… and another gander at lala land
AND… To begin again…
— GIVE THE AMERICAN CITIZENRY BACK ITS SOUL! –
Lyn held a several hour discussion with the NC/NEC on Saturday afternoon, in which he kicked off a process of discussion for improving the functioning of the organization, which cannot be
adequately summarized here. Here are a few of the highlights of the areas discussed:
* THE CURRENT STRATEGIC SITUATION:
We are on the edge of something worse than fascism taking over the United States–the edge of the doom of civilization itself. If these Greenie idiots, typified by Gore, do what they plan, the world’s population could go from 6.5 billion, to less than 1 b illion people. We are already in a {breakdown} crisis, and if we don’t get the United States to make a change in direction {right now}, we will have no chance to survive. That’s the test of responsibility today.
………………………………………….
I was sort of making half-hearted and botched attempts at a response to the final comments of the long-time Larouche cult member who just wrote — what? 100 comments? — on this blog over a weeks’ span. One question lingering in my mind is where do I take this crock?
The line of questioning were stupdifying, but instructive in the way that the leaps that arrive at the questions show the beach-heads that allow someone to believe in the conspiracy of… um… Al Gore, I suppose a puppet of the synarchy of Felix Rhoyatin or the British Empire, and their environmentalist ploy of mass genocide to eliminate the Earth’s population from its current 6 billion to 1 billion — masked in a Global Warming Crusade. After a bit of thought it also occurs to me how this allows a person to see the scribblings of a wayward blogger (um… me) or the publisher of a national publication (go back to the L-PAC “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy” shot at the upcoming Washington Monthly article) as motivated to attack Larouche because of a desire to STOP LAROUCHE from exposing the great Global Warming Fraud.
Really.
I think I have more or less cracked the strategum of concerns over the vacuuousness of popular culture, and how that can ensnare a few wayward youth (and onto a lineage of history). But I have never gotten around to a certain battle over neo-Mathusianism — as enabling with a straight face, what’s that line? Some combination of the terms “Technological” “Humanism” and “Positivism”. (Maybe I’ll insert it here later.) There is something here.
“Let me guess: there are too many human beings and not enough resources?” “Okay, who should die and who should live? Who will decide how many children I can have?
Surely you jest. But Larouche has provided me with the absurd basis wherein I have a short-cut in unscrambling this: Population 6.5 billion down to Population 1.billion. I don’t need to say another word. You start with some plausible-sounding enough that might catch someone (Hey! China has a “One Child Policy”!) and, as if to make sure it stops short of accidentally latching a mass movement — you go to 1 billion. (Enough wiggle room between the two lines to lead somebody along, enough wiggle room to garner some fund-raising ala “environmentalist wackos”.)
Okay. It does not take a Great Greenie to summise societies must make adaptations here and there regarding issues of population and resources and how they affect day to day life– and if forced to I’ll go into some very practical matters drawn into any Environmental Impact Statement. But Larouche believes in a sort of “Unlimited”, unencumbered by the laws of entropy or environmental impact. Or, you know, moon bases will be hegemonic for humanity and solve whatever minor problems there might come from rapid development. And fusion, which I’d summise is a solution to some matters, but has proven to be a case of “Waiting for Godot” — put it in the hands of people seriously working on it and ignore a cult and maybe somebody is progressing on the matter.
But you go from that breach — the line about everybody believing that “Earth has too many people” — to the assumption that what they are attempting to thin the Earth’s population, which allows for the manichean view that Al Gore (or whomever… Um… Jarred Diamond) and wouldn’t you know it? They are the pessimists predicting the Apocalypse SOONER THAN NOW, not us — who are, you know?…
… all with a straight face. The Dollar equals Zero right now, after all, and have entered a dark age similar to the second interval of the years… etc. etc.
I gather that one keeps the 1 billion plot hidden in seeking funds from some less-than-Larouche-nutty-Conservative arenas (as the same with less-than-Larouche-nutty-antiwar arenas in the “Children of Satan” area), but I’ve never been entirely able to figure out how those things fully work.
…………………..
http://www.floridatoday.com/blogs/brevardwatchlist/2007/10/larouch-is-back-crying-british-are.html
……………….
Somewhat puzzling moment in a Larouche “Historic Internet Broadcast” q and a session. A weird discordant note — as posted at factnet…:
[Flintstone] I’ll ask you them, one at a time….
The first one is: “Mr. LaRouche, if you stop all foreclosures, how would you prevent some people from simply ceasing to pay their monthly mortgages? Or even just cutting back some months if their money is tight? If banks can’t foreclose, how does one force people to continue to pay their home mortgages at all? The entire population could just skate home-free on their payments.”
LaRouche: What a swindle! What a phony question!
Look: The provision is—as I made very clear, and even an idiot in the Congress can understand it—the way you do it is, once a property is in a state of threatened foreclosure, you come into negotiation, and it’s a negotiation conducted under law. What’s the law? I specified it very clearly. Didn’t the idiot listen to what I said? He wants to criticize what I say, before the idiot knows what he’s talking about?
I said, we will, instead of paying the scheduled mortgage as scheduled, there will be an agreement, an arrangement, under which the person who is the occupant of the property, will pay something per month, in the form, as if of rent; until such time as a resolution of the debt can be made. The object is to keep the people in their houses. And if you take them out of their houses, and if you take the extent of the evictions which are about to occur if this does not happen, you’re going to have the United States going into a sinkhole of Congress!
Anybody who opposes this, should be considered as tantamount to a criminal mind.
Freeman: I figured that was a good warmup.
Hm. Tightly controlled as those things seem to be… who asked that one, anyways? Designed to make an example, I … guess.
October 24th, 2007 at 4:37 am
If you think that briefing was weird, get a load of the Monday briefing, which gets some air time over on FactNet….
I only regret that we-all didn’t discover till recently the Mother Lode of comedy this LaRouche represents. And the LPAC site? More fun than the Onion!
October 24th, 2007 at 8:17 am
Which would be:
And then we had, of course, the operation in the United States, which was run largely run (sic) through various agencies, but most notably the private agency was Mellon Scaife, who was funding the operation against us from 1983, oh about I would say about March 1983 on, and in conjunction with John Train: Who is actually an Anglo-American agent, more than just an American agent, who runs a private company who specializes in this. And the most recent thing, with people like Molly, for example, was being controlled by those circuits, and had been controlled by them for some time. Although her husband, Ken, who had committed suicide recently, was quite loyal to the organization, she was an enemy, actually. So, there wasn’t much loss.
But nonetheless, this mess had to be cleaned up.
In the same briefing lead (which, as mentioned, is actually a transcript of some L-riff or other), first LaRouche reviews how all the European leadership fell into the clutches of The Enemy, and therefore their dropping out a year ago was no loss. (There are persistent rumors that Helga’s still in touch with them, but, oddly, Lyn doesn’t go into that.)
Then he analyzes the situation in the U.S., pinpointing the combination of Richard Mellon Scaife, John Train, and Molly Kronberg that has been doing Something Bad for the past 24 years.
As for Ken Kronberg and his suicide? Well, he was “quite loyal”–Curb Your Enthusiasm, Lyn–even though his suicide didn’t represent “much loss” (unless that’s Molly he’s speaking about. We all know how much Lyn valued Ken–immortalized in LaRouche’s own words and frequent memos.) And it was a “mess” that had to be cleaned up (or, perhaps, “another fine mess.” Oh, well said! Particularly in view of how Ken died. After 36 years of “quite loyal” service, that’s all Kronberg gets? Wow! Aren’t you glad you aren’t on the NC? At least, not any more?)
Publicly, bad things are being said about Molly. Privately, of course, LaRouche’s intimates (if that’s the right word–ugh) are saying bad things about Ken, too.
October 25th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
Avi Klein’s article is out in the Washington Monthly, on the newsstands and online:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2007/0711.klein.html
It has factual errors–wrong maiden name for Molly Kronberg, for example–but it is basically on target with that laser-like quality LaRouche has always oohed and ah-ed about. Awkward for the LaRouche squad, for sure, all that financial detail…..
The legal team has been freaking out about Avi Klein since he first went to PMR a week after Kronberg’s death–now it will be entertaining to watch them tie themselves in knots debunking and denying.
The more they squirm, the more I hear that great sucking sound from the quicksand.