This transcript appears in the October 11, 2019 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
As Psycho Regime Changers Go Wild,
A Revolutionary Spirit Spreads Worldwide
This is the edited transcript of the Schiller Institute’s October 6, 2019 New Paradigm interview with the founder of the Schiller Institutes, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, by Harley Schlanger. A video of the webcast is available.
Harley Schlanger: Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger with the Schiller Institute. Welcome to our webcast with our founder and President Helga Zepp-LaRouche. It’s Oct. 6, 2019, and there’s a lot to talk about today. We’re in the midst of an escalation of various regime-change operations, and I think we’ll start with the one in the United States, the operation against President Donald Trump, which he correctly identified as a coup, not an impeachment. Helga, what is going on with this?
Helga Zepp-LaRouche: It is very remarkable that the President of the United States says that this is a coup against him. I think this deserves reflection, because if you listened to the mainstream media, at least in Europe, you would absolutely not think that that’s a possibility, because the mainstream media here are so absolutely 100% against Trump.
What he said is enormous! This is not just words. We know that Attorney General William Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham went to Italy; they’re now investigating the Joseph Mifsud role in setting up the former Trump campaign volunteer George Papadopoulos. Reports will come out, from Durham, from Barr, probably also from Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz. So a lot of evidence will come out, and if that’s not enough, Trump said, given the fact that two years were wasted, and $42 million in taxpayer money was wasted, with Russiagate, after which absolutely nothing came out, he is planning to do litigation, himself. Even if these reports don’t surface all the involvement of foreign governments, but not the Russian government, what will come out is that there was an involvement between Biden and the Ukrainian government of Poroshenko. So, I think this has the potential of really causing an earthquake where all these people who have been involved in this coup may face some very, very big surprises.
And if this comes out, which can happen very shortly, I think an earthquake will go through the entire world, but especially rocking the trans-Atlantic liberal establishment, who all were somehow supportive of this coup, at least in attitude. So this is a really big story, and I think we will be in for some big, big surprises.
Trump Now Investigating
Schlanger: When Trump spoke the other day, he identified not just Ukraine, but the United Kingdom, Australia and Italy, minimally, as being involved, as well as the Obama administration. This gets right to the heart of the setup that was run from the British with Christopher Steele, GCHQ, MI6, working with the Obama team.
Zepp-LaRouche: Well, yes. The big question, naturally will be what did Obama know and when did he know it? Joe Biden’s Presidential ambitions are already as good as finished, because Trump has now not only requested that the Ukrainian government to investigate the involvement of Biden and his son, Hunter, with Burisma, the oil and gas corporation, which has been investigated for many things in Ukraine already. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has said that will happen. Trump has also demanded that the Chinese government should look into what happened in 2013, when Joe Biden and his son were involved in a $1.5 billion operation in China.
This is perfectly the right of President Trump to do. The Democrats, naturally, try to make that again a story, saying he’s trying to collude now with China and with Ukraine, but he as President has the right to determine what is going on and if there was a coup, he has all the right in the world to investigate how it happened.
Schlanger: Helga, as one who’s been commenting on this, and working on it for some time, I’d like to get your thoughts on a simple question that should be asked, but very few people are asking: why the sudden rush to judgment? The so-called whistleblower’s report was out in one day, and the next day, the impeachment calls, the inquiry was started, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi shifted her position—what’s really behind this?
Zepp-LaRouche: I can only make an hypothesis, because the facts of this are not yet established, but Pelosi, who otherwise has been close to the intelligence community for her entire political life, nevertheless insisted against the left wing of the Democratic Party that impeachment was a losing proposition for the Democrats, because the voters in 2020 absolutely have other concerns than yet another scandal against Trump. They want to know, what about their jobs, what about health care—and if the Democrats are only going against the President, who after all still has a very high popularity and has a hard core of supporters and many people who are in a swing mood—they could go this way or that way—Pelosi so far argued that it was too risky to go for impeachment.
Now, why did she change her position, and why did this whistleblower sound off, who many people think is a CIA agent? Pelosi went to New York, this was in the context of this Bloomberg Green finance conference; we don’t know exactly with whom she met, but then she came back and she all of a sudden was for impeachment. The only hypothesis one can put forward, is that she met with some of the top Wall Street banking circles, and they basically told her that Wall Street would not finance the Democratic candidates in the upcoming campaign. And since a congressman in the United States needs at least $5 million to have any chance, given the present plutocracy system (which is very far from a democracy), naturally, that argument is overwhelming, so she basically came out for impeachment.
But this is a big, big risk: It can completely backfire and many people know that. There were actually several voices already saying this may end up with a lot of tears for the establishment.
Regime Change Underway in Hong Kong
Schlanger: While the regime change is escalating in the United States, there’s another place where it’s now clear the intention is regime change, and that’s Hong Kong. This has just deteriorated as we’ve seen more violence and brutality from the so-called “demonstrators.” What’s your view of what’s happening there?
Zepp-LaRouche: The New York Times has an opinion piece by Bret Stephens, who by the way, in his former capacity as the editor in chief of the Jerusalem Post had given the “Man of the Year” prize to Paul Wolfowitz for his involvement in starting the Iraq War in 2003; so you have a real hawk of the worst neo-con tradition. In his October 3 article in the New York Times, “Is China Heading for Crisis? The Protests in Hong Kong Accelerate the Contradictions in Beijing,” he writes that China is already having enormous trouble, that capital is fleeing China, and now this Hong Kong thing is bringing it over the edge; and that Chinese President Xi Jinping’s dream to have a modern well-to-do China is all going up in smoke, and that the Belt and Road is not functioning.
So, it’s an open call, unveiled, for regime change. Meantime, the Chinese media have covered a lot of the sources of the funding of the Hong Kong opposition—the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the CIA; the NED bragged that they trained a lot of the opposition leaders. And then, to top it all, Chris Patten, the last British Empire Governor of Hong Kong, when it was still a British colony, he called on the opposition in Hong Kong to form an alternative government and then charge the police and Beijing with crimes and so forth!
Now, I think this is an incredible thing. I’ve had Sir Leon Brittan on my radar for a very long time. In 1996, I participated as a speaker in the first major conference on the Eurasian Land-Bridge in Beijing, presenting our proposal for the New Silk Road, the Eurasian Land-Bridge. Sir Leon Brittan was at that conference, also, and he personally had delayed the emergence of this conference for more than two years, by always arguing that he had no time, and since the Chinese wanted the EU involved, he was actually able to postpone this conference. The speech he gave was really a declaration of war against the New Silk Road by saying it will not function because there will be terrorism and there will be instability along all the routes. See “China Must Play by ‘Free Trade’ Rules,” the May 7, 1996 speech of Sir Leon Brittan [EIR June 14, 1996]. So, already in 1996, the British policy against the New Silk Road was revealed, which has not changed, and is now becoming very, very apparent in Hong Kong.
I think the Chinese government probably should appeal to the United Nations, or basically say that if significant forces on the British side are demanding an alternative government should be formed, then maybe the deal which supposedly still lasts till 2047, when Hong Kong is supposed to be integrated into the mainland, and the present status of One Country, Two Systems is supposed to be replaced—maybe that is now putting that deal in question and there should be right now a vote. Because it’s not that the Hong Kong population is all like that: This is a very virulent and loud minority using terrorist means, everything from Molotov cocktails, metal pipes; and if you look at the video footage which exists of this 18-year-old who was shot, and which the Western media nevertheless claimed this was all police violence, these people were absolutely on a terrorist rampage, and it was self defense by the police.
I think what is probably advisable, that the role of the British should be documented by the Chinese even more than they have done so far. They’ve already had articles saying now what the British did with the Opium Wars—which after all, is the reason why Hong Kong became part of the British Empire in the first place—that ugly face is now again showing itself.
I think this is a very, very unbelievable color revolution/regime change operation, but it’s completely ludicrous to think that will endanger the government in Beijing, which is absolutely in a strong position. They have just had the beautiful celebration of the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China. So, I think this is a completely desperate, ludicrous attempt, but it shows you the absolute viciousness of these forces.
State of Chinese Economy and People
Schlanger: Helga, that leads me right into the next question, which is, if you look at the Western media and listen to the usual voices in the Western politicians and others, they’re trying to make the case that China is weak, its economy is collapsing, that Xi is going for top-down dictatorship, there’s a lot of opposition. But you were just there: You’ve been participating in numerous events there recently. Is there any truth to that image that they’re trying to present?
Zepp-LaRouche: I have no indication that there is anything like this going on at all. Because, as you just mentioned, I was in China, in Beijing in May. I participated in the Asian Dialogue of Civilizations. Then I was there in September, where I participated in the Euro-Asia Economic Forum in Xi’an. I had many discussions. And, you know, people are happy! People are absolutely proud to be Chinese, they are self-confident, they know what they have done. The Chinese economic miracle is the greatest transformation of any country from a state of extreme poverty into a well-to-do country: They have gotten 800 million people out of poverty. They want to eliminate extreme poverty completely by next year! And given their record, I’m absolutely confident that they will succeed in doing that.
Now, I mean, look: This is not in an abstract space. China has launched the Belt and Road Initiative. More than 130 countries are participating in it in one way or another—with Memorandums of Understanding, with great projects, with all kinds of agreements, and China gets the resonance from these countries! I have observed with my own eyes and ears, that in general, the condition of Africa, Asia, Latin America before China entered the world stage in such a big way in the last 10 and especially the last 6 years—was absolutely no hope for the developing sector to overcome and get out of this terrible poverty which they were left in with the end of colonialism, and then the following IMF conditionalities. It was only when China started to invest in their infrastructure, in railroads, in industrial parks, in agriculture, that these countries have a clear perspective for overcoming poverty. And this is just more attractive.
I mean, the West is claiming all this “democracy” and “human rights,” and so forth, that they are the sole owners of a “rules-based order.” Now, a “rules-based order”—I have an image of that, and it looks like former German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble! Who, with his “black zero,” has made all the economies of southern Europe completely unhappy. He reduced them by one-third, and the EU Commission has prevented any kind of development in the Balkans, in Southern Europe, and that is what they call a “rules-based order.” Now, that is not an attractive model. So the Chinese naturally know all of this, and they know that they have improved the lives of not only the Chinese population, but that many other countries have studied and are now imitating how China has overcome this poverty and has entered a path of development towards becoming a middle-class economy for the majority of their citizens, and this is causing optimism!
So, I don’t think there is any truth to this matter. Sure, China has economic difficulties, as a result of the trade war, as a result of Hong Kong—this is a big factor; but I don’t think it has any chance at all to change this government, because they have the full support of the population, who is very grateful and identifies with the cause of politics in China. That is my direct observation, and that is the best I can say.
State of the Trans-Atlantic Economy
Schlanger: Just one final point on this: the people who are saying China is collapsing, are watching the Western neo-liberal model actually undergoing a collapse, as we’ve seen in recent days, with the repo liquidity crisis and so on. Do you have anything to say about that?
Zepp-LaRouche: Well, you know, we are now in October, so in three weeks or so, there is likely the Brexit. As of now, one cannot see how this thing can be resolved in any way, even if they postpone it to the end of the year. This is a completely unworkable thing, and who knows what will happen. Because I don’t think they have it under control at all.
Then you have the derivatives crisis, which is lingering. There was just a warning article in “Wall Street on Parade” that the big insurance companies are all still involved in massive derivatives trading; they didn’t change that after 2008. So this is just one more of the many mines which could detonate. And we saw, with the Thomas Cook Group bankruptcy that this is having all kinds of reverberations in all the countries which relied on tourism and tourist businesses—Spain, Greece, Italy, Turkey—all of them, the hotels and so forth are suffering. So this is a powder keg.
It just absolutely makes the point that the proposals of my late husband, to have a New Bretton Woods system, and go for global Glass-Steagall, this is the only way to go, which is why we have to absolutely stop this regime change operation against Trump and against China, because only if these two strongest economies are working together, plus some other countries, do you have any chance to get out of this crisis, without a big chaos.
‘Eat Babies’ Prank Exposes AOC
Schlanger: Now, if we can move to something which is actually quite humorous—the intervention of one of our young members at a town meeting of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC); where this young woman stood up, and in the best tradition of Jonathan Swift, discussed the idea that the solution to the global warming crisis is eating babies. Helga, this went viral; millions of people saw it. It’s been commented on by everyone. What’s your thought about this?
Zepp-LaRouche: Well, this is quite amusing. I tweeted an article by the Washington Post some years ago, where they proposed that the Republicans should eat babies! So all this hysteria should be seen in perspective.
It proved one thing: That AOC is not the sharpest cookie on the planet, because, while this young member was imitating Greta in a certain sense, also, AOC didn’t get it, because she then answered to the idea that babies should be eaten to save the world from CO2, she said, yeah, yeah, there are many ways to find the solution.
Many people didn’t get it—the whole first coverage was that people thought this was just a normal AOC supporter. And if you watch this video, it’s actually quite funny, because this young member spoke for two minutes and all the audience was looking and they didn’t say, “Hey, c’mon! This is crazy, you can’t eat babies!” But they just thought this was a normal discussion. So it really shows you the lack of humor, the lack of intelligence, and I think some people really got it—like Tucker Carlson, and I think Pat Lang, and a couple of other commentators got the point. So I can only invite you, our audience, don’t miss this video, because it’s good political satire of the first class.
President Putin on Greta Thunberg
Schlanger: And also we had a comment this week from Russian President Putin on Greta Thunberg, which you may want to share with people.
Zepp-LaRouche: Yes, I think that is quite important: Putin, at the Russian Energy Week international forum comment on that, and what he said there is very worth mentioning. Because he said, well, maybe Greta Thunberg is a sincere girl, but the people who are using her, this is absolutely to be condemned. Because to rile up extreme emotions in young people, which can destroy their character is something one should absolutely not do. And if you have seen this poor girl, Greta, when she is really beside herself, you really fear that some emotional damage will be inflicted on her by all this publicity.
And then Putin also made another point, which I think people should really reflect about. He said, apparently nobody explained to Greta that the world is very complex and that the Asians and the Africans, they insist that they want to have similar benefits from the economy like people in Sweden. And basically, are you telling them that they should stay in poverty for the next 30 years, and their children another 30 years?
And I think this is a very important point, because given the fact that, still, 60% of world energy comes from coal and natural gas, and if you actually take coal out of power production, for a continent like Africa, this means absolutely no development, and it means genocide. And should we tell the African young people that we are going to deny them development? I don’t think that that is a morally presentable idea: And people should really think about it, because many of these greenies, in Germany for example, they belong to the part of people who earn the most money, they don’t have to consider what it means to be poor in an African country or some other developing country, and therefore, they’re so absolutely arrogant and have total lack of empathy with what is actually going on in the real world.
Schiller Institute Conference and NASA Promote Mankind
Schlanger: I think it’s important then to look at the counter to this: While central bankers are spreading pessimism through their funding of the green movement and the regime changers are disrupting the potential for a community for a shared future to be brought into being, you participated in an event yesterday which was quite extraordinary: “Mankind Is a Galactic Species: The Necessary Alternative to War.” You gave a very stirring keynote, but a lot of very interesting participants. Can you give us a report on what you saw, the potential for optimism coming from this kind of approach?
Zepp-LaRouche: Well, this “International Observe the Moon” day, this was started in 2010, so this was actually the tenth year when this was taking place. And in my short speech, I pointed to the fact that on that same day, there were more than 1,500 events around the world—500 in the United States, 300 in India, and 300 in Europe. So if you look at how many people participated, it goes easily into the hundreds of thousands, probably more than a million people, who have a healthy disease: “Moon Fever.” Moon Fever is something which is really very optimistic, because once you start to think about making a colony on the Moon—this, by the way is not only planned by China, by NASA, the Artemis program of President Trump who wants to have a man and a woman on the Moon in a little bit more than four years from now, and a permanent station by 2028; it’s the policy of the European Space Agency, ESA; the General Director Johann-Dietrich Wörner, calls it Space 4.0, because he says this is no longer just for the space-faring countries, but it’s open to all governments, all companies, all academia, and all businesses to participate, and that is exactly the kind of open integration of space projects which will establish a higher level of reason of international cooperation.
Now, I think the question of space projects, the idea of not only going to the Moon, industrializing the Moon as the stepping stone, for a city on Mars!—you know, China will start next year, their Mars expedition to investigate whether terraforming is possible on Mars; they already have a test model for that in the Gobi Desert where they’re training young people, astronauts and engineers for such future deployments; and if you build a city on Mars, you need a city, because if you want to have hundreds of scientists, you need thousands of people who support the city, who keep the systems going. So, this is an absolutely fascinating idea.
And I also discussed the work and the vision of my late husband, of Krafft Ehricke, the German-American space pioneer, who had this absolutely fantastic idea that it is the natural character of man to find new areas in space, that man is a spacefaring species. And that has not just some very practical implications; you know, it will be a complete counter to the narrow-minded idea that we are living in an Earth-bound, limited system. It has a deep, anthropological meaning, because it’s a question of what is the character of man? We are not animals: We can again, and again, overcome seemingly unsurmountable borders.
And Krafft Ehricke—I like this a lot—he mentioned Homer’s reference to Odysseus: When Odysseus started to go to sea with his ship, he didn’t know where he would end up. The same, more or less, was true for Columbus, who, in spite of the fact that he naturally had maps and had an idea, but he thought he would go to India. So, then, naturally, Yuri Gagarin, the first man to go into space,—I mean, the idea that man can leave the surface of the Earth and go into orbit, no animal would ever think that! I have not seen the nicest dogs or donkeys to discuss that they would build a spaceship and explore what is the far side of the Moon like?
I think this is very exciting, and it instills a tremendous optimism, because once people realize that there are new frontiers of knowledge, they completely change their attitude and become optimistic. And I think optimism is, for the mental health of people, the most important, because if you’re culturally pessimistic and you think there is no future, well, then all kinds of terrible things can happen, as we have seen in the ’30s in Europe, where cultural pessimism was the basis for everything that happened wrong in the ’20s and the ’30s. And I don’t think we should repeat any of this, but we should have a different approach, of reaching a new paradigm in the history of mankind: And space travel is one extremely indispensable component for that.
Schlanger: A video of the event yesterday is available on the Schiller Institute website. And also, Helga, you wrote a statement “Economic Renaissance of Humanity and the Exoneration of Lyndon LaRouche,” available in EIR, which people should use and get out as part of this spread of optimism.
Is there anything else you’d like to add?
Don’t Sit on the Fence!
Zepp-LaRouche: I can only ask you: Don’t sit on the fence. Really, you may not think it in Germany, which is probably the last country where changes for the better will happen, but there is around the world a revolutionary spirit, because I think we are reaching the point Lincoln talked about, where you can fool some people all the time, and you fool all the people some of the time, but not everybody all the time. I think we are approaching this, because many people realize that there is something completely different going on, than the mass media are trying to tell you. And people are not that stupid, so in the United States, I think we are on the verge of, really, maybe a revolutionary spirit which is spreading, and I think the best you can do is join us: Get active with the Schiller Institute, and be an active part of a change for the better.
Schlanger: OK, Helga, and we’ll see you again next week.
Zepp-LaRouche: Yes, till next week!