He gave up on the outside world long ago, and has been focused solely on replenishing his nest with fresh young prey. The biggest revelation for me, when I finally completely separated from LaRouche, was the discovery of how invisible he is to the real world. Inside his organization, and his Daily Briefings, LaRouche is portrayed as the center of the universe, around which all else revolves. Once outside, former members come to realize that, perhaps, this is the biggest fraud of all.

That would be Nick Benton.  Writing on his myspace account.  A two-fer for Larouche — an ex-member AND a myspace account.  In the preceeding paragraph, Benton states that Larouche has failed on all accounts.

Reading into the pre-emptive offense against the upcoming piece by the Mossad Agent, if I am reading it correctly, I think Dear Cult Leader is about ready to absorb the loss of Baby Boomers as he pursues his end game — and he was writing off his baby-boomers anyways.  He mentioned his mortality, which is — whatever else it may suggest — is a pre-requisite for preparing his membership for their post-Larouche mortem duties.    You gather how little the LYM members could care about Ken Kronberg, and you gather that he has ready the story of the “Ken Kronberg Hoax” for the — um — Mossad Agent’s piece, that which at this point probably wouldn’t work for too many of Baby-boomers, but the replacement LYM would probably eat up.

the implications of the growing [sic] LaRouche Youth Movement, which promises a long institutional life for the organization, for many decades after the 84-year old LaRouche’s demise.

My speculative fiction regarding Larouche would be of a future, middle of this century, Lyndon Larouche long gone and long forgotten except for the most footnotey of footnotes, and the remnants of his cult of personality gone.  But a current LYMer, using much of Larouche’s jargon, and a little more nimble and on his feet, with the correct mass-desperation society experiences during a really big economic downtrun, becomes the Fascist Dictator of America.  But that’s as far flung science fiction as the Sliders episode with Larouche as president.
I have not much understood some mechanical touches for Larouche.  At the end of the day, he does need some public awareness, and the means to arrive at those have deteroiated.  Laugh as one may at his presidential bids, but they gave the media a certain requirement to cover him, and at times with a forced neutrality, as well a public curiosity to cover him otherwise.  Laugh as one may at his literary output — and to a slice of the under-30 set, say Larouche and they will think “Children of Satan” s I, II, and is there a III? — but they provided some place in the public sphere — and gave purpose for them to pop onto college campuses.  Larouche has no presidential bid in the offing, it has deteroiated to the “Support Hillary Clinton” campaign — something for his minions to do, I suppose.  Sans the concept of Larouche behind the scenese giving economic policy for a President Hillary Clinton, what would the Larouchies be promoting visa vie Larouche?  And Larouche has folded up his print runs, offering up a supposed “Internet Strategy” — something Larouche must realize by now is a sort of double-edged sword — and which is a bit more difficult to pollute the atmosphere with, I must say.   Now his street teams are standing in the middle of the freeway, poster-signs on, crude sexual jokes about “Dick” Cheney.

I do not quite get it.  Is this a “neo-Malthusian” or “negantropic” (or whatever that word is) Economic model which somehow by itself refutes the supposed Economics Larouche is advancing (which boils down to a love of building large shiny objects.  NOW does he understand the concept of governments doing a little penny-pinching now and then?)
The “Larouche Youth Movement” would probably have to end up becoming inward-looking without the physical presense of their leader, a strange spirituality.  And I will note the what he released during his prison era.  I suppose they have the “Plato” story to work with, and the cultural malaise, but beyond this, economic trends are pointing downward, rationalized as “The Winds of Change”.

But, okay.

By a very weird coincidence, I checked Dennis King’s “L.L. and the New American Fascism” out of the library about an hour before I found your post. (concering Webster Tarpley at “9/11 Truth Conferences”.)  Lately his name just keeps popping up in my “Satanic panic” research, in posts, even in casual conversation. I decided I must know more.

A few thoughts about Dennis King, not in relation ot the “Satanic Panic” — at least not directly — but with the book, from an assortment of ex-members.

And to me, the biggest irony is, I don’t think he has comprehended squat about why people join LaRouche, or stay with him for years, decades, and entire lifetimes. I can well imagine that a member who already has largely figured it out, could read King’s book and find enough justification for his/her misgivings to decide that’s the final straw, and leave at that time. I doubt that King says anything that could sway a regular member, or even a new LYM member.

AND

As to Dennis King’s book, it contains extremely useful information and insights. It is true that, since King is not a former member, there is plenty he misses, but it seems to me, judging from his recent work, that he is fast rectifying that.

It is, by default, THE book on Larouche.  My guess is if someone were to write a new book that could be take that crown of “THE” book — and not by default — it would have to be written by a former member of the cult, and not even necessarily one who was terribly high up in the ranks, because — face it — I can grasp at pieces of what the heck their point is (and I have gone through with motivations on joining — which all members are actually surprisingly up-front in explaining — and they are rather typical concerns of late adolsecents), but nonetheless, it’s an alien creature to me.

Other than that, he probably overplays the anti-semitism angle at the epense of other parts of the problem with Larouche.

I would like to say King’s motivation are foreign to me — which seems to be another weird tic that arises from any slight criticism of Larouche, but then I realize I have been on this topic for this calendar year, so I kind of  just have to shrug that question off.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 14th, 2007 at 4:20 pm and is filed under The LaRouche Challenge, Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.