Solving the Dangers of Economic Crisis and War
by Lyndon LaRouche
November 22, 2023

Click here to read a transcript of the question period.

First, one should not try to understand the United States, by reading the leading U.S. press. The press represents--or, may reflect--reality, but it never speaks for reality. The press in the United States--the major press, including the television and so forth--is controlled by the same financier interests, which represent my opponents. And they represent a very specific financier interest, which is now going bankrupt. For example, all of the major banks of the United States are bankrupt. That can also be said, generally, of the banks of Europe. If you want fiscal responsibility, you have to go to China, or probably Malaysia; otherwise, the world's financial system is collapsing.

The problem is partly a moral problem, in which most of the population has submitted to an immoral policy, an immoral change, which was put into effect in Europe and the Americas during the middle of the 1960s. By immoral, I would also say, “inhuman.” And the point is, that man is not an animal, and the difference between man and the beasts, is the essence of morality. If man were an ape, the potential population of mankind on this planet, would never have exceeded several million miserable individuals. We presently have an estimated 6.2 billion people. The problem is, there's much poverty and injustice around the world; nonetheless, we could support, with what we know today as technology, 25 billion people, in security.

The chief achievement of European civilization came in the Renaissance. For the first time, as a result of the Renaissance, which was centered here in Italy, we created the idea, not of empire, not of ultramontane systems, but rather, [of] individual nation-states, which were sovereign, and in which the sovereign was accountable for the general welfare of all of the people--both the presently living and their posterity. This is the principle of the General Welfare, or the Common Good: Which means that the responsibility of government is to understand the nature of the human individual, and to understand the needs of the individual, because of that nature. And not merely to take care of the presently living.

Greatest Economic Crisis in Modern History

The majority of current opinion, is not necessarily moral. And majority opinion is not necessarily legitimate. The present opinion must be judged by its effects on two to three generations to come.

All right, then, look back at the history of the past 60-70 years: The world came out of a Great Depression, to enjoy the pleasures of war. In the post-war period, Europe and the United States, and much of the Americas as well, concentrated on developing a productive society, rebuilding civilization as a productive form of society; to increase the productive powers of labor; to raise the standard of living; to increase the span of education for the population; and that each succeeding generation should be better than the preceding one. It wasn't so bad. It wasn't good, but it wasn't so bad.

Then, about the time of the beginning of the U.S. war in Indochina, there was a fundamental change in policy and morality. It reminds us of what happened in Rome, during the period of the close and the centuries following the Second Punic War. We, in the past 35 and more years, have done the same thing that led to the doom of Rome. We went from a producer society to a consumer society, living on the poor of the world. And we are now being destroyed by our own policy. The idea of “post-industrial society”--a form of mass-suicide; the idea of globalization--the destruction of the nation-state on which civilization depends; the idea of government, accountable to the nation. Strange international agencies are now more powerful than governments. Strange ideas, which were inhuman, predominate.

And now, we're being suitably punished. Over the past 35 years, the degeneration of Europe and the Americas, in particular, has led us into the greatest financial-monetary and economic crisis in modern history. We are now in the end-phase of a terminal crisis, which means the collapse of the present financial-monetary system, within the short term ahead. The financial system is hopelessly bankrupt. The present Anglo-Dutch model of liberalism and free trade is finished.

So, we have the cries, again, for fascism, as in the 1930s. We see this in the United States, in the people who are calling for the Iraq war and a general war against Islam. This group is, officially, what's called “international fascists.” A form of fascism, in imitation of the Roman Empire. That's what this recent Iraq war question is.

We Can Change the Monetary System

Now, it's not all that bad: We could get rid of the financial system. There are many useful political forces in Italy, which are committed to a reform of the monetary system. In other countries, there's also a commitment in that direction.

In the United States, however, there was an impulse for war, which many in Europe foolishly believed was inevitable. And I told them, they were wrong: that the war against Iraq was not inevitable. But, many in Europe, who did not understand the United States' system, didn't think we could stop it. Over the Summer and Autumn of this past year, I had the privilege of being in a key position in trying to organize a stopping of this war. Neither of the major parties were worth anything on this issue. You couldn't tell which was the more rotten, the Republicans or the Democrats. There were a few good ones, here or there, but there was no courage.

But, remember, the United States is not a monarchy; it does not have a parliamentary system; we have a Presidential system.

Under a Presidential system, such as ours, we can have a good Presidential system with an idiot as President. And we, in the United States, have previously done that: We've had, many times, an idiot as President; but the United States survived nonetheless. Because the Executive branch--under our Constitution--the Executive branch is constituted as the institutions of the Presidency. These are made [up] of professionals, inside and outside the institutions of government, including many people in government or who have retired from government service. We refer to these, in the United States, as “the institutions.” When the President of the United States wishes to do something, he relies on the institutions, to be capable of doing them.

As you may have noticed, in the case of the Iraq war, the institution which led the opposition, was the U.S. military. The flag-officers whose specialty was ground forces, were in the overwhelming majority against this war, as a piece of stupidity. The loudest voices were many people who had been retired from military services. But they spoke for people in military service. This includes many people, including people in the Congress, in the regular Congressional committees--that is, the permanent staff.

So, what happened is, the people in the institutions accepted my argument. My argument became the following three points. We can stop the war that no one in Europe or the United States wants, if we do three things. We must first put the issue into the United Nations, because we have to have the world have a voice in this. Secondly, we must get Saddam Hussein to accept that agreement. Then, we must  get the President of the United States to accept the United Nations' acceptance of Saddam Hussein's acceptance.

The agreement that this be done, was made, before the Nov. 5 U.S. elections, but it was not brought out into the open, until after the elections. But, the decision had already been made. So, we temporarily have stopped the war. The fascist element that wanted the war, is trying to do everything inside and outside the United States, to make the war happen.

The Treaty of Westphalia Principle

The final point to be made, is how this relates to the economic question. We can not simply count on not having an Iraq war, and assume it won't happen. You do not get peace through war: You neutralize war through war, if it's justified. But, peace must be created in a different way.

The example, in European history, is the work of a fellow who was once called Giulio Mazarini--who became known as Cardinal Mazarin in France--who was committed to a strategic peace in Europe, and used his great influence on French diplomacy, to intervene in the Thirty Years' War, to bring it to an end. And, if you read the first articles of the Treaty of Westphalia, you see a great principle involved there: The first principle of the peace, is, the peoples who were at war must now learn to care for and love one another. And, what is left of European civilization, depends upon that agreement.

Now, today, we have, in Russia, China, India, Southeast Asia, Korea, elsewhere, a great effort to unify this part of the world, for peace, security, and prosperity. A recent conference held in Phnom Penh exemplifies that. I think a recently deceased Cardinal, [Francis Xavier Nguyen] Van Thuan, who was head of Justitia et Pax, would have been very happy, to have the news of that meeting in Phnom Penh.

Europe is bankrupt. Europe is not now employing and producing enough people to sustain its own existence materially. The financial system is collapsing. The economic system is being crushed by the collapse of the financial system. Europe's only chance is to open up large markets for exports into places like Asia. You see this in this part of Italy: The export activity of private and small industries from here, is key to Italy's income abroad. The only important increase of Germany's exports, is China.

So, like the Treaty of Westphalia, Europe and Asia must reach an agreement on the mutual need for cooperation and development of Eurasia, as a whole. The United States must accept that, and cooperate with it. The nations of Central and South America must be freed from the destruction, which the United States is imposing upon them. And together, we must stop the genocide, and reverse the genocide, in Sub-Saharan Africa--which is primarily Anglo-American intentional genocide against the population of Sub-Saharan Africa.

The solution, therefore, to the economic and to the war dangers, like the Treaty of Westphalia, requires, in a sense, that the nations of the world come to love one another, to find this love expressed in programs of mutual benefit. This is actually not exceptional for the United States. The Founders of the United States, around Benjamin Franklin, had this intention. This is embedded in our Constitution. The greatest leaders of the United States, such as John Quincy Adams, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, have shared this. So we have to, in a sense, affirm--from the United States--affirm our true Constitutional intention, which is fully consistent with the accomplishment of Cardinal Mazarin in France. And, which, perhaps, would make happy the spirit of our recently departed friend, the Cardinal Van Thuan.

That, in essence, is my message.

-30-

Click here to read a transcript of the question period.