It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What do people think of Lynden LaRouche,? and would he be a good President?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 03:24 PM
link   
I have a question, "what do people think of Lyndon H. LaRouche"?and why
, I've been reading some of speeches, writings and watched some audio-videos of him and he seams to talk alot of sence to me though I'm not American I think I would vote for him for prezz

this is a quote from one of his web sites
LaRouche is the only qualified candidate for U.S. President with a political movement representing what Franklin D. Roosevelt referred to as the "forgotten man," who is now facing ruin in the ongoing Global Depression and the Neo-con drive for perpetual war.

Lyndon Larouche in 2004

Executive Intelligence Review




posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 05:17 PM
link   
20 views and no response, can I get points for that maybe 1 LOL just kidding.
Is it no one cares, or is no one knows?
I'm suprised no one has even flamed me yet ?


[edit on 28-6-2004 by Sauron]



posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Oh, i've met him. He is a moron. Well, not so much moron as a lunatic with a dash of stupid.

If LaRouche, Kerry, Bush, and a Monkey named Binky all ran in 2004. I'd vote for Binky.



posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quest
Oh, i've met him. He is a moron. Well, not so much moron as a lunatic with a dash of stupid.

If LaRouche, Kerry, Bush, and a Monkey named Binky all ran in 2004. I'd vote for Binky.


that could be said of Bush as well, for that matter all of them
why do you think that,



posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quest
Oh, i've met him. He is a moron. Well, not so much moron as a lunatic with a dash of stupid.

If LaRouche, Kerry, Bush, and a Monkey named Binky all ran in 2004. I'd vote for Binky.


Not if Lyndons TV hypnotics got to you first



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 03:47 AM
link   
If you render LaRouche stupid when talking to him, i'd like to hear you dissect his views. I've read massive amounts of LaRouche material, listened to plenty of speeches and i steadily follow the newsflow on www.larouchpac.com . He is VERY knowledgeable and knows intricate history by heart. If there is one candidate for president that could change the world as we know it to the better it is LaRouche.

You can hate me now.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:00 AM
link   
I have not read a great deal of his work, but my experiences with his followers are... uncomfortable.

It felt like a manipulative cult trying to pull me in through a plethora of tactics. There is no other choice than LaRouche. They kept calling me. Plus the pamphlets with Bush as the antichrist is kind of strange.

All I know other than that is he has been saying a big disaster will happen in August (The "Guns of August") every year for a few years now.

That was my experience at least.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 05:10 AM
link   
I hear ya. I remeber the "guns of august" from last year. Allthough it was more of a warning than a "prediction". If i shall be his advocate here, i would argue that he intentionally makes these warnings to STOP such an event from happening. This may not be a real threat ever time, but i would be cruel of him NOT to warn about it, to be able to LET them happen, proving himself right.

About his cadres, i've met their swedish counterpart which probably differs a bit. They sure do have a "gung ho" attitude to orginizing and they're very firm as to what needs to be done. they are very oriented by Lyndon LaRouche himself. Sometimes he will get this idea about something (myspace and facebook beeing the latest target) and then magically all the youth will hammer that iassue until he redirect them. I went to some meetings here in Sweden, which was kinda cool, they had newsbriefings about world events through their lens. They sure feel pushed to raise money and to work hard, thats for sure. But i really hope they agree with most of it themselves, AND have some critical thinking left.

The main reason why i got interested in him/them was the main themes of his ideology.

He's a "neo-platonic" which means he is anti-materialist.

He believes it to be necessary to understand astronomy/physics ALONG with monotheistic creation.

He fights agains globalism, fascism, corporatism, relativism, existensialism.
He argues against the sex drugs and rock & roll culture, green extremists(global warming) and post-industrial utopians.

He is an avid promotor of Plato, classical drama/tragedy, Bach and Beethoven and the classical method of composition and classical arts in general.

He believes that man must colonize space, starting with Mars, as the logical continuation of mans progress and power over the planet and the universe.

He dispices Nietsche and Heidegger, Russel and Crowley.

he thinks Newtonian physics are silly while praising Kepler, Riemann, Gauss and vernadski.

Other referances are: Gandhi, M.L King, Socrates, Shakespear, Pythagoras, Solomon of athens and Einstein.

So there is a quick run-through of why I like the guy. I'll admit - he had me with the Mars idea!



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 10:56 AM
link   
I've read alot of his writings and have followed him for a long time. Back in the '80's when AIDS had just appeared, he advocated locking up all homosexuals so AIDS wouldn't be spread.
He has some good ideas, but he also has some very strange ones. I don't think I'd trust him as president.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Haha, yes i heard about that. But c'mon that is a bit old. But yes he can surely be a bit categorical most of the time! I mean they now fight for making FPS-games illegal, which seem a bit... Over the top? He also praised some arab country (Syria?) who had blocked the usage of Facebook. Instead of rushing to forbid this and that he should aim to inspire the population to "the right thing". So yeah, maybe not president. Better off as an advisor perhaps? This is what he aims at, should hillary be president.

I personally think he is making a risky leap of faith as he believes hillary to be "quite sound". He does NOT approve of dr. Paul and his anarchic economic liberalism. Time will tell if he is betting on the right horse.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 01:03 AM
link   
Thank you, swedish guy, for contributing your info about Mr. Larouche. I personally have read much of his works, and find them fascinating. I like the ideas he supports for the most part.

He also loves Friedrich Schiller, who wrote some extremely important and powerful literature when the 19th century began.

Larouche is a proponent of FDR and Lincoln, as well as the "American System" of industrialization

His economic policy is excellent, as he proposes a new "Bretton woods" or fixed exchange system, he contends that the banks should be kept open, but put through bankruptcy. he wants to end the WTO and the Federal Bank. He also suggests a 2 tier interest system, to discourage speculation

He calls the NWO the british anglo-dutch finanaciers, using the venitian Imperial system. He hates Free Trade.

He says we're headed for a global breakdown crisis in regards to economic systems, and thereby political systems... He says we're headed for a new dark age, or at least a great depression. He wants a global revolution instead, and i agree!

their agency is basically a massive 5 continent intelligence agency, and their funding may be questionable.. but i like them because they share their well researched intelligence..

someone said recently that he may be baiting us with 80% truth, and 20% rat poison.. i dont see any rat poison, and even if its true, i think its better than the 50-100% rat poison we're fed by pretty much every other source out there!!

i actually came here to see if anyone had anything bad to say, like perhaps what the 20% rat poison is, or what their hidden intention is..

still waiting on that..

maybe someone can give me some tips for how to make sure i dont get too caught up in a movement i dont know enough about, or what are the warning signs of a group i should steer clear of?

to be honest, i am 99% sure this thing is legit, and i really want to get behind it and support the refolution..

help me out!



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by WinstonSmith911
 


Your observation "a 5 continent intelligence network" caught my attention. The LaRouche organization certainly supports much excellent research and analysis.

If one becomes aware of something serious going on it seems a good bet to check the Larouche site for information and more importantly, context.



posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 12:04 AM
link   
I signed up for his movement... at least gave them my phone number. At first they started making sense... purely speaking about economics. Then they got into colonizing space, and talking about how evil AI is for some reason. They seem to despise random things that go against any of the philosophies larouche has. I might agree with some aspects of his economic policy, but avoid this group. They are seriously nothing but a bunch of teenagers brainwashed to do Larouches bidding. It's very obvious he uses them to try to make himself a real political figure, which is never going to happen. I could go on and on about this group and how stupid 90% of the # they've said to me is, but I'll leave it at- they are a joke.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 02:31 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthDweller
 


The issue here is that LaRouche is never going to be President. He's been running since 1976, he has a criminal conviction hanging over his head, besides he's too old, 86 now, and finally decided to call it quits by not running in 2008.

In the last election, 2004, he ran in, he failed to get more than 1% of the vote in any state that had his name on the ballot.

He has no real movement or following in the United States, nor any significant supporters or influence in governement.

But i agree, he could bring about "real" change, like that other forgotten candidate Ron Paul. Except Ron Paul actually does have a movement and gets frequent coverage in the national news media, unlike LaRouche.



posted on Jan, 8 2009 @ 11:39 PM
link   
I decided to write this email to attempt to relate to you all what the Larouche movement is really about.. I am doing this because, without standing to gain anything, I truly believe in many of the principles and ideas they represent. I think they offer a few things that are not only important, but very rarely found in the sorts of sources most of us come across. Those sources tend to be very pessimistic, and do not inspire hope for the future, nor appropriate action. I am also aware that there is much controversy and disinformation out there which I think unfairly defames the movement. I suppose it is understandable if that which poses a serious threat to those in power will be attacked the most harshly by the media/legal system they control.

I will attempt to give you an idea of what the Larouche movement is trying to accomplish. this is a sophisticated, intellectual, and philosophical movement. Currently, it's intelligence arm is perhaps the best of any private agency in the world. It spans 5 continents, and is truly international in scope. The goal is to defeat 'free trade,' 'globalization' pushing, anglo-dutch-saudi liberal financial cartels which are causing this crisis; and replace them with a community of principle among sovereign nations, with a fixed exchange system, leading to a promotion of the general welfare of the people so that a modern renaissance can pull the world out of a decent into a dark age collapse. They work to interact at all levels, including the governments of the most powerful countries to implement policies that will free nations and their citizens from slavery and economic collapse (in different forms and degrees in different regions) to which it is bound.

Their view is that for hundreds, even thousands of years, there has been a struggle going on between the ruling class - proponents of the system which is empirical in nature.. From Babylon to Egypt, Rome, and now the British empire - history has repeated itself. We have seen this system of empire, colonialism, and oppression many times. Scientifically, physically and economically, the oligarchs, aristocrats, plutocrats, conquerors, emperors, and monarchs have controlled the masses, and manipulated everything they could to increase their control and wealth at the expense of the population. Larouche is the most learned human being I know of on the topic of history, and I think his insight is most informed and brilliant. He points out the fact that history tells us where we came from, and where we are going. He points out the important breakthroughs and setbacks in the fight against the tyranny that is the predatory system of empire. He gives credit to the great thinkers and revolutionaries of physical science and philosophy that have risked their lives to create and protect the vision of a free nation-state system which can end the tyranny of empire.

What Larouche proposes, is to follow in the footsteps of the greatest empire slayers of history. This is in the tradition of the American and French revolutions, which didn't quite stick, and were ultimately subverted and killed. Luckily, their ideas live on! America was founded upon the purest of principles. It represented a rejection of the neo-feudalistic 'free trade system.' The American system, was created with emphasis on infrastructure and science. The great idea was to build a network of nations, which did not have to pay tax to the British maritime empire, which controlled the trade networks and finance. A system which was not monopolized by the British controlled, and inefficient naval shipping system for trade. Instead, America built an inter-oceanic railway system. The effect of this was that every city that linked to this rail system was directly connected to every other city on that rail. Imagine if every city in the world was hooked up to this 'internet' of trade! It would break the control over global commerce which could previously only be done by sea.



posted on Jan, 8 2009 @ 11:40 PM
link   
If today, that intercontinental railway system were 'replicated' in Eurasia, South America and Africa, there could be no global empire.

Freeing the human mind, and developing technology vastly improves the physical economy of a nation by making for a much higher energy flux density – more work could be done with less effort from the population. This system made America, Japan and Germany the most industrious and progressive countries in the world overnight! The empire was on the verge of being destroyed by this system. This is why they manipulated events to start most of the wars we've seen ever since (war, and balkanization disable nations from carrying out plans in their own interest, instead they depend on loans from financiers, along with conditions.) This is why they killed Lincoln, because a nation is only as strong as its leader.

I think the private centralized banking system, run by trillionaires from London is well known by people that talk to me, so I won't get into those details, but Larouche would say we need to have a 2 tiered credit system run by a nationalized central bank (the country prints its own money) whereby low interest (like 2% or less) is charged for infrastructure and scientific projects (the bigger and more internationally cooperative the better, because such projects require peace and prosperity.) And speculative loans should be charged much higher interest. Speculators, such as hedge fund managers, derivatives brokers, and futures market gamblers are the reason for the mess we are in today. Furthermore, since the early 70's, our standard of living has been steadily going down, ever since the Bretton Woods agreement was breeched.

Bretton Woods was an agreement for fixed exchanges (put forth by FDR) between nations, which made it so that if a loan was made, repayment would be made with equal value to what was leant. Now, with a floating currency, America can just print up half a trillion dollars and send it to China to pay down a debt, but the value of the currency is inflated. This means China won't be lending to them again to finance countless wars. A floating currency also means that mega speculators like George Soros have the ability to throw billions of dollars at a currency, and crash an entire economy like the case of Malaysia where he did it. This means the banksters can threaten, and dictate the economic policy of any small nation, and thereby extract the maximum amount from the population.
This is why we have 3 BILLION people on our planet living on less than (equivalent to) $2 a day, and half of those living on half of that! This problem compounds when the world economy weakens, and suddenly we don't have any slaves to make the products we use. The global food crisis (thanks in part to free trade and the WTO) is causing rising food prices which will affect us all. Soon, we could have no jobs, a global carbon and cattle tax, rampant disease, worldwide war, and collapsed global economy. There is a very real possibility of the world falling into a new dark age if the current antiquated systems aren't replaced. If now, isn't the time to act, I don't know what is.

Philosophically, Larouche teaches us that the universe is not just a vast collection of infinitesimal points, whose random interactions have spawned the complex universe we are experiencing. Larouche suggests that our existence can NOT be reduced to mathematics, or mere equations. That the average human mind is capable of unlocking the principles that govern our universe, and those principles are knowable. He tells us, that contrary to the Malthusian ideology propagated by empiricists like Al Gore, Prince Phillip, Darwin (who was a student of Malthus) and Huxley, we have the ability to foresee a limitation imposed by our resources, and work to solve that problem before it affects us (unlike animals). Economics is the ability of a population to reproduce itself without sacrificing a standard of living.



posted on Jan, 8 2009 @ 11:41 PM
link   
If there isn't enough fuel, or food – just invent a new type of fuel, and irrigate new farmlands!
Empiricists would tell you that the 3rd world should not be industrialized because the world's resources are limited, and we are overpopulated.. Or they might tell them it is because they would accelerate global warming, but whatever excuse they use, it is so they can continue to pillage those countries without giving anything back to them. Their system is predatory in nature, in that they believe in 'survival of the fittest' where you plunder your neighbor to increase your own fortune.
I am truly excited to be going through the process of learning how to confidently think for myself, and how to create new ideas and make discoveries. I feel like a kid again, as I had been deprived of these joys by the establishment for most of my life. No matter what happens, anyone with a more developed mind will have a much more prosperous future, and greater ability to lead others and create the ideas that will shape the world in a positive manor. The philosophical concepts I have learned recently, are very profound, and self evident.

If anyone wants to discuss any of these or any notions, I'm always open to hearing another perspective, because the philosophy of the most conscious thinkers should always be to prepare oneself to abandon any belief when sufficient evidence suggests that to be correct.

PS: The belief that 'capitalism' is the problem appears to be a bit of a misunderstanding. The capitalism of today, is not the true American system, it is actually the Adam Smith system, which is rooted in the British Empire. They like to co-opt good things, and ride along like a parasite. Same with environmentalism, spirituality, banking, media, and their version of the 'new Bretton (Brittain) Woods.'


PPS: There are also some thing which I don't necessarily agree with: I have reserves on the idea of a bigger government with more rules.. I'm unsure on Larouche's advocacy of FDR, who in my opinion did some very good things, and some bad. I've also never been a fan of Hillary or SecDef Gates, but I do respect them if they do in fact go public with the aforementioned policies. I suppose to get anywhere in politics you have to do some sleazy things and ally with some not so honest folks. What matters is what they do now. Drugs, is another debatable topic, I think that if they were legalized it would eliminate the crime associated with the black market economy, and reduce disease and addiction by making it a socially acceptable and treatable problem. Larouche's perspective is that the drug trade is run by crooks, finances their other crimes and zombifies the people.

The most important video out there in my opinion is Firewall: www.larouchepac.com/firewall



posted on Jan, 10 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sauron
I have a question, "what do people think of Lyndon H. LaRouche"?and why
, I've been reading some of speeches, writings and watched some audio-videos of him and he seams to talk alot of sence to me though I'm not American I think I would vote for him for prezz

this is a quote from one of his web sites
LaRouche is the only qualified candidate for U.S. President with a political movement representing what Franklin D. Roosevelt referred to as the "forgotten man," who is now facing ruin in the ongoing Global Depression and the Neo-con drive for perpetual war.

Lyndon Larouche in 2004

Executive Intelligence Review



Ex-con, anti-semites don't get to be President of the United States.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Sauron
 


Personally I think that Lyndon LaRouche is a nut.

I remember back in the 1980's when he was running for President on the Libertarian Ticket. He ran a nationwide infomercial about his candidacy on national television. In his infomercial he spliced in dozens still frames of flag burnings, starving kids, disasters, etc. They were intended to be subliminal messages, to MAKE you vote for him.

The problem is that the FCC would not allow him to put these images in as single frames, so they would flash up on the screen for about 1/2 second. It was really distracting and annoying. It also had the opposite effect. After that I would never have voted for LaRouche, even if he was the only one on the ballot and he was paying 200 bucks a vote.

The reason is that I saw a man who had no confidence in the American People. Did he really think that he could mezmerize us and thus win the White House? I saw him for the conman that he is.

I think that LaRouche did huge damage to the Libertarian Party. He is one of the main reasons that the Libertarian movement has not taken hold in this country. It's too bad too, there are a lot of Libertarian positions that I agree with. He has since left the Libertarian Party and it has slowly been able to put the LaRouche years behind it.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 10:34 PM
link   
Well, his claim that the Queen of England runs the drug trade, and that the Beatles "were a product shaped according to British Psychological Warfare Division specifications", doesn't really help his cause.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join