From Volume 4, Issue Number 9 of EIR Online, Published Mar. 1, 2005

Latest From LaRouche


The following exchange with Lyndon LaRouche took place at the ICLC/Schiller Institute Presidents' Day Conference on Feb. 20, following LaRouche's keynote address (see this week's "Need To Know"). The question was submitted in an e-mail, from a leading Democrat who lives in the Washington, D.C. area.

Question: Lyn, Democrats are undoubtedly unified on questions of domestic policy. But when we get into the realm of strategic policy and international policy, we're dealing with a different kettle of catfish. I refer simply to, just as an example, to the events of Friday, when Joe Lieberman and John McCain entered this resolution to kick Russia out of the G-8.

Sid Blumenthal, among others, has pointed out publicly, that when we're dealing with this Administration, the fact is that Bush's popularity was at an all-time low, prior to the events of 9/11. This is a fact, that is not one that Bush, Cheney, and the people who control him do not recognize. They know that, under current conditions they need a new national security crisis, whether it be Iran, Syria, North Korea, China, or even Russia. And my problem is, that I'm not at all confident that we Democrats will respond with the same unity that we seem to be able to maintain on questions of domestic policy. I don't know exactly how to pose this question. And I don't normally engage in "what ifs"—but, what if they actually do this? What do we do? What do we do, if they try to change the subject? And how do we ensure unity among Democrats in meeting a challenge of this type, when there is no unity at this moment?

Tell the Truth!

LaRouche: In a situation like that, where you're faced with telling the truth, or lying by omission or statement, in order to avoid being rejected, there's only one thing you can do: The enemy is trying to intimidate you into telling a lie. You should scare the hell out of him.

For example—and I've dealt with this: Let's take the case of my record on this thing, because it's relevant to the Democratic Party today. They have been opposing me. They opposed me on SDI. They were wrong. If we had had, if the Soviet government under Andropov, had agreed to discuss with President Reagan, who was actually quite dedicated to this specific idea, then the discussion itself would have produced a change in the political situation inside the United States in the 1980s. And would have changed the world situation, so that the nightmare which threatens the planet today would not have come into existence, because of the lack of guts.

Now, what was the lack of guts? The lack of guts is centered in an institution which is called the Committee on the Present Danger, which has had several incarnations, including a present incarnation under the direction of George "No-Good" Shultz. And this idea has been the charge of "OH! You're pro-Communist! You're soft on Communism! You're soft on Communism! You're soft on the Russians. You're soft on the Soviets!"

Like fools—in the Congress and elsewhere—they capitulated to Bush-Cheney et al. on the issue of going into the war in Iraq. The American people did it out of cowardice. How was this cowardice induced in the American people? By the people who orchestrated 9/11, which were not a bunch of Arabs. The bunch of people who were running whoever was involved in the operation.

A State of Terror

This was, as I had forecast the danger, before the inauguration of the year 2001, is that because of the economic situation, that the Bush Administration would come up, soon, with what Hermann Goering did in setting fire to the Reichstag in 1933, which established the Hitler dictatorship. And we had a very similar phenomenon in 9/11—9/11 induced a state of terror, a state of disorientation in the U.S. population—not so much in the citizens of New York, but in other parts of the world, in the other parts of the United States. (New Yorkers are much more sophisticated than these dumb fools out in the Midwest and the South.)

This state of terror made it possible for Dick Cheney, George Shultz, and company to launch a regime-change war in Iraq. There was no evidence to justify war. All the claimed evidence was a lie. And now they're going to do the same thing all over again—in Syria, Iran, and North Korea and so forth, the so-called "outposts of tyranny." Of which the White House is the principal representative, by the way.

So, the question is: Do we have the guts to stand up? My point has been, I stood up. If I had not stood up, I can tell my fellow Democrats, they would be nowhere on any of the domestic issues of the United States, today. We saved the Democratic Party, from absolute disgrace, by my having the nerve to do it.

And what you have to do, is stand up and tell the truth.

Now, you have to tell the truth in a special way—and I can be very savage on this thing, and quite justifiably: I would say, "You dumb—. You idiot. You fool! Do you know what you're really talking about? Do you know what the consequences are, of the policy you want us adopt? Do you know the international financial system is finished? Do you know you're bankrupt? There's nothing you can do about it in your terms? Only on my terms? Do you want to escape the effect of a bankruptcy which will wipe you out? Well, come to my terms!"

A Firm Hand of Leadership

You have to have a firm hand of leadership. And people have understood democracy to be sloppiness, cowardice, foolishness. You don't have to be sloppy, foolish and cowardly to be a Democrat.

You can stand up on your hind legs, and tell this guy where to get off! And make it stick. You can go out on the hustings, as we are doing; you can issue pamphlets, as we are doing, through the youth movement, largely. You can do these kinds of things, we have done. And if we had more means, we would do more of them. The only chance of saving the existence of this nation, is to do that.

And you dummies, if you want to get frightened about foreign policy questions, well, you're just going to go to Hell. And when you're delivered there, you're going to say, "How did I end up here? I'm such a good Christian?" Well, first of all, because you claim to be a Christian, you ain't, and that's blasphemy. And secondly, because, you're such a cowardly fool, you deserve it.

So, the answer, essentially, is: You have a lack of courage, a lack of intellectual courage in the leadership of the Democratic Party. What we've demonstrated recently, over the recent period, the course of the past year, 2004, and continue to demonstrate now, is that you can save a Democrat! God, you're great! You can save a Democrat! [laughter]

That's the problem. Stick with the truth. But, sometimes you have to put spurs on it.

All rights reserved © 2005 EIRNS