Would a nation led by his movement, like LYM, EAP, CEC, BUESO, etc, really be run in a democratic manner, or not?
No, he is not democratic at all! Anyone that knows the organization from the inside can testify on that! As he runs the organization he would run the world. The best thing is to quote Lyndon LaRouche himself, from a speech defending the Sudanese dictator Bashir in 2001: "In these days, it is fashionable to exaggerate the importance of democracy. Because the idea of democracy, as it is taught by international institutions, which use it as a way of manipulating governments, and manipulating people, is the idea of democracy that comes from where? In European civilization this usage comes directly from the Roman Empire."
He is not democratic at all. Neither is he a DEMOCRAT. The Democratic party in the USA has often denounced him as a fraud, a fascist and not a true Democrat!
Read more here: http://american-lycurgus.blogspot.com/2009/03/faq-is-larouche-and-lym-democratic-or.html
His movement says that if LaRouches policies is not accepted by the leaders of the world, the global economy will collapse within the next years, and there will be a World War 3. What do you say about that?
Cults often use this kind of method. He uses this rethoric, as the cult guru he is, because he wants the members to work hard for him. If the members believe that the world will come to an end tomorrow, if he does not save the world, they will work harder for him!
There are many similarities between the movement and religious cults that say that the "final days" are near! And as a kind of Messiah, LaRouche always claims to be right in just about everything!
Some say that LaRouche, and his movement (like LYM and the EAP and BUESO) are leftists, others say they are rightwing. Some say they are nazi, but the nazis call the movement a "jewish conspiracy". Some say LaRouche is close to the KKK but there are lots of coloured people in his organization. What is LaRouche really?
The movement is a kind of new phenomena. It started out as a communist-movement in the 60s and still works in a way that is similar to how many leftistmovements worked in the 60s and 70s. In those days much of the political left were reallyworking like fanatics! In the 70s LaRouche established himself as the only "owner" and "leader" of the organization and moved to the right. LaRouche started to cooperate with conservative forces, antisemites, nazis and racists and therefore became more and more fascist. During these days the movement also became a kind of pseudoreligious cult.
Its often very vile methods, and its strange friends, has made many asume that it is a kind of nazimovement, for example the Campaign Justice for jeremiah, but I cant agree. It welcomes people from all so called races and cultures, and therefore I dont agree that it is nazi or racist.
It is a political, totalitarian cult, not a nazimovement or KKK, even if LaRouche has cooperated with people from the KKK and that are nazis. It is not antisemitic in the classical sense, he is not against the jews as a race, he "only" slanders the jews that he thinks are "evil", so the movement has many jewish members and friends, including among its leadership. LaRouche is not a racist either. The movement is filled with people of all so called "races" and cultures. He has a certain vile method of slandering just about any culture, that has more to do with EXTREME manicheism than racism...
But that is no excuse. LaRouche is not a racist or an antisemite, as I see it, but WORSE! THE MOVEMENT OF LYNDON LAROUCHE IS NOT RACIST, IN THE SENSE THAT IT CARES ABOUT THE RACE, CULTURE OR BLOOD OF A PERSON. IT IS A "RACISM OF IDEAS". LAROUCHE JUDGES PEOPLES IDEAS LIKE RACISTS JUDGE PEOPLES COLOUR OF SKIN, OR CULTURE. PEOPLE ARE IN FACT DECLARED TO BE "SUBHUMAN", BECAUSE OF THEIR IDEAS, NOT THEIR SKIN!
Read also this post from the factnet on whether LaRouche is a classical antisemite or not: http://american-lycurgus.blogspot.com/2009/03/lyndon-larouche-antisemitic-or-not.html
Lyndon LaRouche divides everything into good and evil, like all cults do. The good is VERY good and synonymous to TRUTH and the evil is VERY evil and synonymous to FALSE. That, my friends, is nothing else than pure manicheism. The somewhat funny thing is that LaRouche himself sometimes says and writes that dualism and "gnostic" manicheism is purely evil, but that is just a typical larouchian doublestandard... Say one thing, do another!
LaRouche has divided every culture into good and evil. Every historical event is either good or evil. Every scientist is good or evil. LaRouche would say that it follows a certain TRADITION. Platonic is good, aristotelian is evil. Republican is good, oligarchical is evil, the seintist Isaac Newton was evil while Johannes Kepler and G.W. Leibniz were good, Wagnerian music and jazz is evil while Beethoven and Bel canto is good, etc, etc...
By looking at historical figures, and political events of yesterday and today and linking them together by connection (they have similar ideas) all history, and politics today, is declared to be de facto good or evil! Thus liberalism, and free market economy, is always evil.
There are nothing in between good and evil, either the persons described are good or evil. This almost all the time leads to absurd results, as in the case of how historical figures are described. Look at Franklin delanore Roosevelt, one of the heroes of the movement. Everything that he did that does not fit in with the picture of him as "good" according to the LaRouchian thinking, is not discussed. In the case of FDR it means that it is declared that he was against economical liberalism, but the fact that he was for free trade is never mentioner. It is declared that he was against the colonial metods of Churchill, but his support for the Morgenthauplan and his support for the division of Europe into a Soviet and a British/American zone is never mentioned!
This dualism, and his conspiratorical worldview, in combination with the methods of the organization makes me think that the methods of the organization potentially is a greater threat that any "normal" racism or antisemitism!
As i said earlier...THE MOVEMENT OF LYNDON LAROUCHE IS NOT RACIST, IN THE SENSE THAT IT CARES ABOUT THE RACE, CULTURE OR BLOOD OF A PERSON. IT IS A "RACISM OF IDEAS". LAROUCHE JUDGES PEOPLES IDEAS LIKE RACISTS JUDGE PEOPLES COLOUR OF SKIN, OR CULTURE. PEOPLE ARE IN FACT DECLAREDTO BE "SUBHUMAN", BECAUSE OF THEIR IDEAS, NOT THEIR SKIN!
And would not any movement that works hard for the best of mankind, like the Civil Rights movement of Martin Luther king, be considered a cult, according to your definitions?
I say it is a cult, because it is a cult!
There are MANY HUGE differences in METHOD between the movement of King and the movement of LaRouche. First of all Martin Luther King allowed people to have different opinion than him, and to say so in public. He made it clear that it was important for those he worked with to rest, and take days off. He could admit that he was wrong and did not say that he knew all about everything and never in his life had been wrong. And above all, he encouraged the activists of the Civil Rights movement to get a family and have kids! (Etc, etc...)
King certainly never forced anyone to work 24/7 for nothing, like LaRouche does, who with in a laborintensive, Schachtian, manner lets the members work six and a half to seven days a week in the USA for nothing!
For me, the most important evidence that the movement is a cult, is that no one almost never disagrees with Lyndon LaRouche IN ANYTHING (and if so, it is in small, unimportant things). And that I as a member adjusted myself to what the politically accepted view was, and did not speak up when I saw something that implied that the matter could be seen from a different angle! Please read what I wrote on double standards, if you want to know more!
I am not the only one that says that the movement is a cult. Look here:
and finally... :o)
Read more here if you want to know how, I, the owner of this blog, thinks about the cult Lyndon LaRouche has created. Is it a cult or not:
The organization says that all people that speak bad about LaRouche are paid agents of people like George Soros, and Dennis King and organizations like AFF and ADL. This is what the Swedish movement say about it: Vem är rädd för Lyndon LaRouche? The Germans write this: Wer hat angst vor Lyndon LaRouche? In the USA a similar message is heard: look at these articles from the LaRouchepac site if you want to know more of what they say!
The organization has done like this ever since the start. Anyone that is a member, OR HAS BEEN A MEMBER, can easily see how this is done. EVERY PERSON that drops out of the organization and critizises LaRouche in public is declared to be an agent, even those that only speaks about what he disagrees with internally, not outside the organization. Just look at how LaRouche declared his old friend fernendos Q to be a traitor and a nazi. for heavens sake, it was laRouche that declared him to be the leaders whose dictates should be obeyed while LaRouche was in prison! Look at how he slanders the ex. european leadership to be Brittish agents. When I wrote my letter of resigination LaRouche said that he assumed that someone paid me too!
No I am not payed by anyone. I am a free mind! To oppose this Messiah-like leader, Lyndon LaRouche, is so unthinkable in the cult he has created, so I guess many members assumes that I am a paid agent of some kind too, because I write what I wite. So be it! I dont blame individual members, we were all very naive, they are too very naive!
But please visit the Webbsite of Dennis King :o) . There are a lot of important articles there: http://lyndonlarouchewatch.org/
No. I dont support any call to investigate the presumed nazi LaRouche, because he is no nazi and not just another nazi-thug and the oranization is FILLED with people of all so called races! It would be a huge mistake to investigate him based on that assumption.
But I support any call to investigate the LaRouchemovement as a totalitarian cult, and to investigate why Jeremiah Duggan committed suicide, and to find out in what degree the methods of the cult contributed to it.
I was at the conference myself in 2003 and met Duggan a few days before he committed suicide. based on what I saw back then, and based on articles like this one in the media, my conclusion is that for various reasons Duggan reacted to the methods of the organization by collapsing mentally, and it continued to recruit him, even if they clearly could see that he was unstable. To what degree the practices of the movement participated to the collapse should be investigated too. He committed suicide or broke down mentally! The blame for that should be put on LaRouche. He ordered all older members (boomers) not to interfere with the organizing the youth did and the "method" of LaRouche made him break down!!
It should also be investigated if the movement is undemocratic and fascist, and I would support any such call!
But I recommend all to visit the Justice For Jeremiah website. In opposition to LaRouche, I believe in free speech and a TRUE dialogue! http://www.justiceforjeremiah.com/
Please red this to, about why I prefer not to call LaRouche antisemitic: http://american-lycurgus.blogspot.com/2009/04/lyndon-larouche-and-antisemitism-why-i.html
I want to quote the laroucheplanet.info page on this one, they too have a wonderful FAQ on LaRouche: "Your friend has become a Cult victim, without knowing it yet. We will soon give on this site more information on how to deal with this problem. With a Cult victim, you are up against three major walls: 1/ a "higher", "purer", and "nobler" Cause, his new goal in life, 2/ a new adoptive family (aka the "Organization", the LYM) and 3/ a surrogate father: Lyndon LaRouche. You do not know his real motivations for joining LaRouche, it could be any of these three reasons or a combination of them. But in the meantime, here are some basic advices: 1/ keep in touch with him, 2/ do not appear directly hostile toLaRouche (in order to secure point #1), 3/ criticize LaRouche constructively and with undismissable proofs (bear in mind the Larouchies spend all their time defending LaRouche against skeptical, sometimes hostile audiences- so they are well trained), 4/ keep afresh good memories from his pre-LaRouche life (holidays, girlfriend, hobbies, music, sports etc) 5/ talk about his future 6/ do not give him money, 7/ be patient, sooner or later he will come back."
9) But isnt it right to call President Obama and his mother a monkey, George Bush an idiot and an ape, and Kissinger a pig? Are they not? I dont like them!
Namecalling is dehumanizing! If you ever want to find evidence for the fascist nature of the LaRouchian method: look at his use of namecalling. The use of dehumanizing names for the opponents, makes it easier for the members to distance themselves from these so called enemies. ALMOST ALL totalitarian governments and movements in history have used this kind of method.
It does not care if you disagree with them. Always treat your opponent as you would wish him or her to treat you! Do not use namecalling!
Read here for more information on this:
My answer is yes, yes and yes! The final evidence for this can be seen in the LaRouchian call to ban Faceboook, MySpace and so called satanic computer games: http://american-lycurgus.blogspot.com/2009/03/do-you-want-larouche-to-censor-internet.html Combine that call for a ban against the supposedly "deadly viruse" Facebook is, with the proposal for a New vanadian Constitution from 1981/2005 and there can be hardly NO doubt about it more: http://american-lycurgus.blogspot.com/2009/03/canadian-constitution-blueprint-for.html
Yes, if ever LaRouche had won one of his bids for presidency, the world would be a mess, and the USA no longer a democratic country!