{"id":80216,"date":"2021-10-06T15:55:56","date_gmt":"2021-10-06T19:55:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/?p=80216"},"modified":"2021-10-06T15:55:57","modified_gmt":"2021-10-06T19:55:57","slug":"hamilton-china-and-larouche-economic-development-is-an-inalienable-right","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/el\/blog\/2021\/10\/06\/hamilton-china-and-larouche-economic-development-is-an-inalienable-right\/","title":{"rendered":"Hamilton, China, and LaRouche: Economic Development Is an Inalienable Right"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Those familiar with the fifty-plus-year forecasting practice and record of economist and statesman Lyndon LaRouche will perhaps recognize the deeper significance of the following statement, a significance probably unknown to the writer himself. In a London Guardian<\/em> October 1 op-ed entitled \u201cAmerica faces supply-chain disruption and shortages. Here\u2019s why,\u201d author Matt Stoller says: \u201c\u2026 what we\u2019re experiencing is also the net result of decades of policy choices starting in the 1970s that emphasized consumer sovereignty over citizenship. The consolidation of power into the hands of private equity financiers and monopolists over the last four decades has left us uniquely unprepared to manage a supply shock. Our hyper-efficient globalized supply chain, once romanticized by men like Tom Friedman in The World Is Flat, is the problem. Like the financial system before the 2008 crash, this kind of economic order hides its fragility. It seems to work quite well, until it doesn\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is not enough to point out that what seems to be a sudden seizing up of the trans-Atlantic goods-distribution system is not the product of the Covid pandemic of the past 20 months, but something more \u201clong-range.\u201d History is never \u201cobjective\u201d in that way. What was the agency that was at work here? Thirty-five years ago today, an \u201cevent\u201d occurred that, if omitted from current history, renders it impossible to fully understand what is happening now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

THE PRICE FOR CHANGING HISTORY<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lyndon LaRouche, in 2004, in a report titled \u201cThe Night They Came to Kill Me\u201d<\/a> explained the true, \u201csubjective\u201d nature of that \u201cobjective\u201d trans-Atlantic-wide economic devolution. “On October 6, 1986, a virtual army of more than four hundred armed personnel descended upon the town of Leesburg, Virginia, for a raid on the offices of EIR<\/em> and its associates, and also deployed for another, darker mission. The premises at which I was residing at that time were surrounded by an armed force, while aircraft, armored vehicles, and other personnel waited for the order to move in shooting. Fortunately, the killing did not happen, because someone with higher authority than the Justice Department Criminal Division head William Weld, ordered the attack on me called off. The forces readied to move in on me, my wife, and a number of my associates, were pulled back in the morning\u2026\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe 1973 campaign for my \u2018elimination,\u2019 the near-slaughter of Oct. 6-7, 1986, and the stubborn effort to exclude me from the debates now (in 2004), are each and all products of the same issue of my fight against the effort of certain liberal economists, and others, to put the world as a whole under the thumb of the policies of former Nazi Economics Minister Hjalmar Schacht.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe ultimate origin of these and related actions is not the U.S. Department of Justice, but a much higher authority than the U.S. government, the same assortment of Venetian-style international financier-oligarchical interests, and their associated law firms, which unleashed the wave of fascist dictatorships in continental Europe over the interval 1922-1945. The common feature of those international financier interests, then, back during 1922-1945, and today, is their present commitment to imposing Schachtian economics upon both the U.S.A. itself, and also on the world at large\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe shift of the U.S. and British economies away from the U.S. \u2018s leading role as the world\u2019s greatest producer nation, toward a pro-Schachtian, \u2019post- industrial\u2019 utopianism, was the hall- mark of the 1966-1968 Nixon campaign for the Presidency. The follies of this \u2018post-industrial\u2019 shift into wild-eyed monetarism, led the U.S. government to the point, that it must abandon its foolish post-Kennedy economic and cultural policies, or make exactly the choice I had warned that I feared they would make. Nixon\u2019s decision of August 15, 1971 made the march in the direction of ruin and fascist-like dictatorship inevitable.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Today, as in 1986 and 2004, there are two systems of choice before the world. There is the system of \u201cReesian choices,\u201d named after the Tavistock Institute\u2019s John Rawlings Rees, typified by the \u201cdevelopment policies\u201d\u2014policies of financial looting\u2014of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) toward the continent of Africa ever since the period after JFK\u2019s assassination. Then there is the \u201cAmerican System\u201d of \u201cHamiltonian\u201d choices, of what has recently been called \u201cwin-win cooperation\u201d by the nation of China. For example, when China\u2019s Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Geng Shuang<\/a>, recently told that body that the international community should \u201cspare no effort in humanitarian assistance and post-disaster reconstruction\u201d toward Haiti, he opened a \u201cstrategic flank in the mind,\u201d that is a far more powerful idea than that of the self-doomed \u201cOperation Orcus\/Global Britain\u201d military adventure hurtling to its strategic doom in the trans-Pacific theater.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

COMPLETING HAMILTON\u2019S UNFINISHED \u201cHAITI MISSION\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The United States used to think that way. In 1861, the United States, under Abraham Lincoln, dispatched Ambassador Anson Burlingame as diplomatic emissary to a China then subjugated by the British Empire through the Second Opium War. Today, in 2021, China attempts to reach a United States whose leadership and institutional structure, as well as cultural institutions, have now also been subjugated, and largely devastated by the same \u201cOpium War\u201d method\u2014though this time, not external force, but seduction through Winston Churchill\u2019s \u201cEmpire of the Mind\u201d was used. The United States was induced, through the Tavistock Institute and its Frankfurt School subsidiary, to destroy itself, to de-industrialize itself, to reject scientific progress itself, and, now, to depopulate itself. The just-announced proposal, however, for a joint, international mission to defend the sovereignty of the nation of Haiti from the international drug mafias that now subjugate it, by demonstrating, through construction of ports, rail, and power, including nuclear and thermonuclear power, that \u201ceconomic development is a human right,\u201d if accepted, can bring the United States itself back to its senses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The LaRouche proposal for the emergency reconstruction of Haiti<\/a>, introducing the higher-order concept of development corridors and an ” economic platform” into one of the poorest areas of the world, provides, as with Helga Zepp-LaRouche\u2019s Afghanistan proposal, and especially if successfully advocated by a group of Americans representing the Committee for the Coincidence of Opposites, including those that hail from Haiti, a way for America to return to its previous Hamilton\/Lincoln\/Roosevelt outlook, that Frederick Douglass, America\u2019s ambassador to Haiti, represented in his living person.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The uncorrected flaw in the American Revolution was, as all know, the inability to resolve the Africa chattel slavery matter at the beginning of the creaton of the nation, largely because of the influence of John Locke and his Royal Africa Company on the constitution of South Carolina, and other Southern states. But slavery was not the desired system, originally, even in the Southern colonies. Auguste Levasseur, Secretary to Lafayette, recounted in 1824:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIn about the year 1680, the General Assembly of the State of Virginia requested of the parent state that it finally put an end to this commerce in human flesh, infamous and unnecessary in the future, since now the population was numerous enough and active enough to cultivate a land that required only the lightest work to reward the tiller richly. Other Colonies repeated this cry of justice and philanthropy, but the parent country was callous and responded only by this atrocious resolution of Parliament: The importation of Slaves in America is too lucrative for the Colonies to be able to insist that England renounce it forever.<\/em> This response was accompanied by threats to which it was necessary to succumb since they were in no condition to resist them. Nonetheless, the General Assembly renewed several times its demand\u2026.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton\u2019s support for the Haitian Revolution, and his co-authorship of Haiti\u2019s Constitution, flowed from his notion of \u201cArtificial labor\u201d as expressed in his 1790 Report on the Subject of Manufactures. Is Thomas Jefferson\u2019s then-opposition to Haiti\u2019s self-government consistent with the now-present United States policy, itself opposite to that of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, of allowing, tolerating, and in effect aiding in the never-ending torture of that population, through refusing to take down the \u201cDope Inc.\u201d financial oligarchy that dominates it as surely as did the slave-masters of 1791? China, which has, since the Bandung conference of 1955, and now even despite the fact that it is not diplomatically recognized by the government of Haiti, insisted that economic development is a human right for that nation. It has now posed to the entire international community that the same problem China has successfully tackled and solved internally\u2014the eradication of poverty\u2014be solved worldwide. The Global Development Initiative premiered by Xi Jinping at this United Nations session has now placed \u201ceconomic development as a human right\u201d on the world table. Executive Intelligence Review<\/em> has answered the United Nations, and the world, by providing a policy orientation for the now-distracted United States. The plan for Haiti invokes, implicitly, FDR\u2019s Four Freedoms, and, explicitly, LaRouche\u2019s Four Economic Laws, to chart a way forward, not only for Haiti, not only for the Caribbean, but by means of eradicating poverty through economic cooperation, for \u201ceverywhere in the world.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cYOUR DEATH WILL SAVE THE PLANET\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is only one problem. The financial neo-Malthusians intend to use the illiterate argument that \u201cnatural law\u201d is above human rights, to introduce what Fred Wills used to call \u201cthe doctrine of regrettable necessity\u201d as the means to argue that billions will have to go away to save the planet. The bill is beginning to come in for this sophistry, in astronomical gas and electricity prices, hyperinflation, supply chain breakdowns, cuts in living standards, and drops in life expectancy that, while blamed on the coronavirus pandemic, preceded it. As stated by Klaus Schwab in the book Stakeholder Capitalism<\/em>:” The same force that helps people escape from poverty and lead a decent life is the one that is destroying the livability of our planet for future generations. The emissions that lead to climate change are not just the result of a selfish generation of industrialists or western baby boomers. They are the consequence of the desire to create a better future for oneself.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Except that Schwab isn\u2019t actually referring in this passage to \u201cwestern baby boomers,\u201d but to both the Chinese policies for the development of African nations, and the desire of African nations to create a better future. As the Club of Rome\u2019s Alexander King wrote: \u201cThe real enemy, then, is humanity itself.\u201d Especially the \u201chigh birth rate\u201d in Africa\u2014too many African \u201ccarbon footprints.\u201d So, regrettably, Africans must be reduced in their numbers, by any means necessary, in defense of natural law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

China\u2019s calling the attention of the world to the crisis in Haiti at the United Nations, seen from the standpoint of the proposal in Executive Intelligence Review<\/em> written by Richard Freeman and Cynthia Rush, places the United States in the position to choose, not the Tavistock choice method, but the \u201cwin-win\u201d method which was always the essential characteristic of the American System which, as Henry Carey put it, \u201cis the only one ever devised the tendency of which was that of elevating vehicle equalizing the condition of man throughout the world.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Those familiar with the fifty-plus-year forecasting practice and record of economist and statesman Lyndon LaRouche will perhaps recognize the deeper significance of the following statement, a significance probably unknown to the writer himself. In a London Guardian October 1 op-ed entitled \u201cAmerica faces supply-chain disruption and shortages. Here\u2019s why,\u201d author Matt Stoller says: \u201c\u2026 what […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":34,"featured_media":55889,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[39,639,632,753,436,726,626],"tags":[842],"class_list":["post-80216","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-allgemein-es","category-global-diplomacy","category-green-new-deal","category-haiti","category-hzl","category-lyndon-larouche-legacy","category-committee-for-the-coincidence-of-opposites","tag-lang-en"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/el\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/80216","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/el\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/el\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/el\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/34"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/el\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=80216"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/el\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/80216\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":80221,"href":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/el\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/80216\/revisions\/80221"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/el\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/55889"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/el\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=80216"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/el\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=80216"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/schillerinstitute.com\/el\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=80216"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}