Well, Jerome's comment saying "they deny the role of class struggle in history" gives it away. Jerome is probably from some branch of Marxist Socialism, because these are the words they use. But so was Lyndon LaRouche; he also got his start as a Socialist labor organizer, and continued to believe in class struggle but went down an alternate path, bringing in energy density and more metaphysical ideas. What you have to understand is that non-LaRouchean Leftists hate LaRoucheans. Think of it like Religion; in Christianity you got Protestantism and Catholicism and in Islam you got Sunni'ism and Shia'ism, and oftentimes they will go to war with each other. They both believe that Jesus is the Son of God or that Muhammad was the ultimate prophet, but they hang on different facets of said religion, and those facets become their focal point for why the other faction is "bad" and why they got to hate that other faction.
LaRoucheanism is a branch of Leftism that oftentimes sounds superficially like Alex Jones (but its ultimate end is completely different). And other Leftists often hate LaRoucheans because of this analysis of symbolism and the occult. As a person sympathetic to the LaRouche side of Leftism myself, I understand the reason for looking at the occult. But it is like a religious war, sibling rivalry. Mainstream Marxists, (or should I say "Orthodox Marxists?") prefer to stick to the strict material, class struggle issue only, whereas LaRoucheans like to go about the class struggle idea in a more roundabout way, bringing in more elements. But I'd say probably that the main focus of LaRoucheans is about energy density and scarcity versus abundance. Which...if you want to have a socialist society upholding the maxim: "From Each According to His Ability to Each According To His Need" you NEED energy abundance to do manufacturing and to maintain an economy. LaRouche figured out that Energy Abundance was key, and once he figured that out he looked for who is the greatest force and power holding back abundance worldwide. And that happened to be the British Empire, and that network of think tanks, corporations, and experts educated in the inner halls of imperial academia such as Rhodes Scholars, Cambridge Apostles, and so on. LaRouche went to war with Bertrand Russell and H.G. Wells. La Rouche was a brilliant man, the Colbert or Leibnitz, or Benjamin Franklin of our day.
This piece is absurd. Go back to the LaRouche crowd, Matthew. That's where you belong
Exactly what about Matthew's piece is absurd?
What is it about LaRouche's work and his "crowd" that you find distasteful?
Who is "LaRouche's crowd"? Is it the same as Alex Jones's "crowd"?
Please flesh out your ideas. As it stands, your comment is a dismissive "floater", with no coherent roots, a balloon stuck to the ceiling.
Well, Jerome's comment saying "they deny the role of class struggle in history" gives it away. Jerome is probably from some branch of Marxist Socialism, because these are the words they use. But so was Lyndon LaRouche; he also got his start as a Socialist labor organizer, and continued to believe in class struggle but went down an alternate path, bringing in energy density and more metaphysical ideas. What you have to understand is that non-LaRouchean Leftists hate LaRoucheans. Think of it like Religion; in Christianity you got Protestantism and Catholicism and in Islam you got Sunni'ism and Shia'ism, and oftentimes they will go to war with each other. They both believe that Jesus is the Son of God or that Muhammad was the ultimate prophet, but they hang on different facets of said religion, and those facets become their focal point for why the other faction is "bad" and why they got to hate that other faction.
LaRoucheanism is a branch of Leftism that oftentimes sounds superficially like Alex Jones (but its ultimate end is completely different). And other Leftists often hate LaRoucheans because of this analysis of symbolism and the occult. As a person sympathetic to the LaRouche side of Leftism myself, I understand the reason for looking at the occult. But it is like a religious war, sibling rivalry. Mainstream Marxists, (or should I say "Orthodox Marxists?") prefer to stick to the strict material, class struggle issue only, whereas LaRoucheans like to go about the class struggle idea in a more roundabout way, bringing in more elements. But I'd say probably that the main focus of LaRoucheans is about energy density and scarcity versus abundance. Which...if you want to have a socialist society upholding the maxim: "From Each According to His Ability to Each According To His Need" you NEED energy abundance to do manufacturing and to maintain an economy. LaRouche figured out that Energy Abundance was key, and once he figured that out he looked for who is the greatest force and power holding back abundance worldwide. And that happened to be the British Empire, and that network of think tanks, corporations, and experts educated in the inner halls of imperial academia such as Rhodes Scholars, Cambridge Apostles, and so on. LaRouche went to war with Bertrand Russell and H.G. Wells. La Rouche was a brilliant man, the Colbert or Leibnitz, or Benjamin Franklin of our day.