Top Left Link Buttons
  • en
  • de

David Dobrodt

Author Archives

Webcast: The Corruption of the System is the Problem We All Face

Last Updated on

In her closing comments in today’s dialogue, Helga Zepp LaRouche pointed to the corruption of the whole system as responsible for the civilizational crisis we face. She pointed to her comment years ago, at the time of the collapse of the Madoff bubble, that the system as a whole is a Ponzi scheme, with no interest in the Common Good, but only increasing private profits.

Whether one reviews the rapid deterioration of U.S.-China relations, the worsening threat posed by the Corona pandemic, the danger of mass deaths among children due to the collapse of food production and distribution, or the increase in social crisis stemming from growing poverty, it all goes back to Malthusian intent of the oligarchy.

The solution is the full implementation of the LaRouche Plan, which would revive the American system of economy. This is what must shape the agenda for the summit which President Putin is organizing. She called on viewers to join us, to insure that the summit takes place, and that the LaRouche policies are on the agenda for the summit.


An Outline for Saving Our Students, Educators, and Their Families

Last Updated on

July 27, 2020

by Stanley Ezrol
stanleyezrol@larouchepub.com

There is much heated discussion about how the United States school system can function under conditions of pandemic infection.  The pandemic is the result of undermining the world’s national health systems over the last 50 to 75 years, combined with the failure to institute the post-World War II global recovery that President Franklin Roosevelt had designed as the immediate task of the post-War world. 

Nothing we can do within the education system can fix this.  What is necessary is a total overhaul of the planet’s economic systems.  The LaRouche Political Action Committee (LPAC) has issued, The LaRouche Plan to Reopen the U.S. Economy: The World Needs 1.5 Billion New, Productive JobsRussia’s President Vladimir Putin has secured the agreement of the heads of state of the other four permanent members (P5) of the United Nations Security Council to participate in a summit in the near future to discuss the perilous situation we all confront as the four horsemen of the Apocalypse are growing in strength.  Those five nations, acting in concert, can lead in reversing our current disaster.  Helga-Zepp LaRouche has issued a call that this summit be held immediately, and no later than early September, to avoid total chaos and disaster.

COVID-19 attacks our school systems based on infection from the general population.  In the absence of efficient medical control of the virus, intensive testing, contact tracing, physical prevention of infection through social distancing, protective masks and other means, sanitary measures including hand-washing, and ventilation to dilute infected interior air with fresh air using anti-viral filters, including ultraviolet treatment are among the methods that must be in use in all “hot-spot” areas, as well as in our schools.  It has been demonstrated that in nations where these measures were strictly implemented and supported by cultural norms including shared responsibility for the future, the pandemic has been effectively shut down.

The costs involved are well beyond anything now contemplated in our budgets.  To re-open our schools and the rest of our economy safely and effectively, we have to abandon the failed attempts to shore up our bankrupt financial institutions with funding counted in trillions of dollars, and restore a commitment to the General Welfare, as emphasized by the Declaration of Independence (under the title, “Common Good”), and Constitution. Contrary to claims made in the name of liberty, the U.S. Constitution and subsidiary laws do not legalize the spread of deadly viruses.  It is criminal to tolerate that kind of deadly attack against the people of the world, and we must not respect this vicious idea.

The purpose of this report is to focus collaborative discussion among students, educators, parents, healthcare providers and researchers, and others, not about what we think is possible under current constraints, but what is both possible and necessary if we mobilize the most advanced ideas we can to ensure that education is safe for students, their families, and the teaching and other staff.  While focusing on the education system, we must also fight for the necessary improvements in our overall approach to containing the pandemic and expanding the productivity of our economy.

Most districts have been considering some mix of distance (virtual) learning and in-person classroom education. Virtual learning prevents transmission through the school system.  Unfortunately, many families depend on all adults in the household working during the day, who cannot leave their children at home alone without risking difficulties of many different kinds. Children of impoverished families, immigrants with poor mastery of English, grade school students, and others, often cannot benefit from online instruction for various reasons including inability to afford high speed internet connections and the required computer equipment.  Some districts have taken steps to equip these students, with varying degrees of success.

As the pandemic is growing out of control in the United States, most districts are turning to virtual learning despite stern injunctions from the President and Secretary of Education.  Many have not yet made their decisions.  As of mid-July, at least 18 states were considered “red zones,” including some of the most populous—California, Florida and Texas. Of all the 13,500+ school districts in the nation, many districts in these red zone states are in the forefront of planning to start the school year with entirely remote learning, whether they want to or not. The largest of these states—California–has some 1,000 districts. The first and second biggest school districts in the state—Los Angeles (2nd largest in the nation) and San Diego, have already announced  they will start the school year with all on-line learning, because of the immediate safety issues. (Together L.A. and San Diego have over 800,000 students). 

On July 21, four large counties in the Washington, D.C. area (Arlington, Loudoun, and Fairfax in Virginia, and Montgomery in Maryland), that had decided to offer an in-person learning option and received parents’ choices for either virtual or in-person learning, announced, after lengthy school board debate, that they were withdrawing the in-person option.  The reasons given were that they could not confidently ensure the safety of students and staff, and that many teachers refused to teach in-person and requested leaves of absence, resigned, or retired.

As of July 20, the 1.1 million student, 1,800 school New York City district, the nation’s largest, has not announced reopening plans.  It has been considering offering parents various options combining online and in-person schooling.  New York’s governor, Andrew Cuomo, has threatened that, based on level of compliance with health safety guidelines in N.Y.C., he may delay or modify the reopening.

D.C. School District officials said on July 16 that they will not announce their decision on what to do about their schools until July 31, and it will be dependent on the D.C. Department of Health’s evaluation of the virus in the Washington Metropolitan area.

Unfortunately, although the virtual option, given the lack of preparation,  will probably reduce the spread of the virus, it will not provide free and appropriate public education (FAPE) to all of our students.

For that reason, the President is correct in seeking full school re-opening, but we cannot re-open the schools to turn them into death traps as the overly hasty reopening of businesses and recreation activities has created.  We are now launching a campaign to institute measures that will safely fulfill our responsibility to FAPE.

What Must We Do?

In the context of all-out mitigation enforcement nationally, the following measures should be under consideration depending on the specific requirements of each locale, district and school.  There is no one-size-fits-all solution.  Districts in areas of low infection may have to make fairly minor changes to their practices to safely re-open.  As you will see below, we have many school buildings that do not even meet minimum requirements for normal functioning, let alone coping with the pandemic we now confront.  Our system of funding schools locally has created enormous differences in readiness.  The “Matthew Effect” (the rich get richer and the poor get poorer) must finally be driven out of our system.

While recognizing flexibility of choice, it is still necessary that there be an appropriate level of screening for the disease everywhere to guarantee that potential outbreaks are  rapidly quashed.

1. Test, sanitize, and, where required, isolate students and staff

In 2019 there were 56.6 million elementary and secondary school pupils nationwide, and a roster of some 8 million educators and other school staff. There were 5.8 million private school students and 50.6 million public.  The public school population included 35.5 million students pre-K to 8, and 15.3 million in high school. These define the parameters of required testing to start school.

One estimate of the extra cost per pupil for the 2020-2021 school year, as reported by Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) is $2,300, to cover the testing and monitoring (temperature checks, etc.), and also the extra cleaning and sanitizing requirements.  The cost of actual viral testing alone has been estimated at $1,000 per student.  The cost for all 50.6 million public students at $2,300 each, would be $116 billion. 

Personnel will not catch COVID-19 in school if the infected are, depending on the severity of their illness, placed in isolation from healthy students or in medical treatment facilities.  Everyone entering a school building should be effectively sanitized of the virus.  In counties with a low incidence of infection, inexpensive means like frequent (possibly several times per day) screening for fever and checking for symptoms including coughing and shortness of breath are used and can keep the spread of infection under control.

In areas of the United States with high infection rates, actual testing for the virus must be used to prevent large numbers of asymptomatic but infected people from infecting others.  The more frequently the testing is done and the more rapidly the results are returned and acted upon, the safer the environment.  Ideally, testing on the way into and out of school, and, possibly more frequently, including surveillance testing, would be the best thing to do.  A source who has studied the different tests currently in use reports that the Abbott laboratory test with a 15-minute turn around would be difficult to use in schools.  

Health officials in each locale should plan testing and re-testing routines based on the density of infection and other factors. Testing all personnel on average once every two weeks is in the range that would work.

Districts in high density infection areas might find that testing several days before school opening, followed by periodic testing with the same delay factor, might provide adequate screening.  If adequate testing is not possible, schools should not re-open.

A rough estimate of the annual (40 week) requirement would be to multiply the equipment, supplies, and labor effort required per test by 20.

Few public school districts have proposed this kind of testing for their students due to lack of resources.  On Monday, July 13, every West Point cadet was tested for COVID-19 on arrival.  Those who tested positive, and a dozen or so did, were tracked into beginning their training in isolation.  Similar regimens are followed at the other service academies and training programs.  If we can make that effort for the well-being of those who serve in the armed forces, we ought to be able to take the same quality approach to make sure our future cadets, industrial workers, engineers, scientists, astronauts, educators, artists, classical musicians, and geniuses of all varieties survive to realize their great potential gifts to the future.

In China, South Korea, and other locations, at least some schools require those entering to go through a routine series of steps including getting a fresh protective mask, disinfecting the soles of their shoes, disinfecting their clothing, and screening for the virus directly or for symptoms.  Full plastic face shields should be considered to provide better protection than a cloth mask alone.

The requirements for this are one disposable mask per day for each person, plus the cost of disinfectant.

Some jurisdictions have proposed that parents report on their children’s symptoms, even though they understand that this is unreliable due both to the parents’ difficulties and the large proportion of asymptomatic cases of infection.

At this point, it is difficult to estimate what level of infection has to be prepared for in school.  It might be the case that if what seems to be an expensive approach to bringing in the healthy students and isolating the infected is taken, we can be more relaxed about what goes on among the healthy majority of students.  Measures taken in isolation areas might have to be more rigorous than what we describe here, but, hopefully, that would affect a small minority of the students and educators.

2. Renovate school facilities

In the same spirit with which nations built new medical facilities to cope with COVID-19 patients, schools must be upgraded to keep students safe.  This should include:

Providing “intake” areas to go through the screening and sanitizing routine.

Include isolation and treatment areas to manage personnel suspected of infection who have arrived at school.

Increase instructional and other space to allow for the necessary social distancing.  As noted above, if infected personnel can be effectively restricted, the school areas may not require the rigor described here.  Isolation areas will require greater rigor.  The sooner we implement Chinese/South Korean-style mitigation among the people at large, the sooner we will be able to streamline what we do in schools.  That said, doubling the distance between students from approximately three feet to six feet, means, depending on the configuration of each classroom, multiplying the area used per student by approximately four.  For schools now at, near, or beyond expected capacity, as most are, that is a lot of temporary or permanent building that must be done.  Extra space might be provided by modern temporary structures such as hoop buildings where the climate allows.  Schools may be able to extend instructional space into areas like cafeterias or gymnasiums that might not be used for the duration of the pandemic.

Provide sanitary requirements including available running warm water and soap, proper hand sanitizer at every classroom entrance/exit, office, and at stations throughout the school.

Aids to help prohibit transmission, including items such as plexiglass desk separators against transmission by breathing or talking, as used in South Korea and China, should be considered.  Separators come in various sizes and cost approximately $25.00 per desk.  They certainly add some protection to cloth masks, but it is not clear how much.  In order to be an effective “sneeze guard,” they should be more than 20 inches tall on three sides.

Depending on the number of personnel, their arrival schedules, and how much time is allotted for intake (30 minutes is the length of time during which we can expect students to arrive prior to the bell.)  If we estimate 15 seconds between each person to maintain distancing, that means, 120 people can enter through each line in 30 minutes.  That would mean that 10 lines are required to service 1200 people.  That seems like a lot, but modestly large school cafeterias may have six to 10 food lines.  Each line would require 3 – 5 staff to process everyone through, which would mean 30 – 50 staff on intake processing.  This could be changed by allowing more time, for intake.  Experimentation with different approaches might help discover efficiencies.

Unfortunately, our nation’s 13,500 school systems, including approximately 100,000 installations, needs extensive upgrading even without considering the special work that has to be done for pandemic-proofing. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) most recent (2017) “report card,” gave our school systems a grade of D+.  They estimated underfunding of normal operations and maintenance at $38 billion per year.  Of permanent structures at these facilities, 24% were rated “fair” or “poor.”  If the 31% of installations including temporary structures to accommodate rapid expansion are considered, 45% of installations are rated “fair” or “poor.” Many of these “temporary” structures are rapidly deteriorating after a decade or more of service. Fifty-three percent of school facilities require modernization or renovation to be put into “good” condition.  Windows, plumbing, or air-conditioning, all systems important to COVID-proofing are rated “fair” or “poor” in 30% of public-school facilities.  Four out of ten schools do not even have long-term plans in place to do the necessary improvements.  ASCE estimates that schools spent $49 billion per year on their facilities between 2011 and 2013, but needed to spend an additional $58 billion per year for current maintenance plus $77 billion to cover deferred maintenance, and $10 billion to accommodate expected expansion.

If we make the fair assumption that that picture has not drastically changed since the 2017 report, that means that school facilities expenditures would exceed budgeted costs by $145 billion, without even providing for the special needs of the pandemic.  As of now, the Federal Government provides almost no funding for school facilities.  We do not have a break-down on how much of the routine maintenance and upgrading cost consists of items necessary in the pandemic situation, but as a rough figure, we can estimate the cost will be in the range of $145 billion, and that will not even bring all school facilities up to a “good” rating.

3. School Activities

Decisions must be made on how to do things and how to provide the facilities and staffing necessary to do them.

Cafeterias.  In U.S. schools these are often the rooms where closely packed students let loose for 30 minutes with shouting, shows of anger and affection, occasional food fights, and other things good for the virus and bad for the students.  Many districts have decided to close cafeterias and ask each student to bring their own food and eat it in their classroom.  This leaves open the problem of feeding students who are on school breakfast or lunch programs because their families cannot otherwise afford to feed them.  Variants include letting students pick up lunch in the cafeteria, but eat in a more controlled setting.  As the calculation for intake lines teaches us, social distancing slows down any line.  Normal school cafeteria lines leave about two inches between students, and that is totally unacceptable.  Students bringing lunch, or serving students from rolling carts or the equivalent are probably more efficient approaches.

Athletics.  Athletic activities including training and competitive sports are highly popular.  Unfortunately, these activities involve varying levels of physical contact, heavy breathing, shouting, potential injury, and physical conflict that can promote viral transmission.  Most gymnasiums are large enough and have high enough ceilings so that, with appropriate ventilation, the air quality can be reasonably safe as long as distancing is maintained.  Smaller exercise rooms may become very unhealthy places.

Schools must assess what activities can continue, where they can take place, and whether modifications of the rules to reduce physical contact or proximity can be made.

Music and other performance arts.  These provide special difficulties because singing and loud speech carry a heavier viral load than normal breathing and talking.  Large choruses, orchestras, and crowded stages are best avoided.  Spacing in properly sized indoor rooms can be relatively safe.  “Band in a tent” can be set up out-doors in good weather.  The open sides allow air circulation and reduces the viral load.

4. Care of School Facilities

Restrooms, hallways, classrooms, desks, computers and other equipment, floors, walls, trash cans, and other areas, furnishings, and equipment, must be sanitized frequently.  In late grade school and secondary school, students can be assigned to take care of these chores in the classroom, but this will involve a large increase in the non-educator staff, possibly a doubling.

5. Transportation

Our students depend on bus transportation to school.  School buses are often crowded and poorly ventilated.  Without reducing the number of students coming to school daily, school bus fleets will have to be expanded and, in part, replaced.  The buses should be well ventilated and roomy enough to accommodate spacing.

The requirements of building to the necessary level depend on the quality and quantity of the existing transit fleet.  Doubling the fleet to accommodate necessary distancing may be adequate.

Facilities for parent drop-off and pick-up of students must access an appropriate intake area.

6. Personnel

Routine levels of school staffing will not be sufficient to guarantee that mitigation measures agreed upon will be enforced.  This may require a doubling of school staff, including instructional assistants, counselors, and health care providers.

Whereas schools may now be staffed with approximately one LPN or equivalent per 1,000 students, more highly-trained personnel and medical assistants are required to deal with potential pandemic outbreaks, maintain isolation of the infected and those under observation for possible infection.  Two medical staff per 1,000 students would mean 100,000 medical staff nationally.

The overall average number of students to teachers nationally is approximately one teacher for every sixteen students.  This average, however, has to be considered carefully.  Typical academic classes may have 25 to 30 or more students and one teacher.  Special needs classes, elective classes, and some advanced classes may have as few as three or four  students.

Given the critical nature of following behavior guidelines to prevent the spread of a deadly virus, we need at least one educator for every ten students in class.  We do not have fine grain data that would make it possible to provide anything more than a rough estimate of personnel requirements.  Currently, there are approximately 3.1 million teachers and 1.7 instructional assistants serving the  50.6 million public school students in the nation.  This gives us an average of 1 instructional employee for every 10.5 students.  That is a ratio that should work, except that some teachers will be in much smaller classes than that.  As a rough estimate, we should assume that we will need 4.6 million teachers and 2.5 million instructional assistants.  This would mean  enlarging the pool of potential recruits significantly.

Another factor is that there are many teachers who, due to age or other health complications, are at a higher risk of COVID-19 infection than others.  Some number of these teachers will take extended leave or resign rather than risk infection in the classroom.  The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports that as of 2012, 18.8% of teachers were over 55 years old.  This is a reasonable estimate of the number of teachers who, due to age, other health conditions, or other reasons to avoid teaching, might not return to the classroom.  That would add an additional 9.5 million teachers to be replaced.  We do not have similar data on age for instructional assistants, who are generally paid in the range of $15.00 per hour.  Both younger people on their way toward full teaching positions, or other career choices, and older people, possibly following a teaching or other career, tend to take these positions.  It would be reasonable to expect that a significant portion of these individuals would not want to risk direct contact with infected students at that pay level, especially if they had special health concerns.

Hallways, particularly if, as is generally done, secondary students change classrooms during the day, are generally monitored only to keep the traffic moving and avoid fights.  Students and staff will have to get used to avoiding friendly chats, and other previously innocent behavior. 

The maintenance staff must be able to take care of the added burden of keeping everything sanitized.

Traditionally, school buses are staffed only by a driver in normal situations.  To be able to maintain distancing, use of masks, and avoidance of shouting, and other virus spreaders, one or more bus aides should be added, depending on the number and behavioral profile of the students.  Since school bus driving is generally a low paid part-time hourly function, many drivers are semi-retired or hoping to move into a better position.  A video made by the Roanoke County Virginia school system pointed out that half of that County’s bus drivers are older than 65.  They have good reason to not return to their positions next year.

The predicament of low-paid non-teaching school staff in this situation might force a decision to provide a living wage for these often very dedicated and underappreciated workers in education. 

Conclusion

We can have safe school attendance, but only if we are making the whole world safe and prosperous.  Investment must be shifted from salvaging financial concerns that produce nothing for the economy into growing the economy quantitatively, and qualitatively, as the LaRouche plan explains.  The education system is long overdue to receive resources proportionate to the importance of its role in building our future, and many or our major financial institutions that have reaped the benefits of government finance are long overdue for bankruptcy.


Live Presentation: Sovereign Nations, or the Imperial Surveillance State? Lyndon LaRouche’s Battle For Justice

Last Updated on

Join us at 2pm on Saturday, July 25 for a discussion between Bill Binney, Dennis Small and Mike Billington.

Is it true that the arc of the moral universe is long, but bends towards justice?

Thirty-seven years ago, Lyndon LaRouche was involved, with the full knowledge of the National Security Council, in a back-channel negotiation with the Soviet Union. That process led to the Reagan Administration’s thermonuclear war avoidance policy the termed the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI.) Despite the fact that the senior director of the National Security Council, Norman Bailey, had met with LaRouche, and, as reported by the Washington Post in 1985, had “described LaRouche’s organization as “one of the best private intelligence services in the world,“ LaRouche was put through a federal prosecution by the United States Justice Department. Former United States Attorney General Ramsey Clark described the persecution of LaRouche and his movement as constituting “a broader range of deliberate and systematic misconduct and abuse of power over a longer period of time in an effort to destroy a political movement and leader, than any other federal prosecution in my time or to my knowledge.”

That LaRouche prosecution from the years 1986-1994 and after, was the seed-crystal for the succeeding decades-long abuse of power carried out, under the guise of “national security,” through illegal surveillance, biased prosecutions, and judicial railroads. This was ultimately done not only against many innocent American citizens, but also against the United States Presidency itself, largely through the actions of British intelligence services and their American assets, as in the thoroughly discredited “Russiagate hoax. The recent visit of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to London, where he said, “it’s great to be back in London to reaffirm the special relationship we share with our closest ally,” illustrates the problem.

Now, through the courageous actions of “good Americans” such as William Binney, the former Technical Director the National Security Agency (NSA), it becomes possible to expose the snake-pit of corruption, duplicity and sedition that has prevented the policies of war-prevention and economic growth of Lyndon LaRouche. This is what is now preventing the Presidency from advancing the General Welfare of all American citizens through economic cooperation with other nations, particularly Russia and China, in the pursuit of peace through economic development and scientific progress.

Join us on Saturday at 2pm, as Bill Binney and friends continue their dialogue with the American people and others who wish to create a new just paradigm.


VIDEO: Let’s End War, Famine, Poverty and Disease

Last Updated on

Leaders in agriculture, economics and science lead a discussion on the terrible danger facing the world from famine, war and disease due to the take down of productive employment over the past 50 years. Subsequently, the prospects of implementing the LaRouche Plan, an economic strategy to create 1.5 billion productive jobs worldwide, is discussed. The speakers participated on the second panel of the June 27 Schiller Institute online conference.


VIDEO: Why a U.S., China, Russia and India Summit is Urgently Needed Now

Last Updated on

Helga Zepp-LaRouche leads an international dialogue concerning the urgent need to bring the leaders of the “Four Powers” (U.S., Russia, China and India) together for a summit to address the pandemic, the global financial crisis and the danger of war. Excerpts are taken from The Schiller Institute international conference of June 27th, 2020, entitled, “Will Humanity Prosper or Perish? The Future Demands a Four Power Summit Now.”


Ryabkov: Resolving World Problems Requires China’s Participation; P5 Summit Needed

Last Updated on

July 5 — Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told TASS on July 4 that there are no negotiations now and there have been no negotiations with the United States for Russian participation in an expanded G7 meeting, as proposed by President Trump in May, specifically because the proposal excludes China. He reiterated, perhaps more strongly, what Russian diplomats had said when the idea was first proposed: “The idea of the so-called expanded G7 summit is flawed, because it is unclear to us how the authors of that initiative plan to consider the Chinese factor. Without China, it is just impossible to discuss certain issues in the modern world.”

U.S. ambassador to Russia John Sullivan had told RBC TV the day before that Washington was “engaged with the Russian Foreign Ministry and with the other G7 governments about whether there is an appropriate role for Russia at the G7.”

Russia is instead working on its proposal for a summit of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, Ryabkov said. “This is a completely different format. We believe that work in that format, including on the most pressing current issues, is optimal…. We have submitted appropriate proposals to other partners in the P5, and we are waiting for their reaction.”

President Trump announced in May the U.S. proposal that the G7 meeting be expanded to include Australia, South Korea and India, in addition to Russia. According to Reuters, Australia has accepted the U.S. invitation to take part.


The Message Which López Obrador Should Take to Trump: A World Summit of Nations Is Urgently Needed to Address the Crisis

Last Updated on

Statement by the LaRouche Citizens’ Movement of Mexico

July 3 — The opportunity has arrived. On the eve of the upcoming July 8 meeting between the Presidents of the United States and Mexico, Donald Trump and Andrés Manuel López Obrador, a number of international statements and developments have occurred which highlight the world importance of that meeting, in particular because of the role that Mexico will play as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, starting on Jan. 1, 2021.

At the beginning of 2020, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed that a summit be held of the five permanent members (P-5) of the U.N. Security Council (Russia, China, United States, France and the United Kingdom) to address the grave crises which the entire planet is facing, and which require immediate joint action. These urgent crises include:

* The coronavirus pandemic;

* The collapse of the physical economy and the total bankruptcy of the Wall Street and City of London speculative financial system, a collapse worsened – but not caused – by the pandemic.

* The need to create a new international security architecture, in order to prevent a Third World War from being unleashed. The recent article by President Putin on the subject of the origins of the Second World War is an important contribution in that regard.

Such a summit must be held as soon as possible, based on the same approach that the great American President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) set forth in his New Deal and Good Neighbor policies.

That is the central message which President López Obrador should communicate to his counterpart President Trump at their upcoming meeting.

Both Presidents, whose presidencies share a common origin — which is that their respective populations were fed up with the old system of looting –, also share a background of fighting to make their campaign promises a reality. But they have also been bogged down by the burden of ferocious attacks coming from a deafening campaign by the media and certain political circles to prevent them from taking any action. On the eve of their meeting, a new wave of collective hysteria has launched protests, which are being joined by congressmen and governors on both sides of our common border, demanding that the upcoming presidential meeting be cancelled.

It is not hard to imagine the fear of political and media circles tied to the current bankrupt system, at the prospect that the two presidents might reach agreements regarding the benefits that would come from joining their efforts to the call issued by the Presidents of Russia and China, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping
respectively, to govern relations between nations on a new basis, such as the kind of approach taken by the U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt during his long terms of office.

Recently, even British Prime Minister Boris Johnson stated on June 30 that he will orient his government along the lines of FDR’s New Deal policies. “It sounds like a New Deal, and all I can say is, that if so, then that is how it is meant to sound and to be, because that is what the times demand — a government that is powerful and determined and that puts its arms around people at a time of crisis.”

In response to that statement, Schiller Institute founder and President Helga Zepp-LaRouche stated:

“If, however, Boris Johnson would be serious about it [the New Deal approach], and he would immediately agree to participate in the summit called by Putin, and would insist that the New Deal in the tradition of Franklin D. Roosevelt is being made the subject of such a P5 summit, then it could be taken seriously and would actually be a useful contribution.”

Why we emphasize Roosevelt

Russian President Putin has called for a new, global security architecture, such as in his famous 2007 speech at the Munich Security Conference, shaped around FDR’s approach: “It is well known that the field of international security goes well beyond issues of military and political stability. It involves the stability of the world economy, overcoming poverty, economic security, and the development of a dialogue among civilizations. This all-encompassing, indivisible character of security is expressed in its fundamental principle, that ‘the security of each is the security of all.’ As Franklin Roosevelt put it in the first days after the outbreak of the Second World War, ‘When peace has been broken anywhere, peace of all countries everywhere is in danger.’ These words remain topical today.”

As for Chinese President Xi Jinping, he told a Seattle business group during a visit to the U.S. in 2016: “In my younger years … I was interested in the life story and thinking of Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt and other American statesmen.”

President Trump has also turned directly to FDR on numerous occasions, including in his victory speech the night of the 2016 election, stating: “The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer.”

President López Obrador, throughout his campaigns, has emphasized the historical importance of FDR. In mid June, he instructed Juan Ramón de la Fuente, Mexico’s representative before the United Nations, where Mexico was elected to serve as a non-permanent member of the Securtiy Council, to promote “the fulfillment of the four fundamental freedoms proclaimed by President Roosevelt,” freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from fear, and freedom from want.”

López Obrador also state that, in terms of sustainable development, “the rich nations and international financial institutions [should] support poor peoples and governments in combatting hunger, epidemics, avoiding racism, classism, sexism, xenophobia and discrimination; help with investments and regional development programs so that no one, no human being on this Earth is forced to emigrate from the place of their birth due to a lack of opportunity to work or because of violence.”

Finally, he said the Security Council must be guided by the principle of Mexico’s great President Benito Juárez, that “among individuals as among nations, respect for the rights of others is peace.” López Obrador said that “in no conflict shall force be used and in no case shall the hegemonic force of the powers be imposed.”

For these reasons, we issue this call for President López Obrador to be the messenger of peace and take President Trump a message of unity, so that a world summit be carried out under the guidelines set forth by Roosevelt, whether that be under the aegis of a Four Power Summit (Russia, China, the U.S. and India) as Lyndon LaRouche repeatedly proposed, or one initiated by the P-5, as Putin has called for – so long as the summit’s mission is to construct a new paradigm of world peace based on universal economic development, and that the summit be only the beginning of an international association open to all nations on the planet.

We believe that only an institutional force on such a scale as this can lead the world away from the current social and health crisis, which stems from the pandemic and the economic collapse, and orient the path of nations towards a new paradigm of general welfare for all.


VIDEO: International LaRouche Youth Movement Calls for the Exoneration of Lyndon LaRouche

Last Updated on

A chorus of voices answers the call from Theo Mitchell, former State Senator of South Carolina, concerning what can be done to exonerate Lyndon LaRouche and correct the injustice rampant around the world. Leaders from the International LaRouche Youth Movement addressed the June 27 Schiller Institute conference concerning the urgent requirement to recruit a new generation of leaders to think at the level of Lyndon and Helga LaRouche.


A Case of the “Lazy Reason”: Behind Americans’ Rebellion Against Science and Authority

Last Updated on

July 2 – Dr. Anthony Fauci of the NIH has recently been hammering away at what he has described as an anti-science, anti-authority problem in the American population, which has gotten in the way of taking the needed measures to contain the Covid-19 pandemic. In congressional testimony earlier this week he stated: “I think the attitude of pushing back from authority and pushing back on scientific data is very concerning. We’re in the middle of a catastrophic outbreak and we really do need to be guided by scientific principles.”

Examples abound. Take the case of a group of students in Tuscaloosa, Alabama who were just diagnosed with Covid-19 after attending “Covid parties” as part of a contest to see who can catch the virus first, a city council member told ABC News on July 1. Tuscaloosa City Councilor Sonya McKinstry said the organizers of the parties are purposely inviting guests who have Covid-19. “They put money in a pot and they try to get Covid. Whoever gets Covid first gets the pot. It makes no sense; they’re intentionally doing it.”

Nor can this be written off as “just kids.” In Rockland County, NY, so many residents have flat-out refused to cooperate with authorities on contact tracing, that the county has been forced to use subpoenas to enforce the process. NBC New York reported yesterday: “Health officials are investigating a new cluster of eight or more COVID-19 cases in Rockland County tied to a large party earlier this month, but they’re running into trouble with contact tracing because people refuse to cooperate. The county plans to resort to subpoenas, as it did during its measles outbreak some years ago, to compel people to work with contact tracers as they work to contain a new potential outbreak… That party linked to the new potential cluster was the first of three large parties in Rockland County in the last two weeks. It was hosted June 13 by someone in New City who was sick with coronavirus at the time, sources say. County officials said Wednesday that the host knew they were symptomatic and held the party anyway.”

Insight into such problems, which affect both “left-wing” radicals and “right-wing” libertarians in the country, was provided 310 years ago by Gottfried Leibniz in his {Theodicy} (1710):

“Men have been perplexed in well-nigh every age by a sophism which the ancients called the `Lazy Reason’, because it tended towards doing nothing, or at least towards being careful for nothing and only following inclination for the pleasure of the moment. For, they said, if the future is necessary, that which must happen will happen, whatever I may do…

“The false conception of necessity, being applied in practice, has given rise to what I call {Fatum Mahometanum}, fate after the Turkish fashion, because it is said of the Turks that they do not shun danger or even abandon places infected with plague, owing to their use of such reasoning as that just recorded…

“It is true that they are not inactive or negligent when obvious perils or great and manifest hopes present themselves; for they will not fail to abandon a house that is about to fall and to turn aside from a precipice they see in their path; and they will burrow in the earth to dig up a treasure half uncovered, without waiting for to finish dislodging it. But when the good or the evil is remote and uncertain and the remedy painful or little to our taste, the lazy reason seems to us to be valid. For example, when it is a question of preserving one’s health and even one’s life by good diet, people to whom one gives advise thereupon very often answer that our days are numbered and that it avails nothing to try to struggle against that which God destines for us. But these same persons run to even the most absurd remedies when the evil they had neglected draws near…

“One will employ the lazy reason, derived form the idea of inevitable fate, to relieve oneself of the need to reason properly.”


World Leaders Must Unite Around an “FDR” Approach to Solving the Existential Crisis Facing Mankind

Last Updated on

July 2 – The proper way to commemorate the upcoming July 4 anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, a document of universal importance for all nations to this day, is by carrying that same spirit forward into organizing an urgent summit of world leaders around the New Deal and Good Neighbor policies of American statesman Franklin Delano Roosevelt. In her weekly webcast yesterday, Schiller Institute founder and President Helga Zepp-LaRouche picked up on British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s announcement of the adoption of FDR New Deal-style economic policies by his government, by stating:

“If, however, Boris Johnson would be serious about it [the New Deal approach], and he would immediately agree to participate in the summit called by Putin, and would insist that the New Deal in the tradition of Franklin D. Roosevelt is being made the subject of such a P5 summit, then it could be taken seriously and would actually be a useful contribution.”

There is little doubt that such an approach would be welcomed by Chinese President Xi Jinping, who told a Seattle business group during a visit to the U.S. in 2016: “In my younger years…I was interested in the life story and thinking of Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt and other American statesmen.”

The same holds for Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose call for a new, global security architecture in his famous 2007 speech at the Munich Security Conference, was shaped around FDR’s approach after World War II: “It is well known that the field of international security goes well beyond issues of military and political stability. It involves the stability of the world economy, overcoming poverty, economic security, and the development of a dialogue among civilizations. This all-encompassing, indivisible character of security is expressed in its fundamental principle, that `the security of each is the security of all.’ As Franklin Roosevelt put it in the first days after the outbreak of the Second World War, `When peace has been broken anywhere, peace of all countries everywhere is in danger.’ These words remain topical today.”

Trump has also turned directly to FDR on numerous occasions, including in his victory speech the night of the 2016 election, stating: “The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer.” President Trump’s leading participation in such an international summit would also be the perfect rejoinder to the British-led efforts to remove him from office, either now with fabricated scandals (such as the absurd Russian “bounty-gate” hoax), or by trying to defeat him in the November elections, by attempting to blame {Trump} for the economic and coronavirus pandemic crises which {the British} in fact caused by 50-plus years of their policies of economic looting.

Nor is there any doubt that the global systemic breakdown crisis makes such a summit of leaders urgently necessary, whether it be under the aegis of a Four Power meeting of the U.S., China, Russia and India, as Lyndon LaRouche long proposed, or the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, as Putin has called for — so long as the agenda is building a New Paradigm of world peace based on universal economic development.


Page 1 of 8123...Last