Continuing Ferment in Russia Around Terra America Series on LaRouche
April 24, 2012 • 7:01AM

The Russian website Terra America (www.terra-america.ru) today published Part II of its series of articles on American economist Lyndon LaRouche, this one taking up "what could be called LaRouche's 'philosophy of history'." The series has also included an interview with LaRouche on the Strategic Defense of Earth and mankind's extraterrestrial imperative, and a 5000-word interview about LaRouche's writings with the noted Russian historian Andrei Fursov.

In today's installment, Terra America authors Kirill Benediktov and Mikhail Diunov emphasize the importance of Helga Zepp-LaRouche's founding of the Schiller Institute in 1984, as a turning point in the LaRouche movement's global reach. With John Keats supplying the epigraph, "Beauty is truth, truth beauty, — that is all / Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know," the authors explain the Schiller Institute's work on classical music in terms of how LaRouche identifies the source of wealth in the economy: neither the Physiocrats' "bounty of nature," nor Adam Smith's "free trade," nor the "horny hand of labor" of Marx and Engels, but the creative capacity of the human mind.

They write that in LaRouche's philosophy of history, which they term "alarmist and eschatological," there is a global showdown between two traditions. "One tradition, in which LaRouche places himself, goes back to Leibniz, Leonardo da Vinci, Nicolaus of Cusa, and, ultimately, to Plato. This is the 'sunny' tradition, which is positive and directed toward active reconstruction of the world. But there is another tradition, hostile to that one, associated with Immanuel Kant, Thomas Hobbes, and Francis Bacon, as well as the ideologues of the Venetian oligarchy Fra Paolo Sarpi and Gasparo Contarini, and, through them, with Aristotle. That is a brutal, sterile tendency of thought, based on empiricism and utilitarianism. In LaRouche's opinion, this is the tradition which laid the way to the future domination of international finance capital."

The article cites LaRouche on the Venetian offensive against the new institution of the sovereign nation-state, beginning already in the 15th century. The authors quote Professor Yuri Gromyko and others on LaRouche's account of the transfer of oligarchical power from Venice to London in the 16th century, noting its consistency with the presentation of these matters by French historian Ferdinand Braudel. At the same time, they note that "respectable academics" in the West turn up their nose at LaRouche's historical analysis, saying that perhaps this is "because LaRouche is extremely subjective in his evaluations, calling Leibniz the ideal scientist, while Bertand Russell was 'the greatest monster of the 20th century, even after he died'."

Turning to LaRouche's writings about the United States, the article draws attention to his counterposition of the American System of Political Economy and the U.S. Constitutional principle of the general welfare, against the world financial oligarchy centered in Great Britain. The authors also note LaRouche's identification of recent decades' neocons in the USA as part of the Synarchist International.

The article reports on the frame-up and jailing of LaRouche, citing Ramsey Clark's famous characterization of the extremes to which the get-LaRouche effort went. The authors' explanation of why LaRouche gets smeared as a "fascist" includes a muddled summary of different tendencies in U.S. politics, but this section of the article becomes clearer through a reference to Andrei Fursov's interview, in which "Fursov fairly commented that for LaRouche's critics, 'fascist' is simply 'an ideological label they use for people you can't argue with, but you want to get them out of the discussion'."

After a spurious account, attributed to an anonymous source, of the reasons for what the authors call LaRouche's "sympathy for Bill Clinton," they cite LaRouche's own statements that what was positive in Clinton's policies was "a rebirth and affirmation of the principles that had prevailed before the sudden death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. These were the national anti-British traditions of F.D. Roosevelt."

The installment concludes with LaRouche's record of forecasting the current world financial crisis. Citing a Russian Internet debate about the Triple Curve pedagogical graphic introduced by LaRouche, during which Russian mathematicians were complaining that it was not mathematically precise and that LaRouche was operating through "feelings and analogies," the authors conclude: "Subsequent events showed that, whatever methods LaRouche was using, he was not wrong in the conclusions he drew. In the early 2000s he was constantly saying that the U.S. 'mortgage bubble' would inevitably pop, with fateful consequences for all mankind. In July 2006 he again forecast 'the greatest financial crisis in modern history.' A year later the shrares of the 'mortgage giants' Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, precisely as identified by LaRouche, lost 80% of there value, touching off the global crisis."

Terra America is a web project dedicated to U.S. affairs, launched by a team including Boris Mezhuyev and Nikita Kurkin, editors at the major periodical Russky Zhurnal (Russian Journal). The Terra America series on LaRouche is circulating widely, having been reposted on a number of portals and debated on Mikhail Khazin's worldcrisis.ru site, the Aftershock economics discussion blog, and elsewhere. Fursov's interview, titled "Intellectuals Who Call LaRouche a Fascist Are No Intellectuals," is drawing particular attention.