In Search of Universal Love

  Rolf A. F. Witzsche

Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. 
A 35 Year Struggle to Protect and Uplift Civilization

In this fight for truth, justice, and a return to the principles of civilization, such as peace through economic development, respect for the sovereignty of nations, dialog among cultures to head off a "clash of civilizations war", etc., LaRouche stands virtually alone among America's civil institutions as one of the most slandered politicians in American political history. His campaign for the Democratic Party nomination for the U.S. Presidency cuts deep, and necessarily bluntly, into America's imperial paradigms in which the present drive for war is anchored that looms with potential consequences that effect the whole of humanity. 

In this sense, LaRouche stands at the center of the crossroads in modern history and in the future development of mankind. At 80 years of age, his struggle to uplift humanity into the age of a new renaissance, culminates a 35 year long struggle to expose the roots of fascism and imperialism that have made the last century the worst century of war and cultural destruction in human history which now threatens to end civilization. 

His commitment to protect all nations on this planet, and civilization as a whole, makes LaRouche one of the most remarkable men of this century, and the most influential in terms of what has already been achieved by him for the betterment of mankind.

Rolf Witzsche



by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
March 13, 2003

The increasing rage, from around the world, against the
tyrannical follies of the current U.S. Bush Administration, tends
to assume the form of a delusion among the U.S.A.'s critics which
could be as deadly to the world at large as the folly of the neo-
conservative Chickenhawks' present control over U.S. domestic and
foreign policies. The reasons for such blunders by some
Europeans should have been obvious.

The rising popular delusion among the U.S.A.'s foreign
critics falsely attributes to combination of the President's
unilateralism and his Chickenhawk captors' imperialism to a
specifically U.S. origin. What befuddles the Europeans, and
others, thus far, is that the origin of both the presently
onrushing collapse of the world monetary-financial system and the
imperial-war impulse, is the virtual takeover of the U.S.
economy, the President, and the forces exerting top-down control
over both political parties, is the successful importing of the
Anglo-Dutch Liberal system of William of Orange and John Locke
into a presently controlling feature of post-1964-1971 U.S.
economic practice.

To emphasize the crucial point, what affrights the world
about the U.S. today is the lawful fruit of the same liberalism
which is still a controlling influence within Europe (and other
locations) today.

For related reasons, there are self-deluded ideologues
within Europe, as Angela Merkel's visit to the U.S.A. reflected
some leading circles in Germany's CDU-CSU circles, who assume
that the catastrophic aftermath of a successful attack upon
Iraq, will weaken U.S. power to the degree that Europe would then
have more leg-room for expressing its own specific
self-interests. Germans of that persuasion, for example, are to
be compared to the deluded state of Marie Antoinette's "Then, let
them eat cake." The combination of the actual unleashing of the
control of U.S. policy by the nuclear-weapons utopians of the
U.S.A. and Israel, would mean prompt descent into an early dark
age for Europe, and sundry other parts of the world. Only a
European leader in a towering state of terror-driven denial would
draw a contrary conclusion.

Face reality. The neo-conservative Chickenhawks, as
typified by Wolfowitz and Perle, are essentially neo-Nietzschean
fascists of the Leo Strauss, Carl Schmitt, Martin Heidegger,
Michael Ledeen, et al. variety. They are, like Adolf Hitler in
the bunker, doomsday utopians, enjoying a narrow but nasty base
of support in the ranks of the illiterate unwashed Armageddon
fetishists. They are not representative of a financial
aristocracy, although not lacking the propensity to steal, but of
a caste of feudal lackeys, which has taken control over the
affairs of their masters' estates. The notable obsession of this
pack of lackeys is their devotion to Bertrand Russell's doctrine
of conduct of preventive nuclear war as a way of terrifying the
world into submitting to a utopian world government of the
qualities proposed by Russell and H. G. Wells. Their gospel is
H. G. Wells' 1930s movie, "Things to Come."

What is to be observed in Washington, is this lackey class
(including Conrad Black's 2004 "Bull Moose" candidates McCain and
Lieberman, and Black's resident lunatic, Laurent Murawiec)
seizing control of policy-shaping from the hands of the
professionals and the financier circles themselves, just as
Hitler took power from the hands of those such as the backers of
Hjalmar Schacht.

The issue of war against Iraq thus packs into a single
package President George "Hindenburg" Bush's putting some
Chickenhawk Hitlers into power on the pretext of the Reichstag
arson. Fools greeted Hitler's appointment by Hindenburg as a
temporary affront to political good taste. Acquiescence to the
alleged "inevitability" of the Iraq war, should remind us of the
foolish German generals of 1933-1934 who abandoned Chancellor von
Schleicher for "reasons" no worse than those of Europeans
prepared to accept the "inevitability" of an Iraq war today.
Those German generals, among others, paid dearly for that mistake
on the matter of von Schleicher, in July 1944. The cost to the
world today, would be far worse.

In other words, the proverbial "bottom line" is, that there
is no hope for the world in the near-term, perhaps for
generations yet to come, except on the condition that certain
sweeping, axiomatic changes are effected within the U.S.
political system about now. There exists no alternative pathway
to security for any part of the world.

In fact, there are two most crucial implications of the kind
of denial of reality we discover among relevant Europeans. One
is the set of points just outlined above. The second is, that
the continued influence of Anglo-Dutch Liberalism in Europe, as
in Angela Merkel's CDU or Westerwelle's FDP, prevents the victims
of the delusion from considering the urgently needed adoption of
Franklin-Roosevelt-like economic-recovery measures. The latter
delusion prevents Europeans who are victims of that ideology from
recognizing that only political overturn of that form of
Liberalism in the U.S.A. -- the so-called "American Tory" form of
the dupes of John Locke, would free the U.S.A. from the deadly
form of combined unilateralism and Chickenhawk imperialism
menacing the planet today.

How Liberalism Created Fascism
by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
March 14, 2003

Lyndon's FDR vs. Joe's Hitler
by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
March 14, 2003

The Essential Fraud of Leo Strauss
by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
March  5, 2003
Recent coverage in the German press and media has highlighted the role of Leo Strauss, a German émigré to the United States in 1938, as the mentor of today's warmongering 'Chickenhawks' in Washington. Strauss, who taught at the University of Chicago, promoted the fascist philosophy of Nazi apologist Martin Heidegger.

       In a new statement, LaRouche discusses the role of Strauss and his co-thinkers in perverting the meaning of Plato's dialogues and how those dialogues are a powerful tool for developing a true science of the human mind.

Iraq Is A Fuse, But Cheney Built The Bomb
Statement by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
September 22, 2002

Iraq Is A Fuse, But The Fuse Has A Bomb
Statement by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
September 20, 2002

The Truth About 'Pollard II'
And The Iraq War Threat

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
September 11, 2002

The Pollard Affair Never Ended!  - Exclusive Revelation by LaRouche. 09/07/2002 - background to the now breaking Perle corruption scandal and its root in the Israeli "Clean Break" (1996) policy paper that Perle wrote for Benjamin Netanyahu, that mapped out war against Iraq, Syria, and Iran, and abrogating the Oslo Accords, and the personal financial interests in the carrying out of this (private) war against Iraq.

More on

A crucial element in LaRouche's intervention to save civilization is his long term commitment to a positive process for generating peace that is focused on creating a New Renaissance. This can only be achieved by focusing on the scientific development of the cognitive processes of the human mind with advanced education and classical literature, music, and humanist culture. The International LaRouche movement is focused on these cultural elements as a necessary foundation for uplifting society, and themselves, above the dehumanizing effects of hate, greed, poverty, violence, and force of war. In this sense, beauty and joy have become a necessary political 'weapon' for creating the New Renaissance that humanity so desperately needs in this era of escalating crisis.

Rolf Witzsche (4/1/2003)



Wednesday, March 12, 2003 - LaRouche statement


The so-called Blair six-point compromise plan being circulated as of today at the United Nations is a non-starter. Any so-called concessions that still revolve around a time deadline, simply mean that at some near-future point, the world will be back at the same point of imminent war. Such a compromise, by its very nature, is no better than war, because it leads, at some point down the line, to war. What is required is an appropriate path for war avoidance.


The only basis for solving the present crisis is the following:


1. The Bush Administration must acknowledge that the world is in the end-game phase of a systemic financial collapse. This must be publicly admitted. Ari Fleischer must retract his recent foolish statements, claiming that the U.S. economy is sound. The U.S. and global economies are in shambles.


2. The President must dump the entire chickenhawk apparatus from his Administration. This action must be accompanied by parallel action by leading circles in the Democratic Party, to dump Joe Lieberman and the entire Democratic Leadership Council. Lieberman is nothing but a tool of the Conrad Black/Hudson Institute "Bull Moose" ticket project, aimed at the destruction of the Democratic Party of FDR and Lyndon LaRouche. Some leading Democrats privately admit that the DLC was established in the first place as a "Stop LaRouche" operation.


Once these two actions have been taken by the President, the basis will have been set for reaching a deal with Saddam Hussein, to avoid a needless and devastating war. On this basis, the Administration, with the assistance of the governments of continental Western Europe, Russia, and China, must immediately move to solve the North Korea crisis.


An institutional mechanism must be established for the restoring of dialogue with Western Europe. The key issue is the economy. Germany has already put proposals on the table for the revival of the German economy, based on Eurasian trade and rebuilding of infrastructure. On this basis, a global reconstruction effort can be launched, in which the United States can play a role, in keeping with the American System policies of the first hundred years of our republic.


Once the Iraq war has been called off, and cooperative mechanisms established between the United States and Europe, it can be fairly expected that both Russia and China will play a vital role in settling the North Korea crisis.


Lyndon LaRouche has offered, under these circumstances, to take up the role of interlocutor to the North Koreans. LaRouche has indicated his willingness to travel to Pyongyang, to meet with Chairman Kim Jong-il, to find out, in direct dialogue, what he really wants. LaRouche's well-known credentials as a leading opponent of the Iraq war afford him a unique opportunity to open such a private probe to the North Koreans. LaRouche's involvement would be predicated on a clear signal of cooperation for this effort from the government in Beijing, as well as in Washington. Given the crisis nature of the situation, in North Asia, in the Middle East, and globally, it is appropriate for LaRouche to be making this diplomatic offer openly, in public, rather than through quiet back-channels.

[source: CFR website, interview with Donald Gregg by Bernard
Gwertzman, 3/7]


Gregg has repeatedly called on Bush to speak directly with the
North or risk serious developments. In the interview, he said
Bush suffered from "a fundamental misreading of the Korean
character. I think that the president has always had real
animosity toward Kim Jong Il."

"When I went to North Korea last April," said Gregg, "I
found an accumulation of questions on the North Koreans' part.
Why is George Bush so different from his father? Why does George
Bush hate Bill Clinton? Why does George Bush use such rhetoric
against us? Why don't you understand us better? Why do you
threaten us with your nuclear weapons?"

When Gregg returned in November, "a general, who had been
just bristling at the first meetings..., said you know we are
making great progress. We are cutting down 50-year-old trees in
the Demilitarized Zone, and I have multi-channel communications
with my South Korean counterparts. We are improving relations
with the Russians who want to build a gas pipeline. What's the
matter with you Americans?"

Gregg also said: "I think the situation is quite dangerous.
The president feels that Kim Jong Il is evil. There is a
demonization process that goes on." On their nuclear weapons: "I
am sure they heard from the Pakistanis how much more secure they
felt having acquired a nuclear counterbalance to that of India. I
think that was a tremendously seductive song to the North
Koreans, particularly when they had seen a series of hostile
statements out of the United States, including the Pentagon
report making them one of the seven countries eligible for a
preemptive strike, and various other things said by the president
and Rumsfeld and other hawks."

Gregg said he and UN envoy Maurice Strong agree that the
North Koreans believe they are next after Iraq.

"A new factor has entered into the scene, and that's the new
South Korean president, Roh Moo Hyun.... He is, however,
determined to prevent military action by the United States
against North Korea. And I know most experienced United States
military men would not support armed action against North Korea
if it was opposed by the South."



 Home Index: