From Volume 4, Issue Number 33 of EIR Online, Published Aug. 16, 2005

This Week You Need To Know


by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

August 10, 2005

I wrote earlier today:

"In a memorandum transmitted this past weekend, John Hoefle [of the EIR Economics staff] posed the question, to what degree is the timing of an already overripe general financial collapse controlled by decision made in relevant political-financier circles? My response, is to pose a different question: To what degree does the pulsation of an onrushing general monetary-financial crash determine those decisions which will tend to be considered in later history as the voluntary trigger of a an already ripe general financial collapse?

"To pose the same question in a different, practical way: To what degree is the impulse of a Synarchist-like financier interest around the combination of Britain's Liberal Imperialist Prime Minister Tony Blair and Pug-Ugly Brute Dick Cheney controlled by their panic over the now terminal phase of over-ripeness of the present world monetary-financial crisis? As long as even some experts in the relevant financial community see the "trigger" decision as a matter of relatively arbitrary choice to be made by the relevant agents of the oligarchy they will wrongly overestimate the degree of choice in the making of those political decisions which, as John indicates, will be the likely trigger of an actual financier-monetary detonation?

"Implicitly, John is asking: Is this a scientific question, or a guess at a predominantly subjective decision to be made "voluntarily" by a relevant cabal?

"The correct answer to such propositions, is that the ability of relevant influential circles to make a choice, is bounded in range of timing by the characteristics of the interaction between the political-economy and the state of the financial-monetary system. Without the introduction of a change in the axiomatic characteristics of that system, one way or t'other, the situation, as now is described as an accelerating rate of narrowing of the band of available decision-making,"

It is fair to say of modern European civilization, that the most frequent motive for warfare, especially what become major, or greatly prolonged wars, is, as in the launching of the official U.S., "dead-end" war in Indo-China, the fear of peace. This kind of fear originates within relevant leading circles of society, but is spread in slightly different guises among spreading elements within the wider population. War becomes a less undesirable, even desired solution for what are seen as intolerable conditions associated with a continuation of the peace.

Usually, the waning of the popular reluctance to go to war is a sheep-like reflection the moods radiated from leading, conspiratorially inclined circles, as this is typified by the British Fabians' role in promoting King Edward VII's pre-orchestration of a war intended to remove the threat that continued peace would mean a continued spread of the American System's influence to the degree that the British-controlled world monetary-financial imperial system would be ruined by the influence of U.S.-style national economic development in relevant parts of Asia, as throughout the Americas: Hence the collusion of U.S. Presidents Theodore Roosevelt, against Ibero-America and elsewhere, and Woodrow Wilson, with what became the plot for World War I.

This was not original with the British East India Company and its Liberal Imperialist heirs. This had been the character of the motive for the Venetian "old party's" launching of the Spanish Inquisition and most of the religious warfare of the Sixteenth Century, and also the Venetian "new party" — Paolo Sarpi's "New Venetian Party's" — launching of the Thirty Years War of 1618-1648. This had been the cause, in each case, of the string of major wars orchestrated by the Anglo-Dutch Liberal successors of Sarpi's Venice, beginning with the wars of France's Louis XIV, the Seven Years War, the Napoleonic Wars, the Crimean War, two actual World Wars of the Twentieth Century and the quasi-world-war, the so-called nuclear-age's Cold War launched by Winston Churchill at the time a monstrously overworked President Franklin Roosevelt was already on the way to his death. This was the reason that Winston Churchill and his U.S. accomplices launched the policy of nuclear preventive warfare first applied against the already defeated nation of Japan at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The same is true of the Anglo-American wars launched by the British and U.S. governments under Thatcher, Blair, Bush, and Bush since 1989.

In all of these cases, most clearly since the Anglo-Dutch Liberal Party superseded Venice as the leading imperial social formation of the planet, war has been sought and launched by the power representing the Venetian Party and its Anglo-Dutch Liberal successor, whenever that party considered the projectable effects of a continuation of the present basis for a state of peace, to be intolerable to the relevant faction. The Brzezinski-Huntington commitment to global religious warfare against Islam, is only a special form of expression of the policy of seeking war to avoid the threat of peace. In all these cases, peace itself, rather than any nation which happened to get in the way, became the enemy to be destroyed. The brutish Cheney's role as the fully accredited, draft avoiding, chief chicken-hawk in launching the current war policy of the George W. Bush Administration, as early as January 2001, is an example of war sought, on any available, even wildly concocted pretext, against the threat of continued peace as the intended foe.

Atlas Shrugs, Greenspan Craps

As I have emphasized earlier, the October 1987 U.S. stock-market crash was the parallel for the Hoover crash of 1929. With the events leading into October 1987, it became urgent, in certain leading financial circles, that I be removed from the political scene at that point. There was the exemplary point of the fear at that juncture. The panic-stricken effort by relevant "establishment" circles, to kill me, or defame me in the utmost degree at the earliest possible point, was one indicative reflection of the rising fears in the Anglo-American financier establishment since President Ronald Reagan's March 23, 1983 announcement of his SDI offer. That was not all. The appointment of Alan Greenspan, to replace Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, is key to the history of the presently most crucial features of the situation which has been developed during the 1987-2005 interval. The difference between the situation of October 1987 and now, is that October 1987 represented the echo of the 1929 Hoover Crash; the present crisis is a general economic breakdown-crisis of the entirety of the world's present monetary-financial system. The latter result will be known to future history (if there is any) as the singular significance of the long reign of Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan. This is the crisis otherwise known as the blow-out of the "Great Financial Derivatives Bubble."

The implication of the onrushing great financial derivatives bubble, is that, from the standpoint of those who have used Greenspan as their political tool, there is no longer an acceptable option for permitting the continuation of the present world political-economic system. Peace under that system is now perceived as a far, far greater threat to such financier interests than even the most horrible war. Hence the placing of a weak-brained psychopath in the White House to be managed by a wholly degenerate sociopath as the Vice-President and resident thug, Cheney, managing the mentally "challenged" President.

Cheney is not the independent source of the danger. The danger is those who say don't interfere with Cheney's conduct of his assignment at this time. "Don't attack Cheney now, and we will give you some money for your political projects at this time," and the lure of their friendship and money gives birth to another Judas. Tiberius' Roman Empire, in its present incarnation, uses its agent Pontius Pilate for the judicial murder of Jesus Christ, and Rome rules and ruins for generations to come.

The economic process, now unfolding, is the natural consequence of the process of economy as presently structured. The crisis inherent in the false premises underlying the operation of that economy, is produced by the influence of the money-changers over the system of political-economy.

Since the money-changers hate the kind of economy which would be a real alternative to the self-doomed system now in collapse, the collapse is oncoming because the money-changers are able to intervene to prevent sane remedial reforms. Therefore, for the money-changers, the oncoming collapse creates a threat to the power of the money-changers, who find continued peace, therefore, intolerable. The money-changers therefore employ hooligans to launch brutal dictatorship, in their attempt to prevent their own loss of power at a moment of their being discredited, economically, into a state of political weakness a short time ahead. Therefore, they lash out in rage, using whatever instruments of treason and terror are found available to induce the population to destroy itself.

That is the source of the fear of peace. That is the source of all of the principal wars of modern European history. War is an act of will, but, then, what controls the choice of that will?

All rights reserved © 2005 EIRNS