LaRouche | Highlights | Music |Join | Books | Concerts | | Education | Health
What's New | Spanish Pages | Poetry
Dialogue of Cultures | Maps
The very future existence of the U.S.A., and much more besides, are being put in terrible peril by current economic and military policies of both the U.S. Bush Administration and the matching, negligent follies of Senator Kerry's presently ill-advised campaign. While the Bush Administration's policies do differ, presently, in the relatively tertiary matters of detail, both campaigns currently share axiomatically identical policy-shaping assumptions for practice, respecting both a.) the economy and b.) the currently escalating asymmetric warfare in Iraq and Palestine. However they may differ respecting the proposed rearrangement of the deck-chairs of our Titanic U.S.A., both refuse to say or do anything which is even merely worthwhile, or even urgent, about the fact that, under the currently proposed policies of either, the ship of our state will surely sink.
Only if Kerry were to continue his recent, pathetic "me, too" campaign postures in these areas, were Bush's reelection by any honest means a likely prospect at this present time. In Kerry's apparent efforts to placate the menacing Bush Administration, and to please prospective financier interests seen as funders of his campaign, his proclivity for shilly-shally tokenism is alienating, even angering large portions of those citizens, the "proverbial forgotten man and woman" on which a Democratic victory in November would depend. The victory is, for the moment, for Kerry to lose; at the present rate he is doing much to bring that loss about.
Whether President Bush had been actually elected, or merely injected into that office, remains obscured by the January 2001 act of anti-constitutional ejaculatio praecox by that U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, a man whose proclivities on constitutional law are often more echoes of the Confederacy's than the U.S. Constitution. We have, nonetheless adopted Mr. Bush as President, perhaps out of compassion, by some, for the fact that, since the "Keystone Cops" have gone out of business long ago, poor Mr. Bush may not be qualified for entry to any other presently available place of employment than as a dummy performing in a White House, where his performance is managed by his ventriloquist, Vice-President Cheney.
Meanwhile, of late, neither of the two rival candidates has much of anything really significant and good to say on any essential matter confronting the nation at this time. My duty is either to replace Senator Kerry as presumptive nominee, or to create a situation in which he is impelled to become both a winning, and an actually qualified candidate as Bush's replacement.
On the economy:
The present world monetary-financial system is presently gripped by an acutely terminal phase of an ongoing general collapse. Contrary to the disclaimers of Senator Kerry, for example, virtually every important central banker in the world today, whether he or she agrees with my proposed remedies, or not, agrees emphatically, in their discussions behind the scenes, with the factual accuracy of my warning that there is an ongoing collapse. They know that this is an Alan "Mr. Financial Derivatives" Greenspan-crafted collapse which would be far worse than that Europe and the U.S.A. experienced over the 1928-1933 interval, a collapse now rushing toward a general, global blow-out in the very near future. The present world monetary-financial system is gripped by the kind of financial-derivatives-driven hyperinflation from which that present system could never recover.
The U.S. itself could recover, but only under a new kind of monetary system, similar to that crafted by President Franklin Roosevelt. Either we reorganize the world system now, as President Franklin Roosevelt did, or we today will be plunged into a global epidemic of "vulture fund"-like fascism, such as that which took over all of western and central continental Europe over the interval 1922-1945. This is not a threat of what might occur down the line a few years ahead. The threat is immediate. It could occur on Monday, or come even months later; but it is onrushing, and will hit with far greater force, this time, than the calamity which Calvin Coolidge bequeathed to Herbert Hoover, three-quarters of a century ago.
In this area, the economy, Senator Kerry has been, so far, an electoral disaster waiting, eagerly, to happen. His case reminds us, not without relevance, of the case of the unfortunate, bungling Al Gore, without whose folly in his campaign, the current incumbency of President Bush would not have been possible.
We have very little time. The general collapse of the U.S. financial system, and that of Europe, could occur on the coming Monday, or the kind of hyper-inflationary tricks now being used might postpone the crash for a short time.
In Spring 1987, I forecast a probable, early October major stock-market crash; which later occurred, precisely on schedule. At the latter juncture, former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, who had rapidly turned the U.S. economy into wreckage, beginning October 1979, was being replaced by the present incumbent of bathtub and Chairmanship alike, Alan "Bubbles" Greenspan, otherwise widely, and wisely better known as "Greenspin." Greenspan reacted to the already calamitous situation which Volcker had bequeathed to him in October 1987, by inventing a new kind of money, called "financial derivatives." Among intelligent people, these are not called "derivatives," they are better called "side-bets" on that already wild-eyed gambling enterprise known as the speculator's market for paper securities. Greenspin turned these side-bets, which have been reported as aggregating to $8.7 quadrillions of hyper-inflationary turnover during 2003, into a giant financial-accounting swindle, a source of nominal assets included as if they had had some real economic value on regular financial markets, including stock and bond markets.
Breaking the Bond Barrier
To understand the presently onrushing collapse of the world's present monetary-financial system, compare the way in which financial markets are being inflated, largely through the derivatives hoax, with the image of a propeller-driven, or even an early configuration of jet aircraft approaching the point at which it will attempt to "break the sound-barrier," the famous shock-wave front first defined by the mathematical physicist Bernhard Riemann back during the middle of the 19th Century. For the purposes of applying the Riemannian concept to the present economic crisis, the limiting condition which defines the shock-front we are currently entering in the world's finances, is the ratio of the rate of increase of financial aggregates to the relative decline of production of physical goods, excluding fictitious qualities of "services," as the Wal-Mart phenomenon typifies this economic insanity in the domain of so-called "micro-economy."
As the mass of financial aggregates increases geometrically, the required lowering of the discount-rate needed to sustain the financial bubble converges on the virtual zero-overnight-rate of emission of a virtually bankrupt Japan banking system. This kind of inflationary emission of monetized credit is used, chiefly, to prop otherwise collapsing U.S. financial markets. The case of Greenspin's U.S. mortgage-based securities swindle, run through channels such as Fannie Mae, and a similar, worse bubble in England, are typical by-products of that sort of increasingly explosive international financial-monetary situation.
As the angular aspect of the inflationary curve turns toward a nearly vertical direction, the equivalent to a trembling in the aircraft becomes ominous. The craft may shatter, or dive out of control to its doom at an uncertain, but immediate point just ahead, as test supersonic flights often crashed, until a certain German engineer showed the U.S., drawing virtually on the back of an envelope, how to reconfigure the craft for supersonic flight, according to Riemannian shock-wave principles.
For points of reference, this bubble could have popped at the close of President George H.W. Bush's term, and those pressures did contribute greatly to his defeat by President Clinton. Greenspin's IT bubble kept the hoax alive during the Clinton Administration until Spring 2000, when the bubble was already touching the area of the presently ongoing general collapse. The 1997 Soros crisis in Asia was a product of this. The collapse of the market in Russia's GKO bonds, in August 1998, was a case. The hyper-inflationary "wall of money" policy introduced during late 1998, postponed the collapse until President George W. Bush's term in office.
Now, the rate of the shock-front-like curve is turning toward pointing straight upward. The ratio of the rate of increase of increasingly inflationary emission of fictitious monetary and financial assets, which occurs in a way which accelerates the collapse of the underlying (real) physical economy, tends to produce an hyperbolic-like combined effect. At that point nothing can postpone the collapse of the world's monetary-financial system in its present form.
Only ignorant people, or liars, from leading circles around the world today, would deny that fact. Rather, as the elegant François Rabelais might suggest, the next meeting of the IMF's principals will probably be conducted, so to speak, each and all arranged in a circle, with each seated, panic-stricken, on an automatically flushing lavatory-stool.
What is certain is, that were the present Bush-Cheney Administration reelected in November, a general financial crash, a Schachtian world government, a fascist one advised by a neo-Schachtian Felix Rohatyn or Robert Mundell, controlled by vulture funds, combined with a prompt unleashing of Cheney's and Blair's Fabian Society-like policies of a rolling, world-wide, perpetual warfare according to the doctrine of preventive nuclear warfare which created the presently hopeless U.S. situation in Iraq, are assured.
Meanwhile, the U.S. under a post-November 2004 Bush-Cheney-Ashcroft-Scalia team, would be transformed, by emergency measures, into a fascist state modelled upon that which Ashcroft and Scalia have already resurrected, as aggressive tendencies, from the policies of Adolf Hitler's "crown jurist" Carl Schmitt, the Schmitt who was the original sponsor of the same Leo Strauss whose fascistic doctrines later produced Cheney's neo-cons. Times of an oncoming twilight of those ever-damned gods of financial Olympus, usually mean times of those kinds of war and dictatorship associated with the notion of a dark age.
On the war:
The immediate subject of my present policy-statement here, is the task of successfully and quickly extracting U.S. military forces back to safety, out of the hopeless Hell-hole of the presently disintegrating U.S. military occupation of Iraq. Neither President Bush, nor Senator Kerry currently, are competent to define a practical approach to the accomplishment of that withdrawal. Nor would even my policy work, were it not presented by the U.S. as my doctrine, as I shall explain here, and the U.S. government were to identify this as their adoption of my doctrine.
That doctrine itself is as follows.
U.S. Interest in Southwest Asia
by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
Saturday, April 17, 20041. Neither the causes, nor remedy for the present quagmire of boiling asymmetric warfare in Iraq can be found within the bounds of the present configuration of conflicting forces within Iraq itself. There could be no competent moral or military reason for maintaining a policy of keeping our forces within the territory of Iraq. We must, therefore, extricate our troops safely, and quickly, from Iraq itself. However, this can not be done without creating a larger strategic framework in which a workable solution could be brought into existence.
The trap currently gripping U.S. military forces inside Iraq, is that either a headlong flight forward, as a desperate Secretary Rumsfeld proposes, or reckless retreat, would inevitably create an infinitely worse mess there, and for the U.S. world-wide, than already exists today. Therefore, the present situation on the ground must be strategically outflanked.2. To define a feasible solution, we must shift the agenda, from Iraq alone, to the subject of Southwest Asia as a whole. Only within an appropriate declaration of U.S. policy-interest in Southwest Asia as a coherently defined unit of U.S. policy-making, could we bring into play the concert of forces required to create a viable option for Iraq today.
3. For the purposes of U.S. foreign policy, Southwest Asia is to be recognized as bounded by four principal states, whose appropriate cooperation is indispensable for creating a zone of stability among the nations and peoples of the region as a whole. These are Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Egypt. The security of northeast corner of the region so defined, depends on protecting its flank, by ensuring non-interference from outside interests, that by the exclusion of meddling outside parties from intrusion into current discussions on cooperation among Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Iran.
It is only through fostering the immediate establishment of an appropriate declaration of U.S. commitment to recognition of that reality of Southwest Asia, that the needed aid for the extrication of U.S. forces from Iraq could be accomplished. The acceptance of that U.S. declaration by those and other nations of that region, is the necessary flanking action. Therefore, action in the direction outlined here is urgent, and must be immediate.4. The effort to establish such a zone of mutual security in Southwest Asia, would fail, unless the U.S.A. also took the boldest action toward bringing about the realization of an unconditional U.S. commitment to immediate negotiation of a two-state peace-agreement along long-standing, predetermined lines, between the Palestinian and Israeli state. No one in Southwest Asia or much of the world besides, would believe the U.S. to be an honorable party unless the U.S. came down hard, without its present and customary equivocation, on the long-overdue establishment of a kind of Palestinian-Israeli peace consistent in fact with the principled precedent of the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia.
If the nations of the Southwest Asia region accept such a settlement, with assured U.S. backing, the global influences needed can be brought into play.5. However, no such policy proffered by the U.S., even if it followed to the letter what has been said here, would be accepted among the peoples of the regions, unless the U.S. government were to identify such a declaration as the adoption, by name, of this as a "LaRouche Doctrine." No other notable political figure of the U.S. would be capable of enjoying the trust of the Arab and related parts of the world, for this purpose, at the time.
The included, and essential significance of this role of the name of "LaRouche," is, chiefly, that the U.S. government under the thumb of such figures as Vice-President Cheney and his Leo-Straussian neo-conservatives, has acted under a continuing commitment to a utopian doctrine known variously under the titles of "perpetual warfare" and "preventive nuclear warfare." These policies are an extension of the Fabian Society doctrines of the U.S.-hating H.G. Wells and Bertrand Russell, the doctrines of "world government through terror of nuclear weapons," the terror which ruled the world from the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, to the European events of 1989. Cheney, in particular, has targetted Syria, Iran, North Korea, and other nations as intended victims of such a policy. Were he to be reelected, the world must expect early action, including "preventive" nuclear attacks, on those and other targets, to begin soon after the November election. No relevant declaration of U.S. stated policy will be considered credible by the world at large, unless that statement, as crafted by me, is considered as a systemic eradication of the Russell English-speaking "world government" tradition and of that tradition's association with the doctrines of Vice-President Cheney today.6. At the present time, we must keep the Wall Street and kindred lawyers out of the policy-making. No attempt to develop a "detailed plan of withdrawal," or negotiate a "contract" should be introduced prior to the achievement of a commitment to an agreement in principle among a relevant majority, at least, of the prospective partners to a new Southwest Asia security and development agreement. We must recall that the beginning of the ruin of the otherwise excellent agreements reached in the Oslo Accords occurred, once certain financial interests, such as those associated with the World Bank, were permitted to intervene, in the fashion of attorneys for banking interests, to distort the implementation of the agreements in such incompetent ways, that no serious economic-development measures were ever taken. That error created the vacuum of inaction in which the ensuing mischief by Netanyahu, Ariel Sharon, and others, ostensibly on both sides, took its toll.
Relevant U.S. Military Policy
9. The issues of peace and security today can not be separated from the rebuilding of the U.S. economy, back toward its former role as the world's leading producer society, a role expressed in levels of scientific progress and technology. This requires a rebuilding of our republic, in which institutions consistent with our military tradition of strategic defense must be enabled to resume their traditional constitutional orientation.
The Schiller Institute
Thank you for supporting the Schiller Institute. Your membership and contributions enable us to publish FIDELIO Magazine, and to sponsor concerts, conferences, and other activities which represent critical interventions into the policy making and cultural life of the nation and the world.
Contributions and memberships are not tax-deductible.
Home | Search | About | Fidelio | Economy | Strategy | Justice | Conferences |Links