This article appears in the March 8, 2019 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
Messages of Condolence
On the Passing of Lyndon LaRouche
The following is a second selection from the large number of memorials and messages of condolence on the passing of Lyndon H. LaRouche, and of tribute to his life’s work, which continue to pour in from around the world. (Compiled as of March 3, 2019.)
I extend my deepest sympathies to the Schiller Institute and Helga. Please accept my condolences. With a heavy heart, I pray for the eternal repose of one who was a man of distinguished humanity.
Dear Mrs. LaRouche,
It was with big sorrow that I have learned the sad news about Mr. Lyndon H. LaRouche’s passing away. Indeed, he was a brilliant economist, a partisan of global justice and a valiant fighter against predatory behaviors of the global synarchy.
I feel very happy and honored to have met Mr. LaRouche personally, and listened to his insightful explication of European and global economic history. I was deeply impressed by his enthusiasm and sense of humor. Since then, his predictions about the U.S., the Western and the global economy have always been my favorite references.
Alas, the world has lost a brilliant mind.
Please, accept my sincere condolence, and extend it to members of the Schiller Institute.
I am convinced that you and your colleagues will continue Lyndon LaRouche’s great cause and fight against the predatory actions of the global synarchy.
I send you also the sincere condolence of Ambassador Mei Zhaorong, with whom you had friendly conversation in German at my institute.
I am saddened to hear of the passing of Lyndon H. LaRouche, the founder and inspirer of the Schiller Institute. Please accept my sincere condolences.
It was with a feeling of profound grief that we received news of the passing of a truly great American and worldwide philosopher, economist and politician Lyndon LaRouche. We mourn together with you and wish for a continuation of his great ideas in the works of his comrades and disciples. We are prepared, within the scope of our capabilities, to help you in continuing his cause. That will be the best commemoration of this great man.
Lyndon LaRouche has passed away. He was a partner of the Russian anti-globalists for many years, the author of fundamentally new theories of development of the world economy, and a man who not only criticized the existing economic system, but proposed interesting plans for a way out of the dead end into which Western civilization has fallen. In the Western press, and even in our RT, it is only mentioned that Mr. LaRouche repeatedly ran for President of the USA. Naturally they did not make clear that this was not out of ambition; all Americans understand quite well that candidates outside the mainstream have no chance in elections. But the economist was trying to draw the attention of society to the pointlessness of continuing to follow the road of the “brave new world” of globalization, something of which the entire world is now becoming convinced.
Taking individual fragments out of the context of their well-reasoned exposition, the mass media accuse Lyndon LaRouche of espousing what they see as “freak” notions about the “world government” and “the British royal family.” Yet there can no longer be any doubt about the existence of agencies of behind-the-scenes coordination of the interests of transnational corporations and of the nations they are tied up with—whether you wish to call it “world government,” deep state, the Trilaterals, or the Bilderberger Club. It is not to be excluded that we’ll learn something about the Windsors in the near future.
But what is the most delightful in the theories and statements of Lyndon LaRouche is less the decisive criticism of the existing world order, but the proposals for overcoming the dead end of globalization. In them are to be found magnificent transportation construction projects, which no longer seem so fantastical, in light of ideas from the PRC. And proposals for financial policy. And there are important initiatives in the realm of cultural development, which have been implemented primarily through the Schiller Institute, headed by Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche.
Mr. LaRouche took part in several of our conferences by Skype [or video], contributing a creative stream to the discussion of economic problems. And it should also be noted that Lyndon LaRouche was a true patriot of America, who fought for his country in the Second World War. Thanks to him and his young associates, many of our anti-globalists who were critical of official U.S. policy were able to see a different face of America, and they understood that they have many co-thinkers and comrades among the American people.
We offer deep sympathy to all the associates of the LaRouche Movement, above all deepest condolences to his widow, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, on the passing of this Leader, Teacher and Thinker.
Of Historian Andrei Fursov
Lyndon LaRouche Has Passed Away—A Man Who Foresaw Our Future
Lyndon LaRouche died not long ago. He was a philosopher, politician, a person with great knowledge, encyclopedic knowledge. LaRouche was a friend of Russia. He foresaw many things before they happened. He predicted the Russo-phobic aggression of the American elite and warned of its catastrophic consequences. For many years, right up to the present, LaRouche has forecast the inevitable onset of the global financial crisis, pointing to the growing gap between the volume of real production and that of financial speculation. He told us about the financial bubble, the one that right now is hanging over the world, threatening to bury all humanity under its shards. LaRouche revealed the hidden mechanisms of world politics behind the scenes, including its army of pseudo-progressive figures, who in reality are regressive types, transhumanists, lobbyists for drug legalization, propagandists of perversion, and so on. Today I would like to honor the memory of LaRouche and hear from you, Andrei Ilyich, as someone who knew LaRouche personally, a few words about him.
Andrei Fursov: First of all, we should offer condolences to his widow and his colleagues, for whom this is unquestionably a great loss. . . .
LaRouche ran for U.S. President several times, unsuccessfully, of course, but the most important thing is his contribution to scientific research and his creation of powerful analytical organizations. It is of great importance that LaRouche never feared to “go against the flow”; he was a strong person, and could do this.
In his ideological and scientific views, he was an opponent of globalization and always opposed the so-called post-industrial society. He was an extremely harsh critic of the British Empire, and in the conflicts taking place within the West, he acted as a supporter of industrial capital in its confrontation with finance capital. It should be noted that the entire history of the capitalist system over at least the past 200 years is a history of confrontation between finance and industrial capital. In the 19th century finance capital took the upper hand; in the first three-quarters of the 20th century industrial capital was able to take revenge; but beginning in the 1970s finance capital abruptly began to strengthen again and, together with the corporatocracy, it crushed industrial capital.
LaRouche always advocated what he called “physical economy,” that is, the real economy. He understood perfectly well that financialized capitalism is parasitical, predatory capitalism.
LaRouche proceeded from the position that there is a need for an alliance between the United States of America, Russia, China and India. I personally think that this idea is fairly utopian because these four countries are too large to form some kind of an alliance in peacetime. But what’s very important is that his standpoint was always one of non-confrontational relations among these countries. . . .
It is very important that LaRouche dealt with the real mechanisms and levels of power in the West. He analyzed the hidden codes of the Western power system. Therefore, he was often accused of promoting a conspiracy theory. But such accusations are a hobby of those who either don’t want to look at things as they really are or, to the contrary, know the reality well, but try to hide it. LaRouche’s organization issued a weekly journal, Executive Intelligence Review, which published a lot of material on this topic.
LaRouche and his colleagues were not afraid of releasing the book Dope, Inc., which dealt with how the upper echelons of the British elite, and part of the American, are involved in the drug trade. In 1989, it was for this, and not for tax evasion, as stated in the official charges, that he was sentenced to fifteen years in prison. Although he did not serve this entire term, he did spend five or six years behind bars.
I met LaRouche in person in 2013 at a conference near Frankfurt, where we had very interesting discussions. Then I visited him and his wife, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, at home. He was, of course, a very interesting and well-informed person. . .
In principle, I think that LaRouche was sympathetic, despite making criticisms, towards much of what Trump is doing today, because America’s course towards independence, towards breaking or weakening ties with the British establishment, and towards making America great again, I think that LaRouche would embrace.
In conclusion, Lyndon LaRouche was certainly a very interesting phenomenon in Western political and intellectual life. He revealed many things to Western readers, at least to those who were ready and willing to think. LaRouche was popular in Russia as well. He was in contact with very interesting people, such as [the late Prof. Grigory] Bondarevsky, with whom he discussed the Silk Road concept and the idea of physical economy.
Many people in Russia were, if not his followers, then allies who sympathized with him. I think therefore that many of LaRouche’s ideas, both physical economy and the railway integration of Eurasia, belong not to the past, but to the present and the future.
Back in the 1990s, LaRouche anticipated and forecast many trends that seemed impossible in those years. And now we see these trends making their way. This prognostic power of LaRouche’s concept and works establishes him as a serious thinker.
I think that the study of LaRouche’s ideas and legacy is a very important task. And finally, I think that we should rejoice that we had as our contemporary a person like Lyndon LaRouche.
Unfortunately I learned about the death of Lyndon LaRouche with some tardiness. I mourn together with you. Lyn will go down in history as a unique public figure on a world scale. I consider it an honor that I was able to some extent to assist in the dissemination of LaRouche’s ideas in Russia, as well as to introduce this extraordinary personality to readers in my country through my extensive interview with Lyn and thanks to the unforgettable experience of meeting this outstanding man. I am grateful for that.
Please convey my condolences to Helga and all of LaRouche’s associates whom I know. May he rest in peace, and God rest his soul.
Lyndon LaRouche, Friend of Russia, Has Passed Away
Published Feb. 16, 2019, on the website For the Revival of Russian Science.
This is immeasurably sad news!
Lyndon LaRouche and his colleagues have been known since the 1970s as fearless and consistent fighters for the establishment of a truly just political and economic international order, for building productive national economies and sovereign nation-states, and against the reign of speculative capital on a national and world scale.
L. LaRouche was an irreconcilable enemy of “finance capital,” who mercilessly exposed the subversive activity of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the international financial speculators and adventurists, for which he and his supporters were politically persecuted and served lengthy prison sentences. The Soviet press, unfortunately, contributed to the slanders.
From the very beginning of the 1990s on, he insistently and repeatedly warned the scientists, public figures, and officials in Russia about the catastrophic consequences of “liberal economic reforms,” and proposed alternative approaches. He repeatedly visited our country during that time. His ideas were blacked out on the official level in Russia, right up into the mid-2000s, but the reception he met with in our academic circles and the patriotic media was better.
He believed in the ability of humanity, united, to solve any and all global problems. He believed that the accord between leading powers of the world, necessary for that, was achievable, and he worked for it tirelessly to the very end.
Lyndon LaRouche was a great and long-standing friend of our country. He highly valued Russia’s aid to the USA in the American people’s struggle for independence from Great Britain, and viewed the USSR’s contribution to victory over fascism as having been decisive and the role of Russia today in maintaining global equilibrium and stability to be irreplaceable.
He was a man with extremely broad intellectual horizons and the greatest nobility, being a visionary and a realist simultaneously.
One of the greatest qualities of L. LaRouche, worthy of being imitated by anybody was his ability to preserve, even in the darkest times, his faith in the inevitability of changes for the better and his preparedness for such changes. His eternal optimism was unfeigned and infectious.
For the U.S. political elite, the departure of such a person as L. LaRouche is a national tragedy, although the greater part of that elite, because of criminal myopia and obtuseness, is hardly in a condition today even to realize that fact.
It is sad that such people do not live forever. But the cause and the works of L. LaRouche, in one way or another, are destined to live forever, because, as a true patriot of the USA he worked for a better future of his country and for people throughout the world. He worked honestly, with talent, and with joy, and spared no effort.
My sincere condolences to the family, friends, and co-thinkers of Lyndon LaRouche.
I’m very sorry to hear this. . .! Our condolences to the family. This is a great loss for us, as Russian economists who supported him. We are mourning.
Please convey my deepest condolences to Helga, and tell her that I remain a true friend and a follower of our common cause.
Remarks made on the Feb. 23, 2019, “Cara a Cara” TV program
In homage to Lyndon LaRouche, hosted by Rafael Reyes Jerez
By Ramón Emilio Concepción and Dr. Marino Elsevyf
Lyndon H. LaRouche has been for me, in politics, in ideas, in humanism, in philosophy, in poetry, in all of that, he was above all a statesman, a precursor, and a man dedicated to the worth of all human beings. People like him become immortal; they ensure their immortality with the works they perform.
Lyndon LaRouche said that human beings are born as little angels, made in the image and likeness of the Creator. He was a man who for some 60 years or more, perhaps for 70 years dedicated his life to the benefit of mankind, and the quality of life of human beings around the world. With him I learned to begin to study the great contribution he made on the New Silk Road, which China is now carrying out. He and his wife Doña Helga were the precursors. We speak, for example, about a New Bretton Woods agreement that they proposed; we speak about the integration of the world through infrastructure, which China is carrying out; in fact all of these ideas were the ideas of Lyndon LaRouche, which we began to know when we were young.
Lyndon, in my view, was a great man for all humanity; he achieved the status of genius, he was of enormous value to us. He helped us students unmask the lies of the neoliberals, especially those of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Thomas Malthus and Keynes—all of those people who, in different ways, have worked for unbridled globalism—as opposed to the national development school which we learned about through the Schiller Institute, founded by Lyndon’s wife, Doña Helga. We really learned how nations are built. I remember the first time that I had the opportunity to read “Economy and Society,” a book written by Leibniz in 1651, that shows that economics and morality can go hand in hand. Because the neo-liberals say that in economics there is no room for morality. With Leibniz, through LaRouche, we discovered that in 1651 Leibniz was already stating that economics and morality go hand in hand, that they can work for the benefit of mankind. . . .
What is dangerous today, which LaRouche also discussed, is that a war at this time would not be a conventional war, but rather a thermonuclear war which would ensure the annihilation of almost two thirds of humanity. That is why we are opposed to every kind of confrontation that could lead to a world war. We may have differences with another State, but to therefore intervene and provoke what could become a clash among the United States, Russia, China Germany—this could unleash Armageddon, fulfilling the dream of those evil people who would like to reduce the population. Remember that Thomas Malthus, an economist on the payroll of the British East India Company, like Adam Smith and David Ricardo, called for eliminating the poor. If there are no wars, if there are no plagues, then create them! Foster war! Don’t build houses for the poor, let them live in swamps so that they are bitten by mosquitos and die!. . .
This was not an easy fight [for LaRouche], because the great American power—not the political powers, but the financial powers—sent LaRouche to prison, because at a certain point he became a very important person vis-à-vis the Reagan administration. During the so-called Cold War confrontation—that British invention—he proposed the famous national security shield [Strategic Defense Initiative]. And he became very important in the Ronald Reagan government. They then fabricated a way to send him to prison, and they sent him to prison. He spent five years in prison, but even that didn’t lessen his strength of character, his will to keep working on behalf of humanity.
And today, although it is true that he is no longer in this jurisdiction where we are, he is a man who has left a formidable legacy for the benefit of mankind. And he has left a group of men spread around the world; and we have understood his ideas, we have studied his ideas, and we became convinced of the value of his idea, and we are his continuers.
I met Lyndon LaRouche in 1985 in Boston, at a very interesting conference, and the wisdom of his proposals captivated me. This led me to follow him through the Schiller Institute. What really moved me were his explanations about the causes for the world to be in crisis, what are the structural reasons for it. LaRouche made forecasts of what the financial collapse would be, and those forecasts came about! Not immediately, but they came about. Then in 2008 we saw the collapse of U.S. society and the multinational banks, the trans-Atlantic banks as he called them, where there was a systemic crash. Of course, as people said at the time, the crash was so great that it could not be recognized as such, and the State had to intervene, and the neoliberal postulates that private individuals could carry out business activities according to the free market, were defeated by that 2008 crisis.
Of course, LaRouche had in his ideology and thinking a Platonic concept of how to exercise power, which was contrary to the Aristotelian view that elite groups run our affairs, our knowledge, and transfer of technology. He understood that a developed world was the only solution for the betterment of humanity. He often referred to the phrase that “development is the new name of peace,” of Paul VI; he employed the concepts of “savage capitalism” of John Paul II; he established clear and precise parameters that only cooperation among States could bring about the true development of mankind. He posed from the outset what today mankind is seeing as the New Silk Road of Marco Polo, which the Chinese today are carrying out with a new route and a new market for humanity; with the idea of “win-win”, as China’s leader Xi Jinping has stated. Only with cooperation among States can there be transfer of technology which encourages development, and which also brings it about. Asia, for example, is developing, linking up Siberia with a connection towards China, and new labor markets are being created and the condition of mankind is being bettered. . . .
LaRouche proposed as an answer to the systemic breakdown the employment of a new law, which is already an old one in the United States, the Glass-Steagall law, which is the basis for creating two kinds of loans: one, for development lending, with low interest rates and which can be repaid; and the other for capital markets with a different kind of regulation which would not be out of control and lead to the bankruptcy of the system, as has occurred in the past, such as in 2008, specifically, with the bankruptcy of what were called sub-prime mortgages in the U.S., which was really a house of cards which collapsed on the U.S. economy. . . .
I was part of the Martin Luther King Tribunal in Washington, D.C. [seeking justice in the case of Lyndon LaRouche], which was set up along with Ramsey Clark, who had been the U.S. Attorney General under Lyndon Johnson. And I had the opportunity, as the only Latin American member who participated in that trial, where it became totally clear that there had been political persecution in the case of Lyndon LaRouche in 1988 in the Alexandria, Virginia court, where they persecuted and then jailed LaRouche over tax matters—which, it should be noted, LaRouche recently denounced as what is going on with the current President, Donald Trump, that it is [the networks involved in] the Alexandria trial that are trying to go after him because of alleged ties to Russia, on the basis of manipulation of investigations carried out. That’s what happened with Lyndon LaRouche: groups carried out investigations which were used to present false charges, to manipulate the threads of justice, precisely in Alexandria. And he warned recently that President Donald Trump should beware of the same machinery that was used to take him to trial on the basis of such manipulations, using the Alexandria court for political persecution. These are the real powers that be in the United States.
LaRouche provided unequivocal proof to that hearing that his was a case of political persecution. And that the manipulation of alleged interest charges related to taxes was merely a far-fetched invention in order to send him to jail.
After LaRouche was released from prison he ran in the Democratic Party, and I also had the opportunity, along with Amelia Boynton Robinson—that great fighter for civil and political rights, along with John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King—to observe the primary elections of the Democratic Party. . . .
You know, LaRouche was not only a candidate; he also had a whole worldview, because he was a man of science, he was a scientist, a mathematician, a philosopher, and he had extraordinary knowledge of history and he loved music. For example, I learned from him that human beings have a tuning of their voices that is below A-440, which is now used by nearly all musicians. . . .
LaRouche’s proposal for a New Silk Road has been taken up and is part of international policy. In Latin America, for example, the proposal for a bi-oceanic connection that has been proposed to go through part of Peru, and Brazil, and Bolivia; and what they are trying to do in Panama, to connect all of Latin America—these are all part of the plans going back to the great American Presidents at the end of the 1800s, and which LaRouche has revived as an indicator of development and land communication to make human beings viable in society . . .
Fundamentally, doing politics means to do the Good; doing politics means involving all human beings. Because the fundamental idea of LaRouche is that we are all equal, made in the image and likeness of God.
We are deeply saddened at the passing of Lyndon LaRouche. Please convey our condolences to Frau Helga. A great humanist, thinker, and fighter for the rights of the people has departed this life. Mankind has suffered an irreparable loss. I am happy that I was destined to work side by side with such a man. His ideas and his works will remain forever. We mourn his death together with those close to him.
Great loss for all of us who knew him and followed his philosophy. My condolences to everybody.
At the end of the 1980s, Emanuele Levi, a friend of my father and a trade unionist with quite radical ideas in monetary matters, with whom I had already published a book entitled Currency in the Service of Man, wanted to introduce me to Father Amos Spiazzi, the spiritual advisor of many political figures.
At the end of a long and intense conversation on the economy, Father Spiazzi put a book into my hands, saying: “Perhaps you are the only one who can tell me whether it is sound or unfounded.” It was The Science of Christian Economy by Lyndon LaRouche, an author whom I did not know directly. On the cover was Brunelleschi’s cupola in Florence.
I started to read it somewhat skeptically, but soon I became convinced that it was a revolutionary work, a convincing and deeply scientific one.
My thought went to my teacher Federico Caffe, whom I had lost shortly before; in his case as well, I had first known him through his writings and then personally.
I reported to Father Spiazzi about the beautiful discovery, enriched by the fact that higher dimensions of mathematics and geometry opened very interesting perspectives for macroeconomics; Father Spiazzi told me that he would act accordingly, but I never heard about the follow-up.
But a few years later, I had the opportunity to meet Lyndon LaRouche on the occasion of an event in Rome. From then on, an over-two-decades-long collaboration began, with mutual sympathy in shared battles.
During those 25 years, we met many times at events and conferences which I organized in Italy and which he, his wife Helga and other activists organized in various European, North-American and Middle East localities.
We had very amusing and interesting convivial occasions with my father and my mother, during which Helga, Lyn and we shared analyses, evaluations and projects.
On several occasions, our common friend Amelia Robinson was a guest at my house; she got to know my three children, she entertained us with her emotional spirituals, and was able to appreciate our cuisine and sweet red wine, which she preferred the most.
For many young people (and I include myself among them, being 30 years younger than him), Lyn has been a benchmark, first of all in terms of social commitment, and secondly for his teachings that unite science, art, politics, economy and real human sentiments.
Since in the 1990s, I found myself having to deal with the Italian followers of Michael Novak, in what was then the Popular Party—at precisely the time that my father had made the unfortunate decision to leave Italian politics—the friendship with LaRouche and the study of his political and economic ideas were very helpful and comforting for me. I believe that Novak and LaRouche are the perfect representatives of current thinking in the United States. On the one hand Novak, the failure of free market economics; and on the other, Lyndon, the possibility of a planetary revival through new agreements on monetary and financial problems, and the creation of large-scale infrastructure networks which connect Asia and Africa, passing through Europe; the Bering Strait bridge, or tunnel; the magnetically-levitated train along the southern part of Siberia, Eastern Europe and Italy, down to the Messina bridge and the tunnel which will connect Sicily and Tunisia.
The free traders and monetarists limit those perspectives based on the existence of available resources; but we say that such resources exist by transforming the current dangerous short-term speculative financial flows into long-term, low-interest bonds, to provide the necessary resources for the programs to relaunch the global economy. Lyndon has continued to point the youth in this direction, concerning the feasibility of agreements, such as the New Bretton Woods, which would open economic and social perspectives that are very different than the financial bankruptcy created by inept governments and the so-called Poteri Forti (vested interests) which, starting in the 1970s, have taken hold of almost all the control levers, but who have shown that they are unable to manage industrial systems and civil life.
My thoughts go to Lyndon and to persons who were better than me: Mattei, Moro, Falcone, Borsellino and all the others who have been in the heart and memory of people like Lyndon LaRouche and my parents.
It is unfortunately seven days late that the sad news of the death of your great inspirer and leader Lyndon LaRouche, reached me. Even though it was to be expected seeing his great age, it provoked in me a great sadness and regret. To you, to Jacques [Cheminade], to Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche and to all my friends of the Schiller Institute, I wish you, on this painful occasion, my sincere condolences. But also the expression of my unbreakable certitude that the great man who just disappeared will not stop inspiring in times to come, beyond yourselves, those militants throughout the world, fighting for dignity of men and peoples.
Dear Helga Zepp-LaRouche and dear fellow humanitarians of the Schiller Institute,
Please accept my sincere condolences on the passing of Lyndon LaRouche, a universal, global thinker, progressive and wise internationalist scholar, who dedicated all his noble activity to the triumph of the highest social and political ideals of justice, mutual understanding, and moral and ethical integrity in international and interethnic relations.
May his bold scientific-secular and political-economic ideas and projects serve as a reliable platform for the rebirth of civilized, mutually beneficial, and fair relations among all the countries and peoples of the world!
With best wishes of enthusiasm and the continuity of LaRouche’s scientifically progressive legacy, to be passed on to all his progressive humanitarian colleagues.
I am so very sorry! Sincere condolences to all. Continue his work! We shall remember!