Friday Webcast, December 23, 2016
Join us live at 3pm EST for our Friday webcast featuring Mike Billington, Ben Deniston and Diane Sare.
BENJAMIN DENISTON: Hi! Welcome to the LaRouche PAC Weekly Report for December 23, 2016. My name is Benjamin Deniston; I'll be hosting the discussion today. We're happy to be joined by Mike Billington of Executive Intelligence Review here in the studio; and over Google Hang-outs, we have Diane Sare, leader of the LaRouche PAC Policy Committee joining us from the New Jersey-New York area.
So today we have, I think, a rather exciting and important discussion. We're here on the eve of Christmas Eve; and we thought it was very important to do a show today and have a discussion, because this is an extremely intense and important political situation right now. We hope all of you have a sense of the importance of the situation in the immediate hours and days right now; and are not too swept up in the festivities of the holidays. Despite the massive fake news operation, otherwise known as the mainstream media, despite what you're hearing from that, there is a major historical and strategic shift underway right now globally.
I think just to highlight one element of this, there's been a major freak-out around a leaked Pentagon transition memo from the incoming Trump administration, which explicitly does not list Russia as an existential threat to the United States. This alone is one more small but important indication of the type of transition we're seeing. There's a lot of questions around the Trump administration, but what's been absolutely clear consistently is that he is looking to take this entire geopolitical threat of World War III off the table. This is just another indication showing that he is not willing to play this Obama-Hillary Clinton going back to the George Bush administration, geopolitical game of trying to threaten, undermine, and destroy Russia and China to try and maintain some kind of Anglo-American global hegemony. This is completely terrifying Obama and the people behind him in the United States, in Europe, in London and related places. This is creating on the one side obviously a clear opportunity; but also a rather tense and dangerous situation. It was just a few days ago that Mr. LaRouche emphatically warned that in this period, even if it seems like we're close to the inauguration of Trump, we still have a very dangerous transition time; and you have Obama sitting there as a killer, as a murderer, who has committed acts of murder around the world, destroyed nations around the world, killed Americans, completely ripped up Constitutional measures and those grounds. And he is sitting there, still in office, still in power; and it was only in the immediate hours and days after that that you had almost by the book, a wave of terrorist-type activity launched all over the planet. You had this terrorist event in Germany, which is still creating major hysteria over there, and there are still major questions about what actually happened with that operation. You obviously had the assassination of this Russian ambassador in Turkey, which was a direct threat to the entire operation that's been run successfully by Putin to bring stability and an actual fight against real terrorism in that region in connection with a series of other terrorist threats and attempted actions around the world. It's almost a by the book response of this chaos operation blowing up.
But what we're going to discuss more today is going to be very useful. Mike is going to put some depth in where the world is actually going and could be going; assuming we can solidify this strategic shift; and why the new directionality of the planet under the leadership of Putin, China, and allied forces is really threatening to overturn this historical paradigm that's crushed the world for many decades at this point. I want to hand it over to Mike; and we're going to get into the discussion.
MICHAEL BILLINGTON: OK, thanks Ben. I'm certainly glad to be here. It is an incredible moment in history; it reminds me of the opening of Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities, where he says, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times ..." He meant it, and it's true; we are in a revolutionary period, there's no question about that. This is sweeping the globe; it's already largely taken over Asia, and the Brexit and the Italian vote, the Trump vote, and so forth, indicate that people have finally reached the limit to the power of tyranny over their economy, over perpetual warfare. But a revolution doesn't necessarily have a positive outcome, and that's actually what Dickens was talking about. The French Revolution came soon after the historic and wonderful American Revolution based on a new conception of man; based upon science and technology and a new financial system under Hamilton's ideas to defeat the power of the British Empire which lay in their global financial empire. But the French Revolution was taken over actually by the British; but turned into chaos. It's what Schiller said was "a great moment [in history] has found a little people." So, instead of a great republic, you ended with the guillotine; you ended up with Robespierre saying the revolution has no need for science, and ultimately this led to the emergence of the first fascist — Napoleon.
So, we cannot be complacent; we have a tremendous victory in the defeat of Obama and his clone, Hillary, and their British operation. But we certainly cannot sit back and cross our fingers and hope that Trump is going to do the right thing. It's going to be up to us. We should reflect on how the American Revolution succeeded. It succeeded because it was focussed on a tremendous sense of history and philosophical thought; the Founding Fathers put together the Federalist Papers, the writings of Alexander Hamilton, which we've recently published. If you read these, these are not easy; yet this was the basis on which the so-called common men and women studied and came to the conclusion that in fact this small group of leaders were leading them in the right direction, and had created a future. It was based on poetry. In fact, Schiller was known as the Poet of Freedom and was treasured for 100 years after the American Revolution as the poet of the American Revolution; despite being German and writing in German. But this was known to the American people. The music; the great Messiah by Handel was composed in 1741 — it was known. Our Schiller Institute just performed a phenomenal version of this great work — the Messiah — at the Co-Cathedral of St. Joseph in Brooklyn last week in an extremely moving ceremony. These are the kinds of ceremonies that took place at that time; that lifted people to a higher sense of their humanity, of the dignity of man, and of creating a future.
So, which of these two paths are we going to be taking today? Well, it's obvious which way Obama was going; we've made that very clear. His intention was war; not only the perpetual wars in the Middle East, but leading to a war with Russia, a war with China. These are not completely resolved, but as Ben said, we're a long way away from that horror, which was facing us had we not defeated that in this final election. But the result of these 16 years of Bush and Obama can be seen in what's happened to our own country; not just the Hell that's been taken to the Middle East and other parts of the world. We now have a decline in life expectancy for the first time in our nation's history. We have a drug epidemic in which 1 out of 15 Americans are addicted to heroin or its substitutes; 1 out of 15 Americans. This is not a problem; this is a disaster, a collapse of civilization which is not only tolerated and supported openly by our President, who promotes legalizing drugs and who is doing everything in his power to stop the emergence of a war on drugs in the Philippines, which I'll come back to.
So, on the other hand, we see that Russia, under Putin's direction, has intervened to stop this series of regime-change operations. What's happened in the tremendous victory in Aleppo against terrorism, is that Putin has demonstrated that if you work hand-in-hand with sovereign nations, with their leaders, you can defeat terrorism. And he basically exposed the fact that Obama — like Bush — was on the side of the terrorists; under the guise of fighting terrorism, was openly working with the Saudis and the British, who were arming and creating these terrorist movements to overthrow regimes who refused to follow their dictates — the so-called "regime-change" movement. That's been probably crushed; this is not completely solved, but what's happened in Aleppo not only stops the disintegration of Syria, but it should — if properly pursued — mean the end of the regime-change criminality of both Bush and Obama once and for all.
I'm going to read to you — today happened to be the day that Putin gave his annual end of year press conference. I think just reading one section of part of that, and paraphrasing a few others is important. It's important for people to watch Putin; it's done with an English voice-over. It's useful to watch to see why it is that the oligarchy is so terrified of this man. I'm just going to read you — actually it was a question that came from a man named Yevgeny Primakov. It turns out that he is, indeed, the grandson of the great Yevgeny Primakov who died recently; but who was the original architect of the idea of China, Russia, and India collaborating to form a new core of nations that could appeal to America to join them. Which is, of course, what has to happen, as a basis of reversing the imperial decline of the human race; and which led to the BRICS, it led to the New Silk Road. So, his grandson asked a question which said, "Mr. Putin, Barack Obama, who is still your official colleague, said that 37% of the Republicans sympathize with you. And hearing this, Ronald Reagan would have rolled over in his grave." So, he says, "Our western colleagues often tell us that you have the power to manipulate the world, to designate Presidents and to interfere in elections here and there. How does it feel to be the most powerful person on Earth? Thank you." So, with that humorous, but very insightful question, Putin said the following:
"The current US Administration and leaders of the Democratic Party are trying to blame all their failures on outside factors¦...
"We know that not only did the Democratic Party lose the presidential election, but also the Senate, where the Republicans have the majority, and Congress, where the Republicans are also in control. Did we, or I also do that?...
"It seems to me there is a gap between the eliteâs vision of what is good and bad and that of what in earlier times we would have called the broad popular masses¦... [a] substantial part of the American people share similar views with us on the worldâs organization, what we ought to be doing, and the common threats and challenges we are facing. It is good that there are people who sympathize with our views on traditional values because this forms a good foundation on which to build relations between two such powerful countries as Russia and the United States, build them on the basis of our peoplesâ mutual sympathy.
"¦... I'm not so sure who might be turning in their grave right now. It seems to me that Reagan would be happy to see his partyâs people winning everywhere, and would welcome the victory of the newly elected President so adept at catching the public mood, and who took precisely this direction and pressed onwards to the very end, even when no one except us believed he could win.
"The outstanding Democrats in American history would probably be turning in their graves though. Roosevelt certainly would be because he was an exceptional statesman in American and world history, who knew how to unite the nation even during the Great Depressionâs bleakest years, in the late 1930s, and during World War II. Todayâs administration, however, is very clearly dividing the nation. The call for the electors not to vote for either candidate, in this case, not to vote for the President-elect, was quite simply a step towards dividing the nation. Two electors did decide not to vote for Trump, and four for Clinton, and here too they lost. They are losing on all fronts and looking for scapegoats on whom to lay the blame. I think that this is an affront to their own dignity. It is important to know how to lose gracefully."
Helga LaRouche commented when I read this to her, that this is a call not only to the Democrats in America, but to the oligarchs throughout the world who are acting as if this revolutionary change is not taking place; as if they still have the power to dictate policies, and who are hysterical about what is happening in America. Putin concludes this way; he says:
"But my real hope is for us to build business-like and constructive relations with the new President and with the future Democratic Party leaders as well, because this is in the interests of both countries and peoples."
So, this is leadership; what we so sorely miss here in the United States. There's much more; more will be made available in the EIR.
Now let me turn to Asia. Asia today should — in fact China in particular, but not just China — be seen as the model which America must follow if we are to pull ourselves out of the morass that we're in today. We've discussed this in this program and in our publications many times: the entire Silk Road development, the development of corridors. I want to put some maps up, and just very quickly review some of the incredible development projects that are going on, virtually every single day.
This [Fig. 1] is a map published just in the last few days by something called MERICS [the Mercator Institute for China Studies]. They have a competent article on the whole Silk Road process. They've marked in this red graphic where some of the corridors are; they're not all there. Of course you have the original corridor, which was the Trans-Siberian Railroad; which was developed with consultation and advice from Henry Carey and the American System, who worked with the Russians to replicate what had been done in the United States with the Transcontinental Railroad, not just to be from one end to the other, but to develop the entire region in between.
DENISTON: It's the black-gray dashed line of the existing rail lines.
BILLINGTON: Yeah, this one here, where I'm running that thing. Now, you see the lower one that goes through China, through Xinjiang Province, into Kazakhstan. This is the New Silk Road, which was developed following the 1990s, with the fall of the Soviet Union. Helga Zepp LaRouche helped organize in Beijing a conference in 1996 on what the Chinese call the New Eurasian Land-Bridge. Helga called it the New Silk Road even then.
This led to the building of this rail which is now functioning. It has several branches, both in China, and, on the far side, in Europe, as well as branches down into central Asia. It's being upgraded. It's not connected, it doesn't have the same grade, most of it is not high-speed. So this is a work-in-process.
Now look at what's happened just in the last couple years. This red line down here, is what's called the Pakistan Corridor. This is a connection by rail, from China, down through Pakistan, into Baluchistan (the southern part of Pakistan), and to the Gwadar Port, which is being transformed into a major hub for oil from the Middle East, for trade with India. Hopefully, if the India/Pakistan relationship can be resolved. Then — not on this map — right around here in southern Iran, is the development of the Chabahar Port, from which there are rail connections up through Iran to Teheran, and then into Azerbaijan, and into Russia. Another north/south route; so, you have several north/south routes.
Over here, you see this red line that goes from Kunming in southern China, through Thailand, Myanmar, and into India. This is the old Burma Road that was built during the Second World War. Mr. Lyndon LaRouche had a hand in building the Burma Road (or worked along that Road). That's now being reconstructed. It will eventually be a rail connection. And you see that this pipeline — the black line here — is an offshoot from China all the way down to the coast of Myanmar, where they are now taking in shipments from Middle East oil and piping it up into China.
Over here, this corridor. You already have rail connections from Kunming down to the Laos border, and now the Chinese are building a high-speed rail through Laos, down to the Thai border. Just in the last few months, they've concluded their plans to build a high-speed rail from the Laos border down to Bangkok. At this point, there's only an old railroad from Bangkok down to Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia — down here. But that will eventually be done; and in the meantime, probably the Chinese, maybe the Japanese, are building a high-speed rail from Kuala Lumpur to Singapore. So, eventually, you'll have all the way from Kunming down to Singapore.
In Indonesia, the Chinese are building a railroad from the capital of Jakarta to Bandung. Many of you have heard of Bandung from the famous Bandung Conference in 1955, which was the first meeting of Asian and African leaders who had formerly been colonized, meeting without their colonial masters — the so-called Asia-Africa Conference that was organized by Sukarno and Nehru and Chou En-Lai (from China), and others. So that's in the process; other developments there.
If you look at this part of the Africa map [Fig. 2], these are some railroads that have already been constructed. Go to the next map of the two Africa maps. Okay. This [Fig. 3] is fromEIR's report "The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge". This shows, on this side, the existing rail structures as of a few years ago. You see that basically there's no way to get from one capital to another. You can only get the raw materials from the mine out to the port, where it was shipped off to Europe and America. That's all the colonial powers cared about in developing Africa.
What you see here, is a general map of the kind of commitment that the Chinese have made to connect every capital of Africa with high-speed rail, several cross-continental railroads. The Chinese need raw materials, just like the Europeans did, but they're paying for it; they're building nations. They're building nations that have industry, agriculture, water, power, education, using a model which we used to call the American System, but which we've deserted in our country.
The same in South America. You can go to the next map [Fig. 4] here. This is also from our report. It's not quite accurate for what is in the process now, actually, because the Chinese are talking about building two trans-oceanic railroads: one that goes from Peru directly into Brazil and to the coast; one that goes south of that through Bolivia. The Bolivians, of course, want that railroad to go through Bolivia.
So, again, transforming the world in a way which, of course, the U.S. long ago ceased to do; becoming more of a British-style colonial power which looted the raw materials, imposing huge amounts of debt, and then using that debt as a weapon to keep the countries in a state of backwardness.
Now, I'm going to look at two other aspects of Asia: the Philippines and Japan — where huge transformations are taking place. Most of you have seen — either in our material or just in the daily news — about Rodrigo Duterte, the new [philippine] President who took office in June of this year, who has totally transformed the Philippines, with massive, massive support from the population, estimated at more than 80%. Why? It's because he took on the reality that the country had been destroyed. The history of the Philippines, in brief, was that in the 1970s and '80s, they were viewed by the rest of Asia — including Korea, by the way — as the model for development, under Ferdinand Marcos. They had built the first nuclear power plant. They had made the country self-sufficient in rice, by direct support for infrastructure for agriculture. They had built 11 major industrial infrastructure projects. They had built rail and road infrastructure. Imelda Marcos, whom most of you know only because she supposedly was wildly extravagant and had millions of pairs of shoes. Well, the reason she had the shoes was because she built a shoe industry in the Philippines. She brought in Italian shoemakers; she shipped in cattle from Australia, for the leather; she created a shoe industry. And those who produced the shoes in the Philippines were so grateful that they gave her the first pair of any new shoe they developed. That's the reality, contrary to the "fake news" that we received back in the 1980s, when the neo-cons, under George Schultz and Henry Kissinger and others decided to overthrow Marcos, to make a horrible example of him; that they would not allow Third World countries to have nuclear power, to be self-sufficient.
The result is, that what was once the greatest rising power in Southeast Asia, has become the basket case of that region. And this is what Duterte is acknowledging. He's saying, "We've been destroyed by the so-called big-brother, who looks down at the little brown brothers in the Philippines." And he said, "We're not going to tolerate it anymore. We're going to crush the drugs that have been brought into our country and are destroying our children. And we're going to reject the U.S. domination of our economy, where all they want is our raw materials, and to use our bright young people who graduate from college who have no jobs as engineers or scientists or teachers, or nurses or doctors, even, but who can only work all night long in call-centers, answering calls from the master back in the United States who has a problem with his computer or his banking code." This is how the country was destroyed.
So, he's turned to China; he's turned to Russia. His Defense Minister, Delfin Lorenzana, has gone to Russia; he's going to China. They're going to build that country. They're going to end this drug epidemic. And for that, he's being told he's going to be taken to the International Criminal Court for extra-judicial murders, for human rights violations, by the fact that drug dealers who fight back are being killed. Well, this is rather hypocritical, I would say. If you count the tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of people that Obama has killed through extra-judicial murder — no court, no due process, no proof. Just the king decides: "This is my list of people to kill this week"; he and John Brennan, Director of the CIA. This is rather hypocritical. What's really behind it? The British don't want to stop drugs. The banking institutions in London and New York are drug dependent, meaning they're drug-money dependent, in addition to the fact that many of the bankers are high on cocaine and heroin. They're drug dependent in the sense that the biggest business in the world is propping up these bankrupt Western banks who do nothing but speculate. This is the reality of this.
And of course, the main thing is that they don't want to see this war on drugs brought home. One out of 15 Americans addicted to heroin; this is mind-boggling! And they know that the American people, if they're given a sense, like we did with our War on Drugs policy under LaRouche's direction back in the '80s and '90s; that this could capture the American people.
Lastly, let me mention Japan. The British-American strategy for containing China and Russia in the Asian side, has always been South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, and Australia. And Singapore is in there someplace. Many of you know Korea's in total upheaval. The President who started off wanting to work with Russia and China, and was somehow completely taken over by Obama, turned against the collaboration with Eurasia; agreed to bring in these U.S. THAAD missiles, supposedly to protect them from North Korea. But these are missiles that go up into the high altitude. North Korea is 30 miles away from Seoul. You don't need this for Korea! You need them for China and Russia, for war. They were in the process of turning the Philippines into a massive U.S. military base, under an agreement with the former puppet-President.
In the Korea case, the President is now being impeached. She'll probably be out in April or so. The Opposition wants to stop that THAAD deployment. The Philippines we know; we've just discussed it. Just in the last week, Duterte repeated that he's probably going to absolutely cancel the strategic agreements with the United States. "We don't need foreign soldiers in our country," he said. "We're not going to have a war with China."
Now, Japan. Lyndon LaRouche has always said that there are two Japans. There's the Japan that came out of feudalism with the Meiji Restoration, which was highly influenced by the American System. Key people who brought in the work of Henry Carey, Friedrich List, which gave rise to this great industrial explosion in Japan; which turned them into the leading nation of Asia at that time, that superseded the 5000-year old culture and tradition in China in terms of its strength. But there was also the Japan of the British Empire; the British came at the same time, and basically said, "Look, Japan, you're an island nation like we are. You need to get raw materials, you don't have them in your own country. The only way you're going to get them is by having a mighty military and colonizing; taking over countries and taking their raw materials like we have — the great British Empire." Without going through all the details, as you know, this eventually won out in the sense that Japan adopted a militarist policy and unleashed the horror of the Second World War, which started long before Pearl Harbor. It started with the invasion of China and the looting of China; but then led to the destruction of China and other countries and ultimately to the destruction of Japan.
So, President Shinzo Abe represents both of these things. He has had his problems with China; he has wanted to remilitarize to get out from under the Constitution in Japan, which basically forbade them to fight war — a Constitution worked out after World War II with General MacArthur's collaboration. And he wants to be what he calls a "normal nation". But, he also recognizes that he's gotten nothing from the collapsing Western financial system; and he sees the future of Japan in the real development of Russia and China, of Asia; and not by taking it over this time, but by collaboration through the New Paradigm, through the New Silk Road. Through the collaboration especially with Russia. His grandfather, who was a prime minister, and his father, who was a politician, were committed to developing good relations with Russia; and he is now on course.
So, what's happened this year? It's an extraordinary transformation taking place. It began with his visit with Putin in Sochi in May; at which point he laid out an eight-point program for the development of the Russian Far East using Japanese technology and resources and financing. Also, in May, there was a meeting of the G-7 in Japan. Russia wasn't there, because they threw Russia out of the G-8; it became the G-7 again. So, he didn't meet Putin there; but at that event, Abe basically said to the other G-6 leaders — including Obama — that we were on the brink of a horrible financial breakdown crisis — worse than 2008. This was absolutely rejected. Obama said "No, we're in a recovery; it might be too slow, but it's going well." He didn't say this, but because there's lots of money being printed to keep the speculation going in the banks; there's lots of drugs flowing everywhere, things are going fine.
So, Abe was crushed on that; the final communiquÃ© didn't mention what Abe had said, but everybody knew. Then, in September, he went to Vladivostok for a conference organized by Putin on the development of the Far East; and they went further ahead with these development projects. And then, finally this month, Putin came to Japan; and he went to Yamaguchi, Abe's hometown; he then went to Tokyo. He visited the karate teacher that had Putin one of the great black belts. But at that, they knew they would not be able to overcome the still-festering problem of the territorial issues of the so-called Northern Territories, or the Kurile Islands. At the very end of the Second World War, the Russians had come in to help with the war in Japan; had taken the Kuriles, which had been back and forth throughout history. These are basically four islands north of Japan. Both sides claim sovereignty; the Japanese want them back. But, what they agreed to was that they would go with a policy that had first been put forward in 1956 to divide the islands two and two, which had been stopped by the US. The Dulles brothers came in and said, "Don't you dare; you must demand all of these islands back from the Russians, or else we won't turn Okinawa back to you." So, the Japanese backed away from that deal, and after that, the Russians said, "OK, that's it. You're not going to get any of them back." So, now Putin has said, "OK, we can start joint development of these four islands. Joint development. And over time, we can go back to the 1956 agreement and come to a settlement; meaning that we'll be able to finally have a peace settlement to World War II by probably 2018."
But in the meantime, huge development projects. They made agreements for $2.5 billion of infrastructure projects throughout the Russian Far East; ports, rail, agriculture, nuclear, pharmaceuticals, education, cultural exchanges, $1 billion joint fund which can be leveraged into more, and this framework for peace. So, just as Putin has largely unified the entire Middle East — he's even now talking to Bibi Netanyahu and the Saudis; because he's in charge. Obama and the British game is largely defeated. So, they're basically creating a common policy of common interests of all these nations. And in the same way in Asia; the China Silk Road process, the new financial institutions are bringing all of these nations together. There are still a few problems, but it's a new world; it's a new world which the United States can and must join. It's the only option.
And again, I'll repeat that while Obama's Pivot to Asia is dead, the TPP is dead, the regime-change policies are largely dead; but don't just sit back and say, "Yahoo! Trump's going to do it for us!" Because that is not the case. This is going to be done by us; we created the environment in America and around the world which made it possible for these revolutionary changes to take place. It's the power of ideas that moves history; it's Lyndon LaRouche and Helga LaRouche and this institution who fought for these ideas before they became popular. In other words, we fought to bring these ideas into circulation; which made it possible for the emergence of people who recognized the truth of those ideas and have begun to take them up. This is doubly true now; we're at a moment which is going to go one way or the other. It's going to depend on you and me; on making sure that we take this fight now at a crucial moment — what Schiller called a great moment — and make sure that we define a future that uplifts people to a level of the dignity of their true humanity through activating the creative powers that they have by the right of being human beings created in the image of God.
This is our task, and this is where we stand today; and it's a great time to be celebrating Christmas, but you should be thinking about George Washington leading the fight across the river on Christmas Eve. That's the way we have to approach the fight that we have on our hands today. A good fight; one that gives us reason to be happy, but which is deadly serious. Thank you.
DENISTON: I think that was excellent, Mike; and I liked your concluding point. We're seeing a lot of horrific, awful things being removed; but I think Helga Zepp-LaRouche's focus on this being the potential transition to a new historical paradigm centered around a new positive conception about the truly creative nature of mankind, is our mission, is our unique task today. As our viewers know, Mr. LaRouche defined New York City as a critical point of intervention on that level; to really revive that true American spirit and true American insight and understanding into this historical unifying mission for mankind that we're talking about. So, I know Diane was part of our discussions with Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche earlier today, and she was raising some of the critical aspects that we have to focus on in terms of getting the American people to realize that you're not just passive observers in this process. Like you were saying, we're not just going to sit back and root for who we think might do this or that. We have a critical leadership role — including our audience, everyone involved with us — to actually take this fight to this higher level. So, I think that Diane has some remarks on that; I know she would like to contribute here.
DIANE SARE: Mrs. LaRouche said something this morning that I think is very important, which is that in a period where everything is stable, then the subjective factor is not as crucial. That is, if everybody gets all worked up over a particular celebrity's drug addiction problem, or various fads, various emotional things that people get tangled up in; but when you have a moment like this, which on the one hand, I'm really glad that Mike just went through what he did, because I think most Americans have absolutely no idea of this incredible picture of what's happening in the world. And also, should reflect a little bit on where these countries are coming from; what did China look like 45 years ago, for example, compared to how they look now? You'd get a sense that there is no reason, except a subjective reason of the mindset of the American people, why our nation cannot similarly be self-transformed to a completely different domain, a completely different culture.
I'll say here this past weekend, we had another musical intervention. The Schiller Institute chorus, which I helped to organize and direct, sponsored by the Foundation for the Revival of Classical Culture in a performance, a unity concert in Brooklyn of African-American spirituals, the Bach Wachet Auf cantata, and Handel's Messiah. But what was so striking about this particular performance is, my sense was that the musicians were completely engaged. In other words, it wasn't like a stuffy thing that you go to at Lincoln Center, where everyone is going through the motions; and of course, the tuning is way too high anyway, so their voices are strained and they need all kinds of electronic adjustments and things like this. But the thing really was from the heart; and there's clearly a potential where Americans have a sense, they want something substantive. Who actually doesn't want their life to have had a purpose?
What we have right now, is a moment of extraordinary opportunity; it is also dangerous, because as you said, Ben, at the beginning, Obama issued these threats, this intent to kill as LaRouche put it, a week ago today at his crazy press conference and interview on NPR. Saying, with no evidence whatsoever that Russia had any involvement in hacking, that we will retaliate at a time and place of our choosing. Those are murderous words, and therefore, we're not at a moment of stability; and it requires from us, as Schiller would say, a certain sublime quality of thinking where we look down on the world as if from above, and consider what are the common aims of mankind and what mankind can do together. And the potential that we have, given that the defeat of Hillary Clinton was really a defeat of Bush and Obama; it was a defeat of a 16-year legacy of evil. It doesn't guarantee — as Mike said — that what comes in under Trump is going to be good; that is for us to determine. It just indicates that there is a tremendous potential for this, as we see with the communication between President-elect Trump and Vladimir Putin; that's very promising. There are other aspects of a potential with China that are very promising, and then there are some appointments that are not so promising.
It is definitely a moment for each of us to consider our responsibility to future generations; because we have a moment, hopefully a revolutionary moment where we have not found a little people, but a people who will grow into the situation and will take the actions that LaRouche has outlined. Specifically, the Four Laws; beginning emphatically with Glass-Steagall, but not ending with Glass-Steagall. The fourth law is not an end, but is really a beginning; which is the development of mankind on the imperative of exploring the Universe, of mastering thermonuclear fusion and getting ourselves out of this Solar System. I think that's the challenge: To objectively address where we are; to not get flustered by every piece of crap that gets put in the mainstream press, which is a bunch of propaganda designed to make everyone hysterical; and to really fight for the direction that is required.
DENISTON: Another thing that does lie in that issue of the creative development of mankind, and I was also struck in some recent discussions with Lyndon and Helga LaRouche. Helga was making the point that what we're seeing now is really the realization of this World Land-Bridge perspective that she and Lyn had fought so hard for. We were discussing how this really should be seen from the standpoint of Mr. LaRouche's unique insights into the fundamental nature of human creative progress and human creative revolutions. And in a sense, what we're seeing — what Mike just presented — what's being led by China, the potential for that to expand globally with the United States jumping on board, really is a certain potential culmination of a certain platform of development for the entire planet. What that sets the base for, is the next leap for the expansion into space and the creative development of nearby space first; as Krafft Ehricke had been one of the leading visionaries for as a basis for the expansion further into the Solar System. I think this idea of continually defining the next levels of creative leaps, creative developments is absolutely critical; because it's not that we are completing some process of some steady state level of development, but it's the fact that mankind is always participating in creative revolutions. Every generation should be focussed on a complete revolution in the very nature of mankind. The very understanding of mankind's existence is continually being reshaped, recreated on higher and higher levels. That's the positive principle of this New Paradigm.
BILLINGTON: What Diane referred to that Helga said this morning about certain moments in history in which the subjective becomes crucial, is a reflection of what Percy Shelley said in his "In Defense of Poetry" which we've quoted often. He develops the concept of great revolutionary moments in history, at which he says, in his describing why the poet is the legislator of history in moments of great crisis like this. But he describes how in such moments, the common person who normally doesn't have to think about profound ideas, is suddenly capable of understanding very profound concepts about man and nature — both about society and about scientific reality of the Universe. That's clearly where we stand; where we've reached a point at which there's nothing holding back any human being. Perhaps he's been drugged; perhaps he's been degraded; perhaps he's been left unemployed, driven out of the workforce. But nonetheless, it's a moment in history in which everybody can, in fact, bring themselves up to those creative capacities that they were blessed with by being a human being. To activate that now, in learning huge amounts of things in a very short period of time, is possible and necessary.
DENISTON: I think that definitely defines our mission for the next coming year — 2017. This can be the year of the shift of the United States under the leadership of what we're doing.
So, I think we gave people a very good overview of where the world stands today, and what the challenge is before us. So, unless Diane you want to have any additional ending comments, I think we're coming to the conclusion of our discussion today.
SARE: I would just like to encourage people over this holiday period, as we're about to enter a new year, which could be a very different year, to protect your mind and not engage in degraded cultural activities. But take advantage of the LaRouche PAC website, which has phenomenal educational material. You can choose to study the Four Laws of Mr. LaRouche; read the papers of Alexander Hamilton; watch the video on Operation Phoenix — the reconstruction of Syria. There's just an abundance of material here that, if you set your mind to it, to determine that between now and the beginning of next year, to be a more ennobled human being, and more able to articulate these profound ideas and organize your friends and neighbors; then we'll be off to a very good start.
DENISTON: With that, I think we have our mission defined before us. We thank you for joining us, and we will be back next week for the next Friday webcast; and we'll be sure to be delivering some material for you between now and then. So, thank you for joining us.