Questions to LaRouche from
the Catholic Press Association
November 22, 2023

Q: Concerning your presentation: You referred to the worldwide financial speculative bubble. Resolution 40030 of Sept. 25, “New International Financial Architecture”; it carried as first signature, that of the Honorable Giovanni Bianchi. [This is] a motion that has been approved by the Italian Parliament, in which it is said: “the entire worldwide financial bubble has reached the level of $400,000 billion, of which $140,000 only in the United States, in relation to a worldwide Gross Domestic Product of about $40,000 billion.”

If I understand correctly this means that the Gross Domestic Product, i.e., the wealth produced by the entire planet, is a tenth of the total financial aggregation. I would like you to comment on this point.

LaRouche: One of the problems is, the problem of the concept of money, in an economy. There is a natural-law conception of economics, as opposed to a Venetian-style, oligarchical, financier conception. And, this model: When Venice began to lose its state power at the end of the 17th Century, we got two new Venices in northern Europe: The first emerged in the Netherlands, especially around William of Orange; and the second was imported to England by William of Orange; which took over the entire northern part of the old Hansa area of Europe, as well: Sweden, Denmark, and so forth.

So, from the beginning of the 18th Century, Europe was dominated by a conflict between the Hapsburg interests on one side, with certain ultramontane pretensions--that the Hapsburgs considered themselves Pontifex Maximus. On the other side, you had this Anglo-Dutch liberalism, which is based on privately controlled central banking.

So, with some variations, the history of Europe has been the domination of government by central banks, which are largely independent of governments. This corruption spread into the United States repeatedly, but especially with Woodrow Wilson. The Federal Reserve System of the United States is an unconstitutional approximation of the central banking system, which was put through by force, not by law.

So therefore, the world is dominated by a specific financier-oligarchical control over money. The governments of Europe are subject to a concert of financier interests, through the so-called independent central banking systems, which is the old Venetian system looting, of imperial-financier maritime power. And today, that is not merely sea power; that is also air power. Therefore, the controlling interests of the planet over the past period of 35 years, have been financier-monetary interests. And the practice of accounting and of finance has been based on monetarism.

Now, the most evil expression of this, is by a British-Dutch philosopher, John Locke. John Locke had the concept of “property,” which is called in the United States, today, “shareholder value.” The assumption is, that the person who has title to ownership of money, must have the right to a certain rate of return on that money, no matter what else happens to them. In other words, a law of pure usury. Now therefore, the value of stocks is no longer the value of physical production; the value of stocks is based on a multiple of a yield which is taken out of them. So, as a result of that, we've had a vast inflation of financial claims.

Economic Cannibalism Must Cease

Whereas, for example, in the United States, you take 1977 to the present: If you look at physical consumption, by households; take the lower 80% of income brackets of U.S. households: The content of consumption has collapsed. Look at the industries. The industries of the United States have collapsed. Similarly, the industries and infrastructure of Italy, of all Europe, have collapsed. The looting of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, is another big collapse of world wealth. Most of the collapse has been caused by usury. Industries are shut down and looted to provide profits for monetary-financial interests.

So what you have in finance: You have, therefore, a pure John Law Bubble in finance. The conflict, therefore, becomes, do we, as nations, impose--as His Holiness has emphasized recently, repeatedly--the Common Good, and insist that the governments use their sovereign power to enforce the obligation to the Common Good? That when there's a conflict between financier interests and the Common Good, the Common Good must prevail. Which means you have to invoke what is called “natural law.” Not empiricist natural law, but natural law based on the conception of the special nature of man. And on that basis, then, we have a great discrepancy, but the discrepancy is a moral discrepancy.

The cannibals are eating the people. And the people must defend the people, and cannibalism must cease.

This is the problem. The problem is, where do we find enough leaders?--who agree with this, but who will not say it! And you see the case of Signor Bianchi typifies those in the Italian Parliament, who still believe in natural law. They're not all Catholics. Some of them are secularists, who believe in natural law! So, my job is to--at my age, since I have nothing to lose--is to defend the natural law.

Is It War Over Oil?

Q: Beyond the considerations that inspire Bush against Saddam Hussein, demonizing him as once [Nasser] was demonized--he also was considered and called “Hitler”---I believe that the key issue is the issue of the control of the energy sources, oil. Now you have travelled around the world and know the Third World countries very well. What do you think about this sudden decision by the United States to unleash a war? Do you really think that Saddam Hussein is this devil that they are painting for us?.

Q: [another journalist] Do you believe that the decision-making power in the United States is in the hands of the the Council on Foreign Relations and of the Trilateral Commission? Second question: What do you think of the decision taken yesterday by the leadership of NATO, with respect to to a statement that appeared today in Corriere della Sera, of the Ministers, that NATO will substitute in the future for the United Nations? Following the [NATO] decision that has created a military force able to intervene all over the world, it is clear at this point that the decision will be taken by America; Europe will follow it. And so we have de facto the center of world power in America, supported by hundreds of military bases in the world.

LaRouche: Well, on the first one, oil is not the primary factor in this. It may be for some interests in the United States, to try to steal control of the oil.

But this also goes over the same area as the second question. The source of evil here, goes back to the middle of the last century--of the 19th Century, I mean (these centuries keep passing me by!).

After the U.S. victory over the British puppet, the Confederacy, and President's Lincoln's kicking the French out of Mexico and leaving Maximilian to swing by his Austrian heels, the United States emerged as the greatest single economic power on this planet. And, coinciding with the 1876 Centennial celebration in the United States, in the aftermath of the overthrow of Napoleon III in France, there were moves, around the world, to imitate the American model. For example, the national unity of Italy, was a product of this circumstance. In 1877, Bismarck adopted the American model, as the law of industrial development for Germany. In the same period, Alexander II, the Tsar of Russia, adopted the proposal of Mendeleyev, the scientist, for railroad and industrial development in Russia. The Meiji Restoration forces in Japan asked Henry C. Carey, who was then the world's leading economist, to assist them in becoming an industrial economy. At a later point, as part of the same policy, Sun Yat-sen was backed by the United States, for the creation of what became modern China.

Therefore, across the continent of Eurasia, there was a great movement in Europe and Asia, for the emergence of a system of cooperative nation-states, based on the success of the American model of agro-industrial development. You see this around Cavour, in Italy; you see this around Betti, and his circle of scientists in northern Italy.

So, the British said, “We're threatened.” The British responded with the friends of Thomas Huxley, who was actually a candidate for the position of Satan. And a movement was launched, which was called “geopolitics,” under which it was argued that the world maritime powers must ally to prevent the continental, Eurasian powers from coming together in a cooperative bloc. As a result of the successful assassination of a U.S. President, McKinley, in favor of Teddy Roosevelt, the United States was switched, from being an ally of the interests of continental Eurasia, to becoming the ally of Britain. And Woodrow Wilson was even worse. And Coolidge was evil.

So, Franklin Roosevelt made the turn back to the American Constitutional policy. And, if he had not died in '45, Roosevelt, at the end of the war, would have carried out his intention to destroy the British Empire forever.

The American Tories

To understand the answers to the questions posed, you must take this into account. We've had, in the United States, a treasonous element, which has sometimes been very powerful. This first emerged as a distinct political-social formation, in North America, in 1763. These were known as the “American Tory Party,” as opposed to the patriots. They were very close to London; very close to the British East India Company; and to the British Foreign Office. These were the Americans, who were allied with Jeremy Bentham, who ran the secret committee of the British Foreign Office, and whose famous successor was Lord Palmerston. And, there are a lot of people in between that were no good. So, the Spanish monarchy, after Napoleon, had a franchise on the African slave trade, for the British monarchy. This kind of problem.

So, Lincoln, essentially, saved the United States, saved its Constitution. Franklin Roosevelt, again, saved our Constitution. Now, when Roosevelt was dying--and he was already dying when he went to the Democratic nominating convention, in the Summer of 1944--the American Tory faction moved to force a Vice President on the Democrats, who would be their puppet, when Roosevelt died. That puppet was Harry Truman.

So, this is where the problem starts: The concern of this faction, inside the United States, and Britain--though there are some divisions between them, on the question of who's on top--has been to destroy the character of the United States, which you see, for example, with the cultural paradigm-shift, which was induced from 1964 on: the so-called “rock-drug-sex counterculture.” The Indochina War, which was aimed, largely, to destroy the United States. It's moral destruction; moral destruction of people. Then, you had the Nixon Administration, or better called the “Kissinger Administration,” because Kissinger actually ran it--not for himself, but for the American Tory faction, the Harvard-based American Tory faction. Then you had Brzezinski, who's clinically insane. He's worse than Kissinger. More of a killer. Kissinger likes to watch people die; Brzezinski likes to kill them!

What these people's purpose has been--and they were motivated by H.G. Wells and Bertrand Russell, who's the center of this international faction. And this group was centered internationally, around an organization which still exists, called the Unification of the Sciences Project, launched inside the United States in 1936, by Wells and Russell. Their purpose is to set up a world empire. It's sort of an Anglo-Dutch-Venetian version of a Roman Empire, to destroy all nation-states. Like the ancient Roman Empire, which they copy, they developed what's called a limes [“wall”] policy; and their idea was a strategic policy of taking the Islamic population of the world, especially in Eurasia: Make the Islamic population the limes target, for permanent warfare.

This is the same group that's running the genocide against Sub-Saharan Africa--and it is deliberately intended genocide. It's not an accident: It's mass murder, by intention. The object is, that if you put, from the area from Chechnya down through South Asia and Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa, as a target of a perpetual war against Islam, you can thereby prevent the possibility of civilization in Eurasia.

NATO: Dead Man Marching to Prague

The significance of Middle East oil comes in as a part of that, not as a starting point; but it is a reflection of that. For the next 80 years, the cheapest source, and most abundant source, of petroleum for world will be the Middle East, especially the Gulf. No part of the world, as a petroleum producer, can significantly rival the Gulf. And the estimates now, are 80 years' supply, at the lowest cost in the world. If you destroy this area, what is the price of oil, as against the need for petrochemical resources worldwide? Imagine the cost of 200 euros, 250 euros per barrel of oil, in Europe: What happens to civilization? With the opposition to nuclear energy, which is the only real alternative?

But, I would say, finally, the optimistic side: NATO got together recently, to conduct its own funeral. NATO will not rule the world; NATO is dead. It was a dead man marching to Prague. Because Europe doesn't want any part of it. But Europe says, “We don't want to fight the United States. We hope the United States will die.” They say, “We won't fight the United States, if we don't have to. We sit, and wait for the funeral.” That's the attitude I get, throughout Europe.

The problem is not the threat of NATO. The problem is the lack of leadership, to address the kinds of things, and say the kinds of things I say. If the world would discuss the truth, especially the truth about the recent centuries of history, or modern European history since the Renaissance, for example, then these things would not be possible! The people would rise. The problem: We have either leaders who are not competent, or who are intellectually competent, but are too frightened to speak. And, as long as you have [that], the majority of people wish to be “little people,” like sheep: They can not defend themselves, except by leaders, who would bring forth in them the capacity to unite for their own interests.

Until we get to the point, where we have men who are truly immortal--in the spiritual sense, the good “little people” wish to be immortal, but that's only a wish. They're not willing to make that come true. They say, “my community, my family, my immediate interests.” The people do not yet see mortality as a talent: They're too small. And we require, still, leaders who do have a sense of what immortality is, who will take any necessary personal risk, in order to fulfill their responsibility to humanity. For me, the problem is not the enemy. I know the enemy. For me, the problem is the lack of courageous leaders.

(Oh, I love this Pope!)

Leadership in a Crisis

Q: Concerning a statement of principles on how to act, for a normal citizen. I find myself, when agencies speak.... Greenspan: “Rigidity in Japan stops the recovery. The structural rigidity in Europe and Japan,” Alan Greenspan said at the end of a meeting at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington. Greenspan called for deregulation of the economies. He said one cannot overcome the difficulties, above all in the short term, with the present monetary policies. The only thing to do is to follow the example of the U.S.A. Now I ask myself, as a normal citizen, not as an expert: How do I orient myself, when the international institutions are controlled by the forces I mentioned? I believe survival is a basic natural instinct of the individual.

LaRouche: Well, Greenspan was recently knighted by Queen Elizabeth II, who, herself, is reported to be in trouble: There's a recent British scandal, which reports that a heterosexual was found in Buckingham Palace. But Greenspan would be better off to have received the title of Marie Antoinette. Perhaps he can think on that, when he's sitting in his bathtub, for every two hours a day, or so, as it's reported.

The thing to say: He's like the Fascist regime at the end of its term: He's nasty, but he's insane, but he's also helplessly incompetent. Ask yourself: What happens if you have a 1% U.S. interest rate; or a Japan-style virtually zero-percent overnight borrowing rate? Under conditions, that, already the world system is involved in a Weimar 1923-style hyperinflationary spiral? Let us call up the ghost of the deceased Rudolf Hilferding, the German minister, and ask him how well these kinds of policies worked, in 1923.

The problem is, here's a man who--he and Volcker have spent their life, since 1979, in running the Federal Reserve System, as the worst kind of European central banking system. Or, compare, for a milder example, the history of Italy, since 1976, since the IMF conditionalities were imposed upon Italy. In Italy, you have today, evidence of the systemic destruction of what was the Italian economy of 1975, by the effects of the IMF conditionalities imposed in 1976. You've got, in Milan--which used to be an industrial center--you can drive along the streets in from the airport, and you will find the industries are dying on each side of the highway! And Milan depends largely on a fashion industry, which depends upon increasing the price by diminishing the amount of cloth worn! Which is called “artistic.”

We're at a point, where the ruling circles of finance are clinically insane, and in which the so-called experts, are the worst sources of advice. One must get the picture, that we are not in a long-term process, where we can debate these things over the coming many months. No intelligent person would guarantee to you, that this economy would still be standing by Christmas. We have bubbles; like the British housing-mortgage bubble; the rate of bankruptcies and unemployment in the United States, increasing at accelerating rates; you have a spiral of collapse in the German economy.

You have a fellow, Arnulf Baring, who was educated at Harvard under Kissinger, who proposed in Germany, in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, recently, that Germany must immediately adopt the Notverordnung law, under which Hitler was brought to power in Germany, before the current period, and the current crisis! Remember, what the Nazis did: When Hitler was appointed, the Nazis, within a month, burned down the Reichstag, which was done by Göring! They used that for a so-called Notverordnung decree, to start the process of the concentration camps, to start the dictatorship. As a result of that, Europe went to war. It was an almost unstoppable process, from the Reichstag fire to the end of the war.

Which comes back to the same thing I said before. The answer is the same. These things are not debatable, except for pedagogical purposes. The point is: What's the alternative? What's the alternative to the insanity, which this man merely typifies? Where's the leadership, as was shown implicitly, by the Italian Chamber of Deputies, on the question of general financial reform? The greatest danger is the lack of leadership, lack of effective leadership. And leadership is not the fist: Leadership is the mind, and the courage to tell the truth.

-30-