Schiller Institute on YouTube Schiller Institute on Facebook RSS

Home >

Presentations to the Second International Conference on Fundamental Questions of Sustained Development in the System of Nature-Society-Man

Dubna University of Nature, Society and Man,
Moscow, Russia

Oct. 29-30, 2012

First two are spoken in English, with Russian subtitles. Third is entirely in Russian, spoken by Rachel Douglas.
See more Russian language videos at :

Transcript of Lyndon LaRouche's keynote address



Dubna University Conference:

"Prospects for the Continued Development of Mankind"

Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

October 2012

The following presentation by Lyndon LaRouche, recorded on October 11, 2012, was shown October 29 as the opening presentation of the Second International Conference on Fundamental Questions of Sustained Development in the System of Nature-Society-Man, dedicated to the Outcome of the World Summit "Rio +20" and the 155th Anniversary of the Birth of Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, held at the Dubna University of Nature, Society and Man, in Moscow. The conference is co-sponsored by the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences and the Scientific School for Sustained Development, among others.

Lyndon LaRouche has addressed the Dubna conference by video for the past two years. Last year, the conference included an endorsement of the Glass-Steagall principle in their conference reorganization. Other presentations were delivered by the LaRouche Science Basement Research Team members and by Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Founder of the International Schiller Institutes.    

Well, again I have the opportunity to be with you by this usual means, with Dubna University and to Professor Bolshakov. We have many things to think about at this time.

We are presently entering into, worldwide, the worst threat of war that mankind has ever experienced in known history. We are headed for, of all things, a thermonuclear war, launched by the British forces which pretty much have control, for the moment, of the United States, who have control over much of Western and Central Europe, which is now in one of the greatest crises of all modern Europe: a breakdown crisis, a hyperinflationary breakdown crisis, worse than that in Germany in 1923.

Everything is headed toward disaster. Inside the United States: disaster. Inside South and Central America: disaster. Africa continues to have the death-rattle of a slave continent.

We have the greatest threat, an immediate threat, of thermonuclear war. The leading issues are the economic issues, physical-economic issues, in particular; and the danger of thermonuclear war.

Thermonuclear war cannot be fought, because under the conditions in which the United States and continental Europe - the euro part of Europe - on the one side, and, on the other side, Russia, China, and other countries: if the war occurs, and it's threatening to reach that point now, within the coming weeks, even, and not later than before the very beginning of next year, the threat is, there will be a thermonuclear war.

A thermonuclear war is not like any other war, not even like a war with nuclear weapons included. Thermonuclear war is a war of extermination. What happens is, for example, the great submarines of the United States, on the one side, typifying this; the United States has the greatest capability in that degree, in all the transatlantic region and beyond. And so those great, ominous submarines, thermonuclear submarines, really, would launch the war - from the present stage of destabilization and warfare in local regions. And immediately, other powers opposing that, such as Russia and China, would respond immediately with a similar launch. The capability of fighting this war, with these kinds of weapons, would probably be two general thermonuclear barrages, which would be the major part.

All you have to do is look back at the old Khrushchov bomb, the super-bomb of that decade. Look at what happened when the experimental bomb was blown up by Khrushchov and company. You remember the images, some of you, of what the sky was like over Siberia in that particular period. It was a very dark time. But that was only one bomb. It was really a crude weapon, but with thermonuclear implications. This is not going to be like that, if it happens. This will be an extermination kind of war. And the intent will be to try to exterminate the opponents. It will not be a war that can be fought. It can't be fought, because once this stuff is launched - and it can all be launched in an hour and a half - the greatest part of the destruction.

Therefore we live in a circumstance, in which the issue of preventing that from happening is now the central feature of the prospects of mankind. There's been nothing like this in history. Finally, mankind has developed a weapon, on a large scale, which can actually extinguish the existence of the human species, or nearly do so. And that thing could happen, quite realistically. It could go off in the remainder of this year or, at the latest, the very beginning of next year.

So far, and this war has been in preparation for the more than a year, now, some people, such as the Joint Chiefs of the United States, Russia, and others, have been taking measures to cause a postponement of what had been the intention of the British monarchy, and President Obama of the United States, who are the actual instigators of this war. They have been stymied by the intervention of military people and others in the United States, and others, who have recognized this danger and realized that we have to prevent this from happening.

On the other side, presuming that we do what we have to do, to prevent this war from ever actually occurring (the war is already [in process];[anything] could ignite this), in that case we face another problem. We face a food problem, globally. We face economic problems which are relatively worse, as threats to mankind, than anything in recent centuries. And we're going to have to not only build up our economy, or rebuild it, as you're trying to do in Russia now, but we're going to have to rebuild the world economy. We're going to have to build it in a new phase.

The new phase, in a sense, is here. Presuming that we do not get into a thermonuclear war, the future of mankind will be dominated by an effort to protect Earth from being bombed, virtually, by asteroids: large objects in space. We know that there are many out there. We have very little knowledge of the identity of most of those things. We have only a tiny fraction of these asteroids, which we can identify presently. We have almost now capability, yet, of doing more than modest gestures of defense against serious damage to the population of Earth, and to Earth itself, and even, possibly, later along the line, even the extinction of mankind, as the extinction of living processes has occurred on the planet Earth at earlier times in Earth's history.

So the great battle, the great war, the legitimate war, necessary war, that we're going to have to fight, is going to be a war which saves and protects mankind's existence on the frontiers of Mars, and between Mars orbit and Earth orbit. That will be a central feature of any sane government, any sane planet which comes safely out of the threat of thermonuclear war now.

We've been on this, as scientists, actually since the end of the 1970s and beginning of the 1980s, where the defense of Earth against satellites, and various kinds of things, was in progress. Now, with the landing of this instrument on Mars, we have the beginning of a build-up of the kind of equipment on Mars, which can interact reciprocally with observers on Earth and we can, at the speed of light, therefore, be in exchange of operations between Mars and Earth, which will help us greatly to interfere with the threats from satellites in the volume of space between the Mars orbit and the Earth's orbit.

All of this suggests that we are going to get out of the kind of slovenliness that we have had, in terms of the progress of science throughout the world. Science will have to take a great leap forward. The postponement of science, and the use of bad methods of economy which stand in the way of science, in the United States - the United States has become collapsed; we have collapsed our capability. We will have mass starvation in the United States, not only because of the bad policies of the current President and his predecessor, but because of natural conditions. We have moved our production, as into China, into poorer parts of the world, where people are paid very little. We have, in the United states, as happened in Russia, and has happened throughout most of Western and Central Europe, the ability to produce has been destroyed by the trends in policy over these recent years, actually since the end of the 1980s, but actually earlier.

So, we're in a period where we have two essential visions. One is, we have a horrible condition of economy in most of the planet, for humanity as a whole. The death rate of humanity is now going to increase, on the basis of the current trends, even without a thermonuclear war. We're going to have to reverse the trends in policy, throughout Eurasia and the Americas, to change the current policy, to go to high-technology, to go to more emphasis on thermonuclear power as a power source, a high-technology power source, which enables us to do the things we have to do, and that we can do.

So, we've headed into a terrible period, but also a very promising period, if we allow ourselves to recognize what fools we have been, over so many decades, so far. Now, we face great danger, a danger of virtual extinction of nations, a possible extinction of humanity itself, though thermonuclear war. We have a world which cannot feed its population, any more, under these conditions. Death is crawling, like a wave, throughout the planet.

At times like this, rather than complaining and worrying, which don't do any good, we have to come to a time, when we reenact and revitalize science. We need a global science-driver program, to go into areas of development which are available to us, which have not been used, have not been promoted. We're going to have to go to degrees of technology we've never undertaken before. And that's our option. We have, on the one side, the worst possible threat, the worst possible possibility. On the other, we have the challenge - and especially to younger people, younger scientists, who will respond successfully to the alternative, to the mobilization of mankind, away from all the nonsense that we've wasted our lives upon, in so many ways. We're going to have to have science-driver programs, which take over not only the development of Earth, as such, the Earth's territory; we're going to reopen the question of the Moon as a place for building up the capability for going to mars, or sustaining Mars. We're going to be going to higher powers: controlled thermonuclear fusion, which can get us from Earth or the Moon to Mars, within approximately a week. It will maybe take a generation for us to achieve that kind of performance, but in the meantime we can be going in that direction.

And therefore we have, I think, two things to consider. One, the threat of disaster, led by the threat of a thermonuclear war which is now likely to occur, unless prevented by almost miraculous means during the rest of this year into the beginning of next. And the push on this is the fact that the economies of Europe, for example, the economies of the Americas, especially North America, are collapsing at a rate which is unimaginable in previous times.

So we're going to have to change those policies, we're going to have to reach up. The Green policy will not survive, or else mankind will not survive. A Green policy is impossible; mankind cannot continue to exist successfully under a so-called Green policy. High-technology, high energy flux density, and very, very advanced physics. These are things that are going to be required, if the world is going to make it. And people who are young people, in universities, who are concerned with science, are the actual leaders of the future, in making possible what is so desperately necessary.

Thank you.