-Caveat Lector-
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:57:58 -0500
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: LaRouche Issues Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LaRouche Issues Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: EIR Talks Special: Eurasian Landbridge New Hope VS New Dark AGE
MODERATOR: DENNIS SMALL
GUESTS VIA VIDEOTAPE: HELGA ZEPP LAROUCHE
JOSE LOPEZ PORTILLO, FORMER PRESIDENT OF MEXICO, SENIOR
STATESMAN
LYNDON LAROUCHE, ECONOMIST AND STATESMAN
Eurasian Land-Bridge: New Hope vs. a New Dark Age
MODERATOR: Welcome to "EIR Talks" for Jan. 14, 1999. This
show will consist of excerpts from the upcoming EIR videoreport
entitled "The Eurasian Land-Bridge: New Hope vs. a New Dark
Age." Your host for this show will be {Executive Intelligence
Review} Ibero-American editor, Dennis Small. He will present
speeches by Helga Zepp LaRouche, Lyndon LaRouche, and former
Mexican President Jose Lopez Portillo.
DENNIS SMALL: 1998 was the year in which the international
financial crisis exploded on the world scene in a visible
fashion. Country after country, from Indonesia to South Korea,
Russia to Brazil, the international financial system went into a
major world crisis. It happened in a way and with the timing, and
in a fashion that had been forecast for decades by the leading
American economist and statesman, Lyndon LaRouche.
Now, as we enter 1999, in this year, that international
financial crisis is going to crash like a tidal wave over the
United States itself, and over Europe. But this is not only a
financial crisis or an economic crisis. This is a civilizational
crisis. This is a crisis in which the values, the moral
questions, the financial issues, the political institutions, are
all being swept aside by this tidal wave.
Humanity is poised at the edge of an abyss. And over that
abyss, is a New Dark Age, like that of the Fourteenth Century,
when half of humanity disappeared. That will be the future of
humanity, unless -- and that "unless" is the topic of this
videoreport today.
There is an alternative to this New Dark Age, and to this
international financial crisis. It is an alternative that is
being put together under the leadership of China, with other
nations such as Russia, India, and nations of Asia such as
Malaysia participating as well.
It is an alliance of sovereign nation-states that are saying
"no" to speculation, "no" to globalization, "no" to
British-sponsored free trade, and are instead rebuilding their
economies in a sovereign fashion around productivity, around
investment in technology and science, and most significantly,
around a global infrastructure project which is called the
Eurasian Land-Bridge.
The Eurasian Land-Bridge is not just an idea, it is being
built today. And it is a project which must be joined by the
United States and by other nations of the world, if we are to
avoid a plunge into a New Dark Age.
That political fight, to build a coalition of forces, an
alliance internationally, to build the Eurasian Land-Bridge, has
been prominently promoted internationally by Lyndon and Helga
LaRouche. In country after country, continent after continent,
through their direct travels and activities, they have been
building the coalition of forces that is necessary to put an end
to the British oligarchical speculative system.
For example, in April 1996, the LaRouches travelled to
Russia, where they presented these ideas of the Land-Bridge, and
the underlying economic policy issues that must be behind such a
great infrastructure project to leading economic policies
thinkers in Russia -- policy thinkers who today, are playing a
prominent role around the Primakov government of Russia.
More recently, in November 1998, Helga Zepp LaRouche was
invited by the government of China to participate in an
international conference on the Eurasian Land-Bridge, which was
held in four cities in that country. Then, in December 1998, she
travelled to Mexico to report on these breakthrough developments
to audiences in that country, and to broaden the alliance of
forces to include emphatically the United States and its close
neighbors such as Mexico, around the concept of the Eurasian
Land-Bridge.
In many of these countries, from Russia to China to Mexico
to Brazil, increasing numbers of political forces of influence
are calling on the world and on U.S. President Bill Clinton in
particular, to listen to the wise words of Lyndon LaRouche, in
order to get out of this financial crisis.
Mrs. LaRouche reported on the matter in the following
fashion to one of her many audiences in Mexico in December of
1998.
(Helga Zepp LaRouche on videotape, in Mexico, 1998)
HELGA ZEPP LAROUCHE: It is extremely important that I report
to you about an alternative which is shaping up. While on the one
side, there is a grave danger that civilization is plunging into
a Dark Age, such that if the policies of the international
monetary institutions are continued, then many countries can
suffer the fate of Honduras, Nicaragua, Indonesia, or most parts
of Africa. So, while I'm absolutely clear on that danger, I also
want to report to you that just in the last two weeks, something
extraordinary has occurred: namely, that the countries of Eurasia
are joining together in building the Eurasian Land-Bridge -- the
idea to integrate the Eurasian continent through infrastructure
programs.
Now, when Jiang Zemin, the President of China, just went to
Russia, he announced a new cooperation between China and Russia.
And the one speech I would like to bring to your attention is the
one he gave in Novosibirsk, a famous science city of Russia in
Siberia. This speech is one of the most outstanding speeches
given by any statesman in the last years. It is a Class|A speech,
giving a vision for all of mankind for the next century. And this
speech has been completely blacked out by all Western media. And
I hope that there are some patriotic press in Mexico who will
just reprint the entire speech.
What Jiang Zemin says in this speech is that the scientists
of Russia will cooperate with China to once more make science and
technology the key driver of the world economy, and that China
will look into the resources of its 5,000-year-old history to
become the avant-garde in science and technology for the next
century.
Now, what is the background of this extraordinary
development?
(End videotape of Helga Zepp LaRouche.)
DENNIS SMALL: That background was elaborated by Mrs.
LaRouche in a February 1997 presentation to a Washington, D.C.
audience.
(Videotape of Helga Zepp LaRouche, Feb. 1997, Washington,
D.C.)
HELGA ZEPP LAROUCHE: In 1988, Mr. LaRouche made the famous
proposal for a soon-to-become-real unification of Germany, which
he just referenced. He was, in my knowledge, the only Western
economist and statesman predicting the collapse of the Soviet
Union more than a year before it happened. He was the only one
who predicted the unification of Germany at a point where all
German politicians called the unification of Germany the "lie of
the century," people should forget about it, and so forth.
And Mr. LaRouche said "Let's take a unified Germany, and
use Western technologies to develop Poland and make that the
model of how you can transform the economies of the Warsaw Pact
with Western means, into a modern economy."
Then, in 1989, at a point when you all remember the pictures
in the TV, the Berlin Wall came down beginning of November.
People were happy, there was an incredible historical moment. And
again, I must say, given the fact that I and my friends, Michael
and Anno, were on the scene, busily trying to shape history,
there was not anyone -- not Kohl for sure, not from the U.S.
administration, or anywhere else, who had an idea of what to do,
how to capture the historical moment of the fact that the Wall
dividing the Eurasian continent would come down, you know, really
the first time since the Versailles Treaty, except Mr. LaRouche,
who proposed (go back to the previous one) -- who proposed the
famous program of the Productive Triangle, which was the idea to
take the territory in the triangular between Paris, Berlin, and
Vienna, which is about the size of Japan, and which still to the
present day concentrates the highest concentration of industrial
capacity and skilled labor power, and goes through Saxonia,
Bohemia, parts of Czechoslovakia, combining for the first time
the industrial centers of France, the Saxonia, Bohemia, into one
coherent piece.
He proposed that this should basically be upgraded through
the most modern infrastructure network, including the maglev
train, the Transrapid, other investments in avant-garde
technologies, to make this then the most powerful locomotive for
the world economy to recover.
Basically, this proposal we put on the table in November
1989 to the Kohl government, to all the European governments,
East and West. We basically proposed that Eastern Europe should
be integrated through the development corridors, namely, the idea
to build up transport lines -- one corridor going from Warsaw to
Moscow, St. Petersburg; another one to Kiev, another one to the
Balkans, to the Black Sea, another one to Sicily, bridging into
Africa, another one to the Ibero-American peninsula through
practically a bridge and reaching into Africa.
Now, this report was published in all European languages in
1990. We presented it in many conferences and seminars in Warsaw,
Minsk, Moscow, in Kiev, in Poland, in Prague, Bratislava, Vienna,
Zagreb, Sarajevo, many other places. And basically, what would
have been necessary, is an approach where the economies of the
Warsaw Pact, which admittedly were not up to the level of the
world standard, rather than being dismantled -- what happened
under the IMF -- would have been taken to build up the
infrastructure of Eastern Europe, to provide the absolutely
necessary precondition for industrial development and
agricultural development.
Because one of the inherent flaws of the communist economy
was a complete negligence of infrastructure. The Soviet Union,
for example, used to lose 40% of their agricultural harvest, just
because of a lack of infrastructure. If you remember the famous
Autobahn in East Germany, when the Wall opened, it was like a
bumping road, the horrible condition of the trains, I mean, you
remember that the lack of infrastructure was one of the key
problems.
Basically, the idea was then to generate wealth by using up
these obsolete technologies of Eastern Europe, to then reach the
condition where, with Western help, one could have a kind of
Marshall Plan for the East, using these corridors about which I
will say more how they function, to drive the economic
development of Western Europe into Eastern Europe, to raise the
level of the republics of the former Soviet Union, and fulfill
their aspiration, that they should join the First World, which is
what the people in Ukraine and Poland and Lithuania and Russia --
they wanted.
They wanted to be part of the advanced West, you all
remember this....
And Germany, rather than going in the direction we proposed,
and using the historic chance of Europe, of which everybody
correctly spoke, capitulated to the British campaign of Margaret
Thatcher, George Bush, and Mitterrand, but especially the
British, namely, that if Germany would do that, they would become
the "Fourth Reich."
So Kohl, rather than using the historical chance,
capitulated. And today we look at a complete collapse of Western
Europe, and the end of the Kohl era in the next very immediate
period.
We, however, continued to organize for the realization of
this program. (Next.) In 1992, we presented a proposal for the
Eurasian infrastructure alliance, because at that point, the
Soviet Union had collapsed. And we proposed to combine the
productive triangular, situated in Western Europe, through
infrastructure lines, all the way to China. Line A being the
northern route, the Vladivostok Trans-siberian Railroad; Line B
going through Ukraine, Kazakstan, China, and Line C from Turkey,
Iran, Kazakstan, China.
So we proposed to integrate the Eurasian continent into one
piece. And basically, again, had many conferences about this in
Moscow, in other places. And especially because China at that
point was still involved in a very dangerous mixture. On the one
side, a state-planned economy, but at the other side, also being
absorbed in the speculative bubble. And fortunately, we put out
many warnings against financial AIDS, which was the financial
speculation in the economy, which was published widely in China.
So by '93, the Chinese government consciously went away from
the bubble economy, put more emphasis on a dirigist policy, and
there was a clear -- (next) -- revival of the famous policy of
the founder of modern China, Dr. Sun Yat-sen, who in the 1920s
(next) had put out a beautiful document called the
"International Development of China." This is the map he used.
It has a very elaborated system of integrated railways, water
projects, and other infrastructure programs....
Now, in '93-94, there were further important changes in the
economic policy of the Chinese government to reduce the bubble,
both in the real estate market and the other markets. They
implemented more dirigistic measures, put more stress on the
Eurasian Land-Bridge, and basically announced that they had the
intention to develop the northeast regions of China, to improve
the relations between China and Europe and the rest of Asia.
In May '94, the vice minister of the State Commission on
Science and Technology, Mr. Hui Shong-cheng (ph), gave an
exclusive interview to {Executive Intelligence Review,} in which
he said that the Eurasian Land-Bridge would be the central
feature of its international economic and foreign policy.
In '94, in August, representatives of the {EIR} participated
in Langshu in a conference on the cooperation for the development
of the Eurasian Land-Bridge. And in May '96, I myself, together
with a delegation of the Schiller Institute, participated as a
speaker at the Beijing conference with the title "Development of
the Economic Regions Along the Eurasian Land-Bridge."
This conference was an absolute watershed, because the
Chinese government announced there their strategic long-term
perspective for China until the year 2010, which is already
written in government legislation. And they have no lesser goal,
than to bring the entirety of China put to the level of the world
as quickly as possible.
Different spokesmen, whose speeches you all can read in the
report we published, basically announced that "a new era of
mankind has started, namely, the Land-Bridge era," where, for
the first time in human history, there will be no more regions of
the world which will be disadvantaged because of their
geographical positions. But because of the Land-Bridge
conception, you can bring the development into all areas around
the globe, and especially the landlocked areas will participate
in the same kind of advantages like previously only maritime
cultures, or cultures, civilizations based on rivers.
But I think the most important was that this conference, in
which I think 64 nations participated, expressed an incredible
cultural optimism, an optimism which you do not find in the
United States, in Europe, for sure not in Russia. And people were
just completely fulfilled with the idea that the underdevelopment
of mankind, is coming to an end....
(End videotape of Helga Zepp LaRouche speech.)
DENNIS SMALL: During her tour of Mexico, Mrs. LaRouche
addressed the deeper historic issues behind the current battle
over the Eurasian Land-Bridge. And she identified this as a
500-year-old battle between two opposing concepts, the concept of
oligarchism and the concept of the nation-state, ideas which are
completely irreconcilable, one with the other.
Of special significance, was her presentation before the
Mexican Society for Geography and Statistics, one of the oldest
and most prestigious intellectual institutions of Mexico.
Speaking with Mrs. LaRouche from the podium, in response to her
speech as the official commentator, was the highly-respected
former president of Mexico, president from 1976 to 1982, Jose
Lopez Portillo. And in that speech, Mrs. LaRouche discussed the
issue and the importance of the battle between oligarchism and
the nation-state.
(Videotape of Helga Zepp LaRouche at the Mexico Society for
Geography and Statistics.)
HELGA ZEPP LAROUCHE: Now, this is very important, because
the fact that some countries of the world have abandoned the idea
of globalization, and have started to impose protectionist
measures to protect their people and their economies against the
effects of the financial storms, means that there are two
dynamics in the world right now. And I think this is also
important for Mexico to consider, because in the coming weeks, we
will see the next phase of the collapse of the world financial
system. And these financial storms are without any precedent in
known history....
Now, what is the issue in all of this? The conflict which is
coming now to its final resolution, is one which started in the
Fifteenth Century. Up to the Fifteenth Century, all cultures in
the world, were of an imperial form. The law which existed, was
just the whim of an oligarchical elite imposing its will on a
backward population of approximately 95%, who were illiterate,
who had the status of human cattle, who did not participate in
culture, in politics, in self-government.
In the Fifteenth Century, something very important
occurred....
The idea of the nation-state which emerged at that point,
was that the government for the first time, had to take care of
the well-being of its people; that the government had to foster
science and technology as the precondition for the improvement of
the population's living standard.
Through the work of teaching orders such as the Brothers of
the Common Life, the proportion of the intelligentsia in the
population increased. Through all of these developments, under
the reign of Louis XI, the living standard under his rule
increased by 50%, or doubled in 20 years.
The most important thinker of this period, was my favorite
philosopher, Nicolaus of Cusa, who was the foreign minister of
the humanist pope Piccolimini in this period. He, in his
writings, especially in his main work, {Concordancia Catholica,}
developed the idea of the representative system, which was the
idea put forward for the first time, that the individual could
choose representatives, and that these representatives would have
a dual responsibility: on the one side, represent the best
interests of the state, but on the other side, make sure that the
well-being of the people would also be pursued.
It is this representative system, which actually is the only
way in which the rights of the individual can be maintained,
which is the reason why the sovereign national state is the most
important defense of the people. It was this idea of the
representative system, which laid the foundation for the American
Revolution, and therefore the first truly republican state,
abandoning the idea of the oligarchy.
Nicolaus von Cusa also had the idea that peace and
concordance among nations could only be guaranteed by the concept
that peace in the macrocosm, is only possible through the maximum
development of the microcosms, which is the idea that only if all
nations of the world develop to their maximum, and that it is the
interest of each nation to make its effort that the other nations
develop in the maximum way, that you can have peace.
These ideas of Nicolaus of Cusa and his successors like
Leibniz, in my view, must become the basis for the New World
Economic Order. So the need to have an alliance of sovereign
nation-states, helping each other in their development, is the
question on the table today.
The problem was that already in the Fifteenth Century, the
oligarchical capital of that time, the city-state of Venice,
recognized that the nation-state was the most important barrier
to the looting of the population.
In the last 500 years, these two systems of state --
nation-state and oligarchical system -- have been in a continuous
fight with each other. Today, the efforts to have a globalized
economy, to have globalization, to have the International Court
overruling national society, to have the IMF and World Bank as
dictatorships of the world, represents a renewed effort by the
financial oligarchy, to impose a neo-feudal system.
We need to remedy the situation today. We need a radical
change in the value system which has emerged in the last 30
years. We have to throw everything out of the window which is a
Holy Cow today: globalization, free market economy, outsourcing,
and similar ideas. And we have to go back not only to the
sovereignty of the nation-state, [but also] to the right of the
nation to protect its people, to impose capital and exchange
controls, to have fixed parities, to have a completely new set of
tariff and trade agreements among nations which are based on a
just basis.
We have to write off about $150 trillion in worthless debt.
We have to cancel almost all debt of especially the developing
countries, but also of most industrialized countries, because not
even Germany or the United States will be able to finance their
debt.
We need to go back to the ideas which were successful when
Germany, for example, reconstructed after the postwar period,
which was a complete favoring of scientific and technological
progress, of industrial growth, of the state taking a larger role
in creating the framework to provide the conditions for private
entrepreneurs to be able to produce. The nation-state has to take
over those tasks which the private entrepreneur will never take
care of, which is the health system, which is education, and
other social questions....
We are on the verge of entering the next millennium. And I
think that we are called upon not to let this crisis throw
mankind into a New Dark Age, but to join our efforts to create a
just, new world economic order, which will allow for the
well-being of all people in the world. And we should be conscious
that future generations will look back at us as the people who
either allowed the world to slide into Hell, or who helped to
create a new Golden Age for all of mankind. Thank you.
(Applause.)
DENNIS SMALL: Helga Zepp LaRouche's speech before the
Mexican Society for Geographics and Statistics may have been the
highlight of her ten-day tour to Mexico. And as you will see
shortly in the response from former president Jose Lopez
Portillo, it was a historic occasion. However, it was
characteristic of the kind of response which her remarks earned
all across the country. And in fact, it is characteristic of the
kind of response LaRouche's ideas are getting around the world.
For example, when Lyndon LaRouche and Helga LaRouche
travelled to Russia in April of 1996, they warned their
high-level audiences about the onrushing financial crisis, and
about the measures that had to be adopted to deal with it, unless
they wished Russia to disintegrate as a nation.
When, in August of 1998, the world financial crisis crashed
over Russia's head, and the Russian government was forced to
declare de facto state bankruptcy, those ideas of LaRouche were
placed on the front burner. Similarly in China. As a result of
Helga Zepp LaRouche's trip in November of 1998, these same ideas
are being taken with the utmost seriousness, and are actually
being implemented to a significant degree by the Jiang Zemin
government.
Helga Zepp LaRouche spent 10 days in Mexico. She visited the
three principal cities in the country, Mexico City, Guadalajara,
and Monterrey, and in those cities, she spoke to audiences
totalling over 1,000 people. They were public events organized by
the LaRouche organization of Mexico, the MSIA, or the
Ibero-American Solidarity Movement. There were other conferences
organized by the Law Department at the University of Guadalajara
in that city, and there was the event that we have referred to at
the Mexican Society for Geography and Statistics.
That society was founded last century, in 1833. And one of
its earliest members was a German scientist and geographer by the
name of Alexander von Humboldt. In fact, a bust of Humboldt
graces the patio of the house in downtown Mexico City which
houses the society.
Von Humboldt was an extremely important scientist. He
travelled the world, including Mexico, and was in touch with all
of the leading humanist organizers of his day. So in that sense,
it can fairly be said that Helga Zepp LaRouche's trip to Mexico
followed in the footsteps of Alexander von Humboldt.
In addition to her public presentations, Mrs. LaRouche held
a series of press conferences, television interviews, and in fact
she received very broad and widespread media coverage in all of
the cities that she went to. Perhaps 20, 25 articles appeared in
the Mexican dailies, the major dailies, covering her events, the
content of what she had to say, and the political impact of her
remarks.
In point of fact, her remarks unleashed something of a tidal
wave in Mexico, a political tidal wave, as layer after layer
realized that the Eurasian Land-Bridge was and is the alternative
for Mexico.
Mexico is a nation that is today facing annihilation, both
economically and politically. There is 50% real
unemployment in the country. The price for its major export, oil,
has plummeted by 50% over the last year. This has wreaked
havoc with the federal budget, because 40% of budget
revenues come from oil. And so, under IMF instructions, the
government of Mexico has chopped its budget to shreds four times
over the course of 1998, and there is still no hope of balancing
that budget.
The policies of NAFTA, created by George Bush and Carlos
Salinas de Gortari, have devastated Mexico. The country is facing
not only poverty, but poverty that is rapidly becoming hunger,
and hunger that will rapidly spread into African levels of
starvation, if these policies and this economic system continues.
The current government of Ernesto Zedillo has unfortunately
continued the policies of his predecessors in support of
IMF-sponsored free trade and austerity cutbacks of the budget. He
agrees with the policies of globalization, and has continued to
sponsor them.
However, Mrs. LaRouche, in her visit to Mexico, made it very
clear that her intention in visiting Mexico, was by no means to
criticize the government of Mexico, but rather to offer to
different political layers in that country, an alternative that
is shaping up internationally, to break the blackout, to let
Mexicans know that there is an alternative that they can choose
to the IMF genocide which is currently wrecking their nation.
The other purpose of her trip, as she made very clear to her
audiences, was to broaden the alliance of nations that are
currently forging the Eurasian Land-Bridge, to emphatically
include the United States and its close neighbors such as Mexico,
and that Mexico, because of its close geographic and historic
relationship to the United States, has a very special role to
play in that strategically decisive process.
Mrs. LaRouche's remarks and her analysis resonated
throughout Mexico, and were picked up in a politically
significant way by different layers. Perhaps the most important
of all, were the remarks made by President Jose Lopez Portillo,
president of Mexico from 1976 to 1982. Lopez Portillo's was the
last administration where there was actual economic growth in
Mexico. His government was committed to technological advance, to
using Mexico's oil to trade for technology with the United States
and other nations; it was committed to industrialization, it was
committed to nuclear energy, it was committed to city-building,
and it was committed to {stopping speculation, and replacing the
global system of speculation and free trade with one committed to
production.}
For all of these reasons, Jose Lopez Portillo got into an
enormous political fight with the International Monetary Fund.
And he fought like a true statesman. President Lopez Portillo was
one of the very few sitting heads of state -- Prime Minister
Indira Gandhi was another -- but Lopez Portillo was one of the
very few who met with Lyndon LaRouche, which he did in 1982, in
order to discuss these policy alternatives. Mr. LaRouche
subsequently wrote a book on the policy alternatives which he had
discussed in Mexico, which was called "Operation Juarez."
Lopez Portillo's views coincided on many points with those
of Mr. LaRouche. And he stated them without fear, and like a
statesman, on many occasions. Perhaps one of the most historic
was his October 1982 address to the United Nations General
Assembly, where he issued a clarion call for a New World Economic
Order.
It was the same Jose Lopez Portillo, 16 years later and now
the elder statesman, who responded to the LaRouche message in the
following way.
(Videotape of former president of Mexico Jose Lopez Portillo
remarks.)
JOSE LOPEZ PORTILLO: I congratulate Dona Helga for these
words, which impressed me, especially because first they trapped
me in the Apocalypse, but then she showed me the staircase by
which we can get to a promised land. Many thanks, Dona Helga.
Dona Helga -- and here I wish to congratulate her husband,
Lyndon LaRouche....
And it is now necessary for the world to listen to the wise
words of Lyndon LaRouche. Now it is through the voice of his
wife, as we have had the privilege of hearing. How important,
that they enlighten us as to what is happening in the world, as
to what will happen, and as to what can be corrected. How
important, that somebody dedicates their time, their generosity,
and their enthusiasm to that endeavor.
For my part, I fulfilled a period of responsibility, and I
can report, in a somewhat dramatic way, what happens to national
economies in an international financial order such as that which
has ordered our affairs since Bretton Woods.
At Bretton Woods, as we all know, institutions were
organized by the victorious powers, all capitalist: the
International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and in some way,
GATT [the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade], to organize
the world through the control of currency, through the financing
of development, and of trade, through the force of the powerful,
and in their image and likeness, which, of course, did not turn
out to be ours. No one outside the powerful were taken into
account. I can report on what happened in my government, and
perhaps it is important that I repeat it here....
But at the same time, for geopolitical reasons, we had to
insert ourselves into the international world, into the
environment which surrounded us, and to enter, somehow, into the
international bodies which ruled the world.
But, what happened when the Mexican Revolution clashes with
those powerful bodies -- expressions of powerful countries which
have no reason to take into account the revolution of a
developing country, which had lived through such a turbulent 19th
century and which has so many social conflicts? Because we should
recall that Mexico is a country of profound inequalities, as was
observed since the 19th century by Baron von Humboldt himself.
This is a country of inequalities, and as such, could be left
neither to free trade, nor free competition, nor the values of
liberalism, today called neoliberalism.
As a result, when we would go to the international bodies,
they disdainfully did not take into account either our political
problems or our social problems. And, by dint of their rejection
of the values of our Revolution, we became accustomed to disdain
it, and even to forget it. And thus Mexico has forgotten its
Revolution, and, as a result, the national economy which we had
somehow wanted to establish.
And so I have heard, with special interest and even
enthusiasm, that those who can do it in this world, are thinking
of reforming the Bretton Woods agreements, in the right way, such
that the world economy might function to resolve human problems,
with humanism, and not to benefit capital, while forgetting or
sacrificing the value of labor.
I remember that in the time of my responsibility, all of the
prescriptions which the international bodies gave us, tended to
depress demand -- not to foster production, but to depress
demand: "Pay less to your workers, to your peasants; sacrifice
employment." When, in our country, to govern is to create jobs.
When we tried, for example, to establish regional justice --
this is also a form of inequality in Mexico, the different
regions which also need to be developed, but for this, you need,
for example, subsidies, privileges -- and they threatened us:
"Watch out! That's encouraging dumping." And we held back.
Little by little, in this way, we lost the spirit of the Mexican
Revolution.
This, briefly, is the experience of our national economy --
and thus the importance that someone in the world is thinking on
behalf of everyone, and is opening doors. Let us hope, Dona
Helga, that your husband can influence the government of the
United States, so that the proposals which you so brilliantly
have laid out to us, can, in some way, be realized, and with
them, that each people can express its uniqueness in the cultural
realm, and in every possible aspect. Thank you. (Applause.)
DENNIS SMALL: In a May 1997 speech, Lyndon LaRouche
explained how the Land-Bridge can be the engine of a global
recovery.
(Lyndon LaRouche on videotape, May 1997.)
LYNDON LAROUCHE: There are only two nations which are
respectable left on this planet, that is, nations of respectable
power. That is the United States, particularly the United States
not as represented by the Congress, but by the president. It is
the identity of the United States which is a political power, not
some concatenation of its parts.
The United States is represented today only by its
president, as a political institution. The Congress does not
represent the United States. They're not quite sure who they do
represent these days, since they haven't visited their voters
recently.
The President is institutionally the embodiment of the
United States in international relations. The State Department
can't do that, the Justice Department can't do it, no other
department can do it; only the President of the United States
under our Constitution, can represent the United States as an
entity, its entire personality, its true interests, its whole
people.
Now, there's only one other power on this planet, which can
be so insolent as that toward other powers. And that's the
Republic of China. China's engaged, presently, in a great
infrastructure-building project, in which my wife and others have
had an ongoing engagement over some years. There's a great reform
in China, which is a troubled reform. They're trying to solve a
problem. That doesn't mean there is no problem. But they're
trying to solve it.
Therefore, if the United States, or the president of the
United States and China, participate in fostering that project,
sometimes called the Silk Road Project, sometimes the Land-Bridge
Project; if that project of development corridors across Eurasia
into Africa, into North America, is extended, that project is
enough work to put this whole planet into an economic revival.
And I'll get into just a bit of that, to make it more sensuous
concretely.
Now, China had cooperation with the government of Iran for
some time. Iran has actually been completing a number of rail
links, which are an extension of China's Land-Bridge program, or
Silk Road project.
More recently, we've had, on the side of India, from Indian
leadership, which has met with the representatives of China, to
engage in an initial route among the land routes for the
Land-Bridge program. One goes into Kunming in China. I was in
that area, in Mishinau (ph), during part of World War II. When we
were out of Mishinau, and we had planes flying into Kunming,
"over the hump," as they used to say in those days. I'm quite
familiar with that area.
But if you have water connections and canal connections and
rail connections, from Kunming through Mishinau (ph), that area,
across Bangladesh into India, across into Pakistan, into Iran, up
to the area just above Tehran, south of the Caspian, you have
linked to the Middle East, you have linked to Central Asia, you
have linked to Turkey, you have linked to Europe.
Then you have a northern route, which is pretty much the
route of the Trans-siberian Railroad, which was built under
American influence and American advice by Russia.
You have a middle route which is being developed in Central
Asia, with China and Iran. India is working on a plan which
involves only a few hundreds of kilometers of rail to be added,
though a lot of other improvements along the right of way, which
would link the area north of Tehran through Pakistan, through
India, through Bangladesh, through Myanmar, into Kunming, into
Thailand, into Vietnam, down through Malaysia and Singapore
across the straits, by a great bridge into Indonesia.
There's a plan also for the development of a rail link
through what was northern Siberia, across the Bering Straits,
into Alaska, and down into the United States.
There's a Middle East link -- several links from Europe as
well as China, but from China, a Middle East Link into Egypt,
into all of Africa. So that what we have here, is a set of
projects which are not just transportation projects, like the
transcontinental railroads in the United States, which was the
precedent for this idea back in the late 1860s and 1870s. But you
have development corridors, where you develop, on an area of 50
to 70 kilometers either side of your rail link, your pipeline, so
forth, you develop this area with industry, with mining, with all
these kinds of things, which is the way you pay for a
transportation link.
Because of all the rich economic activity every few
kilometers of distance along this link, there's something going
on -- some economic activity. People working, people building
things, people doing things, to transform this planet in great
projects of infrastructure building which will give you the great
industries, the new agriculture, and the other things we
desperately need.
There is no need for anybody on this planet who is able to
work, to be out of work. It's that simple. And that project is
the means. If the nations which agree with China, which now
includes Russia, Iran, India, other nations, if they engage i a
commitment to that project which they're building every day, if
the United States -- that is, the president of the United States,
Clinton -- continues to support that effort as he's been doing,
at least politically, then what do you have?
You have the United States and China and a bunch of other
countries ganged up together against the greatest power on this
planet, which is the British Empire, called the British
Commonwealth. That's the enemy.
And if, on one bright day, say a Sunday morning after a
weekend meeting, the President of the United States, the
president of China, and a few other people say "We have
determined this weekend, that based on our advisers and the
facts, that the international financial and monetary system is
hopelessly bankrupt; and we, in our responsibility as
heads-of-state, must put these bankrupt institutions into
bankruptcy reorganization in the public interest. And it is in
our interest to cooperate as nations in doing this, to avoid
creating chaos on this planet."
The result then, is that such an announcement on a bright
Sunday morning will certainly spin the talking heads on
washington TV. But otherwise, it means that the entire system, as
of that moment, has been put through the guillotine, and the head
is rolling down the street -- Alan Greenspan's head, perhaps.
That means we have, at that point, the impetus for building
immediately a new financial and monetary system. Now, in putting
a corporation which is bankrupt into viable form, what do you do?
You've got to find the business that it's going to do, which is
the basis for creating a new credit, to get that firm going
again. The Land-bridge program, with its implications on a global
scale, is the Great Project which spins off directly and
indirectly, enough business, so to speak, for every part of this
world, to get this world back on a sound basis again.
(End Videotape of LaRouche.)
We are currently entering into one of the most
turbulent and dangerous periods in world history. Without
{EIR,} you will simply not know what is really going on.
The success of the LaRouche movement, and the worldwide
influence of Lyndon LaRouche personally, are essential,
if mankind is to find a way out of this crisis.
The forecasts and analyses published in this
magazine, over the past 24 years, represent the
most consistently effective economic forecasting in modern
history. Why is this so? How can we account for the
superiority of LaRouche's economic forecasting, over the
babblings of other economists and government officials?
``Behind our qualitative advantage over this
publication's putative rivals,'' LaRouche wrote in {EIR}
of Jan. 2, 1998, ``there was no `crystal ball,' no
statistical pseudo-science, but only superior science:
that of Johannes Kepler, Gottfried Leibniz, Carl Gauss,
and Bernhard Riemann, most notably.''
It is just not a matter of pride in {EIR'}s
outstanding accomplishments, LaRouche continued: ``This is
the crucial issue upon which the survival of the U.S.A.,
and of this global civilization now depend.'' If
governments and other relevant institutions fail to heed
LaRouche's warnings, and to adopt the policies he
advocates, then we are heading for a new Dark Age.
Escalate the fight. Help bring others on board.
Redouble your own efforts to achieve victory against the
British-led financier oligarchy. Your future, and that of
your posterity, depends upon it.
Call 8883473258
Sincerely yours,
Susan Welsh
Associate Editor
********** NEW **********
LaRouche publications now has a web site: http://www.larouchepub.com .
For further information send Email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . On
the web site you can find information about how to order various
publications, the Table of Contents of recent Executive Intelligence
Reviews, lots of articles by LaRouche and much more. You can also
hear the real audio version of this program as well as some past
issues.
EIR Talks can be heard at 5:00 PM Saturdays Eastern Daylight time on the
following satellite: Galaxy 7 (G-7), Transponder 14, 91 Degrees West,
7.56 Audio.
``EIR Talks'' also airs worldwide on shortwave radio on
Sundays starting at 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time (2100 UTC) on WWCR,
on frequency of 5.070 MHz.
The full-hour program includes commercials for The New
Federalist, Executive Intelligence Review, and other periodicals
and books. Radio stations which pull the program down from
satellite have the option of using the included commercials and
other material that rounds out the hour or substituting their
own.
For further information, contact Frank Bell at 703-777-9451.
EIR Talks can be sent to you each week via Email. To receive this
Email you must subscribe to the LaRouche mailing list. To do this,
send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a line (not the subject
line) saying
subscribe lar-lst
--
John Covici
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
