Tuesday, April 7, 2009

The threedimensional model: A model to describe EAP, LYM and Lyndon LaRouche!

I got the question how I would describe the movement I once was a member in!

If I should describe the organization in a few word, what would I say that it is a totalitarian and despotic political cult with a dualistic, conspiratorical worldview where everything is divided into good and evil, and it has a pseudoreligious method of work, where it is claimed that the "final days are near" and only the members can save humanity... if they only obey the leader of the cult, i.e. Lyndon LaRouche!

Thus I would describe it. But it  is not enough. It wont still explain all the puzzeling facts about the movement. Such as how to reconcile its fascist and cult-like views with its non-racist methods.

I recently heard about a model that makes it easier to understand LaRouche and his movement, the so called "threedimensional model".

The threedimensional model

Many are puzzled by the movement LaRouche has created. It is not similar to anything else and all attempts to compare it to similar movements fail.

Some Swedish authors, that have written about the modern fascism, believe that all totalitarian movements can be described by looking at three different things, the so called three dimensional model. The essay by Mattias Gardell in this anthology is one example of this. (The anthology "Brunt", red. Deland and Westin, 2007! http://www.bokforlagetatlas.se/index.php?sid=2&pid=16&showtitle=291 )

(The three dimensions are described in my words, a bit simplified.)

1) They are either leftwing or rightwing extremists, or move back and forth on this scale... (The division between left and right is not absolute, because some movements, like the one LaRouche founded, can have elements of both left and right. The Strasserists were a kind of leftwing nazis. Mussolini started his political work as leftwing and were later rightwing.)

2) They are either centralized or decentralized, (I.e. they have a strong leader, and is perhaps run as a cult) or they are run very autonomously with individuals and groups working for themselves without leadership. They might have a political ideology where the worldview of the leader/leaders are absolute truth too, and where there is a demand that all members stick to that truth and no opposition is allowed, or they dont have this ideology.

3) They are either racist and perhaps for a culturally and/or religiously homogenous society,  or they are for a racially, culturally and religiously pluralistic society. (Nationalists or globalists...)

Some others add a fourth dimension, I would agree on that:

4) They are pro violence or not violent.

Gardell writes this about Lyndon LaRouche and his Swedish organization, EAP in the anthology "Brunt" (page 59): "Many view LaRouche as bizarre. This threedimensional model shows that LaRouce, even if the position he has in the model is not so common, can be understood as a rightwingcentralist of a fascist kind, but with global ambitions and a pluralistic orientation and membership, i.e. multiethnical and from many religions."

("För många framstår LaRouche som bisarr. Den tredimensionella modellen visar att LaRouche, även om hans positionering är ovanlig, kan förstås som en högercentralist av fascistiskt snitt men med globala ambitioner och pluralistisk - mångetnisk, mångreligiös - orientering och medlemskår!")

There is much truth in this model and it helps to explain a phenomena like the LaRouchemovement and Lyndon LaRouche, even if I disagree somewhat with the description of LaRouche as rightwing, it is actually both leftwing and rightwing at the same time!

Lets therefore clairfy it a bit!

My version of the model

This  is a description in my words, of some examples that can illustrate this model, but with a corrected view of LaRouche and with the fourth dimension added... (And I am comparing LaRouche to other groups.)

The LaRouchemovement is not left or right in the normal sense. It is very centralized, so much that it is a cult. It is nonhomogenous and pluralistic and it is non violent.

The nazis in the 30s in Germany can be describes as rightwing, very centralized, so much that it too was a cult. It was extremely homogenous and nonpluralistic and very violent.

In the same way leftists can be described. The RAF in the 70s can be described as leftwing, very centralized, so much that it too was a cult. Somewhat nonhomogenous and somewhat pluralistic and very violent. 

The LEFTIST militant "green"anarchists of today (Like Animal Liberaltion Front) can be described as  leftwing, very decentralized, nonhomogenous and pluralistic and selectively violent.


We need to be precise when describing the global movement of Lyndon LaRouche. The threedimensional model, or perhaps even a fourdimensional one, can help describing what it is.
And it helps to explain why some fascist movements, like LaRouches, can be for a multhiethnical society, with people of all races, cultures and creeds.



  1. An interesting comment. However, it should be emphasised that the paragraph that you cite is not written by the editors, but part of the chapter written by professor Mattias Gardell.

  2. Thanks. I have changed it! I made a mistake when I looked at my notes.


  3. I think this is useful - but maybe too academic for some.
    Have you heard of PLIS? (OK - I made it up - but it stands for Post-LaRouchian Information Syndrome.)
    I think (just a theory)there is a tendency by some former members - (me included)to get too much into ideas - and not enough into involvment. In other words, I've been reading a lot about the history of the Larouche cult from former members - and about where LaRouche's ideas come from - but I haven't heard much about how people are trying to make educational systems and the general public more aware how to stop the LaRouche organization stop making kids drop out of college.(Does this really make any sense? -
    that anyone drops out of college - especailly when today we have the internet? - if LaRouche's ideas are so powerful - anyone reading them on the internet can get them there - and also financially contribute to him there - but we are still seeing kids practically kidnapped into the cult. To me - it's a really bad dream - I can't believe it's still going on in this day and age.

    The letters from parents on Justice for Jeremiah site are better than anything in explaining to people - how people get involved in the cult and the dangers it poses.

    I saw a while back in factnet that a parent with help from people on the message board were able to get someone from joining the LaRouche cult. This might be less accessible now with the pay system in place.

    I guess besically - what I'm trying to say is
    - if anyone is in need of help - its parents who are currently losing their kids to the cult - if you can put something on here on your blog - short and concise - where they
    can start getting more help.
    Hope this doesn't sound too critical - because otherwise - you are doing a great job!

  4. I agree. The tendency is often either to flee away from the past and dont get involved at all, or to discuss and discuss...

    That is actually a good idea. I will try to find some links and posts about it!

    Including links about where to get help!


  5. So, done! More is coming later!


  6. Have you heard about the three-dimensional anti-LaRouche model of Professor I.M. Oprescu? It starts with ex-member enraged about all the casual sex they missed while trying to actually do something. This is overlaid with a cybernetic personality, or a purely synthetic personality created by a study group with certain clear axioms. Third is a strong quality of establishmentarianism, that is going along with all prevailing establishment views, and regressing to the world view of a three year old. For more see link at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3223372

  7. What do you have against sex, Howie?

  8. Well said, Howie!

    I got myself a good laugh, but at the same time it seems like you know Mr. European personally, since it is such a perfect characterization of his embarrassing decay into childishness and senility. Sad, indeed.

  9. has Howie or the last anonymous person asked the LaRouchies if they still in the USA "work" politically seven or six and a half days a week?

    Talk about cult!