November 2, 2015 (EIRNS)—The following resolution was released today by Schiller Institute, with the intention of rapidly collecting signatures from qualified professionals, political leaders, and ordinary citizens internationally.
The conditions of life for billions of people depend upon rejecting the agenda being presented at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference (“COP21”) to be held in Paris this December. The COP21 Paris initiative to adopt a legally binding agreement to reduce CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions must be rejected on two grounds: the scientific reality that mankind’s activity is not going to cause catastrophic climate change, and the very real, lethal consequences of the CO2 reduction programs being demanded.
There is no legitimate basis for having the COP21 conference. Put an end to this now!
Despite the climate-change narrative being presented by an extremely well-funded, top-down propaganda campaign, there is an immense amount of solid scientific evidence which clearly contradicts and/or refutes the claims of coming catastrophic climate change caused by human emissions of greenhouse gases. For example, satellite measurements have shown that there has been no average rise in global temperatures for over 18 years, despite the fact that human greenhouse gas emissions have been increasing at an accelerating rate. This underscores the reality that the climate simply does not respond to CO2 levels in the way claimed by climate alarmists; said otherwise, the Earth’s climate system is not highly sensitive to changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
Because many climate models are using these false assumptions of high climate sensitivity to CO2, the predictions of these climate models have been consistently wrong, and with each year they are diverging further from reality. The gradual changes in the climate that have occurred over the recent decades, and the gradual changes which will continue to occur in the future, are not and will not be a cause for alarm. Most of these changes are natural, and any impact mankind may have would be relatively minor. A healthy and growing world economy will be able to adapt to these changes.
We must also recognize that CO2 is not a pollutant—it is an essential part of the biosphere. Because the present atmospheric CO2 levels are well below the optimum for plant growth, human-caused increases in CO2 concentrations are already contributing to increases in agricultural productivity and natural plant growth—creating a measurably greener planet.
But the Paris 2015 summit is not only about nations potentially wasting time and resources on a phantom problem existing only inside computer models—the ugly reality is that the CO2 reduction programs being proposed would increase poverty, lower living conditions, and accelerate death rates around the world. The world simply cannot support a growing population with improving conditions of life using only solar, wind, and other forms of so-called “green” energy.
More to the point, this scheme is being intensely promoted by modern followers of the population reduction ideology popularized by Thomas Malthus. Organizations such as the World Wildlife Fund for Nature have repeatedly declared that current human population is billions of individuals beyond the Earth’s “carrying capacity,” and must therefore be reduced by some billions of people. The present push for a CO2 reduction program is deeply rooted in this Malthusian ideological motivation. But Malthus was wrong in the Eighteenth Century, and his followers are wrong today.
Energy-intensive scientific, technological, and economic growth is essential to human existence. This can be measured by transitions to higher levels of energy flux-density, per capita and per area. Such progress, growth, and development is a universal right, and CO2 emissions are presently a vital part of that process for the overwhelming majority of the world’s population. The adoption of a legally binding CO2 reduction scheme at the COP21 conference in Paris will condemn billions of people to a lower quality of life, with higher death rates, greater poverty, and no ability to exercise their inherent human right to participate in the creation of a better future for society as a whole.
This is deeply immoral.
For these reasons the CO2 reduction scheme of the COP21 conference in Paris must be rejected.
(In signing this statement, I authorize my name to appear in its publication.)
Helga Zepp-LaRouche is the founder of the Schiller Institute and the Chairman of the German Civil Rights Movement Solidarity political party (BüSo)
The escalating refugee crisis has split Germany into two fundamentally opposed camps: the majority (as of now) of people who respond as good Samaritans to the distress of the refugees, and actively help in one way or another to alleviate some of this distress. With her statement “We will do it!”, Chancellor Merkel expressed the attitude of that majority.
Then there’s the other side, which ranges from Christian Social Union head Horst Seehofer, to Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière, to Schäble’s son-in-law Thomas Strobl, Bavarian Finance Minister Markus Söder, the Alternative for Germany Party, and the xenophobic Pegida movement. Their common denominator is stoking the fear and resentment of the population and offering proposed “solutions” which ultimately violate human rights, in some cases marked by open racism, all of which share one thing—total inadequacy for solving the problem.
The political climate between these two camps has now become so hot, aggravated by an objective overload on the municipalities and inadequate housing capacities for the refugees, that the situation in Germany is about to become uncontrollable. If it should come to that, this crisis would have fateful consequences for all of Europe, due to the relative weight of Germany on the continent.
A Syrian woman and her children, among the lucky ones who made it to the Greek island of Lesbos after crossing the Aegean Sea from Turkey (UNCHR)
This is not a crisis whose end is in sight; on the contrary, on an almost daily basis, streams of incriminating pictures come out of bodies of refugees washed up on the Mediterranean coast, among them babies and small children, a mirror-image of the failed EU policy, which has ignored the looming catastrophe for years, and left primarily Greece and Italy to handle it alone. Officially, 2,600 people have drowned this year alone; the number of unreported cases must be much higher. But it’s not only desperate Syrians who are risking their lives in the attempt to escape death; millions of people in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, and many more African countries, or in refugee camps in countries such as in Turkey, see no future, and set off for Europe.
There are some, who, like Frontex director Fabrice Leggeri, are demanding that deportation prisons (or jails) be established in the so-called hotspots of Italy and Greece, in order to prevent the refugees from entering EU territory through its external borders. Others want to deploy Frontex-ships against the traffickers—which obviously puts the lives of the refugees in great danger.
Striking the same tone are proposals like those of Markus Söder to change the Constitution in order to restrict the right of asylum to specific quotas—a clear violation of the Geneva Convention. Human rights organizations also consider the new asylum proposals by Interior Minister de Maizière to be unconstitutional and totally inappropriate for solving the problems in managing the refugee crisis, not least because they increase the panic among the refugees at having Europe’s gates shut on them.
It is dawning on some that this refugee migration is in reality a mass migration comparable to the great migrations of late antiquity. They are the result of a decades-long failed policy of the geopolitical wars of Bush and Obama in Southwest Asia, which were based on lies; and of the conditionalities policy of the IMF, which suppressed economic development and created the breeding ground for terrorism through the resulting poverty.
The idea that you could remedy this situation which is totally coming apart at the seams, by building a new Limes Wall around Europe, and declaring the Near East and Africa terra incognita,—as is proposed in the 1991 essay by Jean-Christophe Rufin “The Empire and the new Barbarians: North-South Rupture,”—is absurd, and ultimately reflects the moral and political bankruptcy of its advocates. Should pictures of terrorized refugee children shown between NATO barbed wire and tear gas, who are the victims of a failed policy,—should shot refugees and drowned bodies become the “new normal?”
With reference to the xenophobic Pegida demonstrations and the burning refugee shelters, Die Welt wrote that Mrs. Merkel could only survive the next two years if she gets the refugee problem under control. A fair assessment, and even more so in view of the fact that the trans-Atlantic financial system can implode at any minute, and the gigantic derivatives bubble evaporate in a super-crash, as, among other things, the Glencore crisis calls to mind. It should be clear to any thinking human being that the chaos which would result from such a crash, would destroy the foundations of society, and scuttle all calculations on the refugee question.
A New Paradigm
There is a way out—but it requires a totally new paradigm and a totally new way of thinking. Only if the military operation by Russia, and now China, in Syria, and possibly Iraq, is followed by a comprehensive economic reconstruction program, that actually develops the Southwest Asian region which has been bombed back into the Stone Age, and permits people there to have the future which they don’t have now, can the mass migration be stopped. The same goes for Africa.
Development Plans for the Middle East and Africa on the Table in 1991
Prior to the escalating wars and terrorist onslaught in the region, these projects proposed by Lyndon LaRouche were all under discussion
Already in 2012, the Schiller Institute worked out an extensive development program for Southern Europe, the Mediterranean region, Southwest Asia and Africa, which was based on earlier development plans. In 2014, the Schiller Institute’s associates at the news magazine EIR—this magazine—published the report “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge,” which includes those development plans.
The basic idea is to develop the whole of Southwest Asia with a comprehensive development program; the greening of the deserts with desalination of large amounts of sea water, and other modern methods of fresh water production, such as ionization of the moisture in the atmosphere, together with the building of integrated infrastructure projects, industry and agriculture, and new cities will totally change the characteristics of the region.
Only if poverty is eliminated, and, most important, young people, and especially young men, are given a real perspective for the future, can the problem of terrorism be overcome. Naturally, the known sources of funding this terrorism—for example, through drug cultivation in Afhganistan and certain Wahhabi “charity” organizations, must be cut off.
It is clear that such a change in paradigm is only feasible if all the major neighbors of the region—Russia, China, India, Iran, Egypt, and the European nations—and hopefully also the United States—work together. To stop mass migration from Southwest Asia and Africa, geopolitics must be shelved, and replaced by the common aims of mankind. Among these aims is victory over terrorism, which threatens Europe, as well as Russia, China, India, and the United States,—and the need to preventing the refugee crisis from shattering the foundations of European society.
In addition to adopting a development perspective, the problem of the integration of those refugees already in Europe must immediately be addressed. In Germany today there are about 45 million employable persons; in 2050 that figure will only be 29 million, and in many other countries the situation is similar. The integration of such a new workforce is therefore in our own fundamental interest.
Why should the young employable refugees not be involved immediately in the construction of a half million units of subsidized housing? The financing could be undertaken by the Reconstruction Finance Bank (Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau) just as it financed the German economic miracle after the Second World War, and it would have the same economic effect. The mere announcement of this project, in combination with an extension of the New Silk Road toward Southwest Asia and Africa, would eradicate the current despair and anxiety for the future, and give way to a spirit of optimism.
The mean-spirited skeptics should ask themselves the question: do they really believe that the current policy toward the Middle East and Africa can actually go on forever? On the positive side: With China’s policy of the New Silk Road and President Xi Jinping’s offer of “win-win” cooperation for building the New Silk Road, we already have the framework in place for the perspective outlined here. The fact that the report “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge” has just been published in Chinese translation, and at the book launch received the enthusiastic support of ten representatives of leading Chinese economic institutes, demonstrates that this perspective presents a realistic opportunity, for which cooperation from Russia, China, and India can be relied upon, to resolve the refugee crisis in a totally new way. That opportunity need only be seized.
. PEGIDA stands for Patriotic European Against the Islamicization of the Occident. The movement was founded in Dresden, Germany and has been holding anti-Islam demonstrations since October 2014.
. Frontex is the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union. It was established in October 2004.
Presented at the 2019 Euro-Asia Economic Forum, which took place in historic Xi’an, China, bringing together over 1,000 people, representing more than 58 nations from Europe and Asia, for two days of presentations and discussion. Helga Zepp-LaRouche gave this speech as the keynote presentation to the Forum’s “Think Tank Meeting” on Sept. 11.
For most Chinese, it is very difficult to understand why so many institutions in the West are reacting so negatively to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI, or New Silk Road), and why an anti-Chinese mood has been stirred up recently; why in the USA, for example, Chinese scientists and 450,000 students are suspected of being spies, which is reminiscent of the worst days of the McCarthy period, while in Europe, some security authorities are making similar allegations. It is difficult to understand, because the Chinese people experience the reality of the BRI from a completely different perspective.
For the people of China, the experience of the last 40 years of reform and opening-up policy since Deng Xiaoping is an incredible success story. From a relatively poor developing country—as I myself experienced it in 1971, when I was in China for the first time—China has developed into the second, and in some categories even the first national economy in the world. Eight hundred million people have been freed from poverty; a wealthy middle class of 300 million and soon 600 million people with a good standard of living has developed. The pace of modernization is unparalleled in the world, as is demonstrated, for example, by the expansion of a 30,000-kilometer high-speed railway system that will soon connect all the major cities.
Schiller Institute founder, Helga Zepp-LaRouche addresses the 2019 Euro-Asia Economic Forum.
Since President Xi Jinping put the New Silk Road on the agenda in Kazakhstan, in September 2013, China has also made cooperation with the Chinese model of success available to all other states for “win-win” cooperation. In the mere six years that have passed since then, there has been an incredible response to the BRI, which now has 130 nations and more than 30 large international organizations cooperating with it. This, the largest infrastructure project in human history, has launched six major corridors, built railway lines, expanded ports, built industrial parks and science cities, and for the first time offers developing countries the opportunity to overcome poverty and underdevelopment.
From the very beginning, the BRI has been open to all the countries of the world. President Xi Jinping has not only explicitly offered cooperation to the USA and Europe, but has also said in countless speeches, that he is proposing a completely new model of international cooperation among nations, a “community for the shared future of mankind.” In doing so, he has proposed a higher conception of cooperation, unprecedented in history, which overcomes geopolitics and replaces it with a harmonious system of development for the benefit of all. In this sense, the BRI is the absolutely necessary economic basis for a peace order for the 21st century!
While in many countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, and even some in Europe, the New Silk Road is welcomed as the greatest vision, as a concept of “peace through development,” as Pope Paul VI had formulated it in his encyclical of 1967, Populorum Progressio (On the Development of Peoples)—yet its adversaries call the same policy a “competition of systems.” Many Chinese do not understand why this violent reaction, fuelled by geopolitical motives, is taking place. Meanwhile, the West has begun to habituate itself to the changes that have fundamentally altered its political orientation and its scale of values over almost the last 50 years.
The crucial point is that a paradigm shift has taken place in the West since 1971, leading in the opposite direction from the path that China has taken.
Toward a New Fascism
When President Nixon triggered the dissolution of the Bretton Woods System on August 15, 1971, with its fixed exchange rates and gold reserve standard of the dollar, he set the course towards an increasing renunciation of a policy oriented toward the real physical economy, in favor of a policy aimed at the monetary profits of the financial economy, which was increasingly oriented toward maximizing those profits.
This tendency was reinforced by the abolition, in 1999, of the Glass-Steagall banking separation system, and the accompanying complete deregulation of the financial markets, which led to repeated financial bubbles, and finally to the crash of 2008. Yet the central banks have done absolutely nothing to remove the causes of that crash, but on the contrary, have promoted speculation in the casino economy at the expense of the real economy, through continued quantitative easing, zero interest rates and now even negative interest rates. As a result, the trans-Atlantic financial system, today, faces the danger of an even more dramatic crash than that of 11 years ago.
The late American economist, Lyndon H. LaRouche, JR. , 2018
The American economist Lyndon LaRouche, my recently deceased husband, farsightedly warned in August 1971, that a continuation of Nixon’s monetarist policy would lead to the danger of a new depression and a new fascism—if it were not replaced by a new world economic order.
In 1972, LaRouche also opposed the Malthusian-inspired thesis of the Club of Rome, that the “limits to growth” had supposedly been reached; a false doctrine on which the entire environmentalist movement is still based today, and which has led to a “greening” of a large part of the political party spectrum of the West.
LaRouche replied with his book, There Are No Limits to Growth, which emphasizes the role of human creativity as the engine of scientific and technological progress, which is the factor that defines what a “resource” is. At the same time, he also warned that the shift in values towards a rock-drug-sex counterculture associated with this neo-liberal economic policy, would, in the medium term, destroy the cognitive faculties of the population, and thus not only cause a cultural crisis, but also ruin the productivity of the economy.
Unfortunately, this is exactly where we are today.
China took the opposite path in 1978. It replaced the anti-technology policy of the Gang of Four, with a dirigist real economy, based on innovation and financed by a state credit policy.
What is not understood in the West, is that the Chinese economic model is identical, in its basic principles, to the American System, as developed by the first Secretary of the Treasury of the young American Republic, Alexander Hamilton, and his concept of the National Bank and sovereign credit creation. This concept was elaborated by the German economist Friedrich List, who is very famous in China; it was the framework of Lincoln’s economic advisor Henry C. Carey, and it influenced the economic policies of Roosevelt’s Reconstruction Finance Corporation, with which he led the U.S. out of the depression of the 1930s. The Reconstruction Finance Corporation was later the model for the Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau, with which Germany organized its post-war reconstruction and the German economic miracle.
So today, China is doing the same thing that was the basis of the economic success of the USA and Germany, before they turned away from this policy and replaced it with the neo-liberal model, whose “success” can be seen today in the example of the world’s largest derivatives trader, the bankrupt Deutsche Bank.
Cai Yuanpei and Aesthetic Education
An extremely important aspect of the success of the BRI, which is insufficiently understood in the West, and, in my view, not sufficiently emphasized by China, is the basic cultural orientation of the 2,500-year-old Confucian tradition of Chinese society, which was only interrupted during the ten years of the Cultural Revolution. In China, thanks to this tradition, the common good plays a greater role than individualism, which has acquired a greater significance in the West since the Renaissance, but which, to some extent, has taken on a life of its own with today’s liberal change in values, and has degenerated into “everything is permitted.”
The Confucian tradition also implies that the development of the moral character is the highest goal of education, which is expressed in the term junzi, which roughly corresponds to Friedrich Schiller’s concept of the “beautiful soul.” It has therefore been taken for granted in China, for more than two thousand years, that respect for public morality and the fight against bad qualities in the population are the prerequisites for a highly developed society.
In the West today, with the abolition of the Humboldt educational ideal—the core of which had also been the development of the “beautiful character”—the idea of the necessity for moral improvement goes completely against the Zeitgeist, the spirit of the times. It is therefore only from the point of view of the liberal system, that someone could call China’s an “authoritarian system,” but by no means from the point of view of China’s own cultural history.
Four participants of the 2019 Euro-Asia Economic Forum, Italian economist Nino Galloni, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Solidarité et progrès head Jacques Cheminade, and his wife, Odile Mojon.
Anyone who wants to understand Xi Jinping’s intentions must consider his letter in reply to the request of eight professors of the Central Academy of Fine Arts (CAFA), about a year ago, in which he emphasized the extraordinary importance of aesthetic education for the spiritual development of China’s youth. Aesthetic education plays a decisive role in the development of a beautiful spirit; it fills the students with love, and promotes the creation of great works of art.
Confucius had already understood that the study of poetry and good music should have a decisive role in the aesthetic education of man, but a master key to the understanding of Xi Jinping’s vision, not only of the “Chinese Dream,” but of the harmonious development of the entire human community, is the scholar who created the modern Chinese educational system—the first Minister of Education of the Provisional Republic of China, Cai Yuanpei. During his travels in search of the best educational systems of his time, Cai finally, in Leipzig, came across the aesthetic writings of Baumgarten and Schiller, and, through the writings of the philosophical historian Wilhelm Windelband, became aware of Wilhelm von Humboldt’s educational concept. He was totally enthusiastic about the affinity of Schiller’s aesthetic education to Confucian morality, and recognized that Schiller influenced the spirit of German Classicism with “great clarity.”
Cai used these ideas to modernize the Chinese educational system, and created the new term meiju, for aesthetic education. This strengthened the idea, already found in Confucius, that the refinement of character can be achieved by immersion in great classical art, so that in this way, a bridge can be built between the sensual world and reason. In an essay of May 10, 1919, Cai formulated thoughts that could also build a bridge for today’s problems in the West:
“I believe that the root of our country’s problems lies in the short-sightedness of so many people who want quick success or quick money without any higher moral thinking. The only medicine is aesthetic education.”
Is the Good No Longer Conceivable?
Many people in the West today, find it hard to believe that China could be serious about its idea of win-win cooperation, because they have become too accustomed to the paradigm shift already described, with its axiom that all human interactions must be a zero-sum game. But we in the West should remember that the Peace of Westphalia of 1648, which ended 150 years of religious war, established the principle that a lasting order of peace must take into account the interests of others. It was the Peace of Westphalia which established international law and laid the foundations for the UN Charter.
It is the West, and not China, which has moved away from the principles laid down therein, such as absolute respect for the sovereignty of all states—adopting instead concepts such as the alleged R2P (right to protect), so-called “humanitarian” wars of intervention, and regime change through color revolutions, as we are currently witnessing in Hong Kong.
Xi Jinping’s vision of a “community of a shared future of humanity” corresponds to the Confucian notion of a harmonious development of all, a tradition to which Cai Yuanpei also contributed essential thoughts. He designed the dream of a “great community of the whole world” (datong shijie), which would be harmonious and without armies and wars, and which could be achieved through the dialogue of cultures, comparing the partaking of a culture by the culture of other peoples, with the breathing, eating and drinking of the human body, without which it can not live. Indeed, a look at history shows that any higher development of mankind has always taken place through involvement with other cultures.
It is significant that hardly any real analysts or politicians in the West have responded to Xi Jinping’s idea of a “community of destiny for the future of mankind” in any significant way. If it is mentioned at all, it is only in passing, as if it were not worth regard as anything other than communist propaganda, and as an announcement of China’s intention to play a leading role on the world stage in the future. But what Xi said at the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) in 2017, was that by 2050, at about the 100th anniversary of the founding of the PRC, the people of China should have democracy, human rights, a developed culture and a happy life. And, not only the Chinese, but all peoples on this planet.
This implicitly poses the question—and answers it positively—that should occupy all philosophers, scientists and statesmen and stateswomen, in view of the many chaotic developments on our planet: Can the human species give itself an order that guarantees its long-term survival, and is appropriate to the specific dignity of humanity as a creative species? Xi’s concept of the one community of a shared future, very clearly presents the thought that the idea of the one mankind be put first, and only then can national interests be defined in agreement with it.
West Must Return to Cusa, Leibniz, Schiller
In order to be able to keep up with the discussion on this level, of how to shape this new order of “reformed international governance,” we in the West must return to the very humanist traditions that we have pushed aside with the liberal system. Corresponding ideas can be found in Nicholas of Cusa, who considered a concordance of macrocosms possible only through a harmonious development of all microcosms. Or in Gottfried Leibniz’ idea of a pre-stabilized harmony of the universe, in which a higher order is possible, because with higher development, the degrees of freedom increase and therefore we live in the best of all possible worlds. Or in Friedrich Schiller’s idea that there need be no contradiction between the citizen of the world and the patriot, because both are oriented towards the common good of the future of mankind.
In conclusion: China must help the West to understand the concept of the New Silk Road. China must not react defensively to the anti-Chinese attacks, but should instead emphasize the brilliant periods of its own history all the more proudly and self-confidently: the depth of Confucian moral theory, which inspired Benjamin Franklin to his own moral philosophy; the profundity of Chinese poetry; the beauty of Literati Painting. And China should challenge the West to revive its own humanistic traditions, of the Renaissance, of Dante, Petrarch and Brunelleschi; of classical music in the culture of Bach, Beethoven and Schiller; and of republican traditions in politics. Only when the West experiences a great “rejuvenation,” reviving the ideas of Alexander Hamilton, Friedrich List and Henry C. Carey, can the problem be solved.
Leibniz was very enthusiastic about China, and he tried to learn as much as possible about it from the Jesuit missionaries. He was fascinated that the Kangxi Emperor had come to the same mathematical conclusions as he had, and concluded that there are universal principles accessible to all people and cultures. He even thought the Chinese were morally superior. He wrote: “In light of the growing moral decay, it seems to be almost necessary that Chinese missionaries be sent to us, who could teach us the application and practice of a natural theology. I therefore believe: that if a wise man were chosen, to judge not the beauty of goddesses, but the excellence of peoples, he would give the golden apple to the Chinese.”
The German middle class and the German small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and cities such as Genoa, Vienna, Zurich, Lyon, Duisburg and Hamburg, and many more, have long since come to realize the potential that lies not only in the expansion of bilateral relations, but above all in the expansion of cooperation in third countries, such as the industrialization of Africa and Southwest Asia.
The enthusiasm that is evident in international cooperation in space travel—the ESA cooperation in the projects of the Chinese Space Agency, the idea of international cooperation on the future Chinese space station, the construction of an international moon village and the terraforming on Mars—underlines that Xi Jinping’s vision of the community of a shared destiny for the future of mankind is within reach.
In this week’s webcast, Schiller Institute leader Helga Zepp LaRouche reviewed the latest financial swindle coming from the Black Rock group as an example of the desperate efforts to buy some time to defend a crashing system. While its promoters refer to this plan as a “regime change” in financial policy, it is just another effort to flood the system with “helicopter money”, to protect $1.5 quadrillion of worthless assets. This was exposed in the 1990s by Lyndon LaRouche, who developed the pedagogy of his “Triple Curve” to show why this approach will destroy the physical economy, and will lead to chaos.
This is the backdrop to the escalated destabilization of China, which shows the British hand, and that of their allies such as Bolton and Pompeo, in a vain effort to prevent the rise of China, and its BRI policy. While Trump wants a deal with China, his opponents, both within and outside his administration, are putting the world on a dangerous course.
One significant, positive development she identified is the coverage, in the Guardian, the Washington Post, and the Financial Times, of the Dark Age ideology behind eco-fascism, and how it is being used to create a green bonanza for otherwise bankrupt financiers.
These developments are part of an incredible process, which shows that the system is not working, and opens the prospect that growing numbers of people can be brought to see that the solution depends on the proliferation of scientific ideas and great culture — and that is the basis of optimism.
HARLEY SCHLANGER: Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger from the Schiller Institute. Welcome to our webcast today with our founder and President Helga Zepp-LaRouche. It’s Aug. 21, 2019.
And we’re in the midst of an extremely turbulent world situation, with things flying all over the place, events taking place, some surprising developments. And Helga, I guess the place to start is the financial situation, where there are some completely crazy proposals being floated which show that the crash is coming. So why don’t you start there?
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think the next financial crash is coming with absolute certainty. It’s coming on like a big tsunami. The only question which is not yet decided is will it be this year, which could very well happen, or will the measures proposed by the central banks and the G7 governments, will that be sufficient to stop a blowout this year and bring it into the next year — but for sure, before the Presidential election in the United States 2020.
So, the signs a many-fold, but I think one of the more telling proposals, is that now the question of “helicopter money” has come out quite openly, and this in the form of a paper proposed by BlackRock. This is the largest private equity firm in the world, and they’re involved in all kinds of things. They have produced this paper for the Jackson Hole meeting which takes place at the end of this week [Aug. 22-24]. This is the meeting where all the top bankers and financial government officials of the world, once a year gather.
What this proposal is, they call it a paper for “regime change,” to abandon the so-called “independence” of the central banks. Now, if you think this is sounding like what we say, that we should go back to a national banking system, that’s quite the opposite, because what they propose is to sort of merge the governments and the central banks, and go to what they call “direct investment” or direct delivery of money to anybody who needs it. And when they talk about meeting the inflation requirements, they don’t mean physical goods, or anything like that, but what they’re talking about is to keep the altogether, estimated $1.5 quadrillion derivative bubble going.
And if people remember the famous “Triple Curve” of Lyndon LaRouche, a pedagogical device which he developed in 1995, for a conference in Rome, in the Vatican, where he in a very astounding but simple and convincing way, showed how the financial and the monetary aggregates are moving in a hyperbolic direction upwards to a certain point, while the real economy is moving downwards, and going down. And we have now reached the point where any kind of liquidity pumping you can imagine is not going to be sufficient to maintain this bubble. So, we are heading toward the storm of storms, and there is absolutely not going to be any solution, except those which were proposed by Lyndon LaRouche: Glass-Steagall; nationalize the central bank, making it a National Bank in the tradition of Alexander Hamilton or for that matter the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau in the postwar reconstruction plan in Germany; and then establish a new, international credit system, a New Bretton Woods system; and then go into a crash program for fusion, for space research cooperation, and cooperate with China on the New Silk Road.
Unless this package is being put on the table, there is nothing going to stop this crisis. But I’m optimistic that things are actually moving in a direction that the implementation of the LaRouche solution is not impossible at all.
SCHLANGER: Helga, just to make it clear to our viewers: The proposal that’s being made is not to deal with the debt situation in any sane way, but to allow the debt to continue to be carried by creating more debt, by pumping more money in. Is that what the BlackRock proposal ultimately boils down to?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yeah. They’re doing already everything you can imagine. Since 2008, they’re doing quantitative easing, pumping money; then they went to zero interest rates, now they’re going into negative interest rates, and not only for the larger accounts, but there is now a move to even go to negative interest rates for savings and loans banks, and that is pure, simple stealing out of the pocket of the so-called small people. If you have any savings for your pension, they’re just going to take that, step by step, away. So even the Bavarian Minister President Söder is now proposing legislation prohibiting negative interest rates for accounts which are below EU100,000. So, he obviously knows this is an issue where the population really gets completely mad, because it directly affects them in the most direct way.
So I think that the central banks have lost all ability to actually intervene, because they have used up all the instruments, they have all not worked, and this is why we are pushing the LaRouche solution, as the only way to solve this problem.
SCHLANGER: And while they’re trying to deal with this, what we’re seeing is a worsening of the situation. We’ve talked before on this webcast about Deutsche Bank. Now there’s new evidence that Commerzbank is following in the same path.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yeah, Commerzbank, they are talking about closing 400 of their 1,000 branches, laying 9,500 employees, and their stock has dropped in the last several months, from EU24 to around EU6. So this is really another case, just like Deutsche Bank, where you see the absolute inability of the present liberal system to solve these problems, and Commerzbank is half-owned by the state, so this is also a sign of the times. And these are not the only banks are in this condition: This is just the thing which is out in the news in Germany, but that is the condition of more or less the entire Western banking system.
SCHLANGER: Another example of failing to learn the lessons is Argentina, where the present government of Macri followed the IMF policies — austerity, bailouts; and they were just completely crushed in the primary elections, and then they come out and announce they’re going to continue doing the same thing. This could be a trigger for the crash, couldn’t it?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yes. Because this is highly contagious. I think the inflation, the collapse of production, all of this the result of the Macri policy, is throwing a bond crisis in Argentina on the table, and that could go to any emerging country — Turkey, Brazil, it would even take larger countries. So, it’s really one more element of this pending blowout.
SCHLANGER: Partly what we’re seeing also as this financial crisis is coming down the pike, is an escalation of destabilization, largely run by the same people who created the financial crisis, the City of London and others. The situation in China, as we covered it last week, has continued to worsen, with other aspects of encirclement. Where does that stand now?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I think there is an enormous amount of black propaganda, transmitted by the media in Europe and in the United States, who all claim that the demonstrations in Hong Kong are all so peaceful, and people are so freedom loving and so forth. But this is really — I’m not saying there are not some local issues; if you have a liberal society, which Hong Kong was under the British governorship for many decades, it is quite natural that you would have such a reaction. But this was far from being peaceful: You had these acts of violence, which were documented in videos, police stations being attacked, the airport occupied, the local parliament being violently attacked, so this is not that peaceful at all. And that this is also showing some British manipulation, which the Chinese media have published in the meantime, quite a bit, that all of this goes back to the British hand, the Opium Wars: The fact that Hong Kong at all became British, is the result of the Opium Wars!
Now, in that light, this is really absolutely scandalous, that two students went to the British Parliament and were given the floor, to demand the reinstitution of the Treaty of Nanjing and the Treaty of Tientsin. These were the infamous British-imposed treaties after the Opium War, which made Hong Kong a British Crown Colony and which allowed the sale of opium in China. So if you have students demanding the reincarnation of these legislations, if that’s not giving the show away, I don’t know what is.
And it’s quite interesting that there was an article in the American paper The Hill, which points to the fact that everybody in the United States supports these “freedom-loving people” — Congress, Lindsey Graham, Nancy Pelosi, Bolton — but that one voice is missing in the chorus, and that is the voice of Donald Trump.
So, I think this is important, because you have otherwise an enormous effort, and unfortunately, Trump seems not to be in control of all of what is happening in the name of the U.S. administration around the world, but you have a complete escalation against China. The effort to contain the rise of China, with many operation, Taiwan being one of them. There was just the sale of $2.2 billion worth of military equipment to Taiwan. The Taiwan government offered asylum to the protesters from Hong Kong, and the Chinese Foreign Ministry basically said Hong Kong and Taiwan touch the “core interests” of China, and therefore there will be absolutely no capitulation on the side of mainland China on these two points. But then, you also have the orchestration of the so-called Uighur in Xinjiang; then you have the Huawei case. Pompeo is continuing, even so Trump obviously wants to get the deal with China, for sure, before next year’s election, but Pompeo is making bellicose statements despite that.
So you have an atmosphere of, really, very, very negative — I forgot to mention the South China Sea — so I think from the standpoint of China, which has tried to change the policy in the direction of a New Paradigm, new international relations — they are being bombarded right now with a quite significant assault. And this is very dangerous, because there is no solution to the present world crisis without China. And that’s a fact. So, we have to see, but I think the record of who is doing this geopolitical manipulation has to be published, and that hopefully will help to stop it.
SCHLANGER: And sticking with this strategic picture, the Russians and the Chinese have issued a couple of statements, including warning against the attempt to do regime change against both them. Then, there’s a very significant meeting between President Putin and President Macron which just took place, leading up to the G7 meeting. How do you assess that meeting, Helga?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think that was quite good. It was in preparing the G7 meeting in Biarritz [Aug. 24-26], which Putin is obviously not attending, because Russia was kicked out of the G8. But I think the fact that Putin and Macron met in France at the summer residence of Macron, and Macron basically said that France wants to play a role to reopen ties between the European Union and Russia, because there would be no solution to the world’s problems without Russia, I think this is very positive.
Putin on his part, said some very interesting things: They obviously discussed Syria, Ukraine, Libya, and so forth. But then somebody mentioned the idea of a Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok. And then Putin said, “Well, this is not an idea which comes from us. This is actually an idea which comes from Charles de Gaulle, who talked about “Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals,” but Russia is much larger, it goes to the Pacific; it’s a European civilization and culture, and this idea of a “Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok” may sound impossible today, but sometimes the impossible becomes the inevitable very quickly.
And I think that is very interesting, because I think — I don’t know, I didn’t talk to Putin — but I think this is a prophetic foresight, that once you go into an absolute upheaval and a collapse of the present order, then naturally, one resorts to the only concepts available. So I think this idea is quite interesting, and I don’t want to comment on it any further, but it’s for sure, food for thought.
SCHLANGER: Also it’s interesting, Macron and then joined by Trump, emphasized that Russia should be brought back in to make it the G8 again.
Helga the other situation in Europe, that’s really quite explosive, is Italy, where the government was brought down yesterday. What do you think is going to happen there?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: First of all, there is a wide discussion that this is the result of “Ursula,” referring to [EU Commission President-elect] Ursula von der Leyen, because she met with Prime Minister Conte and people really think that that idea, to cause a fait accompli where Deputy Prime Minister Salvini was basically forced to force this crisis, anyway, that remains to be seen.
Now, you have a situation: Conte made a speech yesterday in the Senate, where he accused Salvini of not obeying the rules of the EU. Salvini said something more interesting — he actually talked about his vision for Italy for 2050, so that idea of Lyndon LaRouche about the next 30, 40, 50 years, the idea of the Chinese thinking in terms of 2050, it’s good if politicians start to have a little longer vision than the next election for their own post. So he, among other things, talked about infrastructure, and the American Constitution, that the people have a right for the “pursuit of happiness.” So this is quite good.
Where this thing will go is completely open. Conte went to the State President Mattarella [to offer his resignation], and he will now see if another combination can be formed for a government, and if that doesn’t function, there will be new elections. Now, on some other combination, the only way how the Five Star party could form a government with the Democratic Party (PD) would be with the help of Berlusconi’s party Forza Italia which is completely split. So it’s impossible at this point to say how this will turn out — will it be a short-lived new government, with many factors in it? or will it be new elections? We will see.
But it just is one more sign that Europe is in a complete turmoil. We will have the Brexit in October, and the outcome of the elections in Germany also for sure, will change the landscape, because of the rise of the AfD which is expected in the new local elections. So Europe is in a turmoil and it definitely would need completely different unifying principle that that of cooperating with the New Silk Road.
SCHLANGER: To shift to the United States, I think it’s impossible to talk about the U.S. situation without talking about the work of the LaRouche organization, and this became clear in two ways: One was a Washington Times attack on Lyndon LaRouche and his organization which came out Aug. 19. And the other was the exposure of “ecofascism” in the Washington Post. What do you make of this, Helga?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, first of all, there have been quite a number of attacks on our international movement, which in one sense means we’re doing something well, because if we wouldn’t be doing important things, they wouldn’t find it necessary to attack us. So there was a one-hour slander on the Swedish radio; then earlier a London Times article; and now in the Washington Times, complaining that despite the fact that my husband has died, that we are still moving. And I think that is a very good sign.
Now, the exposure of “ecofascism,” is really very interesting, because for a very long time, we were practically the only ones who went into the historical roots of where all this is coming from, who is financing it, and that is now coming out, and I think it’s very useful. There was an article in the Guardian and then in a different form in the Washington Post, and what these articles basically admit is that the recent mass shootings in the United States, really go back to the absolute despair and pessimistic world outlook of the ecological movement, by basically saying that if the world is so overpopulated and polluted, then killing people is the only thing one can resort to.
Now, that is quite an admission. And then, some of these articles, go into quite some length of the eugenics movement of the ’20s and ’30s, which we have documented in large part; the fact that out of the eugenics movement, which obviously was the basis in connection with the race policy of the National Socialists, that was obviously discredited with the collapse of the Nazi government; and then Julian Huxley basically, in his position as head of UNESCO in 1946 said it quite openly: He said, now this eugenics is discredited for many years, so we have to basically rename it, conservation movement, protection of nature. So that is all mentioned, and also the role of something called “Federation for American Immigration Reform” (FAIR), whose founder is a guy called John Tanton — whom we attacked already, I would say 30, 40 years ago, because he was part of the so-called Paddock Plan of ’70s, which was the idea to halve the population of Mexico. So this is really coming out very, very openly, but basically making the connection, even saying “ecofascism” — that already is a major important characterization, because that is what it is; then these historical ties are also covered, people should really look at our documentation, because we have published a lot of this over the years.
SCHLANGER: People can go to our website, there’s a lot of material that we’ve put out, developing in depth this whole question of where this ecological fascism comes from; and that this in fact is what’s behind the Green New Deal, the FridaysForFuture. You have this publicity stunt now with Greta Thunberg on a millionaire’s yacht coming over to the United States. But this is being exposed: In fact, Helga, you brought up the craziness of the woman who founded the Extinction Rebellion. It’s hard to believe that she’s openly calling for use of psychotropic mushrooms to discover how to save the planet. This is probably some of the reason people are publishing this, because it’s so hard to believe.
But it does bring up the bigger question, which is science versus fascist ideology. And we see this on many fronts, but I think it’s important for you to lay out for people why this is the real fight.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, before I say something to that, I should mention that there is an amazing article in The Sunday Times of London on Aug. 18, illustrating another aspect of Greta Thunberg, basically saying that this is designed to cause the biggest bonanza for the financiers — that coming from The Times, I find quite interesting. And they basically say, there is one narrative, that Greta, the teenager, was sitting for a year in front of the Swedish parliament and all of this was innocently triggering this whole change.
But then, they actually reveal quite a different story, namely, that this guy Ingmar Rentzhog, who is her manager, so to speak, was actually trained by Al Gore, that he is connected to the top think-tank in Sweden, Global Challenge, which in turn, is both connected to a former Swedish minister who is absolutely identical with the Swedish oil and energy industry, and that they’re going to make the biggest bonanza ever by getting everybody to go into green financing. Now, that is really, absolutely the case, and I think the real narrative of Greta Thunberg — she may not even know all of this; maybe she does, may she doesn’t — but this really shows that this poor girl is completely instrumentalized. And that the idea to go now for green financing, is the last effort to prevent, or postpone the collapse of the financial system by causing a straw fire, by causing a last phase boom. But obviously, this would completely destroy the real economy, and therefore it’s very good that these stories are now coming out, because maybe there is a return to reason in time, before disaster is complete.
SCHLANGER: And as you pointed out in a discussion with our colleagues yesterday, this makes the issue very clear, real science versus fascist ideology.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yeah. What this article which I just mentioned also says, it shows the Club of Rome, they had put out recently an emergency action plan, and that the so-called “talking points” of Greta are exactly identical according to these talking points of the Club of Rome! This is really incredible, because the Club of Rome are not scientists, they are quacks, they are fraudsters, who in 1972 had computers with the end result of what they wanted to say, and then programmed the computer in such a way it would produce this result: namely that the limits to growth had been reach, that the Earth is finite, and then the whole ecology movement grew out of this wrong conception.
So, I think it’s not decided at all, because there is on the other side, now, a growing number of scientists, in 20 countries already, who have basically picked up on the petition of the Italian scientists, who some weeks ago denied the idea that there is any connection between CO2 emission and climate change, and therefore, they called on the Italian government not to go into these completely costly, and completely ineffective measures. If you want to change the climate, well, first of all, man can probably not do that at all, because the causes of climate change are not the result of his activities, and you cannot influence the millennia old cycles of the Solar System in the Milky Way, the galaxy, the processes on the Sun, the cosmic radiation resulting out of all of this.
So, it is very important that there is now a growing movement of scientists who basically challenge manmade climate change, and they are appealing to the governments, especially in Europe — maybe Trump, who has in any case left the Paris Climate Accord — to reestablish a scientific debate on this issue. And I think people should spread this idea, and contact scientists and get them to get in touch with these scientists. Once we have this resolution — and the Italian one is known — but I think the international one is being circulated right now for many signatures, and it’s supposed to come out in a few weeks. But help to support this campaign, if you agree, that we should really not go into a New Dark Age, which would really extinguish civilization, but not the way the Extinction Rebellion people are talking about it, but because of a lack of production, food, water, and all of these things.
SCHLANGER: It would seem that the Extinction Rebellion is actually for extinction: They just want it through a New Dark Age, through phony attacks on science.
So, Helga, is there anything else you want to cover?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yeah: I think we are in an incredible process, where many, many people realize that this system is not working. It’s not working in Europe, it’s not working in the United States. Our colleagues in the United States report a very interesting pattern, that many people don’t want to hear about parties any more, which I find very good, because party politics is really evil, because it has completely degenerated into lobbyism for particular interests. So I think to go for the common interest, the common aims of mankind, the common good of nations is a much better approach. And we will fight to have a return to the scientific ideas of the physical universe, of natural science, of great Classical art, basically the ideas of Lyndon LaRouche which I can only encourage people to study. If you go to the archives, you can read an enormous amount of articles by Lyndon LaRouche, and it will blow your mind, because these are the most profound conceptions which have developed by anybody to the present time. And therefore, I again ask you to join the fight for the exoneration of my husband, and join our effort to, in time, get the European nations and the United States to cooperate with Russia and China, in a New Paradigm. Because if we do not change the present lunacy of geopolitical confrontation, the world can actually end up in catastrophe, because the crisis points are many, triggers could easily develop into larger conflicts: So we have to have a new cooperation between the United States, Russia, China, and India; and we should not give up the European nations that they can be brought back to reason. So join our effort.
SCHLANGER: Helga on behalf of our viewers, thank you for making this situation coherent and understandable. And now it’s up to people to act on it. So, we’ll see you again next week.
As the storm signals of the impending financial crisis become more alarming, we are witnessing what is probably the largest social engineering experiment that has ever taken place. The aim of this trans-Atlantic campaign is to make the population—with the help of orchestrated climate hysteria (“We only have 18 months left!”)—voluntarily accept a collapse of its standard of living while directing all investments into “green” projects.
At the same time, the “Great Transformation of the World Economy” is supposed to give “green” investors huge profits and—together with the miraculous increase in money supply via endless “Quantitative Easing”—postpone the collapse of the hopelessly bankrupt financial system once again.
Sixteen-year-old climate star Greta Thunberg, the FridaysForFuture (F4F) student movement, and the Extinction Rebellion (XR) are being strategically exploited by the neoliberal financial oligarchy through a whole complex of institutions and organizations—including investment bankers, consulting firms, the Tavistock Institute, entire battalions of psychologists and behavioral therapists, the World Bank, the European Union (EU), and several billionaires, as well as internet platforms and veterans of the population reduction lobby.
‘Green New Deal’ is a Bad Deal
It uses the whole gamut—from panic-stricken children to “Green New Deal”-advocating “internet personalities,” to groups that are also willing to cross the boundaries from civil resistance to more violent forms—to enforce the demands of the Paris Climate Agreement well before the agreed-upon date of 2050. It includes all the green cadres, from Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project to the internet platform wedonthavetime.org, “We don’t have time,” on whose advisory board sits, among others, Greta Thunberg.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel who, along with Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, had previously praised the F4F movement, commented in her summer press conference that Thunberg’s demonstrations had certainly accelerated the government’s decision-making process toward implementing efficient measures to reduce CO₂ emissions. The German “Climate Cabinet” will announce a whole series of measures on September 20, among which the determination of a “carbon price” will be of central importance. Whoever “pollutes” the atmosphere with carbon dioxide will have to pay a price in the future.
Thus, Mrs. Merkel has finally joined the camp of the ideological climate lobby that wants to “nudge” the population, via an increase in prices for energy and transport, to change its behavior. In practical terms, this will mean that a majority of people will no longer be able to afford to use cars or planes, or have adequate heating or power supply.
It means a bonanza for investors, on the other hand, should this measure become policy. This point was made at a June 7 event on “Sustainable Financing” at the House of Finance in Frankfurt by Dr. Christian Thimann, Chairman of the Executive Board of Athene Deutschland Holding, a subsidiary of the insurance company Athora and a long-time employee of the IMF and European Central Bank.
Often one strives unsuccessfully for years for something, and then suddenly something surprising happens, which changes everything. For example, the topics of the “limits to growth” of the Club of Rome, and climate protection, have been under discussion for decades, but only after the notable phrase, “The climate goals will only be achieved if we direct the capital flows into sectors with low emissions,” was formulated in the Paris Climate Agreement, did the climate for the financial sector change completely. Suddenly the issue of “sustainable investment” became central to the economy; suddenly twelve million young people took to the streets, and suddenly this became a “big thing.”
The EU is working on guidelines on emissions trading and climate protection, and legislation that is designed to make these guidelines binding for investment in green technology. For an industrialized nation like Germany, but also for the whole of Europe, this is nothing less than a pre-programmed course for economic suicide.
For what neither the EU bureaucrats nor the sharks of the financial sector understand, are the principles upon which the real, physical economy is built: There is a direct correlation between the energy-flux density applied in the production process, the productivity of the economy, and the number of people whose lives can be supported through these parameters. A diversion of investments exclusively into so-called “sustainable” areas, e.g., “renewable” energy sources such as electricity generated by wind turbines and solar cells, as well as carbon emissions trading, and mandating that the transport, construction, and agriculture sectors must comply with climate regulations, in fact means devolution back to pre-industrial society. For Germany it effectively means the emigration of young workers, more of the aging population left without adequate care, and general impoverishment.
Scientists Dispute Anthropogenic Climate Change
This “Great Transformation,” the complete decarbonization of the world economy, which has long been propagated by German climatologist Hans Joachim “John” Schellnhuber, CBE, is all the more criminal, because the alleged scientific consensus on the thesis of anthropogenic climate change is a fiction. There are many declarations worldwide that have been signed by thousands of scientists, including the late Frederick Seitz, the former president of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences; scientists and scholars associated with the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC); and hundreds of Italian, Scandinavian, and Japanese scientists addressing this very problem.
Contested by all these experts, is the claim that the anthropogenic contribution to climate change plays any noteworthy role. They argue that the causes of changes in the Earth’s climate are, above all, natural fluctuations that have to do with processes on the Sun, cosmic radiation influences on cloud formation, the Solar system’s changing position in the Milky Way galaxy, and other cosmic phenomena.
They also stress that climate simulation models do not reflect the actual climatic fluctuations of the past 10,000 years, and that nature—not man—determines the climate. As the recent petition by the Committee of Italian Scientists led by the renowned Professor Uberto Crescenti highlights, it is therefore illusory to suggest that a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions could control the climate.
However, Christoph M. Schmidt, the chairman of the so-called economic “Five Wise Men” of Germany, the top advisory body of the German government, did not refrain from praising the F4F movement at its Congress in Dortmund, for allegedly making it clear to the public that present policies cannot continue. Schmidt also fully supported an increase in the CO₂ emission allowance price as a “basic tool” in the fight against climate change. His appearance in Dortmund and his statement are equally scandalous in view of the consequences of this policy and raise the question of whether he should resign because of incompetence, or because of profiteering.
Banks and Foundations in the Climate Line-Up
In the financial markets, initiatives are popping up such as the Climate Bond Initiative, which seeks to turn the $100 trillion global bond market into a giant new platform for investing in sustainable economic activity of all kinds. (The EU has so far provided “only” $360 billion.) Participants in this initiative include the Rockefeller Foundation, Bank of America, HSBC, the Inter-American Development Bank, Bloomberg Philanthropies, the government of Switzerland, the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Frederick Mulder Foundation, OAK Foundation, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, FSD Africa, NAB (Australia), European Climate Foundation, the Sainsbury Family Charitable Trust, the EU’s Horizon 2020 Program, Climate Works Foundation, UNDP, Climate KIC, KR Foundation, and Martin International. Equally active are the World Economic Forum, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), The Economist magazine, and the Green Climate Fund, to name but a few.
Ironically, it is clear to Greta Thunberg herself that wealthy interests are involved in the controversy. In a speech to schoolchildren in Katowice, Poland, she said:
“I do not care about being known. My concern is climate justice and a livable planet. Our civilization is being sacrificed for the opportunities of a small group of people who want to make more and more money.”
However, exactly these sentences were deleted in the publication of this speech by the Internet platform Avaaz. Avaaz, a product of the George Soros-related MoveOn.org platform, specializes in collecting personal information on every conceivable topic by organizing petitions around the world.
Will the Real Economy Survive?
This is precisely the point: At a time when the real economy in Europe and the United States is crumbling and the next collapse of the financial system can be delayed only by a new flood of liquidity, a new gold rush for green investment is being generated, which perhaps may enable speculators to make a large amount of money for a short time. The effect on the developing countries will be catastrophic, the non-affluent part of the population in our country will be clobbered, and after a super-short boom in the monetary area, Germany will be destroyed as an industrial location.
It is high time to pull the emergency brake. But who will do this if the EU and the Berlin government are part of the problem, and the Greens obviously represent the same thing, only colored in green? It can only come from the parts of society that are the victims of that policy: the middle class, the productive part of the working population, parents, teachers and all thinking people.
We urgently need a public debate on these issues. Germany is currently driving at full speed off the cliff!
Elizabeth Economy, the Asia Studies Director at the Council on Foreign Relations, penned a chilling call for military mobilization to confront China, to stop the New Silk Road process introduced by President Xi Jinping, whom she describes in the title of her Foreign Affairs article as “China’s Imperial President” (quite a mouthful for the Asia chief at London’s premier Imperial think tank in the U.S.).
Economy does not hide the fact that the target is the New Silk Road, the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, and the BRICS. She writes:
“For Xi, all roads lead to Beijing, figuratively and literally. He has revived the ancient concept of the Silk Road — which connected the Chinese empire to Central Asia, the Middle East, and even Europe — by proposing a vast network of railroads, pipelines, highways, and canals to follow the contours of the old route. The infrastructure, which Xi expects Chinese banks and companies to finance and build, would allow for more trade between China and much of the rest of the world. Beijing has also considered building a roughly 8,100-mile high-speed intercontinental railroad that would connect China to Canada, Russia, and the United States through the Bering Strait. Even the Arctic has become China’s backyard: Chinese scholars describe their country as a near-Arctic state.
“Along with new infrastructure, Xi also wants to establish new institutions to support China’s position as a regional and global leader. He has helped create a new development bank, operated by the BRICS countries to challenge the primacy of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. And he has advanced the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which could enable China to become the leading financier of regional development. These two efforts signal Xi’s desire to capitalize on frustrations with the United States unwillingness to make international economic organizations more representative of developing countries.”
Then she drops the bomb, calling for a U.S. military mobilization, economic warfare and “color revolution” subversion:
“Xi’s nationalist rhetoric and assertive military posture pose a direct challenge to U.S. interests in the region and call for a vigorous response. Washington’s rebalance, or pivot, to Asia represents more than simply a response to China’s more assertive behavior. It also reflects the United States most closely held foreign policy values: freedom of the seas, the air, and space; free trade; the rule of law; and basic human rights. Without a strong pivot, the United States role as a regional power will diminish, and Washington will be denied the benefits of deeper engagement with many of the world’s most dynamic economies. The United States should therefore back up the pivot with a strong military presence in the Asia-Pacific to deter or counter Chinese aggression; reach consensus and then ratify the TPP; and bolster U.S. programs that support democratic institutions and civil society in such places as Cambodia, Malaysia, Myanmar, and Vietnam, where democracy is nascent but growing.”
Helga Zepp LaRouche opened today’s webcast by discussing “bright spots” in the strategic situation, coming from the diplomacy at the G20 summit and the Trump-Kim DMZ meeting. Yet the potential which is emerging to break from the unipolar world of geopolitics is threatened by the enemy of mankind, the British Empire, which is engaged in military provocations, against Iran and China, but more significantly, through its role in spreading pessimism about the future, through the imposition of anti-human Green ideology.
As the West is destroying itself, Asia is rising, and a key feature of Asia’s emergence is the emphasis on space exploration. China and India are both engaged in lunar projects, and Trump’s intent for the U.S. to be back on the Moon by 2024, defines a potential for broad scientific cooperation. This is the antidote to the pessimism of “limits to growth”, etc., around which the Green movement was launched—human creativity can always open new horizons, she emphasized, as Krafft Ehricke emphasized, with his visionary idea of the “extraterrestrial imperative”, and Lyndon LaRouche demonstrated in his writings.
We can use the 50th anniversary of the Moon landing to bring renewed optimism to people, something which is greatly feared by the neo-liberal imperial networks centered in London.
The extraordinary leak of cables from the British Ambassador in Washington to the Foreign Office in London makes clear that the Brits are still engaged in a broad campaign to destabilize the Trump administration, as they have been since his election. Helga Zepp LaRouche warned that Sir Kim Darroch’s statement that Trump may make another U-turn on Iran means that we must be alert for another False Flag provocation, designed to lead to a U.S. strike against Iran. The seizure of an Iranian tanker by British forces on a false pretense is an example of this kind of dangerous geopolitical game.
The presidential diplomacy at Osaka, is continuing. As a follow-up to the strategically significant Trump-Kim meeting at the DMZ, envoys from the U.S. and South Korea are coming to Europe to report on developments. Other activities include a meeting between Russian and U.S. officials on arms limitation talks; Putin’s visit to Italy; and new trade talks between U.S. and Chinese officials.
This is an extraordinary moment, which was prepared by the life work of Lyndon LaRouche, whose contributions include his prophetic vision for the future. Trump’s July 4 address captured this spirit, especially with his talk of the Moon-Mars mission. For this to be realized, the work of LaRouche must be studied by more people, who can then bring his ideas to those who do not yet know him. The campaign for his exoneration is an essential feature of making this happen.
Because of the disorder in international relations many new formats for discussion and dialogue are developed to figure out what to do about the dangerous world security situation. The Wanshou Dialogue for Global Security was started last year by the Chinese People’s Association for Peace and Disarmament, which is an organization founded in 1985 and is by far the largest civil society organization in China dedicated to Peace. It has a membership of 25 mass organizations in China and maintains contact with 350 international peace organization and institutes for strategic studies.
The Wanshou Dialogue is organized in coordination with the International Department of the Communist Party of China Central Committee whose Minister Song Tao and Vice Minister Wang Yajun were the highest Chinese representatives in the Dialogue. There were 27 International guests and 23 Chinese participants in the Dialogue which had the form a closed round table discussion.
The opportunity to participate in this very prestigious conference about Global Security came out of the blue, as a side effect of the activities of the Swedish Schiller Institute to promote BRI in Sweden. It was a great opportunity to meet and become friends with leaders of top Think Tanks in many important countries. Only a few of them had met or knew of the International Schiller Institute on other occasions.
Ulf Sandmark presents the Schiller Institute’s report, The New Silk Road Becomes the World Landbridge II to Yu Hongjun, Vice-President of the Chinese people´s Association for Peace and Disarmament and Former Vice-Minister of the International Department of the CPC Central Committee
The Schiller Institute expertise was called upon to contribute to the Panel 3 about “Emerging and New Technologies and Global Security.” Among those technologies are ABM, ASAT, UAV, Cyberwarfare and Artificial Intelligence. Here several speakers warned against the militarization of space and the plan from President Trump to unilaterally deploy space weapons. It was an opportunity to bring those technologies that could uplift the dialogue to a level where the Common Aims of Mankind would show the way out of the disastrous global security dilemmas.
Lyndon LaRouche’s Strategic Defense Initiative and the Strategic Defense of Earth were the obvious starting points for this intervention by the Schiller Institute and then also Space Exploration and Fusion Power development that would make it possible for a policy of Global Raw Materials Security. Also, the Chinese Belt & Road Initiative was brought in from the physical economic standpoint of developing a new infrastructure platform as a new international logistics machine. This made it possible to link up the development of the economy as a stabilizer of the Global Security and to bring in the Four Laws of LaRouche as the absolute strategic necessity to be implemented through a Four Powers agreement for a New Bretton Woods.
The Russia-India-China cooperation was brought into the Dialogue by a Russian scholar as the s.c. RIC-format (as in BRICS). Also, at the G20 meeting President Trump had had meetings individually with the other three leaders who also had their special RIC meeting on their own. These developments opened up for launching the Four Power proposal at the Wanshou Dialogue, which is to ask President Trump to join the leaders of the RIC Powers to form a group strong enough to challenge the currently dominating financial power of London and Wall Street which under its leadership of the modern form of the British empire is the force behind the disastrous policy geopolitical wars bringing the world to brink of nuclear war. Finally, the necessity for the immediate global security to bring into the international strategic discussion these strategic proposals by Lyndon LaRouche, made the call for his exoneration appropriate to bring into the 2nd Wanshou Dialogue.
This ten minute presentation was well received. Another participant responded about SDI in a very positive way and asked if the SDI negotiations could move out of the US – Russian format and also bring in other powers. Ulf Sandmark got the opportunity for a very short reply saying that the first step would be to immediately start the process for implementing the SDE, as it it is civilian and can build trust. Secondly the SDI proposal should be studied and updated by all leading powers in the world. Thirdly a fully implementable counterproposal should be proposed to President Trump as an alternative to his proposal for a Space Force.
Sandmark said that SDI was developed by Lyndon LaRouche and further promoted by the Schiller Institute. If we as private institute could develop the SDI proposal, then any other institute, certainly leading national security organizations, would be able to fully develop the concepts necessary to bring forward the SDI as a solution to eliminate the danger of nuclear extinction.
Also, this intervention was received well. The Chinese chairman of the panel half jokingly introduced the need for an “SDF” – a Strategic Defense of Face. He took up the example of a recent video where the face of President Trump had been manipulated and put into a video saying that he was immediately attacking Iran. These types of videos, although false, could if they were spread, trigger a real war, the chairman said. This warning against the new technologies that could be used in this way, had the effect to further familiarize the conference with the concepts of SDI, which then became a reference point in the later discussions.
The 2nd Wanshou Dialogue brought up many other questions and concerns for evaluation among the participants and for sure will continue to be a platform for discussion about Peace and Development also in the future.
Following a 50-minute meeting with the North Korea’s Chairman Kim Jong Un in the demilitarized zone (DMZ) that divides the North and South Korea in Panmunjom, President Donald Trump said today that teams from the United States and North Korea would start meetings “over the next two or three weeks” for talks on Pyongyang’s nuclear program. Trump said he was in no rush for a deal. Negotiators will “start a process and we’ll see what happens,” South China Morning Post quoted him.
The two held a short press conference, no questions, at their meeting, with Trump saying “Well, I want to thank you, Chairman. You hear the power of that voice. Nobody has heard that voice before. He doesn’t do news conferences, in case you haven’t heard. And this was a special moment.”
U.S. Special Representative for North Korea Stephen Biegun held secret discussions at the DMZ to set up the meeting between President Donald Trump and North Korean Chairman Kim Jong Un, media reports said.
“We’re not looking for speed, we’re looking to get it right,” Trump told reporters. “Speed is not the object… We want to see if we can do a really comprehensive, good deal. [But] a lot has already come up.”
“I would like to move away from the past and maintain good relations in the future,” Kim told Trump. Trump said he appreciated Kim’s presence, noting that many positive changes have happened. “The relationship we have developed has been so much,” Trump said. “This could be very a historic moment. I really enjoy being with you,” SCMP reported, which also pointed out that Trump is the first incumbent U.S. President to have visited the North Korean side of the border.
At a joint press conference in Seoul earlier in the day, South Korean President Moon Jae-in said the meeting at the border was crucial for the future of the denuclearization talks.