The Global Dynamic Is Shifting; We Can Save Civilization From the Abyss

The process unleashed ten days ago by the March 12 interventions of Germany’s Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Helmut Schmidt, and the former governor of Maryland Martin O’Malley, has produced a dramatically new global strategic situation. Now, the decision earlier this week of four leading European nations to join the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), totally ignoring President Obama’s threats and warnings to not do so, has further kicked over the chessboard. Nothing is working the way it used to, as recently as two weeks ago.

“The genie is out of the bottle,” Helga Zepp-LaRouche stated on Sunday, and the AIIB will only gain more momentum by the day. We are now positioned, because of the breakthroughs we have achieved to date, to actually get the United States and Europe to join with the BRICS in an entirely new world order, based on the seemingly “impractical” idea of win-win cooperation among nations. If the U.S. and China work together, along with other BRICS nations, “we can save civilization from the abyss,” she stated. She called on the LaRouche movement nationally to maintain a single, “laser-like focus” on organizing for the upcoming March 28 Manhattan Schiller Institute event, as the key action to be taken at this moment, to bring about this strategic objective.

For its part, the Chinese government is moving quickly to maximize progress in this new environment. Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Yesui, speaking at the China Development Forum in Beijing, reiterated and expanded on President Xi Jinping’s November 2014 offer to the U.S. to join with the New Silk Road and related AIIB projects:

As paraphrased by Global Times, Zhang said:

“China and the United States share much common interests and space for cooperation in the Asia Pacific, which should become a region of priority to build a new model of major-power relations between the countries.” He added that China’s concept is not to use these initiatives as “a geo-strategic tool,” but “follow the principles of joint consultation, construction and sharing.”

Lyndon LaRouche characterized the latest Chinese initiative as “shrewd,” as they know that Obama is shaky, and this offer will make him shakier still. Our task, LaRouche elaborated, is to get Obama kicked out of the White House altogether. He is an agent of the British Empire, a lunatic to boot, and our only chance of avoiding global thermonuclear war is to dump Obama.

In discussions with associates on Sunday, LaRouche elaborated on the deeper considerations involved:

“The key thing is: What’s the principle of human existence? We have defined the principle of human existence as located with Kepler as a point of reference. There are other things that happened before then, that led into what Kepler did, and there are consequence of what Kepler had done, which radiate still today, and are developing today. But the question always is: Don’t be practical! Don’t be practical! And don’t be stupid, which is pretty much the same thing as being practical.

“What you have to do is understand the processes which are beyond man’s simple imagination, into man’s higher levels of imagination of the future. Mankind must always place our intention within the bounds of a future, not within the bounds of a present. So the practical interpretation of things is fraudulent.

“For example, what happened with the three people who were pulled, implicitly, from Germany [Steinmeier and Schmidt] and from the United States, O’Malley: that did something. But, in and of itself, it is not the solution; it is simply something which provokes, or should provoke, our sense of what the solution is ahead, not what the practices are today.

“My cursing is cursing at people who try to be practical, who think that they can go from experience, and use experience as a standard for treating the future. That is the mistake. If you cannot think ahead of the present, if you cannot think of the laws of the future, rather than the present, you fail.

“For example: How do we get rid of Obama? Well you can’t just say, ‘We are going to get rid of Obama.’ You have to have a principle which says how we are going to rid of Obama, and why we are going to get rid of him. These things are things we’ve discussed. But the problem is people say, ‘Let’s be practical.’ Or they will say, in the same way: ‘Well, people won’t understand that. We have to explain it so they understand it.’ And that’s the big mistake: when they get practical and think they can share conclusions which really are old-hat conclusions, things that we thought would work in the past, but they won’t.

“All the things from the past will not work in the present, especially under the terms of present conditions. That’s the way we have to think of this thing. Don’t be practical! But you can’t be impractical, either; that is, you cannot be failure, you cannot be a fool. You always have to respond as Kepler would have to the future. Because when mankind is human, mankind is not practical. Mankind is not a practical creature when mankind is functioning. We’re always making discoveries in terms of principles of practice, which were unknown in the previous week, in the previous year. And if we are not basing ourselves on throwing aside what was customary, what was deemed practical, you are wasting your time.

“Because we are in a crisis now, where only if you understand the future, and can shape the future, are you competent to help mankind work our way from the struggle we are going through now.”