Our conferences

Conference: Let us Join Hands with the Global Majority To Create a New Chapter in World History!

August 11, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, Cultural renaissance updates, Economic development updates, General updates, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Our conferences, Our cultural events, Our economic development events

Invitation for the Schiller Institute Online Conference September 9, 2023

The world is presently undergoing changes, changes which occur only once in a thousand years: The age of colonialism, which began in the 16th Century, and has lasted almost 600 years, is coming to an end. The countries of the Global South, which represent by far the majority of mankind, are shedding the remnants of colonial suppression, as it still exists in the form of international control over their resources, unfair conditions of trade, and financial subjugation and looting by the City of London and Wall Street. The countries of the Global South are asserting their right to process these resources and produce value-added goods as a means of becoming middle income societies in the foreseeable future through high-technology industrialization. Lyndon LaRouche, for decades, specified the needed concepts and policies in physical economy to expedite that transition.

It can be expected that the summit of the BRICS countries, to take place August 22-24, will reflect the tectonic shift going on: Twenty-three countries have applied formally for membership in this organization and more than twenty informally. Rather than regarding this process as a threat to the West, the nations of Europe and even the U.S. should take up the offer of cooperation. If the countries of the Global North go forward with their stated intent to “decouple” or “de-risk” from China, which is the largest trading partner of many countries of the Global South, this will be especially devastating for the economies of Europe, which are already in the process of deindustrialization. Even more fundamentally, if the West sticks to a policy of geopolitical confrontation with Russia and China, and tries to maintain an unipolar world by creating a Global NATO, the present conflicts around Ukraine now and soon Taiwan, could escalate into a third, this time thermonuclear world war.

The fact that the old order has failed to solve the problems of poverty, hunger, and the underdevelopment of billions of people in the developing countries, is demonstrated by the horrendous migrant crisis, where thousands and thousands of desperate people are assembling, at national borders—be it between the U.S. and Mexico, or be it along the Mediterranean, which has already become a mass grave. Instead of resorting to cruel and inhumane methods to keep human beings out, we should join hands with China and other emerging countries to help the countries of the Global South industrialize. There is no need for rivalry; there is so much for everyone to do to meet the existential needs of people now suffering.

Which way we decide to go, will in all likelihood determine if we end up in a world war resulting in the annihilation of the human species, or if we keep our humanity and open a new, more beautiful chapter in the history of mankind.

We need a new international security and development architecture that takes into account the interests of every single country on the planet. The warring parties of the Thirty Years War were able to reach the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, because they realized that there would be no one left to enjoy the victory, if they had continued to fight. We should at least be that intelligent.

We must revive the most beautiful traditions of our cultures, especially in classical art, and celebrate the image of man as the creative species, to develop from there a vision of how to create a durable peace for all of humanity.

How the Earth’s Climate Is Changing and Why

July 22, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, Environmentalism updates, General, General updates, Our conferences

Prof. Carl-Otto Weiss — Prof. Weiss is Advisor to the European Climate and Energy Institute (EIKE); Professor and Director, German Federal Institute of Metrology, Germany. This is the prepared text as edited of his presentation.

In this contribution I show you the results of a cycle analysis of 2,000 years of global climate data, the result of which is that Earth’s climate is determined by three main cycles, and that CO2 plays only an insignificant role.

But first let me mention how I became interested in the question of Earth climate. My research subject was everything related to lasers. Physics of Lasers, technical and scientific applications, e.g., spectroscopy and atomic clocks based on one singe atom, etc., etc. Even in the 1990s, for persons with scientific education, the self-contradictions of the official climate propaganda were obvious. Thus, the official narrative could not be true. We joked about the primitivity of the propaganda.

I did not have time to look deeper. I had 40 scientific coworkers, 10 of whom, to feed them, I had to find about $1 million each year. So that did not give me much time. But at retirement I had time. First I looked into the official models, and it is quite obvious where the fudge factors in the calculations are. But, then, I am an experimental physicist, so I got together with Horst Luedecke to analyze climate measurements.

In particular we did what is called Fourier Analysis, which means looking for cycles in seemingly irregular measurements in time series. Since this is the most common type of analysis in any field of physics or technology, we were surprised not to find any such work in the half-million publications of the climate literature. But then we said, “OK, if nobody did that so far, well, we will do that.” We published our analysis, and the reviewers confirmed that our work and conclusions were correct.

We reconstructed the terrestrial temperature history of the last 2,000 years using published local temperature proxy data [4]. Figure 1 [next page] shows the locations of the measurements on the globe and the type of temperature proxy.

The data comprise several hundred thousand individual measurements. Thus, by averaging to yearly values, the noise in the data can be much reduced. The global temperature history reconstructed in this way (Figure 2, annual data in grey) exhibits all historically known temperature extremes, such as the Roman Optimum (~0 AD), the Medieval Optimum (~ 1000 AD), the Recent Optimum (~2000 AD) or the Little Ice Age (~ 1500 AD). Even details like the Deep Minimum of 1450, known from the biography of Louis XI, show up. As to be expected, the reconstruction yields also the 1870–2000 temperature rise, which is officially claimed as due to human CO2 emissions.

Figure 1. Location of Temperature Proxies. Green: tree rings; Blue: ice cores; Red: speleothems (stalagmites, etc.); Magenta: sediments; Black: other.

“Climate,” officially defined as the 30-year running average of temperature, is shown in Figure 2 (blue curve). The climate curve emphasizes the mentioned temperature features. The correct representation of the known historical temperature variations indicates that the reconstruction is realistic. We then Fourier-transformed annual temperatures (grey in Figure 2). The resulting spectrum Figure 3 shows three dominant cycles with periods of ~1,000, ~460, and ~190 years. These cycles were already known from local studies, (Eddy-, Babich-, De Vries cycles, respectively). This confirms once more that the reconstruction is realistic, and excludes [the possibility] that the dominant cycles could be mathematical artifacts.

Figure 2. Temperature history over the past 2,000 years (grey: annual values; blue: “climate”—30 year running average; red: sum of the three dominant cycles).

For those less familiar with the Fourier transform, we mention that periodic variations (cycles) show up in the spectrum as sharp peaks (such as the three main cycles of Figure 2). Non-periodic variations, e.g., monotonically rising or falling, show themselves in the spectrum as broad continua.

In Figure 3, broad continua are not visible. This suggests already that non-periodic variations in the temperature, such as warming due to human emissions, are absent. However, broad spectral continua may be masked by noise. To exclude such a possibility, we transformed back to the time domain.

Figure 3. Spectrum of the 2,000 years’ annual values, showing three dominant cycles with 1,000-, 460-, 190-year periods.

Figure 4 shows the three main cycles in the time domain (amplitudes normalized for clarity). The sum of the three dominant cycles (red curve, Figure 2) agrees with the climate (blue curve) remarkably well (correlation 0.85). The sum of the three cycles represents, notably, also the temperature rise for 1870–2000.

Figure 4. The three dominant cycles in time domain (amplitudes normalized for clarity).

I emphasize this result again: the warming from 1870–2000 is due to the three main natural climate cycles. And not due to CO2, as claimed in the official propaganda.

The difference between the reconstruction (grey or blue values, Figure 2) and the cycle sum (red in Figure 2) around 2000 AD would be compatible with the recent estimates of CO2 climate sensitivity of ~0.5° for CO2 doubling. (See, e.g., [5] and Figure 5), certainly unimportant for life on Earth. The three cycles with their amplitudes and phases, thus allow calculating the essential climate changes for the past and for the future.

Figure 5. Periodogram of 8,000 years of solar activity, showing three dominant cycles [6]. Note the correspondence of periods with the dominant climate cycles of Figure 2.

We can ask further about the origin of the three dominant climate cycles. I found [6] that these agree remarkably in periods with the three dominant cycles of solar activity (see Figure 4). The mechanism by which solar activity (i.e., “solar wind”) affects Earth’s climate, is well understood [9]. It follows that the cycles of solar activity determine the terrestrial climate.

Interestingly, Scafetta [6] shows that all principal solar activity cycles can be explained by the motion of the planets (particularly Jupiter and Saturn), and the planetary tide forces acting on the solar magnetic field generator (the mechanism by which the tide forces of planets influence the solar activity has recently been clarified [8]).

The main result of our analysis is that the global warming from 1870 to the present is natural and not man made, and that it originates from the three dominant cycles.

The continuation of the three dominant terrestrial cycles into the future indicates cooling until 2070 . The recent continuation of the rise of the climate curve (blue) as different from the cycle sum (red) may indicate the small contribution of CO2 of 0.5°C per doubling of the CO2 content of the atmosphere [5], which is certainly unimportant for life on earth

Summarizing, I mention that this analysis, along with many others, disproves all official propaganda claims of a dangerous warming due to CO2.

A first independent confirmation of our results, namely that the 1870–2000 temperature rise is natural, was given recently, using pattern recognition on temperature proxies [7].

Finally, just to give a taste of the surprisingly primitive propaganda lies, I mention only three of them. Fig. 7. {Slide 7. Three examples of totally wrong propaganda claims.}

References

1. See, e. g., https://www.tmgnow.com/repository/solar/lassen1.html

2. Steinhilber, F., Beer, J., Froehlich, C., Geophys. Res. Lett. 36 L19704

3. See, e.g., Wagner, G. et al. Geophys. Res. Lett. 28 (2001) 303-306

4. Luedecke, H.-J., Weiss, C. O., The Open Atmospheric Science Journal 11 (2017) 44-53

5. Microphysics of Atmospheric Phenomena B. M Smirnow, Springer Atmospheric Schiences ISBN 978-3-319-30813-5; DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-30813-5

6. Scafetta, N., Journ. Atm. and Solar-Terrestrial Phys. 80 (2012) 296-311

7. Abbot, J., Marohasy, J. GeoRes 14 (2017)36-46

8. F. Stefani, A. Giesecke, T. Weiter; Sol. Phys. (2019) 294: 60

9. H. Svensmark, M.B. Enghoff, N. Shaviv, J. Svensmark, NATURE COMMUNICATIONS, DOI

10. 1038/s41467-017-2

Water for Peace and Development

July 18, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, Economic development updates, General updates, Our conferences

Alain Gachet – Dr. Gachet is President of Radar Technologies International Exploration (RTI Exploration ) and inventor of the WATEX (Water Exploration) method for locating aquifers by satellite.

This is a synopsis of a video message from French water expert Dr. Alain Gachet, preceded by the edited introduction given by Jacques Cheminade, presented to Panel II, “Why It Is in the Strategic Interest of European Nations to Cooperate with the Global South,” of the Schiller Institute’s July 8-9 conference, “On the Verge of a New World War—European Nations Must Cooperate with the Global South!” Unable to attend in person, Dr. Gachet provided a video on the WATEX process, introduced by Jacques Cheminade, President of the Solidarité & Progrѐs Party, who gave the keynote to the panel.

Jacques Cheminade. Every day, water is and will become more and more an issue for world peace, peace based on integrated resource management and mutual development. In France, between 10% and 40% less water will be available in the coming years, and the challenge cannot be met by multiplying the number of large run-off basins.

On a global scale, a diagonal of thirst stretches from Tangiers to northeast China, passing through the whole of Southwest Asia. The challenge cannot be met simply by multiplying dams. It is a matter of life and death.

The urgency is immediate. Failure to act is criminal. The consumption of unsafe water causes over 2.5 million deaths a year worldwide. All the refugees to be found in the streets and under the bridges of Europe have one thing in common: they come from countries that are cruelly short of water: Sudan, Eritrea, Mali, Chad, Burkina Faso, Afghanistan, Syria and many others. Not to act is criminal, because there are solutions.

We can start with reducing water leakage, which is often enormous, stopping losses through unsealed soil channels, restoring wetlands where possible, recovering the precious liquid from wastewater treatment plants and subjecting it to additional treatment (filtration, disinfection by UV irradiation or chemicals) to eliminate toxic substances and any health risks. In France, less than 1% of wastewater is treated, compared with 8% in Italy, 14% in Spain and 85% in Israel.

However, all this is not enough, particularly in the poorest countries most affected.

The challenge is not to deprive the existing aquatic environment of too much water supply by redirecting flows. Similarly, the desalination of seawater, successfully used in Saudi Arabia and California, would be too energy-intensive on a global scale [under non-nuclear modes of power]. The retention of evaporating surface water today needlessly depletes underground resources for water-hungry agricultural practices. Beyond the useful but insufficient approaches I have just mentioned, my friend Alain Gachet tells us that water is waiting for us underground.

This underground water does not evaporate or pollute, and its resources are a hundred times greater than all the lakes and rivers on the Earth’s surface. It will enable us to make shared water the best weapon for peace and respect for life. It will also enable us to replant forests that are burning, and restore soils that are being depleted and eroded. Aquifers can be located by satellite (using X-rays) and the water can be pumped out with drilling tools that can go deep enough, just like the oil companies can do, but not the water management agencies. Clearly, it’s all a matter of political will: putting human life before immediate profit.

For 20 years now, Alain Gachet, his friends and collaborators have been fighting, from Darfur to Iraq, without forgetting Kenya and Costa Rica, to successfully test his means of action and make people realize that there are solutions that are not being implemented.

For the Schiller Institute, exploiting water resources for all is an essential element, along with a health system for all, for social justice and peace through mutual development. The West, which claims to be so concerned about the plight of women, must realize that access to water without having to travel long distances is the beginning of their liberation. Brice Lalonde, advisor on sustainable development at the United Nations, asserts that strong political will is needed and that “this requires the rapid implementation of an international agreement on groundwater, which accounts for 90% of the planet’s freshwater.”

I’ll now let Alain show you his approach, currently being tested in Niger as part of a vast program with the MCC (Millenium Challenge Corporation) in Washington, with no ulterior motive other than the joy of seeing water bring life for the common good.

Alain Gachet. A video produced by Radio Technologies International Exploration (RTI Exploration) was shown at the conference, which summarizes the WATEX system, its impact, and Dr. Gachet’s experience. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yn3W3zCBAVc&t=83s)

Synopsis by EIR of his video:

Radar Technologies International is a company specializing in the exploration of underground resources, focusing on resources to mitigate the deficit in surface drinking water. For nearly 20 years, RTI Exploration has been involved in the search for underground drinking water at the request of international organizations, such as the United Nations, and other major international institutions.

RTI Exploration, founded in 1999, invented the WATEX system, built on a solid foundation of scientific excellence, which combines in a complex algorithm, mega databases that are linked to a broad spectrum of geosciences, such as remote sensing, hydrology, geology, geophysics and climatology.

The WATEX system is a scalable and replicable scientific tool. Since its invention in 2004, it has been used to explore potable and renewable ground water resources. Nearly 2,700 wells have been drilled worldwide, with a 98% success rate. Its results have been audited and verified by institutions including the USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) and the U.S. Department of the Interior.

At present, surface water from lakes and rivers is no longer sufficient to meet the vital needs of the world’s population, given the weather patterns and circumstances of extreme droughts, advancing deserts, extreme floods, mega forest fires, all of which are aggravated by demographic pressure.

Groundwater has become the priority objective of the WATEX system, because groundwater is 100 times more abundant than surface water. Of the planet’s fresh water, 3% is surface water, and 97% is groundwater. Groundwater is the water of the future, provided that the consumption of this water is compensated for by the replenishment of resources through sustainable management.

Africa Focus, Other Projects

Faced with a worsening climatic distress, that is affecting all the countries in the Sahel zone, condemning seasonal crops, RTI Exploration’s activity is now focused on the development of sustainable, irrigated agriculture and forestation. The activity is in Niger, Kenya, and Ethiopia. In Chad, 250 wells have been drilled, over an area of 80,000 square kilometers. In Sudan, 1,700 wells have been drilled, with a 98% success rate.

In Kenya, there has been the discovery of the Turkana Aquifer, with an estimated 250 billion cubic meter capacity. RTI Exploration has launched its first “cluster of prosperity” in northern Kenya, in the arid Turkana region. This term refers to agricultural zones designed to guarantee water and food security for vulnerable populations. These communities commit themselves to running of decentralized, solar-powered agricultural projects. The resulting economic and environmental benefits are visible in just a few weeks, and help these communities to provide security to the people and their herds, around the agriculture projects.

On a broader scale, there are projects on other continents and for other purposes. The WATEX system allows for the development of master plans for land-use planning, such as has been done in Costa Rica, a country that lives off green tourism. The WATEX study of the entire nation, with the support of international institutions, including the USGS, has allowed for the planning of the decentralization of industrial infrastructure and activity, and the protection of the rainforest.

The WATEX system has demonstrated that the protection of the rainforests, afforestation programs, and monitoring of eco-system biodiversity are key to sustainability for the generations to come. The WATEX system is also key for the development of industry and strategic mining resources.

NASA Recognition

In conclusion, the WATEX system is a solution that leads to access to clean water for people and their herds; food security through sustainable, irrigated agriculture; energy autonomy for each production center; reforestation to reduce climatic extremes; practices to promote groundwater recharge; and measures to protect aquifers from evaporation and pollution, and protect soils from erosion.

Dr. Alain Gachet, mining engineer, physicist and geologist, is a talented researcher involved in the invention of the WATEX system. Over the decades, he has also held important responsibilities in the exploration-production activities of Elf Aquitaine in Kazakhstan, Syria and Qatar; served as Secretary General of Elf in Congo Brazzaville; and then as a game-changer in the research and innovation cell of Shell International.

RTI Exploration and the WATEX system were awarded induction into the Space Foundation (based in Colorado, U.S.A.) in 2016, on the recommendation of NASA, for improving the lives of millions of people around the world.

World Peace Based on Universal Ethics

July 18, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, General updates, Our conferences

Liz Augustat (Austria) – Ms. Augustat is President of Peace through Culture. Europe (Germany)

Peace through Culture is an organization whose main target is to build bridges between ethnics, countries, religions, traditions and different worldviews. Focused on our function as an inspirer and connector, we have organized numerous conferences in Kazakhstan and other Eurasian countries. Looking back to our World Congress under the title “Towards Spiritual Concord” in Almaty with more than 1500 attendees, which was supported greatly by the then-President Nursultan Nazarbayev I especially remember the late Prof. Dr. Dr. H.C. Hans Peter Dürr, the world-renowned German quantum physicist, director of the famous Max-Planck-Institute for Physics, and winner of the Alternative Nobel Prize, who so often enriched us with his participation and insights. Our joint conversations are partially reflected in my contribution.

Nuclear physicists are eagerly following the basic question on what is holding our world together at its core. So Prof. Dürr also asked himself what actually is behind matter. He split matter into smaller and smaller parts hoping to eventually find the essence. But after 50 years of research, he came to the astonishing conclusion: The essence does not lie in matter, but actually does not even exist in the way we thought. What we think matter is, actually is vibration and energy, it is a structure of relations.

Reality is quite different from what we have imagined it to be so far. Expressed in modern language there is no physical matter/hardware at the beginning, but only idea and software. In other words, and with the help of logics, it follows that the so-called “physical or gross matter” and the so-called “subtle matter” are two sides of the same coin, an inseparable unity of spirit and matter. This statement, so far assigned to the area of spirituality, is now getting substantiated scientifically by quantum physics step by step and is likely to radiate into all areas of society in the future.

Our world is the One and the Whole and cannot be dissected. This fact leads to fantastic consequences, because if we include ourselves in this world, we are distinguishable, but not separate. We are all part of this community, in this connectedness. In Sanskrit, this is called “Advaita,” the Oneness, the A-duality.

When people wage wars against each other, they are hurting themselves at the same time, because all living beings are part of the One. When anything in the world suffers, we suffer with it, even if we do not know the reason. This is not to be attributed to sentimentality, but [to] a deep ontological feeling that touches our common roots. Despite retaining our individuality, we are part of a higher unity, namely the whole of humanity.

Reality around us constantly gives evidence to the collective liability mankind is caught in: Let us just take examples such as “El Nino” or the testing of nuclear weapons or the gigantic emissions of poison by industry into the air and the oceans—effects that do not stop at national borders, nor at mountain heights, nor at depths of the oceans.

Worldwide cooperation, individual ethical responsibility, benevolence and mutual understanding of cultures and traditions among peoples will be necessary to climb to the next step: towards world peace. So far, unfortunately, the United Nations has fulfilled the hope of uniting the world through joint political action just rudimentarily, in some individual departments. Can we create something similar in the field of international, intercultural and interreligious understanding and achieve effective results?

Many years ago, my late father, Willy Augustat, already introduced the concept of an International World Ethics Congress, from which a World Ethical Council subsequently would have to emerge. Such an institution would ensure that universal ethical requirements and corresponding parameters could optimally be considered in all major decisions at all levels.

It is true that not all languages differentiate between the terms ethics and morality. However, we can clearly state that “moral” is a somewhat limited term, used within society of either local or temporary significance (what to do or not to do in the sense of customs and traditions). What was allowed and accepted in former times is no longer valid now and vice versa! The current morals are part of the education and legal regulations within a country or group. Whereas the ethical foundation is already part of the human being—it is, so to say, inborn in the individual!

Looking for universal principles we find them in all great world religions, which have a lot of basic ethical requirements for the individual’s consciousness and character in common.

Ethical Councils on a worldwide basis could be composed of impartial representatives of the academies of the humanities and social sciences, artists, scientists in general and religious representatives; they would have to recognize all world religions in their original sense and represent ethics as the common foundation of all cultures and religions. Each candidate would have to be chosen by virtue of his knowledge and authority in a particular field and by virtue of the esteem and trust he enjoys in his own or related cultures.

In this conceptual framework, national ethical councils would have to send representatives to the World Ethics Council, which needs to be on a par with the United Nations. All measures would only be adopted with the agreement of both bodies so that ethical standards are taken into account in every political and other far-reaching decision. Veto rights would not exist within the countries of the United Nations as they do today, but only on the part of the Ethical Council. In a future world community, the advantage of one must also be to the advantage of all others. All cultures of the world should be allowed to keep their substance and thus be included in the aspired overarching World Peace Culture. Unity in diversity, universal ethical principles such as justice—non-violence—equality—freedom—community and philanthropy are the values of today. The kick-off could take place in the frame of an Ethical Congress where the participants define and elect suitable candidates. Let us carry this idea to the next level of practical realization together!

We are here today because we know that there is no other way left for us but to move forward towards peace, if life on Earth is to continue. We all are aware that time is mature for a new paradigm, a profound change of consciousness. Going back to Plato and other philosophers, we must awaken our consciousness again to the cosmic law of cause and effect which at the same time is connected to self-responsibility for everyone.

Fritjof Capra, physicist and futurologist, compares this approach with a global immune system that becomes active for protection of our Earth, a collective and almost instinctive response of humanity to the acute threat to its livelihood. This immune system consists of many people and groups who are tirelessly engaged in all places of our globe to neutralize and regenerate the harmful influences that are threatening our life everywhere.

I am very happy that the Schiller-Institute offers a strong network of such immune reaction for a peaceful future for ALL!

And let me close with my father’s words: “World Peace can only build on a higher cultural consciousness and responsibility, as well as awareness of necessary action!”

Thank you very much for your attention.

On Demonization of Russian Culture

July 18, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, Cultural renaissance updates, General updates, Our conferences

Tatjana Zdanoka – Ms. Zdanoka is a Member of the European Parliament, Latvia

We used to say, “Don’t bring me, My God, to live during an era of big changes.” But we are living during an era of big changes now.

The methods of management focused on unifying the population of Europe and the world according to values of “homo economicus”—the self-sufficient rational consumer—are enduring a systemic crisis. “The economic person” is not even an abstraction, it is a reduction, a flat projection of one of a set of measurements of any human being. The reality is that all people—West Europeans, East Europeans, the Chinese, Indians or Russians—cannot be reduced to the sum of their economic requirements and to functioning as consumers of goods and the benefits.

Each person exists only in the interrelations and the relations with other people, and these communications are irreducible to mutually advantageous or mutually acceptable economic exchange. These are social and political communications—belonging to language, culture, national or subnational community or to religious community. Both these communications and interests are unrealizable out of community, out of political space.

The following phenomenon is evident: with the growth of integration on the contrary, awareness of the originality increases. There is the known mathematical rule: the process of integration must be accompanied by the process of differentiation. I’m often used to quoting the words of Yehudi Menuhin: “Either Europe will become the Europe of cultures, or Europe will die.”

The title of my intervention is “On Demonization of Russian Culture.” There is no need to argue that the EU is infected with Russophobia. Here is just one single example out of thousands.

You see in this slide the invitation to the discussion “Pushing Pushkin: the imperialism and decolonization of Russian culture” co-hosted by Rasa Juknevičienė, Member of the European Parliament (MEP) from Lithuania, and Raphaël Gluksmann, MEP from France. The main idea promoted by the organizers and guests of that discussion is that Russia has always used and continues to use any work of culture as a “weapon of colonization.” The burning hatred in Baltic states, in particular in my country, Latvia, towards everything Russian is irrational and caused by a state inferiority-complex of national elites.

At this moment, the Russian minority of Latvia is on the verge of a catastrophe under the blows of the decisions taken by the ruling politicians, who represent exclusively the national majority. Since last spring, the situation has deteriorated significantly. The war in Ukraine served as a signal for new persecution of the Russian-speakers of Latvia.

Four years ago, my colleague Inese Vaidere, a member of the European Parliament from Latvia, denounced me to the State Security Service for publicly stating that Russians in Latvia felt like Jews on the eve of World War II (saying that we cannot compare [the two], the situation of Jews in Germany was worse). Now another colleague, Sandra Kalniete, calmly tweets that “we should take advantage of the “window of opportunity” that has opened to solve issues important to “our people,” first of all, the elimination of education in Russian and the demolition of the Monuments to the Liberators of Latvia from the Nazi invaders.

Ethnic Russians make up 25% of the population of Latvia, the Russian-speaking linguistic minority makes up 37% of the country’s population. This part of the country’s population is of mixed origin—some represent the descendants of the citizens of the Republic of Latvia from the period 1918-1940, and some represent the labor migrants of the Soviet era. There are approximately 25% of Russian-speaking citizens among the voters of the country, since 12% of Russian-speaking permanent residents remain in a status close to the status of a stateless person and cannot vote.

When speaking about a “window of opportunity,” the Latvian colleague supposed, “[W]e can now achieve our goals without much international attention.” What are those goals? [They encompass] a full-scale campaign by the Latvian authorities to dehumanize, suppress and marginalize the country’s Russian-speaking population. Latvian society is sinking in the wave of hate speech in the mainstream media and social networks. Columnists and commentators openly compare Russian-speaking compatriots with “animals,” a “fifth column” and “aggressive occupiers.” One of the members of National Parliament (Saeima) of the ruling coalition party openly called for ethnic cleansing, aimed at increasing the proportion of ethnic Latvians in the country’s population. The signatures are collected on a petition for the expulsion of “disloyal citizens” from the country and deprivation of their Latvian citizenship, as well as on a petition for a ban on my party, the Latvian Russian Union, standing for the protection of the rights of Russian-speaking minority.

The European Union nominally has an instrument to combat this kind of manifestation. This is the Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism. This document does not have direct effect—it obligates the states to criminalize the respective acts in their legislation. And the Latvian Criminal Code has an article punishing incitement to national, ethnic and racial hatred. The crux of the matter is that this article is only selectively applied in my country.

Appeals to the police and state security bodies regarding the use of hate speech and calls for violence against Russian-speaking residents of Latvia are fruitless. Consistent refusals to initiate criminal proceedings are coming in. At the same time, charges of allegedly inciting hatred against the titular population have been brought against several journalists writing in Russian, the most prominent of them being Yuri Alekseev and Vladimir Linderman.

The Government has prepared a package of initiatives to destroy memorials dedicated to the soldiers of the Soviet army who liberated Latvia from Nazi occupation during World War II. About 150 thousand Soviet soldiers died in the battles for the liberation of Latvia. In almost every family of Russian-speaking Latvians and in many Latvian families, the memory of the victims of the war and the ancestors who fought on the side of the anti-Hitler coalition is preserved. Through this initiative, people are deprived of the opportunity to preserve the memory of their families.

Thanks to the efforts of our party, complaints were submitted to the UN Human Rights Committee and a temporary settlement was requested, i.e., a ban on the demolition of eight monuments until the complaints were finalized. All these requests were granted. However, the government ignored the UN HRC’s decision, stating that it was advisory in nature. During last summer and autumn, more than 70 monuments to the liberators of Latvia from German fascist occupiers were dismantled, despite the decisions of the UN Human Rights Committee obliging Latvia to refrain from demolition.

I was among those who addressed the Committee. Fate so decreed that the land on which one of the monuments stood belonged to my ancestors, victims of the Holocaust. It is the monument to Alosha in the city of Rezekne, the capital of Latgale.

In addition to the demolition of the World War II monuments, the authorities have recently taken on other sites. You see in this slide the sculpture of Pushkin in one of the parks in Riga which was recently demolished.

The fight against monuments of the past continues with repressions against people living in Latvia today. Some of the elderly people are at risk of becoming illegals. The new retroactive norm provides annulment, in the case of bad knowledge of the Latvian language, of the permanent residence permission for those who acquired the citizenship of Russia. But most grave consequences of the use of “window of opportunity” affect the young generation. The ongoing destruction of minority education started in 1995 (higher education), continued in 2004 (secondary education) and 2018 (primary education). The latest amendments to the Education Laws in the Republic of Latvia are deemed to abolish the education in Russian language in total. It will apply both for public and private schools.

I will conclude my intervention with the fragment of the video clip produced by our team in 2003 when the mass protests of Russian-speakers against education reform started. With the kind permission of Roger Waters, the fragments of the famous Pink Floyd clip were used.

School education in native languages of traditional ethnic and linguistic minorities is one of the most important values of the EU. The Russian-speaking community of Latvia is one of such traditional linguistic minorities of the European Union like many others, and its rights should be respected.

Culture Is the Key for Peace

July 18, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, Cultural renaissance updates, General updates, Our conferences, Our cultural events, World war danger updates

Maurizio Abbate – Mr. Abbate is Chairman of ENAC, National Institute for Cultural Activities, Italy

Dear friends and colleagues from around the world,

We are gathered here today to seek, with all our strength, useful ideas and solutions to resolve the terrible armed conflict that has been raging in the old continent for almost a year-and-a-half. A fratricidal war capable of bringing death and destruction among the civilians in the territories directly involved and a very serious economic and financial crisis in the rest of the world, due to a system of speculation implemented with unprecedented wickedness by the food and energy multinationals. Corporations often controlled by the same masters.

We are well aware that giants such as Vanguard and BlackRock share a majority of the shares of agribusiness multinationals through Monsanto, Cargill and Dupont. The same hold today in Ukraine about 19 million hectares of land devoted to intensive agriculture, which corresponds to 60 percent of Ukrainian agricultural land. Similarly, 100 percent of Ukrainian mines are now owned by multinationals. To ask why war broke out in this part of Europe, starting from those simple figures, therefore seems superfluous.

The important thing, therefore, is not to analyze the causes of the conflict, but rather to try to understand how was it possible that the American public, as well as the European public, always attentive to the problem of peace, thanks to their peace movements, are today almost numbed by what is happening.

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. These were the slogans engraved on the facade of the Ministry of Truth described in George Orwell’s famous novel. This year, the European Union, in an almost grotesque way, has created a Peace Instrument to allocate nearly €8 billion for the purchase of weapons. Buying weapons to prevent conflict and build peace—this is stated, prominently, on the European council’s website. Almost a parallel to the Orwellian Ministry of Truth.

If an institution such as the European Union can alter the foundations of freedoms, that is, the truth, by characterizing the supply of weapons, tools for killing, as useful tools for building peace, then the cultural and moral degradation of the institutions, as well as that of the media that should be exposing such lies, has become self-evident.

Unfortunately, what I have previously stated about the concentration of food and energy production in the hands of a few powerholders is also true for political institutions, the media, as well as those in charge of education. Culture, which, emulating the teachings of Socrates and Plato, should be concerned with developing thoughts and indicating the models of society to be built in order to achieve nobler goals, such as general welfare and solidarity among peoples, is constantly downgraded to a kind of unimportant fashion. Such principles, at the same time, are subordinated to the interests of a few economic powers who have made contemporary society a huge market of precariousness in which everything can be sold or bought. Even the right to life.

A society in which social cohesion is being progressively demolished and upon which continuous alleged emergencies are being imposed, such as climate, health and finance, capable of altering national choices in agriculture, crafts, industry and society.

Therefore, the time has come to stop this neo-barbaric drift caused by the globalization of economy and culture.

A new social and cultural Renaissance must be initiated. To do so, a new paradigm is urgently needed for our Western communities, which must definitively abandon the principle of business as the centerpiece of society and put man with his material and spiritual complexity back at its center. Politics must redefine a harmonious system in which every man and woman has his or her own role in a synergistic and organic way. A society in which human beings must be judged and valued for who they are, for the values they express and succeed in embodying, rather than for what they possess. Only in this way can individual nations, free, independent, self-determined and with their own specificities, become communities again and contribute to the global growth of all humanity.

The differences and peculiarities of peoples, generated by centuries of history and different cultures, must become the driving force to build a constructive dialogue for peaceful coexistence. A dialogue that leads to an equitable distribution of the resources of the planet on which we all live and which are often the cause of armed clashes and unprecedented violence due to the criminal desire to concentrate them in the hands of a few.

As we develop this thesis and try to involve all those who share its aims, however, strong and persuasive signals must be sent out. It is imperative to make it clear to the world that so many free people, not only have no intention of bowing to the deliberate decisions autocratically made by globalist elites, but are ready for a global change of the paradigm imposed until now by those who believe themselves to be the absolute masters.

Confronted with the holders of the major global media in a now imminent head-on clash, networking is needed. It is necessary to organize as many events as possible and use every single television, computer or radio channel to spread the news. Inviting foreign guests to local events must also become a habit capable of disrupting the mantra that only globalization can guarantee freedom, pluralism and democracy.

ENAC, the National Institute for Cultural Activities in Italy, which I am proud to represent, is organizing a conference in Italy with the aim of re-establishing relations between Syria and Italy. Economic and cultural relations that were interrupted for mere political interests and have not been reopened even in the aftermath of the dramatic earthquake that caused thousands of civilian casualties in Turkey and Syria.

At this conference, in which we would be happy to welcome any of those present today, who would like to participate, we intend to send a clear and unequivocal message: While liberalism talks about peace and democracy causing wars and building walls, we respond with the strength of culture, the only one capable of guaranteeing and respecting individual differences while working on building a bridge made of friendship, solidarity and cooperation among peoples.

What Would Erasmus Say About Peace in Ukraine?

July 18, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, Cultural renaissance updates, General updates, Our conferences, World war danger updates

Luc Reychler – Prof. Reychler is Professor Emeritus of International Relations, University of Louvain; former Director, Center for Peace Research and Strategic Studies (CPRS), Beglium.

In my presentation I will share an analysis of the current war in Europe and reflect on how Desiderius Erasmus would deal with it.

As one of the greatest scholars of the Renaissance, Erasmus highlighted the folly of religious wars (folly is the pursuit of a policy contrary to the welfare of the people of the states involved), and took on the establishment of his time, whether princes or popes. Their excuses for going to war, were criticized and satirized in writings, as “In Praise of Folly” and “The Complaint of Peace.” He gave peace a voice. His comments, of nearly 500 years ago, are still relevant today, because, although wars are unique, and historically and culturally different, they are universally similar. Wars and counterwars purposefully commit atrocities. (Counterwars are fought against the country that started a war). People, above all the soldiers, are still slaughtered, pierced, burned, shredded, suffocated, tortured, pillaged, etc. And, violence committed during war, is applauded, called righteous and patriotic; the soldiers, dead or alive, get praised with medals. Erasmus warned that wars are attractive for people who have no experience or knowledge about war. His disgust with war is well expressed in the citation “Dulce bellum inexpertis,” or “War is sweet for the inexperienced.”

Before zooming in to the war in Ukraine through Erasmus’s glasses, let me focus on some facets of the war, which are not part of the official discourse in the West. They however invite us to a more balanced, comprehensive and impartial picture.

1. The war was anticipated. Several diplomats and scholars, including myself, expected a war. For example, in 2008, during the George Bush Presidency, William Burns, Ambassador to Russia, who later served as director of the CIA, cautioned that the expansion of NATO to Georgia and Ukraine would have deadly consequences. It would be the brightest of all red lines and create fertile soil for Russian meddling in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.

2. The war could have been prevented. The West, especially America, made war prevention difficult by (a) her expansionist foreign policy, (b) reducing the art of diplomacy to coercive diplomacy and regime change, and (c) underestimating the risks and costs of an escalating proxy war. Hans Morgenthau’s political realism was replaced by neoconservatism that urged democratic states to establish a new international order through military power, sanctions and regime change.

3. Russia started the war and is the main culprit, but the West and Kyiv are co-responsible. There are several indicators of co-responsibility. In 1990 Ukraine defined itself as a neutral country; the country would not become a member of an alliance. NATO would not expand to Ukraine. During the first 24 years of the independence, Ukraine did not experience war. The American interference in the domestic politics of Ukraine, in the name of regime change, was well underway before the Maidan revolution. This meddling in domestic affairs and NATO’s stealthy expansion threatened Russia’s objective and subjective security. Russia spoke of its existential security. The US and NATO ignored the security issue, arguing that the alliance is peaceful and defensive. This public confession is painfully dissonant with the many wars that America, her allies and NATO waged in the 21st Century in the Middle East and Europe (in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and in Serbia to support in 1999 Kosovo separatist movement). The increasing political and geographical expansion of NATO to the Russian borders presented Russia with a crisis and a dilemma: to allow this to happen or to stop the expansion in time and thus avoid a ‘fait accomplis.’

4. There is not enough space for an open discussion in Russia, Ukraine and in the West. An impartial, open and critical discussion about prevention and co-responsibility would have contributed to a sound analysis and forecast, and a rational and realistic policy. It would significantly increase the chances of serious peace negotiations. In Russia, a critical conversation about the war and the eight years of civil war in Ukraine that preceded it, is impossible. That is also the case in Ukraine. In the public spaces of the free and democratic West, all the noses are expected to point in the same direction. An open and critical discussion is discouraged by ‘groupthink.’ This is a political-psychological phenomenon that prioritizes agreement and discourages critical commentary and alternatives. Characteristics are: the illusion of infallibility, the conviction that one’s own morality prevails, the rationalization of one’s own decisions; the stereotyping or diabolizing the opponent, and pressure and sanctions to enforce conformity. This undermines the chances of successful and cost-effective decision-making and forms a one-sided and narrowly informed public opinion. In wars, pacifists and peace researchers tend to be sidelined, sanctioned and stigmatized as traitors, dreamers or psychological deviants.

5. The war in Ukraine is a vicious entanglement of an internal-war and a proxy-war with escalatory potential. It’s an escalation of an eight-year-long civil war in a pluri-national country. Fortunately, so far, it has remained a limited war, taking place within the borders of Ukraine. The war and counter-war has created a lot of suffering and destruction. It’s a mega media event. Diplomacy is down. President Zelinski turned out to be a stand-up diplomat and appears almost daily at conferences or in the living room. It is a cynical war, for which the population and the front soldiers are paying . The Donets Basin in the East has been, for nine years, the most blood-soaked area.

6. The costs are high. During a war it is always difficult to find good statistics; they are usually rude and not reliable. The numbers are part of the psychological warfare. For example, not much attention is given to the casualties and destruction during the preceding (internationalized) civil and secession war in the Donbas. On April 9, 2018, the Washington Post reported that the Donbas was one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world. After five years of fighting, more than 10,000 people were killed, 2,800 of them civilians. The war destroyed the infrastructure and a third of the hospitals and schools, homes and election facilities. The number of refugees and displaced citizens was very high. For the current war, Pentagon documents published in April 2023 estimated that Ukraine suffered approximately 125,000 casualties, with up to 17,500 killed in action, while Russians had nearly 200,000 casualties, including up to 43,000 killed in action. The problem with wars, is not only the huge costs (physical, material, economic, social, political, psychological, spiritual and ecological) but also the real and expected benefits and profits. Wars last as long as they are considered profitable by the main protagonists.

7. The war logic prevails. No serious efforts have been undertaken to boost the chances of de-escalation and the building of sustainable peace. Humanitarians and hawks continue to ask for more guns and more war. NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg’s one-liner, “Weapons are the way to peace,” is a fitting title for a surrealist painting of Magritte. The war looks like a huge cage fight, in which the outsider-supporters are safe spectators who empower the fighters and encourage them to win.

8. The war will probably end as a lose-lose operation. Violence may continue for a long time, intensify and even lead to a regional and a third world or nuclear war. The loss is not only for the Ukrainians and fighters on both sides of the battlefield (mostly young men, 40 to 50 percent of whom have no military experience), but also for the whole of Europe. For some spectators in the rest of the world, the war is a European tragicomedy.

How would Erasmus respond to the wars in the 21^st Century, and especially the war in Ukraine?

I think he would criticize and satirize the excuses for ongoing war; for example, the misrepresentation of the war as the defense of democracy and of the democratic world. He would also tackle the propaganda on both sides. Above all, he would point at the stupidity of the war and the hubris and mediocracy of the warmongers. Only wise people build sustainable peace. Modern and smart weapons have not reduced the actual and potential atrocities of the war; and the weapons of mass destruction are waiting around the corner. Erasmus would also be a whistleblower and name the princes and kings, and the war profiteers who are responsible for the war. He believes, that what cannot be refuted by argument and fact, can be parred by laughter.

As a constructive pacifist, he would add peace-work to his critical analysis. This implies demanding a cessation of the war, because he considers peace to be more precious than the pursuit of triumph, and a frozen conflict less destructive, less costly and less dangerous than a protracted war. The cessation of the war would go hand in hand with the re-establishment of communication and peace negotiations, but also with development. South Korea is a good example of a country that negotiated a cease-fire with North Korea in 1953 and decided (with the help of the US) to use its talents to become a prosperous country. South Korea reminds us that it is not who wins a war, but who wins the peace that determines their future. A cease-fire in Ukraine, combined with efforts to win the peace, could be a formula to end the war.

Erasmus stresses the relation between education and peace. He would recommend that the Erasmian program for education, training, youth and sports, also give attention to the education of sustainable peace building and the prevention of wars.

Finally, he would encourage people to take part in the building of sustainable peace. This may sound like a dream. But as he said 500 years ago, he would remind us that “there are some people who live in a dream world, and there are some who face reality; and then there are those who turn one into the other.

Make the U.S. a Force for the Good

July 17, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, Cultural renaissance updates, General, General updates, Music updates, Our conferences

Diane Sare – Mrs. Sare is a candidate for the U.S. Senate in New York, USA.

Thank you! I am very happy to be with you here, because we must quickly improve ourselves and our approach to everything in a coordinated fashion. I would like to thank Jacques Cheminade for his important leadership of France and his recent statement, and Helga Zepp-LaRouche for her brilliant initiative to pull together all of the international peace movements onto the same page. There is hope.

Humanity is undergoing a transition, and it is a very dangerous one, because you have some shriveled-up old, evil people running some evil institutions, who don’t want to give up the power that they used to have—and I say “used to,” because they’ve already lost that power, and the danger comes from their failure to realize that important fact.

Lyndon LaRouche provided a pathway for the new order with his 1976 [1975—ed.] proposal for an “International Development Bank,” in which every nation would have the opportunity to achieve its full independence in the way the American President Franklin Roosevelt envisioned should occur after World War II.

Unfortunately, or by design, FDR had died just before the end of the war, and his vision for the post war world was unfulfilled.

In 1976, when Mr. LaRouche put forward his program, and launched his first US Presidential campaign, the financial and intelligence community interests tied to the British Imperial system still had too much power, and were able to prevent him from becoming President of the United States. They later assassinated Indira Gandhi and others, including two important German figures, Alfred Herrhausen and Detlev Rowedder, when we had another chance in 1989.

Now, these rotten institutions are totally and thoroughly bankrupt—and I mean, the World Bank, the IMF, NATO, the U.S. Federal Reserve, the ECB, the Bank of England, JP Morgan Chase, all of them! So everything they try to do, not only backfires, but it produces the opposite effect.

They intended to destroy Russia—in fact, President Biden announced that himself last year when he visited Poland. It is not “Russian propaganda’ (which I’ve been accused of spreading).

Has Russia been destroyed? No. The Russian economy is stronger than ever, and Putin is now even more popular since the Prigozhin/Wagner attempted insurrection was so quickly and efficiently put down. Contrary to idiot western propaganda, Putin is stronger, and his nation more unified. However, the arrogant, and perhaps also drug-induced, blindness of the so-called western leaders seems to prevent them from seeing this.

But it’s not only Russia. There is a powerful dynamic among many large nations, and they are joining into various groups, such as the BRICS, the SCO, the Eurasian Economic Union, and now there are signs of unity coming in Ibero-America, and in Africa as well. The African Union has become a powerful player in world politics. Trade between Russia and China is now 85% in yuan and rubles, not dollars.

The grave danger is that the delusional west thinks that they can blackmail and threaten six billion people to change course, and go back to being slaves. If anyone has paid attention to recent speeches of South African President Ramaphosa, you know that this will never happen. So, we face nuclear war.

Please don’t think I am exaggerating, or Helga is exaggerating when she keeps saying this. Let me remind you that President Biden has already crossed several of his own boundaries in escalating this proxy war in Ukraine. He said, “no tanks”; we are sending tanks. He said, “No F 16’s”; we are sending F-16’s. He said, “No long range missiles;” we are now sending those as well. He also said, “NordStream will be ended…. I promise you.” And he delivered. Would he, would [British Prime Minister] Rishi Sunak, would [NATO Secretary General Jens] Stoltenberg approve a strike on the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant?

Now, those of us here, are here because we want to stop this. We want to move mankind into a new direction, but we face some obstacles. Perhaps most frustrating is that our governments don’t listen to us. Not only that, but our governments persecute truth-tellers. Because our societies have been so culturally degraded, it is easy to respond with violence. Before Helen Keller had access to language, if she needed or wanted something, all she could do was throw a tantrum. She caused harm in hope of getting a response.

The violence can be expressed outwardly as in the riots and looting just seen in France, and as happened in the USA a few years ago, or mass shootings—now we have one every few hours; or it is expressed inwardly, with drug addiction, alcohol addiction, and suicide. The rate of suicides among children in the United States, aged 10-19 years old, has tripled.

Everyone seems to believe that brute force, rather than poetry, is the way to “send a message.” What is the message? This is our challenge, because God has created each of us with an innate sense of Truth and Justice, but due to the willful degradation of our culture, like the young Helen Keller, we feel powerless to express these principles and to “be heard.”

The first thing we must remind ourselves is that the universe is created according to the same principles that exist in our souls, and this is why, if we temper ourselves—or tune ourselves to universal principles—we can defeat all evil. But this is hard work!

Let me give an example of the wrong idea about “justice.” You may not have this so badly in Europe, or maybe you do, but in the United States we are obsessed with punishment. It is a popular sentiment, that if a person does something harmful or illegal, they should be made to “suffer the consequences,” which is supposed to ensure that they don’t repeat the action. We even have a culture which blames people for being refugees—we call them “illegals.” There is no concern for whatever monstrous acts, even by our own governments, may have driven them to flee their country, but merely rage that they get a hotel room, limited medical treatment, maybe, and a cell phone!

This self-righteous indignation is fueled by the anxiety and frustration felt by millions of Americans, who themselves can’t afford medical care, or rent, or are hopelessly indebted, and I think it is designed to try to induce us to start killing each other—but that can be taken up later.

I have been reading a book by Dr. Homer Venters, who was the chief medical officer for NYC Jails. It’s called, “Life and Death in Rikers Island.” To give you a sense of the results of this attitude, of the need to punish, let me tell you the story of one 25- year-old inmate at Rikers Island, who died there in 2012. His name is Jason Echevarria.

On the evening before his death, Mr. Echevarria was being held in a unit for people with mental illness who failed to obey orders. It was then decided that he was “fit enough” to be subjected to solitary confinement as a form of punishment. According to Dr. Venters, “in order to escape the stress of solitary confinement, Mr. Echevarria swallowed a packet of industrial soap and then told correctional officers that he needed medical attention. Passing medical staff confirmed that he was vomiting and required medical attention, but the response of Department of Correction staff and their supervisor was to keep Mr. Echevarria in his cell overnight, intermittently taunting and ignoring him as he vomited blood, bile, and lye, screamed for help, and ultimately died with an eroded esophagus.”

Now, suppose they had allowed the medical staff to treat him before he died a horrible painful death, and they had saved his life, but he’d gotten to suffer a bit. Would that be an appropriate means to “teach him a lesson?”

“Well, everybody doesn’t think that way—it’s not how things are done most of the time,” many even here might say. But I am telling you that this is the institutional policy of our governments.

Take sanctions, for example. What’s the idea of sanctions? “Just starve the people, let them watch their babies die in their arms, and they’ll shape up. They’ll overthrow their leader, or their leader will finally start obeying us.” This is the exact same attitude as expressed by the corrections officers, but now made policy and imposed upon millions of innocent people.

Do you think that a society which tolerates and promulgates such barbarism will be capable of preventing nuclear war?

So, we must temper ourselves. We must remember certain fundamental universal principles, so that we can act in accordance—what a great word, with “chord” in the middle—with the universe, which will greatly amplify our voices.

[Video of a musical performance is shown.]

I apologize that that may not have been as beautiful as I’d like, but I think you get the idea. We have to sound a certain trumpet—or trombone—but not in an arbitrary way, but based on truthful principles. If I hadn’t bothered to find out that the note F is in first position, it would have been a very frustrating and ugly experience.

Similarly, if you have a mass movement for change, and you ask for the wrong thing —that is, your demand is not in coherence, as Confucius might say, with the laws of heaven, you might regret getting what you asked for in a way you never intended.

The fundamental principle of our universe, and of our relationship to it, is growth. That is—and we are learning this more and more with the Webb telescope—that contrary to foolish opinion, the universe is moving from lower order, lower energy-density to higher, and more complex order and higher energy-density.

Life on this planet used to be little single-cell organisms which went extinct easily, until photosynthesis occurred. Suddenly, more advanced life was possible, until we came to fish and amphibians which could propel themselves—no longer dependent on the ebb and flow of the tide. Then came mammals, which not only could regulate motion, but also body temperature, requiring a great increase in caloric intake per kilogram of body mass.

What is the link between a mammal and a salamander? I think you’d be hard pressed to find it—these are some of the great mysteries—like the link between life and non-life. There is not a linear connection—if you squeeze a rock hard enough, it will turn into a mushroom, for example. We don’t know how it works.

Then humans emerged, and suddenly, not only could they regulate their own activity and temperature, but they could change the environment around themselves! They could cook their food! They could plan into the future—sowing crops for later consumption. They could build houses to enable survival in extreme temperatures. People are able to improve their environment to make it possible for more people to live more happily. People can even improve the environment to make it possible for more animals to live more happily—some good and some bad, but I wouldn’t call increasing the rat population exponentially an improvement.

This means that the natural creative love of discovery in the human mind is resonant with the way the universe itself is unfolding. This means, that if we wish to survive as a species, we must create the conditions for each individual person to develop their innate potential as much as possible. Do you believe there is such a thing as “too many geniuses?” We need billions of geniuses! We are so very arrogant to imagine that we’ve mastered the secrets of the universe, and that now we should all just stop eating and using electricity and reduce our carbon footprint because we are complete.

It is precisely trying to halt growth which will kill us all, because it goes completely contrary to the laws of the universe. So far, the most efficient means we’ve discovered to foster the development of the individual, is the principle of the nation state. So, the sovereignty of nations must be respected, and the need for each nation to have ever increasing available energy and energy-density. We don’t all need to have the same language, religion, or appearance, but we do need to respect the principle that the measure of our success is the development of mankind.

This is why the one standard which gives any government legitimacy is the principle of the General Welfare. Any policy which seeks to degrade the humanity of any individual person, or any group of people, is wrong.

Mankind is now at a crossroads, as the United States was when Abraham Lincoln was elected in 1860. The United States had reached a breaking point where it was unavoidably obvious that slavery was creating a harsh dissonance with the principles of our republic. The United States could not survive if that evil institution were allowed to continue. Similarly, the world has reached the point where humanity will no longer submit to a system which arbitrarily determines that one group is superior to another, and has the power to make its own rules, as if natural law and the created universe did not exist. The majority of mankind is no longer willing to pretend that snow is black.

If we wish to be heard, and have the power to change our own sorry governments, we will have to tune our trombones to that chorus.

[Transcript of video clip:]

So let’s talk a little bit about resonance, and I’m going to use a trombone as an example of how, if we are truthful, the universe can amplify our truthfulness, and it is a matter of principle. Now, to make a sound on a trombone, we have this, which is not an amplifier…. That not very beautiful, it is kind of labored and the sound doesn’t really carry…. When I put my mouthpiece into the trombone, then we get a great sound which carries, but you have to be precise in your tuning, because the trombone has a certain length … and if you adjust the length the resonance changes, for example, or the pitch changes. There you can hear, the longer the length, the lower gets the sound…. So, what happens if I decide I want to play, but instead of picking the right position in my trombone, I choose something arbitrary. I can get a note but it is not beautiful, and that won’t carry.

Franco-Chinese Cooperation for Peace: The Example of Nuclear Power

July 17, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, General updates, Our conferences

Hervé Machenaud – Mr. Machenaud is former Executive Director of the EDF Group (for engineering and electricity generation) and former Director of the Asia-Pacific Branch, France.

Mr. Ambassador, Madame President, Chairmen, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Dear Friends,

I am particularly pleased and grateful to have been invited by the Schiller Institute to speak about what I believe, in all objectivity, to be one of, or perhaps even the finest cooperation project in international industrial history.

I’m talking about cooperation between France and China in the field of civil nuclear power.

In the early 1980s, France was chosen by China to help her launch its nuclear program. The contract signed in 1986 for the construction of the Daya Bay power plant was a pact of trust between France and China, between EDF and GNPJVC, the Guangdong Nuclear Corporation created for the purpose.

A pact of trust because, in addition to training dozens of Chinese engineers who have come to France to work in EDF power plants, China asked EDF to manage the project and guarantee its successful completion. I’m proud to have been the Chinese company’s first Technical Manager.

A pact of trust, because very quickly, the hundred or so highly-qualified Chinese engineers in charge of observing, monitoring and questioning our practices were, at their request, integrated into EDF’s engineering teams. We are no longer under surveillance, but partners, a truly integrated team.

A pact of trust, because when EDF studies the upgrading, after ten years of operation of the Gravelines power plant, the Daya-bay reference, it offers without hesitation to make available to GNPJVC the 110 modifications, the invaluable fruit of know-how acquired over hundreds of years [PU1] of feedback. China will appreciate this gesture.

As a further act of trust, shortly before Daya Bay was commissioned, GNPJVC asked EDF to take responsibility for the first few years of operation. EDF then sent some sixty operators to start up the plant and train the Chinese teams, who within a few years would be taking the reins of their plant.

In 1995, just as Daya Bay was coming on stream, CGNPC commissioned a second plant based on the same French model, on the same site. EDF will provide technical assistance and French companies will act as suppliers, but Ling Ao will be a Chinese power plant, built under Chinese responsibility by Chinese companies. China has acquired its autonomy in this area.

This will not prevent close cooperation between French and Chinese operators: exchanges of experience, spare parts, support in the event of incidents… Daya Bay and Ling Ao take part in performance competitions for French power plants, often winning first prize. This cooperation continues today between the operators of the 56 French reactors and the 36 Chinese reactors of the same technology.

In 2007, CGN invited France to build two EPR reactors on the Taishan site, and EDF to invest alongside it. This agreement, unique in China’s history, was signed for the plant’s fifty-year lifetime.

The next step, in 2013, will be CGN’s commitment to EDF to build and operate two EPRs at Hinkley Point in the UK, with the prospect of building two more at Sizewell and two HPRs, the Chinese Hualong model, at Bradwell.

This cooperation is set to last a century.

The partnership between France and China culminated in Premier Li Keqiang’s trip to France at the end of June 2015.The joint declaration on deepening Franco-Chinese cooperation on civil nuclear energy was made public on the occasion of his visit. It provides for comprehensive cooperation “from mining to reprocessing,” in all areas of operation, the design of new medium- and high-power reactors, their construction in China, France and third countries, the association of industrialists from both countries and the construction of a reprocessing plant in China. All French companies, starting with AREVA and Alstom, and the hundred or so members of the Partenariat France Chine Electricité (PFCE) association, are involved in this agreement, which opens up immense prospects.

Confidence is at its zenith.

The industrial alliance between France, which has the world’s most extensive operating experience, and China, which is going to build the biggest nuclear program in history, is an asset for both countries, and beyond, for the safety and progress of nuclear power worldwide.

This historic partnership is the fruit of the work of men and women who have put their faith in projects to be built together, and have given each other their trust. Today, they are tied by bonds of friendship.

In a field as strategic as nuclear energy, such a partnership is a cornerstone for building cooperation and peace between peoples and nations.

And if today, this cooperation has weakened somewhat under the effect of various negative influences, let us hope that it is revived. Its foundations remain intact, and it is certainly not only in the mutual interest of our two countries, but also a contribution to progress and peace in the world.

Planning for Integration, Cooperation and Growth with the BRICS: Missteps and Risks

July 17, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, General updates, Our conferences

Julio Miguel De Vido – Mr. De Vido is former Minister of Federal Planning, Public Investment and Services (2003-2015), Argentina.

I would like to begin this presentation, which I titled “Planning for Integration, Cooperation and Growth with the BRICS: Missteps and Risks,” by first thanking the Schiller Institute, Helga Zepp-LaRouche and Dennis Small for the honor of being invited to this conference.

I have been able to reflect on the working paper by Dennis Small and Mary Jane Freeman entitled “Some LaRouche Essentials for the Transition to a New International Financial System.” Here is my contribution to that reflection:

The disappearance of the global financial system as we know it today, depends on the success of the BRICS, conceived of as the possibility of putting together a platform for intercontinental integration of economies that paradoxically have, as an advantage, large natural resource reserves and a determining role in the global supply chain (energy, food, water and biodiversity); and, as a disadvantage, that they bring together very powerful real or potential economies, but very unequal ones. A simple review of the social landscape of many of these countries provides the evidence of these asymmetries.

Therefore, my view is that, in addition to the agenda of speaking honestly and taking a stand about the war between Ukraine and Russia, and the agenda of domination itself that perpetuates dependence on the world financial system (thanks to organizations such as NATO), it is necessary to build that platform for integration which is the BRICS with an eye to and respecting the sovereign views of those countries, connecting their willingness to cooperate, to trade ties and definitions in foreign policy issues that go along with it.

The situation today is one of a “delicate balance.”

There are many of us who agree with the need for a new way of participating in the institutions of global governance, especially among the countries that share a common history of struggle against imperialism, colonialism, exploitation and underdevelopment. But there are many missteps and risks, if the foreign policy and the insertion strategies are not clear in their characterization and are erratic. In addition, the agreements and commitments to represent the so-called “Global South” must be balanced and firm within each of the countries—those that today make up the BRICS and those, like Argentina, that seek to join that bloc.

The historical moment and the context should encourage us today.

Dennis Small writes that “The only way the Argentina-Brazil-BRICS vs. IMF conundrum will be solved, is by getting China’s Belt and Road Initiative actively underway in the region—to put ‘shovels in the ground’ and start building the long-awaited bi-oceanic rail corridor(s) across the continent, in particular, based on multi-billion non-dollar credit lines.”

I would like to recall here that Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela—led at that time by Néstor Kirchner, Evo Morales, Lula da Silva, Rafael Correa, Nicanor Duarte Frutos, Tabaré Vázquez and Hugo Chávez, respectively – we signed in 2007 the Founding Charter of the Bank of the South, guided by the purpose of developing, promoting and fostering the economic and social integration of the member nations of UNASUR (Union of South American Nations).

The process of creating this Bank of the South was part of the joint commitment to create a new regional financial architecture. It was a way to prevent national savings from flowing to more developed economies, instead of being invested in regional projects. In a way, it was for us a first step to get out of the financial and trade globalization of the time, and to be able to revitalize investment, correct asymmetries, and develop integrating infrastructure. In short: the goal was to mitigate the foreign vulnerability of our region.

Unfortunately, we recognize it today as a failed experience of the UNASUR regional block. The non-collaborative technical-administrative superstructures during the first years of UNASUR’s life, with their procrastination, opened the door to a reconfiguration of forces that, by 2011, had an impact on the integration process and, of course, on the project of the Bank, as a result of the political changes in the region.

The effort and political will of many of us with experience in government administration, to break the U.S.’s hegemony and enter fully into multilateralism and into a change in the International Order, has to aim at:

First – Define what we mean by the Global South. I find it necessary to characterize the subject. Today we know the potential of the G7, with low representation in terms of world population (10%) and an economic size of 31% of world GDP. We know the potential of the BRICS, with high population representation (40% of the world’s population) and an economic size of 24% (in terms of world GDP). The open question is to estimate its geopolitical weight in order to establish joint positions regarding world political and economic functioning, to counterbalance a G7 that today includes industrialized countries, with a BRICS composed of countries that appear to be in political and economic crisis as a result of submission to the “prescriptions” of the multilateral credit institutions.

Second – Urgently address the shared vulnerabilities of the economies of the Global South. We have seen that the assessment of the so-called Agenda 2030 in these countries, which the U.N. imposed as part of the world order, is that it was a failure. I am talking about poverty, inequality, climate change. As presented in the Agenda, “sustainable development” went over the top. As a result, and by way of example: extractivism, as a fundamental tool for the concentration of wealth that limits development, and also for the export of natural resources, which in my country is a way of obtaining dollars to pay the debt to the IMF, are clearly very dangerous ways of acting in disregard of sustainable development (environmental and social).

This recognition of the reality within countries should be the platform from which the BRICS work for the global economic recovery which we seek to lead from there, to position these emerging economies on the path of development and self-sufficiency, which, along with the type of proposals being analyzed in this forum, will allow us to define a New World Order.

One such proposal, to quote Small and Freeman when they pose the need for a new currency: “Productive credit must be issued in that new currency to finance great development projects, with a heavy emphasis on science and advanced technologies, in and among participating nations, to quickly boost the physical economies and thereby provide the only possible solid backing for the value and stability of the new currency.”

In that light, we must bring a new international order into being that is truly inclusive, equitable, fair and sustainable, one that allows for reforms to be agreed upon and planned in the areas of energy, transportation, and infrastructure; as well as the greatest possible investment from the BRICS in the economies of its partner nations to allow for the growth of local industry in each of them, as well as the real improvement in the indicators of the Agenda 2030 guidelines and an ongoing improvement in foreign trade and market access.

In the short term, the BRICS platform must help member countries resolve their debts with multilateral credit institutions, supporting the growth of each of them, the creation of genuine employment, and the improvement in the living conditions of their inhabitants; and over the long term, establish new financing mechanisms outside those institutions and the mandates of the United States and its allies.

My understanding is that that is the path to launch the new world economic agenda, so that the world financial system, as we know it today, disappears, and so that the BRICS can create a counterweight in global geopolitics under conditions of respect from the West for the so-called “Global South.” Thank you.

Page 1 of 812 3 »...Last

Recent posts

language