|
LaRouche in 2004 Interview with Y2004 Democratic Lyndon LaRouche was interviewed on Oct. 2, 2023 by Sergio Romano, the host of the “Editor's Desk” news show on Telemax TV and radio, in Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico. The show is seen and heard throughout the northwest of Mexico, and into parts of the U.S. Southwest. Q: Greetings, Mr. LaRouche. LAROUCHE: Thank you. Q: Mr. LaRouche, about 20 years ago, you forecast an economic crisis, of the sort we're experiencing today. How did you know that this was going to happen, and what are the measures that can be taken to solve this crisis? LAROUCHE: Well, this was foreseeable, if you looked at the axiomatic features, which are like the axioms of a geometry: The changes that were made between the middle of the 1960s and the August 1971 decision of Richard Nixon. And, then you had--at the end of the 1970s--you had the actions of the Carter Administration, which were a greater disaster for the United States, than even the Nixon Administration. And those mistakes were never corrected. Therefore, the crash was inevitable. There could have been certain things done to prevent it... Q: Forgive me for interrupting you, Mr. LaRouche, but, are you saying that the end of the Bretton Woods system and the decision to establish floating exchange rates, that these were part of the problem? LAROUCHE: This was the key to it. Q: So, in other words, this was inevitable, because we shifted from a world of production to a world of speculation. Is that the case? LAROUCHE: That's essentially it. Q: So, in other words, we're giving benefits to those who speculate and not those who produce. What can be done to change and correct the situation? LAROUCHE: Well, now, we're in what is, for many people, an impossible situation. We have, actually, the worst financial crisis and monetary crisis in world history; it is now unfolding. There are solutions, but there are no simple solutions. What we have to do, is, essentially put the world into bankruptcy reorganization. Of course, you're dealing with national economies, not individual, major firms, so, therefore, it's different politically than another kind of bankruptcy. And, therefore, what we have now, is not just a financial crisis; we now have a world {political} crisis, not because the world is unwilling to face the crisis, but because the present political institutions are unwilling to face the {reality} of what has to be done. Naturally, since I knew this was happening, I've had, for years, I've had exact statements of policy on what has to be done--for which, as you may know, I was not thanked. The question is now: Is the world going to face reality, and be willing to take the kinds of measures which I've indicated ought to be done? Otherwise, we're looking at something like the fall of the Roman Empire. Q: Regarding the attack on Washington and New York on Sept. 11, how does this affect the situation? Does this change it? What does it do? Or does it simply precipitate what was coming anyway? LAROUCHE: No. It doesn't really affect the economy that much, because the catastrophe is already that great. What this is, is, actually, a coup d'etat inside the United States. And, the question is: Is the United States going to be able to resist this coup d'etat, which, if it does, that means we're back to the question of dealing with the financial crisis, not this war-like situation. But the economic crisis has nothing to do with this particular attack on New York and Washington. Q: You're using the phrase “a coup d'etat” inside the United States. Are you saying that there's an internal factor involved in this, different from the Arab groups that have been noted in the press? LAROUCHE: The Arabs, as groups, had really nothing to do with this, except some members may have been involved. You have a lot of attempts to try to distract attention from the fact, but, the fact is: The heart of the problem lies chiefly inside the United States. It's simply impossible to do what was done, except by a very high-level operation from inside the United States. And, obviously, this has to do with two things. It has to do with the reaction to the world financial crisis. Remember, the coup that put Hitler in power in Germany, came in such a crisis. This has some of the same characteristics as that. And, at the same time, this is tied to the Middle East crisis. For example: Right now, this weekend, there's the threat of an attack on the famous mosque on the top of the mountain in Jerusalem, the place which is called in Arabic, “al-Haram al-Sharif”, which is the second or third holiest place in Islam. You have Protestant forces, in the United States, who believe in having the Battle of Armageddon now. They're crazy, but, unfortunately, they're numerous. They're planning, this weekend, if possible--if they're allowed to--to continue the attacks which correspond to what Sharon did in the first attack on the mountain, some months ago. What's dangerous, is, if this were to go forward, this would ignite an international religious war, which some people in the United States want: They call it, a “Clash of Civilizations.” So, that's the problem. Q: Would you link what happened in New York and Washington, D.C., in any way, to what happened in Oklahoma City at the Federal Building? LAROUCHE: Well, I would say that, anyone who thinks, in the United States, with regret--that this guy, Nichols and his friend, were ever charged without a thorough investigation in the Oklahoma case. The fact that this was never adequately investigated, but that they simply took the nearest person to charge, and took him out and hung him, so to speak, closed the door on investigations which should have been made. But, undoubtedly, the way this was handled--the mishandling of the Oklahoma bombing case, from an investigation standpoint--does raise questions, because there are people inside the United States who might be used for the kind of thing that happened. From a standpoint of political motivation, these types of people that were involved behind the Oklahoma bombing, are precisely the kinds of people who would be useful, shall we say, for this kind of attack. Q: Mr. LaRouche, you spoke recently at the Russian Duma. You've also undoubtedly seen the statements of President Vladimir Putin before the German Bundestag, and you've discussed the issue of a realignment politically, of Europe toward Eurasia. Is that the direction that you see things moving? LAROUCHE: I see the direction they should move in. If we're going to get out of an economic crisis, we have to revive world trade, and the major market for that, essentially, lies in Asia: China, India, so forth. Now, therefore, we have to create the mechanisms of cooperation for long-term trade. If we do that, we could, quite successfully, revive the world economy. There exist plans, which I've been involved in devising, which are now accepted in various parts of that part of the world, including a project called the “Eurasian Land-Bridge” project, which would involve all of continental Eurasia, or nearly all of it, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. It also involves putting a railroad tunnel into Alaska from Siberia, and the plan is to continue that road all the way down to Tierra del Fuego. There are also plans in Egypt, to extend the same system into Africa. This project could result in the greatest economic revival the planet has ever known. My view is that, if we could get such a plan into motion, with the cooperation of the United States, that we can solve all the major problems which now confront us. We need a project to put the world back together. Q: Mr. LaRouche, you're running for President in the year 2023. How's your campaign going? What are your activities? And what alternatives are you presenting to the U.S. population for the year 2023? LAROUCHE: Essentially this one: first of all, to get the cooperation with the Land-Bridge. To launch a large-scale credit operation inside the United States, for the expansion of production based on the new markets. And also, to eliminate many of the changes in policy which were made by Nixon, Carter, and so forth, and go back to the things that worked before. Which would mean that U.S. relations with Mexico, for example, would go back to what they were, say, in the late 1970s, at which time there were many plans for cooperation between the United States and other countries. If we get back to the spirit of those discussions, I think we'll be in good shape. Q: Mr. LaRouche, thank you so much, for taking my call. It's been a pleasure interviewing you, and I wish you the best of success in your activities. LAROUCHE: Thank you, very much. |