Not That Simple . . .
Edited excerpts from Lyndon LaRouche’s Dialogue with the Manhattan Project of Feb. 27.
Question: Hi, Lyn, K— from the Bronx. Very good. I’m having a terrible time wrapping my brain around what’s going on in Syria and I’m here today to have you help me out with it.
There appears to be two factions in the government, one for peace and one for war. What draws my attention to that possibility is Kerry’s cooperation with Putin and China in creating a working relationship with the United States, Putin, and China. I have been prejudiced against Kerry and now see him working for a ceasefire in Syria as very confusing to me. What is Kerry’s position with Obama? As Secretary of State he’s expected to represent the President. What is Obama’s position with this cooperation of Kerry with Putin? I’m under the impression that the agreement Kerry signed was created by Putin. It’s hard for me to not to wonder if there aren’t threats going to Kerry. Does this weaken Obama to the degree that will give someone or some group the courage to remove him? How do you see the British dealing with this?
LaRouche: Well, that’s quite a package of complications. The complications however are not in and of themselves a problem. It’s only when you try to mix them up. That’s when the problem comes up. Because the matter is that there are different parties, there’re different factors under consideration. For example . . . Just to give you an example. What has happened recently is that there is a collapse of the trans-Atlantic community. The trans-Atlantic community is in a disaster mode.
On the other hand you have the Russian mode and the Chinese mode and other things related to the same which are on the upscale. So, obviously, there’s not a complementarity of voices, but rather a conflict, a very significant conflict. Do you want to live or die? That’s the difference. If you want to follow Obama, if you want to work with the British royal family, then you’re doomed. If you want to get a succession for a new world system and you’re able to do it, together with Russia, China, India and so forth,— this is a different voice. The one voice, the old voice, is the evil voice. It’s the evil voice of stupidity and corruption. That’s the voice of Obama and the British.
On the other hand what Putin represents and what China represents, right now,— and now India coming in,— in a very significant way, in a resurrection kind of way, and these things are going to develop.
So there is no monotone in this process. The question is the crisis. Are you going to die? Are you going to live? And that’s it, two voices. One voice, are you going to die? Second voice, are you going to live? And when you look at things in that way, as I do, it becomes relatively clear. I don’t want to have anything to do with Wall Street. I don’t want to have anything to do with that bunch. I don’t want to have anything to do with Obama. On the other hand, there’re certain people of the world who, I say, are valuable. We say that the trans-Atlantic community is terrible. It’s a sinkhole, all kinds of evil. While on the other hand, what you get with Putin and get with China and get with India, you are now almost on the road towards Paradise. And that’s the difference.
They Are Doomed
Question: Good afternoon, Lyn. A— here in New York. I missed you Thursday. I had a bad connection. I think we’re a little better today, I hope.
I wanted to talk with you about,— you’ve stated that our mission, our purpose is to engage people, bring people into the process of development into a unified purpose. Of course, that means you’re going to end imperialism—a very historic, monumental move—and allow mankind to continue in the path that’s being expressed by the nations we talk about all the time, and the United States can join that and a happy future can be realized for mankind, well beyond our lifetimes.
And that we also state, I love the line, that you say “we don’t need a great many people. We need a few great people,” and I go, “yes but they’re hard to find”! and then, I’ve been thinking about that, and the frustrations that seem to come from that. And I go now to a circle that I’m familiar with and see fairly regularly, and I would often find myself complaining: Well, you know, they just don’t get it. I’m talking to them and I’m saying things. And one person in particular is a black man from Northwest America, and I’ve known him for some years. and it wasn’t until just yesterday, that he expressed to me that—you know I always thought he was a jock and had a jock mentality—and he revealed to me,— he said, “you know, I was an honor student with a scholarship to go into engineering school. And as I was preparing for that, my family collapsed, father drinking, broken home and so on.” And he says “it was at that time that I just decided to turn jock.”
I’m raising this because he had this camouflage about him; there’s this disparity in the population, where we’ve made assumptions or think we’re looking at something in a person that we really aren’t. Now this was important and very useful of course, because now I think I know what he wants to hear, because I know actually who he is and what he abandoned, years ago. But there were indications of this before in the times that we would exchange.
So, in achieving that mission I just want to share that type of thing that I think is very common, and will allow me now to be more effective in finding that the people can realize that they’re great within themselves if I let them.
LaRouche: Well, that’s not that simple. The question is, are you going to be a contribution in your actions, is this going to be a contribution to the future of man? Now, how do we locate this thing?
The people of the United States are doomed. Right now, as of now, they are doomed. They’re doing all the things that are necessary in their behavior, to destroy themselves and to destroy the meaning of their lives. What we’re seeing now, as you see now in the experiences which are clinically shown in this matter,— everybody in general as a category, not as every individual, but as a category; the category of the people of the United States and of also other areas of that area, are doomed by what they believe in and what they work for. Now, they deceive themselves on this issue.
What you have now, what you have in Russia and India, as opposed to the trans-Atlantic community: The trans-Atlantic culture is now in a falling mode of self-destruction. On the other hand, Russia, China, India, and certain other countries, represent a commitment to an improvement in the condition of man’s life.
So it’s not a question of who you are and how you change your tricks. That’s a religious fakery, which is a very popular one. To say “Oh I’m corrected now, I’m corrected now.” The question is, what are you creating, in terms of the future of mankind? And that’s the issue. That you can perfect yourselves or improve yourself in some way, and thus find your solution for all your sufferings and so forth,— that doesn’t work.
The difference is that there is a force which is upside the individual type. And that force is the question of true creativity, mankind’s true creativity. And what we’re having is,— the United States and the trans-Atlantic system is now Satanic. It’s in a Satanic collapse mode. On the other hand, Russia, China, and India and so forth, actually fit in generally into an upturn mode. The United States and all of the trans-Atlantic community is ready to go into a deep and prolonged collapse, something like the collapse of the Roman Empire. Whereas another part of the civilization during the same period was in a rising mode; which is not an improvement mode, it was the directly opposite mode.
And if we’re going to solve the problems which face the United States and other nations right now, that is the kind of distinction we have to make.
Just look at one thing, for example, as a clinical case. We have people who used to be working people. They had certain practical skills, more or less good practical skills. Recently, under Obama’s influence, what has happened, is the people who used to be the working people, the skilled working people, are now rotting away. They’re dying. They’re in a self-inflicted dying process. The only thing we can do about them is to try to get them out of it. But! if you look at the policy of the people of the United States, this so-called class of persons, they’re not going to make it, unless some miracle comes in and saves them. They are dying! They’re committing suicide, mass suicide on drugs and all kinds of behavior; a group of people who used to be productive in earlier forms of life are now becoming characteristically degenerate, self-degenerating.
So the problem is now, then what do you have to say? Well, what can you do? Do you want to try to improve people’s behavior? That won’t work. Because behavior is a subterfuge. It’s not a perfect thing. But what happens, you find, that in practice what Putin is doing, what China is doing, what India is now doing, and others, is actually the road to success. Whereas the existence of the trans-Atlantic society is a plunge into destruction, like the fall of the Roman Empire. And these are the considerations which have to be examined.
Something That Has a Meaning
Question: Good afternoon, Mr. LaRouche, I’m T— from Manhattan, recently retired and enjoying very much singing in the bass section of our chorus, Messiah. Reminds me of the time that Paderewski represented Poland at the Versailles Conference, and went to pay a visit to the French Prime Minister Clemenceau, and Clemenceau asked, “By the way, are you any relation to the pianist?” and Paderewski said, “I am the pianist.” [Laughter.] And Clemenceau said, “My Lord, what a falling off was here? From greatest pianist in the world to merely the head of a nation.”
Well, the reason I’m rejoicing about the chorus is that the choral counterpoint is a demonstration to me of how democracy works. Every voice is precious. Every voice gets to lead, every voice gets to support. And there are obvious social implications to this. And my question to you is, that I know that from the beginning you have purposed that the chorus dynamic shall be expanded to a wider social and political sphere. I’m not quite sure about the mechanisms that would accomplish this expansion of energy. Could you say a few words about that, please?
LaRouche: She just presented it in terms of her presentation of the concluding parts of her report today. [Referring to the choral work before the town-hall meeting.] There is something which has a meaning; it’s not something which improves from in itself. It’s something which improves from outside itself. And it’s when people change their outlook on life that they are able to see a future, whereas in other circumstances people can’t understand what life means. And that’s the difference. So there has to be an internal creative motive, which seizes the soul, so to speak, of the individual, and then the individual would not want to do anything that befouls the goal of the action.
In other words, the question is, people will go out and try to be showmen; they try to be successful by inspiring people and uplifting them in some way or other. But on other hand, the real thing, is what does the individual,— in the process of directing the course of self-development,— what do they do in terms of the future of mankind? That’s what’s important. And therefore, the people who do good things,— and you have some people who do good things in part, but don’t do very well overall in terms of achievement. And it’s the overall improvement which is crucial. Many people have adaptations to these things, but they don’t have what we might call qualified, deep commitment to these beliefs. That’s what the difference is.
Subtle Things, Not Simple Things
Question: Hello Lyndon. I’ve been an avid follower of your work for years, and today I come with a complete proposal and wanted to share it with you. United National Anti-War Coalition and a number of other organizations have endorsed a protest in front of the United Nations in New York on Sunday, March 13. And the focus of the protest is going be both domestic and foreign policy issues that are so close to the ideas that the LaRouche PAC has been promoting for decades. It’s a protest against measures that would bring on World War III. It’s a protest against policies of confrontation with China and Russia; it’s a protest against bank deregulation and other financial measures that brought on the global financial crisis.
And so we’re trying to bring together different parts, from the left, the right, the entire political spectrum that’s opposed to the Democratic and Republican mainstream, that has brought this country to the crisis point at which it is right now. So, the question is what do you think about that idea, the idea of holding that protest?
LaRouche: Okay, let me give you a little anecdote on this thing. I’m acquainted,— I never personally spoke to him,— but I have been active with him in part of his career,— Putin. Now, Putin is a survivor from a set of families which were largely brutalized by the Nazis, when the Nazi fight was going on. And most of these people died, they were murdered, just by the process of the conditions. And what happened was, then you had Putin who developed himself with a mission orientation; and the mission orientation is centered in his awareness of his immediate family’s mass death in the household because of the Nazi fight. And he fought that course.
He has a dimension, which is what? The dimension is, for him,— India is important, China is much more important because of the awareness of this thing. The role of China in developing the space program, which was a development within my lifetime period of development. Now we have in this whole Eurasian area, from Russia, across Asia, and we have a development process now, which is a rich development, which is not limited to the experience of the people who are participating in that development. But that rather they are dedicated to the future of mankind, beyond their own lives, and the ability of their own lives. And the consistency is that Putin’s life,— because here he’s one of the survivors of that group in Russia in that period, when the Nazis were hitting so hard against that area,— and he came back at that, against the forces of evil, not just evil against him, but evil against mankind generally. And therefore the future of mankind is something which lies in what mankind can make as a creative contribution to the future of mankind; that is, to be devoted to the realization of something that mankind will not ever fully, accurately achieve in its own life.
And the whole purpose of mankind is the ability of mankind to make discoveries, which the discoverer will never fully harvest, but only the persons who are of that spirit of behavior will be able to deliver an example of what is necessary, for the future of mankind.
These are much more subtle things; they are not simple things. Just take this whole thing of Russia, just as an example. In this Russian case, the mass murder that occurred in Russia,— and it was mostly battlefield issues, if you know the history of the warfare in the Second World War in Russia, and you see that people gave massively, the very existence of their lives, and worked and were dedicated to the purpose of producing for the next generation which would be able to accomplish the missions which the present generations had failed to accomplish. It’s that passion which goes beyond explanations of technicalities and so forth. These are things I think are the most important things.