The End Game of the end game… a lot of pressure to place on one magazine article…

P.S. For those who choose to orbit the Sun, they may get burned.

A Larouchite posted that here once upon a time on this blog. A threat, of sorts, but to dissect that statement is to arrive at a sort of crippling hole in the psyche of the cult follower. The sun is the Cult Leader — and it appears that this commenter was not self-aware enough to realize who it is that is orbiting the sun — and ergo how much he has debased his sense of identity to the point where he feels he deserves to be put under complete control of the Cult Leader — get too close to his greatness, you see, and he may get burned. Better to do as he says, not exhibit any independent thought… Ken Kronberg and Jeremy Duggan orbited the sun, and they could not handle it. They could not handle this, this differential between MAN and ANIMAL. * (By the way: Do you know the difference between man and the animals? The question that appears to have a rather Fascist answer. But I always thought those No Fear shirts with the slogan “If You’re Not Living Life to the Edge, You’re Just Wasting Space” were kind of fascist.)

Another Larouchite posted this: Umm…everybody past and present on this and other anti LaRouche websites tend to be self appointed “experts” on the life and times of Lyndon LaRouche. Especially D. King. But just remember this; the not too old definition of an expert. “an EX is a HAS-BEEN…a SPERT is a DRIP UNDER PRESSURE.”

“Drip under pressure” from what, exactly? He never answered. Which brings me to the latest noteworthy missive from Larouchepac **…

As an aside: You know, for a supposed political action committee, the “Larouche PAC” sure doesn’t do much for the purpose of any legitimate pac: help elect political candidates that fit the pac’s issues, or working as a tool for various political figures in their “I scratch your back, you scratch mine” of our electoral machinery. A statistic I will have to look up — Out of the funds coming into “Larouchepac”, a grand total of $1550 go to his “Democratic” candidates. Where do the rest go, do you presume?

But anyway, back to Larouche’s insanity regarding suicide and the man who has followed him for the past 3 decades: My first impulse on reading this was to see it as an attempted psychological trick dug out from his article’s recollection of his all too human response to the jarring anonymous caller’s “Why haven’t you killed yourself yet?”, which for Dennis King, I can pretty well assume he has the sympathy and empathy which allows him to transfer those feelings to what it would be like for Ken Kronberg to have similar assaults under relations entirely different from his own.

Larouche is giving us some projection on the state of his soul and/or moral campus. The dehumanization is a part of the stripping out process on the part of his followers, projected from the cult leader.

Re-reading it, I come to a more sinister thought — successfully doubling of that square of sinisterism, I suppose. The Manchurian Candidate scenario, which past Larouche incarnations have been obsessed with (as Larouche posits threats supposedly happening from the outside but really happening from the inside of the cult.) He is saying that to continue on Larouche’s scent is an act of suicide. Continue on your suicide run, Dennis King, or don’t — it is up to you. “Nice House. It’s a shame if anything happens to it.” You are dead, either soulless or literally.

His words are disingenuous — clearly Dennis King is front and central in Larouche’s mind right about now, and clearly King hit paydirt with this article. The disingenuousness stems partially from the fact that Larouche gives King a bit too much power in directing unfavorable (and neutral) news about him. When I posted a series of posts going through Larouche’s past 4 decades of history — as presented in mainstream news sources — and let me make clear to you: I had and still have nothing that is not available to a patron of the library system of a middle sized city — the Larouchites finally butted in with an attack on Dennis King. I could only shrug and suggest that I do not need Dennis King to tell me about Operation Mop Up, and coin the phrase “Dennis King, of High Times Magazine single article fame”. (Though, I guess I do need him to tell me about conferences with old Nazis advocating SDI technology for their own strange purposes.)

Actually I think he has Avi Klein’s forthcoming article on his mind, and there is a degree to which Avi Klein is simply transferred to Dennis King. King has been demonized to the point of not being human — What was that he typed at the beginning of the Ken Kronberg fall-out, somehow tying things through John Train?
Lyndon Larouche has repeatedly noted that he’s never had a political enemy who has tried to destroy him, who was not thoroughly evil.
I would not have mentioned Avi Klein’s article [I have taken to referencing it rather vaguely] except I noticed that King updated his essay with an explication for “this might be the end game, folks” — which is, in the end, what is irking LaRouche like crazy. I posited in my last Larouche-related post, which Rachel Holmes backed up, that the spotlight turned on Larouche in 1986 (and again in 1988) did indeed destroy him — and then he rose from the dead… at half strength. Able to exploit the post 9/11 climate and the Bush era for what will prove to be his final go at whatever the hell his project is supposed to have been, he had the right memes at the right time to bring in one last spurt of followers.

I have surmised for quite some time that the post-game — the post-game being after Larouche passes away — has several splintered organizations which will be easily identified as descendants of Larouche’s stupid cult. For all I know, one or two of them might develop into something productive — though not under the leadership of the Jeff Steinbergs*** of the world. The glue that held Larouche together, and not just Larouche but various criminal opportunists who apparently allow its existence, are thrust apart. The goal of Larouche, if he can possibly find his way past the internal chaos of his cult, is to ensure his Cult of Personality fall into the proper hands and someone who will send all glory to Larouche. Considering his crew, and the Machivellian games he has had them operating under, good luck with that. He best have a few highly capable LYMers (the best and the brightest? Ivy League drop outs?) he can somehow harrange straight to Hegla Zepp.


LaRouche’s approach to death has always been to threaten, as if he had the power of life or death. For many years, even while in the organization, I wondered why, every time an “enemy” of LaRouche died, he gloated, claiming, in one way or another, that the dead enemy had received a “just” punishment. Only the very young could buy into such megalomaniacal

And that is the problem, the LYM are, for the most part, very young. The LYM is composed of the same generation that brought the world Columbine, Virginia Tech., Red Lake and other massacres. It is all well and good for LaRouche to blame these massacres on video games and baby-boomer parents, but, since he has claimed to be a powerful, world leader for the entire time these kids have been alive, why isn’t he also to blame?

Further, it is beyond question that some of the LYM are unstable, and are being made more unstable by their intensely coercive living conditions, and LaRouche’s policy of taking away their medications. I have asked before, is it possible that a zealous member of the LaRouche Youth Movement, hyper-stimulated by the rhetoric of Helga et al concerning Jeremiah Duggan’s supposed connections to the British Royalty/Zionist/Tavistock conspiracy to kill LaRouche, took it upon him- or her- self, to protect the LaRouches by killing Jeremiah? If so, how would LaRouche’s statements concerning Dennis King’s “death wish” be interpreted by such an unstable LYM’er?

Two more points:

1. LaRouche has killed people in the past by deploying them 16 hours a day, not paying them enough for proper nourishment, and denying them proper health care. Despite his grandiose claims of having been a leader in industry in the 1950’s, nobody, except a Third World sweat shop owner, would force people to live on $5-7 a day, share a bedroom with four unrelated people, and take away medications without a legitimate doctor’s opinion. Or force pregnant employees to have abortions [I’m not going to let up on this]

2. Do the second generation LYM’ers know that their “caring” guru-LaRouche demanded that their parents abort them, and that he railed mercilessly against the members who dared to defy LaRouche and have babies?


* A few years ago, a current Larouchie harranged a just exited ex-Larouchie with words to the effect of “Couldn’t Handle the Fight”. I take this to be representative of their attitude, and how they have steeled themselves for their card-table-shrine duty.

** As a matter of course, I will avoid linking to his set of websites. Thus I link to my posting of what he posted on the website. I am told that elsewhere on the website, he links to this missive with an old photograph of Dennis King — which does add a certain credence to the “Manchurian Candidate” concept.

*** sp? Either it ends with an “er” or not. Frankly, I don’t care enough to check to see if I got his name right. I note that the Larouche feed spit out an article from him on Cheney’s “Guns of August” — which seems to use the considerable resources of Larouche’s vaunted Intelligence Service to do little more than cite an article in the Guardian. And I note that the Guardian was just recently trashed by Larouche in connection with the author of that New Republic piece.

6 Responses to “The End Game of the end game… a lot of pressure to place on one magazine article…”

  1. Rachel Holmes Says:

    The sinister sense of threats hanging in the air, as you indicate, has a lot to do with why former LaRouche followers have not gone public with the dirty laundry of the cult: They are afraid not just that they will be attacked verbally in all sorts of crazy venues, but that they will be attacked physically, have their houses damaged, their cars sabotaged, have their businesses hurt or their job security hurt.

    LaRouche has relied on this bullying to keep everyone quiet–an important asset to him, because there are far more former LaRouchites than current LaRouchites out there, and the former LaRouchites loathe LaRouche.

    But it seems things are changing a bit, and perhaps that is to be attributed to the trauma of Ken Kronberg’s death. This seems to have loosened some tongues and some inhibitions. From my vantage point, I can see a lot of anger under the surface among members of the org–not all of them, not even most of them, but perhaps enough.

    The bullying and threats (the picture of Dennis King, the “he’s dead already” formulation) are of absolutely no use if people targeted by LaRouche go to the police and say I think I’m in danger, or talk to the media and say the same. Surely the LaRouchies should know that–Lyn’s been babbling about “factitious advantage” for 40 years.

    The mental picture to work with is this: The LaRouche org operates like a (very) smalltime mafia, with one big difference: When the mafia kills someone, yes, they do send flowers to the funeral (see LaRouche on Dennis King), and they take care of the dead man’s family. Somehow, I don’t think this happened in the Kronberg case, but we haven’t heard from them. It certainly did not happen in the Duggan case. LaRouche has trashed the Duggans in a particularly repulsive way.

  2. Justin Says:

    There is the simple question for the Baby Boomers: where are they supposed to go? It’s the bind that goes unanswered with the suggestion from one of the posters to not challenge Larouche at all — just LEAVE.

    The answer for the LYMers, when they get past the ego-stroking that Larouche is providing for them by giving them giving them some measure of power in the organization over somebody else in the organization — the Baby-Boomers — a sense they don’t get in the real world… all while under Larouche’s thumb, of course. But the answer to the question of where they go is simple: Go back to their parents’ house for a few months and then back to college or enter any other part of the Real World from there.

    I can post any number of posts from the last week from FACTNet, from two different lines of thought. XLCer has taken to posting from out of media reports on members who are spotted manning the card-table shrines in being in the organization for 30 years.

    Beyond that problem, The LYMers can shake their Larouche influences a little more easily. Witness:

    The obvious question is how can a bright guy like a Paul Glumaz end up at a card table shrine for over THREE DECADES???? Some people who were with him for a few years emailed me some possible reasons. For a few years Glumaz did not even use his real name and instead used to call himself Paul Morgan. Glumaz may not know this, but several exlcers have run into his card table shrine in the Seattle area over the years. Each person has indicated that it is the saddest thing becuase they all remember talking to him about many subjects and seeing that he has too much education to be in the cult. However, what usually happens when you are in the cult for any length of time is that you get “Larouchefied”. What this means is that about 3/4ths of what yoy know and talk about will be pretty accurate, the remaing 1/4 or so will then have both LC jargon and endless conspiracy tales which then lead to more and more jiberish. The net result is that you always end up talking like a Larouche junkie who just injected 50 ccs of Lyn into your veins.

  3. tuer07 Says:

    Justin hits the nail on the head when he states “there is the simple question for the Baby Boomers: where are they supposed to go? It’s the bind that goes unanswered with the suggestion from one of the posters to not challenge Larouche at all — just LEAVE.”

    I would add that the same question applies to LYMers, not all of them have the option of parents and/or college.

    There is no simple answer. This is because after months or years in the Larouche organization, an individual thinks in terms of “we.” There is no “I.” I know this personally, and it also is painfully evident in every news article cited to recently by this website and factnet where Larouche followers are quoted. For example one baby booner states in one article:

    “WE want to get Cheney out of office before the end of summer,”
    “WE’re also moving the Republican side for resignation,” Glumaz said. “WE want to implement the Baker-Hamilton Report of the Iraq Study Group and WE’re running out of time to do that. And WE want to shift the trajectory of this thing which is heading towards war with Russia. WE want to have a strategic understanding between Russia and China and the U.S. for a kind of FDR New Deal.”

    And in another article, a different baby boomer organizer states

    “WE’re here to bring awareness and to educate people,” said Noble. “Just like Roosevelt, WE need to rebuild infrastructure and WE need a new monetary system that will build new jobs.”

    “WE got $120 from a lady in Deerfield last week when it poured”

    The loss of the ability to use the pronoun “I” is evident in almost all coercive cults, and tyrannical societies. LaRouche has spent 40 years perfecting the removal of “I” from his followers.

    I am not a follower of Ayn Rand’s objectivism, but she lived in Soviet Russia and understood the loss of the sense of self. Her entire book, Anthem, is dedicated to struggle of one man to use the pronoun “I” instead of “we.”

    For those LYMers and baby boomer followers of LaRouche that are stuck in the organization, not only do they have to believe that they will not die of a guilty conscience for letting down humanity if they leave, and not only do they have to believe that they have the resources to survive “out there,” but, the biggest hurdle they will face, before they even get to the point of considering leaving, is that they have to unpeel the onion that has become their psyche in order to find the “I.”

    Once the “I” is found, there is good news. Our society is built on the belief that one can reinvent oneself at any age. Contrary to the culture created by LaRouche, there are laws against age and gender discrimination. And contrary to LaRouche’s unreconstructed marxist understanding of economics, this is still a nation with millions of businesses, small and large. Creative people, at any age, can start companies, go back to school, get jobs. Older workers are sought after by many companies because they show up on time and actually work.

    There is hope, Justin.

  4. Rachel Holmes Says:

    It’s a valid question–where should the Baby Boomers go?–with respect to Baby Boomer members in the “field”–that is, the regions.

    However, it is less valid in terms of Baby Boomers in the National Center in Leesburg–almost all of them have jobs already, and the rest could easily get them–unemployment in the area is running -1%, or something like that–and in general these are people with some skill levels.

    So where do they go? Out the front door of the office and off to work. And rather than coming to the office after work to be beaten up by some drawn, haggard sadist of an NC or NEC member, they can go home and read, or join other political or citizens’ groups, or talk to their spouses, or do whatever it is that they want to do. And do it without being psychologically hammered.

  5. Justin Says:

    Sure, I know it wouldn’t be that simple. I still think that tact of brief release at parents’ house, onto probably college (but not necessarily) fits the profile for the bulk of the LYMers, a middle-class and, well — college drop-out bunch — who fell into the lines of the book “Why Smart People Believe Weird Things”, but can probably shake off the psychological “we” imprint with a little effort.

    In terms of it not being simple at all, well… an ex-LYMer profiled within that Washington Post article from a few years ago and poster to the FACTNet board a few years ago described the abject terror he had in his immediate post-experience.
    Also, I only ever read the article once and fairly quickly, but the college journalist who profiled a commenter on this blog who had just left the organization after 3 decades described intimidation.  I don’t know his full story, though I found where he lived fairly interesting — so far as I can tell, he falls on the other side of the ledger of the “What to do now” than the folks in Leesburg.

    Beyond which, Jeremiah Duggan is a person who “Just Left” — albeit from a conveniently isolated locale where he did not have his full bearings.
    Okay, fine. It’s complicated. To a large degree, I simply don’t know what I am talking about.

  6. Rachel Holmes Says:

    I do agree with you that it’s complicated–if it weren’t the cult wouldn’t have the coercive powers that it does.

    Like Jeremiah Duggan, Ken Kronberg “just left”–he left the way he did, I am convinced, because he couldn’t stomach the organization (I am not sure if this was because he could no longer stand being attacked by LaRouche, or if this was because he had figured out that LaRouche was a Very Bad Man)–as I say, he could not stomach the organization, but he could not face dropping out, having devoted his whole life to it.

    Kronberg, however, might have been inclined to think that he’d failed LaRouche at the same time that he thought that LaRouche had failed him.

    The average Boomer in Leesburg who wants to leave can do so without fear of intimidation, except for stupid remarks made by LaRouchies encountered on street corners or in supermarkets.

    However, if someone is concerned about the possibility of any greater danger–which could be realistic if the person possesses “inside information,” I suppose–that person should go to the Sheriff’s Office before he or she leaves, explain the situation, and explain that they just want the Department to be alerted and to be aware.

    It may be that the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office already has an idea what’s going on on the inside, as a result of coming across the April 11 “morning briefing,” etc., in their investigation of Kronberg’s death.

Leave a Reply