I am not saying anything on the issues at hand with Tucker Carlson and his college yearbook — the problem here is the choice of citation. From what I can surmise, this is the work of a historically illiterate 20 year old intern without any understanding of why Jesse Helms is bad but with some sense that he may be, turns to the first Google search on Jesse Helms and finds his obituary. According to that 2008 obituary.
A pox on everyone’s houses every which place. Hold on a minute, here’s George W Bush! This is a joke right?
Evidentally George W Bush holds that that ability — to spread mis and dis information — should be reserved for the top echelons of government. Or, at least his.
(Sigh).
I think it was Norm McDonald who, in reference to a statement that “the worst thing about Bill Cosby is the hypocrisy” quipped a “no it isn’t”. In personal life — say, parenting, you have to play the role of hypocrite — any number of dangerous behaviors you did as a youth you need to tell your kid not to do. In the arena of politics, it does get tricky — is hypocrisy the one and only problem, and why does the hypocrite caller so often end up in a term of hypocrisy, or perhaps misrepresent the claimed hypocrite into broad strokes? There is this tedious paint by numbers online story style — it is a standard for the Huffington Post and infowars — where when a hated political or other public figure makes some unflavored comment or votes some disfavored fashion — the headline goes that ” so and so Is Destroyed”, and the bulk of the story follows with a long line of tweets calling so and so a poo poo. See here with Josh Hawley. I myself am kind of neutral on hate crimes designation — it does have its juricial problems — but am as glad people can go on Twitter and pillar him for the vote as I am that people can do so with anything said by Maxine Waters for the same basic lazy article from Alex Jones’s website. Understand, it matters not one iota if the person in question deserves a pilloring, the genre is set and gets meaningless because it is used to pillar anything that source disagrees with by whomever they think is evil.
Ugh.
In the wake of the Derek Chauvin guilty verdict, it is interesting to see how Republican heavys calibrate a response to meet that 45 percent of Republicans polled disagree and majority everywhere hold a justice is served. The Arguable Republican 2024 Presidential favorite DeSantis chimes in with one line of pestering. Overall we are dealing with a number of procedural issues that tend not to be the bulliwark of Conservative commentary. Somewhat interesting is the lines of commentary regarding the shooting of Ma’Khia Bryant in Columbus. Reminding me of the Rightwing reactions to a school bus fight from early in the Obama administration — accurately fingered as a non story and kids behaving badly that needs to be dealt with by school and possibly local police authorities, but the right makes hay as Racial Animus. Though, to be sire, this one does line up with some element of the left downplaying as not worth the attention brought to it. A better analogue for partisan double backing may be that case of opposing anti bullying laws in deference to sensitivity of viewing your kids as homophobes — kids being kids, why micromanage it at such a minute level?
A funny thing about the conservative complaint on late night talk shows being political and thus drone ful… I basically agree but with the caveat of “Who cares?”. Able to slide into YouTube clips of Letterman and Conan. The problem with this partisan dangling is a… So late night tv becomes as the right transformed the am dial of the radio in the early 90s — and you can’t complain, it is what the market makes it.
You can’t complain about Apu’s disappearance from The Simpsons either, because the show’sback catalogue is by far stronger than whatever awaits. Like, I have to puzzle over this positive press on a replacement for a voice actor to a gay character — Hank Azaria out and apparently gay podcaster in — the phrase that clunks is ” pipular character” referring to Julio. I never heard of him. Nothing in The Simpsons is popular after about 2000, and if I have the time right for this paeticular episode — 2003 — that was an espicially bleak time period for the show.
For a second I think this is supposed to be a late nineties David Letterman. Nay. Bill Gates. I am surprised there is no allusion to teeming mosquitos.
Over to the right — and you do want to avoid this place, really — the city ought clean the dump up … another sticker with Faucci in I assume a baseball stadium, Padres cap on head, mask lowered off face (I do not recall if on chin or simply not over nose as too mouth). Today I see some similar “gotcha” news report for Alexandria Occasio-Cortez, without any direction.
Good to see the newest addition to the Democratic base, your anti Trump hawkish neocons, recoil as Biden announces the end of the war in Afghanistan… who is now hand wringing over what everyone largely agrees: the Taliban shall regain the big cities.
Maybe once the Taliban are back in power, it will be different. Perhaps they learned their lesson and rather than imposing a medieval Islamist regime on their people, it will be a more modern Islamist regime like that of Iran. Yes, still not good, but it will be a vast improvement over what the Afghan experienced in the 1st Taliban regime. I’ve read that there have been talks with China, etc.
As sound and as doubtful as anything Max Boot will chime in with.
John Boehner is making the rounds with his new book of cute anecdotes about his damned right flank and the damned Obama. Also he calls Ted Cruz mean names. The response is a lot of dumping on the damned right flank with a dash of charging against Boehner as part of that damned right flank — often not accepting any terms for opposing the ACA — with or without the most hyperbolic “Communist!” charge. Colbery bounces back and forth on that score, and the liberal media sphere notes any kindhearted comment on Biden as frictious fodder against that Right flank. Ted Cruz tweets that he has a signed copy in the fireplace — begging the question: wouldn’t the toilet be more dramatic?
I suppose we will shortly find out how much juice George W Bush has with his party, as he now stumps for his book of portraits of recent immigrants with a political axe in selling those immigration proposals his party rejected in his second term. Well, reports have it that we finally see Trump receding, so everyone looks like a ghost — but inasmuch as one exists at the price of the other…
Reports are coming by out that Nancy Pelosi was set to retire after the 2016 election, but changed course because Trump won the Presidency. It is reported by the USA Today as “Exlusive News“.
Even though… It is not much of either. By definition, nothing is exclusive –once reported it becomes news that every other news outlet worth its salt shall report on. But further, it is not news. This has been reported since 2016. I read some details of it in the 2019 book on the first two years of the Trump Administration and its relations with Congress — The Hill to Die On. I suppose we now get it from Nancy Pelosi herself, except we don’t — it is still the one degree of separation in perspective as it was with that book prior that spit out the storyline.
In a few months we will, I guess, get an “exclusive” “news” report on a tumultuous meeting Trump had with members of leadership in Congress over Immigration Proposals where he agreed with each and every posture presented by the Democrats — to the horror of the Republicans in the room — who then had him in agreement with the contradictory postures they laid out — ending with a happy Trump pumped up to the lot of them to “Let’s get it done!”. Banner news that has already been reported.
The LaRouche Movement has had an interesting yet not very influential history in Australian politics. They actually won Joh Bjlelke-Peterson’s seat in the Queensland Parliament at a by-election following his retirement! However, that was their only electoral success and they’ve basically been relegated to public access TV and local newspaper appearances since.
Within months, he joined the National Party and held office for a decade before he lost his seat to a One Nation candidate.
II. Pieces of puzzle: the Larouche — Jones matchup
He’s responsible! Mr. Alex Jones and I used to be friends and spoke back and fourth on a personal dialogue. He’s even thanked before many times. I got him to let Lyndon LaRouche on his show back several years ago. Huh. At the time, the series of Larouche interviews were prefaced with one with Jeffrey Steinberg, who appeared alongside Sean Stone. They strongly suggested Sean Stone was responsible for getting them in touch with Larouche. But apparently Karl Ilonummi did it. Or, “allowed it” — whatever that means. Alex Jones moved on to having Mike Gravel on, where they engaged in fawning over the man … though Jones never does square the pro China sentiment moving forward into the Trump era. Notewothy for Gravel.
III. Have to address eventually because it is a constant in Twitter scans.
“Lengthy Mike Anderson” has a bee in his bonnet against claims of political correctness / woke ideology / social justice warrior / “cancel culture”, (See here) (seeming to argue (and if someone considers this as putting up strawmen, right back atcha) a straight line between an essay published by Lyndon Larouche and this Family Guy clip — or, to the point, that Seth MacFarlane is a Lyndon Larouche dupe. The responses to his Twitter hobby range from adequate to inadequate in terms of refuting him (and a wide range of gradations between these two poles), but he will regard them all as beyond the pale… Fixed position as he has.
For the great question, “Who are THEY?”, emphasis staring down a “they” — I dunno… Assholes?
Hm… ” The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts. While the stupid ones are full of confidence.†– Charles Bukowski
To be sure, though, I am sure and lack any doubt that THIS
I think LaRouche has Badiou beat at the pass at least with Being and Event; but the interaction with the infinite in Immanence of Truths seems to level the playing field somewhat. Am waiting for Reinhard’s translation to tally the full bout
The word is not wholly out as we see those fellow refer to “the Schiller Institute of the Larouche PAC”.
LPAC may be having an identity crisis, as evidenced by the dropping of this biblical passage on a tweet linking to a nuclear power article — And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. —Genesis 1:28 — subsequently deleted — Is LPAC unsure about the Christian market? (They are Certain on the Trump repeater role.)
Accusation from lorger to lpac of Stalinism, complete with a phrase I (roughly) used — ” Larouchism just for one country”. (Lorg evidentally more true to Larouche’s Trotskyist roots.) See also the demand to.”say her name” (Helga) and the plea Ben, why are you pretending to be the LaRouche’s Movement without Helga?
Speaking of history down the memory hole: Chatted with some Larocuheites by my work. They have never read Dialectical Economics, nor did they know about LaRouche’s days as an SWP member. They did tell me that Marx was an agent of the British Empire though.
On LORG’s part… I don’t get it. Unidentifiable bald old white guy’s (closest I can make out is Lyndon Johnson — which would be pretty darned anachronistic… Prince Philips, maybe?) rib-cage is Nazi? I guess this is the message they are going with, suggesting LPAC may just win.
of a this thing here…In 1998, when I worked for @algore, Lyndon LaRouche pamphlets proclaimed that Gore was engaged in Bond villain-style global conspiracy to rule the world with Prince Philip. It was not, to my knowledge, true. Still, I thought the Prince would rather like the idea.
Conservatives came to loathe Clark, but support for him also began to erode among left-leaning activists as he made a habit of defending a rogues’ gallery of accused terrorists and war criminals.
I wish he didn’t do some of these things,†Leslie Cagan, a peace activist, said of Clark in a 2005 interview with the New York Observer. “He is one of the few public well-known leftists in this country, and it does make our work harder sometimes.â€
His client list included political extremist Lyndon LaRouche; several followers of the Branch Davidian cult leader David Koresh; former Black Panther Mumia Abu-Jamal, sentenced to death row for killing a Philadelphia police officer; and Lori Berenson, an American who was imprisoned in Peru for aiding a Marxist revolutionary group.
Clark also defended Slobodan Milosevic, the former president of former Serbia and Yugoslavia, who died while being tried for genocide by a United Nations tribunal at The Hague; Elizaphan Ntakirutimana, a Rwandan pastor who was found guilty of engineering a massacre of ethnic Tutsis inside his church; and Karl Linnas, an elderly former commander of a Nazi concentration camp. … Saddam Hussein.
For LORG’s part it gives Helga the evangelical opportunity to dump the exonerate Larry he message to “heavy hitter” Ramsey Clark Memorializing Twitterers — heavy hitters who appear to delete the message almost instantaneous!y. There is some hidden history in that Clark had prior been an enemy Larouche saw as out to get him.
One issue that keeps popping up.Individuals who are in prison can still run for President of the United States. It’s only happened twice. Most recently was Lyndon LaRouche.
Leonard Peltier was on the ballot for President in 2004 and –though he dropped out before the election — vice president (position under the same legal restrictions) in 2020. (And some states do have the prohibition against felons running).
One. I remember reading the Larouchies’ The New Federalist paper back in college. Used them as drop cloths for room painting as there were stacks of em left for free. The Q
Deleted: I swear I know of that guy. There was a house at 185th and Meridian that used to have all kinds of Lyndon Larouche stuff up in the windows. Obama in clown makeup and stuff.u
I used to enjoy getting into arguments with LaRouche idiots at the bus stop on 1st and Pine. That shit was hilarious. This was like 15-20 years ago
The Ave… you had to worry about everyone there. If it wasn’t the Larouchies, it was Hari Krishnas or Scientologists.
and Oh I so remember, this would have been about 1982, when the LaRouche people sent their crazy to a friend of mine who was a delegate to the state Dem convention. It included that Liz was a drug dealer. We all laughed.
Back in the 90s, I accidentally got on the mailing list for his newsletter. (note to self: never sign petitions)
heh. my grandpa telling an extremely boring story about the Socialist Workers Party “Yeah anyway only this one guy, Lyndon, was making any sense. That was before I really knew who Lyndon LaRouche was, though†Wait what come again
and when he died me and mdl spent a full week getting high and watching his speeches on youtube lmfao always got a laugh seeing these guys with their booths outside of gun shows
and. I swear I know of that guy. There was a house at 185th and Meridian that used to have all kinds of Lyndon Larouche stuff up in the windows. Obama in clown makeup and stuff.
I used to enjoy getting into arguments with LaRouche idiots at the bus stop on 1st and Pine. That shit was hilarious. This was like 15-20 years ago
Blam!  when I was 15 a lyndon larouche acolyte cornered me in a cafe I worked at and pelted me with goldbug pamphlets — a single traumatic event that cost me likely 100k+ in btc appreciation
ba de dum. If you were a weird college student in the 2000s, your main options were Lyndon LaRouche, Bob Avakian, and improv theater. Two of those were actual cults, and the other one had some pretty interesting ideas about Maoism.
and soIs it wrong that I kinda miss LaRouchies? In college I would just get high and read about how we need to cancel HG Wells because Facebook is his fault.
Heh heh. Once, on a whim, I wrote “Lyndon LaRouche Rules” on a psychology paper before I turned it in. When I got it back, the teacher had noted (in red ink, mind you), “You gotta be kidding.” She totally earned my respect that day.
Â
Interesting time reference perspective. His followers are best known for standing in airport terminals, wearing ”Feed Jane Fonda to the Whales” buttons and selling magazines about laser beam weapons and nuclear energy.
Say it again. I remember watching and laughing at LaRouche’s 30 prime time infomercials. When people would try to give me political literature on the street, I would say “I’m sorry, but my leader, Lyndon LaRouche, doesn’t want me to accept that.” Oh to be that young again…
(Note: includes video of Alex Jones and Mike Gravel fawning over Larouche, though Jones never does square the pro China sentiment moving forward into the Trump era. Notewothy for GravelGravel.
And. I had a friend and his brother who dropped off the face of the Earth to go to Chicago to live with 8 other people in some apartment working for LaRouche. It was so fucking bizarre.
Debates! When I was in grad school in Baltimore in the 1980s the Maoists, the Trotskyites and the Lyndon Larouche crowd used to scream at each other across the street while handing out leaflets. Good times.
and There was a local group here that was very pro-Trump and promoted themselves for a long time in front of my local post office, they’re not around anymore and fizzled out when he died but I assume some of them are still around
Yeah we used to have a very active LaRouche chapter in Seattle during the Obama years with the “Obama Hitler” poster, showing up to all the festivals and stuff. I feel like I hadn’t seen them around for a few years even pre-Covid tho.
zoom in on I was chased down the road by LaRouchies when I was working with United Farm Workers. LaRouchies are fignewton insane. They don’t have the right to define anything, let alone U.S. political discourse
The Oklahoma Panhandle is Larouche Land. In every Presidential primary, the Oklahoma panhandle says “watch us vote disproportionately for random candidates”. Klobuchar, Booker, O’Malley, Edwards, Sharpton, LaRouche in Dem primaries. But not just ancestral Dems–Ben Carson, Ron Paul, Alan Keyes, too.
The Grateful Dead at Columbia, as too… will be interested in that one of my clearest memories of Ferris Booth was attending a mayoral debate in which the “Labor Committee” (NCLC: Larouchies, still kind of on the left) really viciously attacked the Communist Party, resulting in a full scale brawl.
The perils of what awaits Andrew Yang campaign. A long time ago, a bunch of white people were holding up Lyndon Larouche signs at the farmers market. Same energy.
The only time I have seen anyone mention LaRouche irl have been elderly black women. No idea what this means
What’s this have to do with Libertarianism?. I always think of the ’80s. My girlfriend and I getting way too high and falling asleep, only to awaken to a infomercial of Lyndon LaRouche. Talk about operation warped speed! It was weirder than this
Say there. Â At 17, I had an argument with a bunch of Larouchians outside a Post Office who insisted that Congress should pass a Law revoking the 2nd Law of Thermo otherwise the Universe would end in heat death and everyone knows that’s impossible.
Parenting. Then there was the Obama w/a Hitler mustache sign incident [LaRouche camp.] & we got into a verbal altercation. I’m my father’s daughter.
When? I was a silly Trot in my early twenties and mostly considered LaRouche a quack at the time, but felt a bit of a pull from some of the overlap. Lol
Hum. The Schiller Institute is a LaRouche “think tank” – extremely fringe, frequently engaging in cult-like behavior, and for some strange reason rather active in Denmark in the early 2000s (which is why I know of them).
VIII. Current Day
Skipping historical personal voting from Socialist Workers Party to Larouche when he becomes a “Democrat”, with one curious throw to Cox against Harding. So… Historical Trotskyist turned Larouchite?
Wait. Doesn’t The Larouche Movement get any credit? Indeed, the other attack on the law—popularized by Sarah Palin’s false claim that it would lead to “death panelsâ€â€”was based on Orszag’s IPAB and an amendment written by Republican Senator Johnny Isakson of Georgia, who pushed allowing Medicare to pay for counseling beneficiaries who wanted to write end-of-life directives or living wills.
The case of William Jones. The meeting will no doubt set the stage for relations moving forward. President Biden, unlike the former Donald Trump administration, said that he wanted to work together with China on issues that were “in America’s interest.” At this point, not much more can be expected, given the build-up of tensions between the two countries over the last several years.  Hey. You know who else is advocating easing America’s China posture?  Henry Kissinger, and… Hearty praise from him. Maybe they can team up?
IX. While everyone ponders the question of the possible coming Andrew Yang mayorialship — New York City — one candidate falls through the cracks. Meet Jackson Rip Holmes, and a list of people he has met.
On September 8, 2016, an invited guest at former Senator Bob Graham’s (he allowed me photo) Commemoration Honoring the victims of the 9/11/2001 attack on our country, I learned from other guests that our country has been plagued by inside jobs dating back to the Vietnam War (non-existent Gulf of Tonkin Incident) and beyond, occurring worldwide (Boston Marathon, London metro attack, Chechen attack in Russia 1999, Uyghur Tiananmen Square attack, China). This launched my study of extraterrestrials, and I have had the honor of connecting with: 1) Roger Stone, friend of President Trump (he allowed me a photo), 2) former Canadian Defense Minister Paul Hellyer, 3) Jeffrey Steinberg, of the Lyndon LaRouche PAC, and 4) John Lear, who was one of two people who exposed Area 51.
Perhaps the need to dig up Columbia University era Larouche lore comes from such kicking up of dust as this here. (Curious implication that the Larry goes’ biggest foe / competition of the time was The Grateful Dead.)
Theory of the day: Â Is it possible that Larouche invented a grandiose theory of British intelligence manipulating American politics to cover for the embarrassment of having ever been involved in the SWP?
 Moreso. The problem with Larouche is his lack of evidence. He’d have explained the origin of the cosmos ex nihilo from a British MI6 agent’s asshole if he were able. Certainly intelligence has played a part, but it is a uniquely yank fantasy to view World History as a James Bond film.
Tangentially connected to my last tweets, as I found it during the same research, but apparently Louis Farrakhan invited Lyndon LaRouche (?) to the 1996 National African American Leadership Summit. It went about as well as one might expect.
Their sleaziness and hypocrisy is incredible! Their press release brags about how they interviewed “America’s number one political prisoner in his jail cell.” But they wisely don’t say WHO that political prisoner might be. One might conclude they meant Leonard Peltier. No. If you ask, it turns out they’re talking about Lyndon LaRouche!
Star Trek. The TNG crew have the same taste in culture as Lyndon LaRouche supporters. It’s his same very specific version of “Western Canon”. Religion may no longer exist in the 24th Century, but you’d think someone would enjoy a nice klezmer or a slice of kugel.  Interesting to note, though, the classic rock listener of Zefran Cochrane in First Contact (but then again he is depicted as an uncultured wino, whereas the Enterprise is the best and brightest) and The Beastie Boys are still played in the future in the reboot.
Alien Vs Predator. Trubetskoi’s Romano-Germanic conspiracy vs LaRouche’s Anglo-Dutch conspiracy … folks, (cue movie poster). (Not too far off.)
XII. That ” gatekeeper at each higher level” conspiracy theory theme. You sell this and you can bring some wanna be elitists by sheer flattery. The flaw is that the seller of such merchandise, by their own logic, can be deemed as just More controlled opposition, a guru sitting at the 50th level… And on one goes, Searching for a Grand Unified Theory and ” secret history”….Â
A sort of point of agreement, though stuck on the A45th level:Â See dee. I’m like 50% sure he was an op.
like not he himself, but the “movement.”
Entertaining enough, with bubbles of worthwhile nuggets of natterings. So here goes with giant chunks.
All famous people are there to misdirect you. ALL OF THEM. They didn’t accidentally get famous. They don’t accidentally get on TV or in movies or in books or on CDs or on the internet. And they certainly don’t earn their way into these positions, as is now clear.
So how did they get there? Why do you have to see them and hear them all the time? Why do you know who they are? Because they were placed there. They were chosen to fill that position, and they were chosen in order to misdirect you from the truth.
You will say, “C’mon, that can’t be true. All of them? I mean, they disagree with each other. How can they all be placed there?†Look at it this way: say you wanted to control everyone in the world. Well people are at different levels. They have different interests and beliefs and levels of intelligence. So if you want to control everyone you have to place your guys at all these levels, all possible paths If you are a football coach setting up a defense, you don’t put all your tacklers in the middle of the field, or on one side. You spread them out. You want to block all paths to the goal. You have to defend against the run and the pass, the short ball and the long ball.
It is the same with government. If you want to govern people, you have to keep them on the path you have chosen for them. That is how the governors understand government.
You may think government is about keeping people employed and building highways and educating children, but it isn’t. It is about “governing†them. Moving them around at will. Think of a governess. She keeps the kids out of trouble and molds them into the sort of adults her employer or her society requires. Same thing with the governors. They keep you from troubling them and mold you into someone who can make them richer.
With that goal in mind, the last thing the governors want is “enlightened†people or “self-actualized†people. Those people might make money for themselves, think for themselves, and govern themselves. People like that make very poor clients. People like that are just trouble. Since people take many different paths, the governors have to place their blockers and tacklers everywhere. They have to have blockers for smart people and dumb people, lazy people and ambitious people, caring people and uncaring people, progressive people and conservative people, men and women, young and old.
they have to have blockers and tacklers up and down the field, on the fifty-yard line as well as on the five-yard line. If you get past one line of tacklers, they have to have another line ready for you. To switch the visualization, no matter how high up the mountain you climb, they have to have some guru on a goat-ledge positioned there to shunt you off on the wrong path. […]
Just imagine the total market for domestic arms sales in the past five years. It boggles the mind. Which means the government is probably playing both sides, as usual.
So make a list of all the famous people selling both sides of this argument. No, really. Write down all the people you love to hate who are on the other side. Then write down all the people that you think are on your side.
Then ask yourself, “Are any of them speaking any sense?†Or are they all promoting this escalation one way or the other? This is how it goes, on all topics
Lyndon LaRouche was right about a lot of things, and he was even right about the “out there†stuff, like the government pushing drugs, laundering money, fluoride, the financial meltdown, pedophilia, and so on. So I went back and studied his writings across the board.
Turns out Lyndon LaRouche was just a higher-level guru, placed fairly far up the mountain to misdirect the most avant of the avant garde conspiracy theorists. He was a Marxist until he was almost 60, which of course I saw as a red flag.
No one over thirty was still a Marxist in the US in 1970, except a few dupes and a few small-time spooks working the campuses. No true intellectual could stomach Marx’s prose, much less his theory.
It should now be clear that Marxism was never anything else but a disguised replacement for Republicanism, created to appeal to the idealistic youth of the West who were disenchanted with their own failed institutions.
Socialism was dressed from the beginning to look like a fairer sister of Democracy/Republicanism, but it was actually a crone in poor make-up. It was purposely created to break down immediately into fascism, the way plastic is now made to break down when exposed to light.
Marxism borrowed the egalitarian platitudes of Republicanism, and even outdid it in its flattering of the lower classes; but the theorists conveniently left out any of the hard facts of government, like constitutions or courts or human nature.
By resting the whole theory on the workers, Marx and his buddies knowingly built their edifice.
Though top-down governance is often or usually predatory, bottom-up governance is simply a contradiction in terms. You are just as likely to successfully run a country from workers’ cooperatives as you are to run your house from the kids’ bedroom.
I am all in favor of trade unions and worker-owned companies; but at the same time I would not like to see a co-op of Walmart, McDonald’s, and USPS employees running the country. While the system we have doesn’t put the best people at the top, Marxism wouldn’t either.
But there were many other red flags with LaRouche, including his promotion of Leibniz, Abe Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, NAWAPA, SDI, and so on. LaRouche was a gatekeeper like Chomsky, placed pretty far down the road to catch those who got too far ahead.
Like Chomsky, LaRouche was instructed to admit to a large percentage of US and British crimes, to appeal to progressives and good researchers who had already discovered them. And also like Chomsky, LaRouche was there to prevent deeper truths from being discovered.
Ironically, perhaps, LaRouche was—in most ways—positioned further up the mountain than Chomsky. LaRouche could admit to 911 where Chomsky couldn’t. LaRouche could talk about ð˜°ð˜¶ð˜µð˜³ð˜¦ crimes that wouldn’t appeal to Chomsky’s audience.
And they were instructed to blow a different smoke regarding Kennedy. Chomsky pretended to be above the whole discussion, but LaRouche was instructed to tell a new variant of the Oliver Stone story, intellectualizing it with the Yalta system and a new player, Mortimer Bloomfield.
You will say I am implying that SDS (Students for a Democratic Society) or parts of it were infiltrated by the government, but LaRouche himself tells us that.
His NCLC was originally a faction of SDS, and although http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Caucus_of_Labor_Committees… If you can accept what he says—that other New Left organizations were dominated by these government think-tanks and foundations—why not his NCLC?
LaRouche’s organization has all the earmarks of late 1960’s government programs, including brainwashing, violence, cultism, and created confusion, so why not ask the question?
LaRouche writes in his autobiography that in 1971 the NCLC formed ‘intelligence units’, and the following year started training members in paramilitary tactics.†Intelligence units? Does that sound like the language of a Marxist professor, or of a CIA agent?
So if he is an agent, why did they later throw him in jail? Are you sure they did? Several famous people you thought were in jail probably never were, including Ezra Pound and Charles Manson. LaRouche’s alleged time in jail simply glosses up his resume even more.
Notice that LaRouche has always been encouraging confrontation. In the early years we are told his followers beat their Marxist foes with pipes and bats. I think it is just another planted story, but the form of the story is crucial.
They want you to think there is a lot of political violence going on, even though there isn’t; just as now they want you to think there are mass murders every month, although there aren’t.
The billionaires love a manufactured world of fear and chaos, because scared people are easier to control.
None of the articles on LaRouche over the years made any sense, because if LaRouche really were what the articles were claiming—a crazy cultist out to defame America and England—why were they writing about him? Why would the mainstream give someone like that the publicity?
Remember, LaRouche was right about some things, and one of the things he was right about was the CIA’s total control of the press. We didn’t need him to tell us that, since we got proof of it from the Senate hearings in the late 1970’s (see the Church Committee hearings).
Well, given that, why would this controlled press want to publicize LaRouche at all? Why not just ignore him completely? That’s what they do to people they really wish to bury.
So how far back does this rule go, you will ask. Is every famous person in history a plant, or just the living ones? We can take the rule back at least to the Civil War, but the further back we go the more exceptions there will be.
But ð—®ð—»ð˜† ð—³ð—®ð—ºð—¼ð˜‚𘀠ð—½ð—²ð—¿ð˜€ð—¼ð—» ð—³ð—¿ð—¼ð—º ð˜ð—µð—² ð—½ð—®ð˜€ð˜ ð˜„ð—µð—¼ ð—¶ð˜€ ð˜€ð˜ð—¶ð—¹ð—¹ ð—½ð—¿ð—¼ð—ºð—¼ð˜ð—²ð—± ð—µð—²ð—®ð˜ƒð—¶ð—¹ð˜† should immediately fall into your bag and ring a bell.
I saw Alan Watts being promoted in strange ways in the film “Her” recently, and had I not already known he was an agent, I would have been alerted to him in that way.
Going further back, we see that Walt Whitman was being promoted in the film Kill Your Darlings. This was one of the red flags that outed him for me.
Since the broad control of media didn’t take effect until recently, there will no doubt be many exceptions to the rule even in the late 19th century and early 20th century. There may be some very few exceptions still.
But don’t make the mistake of assuming that just because you have gone back before 1947 that the control no longer exists. It was less perfect and less broad, but it has existed for many many centuries.
Or maybe Country Music star Lil Nas X is taking Country music into a brave new direction.
The eyerolling terrain of Alice Cooper, Marilyn Manson, Gwar…
Did Charlie Daniels ever pull blood sucking stage stunts for his devil themed music?
Alex Jones and info wars does that ” Illuminati symbolism” click bait thing they’d done before with Lady Gaga and Rihanna with Country Music Star Lil Nas X. (Interesting the man would probably largely agree with this analysis.)
Ronny Elliott "Mr. Edison's Electric Chair"
Bobby Short "Don't Bring Lulu"
TV On the Radio "Dreams"
Archers of Loaf "White Trash Heroes"
Murray Attaway "Fear of God"
Fountains of Wayne "I Want an Alien for Christmas"
The Divorce "Yes"
The Bluetones "Mudslide"
Black Box Recorder "Brutality"
Meat Puppets "Leaves"
Gorillaz "Clint Eastwood"
Neil Young "Keep on Rocking in the Free World"
The Louvin Brothers "The Great Atomic Power"
