to quote Tom Cruise, “Wild and Wooly”
I now present to you the most self-serving version of the old Lakota philosophy that decisions should be made with seven generations in mind, Lyndon Larouche talks about the importance of “grandfathers” to his “Youth”, and the generation which does not honor the grandfather.
No longer do they believe — in successive generations, no longer do they believe in immortality of the individual personality: that even after the individual is dead, their personality continues to live and have an effect on future generations. We used to be a society in which we thought grandfathers would give their lives to provide a better way of life for, not only their children, but especially their grandchildren. […]
That has been lost! We have now become, especially with the 68ers and that generation, which lost their morality almost at birth — actually, this was something done to them. Don’t blame them entirely for it; it was done to them, by their parents, and the consent of their parents, and done by teachers and so forth.
They lost that sense of immortality, they lost that sense of culture. They lost the sense of a continuity of culture. They lost a sense of what the meaning is of national cultures, of cultures of people, the importance of preserving and promoting these cultures, because that’s the way in which [… blah de freaking blah…]
Losing a sense of continuity of culture? Tibet? In the meantime, the “68”ers were either lost in terms of morality at their birth. Or done to them by teachers and with the consent of their parents. Which means we’re losing that generational schism already shown with the statements on how some things skip a generation. Or, actually… we’re supposed to blame Harry Truman, as with this quote:
You don’t like Baby Boomers? Blame Harry Truman!
And let it be done. DAMNED YE, HARRY TRUMAN!!!
Okay. But what about the current election. Well, Clinton is being brought down by the British in the form of Obama who will be brought down shortly thereafter (perhaps by assassination??? Have we learned anything from our dealing with the British back in the 60s visa vie Kennedy — Kennedy — King?) and… I don’t know how Bloomberg figures into these things anymore. But the problem with Clinton is, as discussed here…
Clinton’s continual pledge to represent the lower 80% of the U.S. population, and the unspoken fear that some of her policies seem to lean too far in the direction of the proposals put forward by Lyndon LaRouche
because
As it stands at this moment, unless Senator Hillary Clinton continues her campaign for the Democratic nomination, there is no presently visible chance that the U.S. will come out of the presently skyrocketing hyper-inflationary crisis in any form easily recognized as being, still, our constitutional republic.
This all goes back to Abraham Lincoln… (if it doesn’t go back to the Babylonians), when…
What we are facing in our nation, is what we have faced in this nation, since the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, and that is, a war for the survival of republican forces, uniquely, American forces, against those of the British Empire. And today, that war has come to its final stage.
Because
The post-Civil War conflict between Lincoln’s republican United States and the British Empire, which has defined world politics over the last 140 years, is coming immediately to a head in the course of the current United States presidential campaign. Can the United States and the planet, come out the winner?
But don’t fret. Yet. The Man Has The Plan.
Larouche, as head of LPAC, has committed himself to forming a new United States Presidency which will defeat this barbarism. As the most reliable long-term forecaster over recent decades, Larouche is uniquely situated to outlining the successful strategy to defeat the British.
So vote for Hillary Clinton. Or don’t, as stated:
The issue here is not the election results. The issue is not the president. Obama is not competent to be a president; he has none of the makings of competence. Many of his constituents are valuable people, who are tied to the interests of the lower 80 percent, and they should be encouraged and defended, and their rights defended.
Very nice of him to reference the Obama constituents as “valuable people”, and very civil libertarian of him to support the defense of their rights. Anyway, one more thing Larouche wants done:
In a statement released today, former Democratic Presidential candidate and the world’s leading economist declared that the Democratic Party should stop promoting former Vice-President Al Gore, now.
I don’t believe in Unilateral Withdrawal. I think the Democratic Party should be forced to quit promoting Al Gore until the Republican Party is forced to stop promoting Bob Dole. Anyway, Larouche remains magnanimous:
“Gore should be allowed to keep his party membership.”
Meanwhile, it worth noting, as posted by “realme” at factnet:
The list of delegates to the 10th Congressional District (Leesburg and environs) Democratic convention includes the following delegates and/or alternates pledged to Clinton: Nancy Spannaus, Anton Chaitkin, and Kathy Notley. I believe this local convention chooses delegates to next month’s state convention, which in turn chooses delegates to the national convention in Denver in August.
I may or may not have one further bit of news about that particular item which I will, if it is what I remembered, link to a later.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:38 am
Q: Mr. LaRouche, forgive me for this–I feel like I’m bringing down the level of discussion. But the fact is, that some of us have no choice but to deal with the day-to-day reality of electoral politics.
The one statistic that is reported over and over again by everyone, and which is not disputed anywhere, is that 90% of the Democrats–and I do emphasize, Democrats–who voted for Barack Obama in each of the past primaries, have said that they would indeed vote for Hillary Clinton in a McCain versus Hillary race. However, the opposite is simply not true: The majority of those who vote for Hillary now, may indeed vote for McCain, in a McCain versus Obama race. This is not my estimate, this is what these polls are showing.
My question, therefore, is, what is up with the Democratic Party–the DNC, the House Democratic Caucus, the Senate Democratic Caucus? Even from the most limited, pragmatic, pedestrian view, the simple fact is, that Hillary can beat John McCain, and Barack Obama can not. What are they doing? Do they know what they’re doing, or are they being played for fools?”
LaRouche: In some sense, they’re being played for fools, but the problem is, with them, is not misinformation, it’s a systemic moral problem.
You have to realize that what happened after 1968, particularly with what happened in the 1970s, for example, as a consequences of Nixon, is that the Baby-Boomer generation, is not simply a generation; it’s not an age-group of people born between 1945 and 1958. But rather, there’s a certain element in it, a composition to it: You have a blue-collar and similar type of layer; you have proud engineers and so forth. But then you have, specifically in this age-group, the so-called white-collar group–and sometimes it was a very dirty collar white-collar. Which is the typical, the roving fascists of 1968, both in the United States and various countries in Europe and South America and elsewhere.
So what happens is, these fellows–what do they stand for? They represent anti-technology. This was the hard-core of the 1970s: Kill nuclear power. Support destruction of agriculture, on so-called environmentalist grounds. One thing after the other: The systemic destruction of the United States was based on the impact of the rise of the 68ers throughout the political institutions during the 1970s.
Now, what happened is, then, you have another section of the white-collar Baby-Boomer generation, who were not pigs, unlike Obama’s friends from Chicago. But what happened is, they found themselves–who actually had some competence, some knowledge, some dedication to sanity (they probably change their underwear, as Al Gore, I understand does not)–but they found themselves in an inferior position of political influence.
So what happened is, the scumbags (to use a nice term) rose to the top positions–you’ll find all kinds of people, you look at their pedigree, these guys are really filthy! They’re not unwashed: They rub in dirt to make sure they are unwashed! They’re potheaded, huh? All these wonderful qualities.
And here you have, the other Baby-Boomer, who went to a university perhaps, or has some pride, thought of maintaining a normal family life, finds that his or her conditions of life are not really improving that much–and sometimes getting worse. Whereas the scumbags (to use a euphemism) are prospering, they’re at the top positions.
So what you have, no only with the elected officials who are of this category, or government officials who have this background, but you have a whole coterie of people around them, like political groups, action groups, this kind of thing, which are the political machine. And the political machine is dominated by people you wouldn’t want your daughter to marry. But you have to respect them, because they have the money and the power.
As a result of this, the Democratic Party–but you have the same thing in the Republican Party; it takes sometimes a different form–so you have this generation of Boomers, who either were part of the scum and who are in power, often in top-ranking power, not the very top often, but top-ranking; and then you have the other Boomers of the same white-collar background, who had some competence, but they’re discouraged; they gave up, over the course of the 1980s, they gave up trying to fight against the Boomers in power.
It’s like in warfare generally, the soldiers have to retire from combat or related duties at the age of 35 approximately, because they’re no longer in combat condition. And the same thing is true of Boomers. They reach the age of 35, their sex life is drying out–from overuse [laughter], and similar kinds of things–and they are no longer fighters. And their values change, and I’ve observed this thing in my own organization, the change that occurs: Those who once fought, are now looking for comfort zones, not foxholes. So therefore, they adapt to being, “Well, we can’t fight them. We have to learn to somehow make our traditions felt in some way. But we have to accept the terms that they demand we accept!”
And therefore, what you’ve got then, is a revolutionary potential: Because, these Boomers have no regard for the actual well-being of people in the lower 80% of family-income brackets. Therefore: If you want to organize a political movement in the United States, as Hillary has demonstrated with her own campaign, fairly well, with what she’s done since the New Hampshire campaign; if you want to organize a political base, don’t look to your Boomers.
I mean, she’s the same age as Helga, 60. Hillary and Helga are the same age, and they have a similar kind of situation. I think Helga’s better at it, but that’s all right. Matter of fact, I know she’s better at it! But Hillary has done a fine job, in her own way.
But they find themselves with condition to dependency upon the Boomer generation, which is now ensconced in many of the political positions which determine politics. Their instinct is Boomer! It’s not their brains, because their brains are in not too good condition, these days. They aged out, after the age of 36 when the sex began to dry up. [laughter]
So therefore, the problem of the Clintons, as of many other politicians, is they are depending too much on the Boomers, who are the layer they go to for political support in political institutions, and similar kinds of institutions. They’re also key for fundraising. So therefore, you have a money problem involved here.
So the only solution for this–which is typical of history: You want to fight a war, don’t concentrate on the old-age homes! You want to fight a war, get people under 35 years of age. You get some good generals of course, good strategists and so forth–but you need the people who have the energy to understand the mission. Who will accept the training. Who have the sense of the vim and vigor, are between 18 and 35–those are your fighting troops. These people, obviously, since you’re looking for numbers, you’re going to the most numerous part of 18 to 35. And these people are generally middle class, or lower income groups, or poor.
And therefore, if you’re looking for success, choose the right constituency. If you want a victory, choose the right army. Yes, you need a few generals, but they have to have the right army. And the army has to be well informed, it has to understand its mission, it has to have some tactical sense of what it’s doing. And it has to be dedicated, with a mission-orientation.
Now you have, all over the world, people who are fighting a life-and-death struggle for food, food which is being taken away from them, denied to them. Organize the lower 80% of the population for a war for food. Because, the alternative is mass death through starvation and disease. And if Prince Philip has his way, in his opposition to any development of the water systems in the PLHINO system–with his bats! His vampire bats!–you don’t have a chance. Humanity doesn’t have a chance.
See, you don’t go to war, unless there’s no other alternative. And you don’t go to war for the purpose of continuing a war. You go to war for the sense of trying to win the opposition into acceding to terms that you negotiate with them. Which means, we have the wrong philosophy these days. We have a philosophy of trying to find out “what nation is our enemy? Is it China? Oh! 1.4 billion people, perhaps more, you know? That’s a lot of people–maybe we should cut down the number, huh? India, 1.1 billion people–Oh! that’s much too much. It was much better when there were only 300 million of them.” And so forth and so on.
Africa–“well, we’re not going to fight them, we’ll just reduce the population.” That’s what the policy is now! That is IT! And therefore, someone’s saying their going to fight for “black,” they better not get too involved with Obama’s leadership. Maybe some of the Obama leaders, his faction’s leaders are very useful people, very important people; the base is important, the lower 80% of family-income brackets, they don’t have any interest in this crap! In being sucked into something.
I’ll just go to one other thing on this African-American question. You have two leading tendencies in the United States, among people of African descent. One sense is a great man–my type of fighter–famous from the Washington, D.C. area in point of fact. And he was replaced in influence during the course of the 20th Century, under the influence of Jim Crow and other things, by an idea, of “don’t go out there and fight, and originate, but wait for good things to descend upon you.”
Now, in terms of the African-American constituent, of the Obama campaign–you’ve got to look carefully at this–you have the fighter, who fought to get free of slavery, who probably killed to be free of slavery. And who also was a great thinker, a scientist, a musician, whose sons were musicians and scientists; who was a leader, like many others who fought the fight against slavery in the United States. They didn’t wait for something to descend upon them from above! They didn’t wait for a little good thing to drip down on them. Their stock was “go out and fight for it!” Not just fight for it, but make it! Build it!
And what happened, is the condition of the population of the United States with the destruction of industry–because the strength, largely of the African-American population, in former times, was largely in industry. The real strength of the African-American in the United States was based on industry, and also technology and science. Even though it was a small number, relatively speaking. The association with high degrees of skill, the association with rising from a low level of skill, to a higher level of skill in one’s lifetime, and a higher position in life, and a better life for one’s children: Make it happen! Don’t wait for it to descend upon you! Make it happen! huh?
And the problem is, look at Obama: Obama says nothing! The problem does not lie with the people around him. The people around him, as we know, many of the leaders of the Obama campaign, they’re good people. They think like that; they’re fighters. They’re in it for various reasons.
But, the thing is–get the image! “We’re going to make it happen. We’re going to make it happen!” “How? What’s your program, Obama?” There is none! “What’re you going to do to cure the problem? You have nothing to offer!”
But why would somebody vote for Obama, who promised everything , but promises not to deliver it. By unction, like Elmer Gantry. You know, this travelling salesman, in the novel–and there was this movie with Burt Lancaster, which was a kind of funny movie; it was very good, it was a very good job.
And you get this religious preacher, a faker, like the fundamentalists, like the Jerry Falwell types, huh? And they come along and say, “Jesus will save you! We’re going to raise this money tonight, we’re going to do this… Jesus is going to save you, if you do this. It’s going to descend upon you!”
Whereas in the Christian view–that is not a Christian view–but the Christian view is, “Well, find in oneself the strength to do what has to be done. Spend your life for something useful. Make something necessary happen. Discover what your mission is–and do it! Build something, make something!”
And you’ve got these people out there voting for Obama, who in many cases are waiting for it to descend upon them. He promises the revolution, he promises the Great Change. Where’s it coming from? If there’s going to be Great Change, you’re going to do something, aren’t you? What’re you going to do!?
What’re you going to do, Obama?
You haven’t done anything so far. You take in a lot of money, but what have you done? You haven’t done anything! What’re the problem of life, for people out there? What have you done about these problems? What have you done about the housing crisis? What have you done about the education problem? What have you done health-care problem? You’ve done nothing!
You’ve talked about everything, like Elmer Gantry, the great swindler. Like the minister who creates more people behind the curtain, than he saves in front. That’s what it is, it’s Elmer Gantry.
And the problem here is, is not the fact that he does that. That’s bad. The problem is: The people put up with it! Here they are, they think they want revolutions, they want salvation, they want the good to descend upon them. They’re waiting for the great Faith-Based Initiative money! Coming down upon them. “And if the Faith-Based Initiative will bri-i-ng that Gr-re-at Flow of Money, down upon them, then they will get all the sex and other blessing they desire!” Elmer Gantry-style. And that’s fakery!
But the problem is, why do the American people put up with it? And I can tell you why from my experience, even from 2004: Faith-Based Initiative. People came to us, who had been leaders that we had worked with for years, in the Civil Rights Movement. They say, “Yeah, you’re good, you’re right. But! You don’t have the money! And we need the money!” And so, they drifted off, from being fighters–to make it happen!–to being quite the contrary. “Gimme the money. Gimme the money.” “Let it descend upon us! Let that gr-re-at shower of money from the sky, descend upon us!}” And that’s the Obama campaign: Elmer Gantry. See the movie, it’s all there for you.
And by the destruction of industry, by the destruction of the kinds of things, that transform a poor people, poorly educated, poorly treated, into people who make things happen, in a factory, in a machine shop, in whatever–make it happen!! Don’t pray for it: Make it happen! Pray for the strength of your arm to do it, and nothing else. Pray for the strength of your brain to see it, and to accomplish it. Feel the joy and dignity of being something! We used to say, you know, in the Civil Rights struggle: “Be somebody! Be somebody! Be somebody, who makes things happen!”
Not this slouch. “It’s gonna descend upon us… huhuhuh.”
Anyway. That’s the problem. And we have to, in reaching out to these people who are in the Obama organizations, we have to tell them this:
“Cut it out! Stop the fakery! Get real! Make it happen! People are starving for lack of food: Make it happen! People are starving for lack of decent jobs: Make it happen! People are starving for lack of infrastructure: Make it happen! People are starving and dying for lack of health-care: Make it happen! Be a doctor–make it happen! Create the situation in which you can become a physician, or your friend can become one. Make it happen!
“Don’t tell me about what’s going to descend upon us because by some unction, you’re going to suck this thing down from the sky upon you! Make it happen!”
May 15th, 2008 at 5:44 am
any moron, such as yourself, can take comments out of context — as u did — and make anyone sound like the monkey you are
you’re a clown
a jumper
a loser
make something out of your life before it passes you by
May 15th, 2008 at 9:45 am
Uh, revenire–
Lyn says: “Whereas in the Christian view–that is not a Christian view–but the Christian view is, “Well, find in oneself the strength to do what has to be done. Spend your life for something useful. Make something necessary happen. Discover what your mission is–and do it! Build something, make something!—
That is, the greatest mind of the millennium is giving his encapsulated summary of Christianity, and he doesn’t mention God and he doesn’t mention Jesus Christ.
It’s like the hilarious time when he declared at a conference or an NC meeting or somewhere that he represented the (to coin a phrase) essence of Christianity, except for a few add-ons like the Resurrection.
Can’t you just see him waving his hand, with those too-long, not entirely clean, fingernails, and saying–“Details! Factoids! Don’t get caught up in these turds–focus on the underlying principle…..”?
The old boy is confusing himself with God again, I’m afraid. God, however, is not confused.
(Of course, the LYMers and LYMettes may be, but sooner or later they’ll really have to take responsibility for their own moral choices.)
May 18th, 2008 at 10:00 am
I suppose one could thank revenire for providing whoever is reading this with even more lunacy from one of the diatribes I quoted from.