Subscribe to EIR Online
This article appears in the May 12, 2006 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

LaRouche Youth to California Dems:
Don't Go Down With Rohatyn!

by Harley Schlanger and Aaron Halevy

The LaRouche Youth Movement (LYM), which was born in California during the 2000 Presidential campaign, has emerged as a growing force in the state Democratic Party, as was evident when more than 2,000 delegates convened in Sacramento on April 28. It is not due solely to numerical strength, although there were more than 150 LYM members attending the convention, out of which at least a dozen were themselves delegates, and many more have become active members of, and participants in, the various party caucuses.

What the LYM provides the party is an intellectual force, which is vital if the Democrats wish to capitalize on the ongoing free-fall of the Bush Administration, to win back the House of Representatives and the Senate this fall, as well as to remove the Shultzian fascist Arnold Schwarzenegger from the office of Governor of California.

The LaRouche Youth deployment was centered on the battle to bring the party back to the legacy of Franklin Roosevelt. Highlighting the theme of Lyndon LaRouche's April 27 webcast—that the post-Greenspan era is characterized by an exploding hyperinflation in commodities, which threatens to blow out the world financial system—the LYM members insisted that adopting LaRouche's anti-Depression, FDR-style program, of Federal credit for infrastructure, combined with bankruptcy reorganization, will rally the party faithful and inspire millions of new voters to step forward.

Instead, the timidity and pragmatism displayed by many party leaders in Sacramento, combined with the prominent role played by Felix Rohatyn's Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), which is attempting to impose its "Bush-lite" agenda, means that, as unpopular as the Bush-Cheney-Schwarzenegger trio has become, the Democrats could still blow the 2006 elections.

For that reason, the deployment of the LYM at the convention and into November, represents the best hope for the millions of Americans who have suffered under the present corrupt and immoral Cheney-Bush regime, that there will be a change in the Democratic Party, which will guarantee a landslide in the midterm elections.

The Two Faces of the Dems

Many Democrats, both rank-and-filers, and party leaders and candidates, were wide open to engaging in dialogue with LYM organizers, who represent the living presence of FDR. The LYM brought this to the convention, both at the booth of the Franklin Roosevelt Legacy Club, which was recently accredited by the Los Angeles Democratic Party Central Committee, and through the mass distribution of the "Prolegomena for a Party Platform: The Legacy of Franklin Roosevelt," drafted by Lyndon LaRouche. The open discussion of FDR's policies represents a marked contrast to past Democratic Party conventions, at which the memory of FDR was largely ignored.

However, with the exception of a reference to reviving the FDR tradition by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, at a Women's Caucus meeting, and a more substantive call to return to FDR by former Sen. Max Cleland of Georgia, it was the LYM spokesmen who brought this tradition back to life. LYM representatives who addressed caucuses—among them, the African-American, Asian and Pacific Islands, Filipino, and the Veterans' caucuses—spoke of the importance of not simply referring to FDR, but of rallying the population to a new, updated set of policies, which apply the economic method he used to beat the Depression in the 1930s.

The LYM speakers at these caucuses also identified how the Democratic Party has turned its back on FDR, by joining the Republicans in supporting the modern form of neo-feudalism—globalization, free trade, and deregulation—which has wrecked our nation's once-productive manufacturing base and family farms. They pointed to the role of the so-called "New Democrats" of the DLC, now under the policy direction of Wall Street Synarchist Rohatyn, who has joined with his old pal George Shultz, to promote a radical restructuring of the global economy, based on privatization and the destruction of the nation-state.

While many delegates expressed concerns about free trade and globalization, very few have considered making rejection of these policies a key demand of the party platform.

Felix and Shultz, Together Again

To back up this point, the LYM distributed large numbers of the LaRouche PAC pamphlet, "Stop the Shultz-Rohatyn Cabal Behind Halliburton's War," and briefed delegates on Rohatyn's recent statement at a forum in Washington, D.C., that FDR is no longer a viable option for Democrats!

Although most Democrats claimed to know little of Rohatyn directly, it is clear they have been affected by his, and the DLC's sophistry; and that they have also been bought off by his promises of Wall Street money, if they reject the Roosevelt legacy. This was evident in the vacuous "New Economy" rhetoric of former eBay executive Steve Westly, who is currently ahead in the polls in the battle for the Democratic Party nomination for governor: Westly's idea of infrastructure is the "wired economy," through expanded use of broadband "technology."

His opponent, State Treasurer Phil Angelides, has his own Rohatyn connection, despite his rhetorical allegiance to the FDR tradition. In 2002, he joined with Rohatyn to promote the use of state employee pension funds for infrastructure investment. This is a key part of Rohatyn's deceptive attack on FDR, as he claims that Federal credit is no longer necessary to fund infrastructure projects, since there is so much money available in public funds, such as pensions, and private funds, such as unregulated hedge funds. His hidden agenda in this is the same as Shultz's, who crafted a phony infrastructure plan for Schwarzenegger.

Under the Shultz-Rohatyn Chile model—which was first implemented during their collaboration as the controllers of the fascist Pinochet dictatorship—public pension funds will be looted to build the projects. Then, when the state cannot afford to pay back the bonds, the projects will be privatized, with the public gouged by high tolls and user fees, paid to the private owners.

By the end of the convention, the warning from LaRouche to the Democrats had been hammered home by the LYM: If the Democrats stick with Rohatyn, they will go down with Rohatyn. This registered with leading supporters of Angelides, who requested follow-up discussions with representatives of the LYM. Angelides won the party's official endorsement at the convention, with more than 60% of the delegates' votes.

The Stench of Pragmatism

The deeper problem for the party, which is reflected in the addiction to Rohatyn's Wall Street money and the failure to even acknowledge the cascading economic and financial crisis, is seen in the "pragmatic" approach to the 2006 elections. This is not limited to California, but has been crippling the party nationally, especially since the failure to stop the nomination to the Supreme Court of Judge Samuel Alito—an avowed follower of the doctrines of the chief Nazi jurist, Carl Schmitt.

Some leading Democrats have been saying that there is no reason, at present, to put forward a serious platform. Instead, the strategy should be to get out of the way of the "train wreck" which is the Bush Administration, and pick up the pieces later. LaRouche has compared this to the "first Hitler, then us" approach adopted by the Social Democratic Party in Germany in 1933, which refrained from combatting Hitler, with the absurd justification that he would be so disastrous, that the voters would reject the Nazis and turn to them.

The Democrats should have learned, from the 2004 campaign, that the dangerous idiocy of the first four years of the Cheney-Bush Administration did not assure that voters would rally to an "anti-Bush" campaign, but required something more—a program to reverse the economic crisis and the threat of new wars.

For some California Democrats, there is a naïve belief that the state is "true blue." Those holding this view believe that the Schwarzenegger election was an anomaly. They seem to have forgotten that Bill Clinton was the first Democrat to win California since Lyndon Johnson in 1964, and that Gray Davis was the first Democrat in 16 years to be elected governor.

The failure of the Democrats to capitalize on the dramatic defeat administered to Schwarzenegger last November, when every one of his pet initiatives were rejected, decisively, by the voters—in a campaign in which the LYM played a crucial role—has enabled Shultz's Golem to regain his footing. He outflanked the Democrats by offering a phony infrastructure plan, funded by an elaborate scheme based on increasing the state's indebtedness, a scheme which has the fingerprints of Shultz and his old crony Rohatyn all over it.

Democrats can point to "recent demographic trends" which seem to favor the Democratic Party, but trends do not bring out voters; energetic, passionate activists, with a program to advance the general welfare, are needed to mobilize a demoralized population in a time of profound crisis. This is why the LYM is growing, both in size and influence. In preparation for the convention in Sacramento, LYM members held a weekend cadre school (see accompanying article) and a "Week of Action" in the San Francisco Bay area, to develop the qualities necessary for a sweep in 2006.

It is clear that many Democrats are listening to what their youthful colleagues in the LYM are saying. Now, it is up to them to embrace the bold historic mission that the LYM is bringing to the Party.

Back to top