Putin Has Acted, and the Existence
of Mankind Has Changed
Here are editted excerpts from Lyndon LaRouche’s Oct. 3 Dialogue with the Manhattan Project.
Dennis Speed: My name is Dennis Speed. On behalf of the LaRouche Political Action Committee I want to welcome everybody here, today. Today concludes the last fourteen heads of state speaking at the United Nations. I think everybody here certainly knows we’ve been involved in a full week of intervention there. And there were some decisive changes in the world that occurred, and those changes are not yet conclusive.
I want to go directly to Lyn and ask him if he has an opening statement for us, an evaluation of where we stand. Then that will be followed immediately by our questions. So, Lyn.
LaRouche: Yes, I just have one thing to say, because it’s important to put this on the agenda so that the entire body here can get some sense of what has to be done in terms of practice. We have now just completed this program, which was intended for this event in Manhattan, but now we come to a new era which has already started. President Putin has actually instituted an action which is a rather complicated one relative to previous kinds of experience, in which he’s acted to destroy a force of evil which is responsible for much of the problems which mankind, especially in Europe, in particular, is suffering at this time. And therefore we will find that the things have changed from the standards of what we would have had a week ago. Because we’ve entered a new period of civilization in this form.
And therefore in what I shall do in responding, as the questions come up,—I shall bring into effect different kinds of responses, not essentially different, but different in the sense of the way I approach matters now. Because what’s happened is that the entire existence of mankind living in all parts of society has changed. It changed this week, in the course of the end of this week, and therefore we have to keep our minds open to reflect on what the new condition is, which has just been established and introduced today.
Q: Hi, Mr. LaRouche, it’s H__ from Bronx, New York. I just want to talk a little bit about the events of this week. We had a major rally on Monday on 42nd Street. I think we got a tremendous amount of attention. I’m paraphrasing some of these things, but we had a big banner: "Obama, Help Peace, Resign!" We were getting people who were enthusiastic about Obama resigning. We had some supporters of Putin’s shift, on fighting ISIS. So, I think we were getting a very big response in changing the atmosphere.
Throw Out Obama with Wall Street
And then also on Thursday, myself and my wife,—who’s a Spanish speaker,—we intervened at an event where the President of Paraguay was speaking at NYU [New York University], which was a little bit difficult for me, because even though it was NYU, everybody was speaking Spanish in the event. I know a little bit of Spanish, but I tried to do the best that I could.
Anyway, we got a question to the President of Paraguay,—Paraguay down between Brazil and Argentina. His name is Horacio Cartes. He was speaking about various things: about the development of Paraguay, about getting some students to go to NYU and other of these wonderful schools we have up here. We had a question on a piece of paper that we didn’t know if it would go through, but it went through to the moderator who is a former Foreign Minister of Mexico, Mr. Casteñeda, and the question was: "What do you, the President of Paraguay, think Paraguay can do with the help of the BRICS bank, to increase the investment in the infrastructure in Paraguay?"
We immediately created a stir in the room, of restlessness, because this was obviously not on the program of the people at NYU,—thinking about how the BRICS bank was going to change Paraguay or the world. The President said, well, he thought this was interesting; and then he went through—let’s see, what are the BRICS? Brazil, Russia; and then someone told him about China. Then he remembered that Paraguay, like certain countries in Central America, doesn’t even have relations with mainland China right now; they still have relations with only Taiwan. So, Paraguay really does not have any diplomatic relations with China at all, even though he was interested in the role of the BRICS. Obviously, Brazil is right next door.
So he did refer this question to his Foreign Minister, and after the presentation, me and my wife got theEIR magazine about the reforms of Franklin Roosevelt to the Foreign Minister, who also was familiar with your work, Mr. LaRouche.
I don’t really have a question, but I see that we are beginning to get the message that things have changed in the world to some people, who are very slowly waking up. I don’t know if we can make them wake up a little faster, but that’s what we’re doing.
LaRouche: Okay, well, I can say something on this subject, which is probably useful for what you just said. The point is that what happened is that suddenly Obama was being dumped from the Presidency of the United States. Now, thefait accompli has not arrived, but the situation of Obama is now new and crucial. If he were to remain as President, that would be a tragedy for all mankind. He would actually be athreat to most of mankind in every part of the planet.
White House/Pete Souza
So, this actually is the issue that’s hot right now. Obama must be thrown out of office, along with Wall Street. Now, Wall Street is totally bankrupt. It has no ability to function any more. It’s part of the walking dead; that’s the best way to describe what this thing means. So therefore, what happened with Putin is that Putin acted, not in a sense of an ordinary way we would interpret it. Putin actually movedto destroy evil. And he’s done a fairly good job in the initial progress of what he’s done, but this is not a war run by Putin because of some grievance that he has.
What he’s done, what he’s doing, is supporting the bringing together of nations of both the European region, and below Europe,— across in Africa and so forth,—in their attempt to clean up Satan, get rid of Satan. And the view is, as I can tell you if you want to argue that, that Obama is a child of Satan. And that’s what the problem is, and therefore lots of people around this planetnow have recognized this fact, and they are acting not to slaughter somebody, but in order to destroy Satan, i.e., in this case, Obama and his friends.
Q: Hello, Mr. LaRouche. I am S__ from the New York area and my question is: Last week the president of Argentina called President Obama a traitor. And I would like to know what is the strategic importance of that statement? And I also have a question after that.
LaRouche: Well, Obama is actually a kind of Satan, explicitly. The point is, how are we going to deal with this guy, bring him under control and prevent him from becoming successfully Satanic? In other words, we’re trying to change the way the world has worked for some recent times, and this is trying to create a new option for mankind. This means defending mankind, getting rid of real evil, things that have been destroying. . . For example, we have in Europe a very large number of people coming into Europe, who are fugitives from Obama and Obama’s associates. That’s the problem.
Obama and the Mass Shootings
So what Putin is doing,—he’s undertaken the responsibility of getting Obama out of the picture. This is not an attack on Obama; it’s getting rid of him. Because the man is actually evil, has been evil from the first time he moved. Also his stepfather was the guy who taught him how to beevil. And he came into the United States as an evil person from the first time he walked in there. He was already a servant of Satan in effect. That’s the way people would say it, and that’s what he represents. He was a destructive, purely defective kind of force, and the time has come to get rid of him. Put him out of office.
And the purpose of this process which Putin is playing a key role in, momentarily at this time, is to get rid of the kind of warfare and destruction which mankind has suffered too long. This is to clean up the mess, not to win a war.
Doctors Without Borders
Q: Hi, Lyn, it’s A__ again. What I’m wondering about is being,—perhaps not distracted,—but finding myself drawn in, because even after the Thursday call, now we see the shooting in Oregon,—you know, another mass killing. And people are concerned about this, and it’s valid. And then you have in Afghanistan a bombing.
And it’s very simple, yet dangerous to start making assessments and discussing these things. Keeping this lifeline and dialogue with you is very important. Even in New York City now, just because there’s a storm that is pending, people are panicking,—those who are living in those vulnerable areas where, of course, nothing’s been done.
So, as an organization, I think we can be pulled apart in trying to think clearly and stay on the ball. So, these self-assessments I think can be dangerous and side-tracking; how must we think or proceed to remain with what we must stay focussed on?
LaRouche: Let’s take the most recent case of a shooter, a gun-shooter; what’s that represent? This is not some guy who "did" something; yes, he did do something, but what caused these kinds of actions recently? Well, it wasn’t caused by one person; it wasn’t caused bya person as such. Not in a pattern like that, no. The gun-shooting, a lot of the recent things, are part of the Obama Administration, they’re a product of this process.
Now Obama is not the creator of this, but he certainly is a fosterer of it. And therefore, the problem is, we’ve got to get some degree of control over the process, because we have a lot of people who are eligible to be murderers. The increase of the murderer population is accelerating, and it’s not happening accidentally. It’s happening. It may be induced by somebody who doesn’t know what he’s being induced to do.
But this is a new pattern; it’s a threat to humanity. And you have to remember that what Obama represents is the reduction of the human population. And therefore what you’re seeing is an effect which is the reduction of the human population. That’s what you’re looking at. And this is a process which has a systemic characteristic to it. This is not just one guy shooting some people up. When this pattern is repeated in the same way, again and again and again, as it’s been doing recently,—we’ve had these patterns before, but this is the most serious period.
And the problem lies inside,—I think you could say, not that Obama did these killings, but that what his behavior did was contribute to that kind of phenomenon. And we have a society,—look, we have a society which no longer has morals, in general; not real morals. Look at people who don’t have income; look at the number of people who are being deprived of income; look at the number of people who are being deprived of everything that’s important to them, demoralizing our citizens, especially younger people.
And this is the pattern. It’s a pattern of evil. And it comes from a characteristic that our government, especially the Bush and the Obama Administrations, are exemplary of forces of evil! That’s what they’ve done. And I know a lot of the detail of both of these administrations, and however witting they are, or non-witting they are, their actions, their outlook, is one of evil,—it has been.
And that’s what you have to worry about. We have to take the actions to requalify our own citizens, to ensure that the population as such, becomes more productive, and less destructive.
Putin an Instrument for Civilization
Q: Hello, Mr. LaRouche, it’s a pleasure talking to you. My name is L__. I am from Italy, although I’ve been living here a few years. My question for you is to ask your consideration about the situation in Europe, especially in terms of how the diplomacy is developing in the clash between Russia and the United States and NATO, and the appearance of it developing as a sort of new cold war.
So I just wrote down a couple of things that will lead me to my question for you. Basically, the situation is that the tide of consensus in Europe, but also worldwide, at least from the point of view of common people, is constantly growing in favor of Putin and Russia. And some signs of reversion from sheer acceptance of U.S. orders in terms of diplomacy and financial organization of our nations, seem to be taking place among some politicians. I’m thinking most importantly about Hungary and [Prime Minister] Viktor Orban, for example, who unfortunately, I think, may be about to experience a color revolution coming his way soon. We hope not, but that’s a risk, and maybe you can give me some considerations on that, too.
But my question for you is: Do you see any room for an effective change of policies on the part of European governments in terms of joining that popular tide in favor of Russia, and thus start building a strategy that can liberate us as Europeans from this,—I would define it as servitude,—that has been established after the end of the Second World War, and even more strongly after the fall of the Berlin Wall?
LaRouche: I would say the real point today, is that the future of mankind,—as opposed to what has been the immediate earlier period,—is that what Putin was prompted to do, and I emphasize prompted to do, because Putin did not act on his own, in terms of what he did. He acted on the basis of a relationship within the European system, and within India, Indian society, in China, and so forth. So this was a joint effort in which Putin performed a function corresponding to the perceived interests of a whole part of [world society].
Now the corruption of Spain, Italy, and so forth, was a product of the failure to solve this problem. Mostly, it was done by the British. The British Empire was really the vehicle of orchestration to ruin Europe and to reduce other parts of the world. It was a colonial system; it was an evil system, a Satanic system, essentially, at root. And so this was the problem.
Now what’s happened is that Europe has come to realize—more and more parts of Europe or people within Europe—have come to realize that that was all wrong. And they’re looking for solutions in order to reconstruct the economy, the functional economy, and social conditions of life which are necessary,—which are, for example, the education of our people. The educational system in most parts of the world is deteriorated greatly, as in Europe generally.
So that what’s happened here: The process here is that Putin has become an instrument of his own self; he’s made himself his own instrument on behalf of civilization, for Russia, and for other people, as well. And so, most recently, what he’s done, he went in there to save citizens in that area, and also to get rid of some of the pestilences which were mass murdering, so as to bring a peaceful order. And Putin has worked closely with China, worked closely with India, worked closely with people of other BRICS nations as well, and so these are forces that had to be brought together in concert, to a concert of agreement in order to get a decent kind of new peace for mankind.
Now peace is not submission. Peace is the ability to be actively efficient in bringing mankind to reach the opportunities for success of mankind’s development. And this is true of every part of the world; you know it from the standpoint of Italy, and the fact of the conflicts which existed inside Italy’s culture, where certain parts were one thing and certain were another.
The time has come that we’ve got to bring a resolution among all nations if we can, into coming to an understanding of what the nation is, what the function of the nation is, and to understand that the different nations require the ability to access that function. We need a revolution in thinking. And the time has come, I think, that we may get it. I think we may succeed. I know the opportunity for success is there, and of course, I will do what I can about that myself.
But I say,—don’t be pessimistic about this thing. I think great opportunities are being given to us—opportunities we’ve missed for a very long time. Get rid of Wall Street, for example. That’s one of the good things we’re going to do.
We Can Do What FDR Did
Q: Good afternoon, thank you for taking my question. My name is M__ B__. I was watching something on RT [news broadcaster] about—it was a sort of Noam Chomsky type character from Slovenia; and when he was watching the speeches in the UN, in particular Poroshenko and Obama and Putin, he got this flashback from his Russian childhood days of Russian TV, of a Bugs Bunny type character they had in Russia, saying "What’s going on here? What’s this about?" Because everyone’s talking rationally, but they’re throwing barbs at each other.
But what he did say,—one troubling thought that came to him,—was that he sees this happening more and more in the world. Like Ukraine will become yet another place in the world where there will be a soft peace without any kind of unified state power structure, and it will just go on like Lebanon. Lebanon, of course, after the civil war, never became an effective state any more, but they did manage to succeed economically. And he sees this is happening all the time now in other parts of the world.
So, it would be just an endless cycle of some shooting, then an armistice, but nothing really serious, but it’ll be—it’s the strategy of tension in action, that whole neo-con ideal. So what thoughts do you have on this, and can you add anything to that that we should be thinking about?
LaRouche: Right now, the danger is,—take the U.S. population as such. The U.S. population is now threatened by accelerating rates of death; it’s not necessary, but what’s happening is, you have more and more of the population of the so-called unemployed people, who are losing everything they had in terms of assets, again and again and again.
So now, if the United States were to go into a depression, a classical type of U.S. depression, now, the death rate inside the United States would be enormous. The only way that we could solve that problem is as an emergency, because we are not able, under the present financial system, to maintain a healthy population, and a productive population at all. People are being dumped like rubbish, in effect, into the job loss and conditions of deteriorating production and employment.
National Archives/Ann Rosener
So we’re now at a point where it’s extremely important that we take action to put in a Franklin Roosevelt action, of the type that Franklin Roosevelt applied to the Depression in the 1930s. Without that kind of action, and without also dumping and closing down all Wall Street institutions, there’s no chance of defending humanity safely. That’s what the problem is.
In other words, shut down Wall Street! First thing! Wall Street is dead. It cannot possibly develop anything positive. It’s hyperinflationary, it has no productive characteristics any more; so therefore, we have to remove it. If it won’t remove itself, we’ll have to remove it.
But on the other hand, we don’t have a mechanism now to provide an employment program of the type which would allow us to reconstruct some of the productivity of our people who are being raped, essentially,—being starved of every right they have. It’s an emergency situation: If we went to a Franklin Roosevelt approach of the 1930s, and said we’re going to suppress this, and we’re going to back this,— and we’re going to provide provision, to get the population organized to rise back to productivity,—what Franklin Roosevelt did from the time he became President, until the time he died. Franklin Roosevelt had created a great movement of progress for mankind in the case of the United States, but also what the United States did internationally.
And what we have to do is say that what Franklin Roosevelt contributed to a nation’s economy which was not working,—Franklin Roosevelt’s approach is the correct one, and with that approach we can improve the education, for example. What my experience is,—you know, I’m not the youngest man by any means, on this planet, but I went through all these experiences as a young person, and we developed in the course of my experience; we increased the productive powers of labor of the members of the United States’ population. We improved that! We made great improvements in terms of technology under wartime conditions and even prewar conditions.
We Can Fix the Problem!
We can do that again! But we must get Wall Street shut down! Because if Wall Street were to go any further in a collapse, there would be no support for the categories of citizens of the United States who have no protection, economic protection. They’ll be on the street! They’ll be dead; starved. So it’s important that we get rid of Wall Street. Shut it down because it’s worthless. But as long as Wall Street and the members of Congress who support Wall Street,—as long as they’re doing what they’re doing, most of the people of the United States are threatened by a very serious destruction of their right to life.
And so therefore we’ve come to the time that getting rid of Obama, throwing him out, and following the trail which Putin and which Germany, are doing, in particular, and China, and India,—follow that route, make sure we do it! And we can survive.
But we’ve come to a time where we’re on a short leash! We don’t have a long leash for dealing with this thing; we’ve got to do it quick. And I think that you’ll find that the UN conference, which was just in process here,—that thing is going to be a natural supporter of the kind of reform among nations, among whole groups of nations,—maybe not all nations, but whole groups of nations,—is going to do something to change the way the world has functioned in the short term, up to now.
Speed: I think those are the last of our questions, and you already began to touch on what I was going to ask you for our conclusion. Because it’s this: We seem to have accomplished as a result of the process you started last June, late June, a rejection of Obama internationally: you defined how the United Nations process was doing, and what happened was, we took a force in Manhattan,—sure we had people nationally, but it was focussed here,—and we deployed as I believe you wished us to do. I could have you give us an evaluation of how you think we did on that,—but we’ve got a rejection of Obama internationally. Now we need a rejection of Obama nationally.
And what I want you to tell us, is how you want this crew, and our expanding forces who are also out here,—how do we deploy here now, using your idea about shutting down Wall Street and your idea about the Hamiltonian Presidency: What do we do here to advance that process?
LaRouche: We have to get Obama under control. That means even before we throw him out formally, we’ve got to bring him under restraint. If we do that, and we can put Wall Street under constraint,—and if we can get some members of the Congress who are worse than idiots, and get them also discouraged from continuing to serve,—we could probably do a pretty good job of trying to rebuild the U.S. economy and the conditions of life which that represents. That’s what the real solution is.
That’s an approximation, but what I’m concerned about is, imagine that if Wall Street continues to become the instrument which controls the mind of the Congress, or the leading elements of the Congress, we are inreal, deep trouble, or our entire population is deep trouble. Therefore, we must get rid of Obama’s ability to control the U.S. government in any respect; and we have to take steps which ensure that we will not have a collapse of the income generation of our citizens. We have a situation of absolute desperation in the greatest part of our population! Most people don’t realize how serious this is. The financial conditions, the economic conditions, of people in the nation, are terrible! And it’s become worse at an accelerating rate.
creative commons/Gregroy Hausensteing
creative commons, AFGE
Now, we can with a Franklin Roosevelt approach, we can fix that problem, despite all it represents. And I think that’s what we have to do: We have to force the United States government, the agencies of government, to realize that they have a responsibility to deal with the sins, the evil sins, that the Congress in large degree has supported, by recklessness, by stupidity, by cupidity and so forth,—all these kinds of nice evil things. And we have to protect the population of the United States. We have to protect thepeople of the United States, the children of the United States. We’ve got to defend our population and its ability to think, its ability to create, its ability to achieve.
And we’ve got to end the regime which is typified by the name of Bush and the name of Obama.
Speed: All right, Lyn, thank you very much. I think that was quite clear. And we’re going to get to work on that, and we’ll see you next week.
LaRouche: À bientôt!