Sunday, April 21, 2019

Interview: Lyndon LaRouche says Hillary Clinton was "dumped. She is not anything, she is a dump."

Editor's note: This interview was originally published in February 2017.

This is the third of five articles spanning my discussion with Lyndon LaRouche. The first and second parts of our conversation are available on-line.  
Story by Joseph Ford Cotto 
People have said a great many things about Lyndon LaRouche over the years. 
To be fair, he has shared more than a bit about his own views -- and why not? At 94, he has a lifetime of experience in traversing the maze of politics, economics, science, and cultural pursuits that makes our world go 'round.
While LaRouche's claim to fame is principally of a fiscal nature -- his LaRouche-Reimann Method is perhaps the most accurate economic forecasting model yet devised -- the man has delved into so many different facets of the human experience that one can legitimately elevate him to polymath status.
Whether one should read his views on classical music or space technology, it is a wonder that a single fellow is capable of holding so much knowledge about such a diverse array of topics. Even in the case that his views are found to be disagreeable, it must be admitted that he knows his stuff.
The child of an independent-minded New England Quaker family who served in World War II, LaRouche was imbued with a deep sense of purpose from a young age. Having interviewed the man on several occasions and reviewed his biography, it seems clear to me that, for the immense complexity of his life's work, the overarching goal is raising the bar of civilization so as many people as possible enjoy a more-than-decent standard of living.
Of course, certain voices will point out that he ran into a financial snafu with the federal government, for which he did some jail time, or that the LaRouche organization is run with military-like efficiency -- something starkly unusual for civilian politics.
I say that nobody is perfect. I also say that, given his age and multitude of life lessons, he should be deemed a living historical monument. Special emphasis is due the word 'living' as LaRouche's movement is arguably stronger than ever, thanks to the Internet, and the finely-tuned publishing empire he built ensures that his views will remain in circulation for quite awhile. 
LaRouche spoke with me about several timely issues. Some of our conversation is included below.


Joseph Ford Cotto: What do you anticipate the primary legacy of Trump's election will be; specifically as far as American conservatism is concerned?

Lyndon LaRouche: It will be the revival of the traditional U.S. American System of Economics, which will now have a better chance of succeeding given that other nations are moving in the direction of those principles, like with win-win cooperation with China and the Belt and Road Initiative, where over 70 nations are using American System principles.

Cotto: For the sake of our national interest, was Trump's victory preferable to a Hillary Clinton win?

LaRouche: Ha! There is no comparison. She is dumped. She is not anything, she is a dump.


Yesterday, I included some of a conversation I had with LaRouche going on four years ago. We were discussing the downfall of Detroit, a happening which bore many a cautionary tale for the entire United States. The rest of his words from that exchange describe what might have become of our country should the 2016 election have gone differently.

In America, few industries drove twentieth century prosperity more than automobile manufacturing. Over the last few decades, however, free trade agreements and incentives from other countries allowed what were once solidly domestic jobs to become globalized.

“In the midst of the destruction of the automobile and related manufacturing, for a shift to production in Asia (most notably), there appears to have been no regard for the effects of the catastrophic impacts of the consequent collapses of both the incomes and per-capita productivity of the people [in] states such as Michigan,” LaRouche elaborates. “As a consequence of shifts away from actual production of substantial wealth, to mere services - - increasingly only nominally 'productive services' --  a massively deadly condition has struck down many of the  communities and their populations, with more pouring in on the hapless.

“It is not possible, even as a matter of simply physical reality, to separate an increase of poverty in one sector from the consequent loss of productivity in other sectors of the same economy.  The increase of the impoverished becomes ultimately the poverty of the once-rich.

“The result, is the collapse of the actually net margin of production of wealth of large regions of the United States.”

There is more to this situation than meets the eye. LaRouche notes “that the physical-economic, as distinct from merely nominal productivity of the U.S. population, per capita, has been plummeting” and “the per-capita net income  (accounting for net inflation) continues to plummet, such that entire states are now faced with a combination of accelerating  fatality rates, and so on.”

That scenario is all too true in much of Michigan. The state itself is losing population, and not for the better. As many of its manufacturing centers close, Michiganders are left with decreasing, if not scarce, means of support. Detroit is simply the most radical example of this.

Nonetheless, LaRouche does believe that things can get better.

“The obvious remedy,” he claims, “is a rapid return to increased per-capita productivity: much less Wall Street, and much more serious production, and also the educational standards to match the required increase in rates of the productivity and the education which such productivity demands.

“Otherwise there is very, very little for the collected assembly of human beings known as the citizens of Michigan.”