“Zavtra Editor Catalouges four Decades of British Malice Against Russia”.

So popped up something from out of Larouche’s pump. Just passing forward some current Russian government propaganda against the British … Oligarchy.
It is not difficult to figure out Larouche’s affinity for the Russian government of Vladimir Putin. For one thing, Vladimir Putin is spitting out anti-British propaganda (still fighting World War II, I suppose, only fighting it from the vantage point of before Germany decided to invade Russia.) For another thing, Putin has a youth movement going, complete with instilled elder generational hatred and references to their enemies by scatological references. More. Regretably the person who posted a glossy propaganda pamphlet for Nashi has stuck it behind a firewall.

Oh, and then there’s the line on Litvinenko. No comment on how this shadows Larouche.

But there is nothing new under the sun, and one hobbles together these pieces in the operation of the Fantasy Shadow Government.
………………………………………….

On Nick Benton:

In his weekly national affairs column last month, Nicholas F. Benton, founder, owner and editor of the Falls Church News-Press, an award-winning weekly newspaper in Northern Virginia, became the first person in the U.S., other than on the Internet, to openly and publicly describe his former association with political extremist Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., during the 1970s and into the ’80s.

I am having trouble believing that he is the first, and “The Internet” can’t exactly be brushed aside as meaningless, apart from the points of anonymity. A National Review article I can’t locate easily in my file folders pops up as seemingly written from an insider, but I suppose it may have just been a mere former member (someone with somewhat more knowledge than, say Rachel Tuttle/Williams for that book I keep mentioning). Besides which, Larouchies would be more than happy to “describe their assocation”. But it does not matter, it really doesn’t. Even if false, I am more than happy to let Nick Benton be the first to have done something here.

What is weird is that if I go back and read anonymous quotations from described “early associates” of Larouche in various news articles — this for instance, and I think Benton is a likely source for any number of them. Here’s some anecdotal evidence of the place Nick Benton has put himself in his community.
One man I wonder about is Robert Dreyfuss. (That has long since disappeared from his resume.) It looks like he has never commented on his Larouche associations, which is his call I suppose, though I do note that it is an issue that dogs him a bit, his critics use against him to discredit him.  I am curious if he has ever been approached and asked about it and opted out.  What I find interesting with him is that his work is pretty continuous — he has covered the same intelligence beats from much the same political point of view.

He wrote it, Benton stated, to clarify his personal and professional purpose for being the first news entity to write and publish the report in April on the coincidence between the suicide of a long-time LaRouche associate, Ken Kronberg, and a LaRouche memorandum circulated in his organization the same day. The memo assailed Kronberg’s operation within the LaRouche circle, and stating that “baby boomers,” ostensibly of the Kronberg ilk, are not “the real world … unless they want to commit suicide.”

“Coincidence”? Never mind. I suspect that additional motivation is found here:

“There are many people who were once associates of LaRouche who cut that off once the true nature of it became clear to emerge as highly accomplished and successful,” Benton said.

He wrote in his column, “I and others who aligned with LaRouche in that period, like Kronberg, were generally well-meaning young people determined to follow through on their zeal to end the Vietnam War by bringing social and economic justice to the world. In that era, being a socialist, advocating the creation and re-distribution of wealth, was considered a meritorious vocation.”

It’s a word of encouragement for anyone in Larouche’s orbit looking to get out, as well a humanizing statement to a group of people average people look at as autotrons — take an account of motivations. Looking over Dennis King’s website, the left side of which is bulging ever fuller these days — as we have that lawnchair out watching the supposed destruction of Larouche’s Empire, there are plenty of items on the dreadful life inside the cult. But I think I spot a hole — successful accomplishments after life inside the cult. Thus, a crucial part of the message is missed — and in a round-about Larouche is aided in attacking his “enemies” from this omission. Or so it dawns on me.

……………………………….

FROM MARC COOPER. (Blog conversation goes on over here.)
Unfortunately, Sheehan’s efforts have borne some fruit — so to speak. Check out this upcoming event in which the “unity” sought be Sheehan is at least partially reflected. One expert fringe-watcher has extracted some real nuggets from the stew of participants and backers of this horrific event. He notes that speaker Webster Tarpley was a long-time militant in the proto-fascist Larouche cult.

I have read comments from “9/11 Truth”ers that Larouche has “infiltrated” their group, and Webster Tarpley appears to be the pin-point of this. I believe Webster Tarpley to be something of a cloaked Larouche affiliate, disassociated only for the point of having enough credibility to disseminate Larouchian conspiracy theories in these forums that would balk at the most direct association. But to say that Larouche has infiltrated “9/11 Truth” is akin to saying that Trekkies have infiltrated a Comic Book Convention. Then again, 9/11 conspiracy theorists are sort of the Crazy Aunt of any Liberal gathering — there, and nobody in control of the proceedings wishes to acknowledge it for fear of drawing attention to it. It came to a point where Eric Alterman had to address them in a Nation article.

I say this based on such FACTNet posts as this:

Chaitkin never left the cult. There are people who claim to have left, but that is usually to hoodwink others. Security honcho Paul Goldstien claims to have left, but hosts soirries for the cult security chief and a guy code named Carpet who probably recieves more money in one week than the entire LYM payroll!

Maybe Lyn has franchised the cult as you can often see the raw material of the cult end up in Webster Tarpley’s material. I once received an email from a person who was in Leesburg as a guest and heard a talk by Lyn about how some of the members need to “go out and forage”. It is not uncommon for cults to send out their people to infiltrate or diseminate more lunacy written with out the cult leaders name attached. Mon has hundreds of front groups. Always keep in mond that spending years and years in a cult like this of endless hysteria will screw you up big time.
And I also say that based on the fact that Webster Tarpley’s current work is still filled with that goddamned Larouchian jargon.
……………………………………………..

There. “What words can I type that will move us one small step in the direction of the utter destruction of Lyndon Larouche?” But I probably would just stick to that paragraph about an assembled post-cult Success story rafter.

To go back to that posting of “Where are the Baby-Boomers supposed to go?”, and tuer07’s response on Second Chances and all that. It really is not the long-term or even middle-term that I had in mind with that question. It is the short-term and the immediate — a practical point, and a point of reference that probably fits the profile of some Field Operators, who are probably experiencing tightened control right about now, and as Rachel Holmes put it — not a problem for those in the National Center in Loudon.

I read somewhere that the one thing LaRouche demands is the exceptance and support of science.
He seems to be some sort of science nut. Don’t know if it is true.

Sometimes, when I find my brain turning all spongey after reading a stray sentence like that one (“he seems to be some sort of science nut“), I simply hate having the name “Larouche” indexed.

Okay.  Larouche.  “Right” or “Left”, as that particular message board discussion debates?   He’s a fascist.  His propaganda is roughly Nazi Germany’s (or better still Weimer Republic Nazis) uprooted and placed in the currents of today’s current events.  Once one conceptualizes it that way, one understands why the conspiracies all run back to British Imperial plots.  (This wikipedia article for one time open Larouche associate  and now cloaked Larouche associate Webster Tarpley is off in many ways, but it does not take too much to prick the meaning of the “Versailles Thesis”.  In the same way one finds neo-Confederates still fighting the “War of Northern Aggression”, Larouche and his associates are still fighting World War II.)  As for the exhortation of “science”, we have Ruth Williams (Tuttle) probably never thought a stray person would get so much mileage out of those chapters of her memoir, but to quote her letter at the height of her indoctrination under Larouche, but it was sort of the combination of reading it and a Larouchite asking that question that is their hook, and sooner or later I will have to delve into this one as pertains to every single Larouchian I have read: “Do you know the difference between Man and the Animals?”:

We are becoming members of a new species, equipped to make the conceptual leap which is absolutely necessary if the human race is to survive an impending ecological holocaust.

I have tended to harp on the “I feel like God” exclamation, but perhaps the “we are becoming members of a new species” angle gets to the point a little clearer.  What are the power dynamics that this “new species” (or is that “Master Race”) have with the old species (“the lower 90 percent”, as Larouche’s literature keeps pumping out)?
If I had to go through the run-down of “Ah hah!” moments, I could, but to be fair, I understood it long before I wandered into this thicket: my first Larouche related posts concerned me asking Larouchies why the title of the pamphlet they were hawking was named after an old anti-semitic slur.  They seemed to think I picked that nugget up from a Wall Street Journal editorial I never read.

These days I find myself in a bit of a conundrum.  A weird question pops into my mind whenever I log in here.  “I wonder if there’s anything I can post that will act as one small step in the direction of the utter destruction of Lyndon Larouche?”  I don’t know — a number of people seem to think that is the game I should be playing here, and it becomes a bit unavoidable.  I cannot say that I have much power in that task, but it appears I have more power to do that than I do in directing the topics of any particular political matter, even as it serves as a game of Keyboard Kammando.  Understand, that is why I am harping on Larouche so much these days.
Okay.  Looking at what Larouche is pumping out, essentially for internal consumption, I see the twin bill of “Rally in Pelosi’s Backyard: “Stop Being a Nazi Rohatyn’s Condom!” as well “Nazi Felix Rohatyn Recruits Another Dick Protector!”  Unfortunately no condom reference for “Rep Jay Inslee: Stupid, Crazy, or Under Rohatyn’s Control”.  (That one is my favorite, btw, based on Inslee’s one term in the 4th Congressional District of Washington State.)  I already posted a link to a flickr image of two middle aged men standing in the middle of traffic with poster boards of this crude and embarrassing acidic sexual political commentary, which served as the precursor for Larouche’s latest gutteral level Condom lust.  And, incidentally, Larouche’s definition for “nazi” is “International Banker Holocaust Survivor”.  (Context clues, my good man!)

In this day of blogs, we often get to encounter the actual on-the-street reaction to the Larouche Choir and settings of what is described in their propaganda.
In other news, can someone please do something about the LaRouche supporters that have taken over San Francisco? My efforts to ignore them have not gone over well, so today I elaborated to his posse that I “don’t support homophobic bastards” when the “he thinks global warming was a hoax” was met with “I can prove to you that it _is_!” That was a mistake…he called “I LOVE GAY PEOPLE!” at me as I crossed the street, before resuming his rousing rendition of the “Impeach Dick Cheney” song. I really loathe this crew, because they prey on Bush/Cheney-haters by pretending that they’re offering something more progressive merely by wanting them gone.

Then I find this clustered into a few clumps:

“This System is Finished: The Great Unwind of the Yen Carry Trade”, “The Financial System is so doomed that Regulation may even come to London”, “Issuance of Investment Grade Bonds Collapsing”, “Panic in Franfurt Over IKB: First Prominent German Victims of US Real Estate Collapse”, “IKB Bank Stock Collapse Continues; LaRouche Comments That US Press Will Cover It Up”, “California Budget Crisis — Sign of Worst Times Ahead”, “California Bankruptcy Revealed as Economy Collapses”.

IKB?  American media covering it up?  I can’t find that news, with analysis to it, anywhere. Nowhere.
The stories of the crises spiraling us toward this coming Dark Age brought on by multitude complete Economic Collapses right and left are always part of his background noise, but when ratcheted up serves as signals of tightening control valves inside the cult.  So it appears right this minute. As good a confirmation that the news of mutterings in Larouche’s orbit, at least in his national headquarters, as there is.

Moving on, I see the headline LaRouche’s Cadre School With Ibero-America Invokes Renaissance.  Sure.  I think I saw headlines of that sort in the final faze of “21st Century Science and Technology” — which for some strange reason doesn’t see print anymore.  (For more details, consult an upcoming issue of the Washington Monthly.  Or, you know, ask.)  Does anything Larouchian see print these days?  I actually don’t really know the answer to that question, having not seen a Larouche card-table shrine in some time, or — more typically in the not too distant past because of time happenstances– their droppings of mass quantities of their booklets.  Looking through flickr, it does strike me as a difference between this (a smattering) or this (It seems to be a trend in these photographs of Larouchians standing in the middle of traffic) and  this (THIS is what I remember from a few years, and — Hell– several months back:  the table is loaded with their crap).   Can you produce a Renaissance without printing materials?  I hesitate to note that the famed European Renaissance was prodded on by Gutenberg’s invention of the Printing Press.  There seems to be a bit of a devolution going on here — he is heading in the wrong direction in terms of production of a Renaissance.

Anyway, here’s a quick Count of the numbers at the cadre school Renaissance Faire.  A few things strike me.  If I were Larouche, I would be planning a load of these things.  They serve as an escape from his current problems, and a step to his glory days of unencumbered synchophantic adulation.  These may be the only events where he can go to receive his customary level of syncophantic Adulation these days.  Or so I gather from those “things have changed in Leesburg” points.  His immediate underlings are plotting what to do when he passes on to gain power over his oligarchical holdings, and he has to be aware of that.  The Authorities are investigating, rumors of coming court trials are in the air — in America and abroad.  News media are picking and prodding through his secrets.  His old nemesis, Dennis King, has gotten his goad — and then some.  His mental state is running into the “barricade the bunkers” mode, even more so than normal.

I think the man oughta just go ahead and commit suicide.

It would give him attention.  People would notice.  At the moment the vast majority of Americans with any awareness of Larouche regard him as a relic from the 1980s, when he was at least their monkey-boy, able to be mocked and laughed at.  Today nobody really notices all that much.  So, really, what good is he anymore?  Suicide will give him a chance to be remembered for the joke that he once was — reigniting the old “Queen of England” references floating in the back of everybody’s mind, half forgotten.
It’s not as though he’s a member of the human species.  He gave that one up the last vestiges of that a long time ago, probably around the time he penned his “Beyond Psych” essay.  He is morally already dead already.  He is an empty carcass without a soul.  His soul, if there ever was one, has long since departed.

Don’t get me wrong.  I am not going to kill him.  Nor should anyone else.  His assassination fantasies remain just that: fantasies.  His suicide, whether he chooses to go that route or not, is entirely up to him.

But I think he should go for it.  I understand that one of the persons Larouche has modeled himself after committed suicide. He can follow in his footsteps and re-enact that act, thus fulfilling at least in part his mostly unfilled (and unfulfillable) dreams.

Okay.  I don’t know if this “Keyboard Kammandoes” installment succeeded in taking us one small step further in the direction of the utter destruction of Lyndon Larouche or not, or indeed was counter-productive to such a purpose — but I guess such matters kind of have their own momentum away from me anyways.  I would, for a disclaimer, point out for the record that that screed was nothing other than a reworking of Larouche’s words for Dennis King.
— A word of advice for anyone running around Loudon County:  Stay away from the Kool Aid.
And with that, I gingerly push the “publish” button for a post I mostly typed yesterday night, but decided to sleep on.

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
insanity.

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.

(At the end of a string defending myself.) I don’t think Larouche is listening.

— LaRouche is not listening, but believe me, some of the folks in the org are listening. Or reading. (Of course, ex-members read this material voraciously too–just as I am convinced that ex-members account for a very high percentage of the hits on the LPAC website that the org is so proud of.)

— But members still locked in the org are also reading and reading and reading–welcome, one and all (pretty much–except for the members who read FactNet as part of the endless “investigative” work that the org does in “monitoring” its “enemies”).

(Shrug). HELLO LEESBURG!
I posted two paragraphs from Dennis King’s latest, and most noteworthy, article, on the power a cult leader holds in suggesting Suicide — over on the sidebar. Then there’s the final few sentences. The ex-members are outraged, the boomers still inside the organization are upset, and the “yutes” (LaRouche Youth Movement members) are confused. LaRouche, it would appear, has finally opened Pandora’s Box. This may be the end game, folks.

Tap tap tap…
I am certainly not in a position to argue, or to agree for that matter. But I am reminded of the number of times an article in the mainstream media reported on Larouche and suggested that, for example when his Illinois followers won those two Democratic nominations in 1986, “but will the spotlight shined on him be the end of him?”

Though, in a sense, these things did destroy him.  Imagine you kill a zombie. He returns from the dead — at half strength. You kill him again.  And he returns again — once again, at half strength. Posit up any metric you want, and Larouche will fail to measure up to his old standard, except perhaps in terms of his Grandiose Vision of himself which is a constant unchangeable. (Once upon a time he had decent CIA contacts; now he just appears to google.) So comments like this are what we have: Somewhat disappointed that LaRouche is still alive….so conventional of me.

The mindset of the Fantasy Shadow Government, and if I may quibble with this found at the “larouchewatch” blog: If Hillary supports the resolution, and then gets elected, wanna bet LHL will be expecting an invite to sleep in Lincoln’s bedroom? — It’s not so much that Larouche will be expecting anything, as he will claim such a thing. He’s a close adviser to Bill Clinton, you see.
Cut his strengths in half enough times, and eventually it will just Larouche in a strait-jacket, directing world affairs in his own mind.
From an ex-Larouchie at FACTNet:

Things have changed in Leesburg. From what I am picking up, members are challenging, complaining, muttering.
The place leaks like a sieve, because members and non-members fraternize like crazy now–something that never happened in the past to this degree.
The insulation and isolation that was preserved so effectively in the past is eroding beyond repair because so many people in Leesburg, including NEC members, now work. (Everyone who isn’t independently wealthy or running some special scam or VERY IMPORTANT to Lyn is either working or married to someone who’s working.) “Outside” contact–whether ex-member friends, non-member friends, outside jobs–is popping the bubble.
That means that there is potential for constant leaks, uncontrollable, and also for unrest in the ranks.

Again, I can’t argue or agree, and if this spitting out at the wind were a serious enough threat to their own Special Oligarchy I’d receive denials of such. BUT… continuing on with this message, to the other side of the ledger, conflicting with the signs of breakage.

This all pertains to Leesburg. In the regions, the NCs suffer from a 30-year addiction to being absolute dictators, which is reinforced by the communalism imposed on the LYM, and the general attitude associated with the LaRouche Jugend Bewegung.
And back a bit:
The problem however may lie in the fact that it appears that new recruits are subjected to a much more brutal and coercive and isolated existence than even we members from the earlier 70s, 80s and 90s were exposed to.

These things are probably now more necessary than ever to maintain an increasingly credulous claim to “World Historic Figure” in this day and age, where one can theoretically be hermetically secluded in an obscure corner of the globe and with an Internet connection still have connections with the outside world. With that in mind, it appears that Larouche has ripped some pages off his websites. Note that the Dennis King website linked page on “Larouche served notice on his Jewish ‘boomers’ in 2005” is no longer there.
I wonder what else has been cut. I always thought one could use any number of examples of Larouche disparaging his boomers — or the equivalent of disparaging boomers in general while praising his Youth. Since this has been the very basis of the past half a dozen years of cult positioning, surely they can’t all be just tossed to the wind. Maybe that particular page wasn’t subtle enough.
So here’s the dirty little secret. “Leaking like a sieve”, internal memos flowing out like an avalanche — and I return to the comment Bettag left on this blog about “those stolen documents”, a misnomer that she didn’t actually believe (but which allowed the acknowledgment of accuracy against an earlier insinuation of “slander”.). Maybe the Leesburg gang cares one iota about that situation, perhaps they don’t. But these things — these Daily Briefings — aren’t really needed to get an overview of the events of Larouche-land. It always manifests itself in the Larouche literature, which — after all — is produced primarily for the consumption of the cult members — and thus reflects what he means to knock into their head. (Secondarily any off-hand random supporter of whatever cause — Damned ye, Al Gore. Damned ye, Dick Cheney).
The Dirty Laundry of Larouche’s organization, and its means of control and its circled wagon, is aired right there in the open, thinly submerged behind lines about Synarchist Plots and a supposed “BAE Scandal” or three — if something is beaten to the ground beyond any comprehension, there is a good bet that the external crisis is hiding an inflamed internal crisis. Just toss in a few old lines about Jeremy Duggan in unrelated treatsies, and I think we can measure that Rorschach Test pretty easily.
But Larouche can get great mileage from blasting away anyone who bothers to read these things and reports back on what they just read.

I have a much simpler, more straightforward explanation for why LL et al., substitutes the fake spelling “Jeremy” for “Jeremiah”:
The search string, “Jeremy Duggan” yields very little in Google (for example), whereas “Jeremiah Duggan” produces a vast amount of extremely damaging information.
People who are unfamiliar with the tragedy (Yutes, new recruits, etc) might perform a search and, seeing little, might not delve further.

Well Golly gee. Things that I must do: go through every reference I have made to Jeremiah Duggan, stick the misname right after the name, and link Jeremy Duggan to JusticeforJeremiah. Like so. Jeremy Duggan. His actual name was Jeremiah. So don’t call him Jeremy Duggan.
……………………………………………….

So I leafed through the final 13 issues of “21st Century Science and Technology”. And one thing hit me like an anvil.

I assume they are the final 13 issues, or final 13 printed issues — the printing choice of Larouche Inc having been bankrupted through lack of payment, of course, the company PMR — headed by the baby-boomer aged Ken Kronberg, who was, in case you missed the news, suicided. Maybe the magazine continues in some vague form online.

There was a shift of focus. A rather quick and sudden shift of editorial direction. One issue — the Winter 2002/03 issue, there was no mention of the Larouch Youth Movement — just a pack of articles whose chief editorial direction seemed to be to incoporate the name “Larouche” every fourth paragraph somehow. The next issue, there the Larouche Youth Movement were. And the issue after that, the LYM were the whole show — indeed, taking over articles completely unrelated the Larouche Youth Movement — as seemingly every technological and scientific advance in human history were the product of a Youth Movement, usually with an elder Guru — for example: Benjamin Franklin’s Youth Movement. The image of which bearing striking relation to this omnipresent image of Larouche sitting in conversation with a bunch of Larouche Youth. Or how about that one famous image of those very jovial nuclear scientists en route to creating the Atomic Bomb — (“how a youth movement in science in 1945 fought the Establishment to win civilian control of nuclear power”. How very convenient.) which bears a striking resemblance to the photographs that this newest direction of 21st Century Science and Technology has with all those photographs of those jovial LYMers. The propaganda is laid rather thickly.

So we begin. “We present this piece as a contribution to the pedegogical effort of the Larouche Youth Movement, which is presently struggling to master the paradox of the Pythagorean Comma. Their crucial, related purpose is to attempt to revive the aging intellects of the Baby Boomer generation, who have denied these youth a future by their immoral abandonment of the principle of truth.”
And then the next issue. The cover is The Larouche Youth Movement. And the focus deepens. “You won’t read about it in Science or Nature, but the big news in Science today is the growth of a youth movement, commited to the principle of discovering the truth. […] We have now around us, in a social-political and intellectual process that has chosen to call itself the Larouche Youth Movement [So… um… What were the runner-ups in that naming contest?] , a core grouping of several hundreds of very serious young people in the 18 to 26 age bracket. Around this rapidly expanding core is a very much larger circle of university – age youth [That be you, Mr. and Ms. University Student], debating the ideas which are being forcibly presented to them by the dedicated cadre of thinkers.

The “Burn the Textbooks” article is now sort of legendary — because of that other youth movement that burned textbooks it can’t help but evoke, and because the author of the piece was a recruiter for Jeremiah Duggan — aka (falsely) Jeremy Duggan. And then we get to the “guest editorial from a LYMer. Tell me that this doesn’t represent a disturbing attitude toward the generation of this young chap’s parents. And… other things. Aren’t you tired of wanting to die? Wallowing, wasting away here on Earth, until you run out of breath? That’s how Baby Boomers now live. And we, the youth generation today, will we imitate our bored, shrivelling parents, following in their stinky, pleasure – fouled path? Awake! Pleasure can be entertaining, momentarily, but look around. A muscle bound monkey-man, speaking English in the style of a professional wrestler, directed by a stable of financier criminals, threatens to become Governor of California. The President can’t read, and his minister of Vice Dick Cheney wants to murder human beings with nuclear weapons. There is no economy. There are no jobs. Rave dances and pot parties spatter the social environment. People don’t read. There’s no technological progress, no discovery, no culture. Is this the result of the ‘I’m so free because I do whatever I want’ Baby Boomer counter-culture?
Why don’t we stop lying to ourselves and admit, this culture stinks. We need a Renaissance, a rebirth of creative discovery in the social process, which makes us human, — not animals, but human beings, much superior to any beast on the planet.

Oh, mercy me. The eternal hook, tried on me right here on this stupid blog. I imagine them all shouting in unison: “ARE WE NOT MEN????” (Before getting around to discussing plans for a sort of “Master Race” of sorts?) Meanwhile, through 40 years of drubbing into his followers about the death of Scientific and Technological Development, scientists are advancing science and technology, and here I am on a keyboard — at a personal computer which is far behind the latest consumer products — with a network that had been set up methodically — and I note for the record that I can look up where the scientists — not quite a part of a Human Renaisance but we can still all be productive in something less than utopian (after all, we have Bush / Cheney in the White House and Schwarzenegger in the Governor’s Mansion, but I guess we’ll just have to push on through that, won’t we?) — at this moment in mapping the human genome. But that’s just for example.
Now let us Double the Square! We appear to have found something that lies beyond the infinite: all those fractions (an infinite number of them) and none of them makes the magnitude we are looking for? This so-called “squre root of 2” appears a “hole” in our number line, a discontinuity in what we before thought to be completely continuous. Now you know what the synarchists are confronted with in Larouche!

Incidentally, try this photo montage: Bertrund Russel 91872 – 1970), Norbert Wiener (1874 – 1964), John Von Neumann (1903 – 1957), Issac Newton (1642 – 1727), Johanes Kepler (1571 – 1630), Nicholas of Cusa (1401 – 1464), Gottfried Leibniz (1646 – 1716), and Lyndon Lar… Too bad those other individuals have passed on. I guess they’re stuck with that last one in their intellectual tradition, right?

Which brings us, conceptually, to the LYM – penned essay (the LYM have taken over the magazine from the baby-boomers) “From Lincoln to Larouche’s Land Bridge”.

And The stupidest science experiment ever. Two LYMers make orange juice out of an orange — one uses a juicer device; the other is stuck using his bare hands. The jucicer makes the orange juice in a much more efficient and quicker manner than the bare hands — which is the “ape-like rival” of the juicer-user. The lesson, in case you need clarification: Scientists who espouse the theory of Global Warming are luddites.

It is enlightening non-reading, and one can pin-point the precise moment that the cult was handed over in spirit to the “Youth”, because somehow they have a lot to teach the baby-boomers in the org, and deserve to be cut right in line before them. Oh well. Cults are a pursuit best fit for the young, it would seem. Full of energy to be drained out of them.
I suppose this is all old news by now. But it dove-tails as part of the backstory for the death of Ken Kronberg.

A blast from the past, newly relevant for the Sensation of the Day: Harry Potter.

Both “Pokémon” and “Harry Potter” are fresh examples of epidemic forms of mental disease akin to the “Flagellant” cult which rampaged during Europe’s Fourteenth Century “New Dark Age,” and to the “witchcraft cults” which spread during Europe’s Seventeenth Century, as a by-product of the Venice-directed, Habsburg-led horror of religious warfare over the 1511-1648 interval.

I wonder if Larouche consigned Don Phau to write up the anti-Harry Potter material?

Speaking of Pokemon — One of the World’s Stupidest Fatwas:

Denouncing the lovable Japanese cartoon characters as having “possessed the minds” of Saudi youngsters, Saudi Arabia’s highest religious authority banned Pokémon video games and cards in the spring of 2001. Not only do Saudi scholars believe that Pokémon encourages gambling, which is forbidden in Islam, but it is apparently a front for Israel as well. The fatwa’s authors claimed that Pokémon games include, “the Star of David, which everyone knows is connected to international Zionism and is Israel’s national emblem.” Religious authorities in the United Arab Emirates joined in, condemning the games for promoting evolution, “a Jewish-Darwinist theory that conflicts with the truth about humans and with Islamic principles,” but didn’t ban them outright. Even the Catholic Church in Mexico got into the act, calling Pokémon video games “demonic.”
Wait. What am I insinuating here?
…………………………

Some impossible – to – guage and standard buffoonish .
A Brutish Idiot Who Can’t CountJuly 12, 2007 (EIRNS)–This release was issued today by the Lyndon LaRouche Political Action Committee (LPAC). July 12 (LPAC)— Echoing the line from known circles in Britain, the New Republic has published a piece of garbage by one Conor Clarke. By making itself available as the neo-con outlet in the U.S. for the garbage spillover from London, the New Republic has only succeeded in making known what a piece of garbage it itself has become. Lyndon LaRouche issued the following comment today: “This visiting lunatic who lurks in the orbit of the Washington Post, Conor Clarke, appears to be operating as a card-carrying Guardian of the Cheneyite ‘New Republic.’ His count of the population of the town of Leesburg suggests that had he ever actually visited Loudoun County within the recent quarter- century, it was by Ouija Board, or, perhaps, ‘LSD Express.’ Considering the Guardian’s track-record in the Cheney-Blair gang’s Jeremy Duggan hoax, one might estimate from his own recent scribblings, that poor wretched Conor’s personal morals are even lower than his minuscule IQ.”

I cannot make heads or tails of this insinuation. The town of Round Hill has a 2000 census report of 500 people, and today it is evidentally up to 650. A difference of 150, a drop in the bucket compared to the cows that Conor Clarke reports overwhelm the human population — because he really needs to set a bucolic scene and that is the shorthand way to do so. Round Hill is close enough to Leesburg that one commonly just lumps it in (anyone who grew up 45 miles from the nearest small media market and 3 hours from the nearest major media market knows the sensation of (1) national news reporting events — by which I mean stupdifying things such as the sighting of the Virgin Mary on a sign-post — as coming from the small media market, (2) describing the location of the town in relation to proximate places, and getting further outlier and further off base as the other person fails to recognize anything). Besides which he distinctly referenced Round Hill. The New Republic piece’s online presence is now behind a firewall where I would have to pay to see how he gets around to referencing Leesburg — but it strikes me as not mattering a whole lot.

Larouche appears to be pretending like the interview for Conor Clarke (that resulted in a banal fluff piece he can contort into “SLANDER” for the benefit of his followers) never happened, that Clarke created it out of whole cloth. I… guess(?) I don’t know. I have read enough material through Larouche’s past 40 years to see that he oftentimes leaves these dangling insinuations, where I can’t for the life or me figure out what the insinuation is — or how it connects to what he later explicates. The proof in the pudding is that he misstates the population — kind of — and locates Larouche’s estate into Leesburg — maybe.

I wait with less than baited breath a response to my query of what the hell he is talking about from a Larouchie at FACTNet who seems to think this is a “GOTCHA!”

The more appropriate title of the LPAC press release should be, “I’m a Brutish Idiot Who Can’t Read.” The New Republic article says that the town of Round Hill, Virginia [not Leesburg] has a population of 500. Guess what? So does the City of Round Tree: http://www.city-data.com/city/Round-Hill-Virginia.html.

Well, it makes sense to somebody — the cloistered unit of LYMers — I guess, as I quickly google to see what the hell a “Round Tree” is — with no success, and make sure to note that every goddamned Larouche-given location for his estate posts “Round Hill”. The next article, coming in a month or so — anticipated to the degree that such articles can be anticipated — should get an even more entertaining press release, tying up the Baby-boomers, synarchists, Jeremiah Duggan*, Dick Cheney, and on and on.

Cult leaders, I suspect, are much worse tragedies than the people who get hurt by them. The victims can snap out of it, walk away and, eventually, recover from the experience having learned some very hard, valuable lessons that can make them stronger and more fully human and compassionate beings. The cult leader seldom sees the possibility of snapping out of his self-constructed world and leaving it for healthier, more beautiful and loving ones. And, ultimately, this is a fate, whether conscious or not, that the cult leader has chosen.

Much more material is coming out of his world of make-believe out of the Larouche rss feeds, (blah blah blah — Baby Boomer Democrats stop the LYM and Democratic Youth — um? together at last? – from issuing an impeachment resolution somewhere or other… blah blah blah — will deliver to John Edwards shortly.) But really? In the world of fantasy, I hear that JK Rowling writes better stories. No hang up over out-of-date almanacs. An item from “the other side” of that story: Hm, am I wearing something that says “Potential LaRouche Cultist Recruit”? Why are they here? Does the world really need more looneytoons in it? And so it goes…
……………………….

*or, as  LL insists on calling him, Jeremy Duggan.

Scott McLemee, on his duo “Inside Higher Education” article / “Crooked Timber” blog entry — posted the comment:

It took a while, but a LaRouchie has commented on my article, saying among other things

And then on to a refutation of this Larouchie’s belief that she is fighting the neo-cons, and then to the precise point of reference for Larouche’s ideology. I submit that McLemee is slightly off about when Larouche started aligning himself behind the FDR mantle, but it’s a minor point — especially in line with the bigger focus about — oh, you know — Larouche’s klansman alliance and such.

But indeed. Three Larouche followers ended up making comments to the “Inside Higher Education” post. Starting with Margaret Fairchild. The name is strangely familiar, and familiar in association with Larouche. (ie: I am not confusing the actress Morgan Fairchild with Margaret Fairchild. Though the quickest of google searches shows there was indeed an actress named Margaret Fairchild — of some renown, too). It appears that there might indeed be a family of Larouchian Fairchilds, headed by Mark Fairchild — who destroyed the 1986 Illinois Democratic Party — and ended the political family dynasty of Adlai Stevensons — by unexpectedly winning the nomination for lieutenant governor.
Never mind. The first sentence sort of stuns me. Suddenly there are a lot of blogs about Lyndon LaRouche and the LYM. Could this be because the man LaRouche has been fighting to Impeach since 2002, is in big trouble? Why all the attention to LaRouche, if he’s so crazy and irrelevant?

Simply put, there aren’t a lot of blogs about Lyndon Larouche and the LYM. There’s this blog — and I have chosen to stay on this horse since December. There are a couple of others. And there’s an assortment of entries of various blogs on encounters with Larouche or odd places Larouche has stuck his unwanted neck out — video game players pounding on about Larouche official Don Phau glomming onto the Virginia Tech tragedy with some rewritings of old 1980s conspiratorial diatribes on Heavy Metal music reworked so as to replace video games for the subject, for instance.
Seriously, I was a little pleased when that my bloglines feed for the word “Larouche” spit out all the comments from these Scott McLemee pieces, because otherwise the standard is a whole mass of Larouche party-line material about, oh, you know, the BEA Scandal.

It is enough to make me feel like this goddamned blog is a bigger deal in Larouche-land than I had thought. Really? Is that a possibility? That seems like an insane proposition.
Margaret Fairchild goes on to air her insecurities and the cue to the motivation of anyone who joins with the forces of Larouche from the start. “The LaRouche youth, stupidly wanting a future, not wanting to go to war for Dick Cheney and Halliburton, or work at Walmart after getting a college degree.” I don’t precisely know what the venues to change the status quo are — and I am constantly searching through our nation’s political history to attempt to conceptualize such things out–, but I know it is not with Larouche — after all, the opportunities for Career Advancement at WalMart are much greater than with LYM.

And she throws out the Larouche party line on Larouche’s Fraud case. For that, I may as well suggest Chaitkin’s biography of George Herbert Walker Bush (available at Powells), which is relatively hilarious in the manner that a few references to Larouche as “the pre-eminent political opponent of George Bush” turns the book right around and makes it about Larouche.

Moving on to Larouchie #2: The point that Scott is missing is that Larouche is right. And on to describe an ebullient technological wunder-future — the rub coming that any practical considerations of Environmental Impact Statements are going to be pretty much null and meaningless.

Actually I just want to skip along to Larouchie #3, and for all intents and purposes want you, the reader, to forget everything you have read and focus on Margaret Fairchild’s sentence: Suddenly there are a lot of blogs about Lyndon LaRouche and the LYM. And “Grizzled Veteran”‘s opening sentences in this message:

Why indeed the sudden appearance of articles in the media about LaRouche and his youth movement. The New Republic just weighed in with an slander piece on LaRouche as well.

LaRouche and his LYM have Dick Cheney on the ropes and they will most certainly knock him out for the count.

God bless Lyndon LaRouche and all the people in his organization both past and present.

What a cloistered outfit we have here. The New Republic’s “slander piece” was a rather banal affair. I can count on one hand the media pieces on Larouche that have appeared lately, of this and that type. But the thing is, in the Larouche Universe, this handful of articles — Nick Benton’s pieces, Scott McLemee’s piece, the New Republic fluff piece, the piece that is coming up shortly for another political magazine — seem like a MEDIA FRENZY, bashing up against the gate, suddenly THE ENTIRE ESTABLISHMENT of synarchists is being pitted against the forces of Larouche… because, I guess, Cheney has an approval rating in the 20s… what with that BEA Scandal nobody has ever heard of that Larouche, Inc. has sent his following into a frenzy over.
If you dig into the pieces, and throw out the New Republic fluff piece as a matter of spite, the answer to the question is sort of answered with the final statement of that blog comment — God bless Lyndon LaRouche and all the people in his organization both past and present. Or, better still, forgetting the first half of that equation, and go with: God bless Ken Kronberg.

But perhaps the cloistered outfit of the Larouchians don’t quite see that “slander” connection, since it is outside what they need to think about.

………..

An additional update: The writer of The New Republic fluff piece has written on the “Larouche Watch” blog: as it happens, I had reported on all of those things – the magazine just wasn’t interested. sometimes that happens and it’s got nothing to do with the writer. This gives the suggestion that Larouche had his organization primed for something of, quote-in-quote “slander” (ie: substantive reporting), and what appeared was less than what they saw him sniffing about toward. Or maybe I’m just giving the yahoo too much credit by suggesting he has standards to define “slander”.

Last week’s article and blog entry from Scott McLemee (which I passed right on over over here) had me taking another gander at the strange review from Bronfenbrenner — which (shrug) I can send off to anyone who asks, in pdf form — as well that book Dialectical Economics. Bronfenbrenner wrote the only review of a Lyndon Larouche book to appear in an academic journal. The story behind this happenstance appears to have been given in one of the comments at McLemee’s blog:

Bronfenbrenner’s essay is, quite simply, a joke from beginning to end. The Journal of Political Economy does not often publish long review essays even about books its editors would consider important, but it often does (or at any rate did then) publish something funny or of quaint historical interest – usually much shorter than this one – as an end-piece. The JPE is, in addition to being one of the leading economics journals in the world, the house organ of the Chicago school of economics. In the early 1970s, Marxian economics was taken seriously by small but significant minorities in many leading American economics departments – but not, ever, in the Economics Department at the University of Chicago. Bronfenbrenner notes LaRouche’s dismissal of several leading contemporary Marxian economists, but it is not such serious contenders Bronfenbrenner has come to discuss: it is LaRouche, a clown, for the entertainment of the Chicago faithful. The nature of his audience is clear when Bronfenbrenner finds that he must drop his light tone to do serious business in one footnote, because LaRouche has actually landed a blow on hometown favorite Milton Friedman’s simplistic view of deregulated markets; the professor parries with Friedman and Schwartz’s rather more sophisticated Monetary History of the United States – a cheap move, for reasons that Paul Krugman spelled out well in his obituary of Friedman in the New York Review.

One footnote, however, does not a review make. That may leave the number of serious independent assessments of LaRouche’s theories at exactly zero, which would be evidence either of a previously unfathomed lower bound for standards in the diverse community of academic editors and referees (barring that one mercifully unnamed commissioning editor from DC Heath), or a supremely powerful conspiracy, I’m not sure which.

Just as well, it still stands there, confoundedly, for people like me and Scott McLemee, and probably Avi Klein and Dennis King, to pull up when engaging in relatively rudimentary research. A paragraph from that piece:
Marcus has apparently had the advantage of more private-business experience than the great majority of academic economists. One can guess that, blackballed by his radicalism from academia and civil service, he has turned to business in something like like desperation — and been rather good at it. Certainly the range of his experience, as reported here, is broader than the ordinary economist’s — including specifically mine. It is accordingly interesting to notice triple interactions between Marcus’ business experience, his philosophical background, and his policy conflusions.

I now accept this paragraph as dripping in sarcasm, a reading that suddenly allows it to make sense. But then comes this, and I am startled that I did not recognize the implications of what this is telling me.

Much of Marcus’s business experience, as he reports it, has been at the exploitative frontier of “white collar crime,” bordering on fraud both in the inducement and in the factum — a circumstance that I should imagine pushes one to one or the other end of the ideological spectrum.

Any other self-described Marxist and I could pass this off easily as someone regarding all of Capitalism as defacto exploitative “white collar crime”. Indeed I did when I read this. But Larouche is no ordinary Marxist, so now I’m stuck at a subject I once professed to be through with (and to a large extent am) — the life and times of Lyndon Larouche. His biography gets a little hazy up to 1967 or thereabouts, and I had assumed everything was on the up and up, Larouche was an erstwhile Marxist as he pursued business opportunities in a couple of fields, and then sometime just shortly before 1967 developed a more active interest in his politics and started haranging the Trotskyite bulletin boards with his loud, angry polemics. I note for the record that The Nation published a letter from a Lyndon Larouche in 1959, or thereabouts. Out of left field, there is this. I am weary of because I am infringing copyrights left and right by popping up. But one may do with that whatever one may.

Marcus’s experience extends to the speculative overcapitalization of capital values, creating “fictitious capitals” which cannot later justify themselves by earning capacity in the normal course of events. Observation of the overcapitalization process confirms Marcus in an overcapitalization theory of depression of the sort associated in America with [blah blah blah] Marcus has also been involved with inudustrial engineering and management science, including “rule-of-thumb” decision rules which appear to have soured him against bourgiois economics generally and reinforced his methodological biases. On the technical side again, Marcus claims to argue from the inside as well as the outside that the “US economy, viewed with some knowledge of the ABCs of technology, is one horrendous mess of waste, redundancy, obsolescense, and managerial incopetence.” Likewise, he believes the living standard of the representative fully employed US worker has fallen since the end of World War II.

At this point, we pause and reflect on every meaning of “Fictitious Capital” that one possibly could conjure, up to and including that which leads to a Felony Prison Sentence. Simply put, in other hands I would consider it a fair enough interpretation of economics. But, here, after scrambling in vein to find relevant material from his 500 page book on what he had to say about his past on the edge of “white collar crime”, we come to a question posed briefly on the FACTNet board: SO JUST WHAT WAS LYNDON LAROUCHE UP TO IN THE SHOE INDUSTRY?

As for the idea of being “inside” and “outside” of the US economy, flipping through Dialectical Economics, and right at the beginning, right there in 1974, he claims something he still claims today:

In fact, to a considerable extent, it is the exceptional efficiency of this dialectical mode that has enabled the author to become, alternatively, influential or bitterly vilified among most leading governmental and labor circles in North America and Europe today.

The component memes of his cult have always been in place. Back to the review, and one can check off just about everything.:

Marcus recaptures neither the confidence of the Communist Manifesto in a socialist future the day after tomorrow nor the confidence of the pre-1914 Social Democrat that socialism in itself would be a step forward whenever and wherever it came. His vision of the immediate future in America is of fascism not significantly more appetizing than the Nazi variety. His vision of socialism however, includes along with social ownership of the means of production a regime where most […] He appears to be what my late Wisconsin colleague Selig Perlman called an “efficiency intellectual.” That is to say, Marcus believes all rational men of goodwill accept his own technocratic design for the planned economy with minimal need for repression. All this is relatively standard, and Marcus also accepts a standard radical view that freedom today (in economic matters) is less than we believe it is because we have been narcotized by advertising, by salesmanship, and by the planned unavailabliity of goods we really want at prices we really can afford. In addition, like any other dialectic philosophers, Marcus sets off freedom against necessity in a fashion well adapted to rationalize almost any measure of dictatorship. Admitting that freedom requires the recognition of necessity, who is to draw the institutional frontier between the two domains? Judging perhaps unfairly from controversial manner, Marcus impresses at least one reader as a Me-for-Dictator type to whom it would be dangerous to entrust the task of drawing any boundary between the domain of freedom and that of necessity of order.

The criticism of consumer culture as giving one a false free will has struck me as a particularly powerful force in the realm of why a few hundred youths have joined up with LYM. I do not see the sense of rambling through the 500 page Dialectical Economics book (the body is 400 pages, but the footnotes and glossary are clearly just as self-important), densely written and with pseudo-knowledge that does not enlighten human thought in any way. One can leaf through it easily, and pick out items — the pooh-poohing of Adolf Hitler’s “peculiar psychology” as to why he set up those “work camps” (and what, pray tell, is this “peculiar psychology”, and what, pray tell, are these “work camps”?). Otherwise, I discussed matters on the book here and here.
Bronfenbrenner has a short wikipedia entry of some note, but I notice a new Larouche-feed entry includes the phrase: the notoriously unreliable, LaRouche-hating Wikipedia. ‘Tis a closed circuit, a cult.

Stumbling through the comments:

His Executive Intelligence Review developed a fixation on my dad at one point, thus resulting in the headline – ‘Martin Palmer: High Priest of Evil.’ (My dad was Prince Philip’s religious adviser at the time.) Such paragraphs as –
One of the more revealing expressions of the oligarchical strategy is the unwholesome symbiosis between Britain’s Prince Philip (Duke of Edinburgh) and his satanic religious adviser, Martin Palmer. Out of his oligarch’s pure hatred of Christianity and the modern nation-state, Prince Philip has resurrected the ancient satanic cult of Gaea, and has proposed to eradicate Christianity by means of superseding it with a mish-mash “world religion,” the latter incorporating all those degraded features of sundry religions which are consistent with Olympian hostility to science and do not promote the dignity of the individual person as “made in the image of God.”

used to give my family great amusement,

Actually I just find hilarious the sentence “His Executive Intelligence Review developed a fixation on my dad at one point”, which probably any number of people can claim.
………………………………..

moderate update: Stupdified am I: Leftists describe the factional sectarian conflicts Larouche traveled through the 1960s. What amuses me most is that Larouche still today finds the 1957-1958 Recession a watershed moment in American economic history, that it has all been downhill since then — and one can pull this out of his literature still today, in the year 2007.
…………… ……………………..

Another update: Phil Ossifur sez: This is unbelievable idiocy. It’s why the good aspects of Bucky Fuller and Lyndon Larouche are not being employed to turn the world around. It’s unbelievable idiocy. Sheer idiocy. Idiotic idiocy.  UM.  Urm.  Huh.  Bucky Fuller and Lyndon Larouche are not particularly compatible in any measure.  Start with what one does with the environment and go on from there.

Scott McLemme wrote something. And then he wrote some more things.

A different phrase from that review of Dialectical Economics stayed with McLemme than stayed with me. So it is “one man party” — of which the world is out of step — where I keep using from that review “‘Me for Dictator’ type”. Either one, a remarkable insight from a very puzzled reviewer who did not quite know the nature of what he was reading.

I get the feeling things are off course in Larouche-land right about now. On Sunday, I sat down, looked at the latest posts on FACTNet, and thought the story of Susan Bowen — an otherwise anonymous “wacky” stray person featured in a photograph posted at flickr– was worth passing on. I am very much tempted to just cut and paste that part of the entry and stick it to that flickr page (though I guess I would have to register with flickr first)– it is a sort of pause that humanizes some individuals one otherwise dismisses out of hand as sort of autotrons, and autotrons with no back story — out of place and out of time.
As I was getting ready to log off, I refreshed the factnet page, and read that daily briefing. And I knew immediately I had to repost it here. Later, Jeff Steinberg provided more comments. It strikes me as a rather significant item on where Larouche and his “movement” is at this precise moment in time.
Lyndon Larouche is sweating hard right about now. Now, I take Larouche’s personality to desire crises more than anything, so it may well be for the best for his perverse sense of pleasure. The briefing came from maybe a week he posted a barrage of materials linking everything and everyone to the BEA Scandal, and hyped the BEA Scandal to world historic impressions. What is the BEA Scandal? Well, there are non-Larouche news sources that have covered it– it appears to be a blip. It’s a minor British government scandal, and that is about all I have to say about it. But, I took this frenzied assault to be an assault on the senses of the Larouche faithful — crisis mongering to whip them into lock-step behind a mission — a clouding of the mind. I have come to learn — and came to learn rather quickly– that this a tactic that Larouche has employed for the past three decades whenever he is facing outside scrutiny and/or inner turmoil from within his organization. (Or, in one infamous case — and a supposed origin of where Larouche turned completely bonkers and swerved his organization off course, but I have my doubts about such an analysis– in his personal life.)
Dissension, or at the least weariness, within the ranks to be exploited for generational-conflict, naturally.

So he brow-beats the “Baby-boomers”, ostensibly for their refusal to recognize the Historically important webcast on BEA. It’s part of a pattern from these baby-boomers who dared to be less than infused at his calls of crisis leading up to, and probably leading right past, his Y2K warnings of imminent stock market collapse — which I guess manifested in what any sane person would accept as standard boom and bust cycles of the Tech Stock bubble bursting.

But really, their mind is set more toward the haunting death of Ken Kronberg, or if it works toward the economic situation — the current economic situation of Larouche, Inc — which can’t print anything anymore. (I would say that I would like to get a copy of the transcript for that “historic webcast” in the next Larouche pamphlet, but dagnabit — the “Internet Strategy” gets in the way of hard copies — printed by PMR?) Larouche cannot acknowledge this, so he goes back forth to their supposed perfidy in dismissing some of his predictions.

The baby-boomers’ body language are all wrong? I will have to take his word for it. And I will have to suggest that this is a good sign. I ought to revisit that mildly ponderous, and probably misfiring in terms of actualities, post of mine “How to Dissolve a Cult”.
I do not know from Jeff Steinberg. I would not be able to spot him in a line-up, but if everyone has come to the conclusion that he is currently setting himself up for the intermediate future of Larouche’s passing, where he will pick up some pieces — old and new — and carry on with a Steinberg-ian cult, all I can say is that that fits Oscam’s Razor in terms of reading his response. Tied to the Larouche party line, but needing to find where he can soothe the needs of tired and worn out baby-boomers, he offers a couch to lie down for psychiatric sessions with Gerry Rose.

I often wonder how some things read to the non-initiated. I throw out weird references. 1974!, I post, as though that could possibly strike anybody as meaning anything, and as though I can offer up personal remembrances from several years before I was born. Well, there is a history of some less than stellar psychiatrics in the organization, and it doesn’t come out well. Reportedly there was an exodus of membership right about then. As there ought be right about now — good and bad news for Mr. Larouche — anyone fleeing the ship can be accepted in true-ex-Larouche fashion as being simps who “Didn’t Get It” and didn’t have the stomach for Changing the World.

History repeats itself.   I can’t say that in terms of Larouche that “it repeats as farce” because it was farce the first time it happened.