This transcript appears in the March 8, 2019 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
Defeat the Murderous British Empire—Raise Mankind to a New Level of Creative Thinking
This is the edited transcript of the Schiller Institute’s New Paradigm Webcast of Friday, March 1, 2019. A video of this webcast is available.
Harley Schlanger: Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger from the Schiller Institute. Welcome to our international strategic webcast today. It’s March 1, 2019. We’ll be joined by the founder of the Schiller Institute and our President, Helga Zepp-LaRouche.
These last days have been extraordinary in the depth of machinations, movements on all sides of the strategic picture, and in a sense, it looks like we see the clash of the two paradigms in very bold relief. I think the place to start is what happened in Hanoi, the summit meeting between President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong-un of North Korea. Helga, what’s your reading of what happened there?
Helga Zepp-LaRouche: I think it was a step forward. I think that both the Trump assessment and also from the North Korean side was that the two sides have come closer to each other than they were before the summit. Obviously that means they did not get the possible expected breakthrough, but in a complex question like North Korea and South Korea, which involves all the other strategic factors—including U.S., China, Russia—it is not necessarily a disaster or completely unexpected that you would not get a breakthrough of that dimension in one, or even two meetings.
I think the interesting thing to look at is that both sides—Trump and Kim Jong-un— expressed the wish to continue the negotiations. Look at the difference how absolutely hysterical the western media have been, saying, “Ah, you see, this was a complete failure of Trump. He obviously thought he could negotiate a business deal, and he just doesn’t know how to do these things.”
There was a thoroughly different reaction coming from Russia, from China, from South Korea, from Japan; all of whom expressed the absolute conviction that this is on the right track, that it must be continued. I think that that is absolutely the case. I think the really incredible circumstance which show you how nasty and totally vicious the old paradigm is trying to fight against the possibility that Trump would get an agreement about denuclearization of North Korea with Kim Jong-un, was the hearing which was scheduled for exactly the same day for former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen in the House.
Con Man for the British Empire
Then, if you look at how this was orchestrated, this utterly slimy character Michael Cohen used all kinds of words against Trump from con man to racist to even worse ones. That tone was uniformly pushed by the western mainstream media internationally to say the absurdity that Trump only did the North Korea meeting to divert attention from the much more important question of the hearing of Michael Cohen; when the exact opposite happened. They decided to use the Michael Cohen story to create a situation where you had the most unfavorable environment for such an important meeting to take place.
This incident alone should tell you what is really going on, because there was an unspoken—or maybe even spoken—rule in the past, that when a President or a head of state is conducting extremely important diplomatic negotiations abroad, that that would be respected unconditionally, and nothing would be done to interfere with that. This incident really shows how any code of conduct, any civilized behavior on the side of the opponents of Trump (or better, of the opponents of the New Paradigm) has been eliminated, and they wish to destroy the idea that you actually could have a world in which conflicts are overcome through negotiations. I think it shows you how viciously barbaric the tone has become, and I think it really should backfire on the people who orchestrated that hostile environment.
As for the North Korean situation as such, I don’t think it’s a disaster. I think there will be progress. Russian spokesman for Vladimir Putin, Dmitry Peskov, said that this diplomatic situation between the two countries is again proof that you cannot get progress in a step-by-step manner. This is true, because the world situation is so complex that you have to find solutions which address all of the problems, or you don’t make progress anywhere.
Schlanger: Back for a moment to this juxtaposition between Trump conducting very high-level diplomacy, and the Democrats in Congress using Michael Cohen not just to distract from what Trump is doing, but to run him out of office. Trump made the point in the press conference afterwards, and also in his discussions leading up to it that he’s working with Russia, he’s working with China, with Japan and South Korea.
The Nature of the Coup
Afterwards, he spoke to the leaders from those countries, so it’s clear there’s an ongoing cooperation on the highest levels among the most important nations in the world. That’s not just disregarded by the opponents of Trump, the “Never Trumpers,” that’s what they’re trying to stop. I think that really, as you say, that intention was in bold relief from the way this thing played out over the last couple of days.
Zepp-LaRouche: I’m sorry; I didn’t understand your point.
Schlanger: Well, my point is that it demonstrates the nature of the coup. It’s not about anything that Trump did related to Russia; it’s about what Trump is trying to do in terms of shifting the strategic paradigm.
Zepp-LaRouche: Yes, that is the whole nature of Russia-gate. In the election campaign of 2016, the moment Trump indicated that he was in favor of improving the relationship with Russia, and then what he did in the initial phase of his administration with Xi Jinping, to improve the relationship with China, this indeed is the exact nightmare of the geopolitical faction on both sides of the Atlantic. Because once you have an alliance of U.S.-Russia-China, possibly India and other nations, working together, the whole British game of manipulation goes out the window. I think under the circumstances, Trump is doing an incredible job if you consider the forces he’s up against.
Schlanger: You mentioned the British in this. We see a couple of other operations under way, one of which is the fighting that broke out between India and Pakistan, which is extremely dangerous. And also, the regime-change coup which seems to be under way with Venezuela. What do you think is happening with India and Pakistan; and how can that be resolved?
Zepp-LaRouche: Obviously, the trigger was the terrorist attack by this terrorist group in Pakistan [Jaish-e-Muhammed] attacking Kashmir. Forty Indians were killed, and two Indian fighter jets were shot down. If you have two nuclear powers that historically have a rather adversarial relationship ever since the division of India following independence, this is extremely dangerous. There have been in the past many worries and scenarios that you could have regional nuclear wars exactly between such powers as Pakistan and India.
In the meantime, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan and the Modi government in India expressed that they are fully aware of the fact that if there would be a nuclear war between the two countries, it would be annihilation of both, and possibly a terrible catastrophe for the whole world. So, I think there are moves being made to cool the situation down, but on the other side, the situation remains extremely hot.
There are still military exchanges going on, so I think it is very important that there again, as we have seen it in the case of North Korea, you had Putin, who telephoned Modi; you had the Chinese government and also Trump all offering their mediation and offering to help to cool the situation down. These two instances—North Korea and now the India-Pakistan situation—demonstrate that the world definitely needs the cooperation of the four major powers (at least), the United States, Russia, China, and India.
Four Powers Against Empire
That is one of the reasons why my late husband, Lyndon LaRouche, many years ago had called for a four-power agreement to address all major problems of the world situation, including the need for a new financial and credit system, a New Bretton Woods system. I think these tensions really show you that the world is urgently crying out for a solution.
For example, the case of Venezuela: here you have the full-fledged, neo-con, regime-change policy in place. The only good thing is that in the meantime, all the Latin American countries have come out speaking against a military intervention. Unfortunately, this is a flash point into which President Trump has been pulled, unlike in Syria, Afghanistan, and North Korea. So therefore, the situation there remains extremely dangerous.
Schlanger: Helga, this brings up one of the other questions that needs to be resolved, which is the tension that has emerged over the U.S. threat to withdraw from the INF [Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces] Treaty. This is in the background, and it brings up again lowering the threshold for nuclear war. What’s your thought about where this is headed?
Zepp-LaRouche: I think it is definitely a very dangerous development, because it may be that President Trump wants to accomplish some other treaty replacing the INF Treaty. But this is a very tricky question. I think there is not so much an imminent danger that you would have medium-range U.S. nuclear weapons immediately deployed in Europe, because as far as I know there are no such weapons systems in the pipeline which could be established immediately. If they were to be positioned there, it would bring us back right to the situation of the beginning of the 1980s where you had only a few minutes’ warning, and therefore all the forces of the Warsaw Pact and NATO were on “launch on warning.”
The more immediate danger is that it opens a Pandora’s box; once you break down all disarmament or arms-control treaties, like the ABM [Anti-Ballistic Missile] Treaty which was cancelled many years ago, it brings down any kind of treaty arrangements, and it could lead to unpredictable developments.
This brings me to the point I have made many times. Some people say the motivation behind that is the effort to get the Chinese into an INF agreement, but some experts have recently written that it’s not very likely that the Chinese could agree or would agree; because if you just have an INF approach, it would mean that the Chinese would have to give up more than two-thirds of their entire missile arsenal, which they obviously will not do under these circumstances.
I have emphasized this point many times. If you look at the totality of all of these problems—Venezuela, North Korea, India-Pakistan, the whole situation of Southwest Asia which remains extremely fragile, and the situation with Ukraine: all of these things have the potential of leading to a large, if not the final, catastrophe of a Third World War. Given the fact that the old paradigm is collapsing, it’s disintegrating, there are people and forces representing this old paradigm that are pushing confrontation.
I think it is extremely urgent to recognize that either humanity moves to a completely new type of thinking, a New Paradigm where you establish of new international relations, which considers the security interests, the economic interests, the political interests of all nations, or the world could face World War III.
A More Elevated Solution
The only way you can do that is to establish a higher order of a system, a New Paradigm which overcomes geopolitics and puts humanity as one first, and then all national and regional interests, second. That is what Xi Jinping has been proposing with his New Silk Road, the Belt and Road Initiative, and the idea that we have to build a community of shared interests for the future of mankind.
You can see right now that it is that idea which is being fought against by many of the neo-cons in the United States, for example Marco Rubio. Mitt Romney just came out attacking the Confucius Institutes as if these schools, where Chinese language and culture is being taught, would represent the biggest threat to the national security interests of the United States.
I think it is really very important that we develop a different kind of thinking to approach all of these problems, such as the ideas of Nicolaus of Cusa, who thought these things in the 15th century, that in order to solve problems you need the coincidence of opposites—the coincidentia oppositorum—as an approach to solve problems. You find the higher level of reason where the problems which, on a lower, Aristotelian level of contradiction are looking insolvable, can be solved.
That is what Einstein also expressed in a different way. He said you will never find a solution with the same method which caused the problem to arise. That means you cannot just geopolitically try to put this puzzle-piece here and that puzzle-piece there; but you have to define the common interests of humanity.
The best way to do it is to look towards where mankind should be 100 years from now, and hopefully will be. We will have commercially-used thermonuclear fusion power, which will give us energy and raw materials security. We will hopefully have established villages on the Moon. We will have plans for interstellar space travel as an international effort. We will join our efforts on the common aims of mankind, such as asteroid defense; we don’t want planet Earth to be attacked or hit by an asteroid or some other body which could cause a big destruction as happened 65 million years ago. So, we would have to put our minds together to develop better laws of the physical universe. We are living in a galaxy which is only one of 2 trillion galaxies, about which we know really very little.
We have only made infant steps in knowing the nature of our physical universe. We have to find out what is the real process of life. We had this wonderful recent breakthrough by the Chinese when they landed the lander and the rover on the far side of the Moon; and then a few days later, they were able to have a little cotton plant sprout and even develop buds! There were human beings on the Moon before, so life was on the Moon before. But it was for the first time that other than human life developed on an extraterrestrial body; which is obviously extremely important for the future of colonization of space, and the ability to have long-term space travel and grow food in space.
Beyond Infant Steps
It just shows you that we are on the verge of completely new breakthroughs in terms of the definition of the human species—what we can do together, once we stop squabbling like little boys kicking each other on the knee. And, that we will develop our creative powers together as the creative species in the universe. There may be other creative species, but we haven’t found them yet.
So, I think we should really mentally—and I’m appealing also to you, our audience—it’s a mental exercise to not think solely in terms of sensuous experience; or just project your experience from the past into the future. Do it the other way around; have a beautiful vision of where you want mankind to be, and then try to apply that approach to the problem-solving in the world today. Then you will realize that that is the only way you can find creative solutions.
Schlanger: That I think defines what the task is for our listeners. We just had a Schiller Institute conference where among the topics that came up was this question of what a threat to national security is, identifying the Russia-gate scandal, the Mueller investigation as one of the threats. Presenting new evidence at that conference was Bill Binney, the former NSA [National Security Agency] Technical Director. He has a new article out with Larry Johnson in which they rip apart the argument that there was Russian hacking in the 2016 election. I don’t know if you want to say something about that Helga, but the videotape from that conference is available on the Schiller Institute website. Did you have any thoughts on the Binney-Johnson new article?
Zepp-LaRouche: Yes! I would really urge you, our viewers, readers and listeners, to study this article and spread it around as far as possible internationally. What Bill Binney and Larry Johnson present in this article, and Bill Binney at the conference of the Schiller Institute in Morristown, New Jersey is really incredible. It is the categorically undebatable forensic proof that there was no Russian hacking; that instead the emails from the DNC server were downloaded, because all the technical data—the speed at which these things were copied—makes it impossible that it was via the Internet, but it was some kind of storage device; probably a thumb drive.
When they presented these accusations some years ago, the analysis used by the NSA, demonstrated that they had considerable confidence that it was like that. This is in the talk of the intelligence community; if they would have definite evidence, they would have said they had “full confidence,” and they would also have NSA files. If the NSA had files of these things, they could trace the origin of such a hacking. And the fact that after more than two years they have not presented any such evidence, upholds the fact that there was no Russian hacking and that they made the whole story up, that the whole Russia-gate was an invention.
Also very interesting is the fact that more than a year ago, Bill Binney met with [Secretary of State] Mike Pompeo, and gave him the entire findings that the VIPS [Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity] had produced. Binney never got any feedback; there was never any answer from Pompeo. I think this is really incredible, because the whole Russia-gate story, the whole Robert Mueller investigation completely disintegrates if you look at this Binney evidence.
Therefore, the U.S. Congress must immediately investigate that, but also other parliaments around the world; given the fact that the Russia-gate and everything which hangs on that is not just a U.S.-Russian affair, but it is a strategic matter of the highest importance; other parliaments should definitely investigate that. Investigative journalists should look at this material and start to comment on it. Interview Bill Binney; I think he needs a flood of interview requests from all over the world to get this story out of the control of the mainstream media, which are obviously sitting on the whole story.
The Mueller Report
I think such an action is extremely important to occur now, because it is expected Robert Mueller will issue his report by next week. Who knows what will be in it? I think the best way to get the truth on the table is to interview Bill Binney, to get investigations going, and really blow this story apart. Because it will turn out to be the biggest scandal in U.S. history; but if it’s not uncovered, discovered early enough, it could really lead to a very terrible strategic catastrophe. So, it is urgent to act. And I’m appealing to you to do so.
Schlanger: The presentation by Bill Binney at the Schiller Institute conference was in the first panel of the conference which took place February 16.
Helga, we’re sort of short on time, but I think we can put two things together here. The insanity of the Green New Deal as it’s coming out in the United States, with the new reports from Germany about the incredible cost of the so-called “decarbonization.” In a sense, what we’re seeing is an open admission by some people—including [Rep. Alexandria] Ocasio-Cortez—that in order to protect the environment, humans have to disappear. She actually really said that. If you can just comment on this; the Schiller Institute is involved now in a major mobilization to address this Green New Deal from a higher scientific standpoint as you were just talking about. So, what are your thoughts on this?
Zepp-LaRouche: This so-called Green New Deal is really only the latest re-brewing of an old, brown source which we have seen the in the eugenics movement, which was renamed in the post-war period to be the conservation movement because Hitler had given eugenics a bad name. It later developed in the form of the ecology movement after the Club of Rome invented this fraud of so-called limited resources on the planet. All of this has been scientifically completely refuted, because the whole thesis that we have limits to growth, or we need limits to growth because the resources of the planet are finite, is a complete fraud.
[In 1983] my husband wrote a beautiful book about this called There Are No Limits to Growth, which people should read. It basically makes the obvious point that “What is a resource?” is completely determined by the level of science and technology with which you define what you are looking at. Obviously, the human creative mind and creative power have the ability to again and again develop new insights into the physical universe and therefore completely redefine what a resource is.
The Empire’s Green New Deal
If Ocasio-Cortez is now coming out with this thing, it is an almost unveiled effort to prop up the hedge funds and similar investors on Wall Street and the City of London (most of the hedge funds are sitting in the City of London anyway) and create a new investment boom into matters which are, by the nature of their character, leading to depopulation.
If you go entirely to low energy-flux densities in the production process, what the Greenies call the so-called “carrying capacity” of the planet goes down. The CBE—Commander of the British Empire, as he likes to be called—[Hans Joachim] Schellnhuber, the former head of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research; wrote this incredible paper for the transformation of the world economy some years ago, calling for the decarbonization of the economy: no nuclear, no gas, no oil, just so-called renewables. (Even nuclear would be a perfectly fine renewable.)
He said the carrying capacity of the Earth is only 1 billion people; and Ocasio-Cortez even went so far as to say that people should have fewer children, because the children are causing problems for the environment. So, the thoroughly barbaric nature of depopulation is out in the open. I think that people have to wake up to the fact that this so-called Green policy is really a brown-shirt policy. It’s just the same old wine in new bottles, and we have seen this exact program more than 70 years ago with terrible consequences. It’s just a new form of the same thing.
Now if Germany, which is unfortunately completely Green, continues on this and goes for the decarbonization of the economy after there was this mindless exit from nuclear energy, Germany soon will have no nuclear energy. No coal, because they now want to go out of coal by 2050. Germany will cease to be an industrial nation, and it will have terrible social consequences. The living standard will collapse, the aging population will not be able to be maintained; it will be a terrible thing. There is a research institute of combustion engines, and they just made a study that said that the minimum cost of halting the use of coal for Germany would be anywhere from $800 billion to $900 billion by 2050.
If you go for a maximum scenario, it would be more or less 1.5 trillion euro, obviously with a shrinking productivity of the economy. This is the death knell of the German economy, and categorically must be reversed. I think the Green New Deal is really something which unconditionally has to be recognized for what it is—genocide. If you look at this complete charade where this Greta Thunberg—a 16-year-old girl from Sweden—is being carried around from Davos to now Hamburg, trying to whip up the international children’s movement that school children shouldn’t go to school on Friday—a “strike”—to help stop global warming.
Since Ocasio-Cortez has said that we need to solve the problem in 12 years, there’s now a little girl of 5 years who said, “If this problem is not solved, I will commit suicide when I’m 13 because the world will be gone in any case.” This is really evil stuff! If you look at who is financing it, the mother of Greta Thunberg got an award from the World Wildlife Fund many years ago; the whole thing is financed by Soros and other foundations. It is absolutely a new effort to brainwash young impressionable children and turn them into little anti-science monsters.
The Lawfulness of the Universe
I think we have to have a drive to really discuss what the laws of the universe are—the character of the universe is not of a closed system; very much to the contrary. The best antidote to this pessimism is space travel and the discovery of new resources on asteroids, on the Moon. Look at what the Chinese just did. They plan to bring Helium-3 from the far side of the Moon for a future thermonuclear fusion economy on Earth. That’s the way to go. But I think this Green New Deal is the last effort by a dying empire to impose its anti-population policies. People should recognize it for what it is—a brown-shirt policy.
Schlanger: The best place to go to get the material you need, the ammunition you need to combat it and to mobilize your friends, family members, and so on, would be the Schiller Institute website [https://schillerinstitute.com/]. Become a member; see the videos from the conference that just took place in Morristown, New Jersey, that Helga mentioned. A science panel, a music panel, and the keynote panel where we discuss this question of the Four-Power Agreement.
So, Helga, I think we’ve covered most of what we need to cover. Is there anything else you want to bring up?
Zepp-LaRouche: Just become politically active, because this is a breaking point in human history, and we will either end up in World War III, or we will create a new epoch. So, become active with the Schiller Institute!
Schlanger: We’ll see you next week.