this
citizen wishes to express. We want to engage the citizen
in the dialogue! We don’t want to take the competition
between groups of citizens. We want the citizen to force
the reality, that he or she is voting for the government.
And what the citizens do in voting for a government,
will determine the fate of the nation.
We want to confront the citizen, with his or her responsibility
for being accountable for what government
is, and what it becomes. We have to force responsibility
upon the individual citizen, as a citizen, not as a sucker,
playing into some kind of game.
And this has been understood for a long time by the
best thinkers of the United States, that it is the party
system, as typified by the Andrew Jackson Presidency,
one of the most corrupt Presidencies in our history;
that’s the problem. And the corruption that was done to
the United States, by the election of Andrew Jackson,
and the people who controlled him, who were British
bankers; so, Andrew Jackson was a tool of British imperial
bankers: They owned him. They ran him. And it
was because of the party system, that this could happen.
And we’ve got the same thing today: You’re shacked
up with a couple of clowns—Dumbo and the the insane
Crook.
Now, the only thing we can do, or the only thing I
can do, on this thing right now, apart from telling you
about this wonderful information, is to awaken you to
realize what we’re really up against, to recognize what
the real problems are. If you’re thinking about looking
at this mess out there, from the standpoint of Democratic
or Republican, you’re not thinking! Because
you’re not thinking in terms of the essential interest.
Because what you’re doing, whatever you do, you are
imprisoned to pledging your support to a party! Not to
the nation. Yes, you say, “to the nation,” but it’s the
party that controls you.
And that is how Andrew Jackson destroyed the
United States, with the party system! That’s what
doomed Franklin Roosevelt. Franklin Roosevelt would
never have had this clown Truman stuck on him, except
for the party system business. And that’s where our
problem lies.
And we have to make that clear. Because we know
what the state of mind is.
What’s the state of mind of the voter? He’s playing
football, not politics! He’s playing a version of football,
demconvention.com
The party systems excite the passions of the foolish voters, who
vote for the party, first, and the nation, second. Shown: a scene
from the Democratic Party convention, September 2012.
September 21, 2012 EIR LaRouche’s 90th Birthday 37
baseball, whatever—gambling! Racketeering, whatever!
And his mind, his passion, is associated with winning
this, for this party, this team, and so forth—not for
the nation. The objective of our system of government
must be to force the citizen, as a citizen, to think through
what the national interest is. And we don’t do it.
We say, “Which party are you going to support?”
Well, what’s the party going to do? “Well, I think it’s a
good party.” In other words, they don’t know what the
hell they’re doing—and their passion is involved in
being sure they won’t do it. And that’s where we stand.
And that’s the thing we’ve got to think about.
And you’ve got to destroy the self-confidence of
those damned fools who think that the “party vote,” the
vote for the party, should determine the decision of the
nation. That is a false and fraudulent conception, and
it’s about time we called a halt to it. And right now
would be a very good time.
Only One Way Out: Glass-Steagall
Now, what’re we going to do? We have our organization.
We have a conception of how to organize this
nation, how to deal with the great crisis, the financial
crisis, the economic crises which occur in this nation;
and which occur, also, similarly, in other nations, which
I think would tend, at this time, to look with a friendly
eye at what I might propose here, right now.
First of all, the world is bankrupt. The trans-Atlantic
region is totally, hopelessly bankrupt. Every part of
Western and Central Europe is totally bankrupt. It’s incurably
bankrupt under its present system. Nothing can
be done to save it in its present form. There’s no way
you can bail it out. There’s no way you can take it out of
this—except one way: Glass-Steagall.
Now, of late, you will have observed that Glass-
Steagall has become increasingly popular in England,
in the continent of Europe, and other notable places. So
what does Glass-Steagall do? Well, essentially it says
that the system of government we’re running under
right now is hopelessly corrupt; so, let’s shut it down.
Let’s shut down all the bailouts. We’re not going to pay
it! We jes’ ain’t gonna pay it!
So what are we going to do? Well, we’re going to
have a grand old time: We’re going to go to a straight
credit system, which is Glass-Steagall, immediately.
Now, that means, that all those other guys, the gamblers,
Wall Street types and so forth, well, they have
all these claims. All these values. They own all this
property, in terms of titles. But we say, the point is
here, with Glass-Steagall, is that you can run your
kind of banking system if you want to—under penalties
of law, of course. But you don’t have any right to
come to the Federal government, to demand that the
Federal government bail you out, if you happen to go
bankrupt.
Now, I can tell you, as you probably have suspected,
that practically every part of the whole system in the
United States, today, is already hopelessly, incurably
bankrupt. And there’s only one way we can escape from
this bankruptcy: You want to have some money to live
on? There’s one thing you’ve got to do: Glass-Steagall!
It won’t solve the problem, but it will open the gates, to
permit the problem to be solved.
All these things that don’t conform to Glass-Steagall
must be cancelled. That means these banks can still
have their banking system, as long as they don’t go
bankrupt. We’re not going to shut them down arbitrarily;
we’re just letting them out on their own, and
EIRNS/Eric Thomas
Nothing can be done to save the trans-Atlantic financial system
in its present form. “There’s no way you can bail it out. There’s
no way you can take it out of this—except one way: Glass-
Steagall.” Shown: LaRouchePAC organizing in San Diego,
Calif., August 2011.
38 LaRouche’s 90th Birthday EIR September 21, 2012
saying, “This is not our business. The Federal government
is not responsible for this.”
Now that will reduce the debt of the United States,
tremendously. It would have a similar effect in nations
of Europe. The French banks would not be pleased with
me. They would probably say some very nasty things
about me, but. . .
The point is, the world now knows, and increasingly
in Europe, there’s an understanding that Glass-Steagall
is a necessary alternative. And these guys are having a
terrible time, in fighting off the Glass-Steagall popularity.
But that will do it.
The problem is, because we waited so long, since
we cancelled Glass-Steagall, we waited too long, and
they ran up a hyperinflationary debt, which is really
beyond even dreaming. So therefore, the result is, if we
go with Glass-Steagall, we’re going to have relatively
little money, under our Federal system; because we
wasted it by throwing it into the garbage pail, and we
can’t get it back. So therefore, we’re going to have to go
to another measure.
Now, I said, national banking. Why national banking?
Because, unless you create a banking system,
under the U.S. government, under the protection and
regulation of the U.S. government, you can’t do anything
much with the economy.
We have very little industry left in the United States;
it’s been systematically destroyed. Especially since the
last three terms of the Presidency. We have been running
a garbage pail; and therefore, we have no means,
by ordinary means, to save the economy. We don’t have
jobs.
Now, as most of you know, under NAWAPA [North
American Water and Power Alliance], we would create,
quickly, 4 million or more jobs—real jobs! Real productive
jobs. We would create, at least, immediately, a
couple million more highly skilled categories of jobs.
We would start the process of a general recovery of the
United States—but oh! Wait a minute! Got one more
problem. Where’s the money going to come from, that
we’re going to loan for NAWAPA, and loan for other
high-technology jobs, and certain other kinds of skilled
jobs? The Federal government is going to have to create
credit, which will be run through the national banking
system, so that under national banking and Federal government
approval, we can conduit credit into creating
these jobs.
Let’s take the practical question of the food supply
in the United States right now: As you probably know,
food is about to be cancelled, and the Obama Administration
is doing everything possible to destroy it. Because
they’re doing everything to destroy food for
fuels.
Federal Credit; NAWAPA; Jobs
So therefore, what are we going to do? Well, what
we’re going to do is, by giving the Federal credit into,
say, the NAWAPA system, we’re going to create a flow
of credit, into the various phases of this process, which
will immediately charge NAWAPA, in particular, and
other things that go with NAWAPA.
We have also the lost auto industry, the whole Detroit
system, for example, and we’re going to put that
back to work. So, we’re going to create, instantly, that
is, by Federal decree—instantly create sufficient
growth, not only to get rid of this hopeless debt, which
never was really a legitimate debt, at all. And we’re
going to restart the economy, by taking people—when
you have very few people who are actually involved in
productive jobs, they’re not involved in producing
things; they’re mostly employed in various kinds of
services, which are not particularly productive, and do
not lend any productive value to the U.S. economy.
They’re simply pass-outs, under one guise or the other.
So in this case, we are launching a recovery of the
U.S. economy, by supplying the credit, as we did in the
beginning of the development of our economy, after we
won our Revolution. We’re going back to that system of
recovery to get things moving, and it’s going to start
immediately. And the easiest way for us to do this, is
NAWAPA.
NAWAPA is a project which is relevant, because it’s
focused on water management. And the problem we
have in the United States today, is a water management
problem. In the Western States, we don’t have rain. We
don’t have the means to grow crops. And we don’t have
people who are employed, in actually productive forms
of employment, physically productive forms of employment.
The difference is, with this kind of reform, of three
steps: NAWAPA as a driver, an incentive driver, which
will save the organization of production in the Central
and Western States of the United States. Then going
back into the Detroit area, with several million jobs, immediately,
will have a similar effect. Which means that
we then can use a credit system, managed under Federal
control, as we’ve used credit systems, like Franklin
Roosevelt did in the past, and use that kind of credit
September 21, 2012 EIR LaRouche’s 90th Birthday 39
system under a Glass-Steagalltype
government system, and we
can start the regrowth of the U.S.
economy.
We also have, as a byproduct of
this: If we as the United States do
this, you will find that the nations
of Eurasia will join us. You will
find that nations of Europe, who
are now being destroyed by their
own system, will now go back into
functioning, and we will use international
credit, which is an extension
of the national banking concept,
instead of speculation, in
order to restart the economy. And
that can be done.
So there is a practical solution,
a sane practical solution, as opposed
to the other kind, for this problem we have as a
nation. How far are we from getting it, is the question.
Promise Only What You Can Deliver
Well, that depends. It depends how desperate people
are, and how much their desperation is moderated by
the sense of attachment to a solution. Our job is to present
the solutions. You know, society is actually led,
when it’s led, by a tiny minority of the human race. We
have not, because of our underdevelopment, built up
nation systems, which are actually rational, and truly
represent the will of human beings.
What we approach is the conditional will of human
beings, by providing them with promises, which we
hopefully can keep, and that they will be satisfied by
trusting us, by the means of the measures we offer to
them as suggestions. A very tiny minority of the human
population in all nations, actually has any comprehension,
any qualifications for comprehension of how an
economy runs, or how it should be run. We have to
bring them to us, to our ideas, our conceptions, based
on the fact that they need precisely the solutions that we
present. It may not be exactly what they would dream
of, but it’s what we could deliver. And if people understand
that that’s what the game is, they’ll accept it, at
least in large part.
It’s what they can believe that we can deliver. And
it’s our saying that we can deliver this, but we can’t do
that, yet. And if you promise everything, they’re not
going to trust you, and for good reason. If you give specific
promises, that will work and make sense, and can
be explained to the people, it will work! And if they
don’t accept it, that’s their fault.
But our responsibility, which is limited—we don’t
run the world; we don’t have powers to supervise the
world as a whole. We can only argue. We can only argue
as an intelligentsia, that we have done some thinking
that the other people have not yet caught onto, or didn’t
know about. And we can tell them what we can do.
What we understand, what will work for them; and say,
“We’re going to have to work harder and better, in order
to fulfill the kind of promises we wish to deliver.” And
say we need their cooperation in doing that.
We’ve got to give them a sense, that whatever we’re
promising them, we’re committed to delivering, and
that our promise of delivery has been made credible to
them. And that experience, as in the case of the Franklin
Roosevelt recovery in the United States during the
1930s, the same program, the same policy that Franklin
Roosevelt used in reviving the U.S. economy, worked.
But we have to tell these guys, “Stop being the kind
of idiot, who believes in the party system! That’s
number one. Number two, don’t believe in Obama, get
him out of there, and make sure he’s removed quickly.”
And we’re going to have to figure out what we’re going
to do about this Republican. Because that’s a real weak
point, there.
However, I believe this: If we can establish a functional
Presidency of the United States as was done in
establishing the United States under George Washing-
LPAC
The Federal government will create credit, through the national banking system, which
will go into great projects, such as NAWAPA, which will generate 4 million new,
productive jobs, thereby starting a general recovery of the U.S. economy.
40 LaRouche’s 90th Birthday EIR September 21, 2012
ton’s Presidency, if we have a President, and we use our
system of government, our constitutional system of
government, we can solve this problem. Not the way
people would like, by a “wish factory” or something,
but by the fact; we can point the direction, and it’s up to
the people to follow the direction, and choose to follow
the direction.
But we must do what is not done right now: The
problem with government now, is that the U.S. government
and its functions, are chiefly one, big, damned lie!
They promise things that do not exist, or will not exist,
and make rules which make no sense, and are willing to
get into wars, by which civilization and mankind in
general could be destroyed. And we have to use that
argument and that bill of particulars, as a method of
convincing them, this has to be done.
We Need Leadership, Not Parties
And the key thing is this, to come back to the theme
I started with: Space. It’s obvious that there’s a limited
time frame within which mankind can continue to live
safely under the system of the Sun. The Sun has a limited—
some people say 2 billion years; some would say,
long before 2 billion years—the Sun is going to act up,
and life is going to be most unpleasant on this planet.
So, we as mankind, have to address this question.
And it’s obvious that to address this question, we have
to give new attention to space, the questions of space.
We have to find ways of intervening in the space system,
or the Solar space system and so forth, and this is possible.
But we must turn to that direction, to think, “Well,
we can’t stand around, following a fixed recipe, like a
kitchen cookbook recipe, forever. We have to anticipate
the problems which face mankind in the future; we
have to search for solutions to those problems, and
we’ve got to convince people.”
And the big thing you have to do, is this: Most
people in the United States today, behave stupidly, and
this, of course, is helped by the educational system; it’s
helped by the terrible conditions of life of children, as
well as adolescents; and there are many things that have
to be done. And our job is, as a minority in society, and
with other minorities in society which wish to find and
initiate true solutions for these problems, we have to get
out, and convince people, and educate them.
And in particular, get them immediately to understand
that these two Presidencies that they’ve stuck out
there for voting, ain’t shucks! And we’ve got to do
something about that; and the best way, is to go out and
say that these guys aren’t fit to run anything, and give
some indications of what we’re thinking.
It can work. It can work because the situation of all
humanity on this planet right now, is almost a hopeless
one. The war danger, the thermonuclear war which is
hanging over us right now, is threat number one. The
shortage of food in the United States, for people, citizens
of the United States, is another. The conditions of
health care, are another. All of these conditions are intolerable!
And nobody’s doing a damned thing about it,
from the standpoint of government on down! I don’t
hear of any big riots coming out of the Congress, against
the lack of such needed reforms! They’re going by the
party system. And I think we have to just treat the party
system as the kind of fraud that it has always been!
We should have a system of representative government,
in which the citizens can use those other citizens
who are the most qualified, and the most committed, to
provide leadership, to provide the ideas and the leadership
which is needed for the rest.
If you can’t be something, inspire it in somebody
else.
Thank you.
Planetary Defense
Leading circles in Russia have
made clear their intent to judo the
current British-Obama insane
drive towards war, by invoking the
principle of Lyndon LaRouche’s
Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).
Termed the Strategic Defense of
Earth, the SDE would focus on
cooperation between the U.S.A.
and Russia for missile defense, as
well as defense of the planet
against the threat of asteroid or
comet impacts.
The destiny of mankind now is to
meet the challenge of our
“extraterrestrial imperative”! Available from LaRouchePAC
Lyndon LaRouche gave this address on Sept. 9, the day
after his 90th birthday, to a large gathering of friends,
who joined him to celebrate this milestone.
As you would expect from me, you will get the best
possible quality of bad news. And the advantage of that
is that it’s truthful. You can have confidence in that.
There are actually a number of subjects which are of
solemn importance on this occasion, and I shall outline
these subjects, state a few things about them, so they are
clearly identified, and then, I presume somewhere in
the process, if there’s discussion of some of these subjects
by me, you’ll find some way of dealing with that.
The problem here is that, we have two candidates,
neither of which is fit to run for office as President. And
we are faced with the most dangerous situation in the
history of mankind. The danger is explicitly that of
thermonuclear war. We are at the brink of thermonuclear
war. That doesn’t mean we’re going to have it; it
means that some people are organizing for it, and it
would tend to happen under certain conditions.
Such a war, if launched, would not necessarily kill
everybody at once, but it would create conditions lasting
years, which would generally eliminate the human
species. If there’s no food supply for several years, and
similar kinds of problems, the human race can be rendered
extinct. This has been the concern of responsible
people, for many years, actually since, shall we say,
about the 1950s, when, in the middle of the 1950s, we
had reached the point that thermonuclear weapons, or
weapons systems, existed. And if nuclear weapons, nuclear
fusion weapons, are used for purposes of general
warfare, what will happen in these days, is that it will
take about one and a half hours, at most, to produce an
effect which virtually eliminates the human species.
That is the intention associated with Barack Obama,
the current President, and the one who has just been renominated
for election as President. This is the ugly reality
of the situation.
Now, this has implications which are, shall we say,
more interesting: that first of all, the deployment, in say,
the space of an hour and a half, until the U.S. submarines
which deploy these missiles have done their job;
the British have done their job; and Russia and China
have responded to the launch—the result will be within
that very short period of time, that it may not kill everybody
on the planet, but it will condemn everyone to
death.
This has been understood, and known in principle,
since the middle of the 1950s, and was certainly clear
by the 1960s. And now, the fact is, that the President of
the United States has engaged himself in a commitment
to warfare, which must inevitably lead to that deadly
hour and a half, in which most of the human species is
exterminated. And therefore, the issue here, the leading
issue above all others, is that Obama must not become
EIR LaRouche’s 90th Birthday
September 21, 2012 EIR LaRouche’s 90th Birthday 31
President again! Should he become President again,
except as in a prison, then the existence of mankind is
in jeopardy.
Any War Will Be Thernonuclear War
What’s the implication of this? Because this is not
just a fact, and it is a fact. It’s known to everyone who’s
competent. We have, for example, the Joint Chiefs of
Staff of the United States, not in alliance with Russia,
but in agreement with Russia, in a certain kind of agreement,
together with China and other nations that are involved—
that if the war starts, it starts, and the ending
within about an hour and a half, is either the extinction
of the human population, or of a great part of it, and the
consequent death of all.
Now, the implication is, what does that have to do
with war? Is there a legitimate war? Well, in general, no.
Because the nature of war is such that there is no real
solution for wars, especially now, since the standard of
warfare is thermonuclear war, done largely with ‘submarines,
and everybody’s in a rush to get their weapons
deployed, within immediately a half-hour, and then, certainly
by an hour and a half, all of these weapons that are
presently in the possession of the relevant parties will be
used up. And so will the human species.
So it means that the time has come, when the idea of
warfare, as we’ve understood it traditionally, is no
longer allowed. Well, why should it be allowed? Because
the ratio of kill involved in the very commitment
to warfare is such, that it means the extinction of the
human species. Now, how can the human species agree
to its own extinction? Except by madness.
So therefore, we’ve come to a time where the issues
of warfare, as warfare, must be addressed in a different
way, and this means an examination of the motives for
warfare. People decide to use force to impose their will
upon others, or to prevent others from imposing their
will by the same means. It means that the question of
government, self-government of the human species,
will have to undergo a change.
Now, there are some very good changes to be made.
We had recently the wonderful landing on Mars. There
had been other landings on Mars, which were relatively
wonderful in their time. They were genuine achievements,
and some of these elements are still floating
around and being used. But the most recent one was a
qualitatively great uptick in the whole process.
Asteroids: Another Deadly Weapon
And what we should be doing, essentially, is we
should be going to that, because we have another
weapon in this, another deadly weapon in this Solar
System. It’s called asteroids! And it is known to us, although
there are many uncertainties involved, that asteroids
are very dangerous, particularly if they hit Earth.
Many of the asteroid hits, which have happened on
Earth, and which could happen, or which are about to
happen, somewhere along the line, are very deadly.
Whole city areas are easily wiped out on a minimum by
these kinds of things; or several of them.
Therefore, the question is—we have another physical
enemy of humanity, apart from warfare among human
beings—and that is: How do we defend Earth from asteroids?
Now, the area is full of asteroids! We don’t even
know where most of them are; we know the general order
of magnitude of quantity of these asteroids. We also have
EIRNS/Stuart Lewis
The landing of Curiosity on Mars was wonderful, LaRouche
stated, a “great uptick” in man’s exploration of space. Here, he
examines a globe of Mars, presented to him as a birthday gift.
32 LaRouche’s 90th Birthday EIR September 21, 2012
intimations that the rate of these asteroid
passages, as our Solar System goes
through its routines into different parts of
the galactic system, the indications are
now, or the hints, are that they are going to
increase. And we know where some of the
things are, but we don’t know where most
of them are! We suspect certain ones
might hit Earth, but we’re not quite sure
whether they will.
Some we know about, and we understand
that there are ways in which they
can be diverted, so that the asteroid
passes by, without striking Earth, like
what happened last year, where an asteroid
got in, floating between the Moon
and Earth. And it didn’t actually hurt
anybody, as far as we know. But we’re
living under that kind of threat, which is
not the same thing as the military threat,
but it’s also the idea of what defense is.
How do we defend the Earth from
these things? And some of them, as in the past, have hit
Earth, in the ancient past, and they’re totally destructive.
Others have been more limited in what they destroyed,
and as we’ve discussed among ourselves, you
could take out the Los Angeles area, or the San Francisco
area; other comparable territories of the planet are
subject to this kind of thing from time to time, from the
relatively smaller asteroids.
So therefore, we’ve come to the point, as Dr. Edward
Teller launched this in the aftermath of his opposition to
thermonuclear war. And he was a key part of the operation
which I was a participant in, in the defense of Earth,
against the nuclear war. And he continued to go on this
question of defense of Earth against asteroids and similar
kinds of problems. And that is being continued
today.
And what happened is the SDI, which is something
which I had the privilege of initiating, back in the late
1970s and early ’80s. The SDI has now been upgraded:
It’s called the Defense of Earth, and that’s our commitment,
on military questions: the defense of Earth, the
defense of its people, the defense of its future. And the
problem is one which, by its nature, lends itself, at least
to the suggestion, that we could take the means which
we otherwise would have used in the past for warfare—
but these means could be used in various ways to defend
the population of Earth.
So now, the war we have is the war against those
asteroids, which might eliminate the human population,
or at least a large part of it. This is the new war.
This is the new policy of defense. And the policy of
defense is negative, in the sense of trying to defend the
Earth against an attacking problem; and also positive,
in the sense of using our exploration of space, in our
defense of Earth from space, and use that to increase the
benefits and power of the human species.
I’m not pushing now for large-scale colonization on
Mars. However, I do not prohibit mankind from developing
Mars as a place of occupation. I simply insist
there are other means, which are more appropriate right
now, for the defense of Earth against asteroids and
things of that sort; that we had a recent achievement in
the launching of this Curiosity, which is the greatest
achievement so far, of this type.
Mankind Will Have To Move On
And this is another reason you have to get rid of
Obama. You have to get rid of all of his policies, because
we need every bit of these things that Obama was
shutting down, for the defense of Earth, and the defense
of humanity. We’ve got to get those satellites out there
around Earth and other kinds of things; we’ve got to
improve our abilities to forecast the problems of these
asteroids threatening Earth.
U.S. Navy/Petty Officer 2nd Class James Kimber
The standard of warfare is thermonuclear war, done largely with submarines,
LaRouche stated, “and everybody’s in a rush to get their weapons deployed; and
then, by an hour and a half, all of these weapons will be used up. And so will the
human species.” Shown: the ballistic missile submarine USS Alaska, January
2012.
September 21, 2012 EIR LaRouche’s 90th Birthday 33
We’ve got to think in the long term of going beyond
that, because sooner or later, the Sun’s going to be gone,
and long before the Sun is gone, it’s going to be a very
unpleasant neighbor, or neighborhood. So mankind is
going to have to continue our existence in other places.
We’re going to have to move on, as a human species, by
increasing the power at our disposal. Because we know
the creative powers of the human being, which, insofar
as we know, are unique to the human species! No other
living species known to us has ever demonstrated the
capability of creativity. The only willful creativity that
has ever occurred, by any species, is by mankind.
And we have to change the policies of mankind, and
instead of trying to keep people down as cheap labor,
we’ve got to go in exactly the opposite direction. We’ve
got to go to a perspective that we’re going to manage
nearby space! We’re going to deal and negotiate with
this system that we live under. We’re going to make it
habitable. Because mankind, unlike any other species,
has genuine creativity, the ability to make discoveries,
and apply these discoveries, that no other living species
known to us can do.
And our destiny is not just to be the same ol’, same
ol’, as we are now. Our destiny lies in the fact of the
human mind, not necessarily the brain as such but the
human mind, the creative powers that the human being
represents, and which, for us, is also called, the power
to do good. The prevention of doing harm, and the
means of doing good.
There’s no shame in mankind’s advancing to living
in a condition, way beyond anything we can imagine
today. But we have to think in that direction now, not to
say it’s something of the distant future—it may be
something of the distant future, in part—but we can not
limit ourselves, by our nature as human beings, when
we think like human beings, rather than animals; when
we think, actually, like human beings as creative beings,
the only ones we know of in the universe so far, that
means that it’s not just defending us, negatively, selfishly:
It’s the point, because we, as a human species
have a mission in this universe.
We don’t know a lot of things about that, but we
know we have this power, which is very poorly developed
among us, because our educational systems stink,
our outlooks stink! We are not living up to what mankind
is: Mankind has a special destiny in the universe as
we know it. And our job is to live up to that destiny. Not
to demand that everything be limited to what we can do,
and what we know today. We must not deprive those
who succeed us, from realizing the greater good that
they will be able to do, if we lay the basis for their
achievement of that capability.
And therefore, our whole view of politics must now
change! It must change on the negative side, because
we can no longer have major war on this planet. It can
not exist! It can not be tolerated. Obama must be taken
out of office, and heads of state and government like
that must be removed from office. They must not have
the power to utilize these kinds of weapons systems and
means. And it would be the greatest of all crimes to
allow any President of the United States, or similar
heads of state, to have the authority to launch thermonuclear
war.
And that’s an absolute: There’s no room on this
planet for any President, or any other major head of
state, who seeks to launch thermonuclearAnd if major
war comes, it is thermonuclear war. And within an hour
and a half, the destiny of the human species can be all
over.
And therefore, this President and what he represents,
and similar kinds of people, must be removed
from power! It’s not because we’re pacifists. We’re
against killing of human beings, because we’re for the
realization of what a human being is, the only known
creative species, in existence, as far as we know. And
that is sacred.
Human beings, as a species, must be defended, because
of the creativity that we represent. Which means
that we must defend that creativity, but we must also
promote it. Our mission to Mars, for example, is a
complicated question, but it’s also, obviously, for
many of us—or some of us, anyway—it’s a feasible
proposition. And it means that mankind has within its
power, the power to do things which are beyond the
imagination.
We can explore the universe. We can explore, particularly,
the Solar System. We know that we have the
potential ability, innate in the nature of things, that
mankind can actually begin to take over the Solar
System. Whether we’re going to inhabit it or not, is not
the question; we’re going to take it over. Because if we
use the power of the speed of light, which is what we
call communications systems now—electronic communication—
we can actually control this Solar System;
at first, the inner part, which includes Mars, and gradually,
at a later point, we’ll have greater power, and we
can reach further.
We can also do explorations earlier which give us
34 LaRouche’s 90th Birthday EIR September 21, 2012
knowledge. These things are innate in the nature of mankind,
the nature of mankind which many politicians have
no sense of whatsoever! But we, as we live and die, as
persons, must have the right to access to a meaningful
course of life, to the ability to do something with our
lives, which we can rest upon as we die, and know has
something to do of permanent value for the human species.
And that is what must be protected and defended.
The Parties Are Over
Now, that said, look at what some people would call
the “practical problems” of this particular occasion—
the politics of Earth, the politics of the United States:
Well, from the beginning of the development of our
Presidency, our system of government, a very bad mistake,
crept in. It was called “the party system.” And the
party system was a travesty, which has corrupted, and
in part, destroyed the United States, by itself—by
means of itself—over much of our nation’s history. As
in other nations, as well.
But the idea of the party system is a form of degeneration
which must be eliminated, if we’re going to able
to cope with the real challenges which mankind should
be occupied with, now. We do not need a party system.
What happens with a party system? You’ve got two
jerks running for President now, official jerks; one Republican
jerk, the other a Democratic Party jerk!
These guys—one, Obama, is the one you must not
have as President! He must be eliminated from the
Presidency, because he inherently is a danger to mankind.
A danger to mankind! And the Republican Presidential
nominee, while he has not shown any of the
sheer evil that this Democratic President has done, I
wouldn’t trust him a bit! And I wouldn’t trust the crew
around him, at all!
So therefore, we can not accept either of these two
proposed Presidencies! So, what are we going to do
about it? One Presidency is almost as bad as the other;
and we know the Democratic nominee is the absolute
worst! But we don’t know about some of the underlings
of the Republican Party—we’ve got some very strong
suspicions about some of them! And we don’t want a
Republican President to bring that crew along with him,
into power!
So what are we going to do about it?
The nominations have been placed. The campaign
propaganda is in full sweep, more or less: What are you
going to do about it? Are you going to say, “Well, we
have to give up; we’re human beings. We have to give
up everything to sacrifice ourselves for the existence of
one of these two Presidents?”
I don’t think that’s a very good idea! I think the occasion
demands that we pay some attention to doing
something about that. And I would suggest that some of
us assembled here, might be able to do something in
that direction, which would inspire some other people,
in other places, to take a similar course of action! That’s
my inclination anyway. Some people do know I have
these inclinations. I think we ought to have human
Presidents, frankly! I mean, there ought to be a law that
says, the President has to be human! And a birth certificate—
sometimes, it’s not the birth that’s questioned,
but sometimes, it’s more complicated: We don’t know
whether he’s a citizen, we don’t know if he’s from
Mars; we have to ask the Martians about that.
But we know that this President in power, has shown
a commitment, to commit thermonuclear war. This
President is a fanatical, chronic, mass-murderer! And
he should not have been even nominated again. He
should have been expelled from office for the crimes he
is known to have committed! The violations of our Constitution!
He must be ousted; he must be put in some
place where he can do no harm to mankind.
But the other case is not promising either, as I’ve
indicated.
Well, how can we attack this problem, within the
law of our system, as it stands today? I would suggest
there is a remedy. The problem is, the party system.
President George Washington and others, at the
founding of our republic, as an independent republic,
tried to prevent the formation of a party system. And I
think the time has come to eliminate the party system.
At this time, it’s the only way, formally, through the
legal process, that we could eliminate the possibility of
these two kinds of Presidents.
What’s wrong? Why should we have party systems?
We have a Constitution, which is defined; the Constitution
is fine, if it’s carried through as intended; it is our
system. But why do we have to have parties intervening
between the process of selecting Presidential leadership
in national government? Why do we do that? What
screwball invented this kind of nonsense? Because
that’s what happened. People become partisan, and say,
“whichever party wins is going to determine the fate of
the nation!”
No party has that kind of right. There can not be a
party that has the right to oversee and control the destiny
of the nation. You can have a President; there’s
September 21, 2012 EIR LaRouche’s 90th Birthday 35
nothing wrong with that. But you can’t have a
President as the President of a party. Or, you can
not have a conniving between two Presidential teams,
or two party teams, by special agreement among themselves,
to create the composition of a national government!
These things are obscenities, which leaders of
our nation, beginning from the George Washington Administration,
recognized as evils!
Go Back to the Constitution
And the idea of going to a European kind of government,
which is inherently corrupt—by its very nature,
not necessarily by the intention of the people, or the
intention of the politicians—they just don’t know any
better.
And the only way this can be done, is if we infect the
population with the realization, we do not want a party
system. We have state governments, don’t we? Under
our Constitution. We have local governments, within
state governments, under our Constitution. We have
bodies which the nation creates, to perform functions of
the Federal government, the military and the rest of it.
So we don’t need parties. They don’t do any damned
good.
If Franklin Roosevelt had just been the President,
and didn’t have to deal with these damned parties, we
wouldn’t have the mess we’ve got into. We don’t need
to have a contention, over which party is going to win,
when the party was not inherent in the conception of
nation. What we need is a Federal republic, with its
state composition, and other local compositions playing
their role.
We don’t need this party system, which is a system
of inherent corruption. What we need, is the due process
election of a composition of government. And we
don’t want people diverting the attention of the population
from the issues of the nation, over the issues of
partisanship! That’s where the problem lies!
When you rely on parties, as such, you set up a kind
of controversy, or competition, for power, between or
among party systems. These party systems then excite
the passions of the foolish voters, who now are concerned
about voting for the party, first, and the nation,
second, when it must be the nation first, and the not the
party.
The voluntary part of the system, that’s fine. The
citizens have a right to make formations, to make agreements
among themselves, and to cast their votes accordingly,
and to discuss these matters accordingly. But
we don’t want the top-down rule of a party system,
which is controlled by the money sent to them, by financial
interests which control the money which gives
EIRNS/Stuart Lewis
Creative Commons/Gage Skidmore
“What happens with a party system? You’ve got two
jerks running for President now. . . . There ought to be
a law that says the President has to be human!”
36 LaRouche’s 90th Birthday EIR September 21, 2012
one party advantage over the other! You want the bare
citizen, as a citizen, to have an equal right, and independence
of this party system.
This has been said, again and again, in the course of
the history of the United States: People with insight realize
that the essence of the corruption in the United
States is based on, and derived from, the use of the party
system. And you see it right now: The nation is now
mortgaged for the selection of its government, its national
government, to the party system. Everything is
stopped, except which party is going to win! And one is
almost as bad as the other.
And why should we be spending our time selecting
a government of two parties, neither of which is fit to be
our government. Why don’t we have a national government
selected in the way that George Washington, for
example, President George Washington, had intended?
We would not have that mess! And the citizen would be
called upon, not to decide who’s butt he wants to kiss,
but rather what the issues and programs are that this
citizen wishes to express. We want to engage the citizen
in the dialogue! We don’t want to take the competition
between groups of citizens. We want the citizen to force
the reality, that he or she is voting for the government.
And what the citizens do in voting for a government,
will determine the fate of the nation.
We want to confront the citizen, with his or her responsibility
for being accountable for what government
is, and what it becomes. We have to force responsibility
upon the individual citizen, as a citizen, not as a sucker,
playing into some kind of game.
And this has been understood for a long time by the
best thinkers of the United States, that it is the party
system, as typified by the Andrew Jackson Presidency,
one of the most corrupt Presidencies in our history;
that’s the problem. And the corruption that was done to
the United States, by the election of Andrew Jackson,
and the people who controlled him, who were British
bankers; so, Andrew Jackson was a tool of British imperial
bankers: They owned him. They ran him. And it
was because of the party system, that this could happen.
And we’ve got the same thing today: You’re shacked
up with a couple of clowns—Dumbo and the the insane
Crook.
Now, the only thing we can do, or the only thing I
can do, on this thing right now, apart from telling you
about this wonderful information, is to awaken you to
realize what we’re really up against, to recognize what
the real problems are. If you’re thinking about looking
at this mess out there, from the standpoint of Democratic
or Republican, you’re not thinking! Because
you’re not thinking in terms of the essential interest.
Because what you’re doing, whatever you do, you are
imprisoned to pledging your support to a party! Not to
the nation. Yes, you say, “to the nation,” but it’s the
party that controls you.
And that is how Andrew Jackson destroyed the
United States, with the party system! That’s what
doomed Franklin Roosevelt. Franklin Roosevelt would
never have had this clown Truman stuck on him, except
for the party system business. And that’s where our
problem lies.
And we have to make that clear. Because we know
what the state of mind is.
What’s the state of mind of the voter? He’s playing
football, not politics! He’s playing a version of football,
demconvention.com
The party systems excite the passions of the foolish voters, who
vote for the party, first, and the nation, second. Shown: a scene
from the Democratic Party convention, September 2012.
September 21, 2012 EIR LaRouche’s 90th Birthday 37
baseball, whatever—gambling! Racketeering, whatever!
And his mind, his passion, is associated with winning
this, for this party, this team, and so forth—not for
the nation. The objective of our system of government
must be to force the citizen, as a citizen, to think through
what the national interest is. And we don’t do it.
We say, “Which party are you going to support?”
Well, what’s the party going to do? “Well, I think it’s a
good party.” In other words, they don’t know what the
hell they’re doing—and their passion is involved in
being sure they won’t do it. And that’s where we stand.
And that’s the thing we’ve got to think about.
And you’ve got to destroy the self-confidence of
those damned fools who think that the “party vote,” the
vote for the party, should determine the decision of the
nation. That is a false and fraudulent conception, and
it’s about time we called a halt to it. And right now
would be a very good time.
Only One Way Out: Glass-Steagall
Now, what’re we going to do? We have our organization.
We have a conception of how to organize this
nation, how to deal with the great crisis, the financial
crisis, the economic crises which occur in this nation;
and which occur, also, similarly, in other nations, which
I think would tend, at this time, to look with a friendly
eye at what I might propose here, right now.
First of all, the world is bankrupt. The trans-Atlantic
region is totally, hopelessly bankrupt. Every part of
Western and Central Europe is totally bankrupt. It’s incurably
bankrupt under its present system. Nothing can
be done to save it in its present form. There’s no way
you can bail it out. There’s no way you can take it out of
this—except one way: Glass-Steagall.
Now, of late, you will have observed that Glass-
Steagall has become increasingly popular in England,
in the continent of Europe, and other notable places. So
what does Glass-Steagall do? Well, essentially it says
that the system of government we’re running under
right now is hopelessly corrupt; so, let’s shut it down.
Let’s shut down all the bailouts. We’re not going to pay
it! We jes’ ain’t gonna pay it!
So what are we going to do? Well, we’re going to
have a grand old time: We’re going to go to a straight
credit system, which is Glass-Steagall, immediately.
Now, that means, that all those other guys, the gamblers,
Wall Street types and so forth, well, they have
all these claims. All these values. They own all this
property, in terms of titles. But we say, the point is
here, with Glass-Steagall, is that you can run your
kind of banking system if you want to—under penalties
of law, of course. But you don’t have any right to
come to the Federal government, to demand that the
Federal government bail you out, if you happen to go
bankrupt.
Now, I can tell you, as you probably have suspected,
that practically every part of the whole system in the
United States, today, is already hopelessly, incurably
bankrupt. And there’s only one way we can escape from
this bankruptcy: You want to have some money to live
on? There’s one thing you’ve got to do: Glass-Steagall!
It won’t solve the problem, but it will open the gates, to
permit the problem to be solved.
All these things that don’t conform to Glass-Steagall
must be cancelled. That means these banks can still
have their banking system, as long as they don’t go
bankrupt. We’re not going to shut them down arbitrarily;
we’re just letting them out on their own, and
EIRNS/Eric Thomas
Nothing can be done to save the trans-Atlantic financial system
in its present form. “There’s no way you can bail it out. There’s
no way you can take it out of this—except one way: Glass-
Steagall.” Shown: LaRouchePAC organizing in San Diego,
Calif., August 2011.
38 LaRouche’s 90th Birthday EIR September 21, 2012
saying, “This is not our business. The Federal government
is not responsible for this.”
Now that will reduce the debt of the United States,
tremendously. It would have a similar effect in nations
of Europe. The French banks would not be pleased with
me. They would probably say some very nasty things
about me, but. . .
The point is, the world now knows, and increasingly
in Europe, there’s an understanding that Glass-Steagall
is a necessary alternative. And these guys are having a
terrible time, in fighting off the Glass-Steagall popularity.
But that will do it.
The problem is, because we waited so long, since
we cancelled Glass-Steagall, we waited too long, and
they ran up a hyperinflationary debt, which is really
beyond even dreaming. So therefore, the result is, if we
go with Glass-Steagall, we’re going to have relatively
little money, under our Federal system; because we
wasted it by throwing it into the garbage pail, and we
can’t get it back. So therefore, we’re going to have to go
to another measure.
Now, I said, national banking. Why national banking?
Because, unless you create a banking system,
under the U.S. government, under the protection and
regulation of the U.S. government, you can’t do anything
much with the economy.
We have very little industry left in the United States;
it’s been systematically destroyed. Especially since the
last three terms of the Presidency. We have been running
a garbage pail; and therefore, we have no means,
by ordinary means, to save the economy. We don’t have
jobs.
Now, as most of you know, under NAWAPA [North
American Water and Power Alliance], we would create,
quickly, 4 million or more jobs—real jobs! Real productive
jobs. We would create, at least, immediately, a
couple million more highly skilled categories of jobs.
We would start the process of a general recovery of the
United States—but oh! Wait a minute! Got one more
problem. Where’s the money going to come from, that
we’re going to loan for NAWAPA, and loan for other
high-technology jobs, and certain other kinds of skilled
jobs? The Federal government is going to have to create
credit, which will be run through the national banking
system, so that under national banking and Federal government
approval, we can conduit credit into creating
these jobs.
Let’s take the practical question of the food supply
in the United States right now: As you probably know,
food is about to be cancelled, and the Obama Administration
is doing everything possible to destroy it. Because
they’re doing everything to destroy food for
fuels.
Federal Credit; NAWAPA; Jobs
So therefore, what are we going to do? Well, what
we’re going to do is, by giving the Federal credit into,
say, the NAWAPA system, we’re going to create a flow
of credit, into the various phases of this process, which
will immediately charge NAWAPA, in particular, and
other things that go with NAWAPA.
We have also the lost auto industry, the whole Detroit
system, for example, and we’re going to put that
back to work. So, we’re going to create, instantly, that
is, by Federal decree—instantly create sufficient
growth, not only to get rid of this hopeless debt, which
never was really a legitimate debt, at all. And we’re
going to restart the economy, by taking people—when
you have very few people who are actually involved in
productive jobs, they’re not involved in producing
things; they’re mostly employed in various kinds of
services, which are not particularly productive, and do
not lend any productive value to the U.S. economy.
They’re simply pass-outs, under one guise or the other.
So in this case, we are launching a recovery of the
U.S. economy, by supplying the credit, as we did in the
beginning of the development of our economy, after we
won our Revolution. We’re going back to that system of
recovery to get things moving, and it’s going to start
immediately. And the easiest way for us to do this, is
NAWAPA.
NAWAPA is a project which is relevant, because it’s
focused on water management. And the problem we
have in the United States today, is a water management
problem. In the Western States, we don’t have rain. We
don’t have the means to grow crops. And we don’t have
people who are employed, in actually productive forms
of employment, physically productive forms of employment.
The difference is, with this kind of reform, of three
steps: NAWAPA as a driver, an incentive driver, which
will save the organization of production in the Central
and Western States of the United States. Then going
back into the Detroit area, with several million jobs, immediately,
will have a similar effect. Which means that
we then can use a credit system, managed under Federal
control, as we’ve used credit systems, like Franklin
Roosevelt did in the past, and use that kind of credit
September 21, 2012 EIR LaRouche’s 90th Birthday 39
system under a Glass-Steagalltype
government system, and we
can start the regrowth of the U.S.
economy.
We also have, as a byproduct of
this: If we as the United States do
this, you will find that the nations
of Eurasia will join us. You will
find that nations of Europe, who
are now being destroyed by their
own system, will now go back into
functioning, and we will use international
credit, which is an extension
of the national banking concept,
instead of speculation, in
order to restart the economy. And
that can be done.
So there is a practical solution,
a sane practical solution, as opposed
to the other kind, for this problem we have as a
nation. How far are we from getting it, is the question.
Promise Only What You Can Deliver
Well, that depends. It depends how desperate people
are, and how much their desperation is moderated by
the sense of attachment to a solution. Our job is to present
the solutions. You know, society is actually led,
when it’s led, by a tiny minority of the human race. We
have not, because of our underdevelopment, built up
nation systems, which are actually rational, and truly
represent the will of human beings.
What we approach is the conditional will of human
beings, by providing them with promises, which we
hopefully can keep, and that they will be satisfied by
trusting us, by the means of the measures we offer to
them as suggestions. A very tiny minority of the human
population in all nations, actually has any comprehension,
any qualifications for comprehension of how an
economy runs, or how it should be run. We have to
bring them to us, to our ideas, our conceptions, based
on the fact that they need precisely the solutions that we
present. It may not be exactly what they would dream
of, but it’s what we could deliver. And if people understand
that that’s what the game is, they’ll accept it, at
least in large part.
It’s what they can believe that we can deliver. And
it’s our saying that we can deliver this, but we can’t do
that, yet. And if you promise everything, they’re not
going to trust you, and for good reason. If you give specific
promises, that will work and make sense, and can
be explained to the people, it will work! And if they
don’t accept it, that’s their fault.
But our responsibility, which is limited—we don’t
run the world; we don’t have powers to supervise the
world as a whole. We can only argue. We can only argue
as an intelligentsia, that we have done some thinking
that the other people have not yet caught onto, or didn’t
know about. And we can tell them what we can do.
What we understand, what will work for them; and say,
“We’re going to have to work harder and better, in order
to fulfill the kind of promises we wish to deliver.” And
say we need their cooperation in doing that.
We’ve got to give them a sense, that whatever we’re
promising them, we’re committed to delivering, and
that our promise of delivery has been made credible to
them. And that experience, as in the case of the Franklin
Roosevelt recovery in the United States during the
1930s, the same program, the same policy that Franklin
Roosevelt used in reviving the U.S. economy, worked.
But we have to tell these guys, “Stop being the kind
of idiot, who believes in the party system! That’s
number one. Number two, don’t believe in Obama, get
him out of there, and make sure he’s removed quickly.”
And we’re going to have to figure out what we’re going
to do about this Republican. Because that’s a real weak
point, there.
However, I believe this: If we can establish a functional
Presidency of the United States as was done in
establishing the United States under George Washing-
LPAC
The Federal government will create credit, through the national banking system, which
will go into great projects, such as NAWAPA, which will generate 4 million new,
productive jobs, thereby starting a general recovery of the U.S. economy.
40 LaRouche’s 90th Birthday EIR September 21, 2012
ton’s Presidency, if we have a President, and we use our
system of government, our constitutional system of
government, we can solve this problem. Not the way
people would like, by a “wish factory” or something,
but by the fact; we can point the direction, and it’s up to
the people to follow the direction, and choose to follow
the direction.
But we must do what is not done right now: The
problem with government now, is that the U.S. government
and its functions, are chiefly one, big, damned lie!
They promise things that do not exist, or will not exist,
and make rules which make no sense, and are willing to
get into wars, by which civilization and mankind in
general could be destroyed. And we have to use that
argument and that bill of particulars, as a method of
convincing them, this has to be done.
We Need Leadership, Not Parties
And the key thing is this, to come back to the theme
I started with: Space. It’s obvious that there’s a limited
time frame within which mankind can continue to live
safely under the system of the Sun. The Sun has a limited—
some people say 2 billion years; some would say,
long before 2 billion years—the Sun is going to act up,
and life is going to be most unpleasant on this planet.
So, we as mankind, have to address this question.
And it’s obvious that to address this question, we have
to give new attention to space, the questions of space.
We have to find ways of intervening in the space system,
or the Solar space system and so forth, and this is possible.
But we must turn to that direction, to think, “Well,
we can’t stand around, following a fixed recipe, like a
kitchen cookbook recipe, forever. We have to anticipate
the problems which face mankind in the future; we
have to search for solutions to those problems, and
we’ve got to convince people.”
And the big thing you have to do, is this: Most
people in the United States today, behave stupidly, and
this, of course, is helped by the educational system; it’s
helped by the terrible conditions of life of children, as
well as adolescents; and there are many things that have
to be done. And our job is, as a minority in society, and
with other minorities in society which wish to find and
initiate true solutions for these problems, we have to get
out, and convince people, and educate them.
And in particular, get them immediately to understand
that these two Presidencies that they’ve stuck out
there for voting, ain’t shucks! And we’ve got to do
something about that; and the best way, is to go out and
say that these guys aren’t fit to run anything, and give
some indications of what we’re thinking.
It can work. It can work because the situation of all
humanity on this planet right now, is almost a hopeless
one. The war danger, the thermonuclear war which is
hanging over us right now, is threat number one. The
shortage of food in the United States, for people, citizens
of the United States, is another. The conditions of
health care, are another. All of these conditions are intolerable!
And nobody’s doing a damned thing about it,
from the standpoint of government on down! I don’t
hear of any big riots coming out of the Congress, against
the lack of such needed reforms! They’re going by the
party system. And I think we have to just treat the party
system as the kind of fraud that it has always been!
We should have a system of representative government,
in which the citizens can use those other citizens
who are the most qualified, and the most committed, to
provide leadership, to provide the ideas and the leadership
which is needed for the rest.
If you can’t be something, inspire it in somebody
else.
Thank you.
Planetary Defense
Leading circles in Russia have
made clear their intent to judo the
current British-Obama insane
drive towards war, by invoking the
principle of Lyndon LaRouche’s
Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).
Termed the Strategic Defense of
Earth, the SDE would focus on
cooperation between the U.S.A.
and Russia for missile defense, as
well as defense of the planet
against the threat of asteroid or
comet impacts.
The destiny of mankind now is to
meet the challenge of our
“extraterrestrial imperative”! Available from LaRouchePAC
No comments:
Post a Comment