A: The world of the coming several years is already in an accelerating process of change, the most radical upheaval in centuries. Therefore, although I have the best record of any living person, as a long-range forecaster over a period of more than four decades to date, the best answer I can offer to your question, is to say that what I would do in January 2023 can only be inferred from what I would do, as President, today.

1. Use the leading role of the U.S.A. to establish suddenly a new international monetary and financial system, to supersede the hopelessly bankrupt post-August 1971, "floating exchange-rate system" which is the principal cause of the presently ongoing bankruptcy of that world system.  Return to the fixed-exchange rate, protectionist model which operated, despite some corruptions by the Truman and Eisenhower administrators, during thee 1945-1963 period of post-war economic reconstruction of the Americas, western Europe, and Japan.

2.  Free the U.S. from the lunacy of the Mont Pelerin Society's doctrine of "shareholder value," to return to the principle on which modern European civilization's overturn of both feudalism and the
Venetian mode of contemporary Britain was based: the primary obligation of government to promote the general welfare, which was set forth, contrary to that neo-Confederate dogma of "shareholder value," as the fundamental principle of our constitutional
law.

3.  Return the U.S. to what U.S. Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton defined as the American System of political-economy, expelling that "free trade" doctrine against which all leading patriots of the U.S.A. have fought, since our first, 1776-1783 war against the British monarchy.

4. Establish what then-Secretary of State John Quincy Adams defined as a "community of principle" among the nations of the Americas, in his specifications for what is known as the 1823 Monroe Doctrine, as the foundation for the foreign-policy objectives of the U.S., not only for the Americas, but also as the basis for the relations we seek throughout the world.

5. End the lunatic use of the term "capitalism," as used by Karl Marx and others, and define our economic policy as that of the sovereign nation-state system. That means a state whose primary moral authority lies in its efficient commitment to the promotion of the general welfare of all of both present and future generations.  It means a state in which government has primary responsibility for basic economic infrastructure, and, at the same time, promotes opportunities for useful forms of entrepreneurship. It means that government has responsibility for the promotion and protection of the welfare of all of the people, and for the well-being of all of the surface-area under the nation's control.

6.  Treat space exploration and related tasks as an unevadable responsibility of the Federal government, as a form of development of basic economic infrastructure maintained under the governing implications of general welfare clause.  By the nature of the tasks before us in this domain, this will be the principal source of all scientific and other improvements in life on this
planet, including education, during the generations to come.  My own writings, published as the principal features of Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., The Economics of the Noosphere (Washington, D.C.: EIR News Service, 2001. To order see https://www.larouchepub.com) identity leading implications of this policy.

7. Sweeping changes in public education, at all levels. This means, first of all, a Classical education for all, through university levels. By "Classical" I signify "Classical humanist" standards and methods of education, under which what is taught is communicated by aiding the pupil to relive, as a personal cognitive experience, each of the crucial discoveries of principle by mankind, from both historic examples, and from clearly inferrable pre-historic ones, as well. The function of education
is not to train a person pre-designated to be an ox to bear his daily yoke, but to develop young human beings as full citizens of a republic, as persons given full access to the knowledge needed to be a knowledgeable citizen, first, and also a useful contributor to the processes by which wealth is generated.

The essential purpose of education should be to provide the individual person a sense of his or her place as one destined to be born and die, the meaning of whose life lies in finding a useful place in connecting the best of the past generations, to the best hopes for the future generations.

8. To influence a sweeping moral reform within our presently, morally corrupted political-party system. This will occur less through statutory reforms in election laws, than what must be accomplished through a new quality of leadership from candidates for President, as much as by incumbents; much must be accomplished by example, rather than law.  By immorality, I mean to emphasize that intrinsic moral degradation of both major parties, which is expressed by the catch-phrase "go along, to get along."  That is the greatest single cause of moral corruption in the leadership of the political parties and the Federal government today.  I have the image of all politicians tending to "get down to a common level," by standing on all four legs, instead of the humanly prescribed two; that is the image which "go along, to get along" indicates to me.

9.  I would not ban, but will make a public mockery of that currently widespread orgy of hypocrisy typified by all "single issue" politics and other decadent pretenses at morality.  Why impose a law upon fools, when it were sufficient to expose them as being fools, as serving society best, by being recognized as a laughing-stock? Let our best comedians expose those single-issue hypocrites for the gnostic babblers which they are in fact. Deal with such fools as Boccaccio, Rabelais, and Cervantes did, in their time.

10. Always set an example, which brings people to a common recognition of the equality of man's
nature, as a member of a distinct form of life known as human. Sovereign nations have been proven the best arrangement for the organized participation of people, as true citizens, in shaping their common destiny; but, the distinct sovereignty of each such nation, is not to be regarded as the premise for conflict, but  as the most suitable instrument for cooperation.  In theology, this principle is called ecumenicism.  IT means, in practice, the extension to the planet of what John Quincy Adams defined as a "community of principle" among perfectly sovereign  nation-state republics such as our own.
--Lyndon
 

Top