I am a little disappointed in Lyndon Larouche.  I was expecting his pump to have been filled to the brim with materials that flogs the Minnesota bridge collapse.  After all, this at least fits the Larouche grind, and at least does not seem as contrived to float as a “mission” than the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shooting kick against the evils of video games — which was contrived on multiple levels, not the least of which the issue was nowhere on any person’s mind whereas references on where America’s infrastructure come to mind anytime we pass over a bridge.  Maybe I will just have to wait until Monday to see a cluster of about 40 items.  I do not know what is taking him so long.  Is he losing a step in pivoting to current events?  What kind of crisis mongerer is he?
As it is, he sticks a few spokes into the celebration of Russian Infrastructure Production, and then there’s the great question:
The question still remains: Why does Rohatyn hate LaRouche’s longstanding call for an FDR-style economic recovery?

I don’t know.  Larouche has decided to attach Rohyatyn to the Dodd – Hagel Infrastracture Bill.   The headline:  Senators Hagel and Dodd Fall Into Rohatyn’s Anti-FDR Trap.  Tellingly enough, Larouche manages to exonerate Hagel from the proceedings, and leaves Dodd as being in league with the forces of Rohyatyn, the — um — Nazi, and by Nazi I mean International Banker Holocaust Survivor.  LaRouche commented, “Hagel has a good heart, but has been misadvised. He doesn’t understand economics yet, the kind of economics that rules the real world.”
That really is a pretty interesting little dichotomy he is throwing up there.  Why the hell does he not suggest that Chris Dodd has a good heart?   I suspect the answer lies within the biography of his father, Thomas Dodd.  Look up and down the wikipedia article, and see if you can figure out what a Royatan – Dodd conpiracy would be all about.
……………………………………………….

I can’t believe you are indulging in this travesty. Do you get paid in money, sex or drugs?

A Larouchite asked that to another blog, found on the sidebar, easily identifiable as — really the only other blog converged on this topic.

Drugs and Sex.   Drugs and Sex.  Drugs and Sex.  This brings me to a question — the drugs part first of all, and I will get to the sex part in a second and weave money into the equation.  So here is my question: Who’s afraid of High Times Magazine?

Well, I am to a small degree.  It’s a magazine that elicits a certain amount of snickering.  My opinion on the issues of drug legalization and criminalization are irrelevant in the context of this post, so it’s best to side-step them.  All I will really say is that I do not really find desirous a nation of pot heads, and refuse to celebrate the drug in any way.  Curiously, I have never actually looked at a physical copy of High Times magazine.  I don’t know what the lay-out is like, and am ignorant of how it weaves together somewhat contradictory components in its mission: it’s serious and not serious at the same time, high minded in defending drug usage and civil liberties inherent in protecting same, at the same time as jerky with Cheech and Chong esque humor.  On the other hand, I lost some respect for the magazine when I read that they endorsed John Kerry in the last election.  This strikes me as against their narrow editorial focus — a Matt Taibbi discussion with Drug Enforcement Agents working for a Kerry victory because it would bring them back to the good old days of Clinton pops into my mind.  But I am not going to tell High Times magazine how to do their job, and they can do whatever the heck they want.

High Times magazine is the source of a few articles from Chip Berlet and a single article from Dennis King on Lyndon Larouche — the narrow focus being coverage of his old “National Anti-Drug Coalition” and its place within the larger anti-drug movement.  Mention either of the two to a Larouchite, or even bring up background information on Larouche, and they will conjure up Berlet or King and attach them to High Times Magazine, seemingly suggesting that British Oligarchs or John Train or whomever placed them to some high editorial role at the magazine, smugly assured that that finalizes the point, that that permanently discredits Berlet and King.

The High Times Reader, a collection of various articles through High Times history, publishes a Chip Berlet article on the “National Anti Drug Coalition”, which has that classic generic name, easily undistinguishable from any number of other anti-drug organizations.  It posited the organization as being an effective in to ally with police organizations, and of course a good money magnate, and ultimately a means to attract black Americans concerned with drug use in the inner-city.

When the US Labor Party perceived it had stumbled across a gold-mind issue, it went into high gear.  The call for the National Anti-Drug Coalition in the July 10 issue of New Solidarity was accompanied by an endorsers list of over 120 community leaders, legislators, union leaders, and clerics.  The founding convention of the group was set for September 29, 1979, in Detroit’s Cobo Hall.  As a warm-up for the September meeting, the US Labor Party scheduled a series of state and city meetings of anti-drug forces, including an annual awards banquet for the Illinois Anti-Drug Coalition, a neat rabbit out of the hat piece of organizing since the Illinois Coalition had only recently been invented by USLP cadre.  At first several prominent political, civic, and religious leaders were lined up to appear at the Illinois Awards Banquet, but as word of the Larouche connection spread — he was the featured guest speaker — people began to break off.

Which is the way of things.  A similar set of circumstances happened when Larouche ended up taking control of an Earth Day Event at New York’s City College in 1970.  In the case of this Anti-Drug Banquet, it gave Larouche an opportunity to ratchet up the charges of nefarious conspirators out to destroy Larouche, and drug-kinged conspirators at that.

I suspect that part of the anti-drug message he has woven slides right along his anti-video game message.  College students look around at their lives and decide that either they or their fellow roommates are wasting time, and desirious of bigger and better things IMMEDIATELY.  Larouche sells the “World Historical Figures” scheme, and they run off to man card-table shrines for the next thirty years of their lives.  But at least they get the opportunity of feeling intellectually superior to their baby-boomer Pothead Parents’ generation and their contemporary generation of pothead peers — who, after all, seem to have no interest in creating a Renaissance, and do not appreciate this great classical music that they are being pumped with.  It is a neat little hooky meme.

Anyway, this Chip Berlet written High Times published article suggests a clue as to some of the troubles that Larouche – related articles have had in laying out basic background information as the years piled on.  What is the shorthand way to slide some details of the Chris White story into a quicky article about a nutty remark made during, say, the 1984 Democratic Party Primary run?  From a rambling Larouche speech, published in the much maligned High Times, something which supposedly had to do with how the forces of Rockefeller or the combined forces of the KGB and CIA or whomever the enemy was at the time were working against them, but which ended up conjuring up the classic Twilight Zone episode which ends when the Human realizes that the book “How to Serve Man” is a cookbook.  I think I’ve published this before — at any rate, published the account from the New York Times writer watching Larouche comment on a video taped session of his “deprogramming *” (see “Part Two”), but that is part of my point here: How does one go about republishing it over and over again in the course of intermittently covering Larouche?  It is background information that floats away, replaced with — say– the “Queen of England” reference.
“How do you brainwash somebody?  Well, first of all, you pull a psychological profile or develop one in a preliminary period.  You find every vulnerability of that person from a psychological standpoint.  Now the next thing you do is you build them up for fear in males and females of homosexuality, aim them for an identification with anal sex, their mouth is identified with fellatio.  Their mouth is identified with the penis — that kind of sex, and with women.  Womanhood is the fellatio of the male mouth in a man who has been brainwashed by the KGB; that is sucking penises.”

Larouche went on to claim that the programming played upon guilt fears about masturbation and homosexuality and forced the person being programmed to engage in degrading acts.  According to Larouche, the programmers would show the victim a picture of a man performing intercourse with a sheep.  “Wouldn’t you like to do that?  How about this dog?”  The key to the technique was summed up by Larouche thusly: “What brainwashes is the victim’s knowledge that he is degrading himself in order to avoid pain.  It’s not the pain that brainwashes, it’s forcing the victim to run away from the pain by taking the bait of degrading himself.  This persistent patter of self-degradation, self-humiliation, is what essentially accomplishes the brain-washing.”

The preceding paragraphs are something that one should keep in mind if and when they see Larouche followers out in force with their stupid and juvenile “Dick Protector” (Point to Condom) promotion, rallying for the impeachment of Dick Cheney and against the Synarchist controlled Democrats.

A question is raised about what ever happened to the National Anti Drug Coalition. What happened to it is what happens to every thing which involves Lyn. A rationale idea of being against illegal drugs become the irrational vanity project of Lyn. Along the way it is used to make as much money as possible via contributions, sales of Dope Inc books and subscriptions to a magazine. The contacts at the card table shrines are called back for subs to the magazine “War on Drugs”. This leads to another call about culture and the drug lobby so we hit them for the Schiller Institute. Lyn is hidden like a crazy grandfather in the basement when all of this is going on.

Next we do something very subtle in contacting candidates and putting a score card in the magazine for a few issues. Of course, Lyn tops the field. Next comes we “boil” the sub list to get money for Lyn’s presidential run. If you blow off some people it is an acceptable loss for a few reasons.

-Hitting the jackpot with some big money or loans will more than make up for the loss if some subscribers. Besides, they will be called back in a few months anyways over and over until they change their phone numbers.

-You really in retrospect do not lose money on the subscription you sold at a card table shrine because you never mail it out in the end.

………………………………………..

Great moments in message board discussions, and add it to how the “National Anti-Drug Coaltion” funnels money in…:

– Let all admit that Lyn is one of the most voluminous rhetoricians in all history.

–  I admit to no such thing. I think it is nonsense – and that ex-LaRouche people still have rocks in their heads.  Moreover, it is probably more likely that LaRouche (or some member of his con-artist team) have simply written a computer algorithm for producing un-artful prose.

– I didn’t say it was any GOOD— I just said it was voluminous.

AND

– Does anyone have an economic model that accounts for the continued existence of LaR and his group?

— Here ya go:

Perhaps Lyn had a brainstorm and refashioned the Marxist equation s/c+v which originally meant surplus value/constant capital + variable capital to become surplus to Lyn/looting of constant capital from PMR and World Comp + the “vig” he gets on fleecing creditors and not paying members their stipends.
………………………

Some stuff.

This entry was posted on Saturday, August 4th, 2007 at 12:51 am 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.