Every so often, I receive an email from someone or other criticizing me for promoting the ideas of the late American economist Lyndon H. LaRouche (1923-2019). I understand where these critiques come from as there is a massive amount of gossipy slander, and over 5 decades of coordinated character assassination built atop the man, and that level of propaganda will obviously have an effect.
Growing up I never ever heard a good word about LaRouche. Thanks for peeling another ignorance scab off my brain. Always appreciate your insight/knowledge/slant on under appreciated history. Cheers!
I witnessed this speech in 1999; it was the same year Vladimir Putin became Prime Minister of Russia, and without a doubt he took LaRouche to heart, (as witnessed by the vitalization of Russia’s Industrial Economy), as did China and the Global Majority, as witnessed by the emergence of BRICS+, SCO, EAEU, and the BRI , (which in essence, LaRouche’s Economic Policy objectives via a New Silk Road-World Land bridge). The collective west ignored, slandered, and imprisoned the greatest economist 20th Century at their own peril, and the world continues to suffer the horrendous consequences of continuous wars, societal-cultural decline and economic disintegration to this day. May the “Special Military Operation” objectives of demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine be extended to NATO and the collective west as well; for the sake of humankind.
Omg I could go on about this! In NYC 30yrs (from Veneto region, my Substack name is inspired by the insights I got from reading the EIR for yrs) and my closest friend is a boomer native New Yorker whose reaction to me bringing up the name LaRouche is so exaggerated and disproportionate that it never ends astonishing me. For my 75yo CCNY educated Jewish friend who self describes as evermore Left as he ages he's become one of the (many and constantly growing too) unmentionable names when visiting him at his house. His house his rules as he says to justify his approach to conversation. As a never ever voted guy (growing up in Padova, Italy in the middle of Strategy of Tension, where both Franco Freda AND Antonio Negri came from I got hip to the OG Deep State of the modern world and realized it hardly matters, so..) wonder 'If that's a liberal' and think about the famous Black Panther comment about scratching a lib and would like to ask him what he thought of Ramsey Clark. If he thought he was a stand up guy then how does he explain Mr Clark's comments on the LaRouche movement, that he believed that
"it involves a broader range of deliberate and systematic misconduct and abuse of power over a longer period of time in an effort to destroy a political movement and leader, than any other federal prosecution in my time or to my knowledge" ? I can predict my friend's reaction to that by now and it's just so sad
So LaRouche is where you get some of your uncommon wisdom. I attended some campaign rallies for him in 1992, even though I was Republican. His enthusiastic progressiveness, in the finest sense of the word, represents the true ideals of the Democrats before the commies stole their party from them. In 1992, his campaign published "The Franklin Cover-Up," which was too horrible to be true. Now that child abuse by elites is coming out more and more, and I am seeing it all over the place. Substantial swathes of the public are beginning to face it.
While the Storm over Asia (LaRoche Storm over Asia. “https://youtu.be/-695NtUNSII”) has some very good historical information, it get's a lot right about the lies told as the history of the 20th century, but it gets some big things wrong, particularly his conclusions. With the incredible build up to a crescendo, I was very disappointed with the Space Race proposal. I see that as just another Military/Industrial/Government Complex expensive boondoggle that will make contractors rich will not really addressing some of the core problems he outlines.
Historical inaccuracies include:
1. Bill Clinton was Deep State all the way. Studying under Global Elite Cheerleader Carroll Quigley ("Tragedy and Hope" and "the Anglo-American Establishment") "In 1991, Clinton named Quigley as an important influence on his aspirations and political philosophy, when Clinton launched his presidential campaign in a speech at Georgetown.[1]: 96 " Wikipedia
2. Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, "Quigley greatly admired the British Empire and lamented that the secret society was not very successful. Historian Robert Rotberg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Rotberg) states:
"But Quigley was not opposed to what Rhodes and Milner had purportedly tried to accomplish. Indeed, Quigley wrote more in remorse at what had failed than in antagonism to what he believed were their mutual efforts at extending the British Empire,"[26]. The society consisted of an inner circle ("The Society of the Elect") and an outer circle ("The Association of Helpers", also known as The Milner Kindergarten and the Round Table Group (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Round_Table_movement)"
3. While the movie refers to the British Royalty as the driver of much evil like WW1 and WW2, although they were important players, the main show was run by the Milner Group (Cecil Rhodes was a founder) so loved above. This group, in alliances with others, would cause the WW's and create a lot of other internationalist (The Round Table, CFR, etc.) Elitists groups. Much like the WEF is today.
4. Given the time of the speech, LL's denigrating the Clinton impeachment and neglecting to fully explain the Milner Group connection, it looks an awful lot like he was covering up Clinton's Global Elite Deep State ties.
5. LBJ was a warmonger of the first order. Whether successfully lying us into the Vietnam War with the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, trying to lie us into the 1967 M.E. war by denying the Israeli murder of US sailors on the USS Liberty, or LBJ knowing in advance about JFK's assassination and orchestrating its cover up with Allen Dulles in charge of the investigation, LBJ was the worst of the worst war mongers.
LL must have know about both of those events. It would have been very much in line with his desire to beat the traditional Democrat Party to highlight both of those so it is particularly odd he doesn't hit those issues harder. ( I did miss some minutes in the middle of the video that might have added additional nuances I missed, but LL later summaries directly make the cover ups mentioned above correct.)
Thanks for the video. Very informative. Things are proceeding to his defined plan to destroy America. The current derivatives markets and ongoing Federal deficits make his graphs look good.
Thanks Matt for the LaRouche video. What he said wasn't deep but it made sense. I have come to the conclusion that deep usually means deception. I hope you take the time to actually read An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Also actually read Kropotkin and Bakunin rather than the neo-liberal propaganda about what they said. You said you mis-judged LaRouche because you listened to his antagonists until you actually listened to what he said.
Appreciate hearing this. Many solid principles and interesting and positive views on foreign policy and international relations. These would all be great and wonderful if people had an inherent will to work together towards such positive principles and ideals (which they mostly don’t have given the oligarchical history of the insatiable thirst for $$ and power throughout human history). Near the end of the 2hrs when he gets into conquering the powers of space beyond our planet, Larouche seems to get wildly out of touch — seriously, if we can’t afford to or find the sincere will to fix our daily issues on the planet, and we’re messing it up more than “big time” into the 21st c., how can we possibly expect to solve galactic challenges into the future? The desire to play ‘god’ with nature on earth and to propose we could fix things in the endless universe beyond, is naive at best, and egotistical at worst. This has spelled trouble for mankind from the beginning…and it always will.
I listened to talk radio late at night as a tweener and remember his work being discussed. He was often scoffed at as “kook fringe,” as the Wikipedia spooks continue to relate on his page. I was left with a negative impression of the name, but today understand him as another effective critic who was unduly and severely persecuted by our overlords, since all the “Crazy Eddies” are in charge.
Growing up I never ever heard a good word about LaRouche. Thanks for peeling another ignorance scab off my brain. Always appreciate your insight/knowledge/slant on under appreciated history. Cheers!
A most excellent post Matt. It's an easy share (8 mins.) with the hopes everyone wants to see more of the video. I look forward to the rest! Thks
I witnessed this speech in 1999; it was the same year Vladimir Putin became Prime Minister of Russia, and without a doubt he took LaRouche to heart, (as witnessed by the vitalization of Russia’s Industrial Economy), as did China and the Global Majority, as witnessed by the emergence of BRICS+, SCO, EAEU, and the BRI , (which in essence, LaRouche’s Economic Policy objectives via a New Silk Road-World Land bridge). The collective west ignored, slandered, and imprisoned the greatest economist 20th Century at their own peril, and the world continues to suffer the horrendous consequences of continuous wars, societal-cultural decline and economic disintegration to this day. May the “Special Military Operation” objectives of demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine be extended to NATO and the collective west as well; for the sake of humankind.
Omg I could go on about this! In NYC 30yrs (from Veneto region, my Substack name is inspired by the insights I got from reading the EIR for yrs) and my closest friend is a boomer native New Yorker whose reaction to me bringing up the name LaRouche is so exaggerated and disproportionate that it never ends astonishing me. For my 75yo CCNY educated Jewish friend who self describes as evermore Left as he ages he's become one of the (many and constantly growing too) unmentionable names when visiting him at his house. His house his rules as he says to justify his approach to conversation. As a never ever voted guy (growing up in Padova, Italy in the middle of Strategy of Tension, where both Franco Freda AND Antonio Negri came from I got hip to the OG Deep State of the modern world and realized it hardly matters, so..) wonder 'If that's a liberal' and think about the famous Black Panther comment about scratching a lib and would like to ask him what he thought of Ramsey Clark. If he thought he was a stand up guy then how does he explain Mr Clark's comments on the LaRouche movement, that he believed that
"it involves a broader range of deliberate and systematic misconduct and abuse of power over a longer period of time in an effort to destroy a political movement and leader, than any other federal prosecution in my time or to my knowledge" ? I can predict my friend's reaction to that by now and it's just so sad
So LaRouche is where you get some of your uncommon wisdom. I attended some campaign rallies for him in 1992, even though I was Republican. His enthusiastic progressiveness, in the finest sense of the word, represents the true ideals of the Democrats before the commies stole their party from them. In 1992, his campaign published "The Franklin Cover-Up," which was too horrible to be true. Now that child abuse by elites is coming out more and more, and I am seeing it all over the place. Substantial swathes of the public are beginning to face it.
Thank you Matt.
LaRouche is a recent discovery for me; makes a lot of sense. Is it realistic; is it too late?
Daily updates https://www.youtube.com/@LaRoucheOrganization/videos
Weekly discussion: https://rumble.com/user/laroucheorganization/livestreams
It is well worth the time to listen to the whole presentation. Still as relevant today as it was 25 years ago.
Thanks, Matt. Knew the name, knew the eye-rolling, now I know a whole different person.
While the Storm over Asia (LaRoche Storm over Asia. “https://youtu.be/-695NtUNSII”) has some very good historical information, it get's a lot right about the lies told as the history of the 20th century, but it gets some big things wrong, particularly his conclusions. With the incredible build up to a crescendo, I was very disappointed with the Space Race proposal. I see that as just another Military/Industrial/Government Complex expensive boondoggle that will make contractors rich will not really addressing some of the core problems he outlines.
Historical inaccuracies include:
1. Bill Clinton was Deep State all the way. Studying under Global Elite Cheerleader Carroll Quigley ("Tragedy and Hope" and "the Anglo-American Establishment") "In 1991, Clinton named Quigley as an important influence on his aspirations and political philosophy, when Clinton launched his presidential campaign in a speech at Georgetown.[1]: 96 " Wikipedia
2. Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, "Quigley greatly admired the British Empire and lamented that the secret society was not very successful. Historian Robert Rotberg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Rotberg) states:
"But Quigley was not opposed to what Rhodes and Milner had purportedly tried to accomplish. Indeed, Quigley wrote more in remorse at what had failed than in antagonism to what he believed were their mutual efforts at extending the British Empire,"[26]. The society consisted of an inner circle ("The Society of the Elect") and an outer circle ("The Association of Helpers", also known as The Milner Kindergarten and the Round Table Group (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Round_Table_movement)"
3. While the movie refers to the British Royalty as the driver of much evil like WW1 and WW2, although they were important players, the main show was run by the Milner Group (Cecil Rhodes was a founder) so loved above. This group, in alliances with others, would cause the WW's and create a lot of other internationalist (The Round Table, CFR, etc.) Elitists groups. Much like the WEF is today.
4. Given the time of the speech, LL's denigrating the Clinton impeachment and neglecting to fully explain the Milner Group connection, it looks an awful lot like he was covering up Clinton's Global Elite Deep State ties.
5. LBJ was a warmonger of the first order. Whether successfully lying us into the Vietnam War with the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, trying to lie us into the 1967 M.E. war by denying the Israeli murder of US sailors on the USS Liberty, or LBJ knowing in advance about JFK's assassination and orchestrating its cover up with Allen Dulles in charge of the investigation, LBJ was the worst of the worst war mongers.
LL must have know about both of those events. It would have been very much in line with his desire to beat the traditional Democrat Party to highlight both of those so it is particularly odd he doesn't hit those issues harder. ( I did miss some minutes in the middle of the video that might have added additional nuances I missed, but LL later summaries directly make the cover ups mentioned above correct.)
Thanks for the video. Very informative. Things are proceeding to his defined plan to destroy America. The current derivatives markets and ongoing Federal deficits make his graphs look good.
Thanks Matt for the LaRouche video. What he said wasn't deep but it made sense. I have come to the conclusion that deep usually means deception. I hope you take the time to actually read An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Also actually read Kropotkin and Bakunin rather than the neo-liberal propaganda about what they said. You said you mis-judged LaRouche because you listened to his antagonists until you actually listened to what he said.
Appreciate hearing this. Many solid principles and interesting and positive views on foreign policy and international relations. These would all be great and wonderful if people had an inherent will to work together towards such positive principles and ideals (which they mostly don’t have given the oligarchical history of the insatiable thirst for $$ and power throughout human history). Near the end of the 2hrs when he gets into conquering the powers of space beyond our planet, Larouche seems to get wildly out of touch — seriously, if we can’t afford to or find the sincere will to fix our daily issues on the planet, and we’re messing it up more than “big time” into the 21st c., how can we possibly expect to solve galactic challenges into the future? The desire to play ‘god’ with nature on earth and to propose we could fix things in the endless universe beyond, is naive at best, and egotistical at worst. This has spelled trouble for mankind from the beginning…and it always will.
I listened to talk radio late at night as a tweener and remember his work being discussed. He was often scoffed at as “kook fringe,” as the Wikipedia spooks continue to relate on his page. I was left with a negative impression of the name, but today understand him as another effective critic who was unduly and severely persecuted by our overlords, since all the “Crazy Eddies” are in charge.