LPAC Policy Committee – June 8, 2015

Matthew OGDEN:  Good afternoon, it’s June 8th, 2015.  My name is Matthew Ogden, and you’re joining us for our discussion here on Monday afternoon with the LaRouche PAC Policy Committee. We’re broadcasting over Google Hangouts On Air:  I’m joined via video by Dave Christie, from Seattle, Washington; Kesha Rogers, from Houston, Texas; Michael Steger from San Francisco, California; and Rachel Brinkley from Boston, Massachusetts.  And here in the studio, I’ve got a full house today:  We’re joined by Diane Sare, Jason Ross from the LaRouche PAC Basement team, and Bill Roberts, who just arrived via New York City — all three of whom had the opportunity to participate in the historic June 6th conference up in New York City that happened this past Saturday, which I’m sure we’ll discuss here.   I’m also joined in the studio as you can see by Mr. LaRouche.  So, Lyn, I’m going to let you begin.

Lyndon LAROUCHE:  Let’s take something which is a fresh issue.  That what has happened in Germany, is where the three officers, two former officers and one an active officer, of the three people, against Merkel, who is the louse of the case, shall we say; that the difference is, is an understanding which we have put on the record in our written publications, on Monday and before that, which says that the three officers, who either are presently or had been leading figures in Germany’s policymaking, have come to the conclusion that Merkel’s policy is contrary to the interests of Germany.

Now, they haven’t quite said it in those terms, but they’ve made it very clear in their arguments so far. Now in our , we had this reflected in detail. As of today, we have a slightly modified expression of the same thing, but it amounts to the same thing in effect.  So there’s some bouncing around between when Merkel is going to be thrown out, or is going to appear to come back in, so far.

But the essential thing is that Germany cannot live, under the economic conditions, which it’s living under now.  And Germany, in Europe in general, apart from Russia, Germany is the only nation which has any viability now; we ignore the British system.  But that’s it.  So therefore, the issue for Germany, in particular, is, that if it does not correct its own situation, which means dumping Merkel, unless that occurs, it’s doubtful that Germany, too, will not be able to get out of the mess it’s in.

And the other side of the thing is, the only solution of course, is the fact that Russia is in a close relationship implicitly, to Putin, and the common interests are, of Putin and the Russian organization, plus the German leadership, minus Mrs. Merkel. So this is bouncing back and forth.  But the point is, the time is reached, that unless Merkel’s policy is terminated, including perhaps her own occupation of her present position, that there’s no chance that Germany itself, could survive what would become very soon, a general collapse of the economies of all Western and Central Europe.  That’s where we are.

So now the point is, that against Obama on the other side, the likely option is that Germany would take a leading position, in working together with Russia;  in other words, the only way that Germany can survive the threatened economic condition which it faces right now, is to have a relationship, a functional relationship, with President Putin.  Now, that does not mean they’re going to marry each other: It means that they’re going to enter into trade with each other, economic relations, and these economic relations will be the means by which we can save the German economy, when the French economy, the Italian economy, the Spanish economy, so forth, are all going down, unless there’s a rescue message.  And a rescue message would be building up, opening the gates for Germany, under a new leadership, without Mrs. Merkel, that is.  And that would provide a solution to the economic crisis, at the same time it would be a peaceful integration in relations between Western Europe and Russia.

Now, this is not what some people want, especially our own President.  And we should dump him.  And the only sane thing to do is dump this guy.  But what we’re doing, we’re on an ignition, where the lack of balance in forces, demands that the only way that this whole system can avoid a thermonuclear war, because we’re on the edge of that, and the edge of it comes from Obama; and Obama is simply an agent of the British Monarchy.

So that the only option, real option for solving this problem, this global problem, which includes the threats against China and India and other parts of the world, are also being threatened.  Because the economic threats, now, and the military threats are an integrated mess!  And we have to untangle that mess, and the only way we can do that right now, on a global scale, is to have a leadership in Germany break the policies of the present chairman of the organization there, Merkel.  That’s the only solution that’s being offered.

Otherwise, we’re still hanging, at a point of a breakdown.

That is, Germany has reached the point, that if Merkel’s policy is extended, the German economy is will take a dive like that of the other Western economies.  And if that happens, together with the Greek issue, which is right there, also, you have the ignition of an explosion, or something equivalent to an explosion, in all kinds of directions.  And what this means is that this opens the gates to an actual, world thermonuclear war.

So that’s what we’ve got on our plate, on this weekend, on Friday, Saturday and now, Monday.  That’s what the issue is.  And that’s what the only solution is, in that direction.

In other words, the question is, if we can recreate a reconstruction of the economy, of Western and Central Europe, that means that we open the gates for peace, we shut down this crazy farce, of this Nazi-controlled Ukrainian organization, and suddenly we go for an economic recovery, for all of Europe, and for tying all of Europe together with China, India, and so forth.

That’s a solution.  It probably is the only solution.  If we do not get that solution, the aggravation which is going to be accumulating, threatens us with thermonuclear war, under the auspices of the British Queen, and her monkey Obama.

So this is the seriousness, the severity, of the circumstances which we are gathered this moment, today.  And it broke out over the week.  Now, we don’t know exactly what’s going to happen, how it’s going to happen.  We have three German officials, of the highest quality and rank, as against Merkel, and that’s where the crux is.  And that has to be understood: Because Merkel is actually working as an agent, in effect, against German interests in the most vital sense — maybe out of her stupidity, which is probably immense.  And that’s the situation.

And we in the United States, our destiny depends upon those kinds of considerations, or related kinds of situations. That’s where we are.  And the problem is, as usual, in the usual course of great wars in modern history, is that, this is all it takes — keep Merkel in, that’s all it takes, to open the gates, to an early launching of a general thermonuclear war throughout the planet.  Because the fact that Germany is the one nation which has some viability in its own economy, in this whole equation, means that that is the only option available, the German option against Merkel.

Now, that can work in several ways. They can go ahead and throw Merkel out of office now; or they can mutilate her position, with a limited amount of time allowed.  And then the thing comes back, they get — Merkel again makes a big mistake, she makes a big boo-boo, she makes another boo-boo, she makes another boo-boo.  And then the Germans begin to realize what the situation is, and say, get her out, now!

OGDEN:  No, absolutely.  These three statesmen have very significant leverage over Merkel, because Schröder, former Chancellor, Schmidt, also a former Chancellor, and current Foreign Minister Steinmeier, all three of them are SPD, top leaders in the SPD party which is the coalition party in Merkel’s coalition government; she’s the CDU.  So they literally could withdraw their support from her, at any moment and literally bring her entire government down.

LAROUCHE:  That’s it. That’s the point.

SARE:  I was just going to say, you think about her relationship with Obama.  I mean, there have been a series of these major blunders, like the wiretapping.  If she was so upset about his listening to her cellphone conversations, why did she continue — and then you find out that there was some kind of agreement between the CIA and the German [foreign intelligence BND], to spy on  people in Germany.  So it’s really rotten!  And then you have her stupidity on Greece, where she takes the Wall Street line, that somehow we can have a hard line against the people of Greece, and that this also is not a detonator for thermonuclear war,  and a meltdown or blowout of the entire system.

OGDEN:  You know, one of the other things from this weekend, was President Putin delivered a very interview in a leading Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera, and in that interview, I think he made two very calculated references to the two leading European statesmen:  Charles de Gaulle, and Chancellor Bismarck. And obviously, both of their relationships to the two great wars of the 20th century.  Bismarck, his ousting as you’ve made the point, leading directly into World War I, and, then, Charles de Gaulle’s role in the victory of World War II.  I think this is very clear, very calculated, and what Putin was doing with that, I think  shows an understanding on his part of this opposition that’s coming from within Germany to what Merkel’s doing, against the interests of her own country.

LAROUCHE:  I can make one other qualification to this thing: I’ve been involved in this issue, broadly, since the beginning of the 1970s.  I’ve been more actively involved, as a part of the policymaking under Ronald Reagan, in that period, and I was thrown into jail for that reason.  Exactly the right thing:  If you do the right thing, you go into jail! [laughs]

Since that time, we have always, those of us who were involved in this, have always understood this.  We had it with other Presidential people, talent: The thing right now, O’Malley. O’Malley is typical of what can be, and is potentially, the new basis for organizing a new Presidential system.

So what we’re faced with is a lot of options in various directions, but they all come back into one, single focus, and the question is, is:  And China is a big factor; India is a big factor; other parts of the world are real factors.  But the thing that pulls it together, is this relationship between the United States and Europe. And that’s how the history of now, from here on in, will go.

Dave CHRISTIE:  You know, Lyn,  you raised this in a similar context just about three months ago.  This was when O’Malley was very active, around the discussion of Glass-Steagall, but this was also when Steinmeier was the CSIS [in Washington, D.C.] and he had made a very clear intervention around the whole policy of Obama and the neoconservatives within the Congress who were discussion arming Ukraine.  And he made the point on this, as did as former Chancellor Helmut Schmidt at the time, who said, “this could lead to a hot war.”  But one of the other things that Schmidt said at that time, which Helga Zepp-LaRouche just referred to yesterday, was that Schmidt had also had made the point that the Ukraine crisis didn’t start with Russia, it started with the EU policy since Maastricht was created, of the EU expansion towards the east, and taking over more areas, obviously which Ukraine represents.

So, I think here, now, we see it in an even more elevated sense of danger, because at that time, it was just the discussion around giving weapons to the Ukrainian Nazis; now there’s a discussion, at least in different forms, of both the placing of nuclear weapons inside of Ukraine — none of this is confirmed, but at least this is an active part of the dialogue; and the medium-range missiles, which, you know, the Pershing missile crisis of the early ’80s had people out on the streets, and here we see where there’s no reaction from the American people, but in terms of the intensity and the danger of the situation, it’s even more intense now.

But the other point of what you had done, Lyn, at that point, was on the subject of Germany’s role, where you had discussed the need for an elevated conception around economics, and you cited the case of Kepler and the Vernadskian approach that mankind must increase the energy-flux density, but it seems that Russia and Germany coming together now, would be from that standpoint; would be from the standpoint of the Silk Road and the development of pushing the frontiers of our scientific and technological capability.

LAROUCHE:  The key thing here, is that the only part of Europe, which has any significance as an economy, is the German economy.  The German economy has a very large element, apart from the filthy stuff, the nonsense, the idiocy, it still retains a very significant, positive capability, in terms of economic development.  No other nation in Europe presently has a comparable, degree of competence in economy.  So this thing hangs on this issue.

So, once you get into logic, what happens is Russia becomes essentially, closely tied to Germany.  That doesn’t mean they have a formal alliance.  It means that they just agree to work together on the basis of common economic issues and economic concerns.

So the whole thing hangs on this particular point.  It’s a wonderful thing, because this is a reliving of principles of history, which have been forgotten since the 19th century and so forth, those lessons of history have been forgotten.  But this is the way things work.

And that’s what we have to focus on.  Because, when I say “we have to focus,” I’m talking about the people of the United States, we’re talking about the political process going on now, in the prospective new election.  But right now, getting rid of Obama, is the crucial thing which is required, to avoid thermonuclear war.  But the point is, the actuality of this threat, to becoming an insolvable problem, lies now with the option provided by the German case.  Which is not a conclusion, but it’s a live option.

So Germany represents now, as of this weekend, a live option.  It always has been, up to now, a live option, but the option was running out of steam.  And therefore, the saving of the steam, in the German economy, is crucial.  Now, that means a lot of changes inside the German economy politically, because who sections of the German economy politically are not on the right side.  But this is also a customary thing in history.

The other side is, we have to actually use, and convey to the American people, largely, what this issue is.  Now, we are doing that, and we outwitted the enemy, because the enemy was always trying to live in our organization to a bunch of bunch of, you know, slackers — weak-minded people.  and therefore, our job was finally, to out some of our own people who were being excluded from consideration, in shaping the policy of our organization nominally.

So, we had a little meeting and discussion and I said, “Yes,” and we have now found that we are building up a rapid expansion, in terms of hundreds of people being activated in our organization.  We are now in effect, a more effective political force, on two factors:  On this factor of our expansion, of an organization we already had; and on the other thing, moving the entire conception of U.S. policy, on the basis of Alexander Hamilton’s New York City.  These are the clues.  And it’s on these kinds of clues, and relative kinds of clues, and related kinds of clues, on which the future existence of the human species depends. And that’s the fun game.

Michael STEGER:  One of the things that came up over the weekend at the conference in New York, which  I thought indicated some of the context of what you’re referencing now, Lyn, is that the U.S. Presidency has had an integral part of a relationship to Germany, since the time of Ulysses S. Grant, which was a Presidency centered in the New York process, committed to the reconstruction of the United States, ending slavery and that there was an ongoing dialogue with Bismarck and the German tradition, on industrial process that represented the potential of what the 20th century could have become and what it failed to do. And I think that, you see that if Merkel’s government is brought down and the German economy is oriented towards Russia, China, India and the potential of Eurasia, and you break from this whole Greenie tradition, because Germany is the center of the attack, to shut down the industrial and scientific advancement, with this environmentalist anti-human program, there’s no way in hell, that Jerry Brown can stay in office at that point.  And that’s exactly what needs to happen in California:  A complete shift away from this environmentalist program, and then, a lot of these problems we face as a country can be solved, and that’s a critical part in shaping the new U.S. Presidency.

So this whole process you see is integrated as a shifting of the Presidency back to what it should have been in the turn of the 20th century.

LAROUCHE:  Yes.  Quite so.

Well, that means that we have to, from here, having said this much here at the table, we now have to go ahead and describe exactly what we are going to do, in the light of the advantage given to us, by the subject-matters which we have been discussing up to this point.

OGDEN:  Well, you laid out an 18-month timeline over the weekend, 15 to 18 months, which carries us through this upcoming Presidential campaign cycle and right into the inauguration in January of 2016.  And I think what you’ve highlighted, with the case of O’Malley thus far, and some of the other developments that we’ve seen, included the role of Rand Paul in introducing this 28 pages resolution, this is going to be a real showdown — he’s attached it to the NDAA bill [defense authorization], I think demonstrates that we are in the position, to shape from the top down, the shape of this Presidential election cycle, and also the creation of a new Presidency in the United States.  So maybe you want to say more about that.

LAROUCHE:  Well, I would say that one thing is clear:  What we need to do, is proceed not from this part of the planet or that part of the planet, we have to look at the condition of the planet as a whole.  We have to take the entirety of the planet system, recognize the parts of the thing, assessing the interrelationship among the parts, and how we build the kind of thing.  Now, you have a great power, between Russia, which was, for a long period of time, was very greatly weakened; now it’s back in business, but it’s still not a superpower. It just happens to be a great power, not a superpower.

But you have China; China is a superpower.  India is potentially a superpower, and will move in that direction very quickly.

Now, let’s talk, about the world:  Now look at these kinds of forces, if the United States — look at what’s happening in South America, the BRICS campaign, as in south America:  This is already part of the same thing.  We have to understand, we have to bring these forces, which are emergent forces or already established forces, in various parts of the planet, and that’s how we build a state system, under which the nations which continue to join with each other in alliances, in normal kinds of alliances, in economic and other alliances, these will begin to work.  When they begin to work, fine!  We’re out of it, we’re out of the worst.

But the problem is, we still have the worst before us, because we still have Obama as President, which itself is a catastrophe for the entire human species, because Obama is the instrument by which the British army, the British war machine, can do the impossible: They can use Obama, now, as an instrument to cause a general thermonuclear war.  And that’s where we’re at. So therefore, we have on the one hand, you have the score is added, you have the factors which have to be considered, but they have to be brought together, efficiently, because we have to prevent Obama, from continuing in the Presidency, because if he stays in the Presidency, is able to stay in the Presidency, the United States, and the world, the human species is in danger.

So we have to take all these various forces, not because they agree with each other, or sworn oaths or something, but because they know they don’t want to destroy their own human race.  They don’t want to destroy the human race.  And if Obama had his will, it would be the human race that would be destroyed!  Not by him, but because of him.

SARE:  Well, I think that’s where this series of calls you’ve been doing to our now-extended and -expanding organization on Thursday nights is so crucial.  Because one of the problems we’re dealing with is that the American population is severely disoriented and demoralized.  They’ve been through the recent 15 years since the impeachment of Bill Clinton and the takedown of Glass-Steagall, and then the 9/11 attacks, and then the Bush Presidency, and then Obama Presidency, young adults today can’t even think of a time when you had sane leadership.  And people who can think of that time, or who are among the leaders of the population, which are the people we meet on the street, and the people on that call,  we all have a challenge of becoming much better, because we have to quickly upgrade the thinking, of people here, in order to actually do what’s required.

LAROUCHE:  but this is propaganda.  The whole thing is based on the propaganda principle.  Because people vote for supporting members of Congress, who aren’t fit to live, let alone rule.  And we have similar kinds of things.  So what’s happened is a discouraging of the American people, and taking away their sense of authority, their rightful authority, the right they have to ask the questions and get honest answers and things like that, that simple.

Take the educational system:  What has happened over the period since, exactly the beginning of the new system, the 20th century, the 20th century has been the plague which has destroyed the United States, and destroyed much of civilization. Everything through that, from Hilbert and Bertrand Russell, this is what has determined everything, in the trends of the United States and in most of the world.  What you’re having is the areas which are least regarded, like China, India, so forth, other nations of this sort, suddenly now become extremely important, because they have a coherence, which the United States does not have, which the nations of Europe, generally, do not have.  So the fact that they have no moral strength, that is, no creative, moral strength, makes them impotent.  Our job is to unify those people by bringing them into a knowledge of what the powers are that lie within them.

Now, most of these students and so forth, in general, are absolutely incompetent these day. Anyone who’s been a university student, is generally, with rare exceptions, absolutely incompetent.  They’re not competent, they don’t know how to run an economy, they don’t know what an economy is, they don’t know what the principles are, they don’t know what science is — they really don’t know what science is, literally!  Remember, the last great scientist was who?

SARE:  Einstein.

LAROUCHE: Einstein.  And I think about what we have got from the past, at best, right now.

So, our job is to focus that.  We have to actually undermine and destroy, the frauds.  Wall Street, it’s a fraud, shut it down! It’s illegal!  It’s a thieves’ organization! It’s a murderers’ organization.  And most of them are bankrupt. Practically all of Wall Street is now, currently bankrupt!  How do you think it controls the things?  By dealing with the Presidential system, right?  That’s how it works.

OGDEN:  O’Malley identified that.

LAROUCHE:  Yeah. So therefore, what we have to understand is, we have to educate the American population.  Now, we know how to do that:  First of all, you have to go to the smart people in our system, but who are blundering around it now.  And what O’Malley is tending to do, typifies that.  You take a step and you try to get the American people to realize they’re not stupid. Most Americans think they are stupid.  How do you know they’re stupid? Because they act stupidly; they react stupidly!  And therefore freeing them — this thing about, for me, in our organization, by free — we were operating on an enemy influence on our organization.  We were acting like yahoos, you know, stupid little yahoos, from some Virginia cult area.  And I had to stop that.  So we have stopped that, and we now have a very large organization, relatively speaking.  It was always there, ready, and this thing is growing at a rapid rate right now.

Now we have an education problem which is of a different nature.  People who don’t know enough, don’t have enough knowledge of principle, but they have a determination to go in the right direction; so our organization has a core, which has a few of us who understand what has to be done, actually know what has to be done.  But we have a larger group of people, who are attracted to us, and part of us, who realize that we are talking about something which they want to know about.  And that’s how you build a movement, to change things.  You get people to become curious, about what might be possible.

And if they see signs that maybe it actually would work, like in California for example, which is a real case: California’s on a desperate level right now, as long as they submit to that governor!  As long as they capitulate to that governor’s roles, they’ll be dead.  But Californians are not that stupid.  They are confused, but they’re not stupid.  And it doesn’t take too much, given them a few suggestions about how the problems might be solved:  Like how to get water, when the governor of California says you’re not allowed to have water, or you can only have water that’s not fit to drink?  That’s our problem, is to expose, make clear to our own people, our own citizens,  — make clear that we as citizens, have the latent power, to fix this situation.

BILL ROBERTS:  Well, I think this conference this weekend was a really good example of exactly how that’s done, in a similar type of way to what you’ve been doing with these calls, which is not some long speech, but a number of people asking questions, where the process is to get people reflecting on what is just wrong in the basic assumptions that people have.  For example, Helga gave a presentation in which she really developed this geopolitics process of the 20th century, as being exactly what you have going on right now, with Versailles.  You had a history panel on the discussion of the Presidency, that this has been a fight over principles.  It’s not a democratic process, it’s been a fight over conflicting principles, and you have an institution in the Presidency, which because of that, intersects a unique capability that the citizens have to intervene into the situation.

And people were very challenged.  You had historians, people who studied history their whole life, running out of this event, basically screaming “Omigod!  I’ve wasted my life in what I’ve been studying!”  People just challenged, people who would consider themselves highly educated, just extremely challenged by this whole process.

But then, in the evening, as we brought in the music work, because the question became, for the people who came in off the streets, who’ve had come in out of this organizing process in Manhattan, the question became “how do I find the courage, then, to fight against the falsehood in society?”  And that’s where the music work — I really saw the importance of the choral work in the music work, in being able to take those people who were highly conflicted, because they were saying to themselves, “how do I know this is something that is really moving me?  How do I know that when I challenge people, that they can’t challenge me and say, ‘oh, this is just a line, you’re just kidding’? How do know that this is actually something that I own?”  And the musical process, I think, brought people into that in a way that those who were most deeply challenged were also deeply appreciative, of finding that capability in themselves.

LAROUCHE:  I don’t think it came quite that way.  It came in the sense — look — look at the idea, how are members of families formed?  What’s the age-group of the formation of the family?  It’s generally within the order of about 25 years age. And if you don’t qualify, by your 25th year of existence, you are not going to make it.  And that’s what’s happened.

Now, what happens then, you put people to work, in this category, but you don’t develop them!  You give them the kind of work that they know, or have been taught, which is a fixed standard of work, like the railway system.  The railway system is a tragedy, and it’s one that’s dying.  Why? Because there was nobody left alive, to organize a competent railway system as a modern railway system as opposed to an old one!  Trolley cars would disappear.  They would have been useful if people had known how to use them.  The use of a high-speed trolley car is a very useful — one of the more useful instruments you can have. Because all the automobiles that are running around loose, you wouldn’t require those things, because you would have various steps of systems, that engage each other.  But nobody did the work of doing that!  The science was not allowed.

Well, you can’t say, you can’t go back and say, I’m going to get science back into the human species; that doesn’t work that way.  What happens, you get younger people who grow up a little bit, and they become exposed to the option of understanding science.  And the rest of the sciences thing are a very limited number of people, the ones who are competent.  But if you increase the number of people who are competent in this respect, then you change society.

So what’s happened is, during the entirety of this century and beyond, from the year of the beginning of the 20th century, up to now, there has been a consistent process of degeneration, moral and intellectual degeneration, of the citizens of the United States as categories.  And only the people who are exceptions to those categories, which are exceptional, have any idea what this is all about.  The typical student, today, is absolutely incompetent!  And the teachers are even worse than the students — it’s a fact, as some of you know.

So the point is, what we have to do, is we have to have a motivation, to a structure of organizing of society, which will provide a revolution as has been done before in other parts of the world.  We’ve had a limited number of people will become forth as the potential  geniuses of that age.  And their influence, and the fact you turn them loose, to practice what they didn’t know beforehand, you turn them loose and that’s how you develop nations.

What happened with China?  China had a very deep capability, despite everything else, they had residual quality which was always there.  But the relative quantity, of that capability was reduced.  So all you have to do is take the steps forward, and then, broaden those steps at the same time.  And that’s what we have to do now.  We have to set up the educational process which is necessary to bring people, who are six years of age or something, well, they’re never going to make it,  except by reconstruction of their thinking.

Jason ROSS: Yeah, putting people in touch with their ability to figure these things out, this is one of the aspects of 1900 that might be less immediately apparent, is that when you do things that destroy the ability of science to function, when you say that there isn’t going to be any more creativity, there won’t be truly new ideas, it has the effect, also on individuals of their relationship to what they might think is knowledge, comes to be convention, what they’ve heard, etc., if you don’t have a relationship personally to having discovered things, to the process of discovery.  Then people aren’t going to be able to figure out their abilities to act politically, their abilities to understand history, their abilities to act with science.  So even things that might seem like they’re true, if you don’t have that process of moving forward, they’re missing that human aspect: Like infrastructure.  Even if we’d maintained our railroads in good condition, and we still had a whopping 70 miles an hour tops on Amtrak, that doesn’t represent an improvement any more. Building that up doesn’t represent the kind of improvement that a real intent to say, let’s really be human, would embody.

LAROUCHE:  No, we don’t have the mechanisms.  We have to have a new science-driver program.  But you’re going to create that new science-driver program out of what Ben Deniston has just impressed:  Galactic method.  The water supply of mankind, lies in the galaxy, not on Earth!  The water supply on Earth is very limited;  the water system as a whole is a galactic phenomenon, not a social process.

So therefore, what you have to do, is the discovery of the galactic principle, and these kinds of things by Kepler, for example, before then who started the whole business:  Kepler was the one who created the understanding which led to the possibility of galactic insight.  Now that’s working.

So our job is what the Chinese are doing with their science-driver program, is exactly in that direction: Go to the higher level of the organization of the Solar System, and go beyond the Solar System per se, into the galactic system.  And it’s on that level, of understanding the galactic principle and how it works, how we can use it, how mankind can take advantage of the galactic principle, that’s where the future destiny of mankind lies, in that direction.

And we have to actually start science.

What’s called science today, remember the principle: there was only one true competent scientist in the 20th century during that period, Einstein.  All the others were, to one degree or other, fakers or relied on relatively fake values.  So the point is, we always go, in the history of mankind, you go beyond what mankind has been able to achieve now, and you force the issue, to go to the areas, where mankind has never gone before! And our mission is that.  Our mission is to demand that the development of our people, is based on that:  Going to levels of reality which have never been known before, and carry them out!

Kesha ROGERS:  Yes, and I think that’s why the structure of organizing society, embodied in what China and Russia are doing, by putting the focus on the posterity, on the future, the generations to come, the generations that haven’t been born yet, when you put that as the primary focus, as is being done by China with their space program, with India, with its commitment towards its young generation and development of leadership coming from the younger generation, then you look at you say, “how absurd can it be, that you would have a nation so viable, such as Russia, that genocidal and suicidal idiots would say, because of our differences we’re going to exclude Russia from talks and dialogue with the G7 summit.” And given the fact that, as many already know, without Russia you cannot have real focus and discussion toward economic development and toward solving the problems confronting mankind of war.

I think what you said earlier about having a planetary, global-wide perspective as to what is being acquired right now, really sheds some light, particularly on what for instance the Pope is doing in his travels, throughout South America, in Argentina, and in two days or so is going to meet with President Putin.  Because you have people who understand that the real question gets down to the point again, of the nature of mankind, and relationships among human beings across the planet. That if we do not build these relationships around a solid foundation of economic cooperation and development for the progress of mankind, then as you have clearly stated, as the Pope has stated, as many have stated, we’re headed toward a total demise of the human species, of obliteration through wars.  And people uses these insane differences of opinion, or allowing for the Empire to control nations, to control relationships and fall for this insanity, as the U.S. media and other things are doing by painting Russia, painting Putin, painting China as a threat to the human species.

But the reality is, is that if we don’t wake up the American people now around the fact that everything can be lost in a matter of a short period of time, if we don’t actually take up these policies that have been set forth.  The fact of the matter is, that we won’t be long to exist on this planet.  And I think if people kind of take a step back, and look at that reality — I just want to make one, final point,  — is that people who didn’t have a chance to participate or watch the proceedings of the conference just this past weekend, what Mrs. LaRouche presented in her presentation was  — what’s the words?—I mean, really, the sense of passion and a connection to future generations that came out of that presentation and the reality that we are at a moment right now which is requiring a turning point for mankind, was absolutely and clearly defined by what she presented. Because it was the quality of an artist, painting a picture of the world that has, as you just said, a world that’s never been seen before, but a world that can be right at our fingertips.

LAROUCHE:  Yeah, that’s true. That  is absolutely true.

Rachel BRINKLEY:  I’ll just add in this question of giving people a sense of their strategic power, that everything we’ve seen in this previous system was a few people trying to dominate a less powerful group, and steal the resources from them.  That was the Bush-Cheney policy, that’s the Obama, British Empire, Roman Empire, policy:  Steal the resources for yourself, until that system collapses.  But what’s not included is the creation of the value of new resources, which is what the BRICS are doing, which is extending around the world, South America, all of Eurasia, — anyway, this is as you’re saying new potential that has never been seen before.  That’s the strategic power which Americans have to have a sense of, that there’s a scientific superiority in this question of creation of new value.

LAROUCHE:  One thing I add on, because it’s relevant to what you were doing some years ago, now, in your role in Boston, in organizing our movement in Boston:  Now, what happened?  The organization in Boston fell backwards, after your relevant term of office around these two campaigns.  All throughout our organization the same thing happened.  What happened?

Well, what happened is that the element of corruption which was introduced by influences on our organization, and people came up with the slogan “be practical, be practical, be practical.” Now the meaning of “be practical,” ends up with being stupid, and so the problem was, we had also a relatively large organization, actually operating inside the United States.  But the leadership of the organization so-called, was a bunch of shylocks, fakers, or incompetents.

So therefore we went through a period of incompetence in our organization, and how was that effected?  By suppressing the people who were competent.  By demanding that we “be practical, be practical, be practical.”  Don’t try to explain things too much, make it simple, make it simple-minded, that would be better.

And what we’ve done now, in the recent period, we’ve had the option of recognizing that we had a much larger organization than these guys were willing to admit, because they were trying to mother everything, by controlling everything.  “We will decide, we will decide, we will tell you want to do, we will teach you, we will write the books, we will write the publications, we’ll circulate the publication.”  Which is actually brainwashing our members.  And when I got onto how this thing was working and saw how it was working, I just said, “We’re going to wipe this thing out!”  And we began looking around how we were going to wipe that thing out, and we’re having a fine, ol’ time, right now.

But that’s the answer.  The point was the possibility of rebuilding our organization after it had been massacred, essentially, by a bunch of creeps, who took over the organization.  They set the standard, they set the standard!  It wasn’t everyone in our organization, but a lot of them — “be practical, be practical, be practical.”  And we said, “end with that!”  And that’s the way we got out as far as we’ve gone so far, now.

Don’t be practical!  Practical is for jerks!  Be scientific, be creative.  Look beyond the popular opinion.  Look for the truth, not for the popular opinion.  Because popular opinion generally is either for stupid people, or bigotted people who think they’re smart, but they’re actually dumb.

So leadership, this kind of conception of educational leadership, of scientific drive, these are the issues that make it possible for us to do something useful, on behalf of mankind.

OGDEN:  Which goes to what you were saying earlier:  The American people have been discouraged, they’ve been robbed of their rightful sense of authority, they’ve been forced to think of themselves as small, little people, “I have no effect, I have to accept a modest, humble expectation,” and there’s a minority which realizes that this is not true, and have the responsibility to lead and allow  people to escape that kind of sense of discouragement.

LAROUCHE:  Well, the lesson of that which I had in childhood, or the process of childhood, was with the idea of teaching, public school teaching.  And public school teaching produced brainless people; they weren’t stupid, but they were sort of brainless, because they had a textbook, or they had a standard class education.  And they would go by these assumptions they were taught at them, which was taught at them!  And the way I got out of this thing, I never liked that stuff.  I just never would accept it.

And I used to get these IQ tests — people would say, you must be stupid, you must be stupid — so they would give me an IQ test.  And I would always come way ahead! [laughter]

And so, the obvious thing was for anybody who was intelligent who knew me, was, well, don’t believe what you’re getting from the teachers, because even the teachers who were honest in their intention, are being subjected of the educational system!  And that’s what you have in universities today:  why are people so stupid?  Because they go to universities.  And very few universities turn out people who are qualified to do anything in terms of thinking.

So therefore, the question, “are you accepted?”  by what? By authority!  What is the nature of that mysterious authority? It’s the educational system, it’s the public opinion system.  And it’s only when you get rid of that evil, which it is evil, because when you make a human being into something stupid which was done by most of the 20th century educational processes, you destroy the ability of the people to survive.

And now the time has come:  don’t listen to anything from those kinds of sources.  Just don’t do it.  Always look beyond, look into science.  Look to Kepler.  most people paid no attention to Kepler, even into modern times, and yet, the secret of science, lay mostly in the hands of Kepler.  The whole principle, what’s the whole system?  What is the system?  The system?  Kepler, it’s all Kepler!  So,  what do they do?  They usher Kepler out, or interpret him in ways which are absurd.

So that’s the problem.  And it’s this kind of brainwashing, which what it really is, which destroys the mental powers of most of our citizens, and has done so over past hundred years. And that’s what we have to fix!

OGDEN:  Okay.  I think that’s a place to conclude:  I want to just return to the point you made in the beginning, with the dramatic potential that’s represented by these three German statesmen, and what has to happen in terms of removing  the power that Merkel has, and then specifically what’s happening here in the United States with Obama.  So I think that’s a very significant thing for people to keep in mind, and to follow very closely over the next few days.

So thank you for joining us here today, and please stay tuned to [url:”http://larouchepac.com]larouchepac.com.