http://www.publiceye.org/larouche/Kronberg.html

One brief observation: In terms of pure cyncism, I can imagine Larouche and the figures in the Boiler room in Loudon seeing it and finding vidication of their view as an evil agent visa vie her husband.
………………………………

With an eye toward placing myself in the shoes of whomever is sitting in the boiler room in Loudon, dreaming up a good reaction to that Washington Monthly article, I think I can conjure something up.  Namely, one can defend how the cult has applied the Internet… and one can  exaggerate it to some unholy extent.

So, they should now pump out the propaganda focusing in on the vast innovative uses Larouche, Inc has employed with the Internet.  Those World Historic Web-casts he holds at a rapid clip, each more worldly historical than the last — depending on who you ask with an audience of either world dignitaries and repected figures in all endevors of politics and humanity, OR dedicated cult members and an assorted number of ex-members generally wathing for tea-leaf signs — but falling asleep out of boredom.

The rest are a bit too disreputable.  In olden times, when the Internet was just becoming a mass-medium and the angle of attraction was kooky and goofy item available — Larouche’s campaign website would tend to be listed off as items of curiosity.  Today we need a little bit more by way of two things:  somehow utilizing the Internet, as he managed his telex list and telephones in an earlier era, as a tool to get money out of different people’s bank accounts and into their bank accounts.  AND, equally tricky, creating a vast-enough Internet community for Larouchites while shielding them from the rest of the arena.

I cannot say for sure if this is organizational or just enterprising youth members, but there has been a long standing Wikipedia battle, focused on the Larouche entries but trickling out to every other topic of humanity.  To a great extent wikipedia has recently thrown their hands in the air and the Larouchies have had it confirmed that wikipedia is a vast anti-Larouchite organization.  Nonetheless, by dent of a strained balance in attempting the often-times false “synthesis antithesis synthesis” — dichtomy (whatever you might say about the takes of those two editors “CBerlet” and “GoodToBeKing” in editing those wikipedia entries, they are closer to reality than the Larouche cult members), they’ve succeeded in part (The long-time disclaimer at the top of the page on how he is perceived radically differently by two different camps has to be seen as a victory for the cult), even if at the end of the day the wikipedia articles are damning enough that wikipedia has to be a product of… I don’t know, the Ford Foundation?  All of which is to say, it’s a bit of a losing battle and I don’t know what a cult is supposed to do BUT to damned it in the eyes of their memberships — all this while engaging within something relatively sophisticated in handling one important piece of the Internet.

A free flow of information, and a ready access to materials previously not available, may just be something they have to juggle.  And what beyond the side-swap of myspace is there to be done?  Perhaps they need to create their own Larouche Myspace.  The good news with such a social networking site is that their “about me” page can already be pre-programmed: Musical prefence: Beethoveen, C=256.  And Rock is the Devil’s Music.  Hobbies: Doubling Squares.  Et al, et al.  Close comments to only Larouchies, except perhaps a pre-selected pre-screened available
 outsider comment of “I would like to hear more about the teachings and political causes of Lyndon Larouche.  When is the next cadre school introducting?”  (No other feeback necessary.)

Beyond all this, Larouchies needs to be peddling something tactile on campuses, which is an adaptation that can not be accomplished by converting literary output to a blog.  I suppose we will be hearing every detail on how a Gore talk was disrupted (while waiting in line), or how
 they crashed a state Democratic convention and managed the oh-so arduous task of getting them to sign onto Impeachment.  That’s part of the
 picture, but it doesn’t get to the level of “blanketing the nation” with the newness and Larouchianist.  The cadres are now apparently unloading their back stock of materials.  Maybe you will be able to pick up that old copy of “Is Dukakis the New Eagleton”?  [Or are they just handing out
 “The Economic Crisis of 2005”, with the year crossed out and stamped
 with “2007”?  I think “The End of the Truman Era” is rather out of time — available for resale at any time under the guise of any ideology he’s serving as a parasite for at the time — so they might be selling that one.

Actually, come to think of it, Larouche has already defended his role as Internet Visionary.  Incoherent as it is, that piece where Larouche jumps from a dinner party in the 1950s to Chomsky to Stephen Colbert with opaque references to seeing where myspace would take us and to Murdoch’s “pouch”?  There you go.  Larouche: Visionary.
……………………..

I would not have used the “many of them are mentally unstable” in describing some of the LYM recruits, which does have a circle the drain effect if exploited well, and I can only assume it refers to… oh, “TimeForTruth”?

To review, and you can start the review here:

Avi Klein, the author of this piece is a (possible or probable) Mossad Agent, and is motivated by a right-wing desire to destroy the presidential ambitions of Hillary Clinton.

… On the behest of the Bankers’ desire to stop the new Economic Architecture that a Hillary Clinton / Lyndon Larouche team will bring to bear…

… helped in their efforts with the assistance of the Irish Republicans.

Behind this article stand the slush funds of John Train.

Klein’s “sponsor” is Congressman Hall, who is livid because Larouche is exposing the CO2 Hoax — and I assume that Hall’s problem here is the same as mine which….

I myself am clearly motivated because I want to eliminate 5 billion people on the Earth, which we all know is what Al Gore’s Global Warming fight is all about.

And This blog — oh, don’t get me started. It is operated by a Star Trek groupie and Robert Beltran stalker. And we all know what that means.

FACTNet is operated by the American Family Association, and is plagued by bitter, drop-outs of a righteous cause — and their gripes are not dissimilar from gripes anyone has in quitting any job. Individual posters we can cover the problems with later.

And Molly Kronberg is a Republican, who even as Ken Kronberg fought valliantly against the Fascism of Cheney-Bush under the banner of Lyndon Larouche, donated hundreds of dollars to the Bush campaign.  And is under the control of John Train.

Okay. Now that we got all that out of the way, the motivations of the author of this piece and people way, way, way off of the periphery (me) or in the center who could offer something of substance (the ex-members at factnet) — as explained by the Larouche organization. Here is an article.

… and thus new people are introduced to the term “Riemann — Larouche Method”.

And incidentally, from the — er — Star Trek groupie‘s site, a comment of note:

Someone who should know tells me that on the few occasions when LCers or LYMers are showing up in Washington, DC now, they are handing out flyers for the 10/10 webcast that were generated on a home PC. Seems a bit different from what Chicago is apparently doing, with all that literature. It may be old literature, because the org has been pushing locals or regions to take old lit (probably trying to save the price of storage).

……………………………………

Okay. Got that? Good.

AND… To begin again…

— GIVE THE AMERICAN CITIZENRY BACK ITS SOUL! –

Lyn held a several hour discussion with the NC/NEC on Saturday afternoon, in which he kicked off a process of discussion for improving the functioning of the organization, which cannot be
adequately summarized here. Here are a few of the highlights of the areas discussed:

* THE CURRENT STRATEGIC SITUATION:

We are on the edge of something worse than fascism taking over the United States–the edge of the doom of civilization itself. If these Greenie idiots, typified by Gore, do what they plan, the world’s population could go from 6.5 billion, to less than 1 b illion people. We are already in a {breakdown} crisis, and if we don’t get the United States to make a change in direction {right now}, we will have no chance to survive. That’s the test of responsibility today.
………………………………………….

I was sort of making half-hearted and botched attempts at a response to the final comments of the long-time Larouche cult member who just wrote — what? 100 comments? — on this blog over a weeks’ span. One question lingering in my mind is where do I take this crock?

The line of questioning were stupdifying, but instructive in the way that the leaps that arrive at the questions show the beach-heads that allow someone to believe in the conspiracy of… um… Al Gore, I suppose a puppet of the synarchy of Felix Rhoyatin or the British Empire, and their environmentalist ploy of mass genocide to eliminate the Earth’s population from its current 6 billion to 1 billion — masked in a Global Warming Crusade. After a bit of thought it also occurs to me how this allows a person to see the scribblings of a wayward blogger (um… me) or the publisher of a national publication (go back to the L-PAC “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy” shot at the upcoming Washington Monthly article) as motivated to attack Larouche because of a desire to STOP LAROUCHE from exposing the great Global Warming Fraud.

Really.

I think I have more or less cracked the strategum of concerns over the vacuuousness of popular culture, and how that can ensnare a few wayward youth (and onto a lineage of history). But I have never gotten around to a certain battle over neo-Mathusianism — as enabling with a straight face, what’s that line? Some combination of the terms “Technological” “Humanism” and “Positivism”. (Maybe I’ll insert it here later.) There is something here.

“Let me guess: there are too many human beings and not enough resources?” “Okay, who should die and who should live? Who will decide how many children I can have?

Surely you jest. But Larouche has provided me with the absurd basis wherein I have a short-cut in unscrambling this: Population 6.5 billion down to Population 1.billion. I don’t need to say another word. You start with some plausible-sounding enough that might catch someone (Hey! China has a “One Child Policy”!) and, as if to make sure it stops short of accidentally latching a mass movement — you go to 1 billion. (Enough wiggle room between the two lines to lead somebody along, enough wiggle room to garner some fund-raising ala “environmentalist wackos”.)

Okay. It does not take a Great Greenie to summise societies must make adaptations here and there regarding issues of population and resources and how they affect day to day life– and if forced to I’ll go into some very practical matters drawn into any Environmental Impact Statement. But Larouche believes in a sort of “Unlimited”, unencumbered by the laws of entropy or environmental impact. Or, you know, moon bases will be hegemonic for humanity and solve whatever minor problems there might come from rapid development. And fusion, which I’d summise is a solution to some matters, but has proven to be a case of “Waiting for Godot” — put it in the hands of people seriously working on it and ignore a cult and maybe somebody is progressing on the matter.

But you go from that breach — the line about everybody believing that “Earth has too many people” — to the assumption that what they are attempting to thin the Earth’s population, which allows for the manichean view that Al Gore (or whomever… Um… Jarred Diamond) and wouldn’t you know it? They are the pessimists predicting the Apocalypse SOONER THAN NOW, not us — who are, you know?…

… all with a straight face. The Dollar equals Zero right now, after all, and have entered a dark age similar to the second interval of the years… etc. etc.

I gather that one keeps the 1 billion plot hidden in seeking funds from some less-than-Larouche-nutty-Conservative arenas (as the same with less-than-Larouche-nutty-antiwar arenas in the “Children of Satan” area), but I’ve never been entirely able to figure out how those things fully work.

…………………..

http://www.floridatoday.com/blogs/brevardwatchlist/2007/10/larouch-is-back-crying-british-are.html

……………….

Somewhat puzzling moment in a Larouche “Historic Internet Broadcast” q and a session. A weird discordant note — as posted at factnet…:

[Flintstone] I’ll ask you them, one at a time….

The first one is: “Mr. LaRouche, if you stop all foreclosures, how would you prevent some people from simply ceasing to pay their monthly mortgages? Or even just cutting back some months if their money is tight? If banks can’t foreclose, how does one force people to continue to pay their home mortgages at all? The entire population could just skate home-free on their payments.”

LaRouche: What a swindle! What a phony question!

Look: The provision is—as I made very clear, and even an idiot in the Congress can understand it—the way you do it is, once a property is in a state of threatened foreclosure, you come into negotiation, and it’s a negotiation conducted under law. What’s the law? I specified it very clearly. Didn’t the idiot listen to what I said? He wants to criticize what I say, before the idiot knows what he’s talking about?

I said, we will, instead of paying the scheduled mortgage as scheduled, there will be an agreement, an arrangement, under which the person who is the occupant of the property, will pay something per month, in the form, as if of rent; until such time as a resolution of the debt can be made. The object is to keep the people in their houses. And if you take them out of their houses, and if you take the extent of the evictions which are about to occur if this does not happen, you’re going to have the United States going into a sinkhole of Congress!

Anybody who opposes this, should be considered as tantamount to a criminal mind.

Freeman: I figured that was a good warmup.

Hm. Tightly controlled as those things seem to be… who asked that one, anyways? Designed to make an example, I … guess.

They tell us they have to “go along to get along,” and that LaRouche’s policies might “alienate the voters.” Now see where it’s got them. Only 11% of respondents in the latest Reuters/Zogby poll released today gave the Congress a positive mark.

… And so it is, in the Larouche World, where somebody is telling somebody something about Larouche. The further problem comes in with:

U.S. Congress Could Learn from Argentine First Lady on How to Fight the British

Larouche is back on a straight-forward uninhibited “British Empire” kick. It is more simple that way. But, while we’re looking at the British Empire, take a look at this. A bit unimportant, but firstly:

What the Ministry of Truth, Wikipedia, will never tell you, is that Sir Rupert Murdoch is a second-generation protégé of the British oligarchy’s 20th-Century propaganda baron, Lord Beaverbrook.

Hm. Now that would be an interesting thing to see in the wikipedia edits page!

More importantly, note footnote #1. The preparations have been made to ward off the Washington Monthly article — online any day now.

…………………………..

There is a topic I need to get to, which I think explains a cornerstone meme for a Larochite. But that topic will take a bit of work and thought. For more mindless fun, a fun gallop through some of the things offered as evidence of Larouche’s Political Power by, um, the now departed long time Larouchite.

I did some Googling of my own and if LaRouche is this crazy whack job he sure had some big boys conned into listening to him.

A plain falsehood. The man did not “do some googling of [his] own”.

I used to watch his old TV broadcasts (back in the 80s) and he’d make some pretty wild charges against very prominent people but they never would sue him would they? If these VIPs wanted to shut LaRouche down why not sue? Maybe someone has sued LaRouche but it wasn’t someone like Kissinger or other prominent political figures.

Have some fun with that one. It is the very definition of circular logic.

I wish they’d put the photo of Reagan and LaRouche talking up there. I bet they were talking about the weather!

There is this photograph Larouche uses for his propaganda, inrternal consumption that convinces a Larouchite of his importance, at a candidates’ forum with Reagan and Larouche. Fringe candidates along with real candidates in New Hampshire. I have you know that I have a photograph of presidential candidate John Cox along with the other Republican candidates for this year. Never mind. The Reagan administration had the strongest connections made between the Fantasy Shadow Government propped up for Larouche’s ego and the real government, running off of the fringes of the dark corridors of the Intelligence services. This would dry up relatively soon.

I also remember when Reagan attacked Dukakis over his mental health — Dukakis slipped 20 percentage points in the polls and if I remember LaRouche’s “minions” slipped the story of Dukakis mental state under the door of a the Democratic delegates.

Now that I review these comments, I can see he was largely reliving the glory days. Dukakis was a horrible candidate, easily caricatured and with a tone-deafness that makes one wonder how he succeeded in politics in the first place (Does he feel your pain?), whose main accomplishment and pitch — the “Massachusetts Miracle” — was already decaying into Recession. Gary Hart, had he stayed out of trouble, I believe would have won in 1988. And I’m sure that Larouche would have come up with something at the Democratic Convention for the purpose of convincing his cult that Larouche is a serious contender for the Democratic nomination.

Here’s another tidbit for you (I suspect you know all of this and just utter things that are false as a habit):

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2007/3437nbcsl_resolution.html

“To National Black Caucus of State Legislators

“State Rep. Juanita Walton (D) of St. Louis, representing the 81st District in Missouri’s House of Representatives

Something about this one, and the mood I was in when I saw it, prompted me to a near immediate response — with the second half of this post. More can be said about that matter — the discrepency between the amount “LarouchePac” rasies and the amount it pours into these electoral campaigns. (Hint: Memory serves, $900 is the latter figure.) Maybe I’m missing some things, but I think I have the gist of the picture down.

Dennis King and his theory that “British” is a code word for “Jew”. 

If it weren’t placed in and around other clear quasi-code words (can you really refer to “Locust Fund” as a code word?  That’s not so much a double-entendre as a single-entendre, so to speak), it just might be completely hackneyed.  It’s somewhat sympathetic — continue the Greatest War on to today, from the German vantage point.  But I can and will relent.  The war against the British Empire is not an anti-Jewish crusade — it’s just a kooky nutcase one.  Happy now?

More later, on this post. Things get a little bit weird.

Bebe
Hello,

I posted several months in your comments section about a friend who was talking to LaRouche people that were campaigning at my school. I don’t know if you remember.

I’m just here to update:

once she finished up her 2nd year at university this last spring, she refused to re-register for fall semester. This past summer she moved across the country, to Boston, with these people, and is staying at a home rented out by Larouche. Six months ago, she didn’t give a damn about politics. Now, she’s moving across the country for the sake of it.

Her family is devastated, as are her friends. She is a very bright girl who had ambitions of entering the field of medicine. She was doing very well in school, was attending a prestigious university, involved in multiple organizations, and had a very promising future.

While she has only just missed one semester at school, and there is a possibility she could always return for the spring, I am deeply worried for her. When I speak to her on the phone, she evades all questions of when she will return.

Fortunately, she is returning “briefly” for a family function in a few weeks. This will be her first return from Boston since June. I only hope she will see what she has left behind, and decide to return permanently.

I mean, alright. I can understand a person’s passion for politics. I understand a person’s need to feel involved in something. What I don’t understand, is how this man, this organization, this whateverthehellitis, can so easily destroy the life, family, and future of a human being.

And for what? I mean, what does their campaigning really accomplish? How can they be there, in Boston, feeling like they really are affecting change in society? How does this man manipulate their eyes in such a way that they fail to see what seems to be glaringly obvious to me –that this LaRouche guy is completely and utterly INSANE?

And I sometimes wonder, from the way she talks about it, maybe they really ARE doing something. Maybe I’m insane for not seeing what is so obvious to her, that LaRouche has got it right. That maybe, as she says, he really is popular in other countries.

But then, all I have to do is try to wade through one of his essays, and I see straight again.

I only hope that once this man dies (he is ancient, isn’t he?), the organization will as well, and it will at last liberate my friend.

………………………………………………………….
2. But here’s something more interesting Nancy wrote recently.

One to two weeks ago, an All Users mail message: No stipends this week because of a big tax payment. (I’m paraphrasing here.)

It’s not the no-stipends part that’s interesting–if there were stipends, that would be interesting.

It’s the “big tax payment” part…. I’ll bet you a dollar the IRS has come acreeping ’round their door about moneys owed to PMR.

Because PMR owed VERY LARGE taxes, and PMR had some customers who were, shall we say, remiss on their payments, so when the IRS wants to get its money, and can’t get it from PMR, which is flattened, where do you suppose the IRS goes?

Already, a few months ago, LaRouche in 2004 (L04), the Presidential campaign committee, had to cough up significant dollars to the IRS as a result of its outstanding debt to PMR.

Betcha the same thing has happened with some “infrastructure” accounts out of which stipends are paid.

Now that’s interesting. That’s a Simple Fact, as B. Boyd so absurdly christened the list of lies about PMR, Ken Kronberg, and the org that she generated a few months ago under LaRouche’s direction.

Gee, if Boyd was telling the truth in her claim about how scrupulously L04 and LaRouche PAC paid their bills, how come the IRS nailed L04 for such a bundle? How did it happen that L04 owed PMR such a chunk of change?
………………………………………..

Oh. By the way. A long-time member of the Larouche cult’s response to bebe’s comments is right here.

And the reason that the date of the Zero Dollar passed by?  We’re dealing with humans, not computers.  Which… I don’t know… is all the reason not to put up a date certain where we’ll enter into a Depression greater than… oh, never mind.  Send your bread to Leesburg.

A milestone has passed.  Larouche predicted that the dollar would be worth ZERO yesterday.  It is not.  The latest in a long line of predictions on apocalyptic happenings — wandering into a Depression Greater than the Great Depression, and into a new Dark Ages which rivals the second Dark Ages interval of… um…

Anyways, bread will be arriving at Cult Headquarters, apparently.  Feel free to send your own loaf of breads their way.  Just go ahead and send it to the EIR address, relatively easily found online I assume.

I’m told by my fellow Talking Heads fan, who also happens to be a member of the cult, that this is no big deal, because look at Bush and Greenspan.

In other news, Larouche’s Bankruptcy plan is, same as it ever was, essentially to bankrupt the banks for, you know, his control… and so…

Anyone reading this who doesn’t right off recognize the enormity of that is either a brainwashed LaRouche cult follower, or someone ignorant of banking. You, see, banks, like all other companies, have assets and liabilitities. In healthy companies, your assets exceed your liabilities, and you have positive net worth. If your liabilities comes to exceed your assets, you are technically insolvent, and need to correct that condition before it leads to collapse. If it starts leading to collapse, such companies can petition for bankruptcy, and if granted a Chapter 11, most of the liabilities are marked down to cents on the dollar, to where the assets again exceed liabilities. Hopefully, also, there is a business plan to prevent the problems from recurring. But the main service that bankruptcy does, for individuals as well as companies, is wipe out all, or a major portion, of your liabilities, typically in the form of debts.

And get this: if Congress fails to enact this bill, from first unveiling it in committee to passage in both houses and the president signing it into law, in about 2 hours from first hint to the public of what it proposes, it will be even more needed, as every depositor in the country will withdraw, or try to withdraw, their deposits and savings from the banks before the bill passes, in hopes of rescuing their entire savings, such that by the time the bill passes, every bank will in fact be totally bankrupt, destroyed by a universal bank run that will bankrupt every bank in the country simultaneously. Lyn, you have outdone yourself. You have had your eyes set on a crash for decades, and by golly, if your bill ever gets introduced in Congress, you’ll have your crash. 

……………….

[…]  Certainly, future generations would bless his name as the father of a bill that would (1) bankrupt all the banks, (2) destroy all depositors’ savings (as larouchetruth points out), (3) destroy the equity all homeowners have in their homes, and (4) destroy the entire financial system of the country, and then the world. 

But there really isn’t much point in analyzing a Larouche written bill.

go the LaRouchepac website, start the webcast, and if you don’t have the time, or the stomach, to listen to the whole thing, jump to minute 26 and listen for about five minutes on the banking bill, then jump to around minute 38, where Debbie starts the questions, and listen to his answers to the first four questions.

Some other time.

Oh mercy me.

I left that Jeremiah Duggan post incomplete, leaving up simply the Larouche model of crisis management in the parallel lines of one NCLCer’s experience in ’74, what I’ve observed in real time with Kronberg, and what I understand about Duggan. The other part of that picture? Well, I’ve been waiting for the right insult to be delivered to me from the Cult Apologist.*

And this morning I got to do a little mental jig.

Right about here. After expressing puzzlement, his response, “You don’t like to be challenged”, is a complete non-sequitur. Lined up next to a very interesting and useful insult.

So, Jeremiah Duggan attends that conference. Now, I cannot recreate much of what went on with the conference, even with the Washington Post “No Joke” article in hand. (“Question Your False Assumptions.”) There are second hand bits here and there, which at the time I’ll jettison. (In part because I’d have to shift about to find any of it.) But instead I’ll paint an imaginary picture, based off of Larouchite experiences that have been thrown my way. So, maybe there was some singing at some point.

And I am not kidding that when they sang the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” they changed the lyric of “my eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the lord” to “my eyes have seen the glory of the coming of LaRouche”!

I don’t know what they would be singing there — it cannot be the “Battle Hymn of the Republic”, but let’s just go ahead and figure that Jeremiah is sitting there, the conference meeting room sings… and…

They were there to hear solutions to stopping the War in Iraq. After participating in a rousing spiritual where key lines are changed to “Larouche”, we get the solution for the war. Running down the enemies list, which Jeremiah Duggan surely shared to a great extent (Cheney, the neo-cons, Blair), — that which is why he is there in the first place — he gets stuck on that title “Children of Satan“. He shifts a bit uncomfortably when you rummage into Jewish named bankers, and perhaps policy visa vie Israel.

And we rumble on through the Larouche Doctrine.

Somewhere along the line he gets the soft sell, the positivity expressed in the slogan “Do you know the difference between Man and the Animals?”

He mutters “This is an f’ing cult.” Reportedly he asked any number of questions, and was shunted. Which brings me back to what is the Hard Sell for the cult, the negative manner one urges one to join up:

You can’t even defend yourself? Your thoughts? You would we weak fodder for a real cult you know that? They’d suck you in like an old Hoover vacuum.

He has to get out of there.

And he calls his dear old mum. (“Still teeting off of mother’s milk, are you?“) It is run of the mill intimidation for Larouche’s minions, second nature — almost quaint.

There is one other item I wish I had immediate access to, an account of someone who was simply bored by his experience with his would-be cult recruiters, but I’ll have to move on from that.

I would have to shift through the articles on Jeremiah Duggan for how one gets out of there. At its most innocuous for the Schiller Institute, I imagine he fled out and tried to wave down a semi-truck. Conjecture can be built up from there.

(*He who practices the “1 + 1 = 11” logic; as well has the unfortunate habit of claiming to hear people say “B” when they say “A”.)

Imagine you are Jeremiah Duggan’s mother. You receive a call from his conference where Jeremiah says, “I’m in trouble.” After that, Jeremiah dies. Placing yourself in her shoes, and THAT is why it is an insult to say that Jeremiah Duggan is being used.

I am tempted to just type out the just over 4 page Chapter 39 of Younger Than That Now, entitled “Epiphany”, appropo of the fact that at the end of the chapter, Ruch Tuttle/Williams walks out and leaves the NCLC, which as my Kirby fan Larouchie points out, one can do — psychologically difficult as it may be. The one important exception to that rule in terms of physical ease is the particular circumstances of that particular Schiller Institute conference which Jeremiah Duggan attended.

Ruth is selling copies of New Solidarity door to door with her fellow NCLCers — Bill, Rodney, and Lorice. While doing so, a mentally ill and deranged woman strikes at and hits Lorice, leaving her bloodied and needing to be taken to the hospital. So as Lorice is being taken away for medical attention, Ruth and Bill soldier on selling New Solidarities at a different location. That night:

“No we didn’t tell anyone we were going to that neighborhood,” she [Lorice] was saying, and Bill and I nodded in affirmation. “Yeah, Rodney’s a new recruit. But I don’t think…” She listened a few minutes. “There was nothing I could do. I know it was my responsibility…” Finally she sighed and handed me the phone. I saw her walk wearily into the front room to join the rest of the group as Arlen read from the
latest briefing updates, giving everyone their evening fix of information from the National Committees.

I told my version of the incident to the man on the phone, adding, “At the hospital the police told me the woman is known in the neighborhood as mentally ill. She’s always hallucinating about the devil, and today she was tripping her brains out, too. They were trying to contact a family member to get her commited.”

“And you believe them?”

“Well, yeah,” I said. “You didn’t?”

“Look at the facts: the working class is being systematically destroyed by Rocky’s Trilateral Commission. There’s a psychological holocaust going on out there. This is the direct result of Nelson Rockefeller’s interference in our daily organizing. If you do your job better, the workers won’t be destroyed like this.”

“So it’s my fault?”

“Let’s go over the story again, only this time I want you to tell me more about what Rodney was doing.”

“Look, he was ringing doorbells, just like the rest of us. That’s all.”

There is a dynamic in this account from 1974, shared with both the Jeremiah Duggan situation and the Ken Kronberg situation. The Larouche line is to skip past the human being in trouble and run straight to a conspiratorial spin, conspiracy against HIM — the mentally ill assailant doesn’t exist in that story, for she is a force from Rockefellar. Jeremiah Duggan was simply a figure being used by the British Authorities in their grand conspiracy against Larouche. More lack of humanity is shown in that Larouche never delivered to the Duggans any semblence of condolences until just this month. (Contrary to some observations made recently at FACTNet, a recent news report had the Duggans pointing to something as “the first condolence we’ve ever received from the Schiller Institute” — five years after the fact. Contrary to the larouchepub article recently posted here, Larouche did not “express condolences” from the very beginning) In the case of this 1974 account and Kronberg, we also see the blaming of actual Larouche workers (witness the Larouche penned internal aggrivation at the baby-boomers for their morale problems following Kronberg’s death — which lead to Jeff Steinberg’s invitation for them to seek counseling with … I don’t remember his name).

More can be said about Jeremiah Duggan, and more will be said. The RC Harvey fan / Larouchite actually said “The implication is that the Schiller Institute is a dangerous organization.” This is a false statement. It’s an explication.

……………………………………………………

I find myself mulling the role of Larouche’s Electoral machine. You know that Larouche has an electoral machine, don’t you? He has a dozen or two elected state representatives. They introduce the latest Larouche plan to solve the curenct crisis that Larouche is flogging to their state legislators, which gives the minions that work the street the appearance that something is happening on the front that they are pestering both US congress-critters and average people about — press releases flutter from the Larouche Pub about individual representatives pushing the Larouche Plan to Avert the latest Crisis. Currently it’s the HBPA, the Larouche plan to solve the mortgage crisis.

What happens is that the bills being pursued by normal politicians are denounced as coming from the Felix Rohatyns of the world, ergo absolute evil. Sometimes, after things settle away a politician will speak words that will have Larouche claim as being that politician embracing the Larouche plan. Here, I’m thinking of Chuck Hagel making some remarks about Iraq and foreign policy, and Larouche’s publication saying that that sounds an awful lot like the Larouche Doctrine. (As I’ve said already on this stupid blog of mine, nope, for The Larouche Doctrine specifically had the tenant that it must be called the Larouche Doctrine, and that was nowhere in Chuck Hagel’s comments.)

We’ll just have to wait and see if that part of the occurences comes about.

The Larouchite elected officials also get to introduce Larouche for his speeches and world-historic Internet broadcasts. Must be great fun to be them.

There are a number of aspects in carrying on about Lyndon Larouche that are a bit of a challenge. For instance, most people do not take him seriously and will never delve terribly deeply into widespread beliefs about him. I refer here particularly to the matter of anti-semitism — in the rare circumstances where an average person encounters a Larouchite diatribe and gives it any brain-span, they will tend to think of it as anti-semitic, what with its references to the Bankers and its odd element of Anglo-phobia– rather vaguely unable to pin-point or quantify why they think so. Something just sort of rings awful with the terminology.

This is more or less all right. But I myself, by dent of rambling on about Larouche (and let it be said that for this blog, due to external events, the year 2007 is sort of the Year of Larouche) — have a bit of a responsibility to delve a tad deeper and quantify it somewhat. Mind you, it’s not very much deeper, but it is more nonetheless.

Another challenge. Something I keep encountering with Larouche supporters, the challenge of which is for me to keep a straight face. Here’s the line: “People have been calling Larouche anti-semitic for 30 years now!” The answer to that, after a bit of a puzzlement is simply “Yes.” I opted for a revision of that matter of fact answer, “35 years, within an inkling before hand.” (The “inkling beforehand” a reference to Tim Wohlsforth looking squinty-eyed at Larouche’s cold Marxist economic interpretation of the Holocaust.)

With that I am charged with believing lies that have been told to me. An invisible question is thus placed before me: “Who are you going to believe: Me or your own lying eyes?” (Just as I do not need Dennis King to tell me about Operation Mop-Up, I do not need Dennis King to tell me that Lyndon Larouche is anti-semitic.)

So, here is that shallow delving into the matter, the one thin example of the flowering anti-semitism, and one example is all I really feel I need for my purposes. I tend to go back to this example because it just sort of slapped at me like a salamandar (and atthe same time the implications of the dual diatribes agaisnt the baby-boomers and the praising of he LYMers struck me) — slimy and smelly.

Synarchist. Felix Royatin.

A conspicuous word choice. A conspicuous figure to cite. Why, in the panoply of words in the English language, would you possibly pluck out “synarchist”? Why, of all the figures with the same ideological position and the same position in the world, would you possibly determine Felix Royatin as the great Evil in the world, pulling strings like a marionette?

Synarchist is a synonym for “International(ist) Cabalist”. Really. Felix Royatin is an investment banker, and Holocaust Survivor. Really. It’s the Jewish International Bankers’ Cabal Conspiracy. That is all. After this, it does not really matter if Larouche himself were Jewish.

This is just sort of second nature for Larouche Inc., and you can take it for whatever its worth — forgive the LYMers, for they know not what they are saying with this.

Without even delving further into this issue, I’ll quote Dianne Bettag back in February or March: “Good game”. I’ll ramble further to the my interpretation of her quote and say “CHECK MATE!” Just as my guess is Dianne Bettag didn’t believe for a moment I was convinced by her comment (“Your source, Dennis King” [WRONG] “High Times Magazine” [Um. He wrote an article.]), I do not believe for a moment a Larouche supporter will let him/herself see this. Nonetheless, I believe I throw my pronouncement of “Check Mate!” out there (tongue firmly held in cheek) with more intelligent backing than Bettag’s “Good Game”.

A while ago, there was a fascinating debate on the FACTNet board amongst those ex-Larouchites regarding Larouche (and Inc)’s anti-semitism. At first it seemed like the gulf of difference was rather large, but as it moved forward it became clear that the gulf was rather slim, and something of a consensus came through. Larouche clearly uses anti-semitic language, it was clearly more pronounced at a time when it was useful in raising funds [in seeking support from the Liberty Lobby] — which suggests a level of cynicism in the anti-semitism — but he is not solely or primarily anti-semitic. All of which falls short of where Dennis King stands on the matter, but that is his preogative, and it suggests somebody else needs to write a book.
With that I am charged with believing lies that have been told to me. An invisible question is thus placed before me: “Who are you going to believe: Me or your own lying eyes?” (Just as I do not need Dennis King to tell me about Operation Mop-Up, I do not need Dennis King to tell me that Lyndon Larouche is anti-semitic.)

So, here is that shallow delving into the matter, the one thin example of the flowering anti-semitism, and one example is all I really feel I need for my purposes. I tend to go back to this example because it just sort of slapped at me like a salamandar (and at the same time the implications of the dual diatribes agaisnt the baby-boomers and the praising of he LYMers struck me) — slimy and smelly.

Synarchist. Felix Rohatyn.

A conspicuous word choice. A conspicuous figure to cite. Why, in the panoply of words in the English language, would you possibly pluck out “synarchist”? Why, of all the figures with the same ideological position and the same position in the world, would you possibly determine Felix Rohatyn as the great Evil in the world, pulling strings like a marionette?

Synarchist is a synonym for “International(ist) Cabalist”. Really. Felix Royatin is an investment banker, and Holocaust Survivor. Really. It’s the Jewish International Bankers’ Cabal Conspiracy.

This is just sort of second nature for Larouche Inc., and you can take it for whatever its worth — forgive the LYMers, for they know not what they are saying with this.

Without even delving further into this issue, I’ll quote Dianne Bettag back in February or March: “Good game”. I’ll ramble further to the my interpretation of her quote and say “CHECK MATE!” Just as my guess is Dianne Bettag didn’t believe for a moment I was convinced by her comment (“Your source, Dennis King” [WRONG] “High Times Magazine” [Um. He wrote an article.]), I do not believe for a moment a Larouche supporter will let him/herself see this. Nonetheless, I believe I throw my pronouncement of “Check Mate!” out there (tongue firmly held in cheek) with more intelligent backing than Bettag’s “Good Game”.

A while ago, there was a fascinating debate on the FACTNet board amongst those ex-Larouchites regarding Larouche (and Inc)’s anti-semitism. At first it seemed like the gulf of difference was rather large, but as it moved forward it became clear that the gulf was rather slim, and something of a consensus came through. Larouche clearly uses anti-semitic language, it was clearly more pronounced at a time when it was useful in raising funds [in seeking support from the Liberty Lobby] — which suggests a level of cynicism in the anti-semitism — but he is not solely or primarily anti-semitic. All of which falls short of where Dennis King stands on the matter, but that is his prerogative, and it suggests somebody else needs to write a book.

The reactions to the evidently competent, recently published LPAC exclusive “Halo 3: The ‘Third Wave’ of Destroying the U.S.”, as received by its authors in the form of “Letters to the Editor” by swarms of agitated Internet-addicts, reinforce the simple points outlined, but not understood by its relevant audience, due to certain, cumulative effects of turning over the sovereign function of creativity to a Tweener-oriented culture of “groupthink”, as typified by Ayn Rand’s Wikipedia.org.

The sacrificing of one’s will to a higher commitment toward the Common Good would be appreciated by future generations. But to sacrifice one’s will to the third-wave of the counter-culture fostered by DARPA, Microsoft, BAE Systems, and the new religious revival known as the Fools of Silicon Valley, is to submit to America’s long-standing enemy—the British Empire!

“Ayn Rand’s wikipedia.org”. Interesting and bizarre, and met with the appropriate “WTF is this insanity?” by the “internet addicts” (seems to be interchangable with video-gamers) who have encountered this, before they run into the part about the “British Empire”. “Ayn Rand” appears as much a slur against things that are not centrally controlled as anything else — and we all know where that bias comes from.

“Internet Addicts”? “Sacraficing of one’s will to a higher commitment to the common good”? This is just a little too transparent.

So, This website is up and running. I think it is probably the best resource available on the Internet for anything you need, even in its incomplete form. But I wonder about the FAQs page. Surely xlcer knows what he is putting together and has his real reason for putting these questions there — questions asked to him, I am guessing — but:

Some say it is a cult. But what I can see is that LaRouche has been a political figure all his life. How could you explain that?

It is a question only a Larouchite can ask, and is thus just sort of jarring. Doing the math, a college Freshman would now be born … right when Larouche was a… um… “political prisoner” bunking with that other political prisoner, Jim Bakker, who they’ve probably never heard of.

Comments here. Comments there. And the magic number is “Zero”.

…………….

Interesting idea here as to what Larouche is preparing for after his “demise”. I had wondered about that particular meme.