De ja vu, bu then again everything has moved in concentric circles for four decades, and we have already formulated the basis of a Generational War going back to Plato and Aristotle.

Try this one, seemingly the organization is begging me to add to this running commenatary of mine:

For example. I am presently eighty-five years of age, and would be eighty-six in about another half-year to come. At this time, my passion for the future experience of our nation and of the world at large, is more intense, more impassioned than it has ever been before. The thing I hate the most among my associates, is either evidence of cheap ambition for personal gratification in the short term, or shirking needed commitments to more long-ranging goals, where their passion should be a gloating satisfaction in the benefits which none of us may live to experience, but which we are working to bring about. All really good individual persons, or groups of persons think like that; they think like persons who really know that they are immortal, and know that their future lies in the outcome of their devotion to the future of mankind.

The de ja vu comes with the three ingredients of the failure of the baby boomers in not holding up the banner of — um — this banner, the prime target of one Kronberg or another, and — if you will indulge me for the moment — the presence of a sort of blurred between figurative and literal metaphor of “suicide” as a means of domineering control, with the up-is-down down-is-up dichotomy of “the real world” and “the bridge jumpers brigade” — which one relies in the real world and which one doesn’t?

Cowardice, and related forms of personal moral corruption, among former associates, as exemplified by the case of the Molly Kronberg who, in 1989, went, like Benedict Arnold, out of corrupting fears under threats from government, over to the cause of civilization’s and our own association’s leading adversary, the British Empire, have taken their toll in such forms as virtual treason to that cause of our republic and humanity generally which we continue to serve.

Now we have reached the great historic hour of decision which I foretold nearly thirty-seven years ago. Never has there been a moment during that interval, when, except for the political or moral equivalent of victims of either sexual ejaculatio praecox or rage provoked by fears of sexual impotence, that that perspective I set forth between August and December 1971 not been the most crucial feature of the way in which history since that time has actually unfolded, up to the present moment.

It is important, especially for us, who remain troubled by the morally disappointing patterns of personal behavior among some former and some present colleagues, that we understand the deeper implications of the indicated pathological tendencies.

You got to hand it to the man.  He has his own sense of self-serving mythological destiny working for him, mentally if not physically in control of his own Fantasy Shadow Government.  He knows about being President.  Or something.  And he predicted the internal set of circumstances of 2008  in the year 1971, which I guess had to have been a year of momentous events of some amount of coercive consolidation.  See, the man is just like Jesus, well aware that Judas is going to sell him out.  I suppose.

Incidentally, I find this analysis from Dennis King pretty amusing:

It would appear from many articles by Greason and others over the past 20 years that the LaRouche movement in Australia is the most successful in the world. It controls the Citizens’ Electoral Council, a previously important far-right group, enjoys nebulous alliances with demagogic rural politicians, and raises money on a large scale from naive seniors without getting indicted. I suspect this success is partly the result of the local LaRouche network being farther away from Leesburg, Va. (LaRouche’s headquarters) than any other international LaRouche group–and hence being less under the sway of Der Abscheulicher‘s constant micromanagement (including his often-disastrous tactical directives).

I always thought the relative success of “the movement” in Australia had something intrinsically tied with Australia itself, but that would not make too much sense.  It beggars the sort of half-hearted analysis that Nazi Germany would have been better off had Hitler died somewhere in, say, 1940.

This entry was posted on Thursday, March 27th, 2008 at 10:48 am and is filed under The LaRouche Challenge. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.