China’s Ambassador to Britain: “It’s an Opportunity, Not a Threat”


China’s Ambassador to Britain: “It’s an Opportunity, Not a Threat”

In an opinion piece published in the Financial Times, China’s ambassador to Great Britain, Liu Xiaoming, had some sage advice for those skeptics who see China’s New Silk Road initiative as a geopolitical grab for greater land and maritime power in response to the U.S.’s “Asia Pivot,” or as something simply driven by economic self-interest.

Liu Xiaoming, had some sage advice for those skeptics who see China’s New Silk Road initiative as a geopolitical grab for greater land and maritime power in response to the U.S.’s “Asia Pivot,” or as something simply driven by economic self-interest.

What the skeptics fail to grasp, Liu underscores, is “that the Chinese mind is never programmed around geopolitical or geoeconomic theory. As Confucius said, ‘He who wants success should enable others to succeed.'”

China’s “One Belt, One Road” initiative, Liu explains,

“is an offer of a ride on China’s economic express train. It is a public product for the good of the whole world…. [it] is China’s idea and everyone’s opportunity. China intends to use its strength in infrastructure construction and financial resources to promote this project.”

Liu points to President Xi Jinping’s affirmation that China will cooperate with countries along the route so that everyone will benefit from its development. The Chinese diplomat makes clear that the One Belt, One Road initiative, has nothing to do with what that well-known geopolitician Zbigniew Brzezinski discussed in the 1990s when he said the world was one grand chessboard, and predicted”an emerging transportation network meant to link more directly Eurasia’s richest and most industrious Western and Eastern extremities.”

The reality, Liu concludes, is that the One Belt, One Road is much more than just a transportation network that will bring Europe and Asia closer.”It will bring development and prosperity to the whole of Eurasia — and every country will stand to benefit.”

Posted in New Silk Road | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Any Greek Deal Has To Include Debt Reduction

Speaking on Greece’s Mega TV, Deputy Foreign Minister Nikos Chountis said that a comprehensive agreement with the lenders must include debt reduction. He said:”If the debt problem is not solved, all the rest cannot help the situation.”

Bearing this in mind, Chountis added that the next loan installment to the IMF should not be paid, even if Greece had the money, which it doesn’t.

“If we do not have the money, we will not pay the IMF,” he said. He also said that government would not compromise on its red lines, such as pensions. “We will proceed with the implementation of our program,” he said.

Chountis said that neither the European Commission, European Central Bank nor the International Monetary Fund, can ask for changes in pensions, labor and social security policies, as these are not within their jurisdiction.

His statement follows what was considered a stormy session of Syriza’s Central Committee over the May 23-24 weekend, at which the left wing, led by the party’s Left Platform, demanded a harder line and even suspension of all debt payments. While Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras was given the green light to continue negotiations along the lines he has chosen, he has been called on not to accept another “memorandum-style” agreements or cross the party’s “red lines.”

The Left Platform, headed by Productive Reconstruction Minister Panagiotis Lafazanis, drafted a two-page document asking that the next International Monetary Fund installment not be paid, if the same “extortionary tactics” continue. While Syriza’s Central Committee approved the document, it rejected the proposal for payments to Greece’s international creditors to be stopped, by just 11 votes (56-44%). It approved a statement that,”If the credit crunch continues, there is no doubt that the payment of salaries and pensions have absolute priority over loan installments.”

Posted in Austerity & Bank Bailouts | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Euro is Over; The Austerity Rejected, What about the U.S.?

You notice that there was a collapse in the European system, that is the Central and Western European system. This is a fundamental change.
Lyndon LaRoucheMay 25th Policy Committee Show

Continuing reports indicate that the bankrupt euro is going down, and Greece is not the cause, although Greek default may be the trigger. The increasing panic over the looming Greek default, on the part of certain figures in the German and French government—and on the part of the Obama White House,—simply represents that they know the euro system is coming down. They cannot postpone the inevitable any longer. Greece simply means that Wall Street and London’s years of stalling, on writing off worthless debts on their books, is over. “Markets are illiquid!” they wail. No: Banking systems are insolvent. The euro collapse is all over Europe. A Greek website, DefenseNet, adds the punch yesterday, that $26.5 trillion in exchange-rate derivatives will blow out along with the euro.

Back on Feb. 18, EIR Founding Editor Lyndon LaRouche issued an international statement on what he called the “Greek debt swindle,” strongly supporting the position of the new Greek government. The statement showed that the 2012 “Greek bailout,” falsely so-called, had been the last great bailout of the London and euro-system banks.

“Looting does not constitute legitimate debt,” LaRouche said then.

“The debt is illegal, it is unpayable, and it is the fruit of a London-led criminal enterprise that must be shut down altogether, if the world is to survive the coming months without an eruption of general war in the center of Europe. This has to be put loud and clear on every doorstep in the United States. If you want to avoid World War III, that’s what you’ll do.”

LaRouche’s estimate is being confirmed, in action, right now.

In elections this weekend, two more European populations—Poland and Spain—rejected the deadly austerity policy of Wall Street and London, which has been imposed on them with the aid of the current corrupted German and French governments.

This fascist austerity policy is being tripped up, which has threatened Greece, and the world, with mass death. It is being rejected by European populations, while China and the BRICS offer them economic growth and technological progress through their new development banks. It is being overthrown in Latin America, in a growing partnership with China’s infrastructure and industrial investments there, focused on major high-speed rail, port, and power projects.

What about the United States? Can the denial of water—and food production—California by Gov. Jerry Brown’s dictates be reversed? The water is there; Brown has to be dumped, and the technologies applied to produce it. Can we develop a nationwide high-speed rail system here, as China has, within one decade? Can we productively employ and train, in particular, America’s young people, and create the national credit institution to do that?

This means throwing out Obama, who is committed to war. If the U.S. system can be moved quickly enough to dump Obama, we can turn the policies of the nation around.

Posted in Euro System | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

LPAC Policy Committee 25 May 2015

Posted in LPAC Policy Committee Discussion | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

For a Genuine U.S. Revival, Dump Obama And His British Masters Now For a Genuine U.S. Revival, Dump Obama And His British Masters Now

The Obama presidency is in a well-deserved and long-overdue free-fall, and this is one factor in the desperate British attacks on Lyndon LaRouche and the LaRouche political movement in the United States and Western Europe, via the recent London coroner’s inquest into the death of Jeremiah Duggan, 12 years ago. While there were never any grounds for the London Coroner to counter the long-standing German investigative findings in the Duggan case, the intent of the coroner’s inquest was to provide cover for a desperate British Crown to launch their latest smear campaign against LaRouche, and, to placate some anti-LaRouche fanatics.

The British Monarchy is facing a process of disintegration. The Scottish vote in the recent House of Commons elections was the latest blow to the integrity of the so-called United Kingdom, and it will also have ramifications in Ireland and Wales. There is a raging debate over whether or not Britain should even remain in the European Union, and the looming breakup of the euro system, ostensibly over the Greek debt crisis, will mean further crises in the City of London.

It is high time for President Barack Obama to be removed from office by Constitutional means. The latest revelations, contained in the Sept. 12, 2012 Defense Intelligence Agency memo on the assault the previous day on the U.S. diplomatic sites in Benghazi, Libya, are a smoking gun. Immediate impeachment proceedings should be launched by the House of Representatives.

The prompt removal of Obama from office is not only the last, best hope for war prevention–his desperation and that of his British Crown patrons could lead to provocations against Russia and China, triggering a thermonuclear war of annihilation. By removing Obama now, the U.S. can take the urgently needed measures to begin the process of real economic recovery. The first step is the restoration of Glass-Steagall.

Lyndon LaRouche pointed on Sunday to the announcement by Peru, China, and Brazil that they have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to conduct a feasibility study for the construction of a transcontinental high-speed rail system from the Atlantic coast of Brazil to the Pacific coast of Peru. “We know what the Chinese are doing, and remember what the U.S. was historically capable of doing,” LaRouche declared. “It’s time to create an assembly of capabilities for building a national high-speed rail system for the United States. We need a single national institution for such a vital project, as this is the only efficient means for getting the job done.”

LaRouche elaborated: “We have a population, particularly a younger population, that is unemployed and lacking in certain basic physical economic skills. But they are capable of being trained, and the launching of such a coordinated nationwide project is the best way to provide that kind of on-the-job training. What China is already doing can be done, once again, here in the United States. We need more than just a rail system. We need an integrated transportation and energy system. That means dumping the green policy now, and dumping California’s Governor Brown, along with President Obama.”

LaRouche emphasized that, by dumping Obama and quickly organizing a national high-speed rail program, as a core of an overall national transportation system, we can revive the American System and align the United States with our natural allies in Eurasia, centered in the BRICS nations, led by China, Russia and India.

Posted in Nerobama | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Immortality of Wilhelm Furtwängler by Matthew Ogden

Wilhelm Furtwängler died on November 30, 1954. The epitaph which Furtwängler chose for his own tombstone were the words of Saint Paul:

“Meanwhile, these three: Faith, Hope and Love abide with us, but the greatest of these is Love.”
Wilhelm Furtwängler’s grave, in the Bergfriedhof cemetery outside of Heidelberg, Germany. Inscribed on the tombstone are the words of St. Paul: “Meanwhile, these three: Faith, Hope and Love abide with us, but the greatest of these is Love.”

Not coincidentally, these are also the last words of Johannes Brahms’ final vocal composition, Die Vier Ernste Gesänge (Four Serious Songs). Brahms’ lifelong friend Clara Schumann had suffered a massive stroke in March of 1896, shortly after playing her last public concert at which she performed Brahms’ Variations on a Theme by Haydn. Brahms, anticipating that Clara Schumann would soon die, composed this series of four songs based on biblical text. Brahms himself would die the following year.

Brahms asks us, what is the meaning of our lives? Is man nothing more than a beast? Do our lives amount to anything more than the dust which we become? As animals die, so our bodies do as well. Are all of our pleasures, sufferings, trials, aspirations, our experiences between birth and death nothing greater than mere idle vanities, ephemeral and lost in time? A breath in the wind? A droplet in the rushing flood?

Or can we see beyond our deaths, as “through a glass, darkly,” to something which abides after our flesh is gone? To the future, into which the meaning of our lives will persist? As the poet Percy Shelley wrote in verses composed shortly before his own death:

Music, when soft voices die,
Vibrates in the memory…
And so thy thoughts, when thou art gone,
Love itself shall slumber on.

As Wilhelm Furtwängler said of Johannes Brahms in a speech commemorating the centenary of his birth: “Particularly in the last years of his life, he lived with the future, with eternity, in mind.”1

Unheard Melodies

Immortality is not merely the unceasing extension of mortality. It is not a never-ending longevity of the flesh. Rather, just as infinity is not the sum of an unlimited number of finites, eternity exists above time, outside of time. The eternal is not contained within and cannot be attained through the additive aggregate sum of temporals. The sequential chronology of what we call elapsed time is merely the unfolding shadows of something higher – the meaning of each moment cannot be located within the moment itself, but only from the standpoint of the greater flow of which it is a passing part. And without the prior existence of the whole, there could be no possibility for the existence of the parts.

How can we transcend the experience of the moment to participate in the eternal, the universal which created it? How can we be living participants within that whole which supersedes the existence of its subordinate parts?

Just as he said of Brahms, Wilhelm Furtwängler himself lived always “with the future, with eternity, in mind.” In fact, the capacity to live in the future – to participate in the eternal – is, in a very real way, the secret that lies behind the almost timeless quality of the experience of a performance by Furtwängler.

The absolutely distinct quality of Furtwängler’s performance will immediately grip any sentient listener, and is instantly recognizable. The relentless quality of suspension, a tension always pulling the listener forward from the very beginning through to the very end, an absolute coherence, an unbroken unity – all of these words describe the effect of the almost magical power that Furtwängler commanded over his music and his audiences. The conductor Claudio Abbado describes the effect that even the presence of Furtwängler exerted over his orchestra:

“Even when Furtwängler walked into the pit, there was tension around him – like electricity… And slowly, this wonderful warm sound came out of the orchestra, and the tension, always this wonderful tension from beginning to end. He was one of the few musicians who could create tension even in the pauses when there was nothing but silence.”— C. Abbado 2

A seemingly paradoxical idea: a musical tension which exists even in the moments when there is no audible sound. How can there be something in what seems like nothing? For Furtwängler, the notes were not the music, but were merely shadows dancing to a higher music, one which lurks silently but powerfully behind the sensual sounds. As the poet John Keats famously wrote in his Ode on a Grecian Urn:

Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard
Are sweeter; therefore, ye soft pipes, play on;
Not to the sensual ear, but, more endear’d,
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone.

This “silent form,” which lives outside of time, “dost tease us out of thought as doth eternity.” The eerie presence of a ghostly something visiting our present time from beyond time itself is the effect we experience through the music of Furtwängler. We are transported beyond the momentary experience of the part to an apprehension of the existence of a greater, superior whole, which is constantly exerting its power and control over each passing present moment in time.

Perhaps the most readily available example of this are Furtwängler’s recorded performances of Franz Schubert’s Symphony No. 9 in C Major, the so-called “Great” Symphony. Furtwängler’s rendering of this masterpiece remains the standard which no other performance of the work has since achieved. Furtwängler’s performance of this Schubert symphony was described by the great Russian conductor Valeri Gergiev in a recent interview3, in which he described Furtwängler as a giant, unequaled among all others, the conductor whom he admired most:

“The most difficult thing in conducting is not to slip into mechanical beating. So this restless search for a real tempo, a real pulse, of practically each bar of music, rather than just one tempo for one movement, is something what very few conductors could ever master. Not many conductors will confess, maybe, that it will be something difficult for them to do, but then they will go and compete with Furtwängler, and most probably lose. Because it’s a kind of God-given gift, a genius quality, which one conductor contributes to the playing of the orchestra — I describe it in the following: You can’t possibly imagine this same orchestra play the way they play with Furtwängler if you just remove him from the podium. It is just not possible to imagine they will do the same thing. They will be even maybe more organized, they’ll be very focused in a certain ensemble, but they will never deliver this kind of incredible expression which he is able to bring to life once being in front of an orchestra…”Take the example of his performance of the “Great” Symphony of Franz Schubert… The quality of symphony and the quality of interpretation. Amazing. I believe in every movement there are so many changes of tempo. First, fantastic theme with horns are playing, and then, in the Second Movement – it seems to be very settled but then it becomes so desperately dramatic. And again, the Third Movement, it’s not just going like a clock, you know, da-da-da-da-DA-da-da-da-DA – it has a bite, it has a freedom, it has a fire.”


Recording of Wilhelm Furtwängler conducting the Berlin Philharmonic in a 1953 performance of Franz Schubert’s Symphony n°9 in C-Major, D 944.

The constant change in tempo so characteristic of Furtwängler’s music indicates the presence of a higher law, a higher time, dictating the unfolding of each moment in time. These are not arbitrary changes, not precalculated mathematical values, but the pulse of a living, breathing organism united by a single all-embracing coherent process of development, proceeding always into the future, residing in what is yet to come. The performer subordinates himself to that power, that higher law, striving always towards the apprehension of the unity which brings coherence to the multiplicity of the parts – an almost religious quality of devotion.

Listening to the Future

“Let us consider the activity of artistic creation… When we look closely at this process, we find we can distinguish two levels. On the first, each individual element combines with those adjacent to it to form larger elements, these larger elements then combining with others and so on, a logical outwards growth from the part to the whole. On the other level, the situation is the reverse: the given unity of the whole controls the behavior of the individual elements within it, down to the smallest detail. The essential thing to observe is that in any genuine work of art these two levels complement each other, so that the one only becomes effective when put together with the other…”The artistic process that has as its starting point the unity of the whole, rests on the concept of a more-or-less complete vision of that whole. For the artist at work, this vision is the goal he seeks to attain; the star that, unbeknownst to him, guides his steps through the maze of obstacles and temptations that beset his path and shows him how to unite the forces at his command. Only at the end of the journey, therefore, will the vision emerge in its totality, not only for the listener, the receiver of the work of art, but also – and this is a vital point – for the composer, the creative artist himself. The total vision only achieves its full radiance when it merges with all the individual sources of light from within the work, the over-alland the particular interacting and stimulating each other. It is not that the vision is present, ready-made, from the beginning and is only waiting to be filled with artistic substance. On the contrary: the joy that the artist feels comes not from possessing the vision but from the activity of turning it into reality.”— W. FurtwänglerThoughts for All Seasons4

The forgoing typifies Furtwängler’s insight into an actually ontological principle, one which extends far beyond music per se, which is as true in science as it is in art. It shouldn’t come as a surprise that Furtwängler’s contemporaries Max Planck and Albert Einstein were themselves devoted musicians as much as they were scientists. In fact, Furtwängler’s composition teacher when he was a young man, Joseph Rheinberger (who was himself a friend and collaborator of Johannes Brahms), had also taught composition to the young Max Planck.

Einstein asserted that the paradoxes pertaining to time and causality presented by Planck’s discovery of the quantum would actually be resolved from the standpoint of a higher understanding of music. In an interview published as an appendix to the book Where Is Science Going?5, Einstein asserted:

“Our present rough way of applying the causal principle is quite superficial… We are like a juvenile learner at the piano, just relating one note to that which immediately proceed or follows. To an extent this may be very well when one is dealing with very simple and primitive compositions; but it will not do for an interpretation of a Bach Fugue. Quantum physics has presented us with very complex processes and to meet then we must further enlarge and refine our concept of causality.”— A. Einstein
Albert Einstein, like his friend Max Planck, was a passionate musician. Einstein said of himself: “Artistic premonition plays a not insignificant role in my life… If I were not a physicist, I would probably be a musician. I often think in music. I live my day dreams in music. I see my life in terms of music.” Elsewhere, he said of his discovery of relativity: “The theory of relativity occurred to me by intuition, and music is the driving force behind this intuition. My parents had me study the violin from the time I was six. My new discovery is the result of musical perception.”

The implications of Einstein’s allusion to Bach’s fugues are very revealing when considered in light of his contemporary Furtwängler’s insights as quoted above. When we consider the necessary existence of a unified whole in music, which as Furtwängler says “controls the behavior of the individual elements within it, down to the smallest detail,” we must ask: where does that whole exist? If the whole cannot exist in any part, nor in the aggregate of all the parts, where and when can we locate the existence of this unifying whole?

Only by listening to the future, to that totality which can never exist in the sequential temporal experiences of the ear, but only in the imagination which can consider the entire composition as a one, existing as a unity outsideof time. By hearing that single unified Being and following it as it guides us through the inexorable evolution of its own Becoming. By allowing the inaudible echo of that yet-to-be-experienced future to resonate within the audible sounds of the present, each meeting and mutually interacting with one another at each unfolding moment in time. At no one moment of the sensed experience in time can this whole perceived, however it is present at all times, above time, guiding the behavior of each moment of the unfolding experience of time.

Furtwängler expresses this as the intersection between the Nah-Erleben and the Fernhören, the interaction between “near-experience” with the “distance-hearing,” also citing the fugues of Bach as exemplary of the most perfect expression of this principle:

“Bach remains today what he has always been – the divine creator on his throne above the clouds, beyond the reach of others… Here we find concentration on the moment in time united with the unheard expanse; the immediate realization of the part paired with the truly sovereign overall vision of the whole. With its ever-conscious feeling for the near and the far at the same time; with its unconstrained fulfillment of the here-and-now joined with an ever-present subconscious feeling for the structure, the current of the whole; its ‘near-experience’ (Nah-Erleben) with its ‘distance-hearing’ (Fernhören), Bach’s music is a greater example of biological certainty of purpose and natural power than we will find anywhere else in Music. Precisely this is what makes Bach’s music so truly unique… Bach, the creator of these choruses and these fugues, seems to be not a human being, but the spirit that rules the world, the very architect of the universe… It is this that makes him for us the greatest of all composers, the Homer of music, whose light still shines out across our musical firmament, and whom, in a very special sense, we have never surpassed.”— W. FurtwänglerBach

In Bach, we experience at every moment this intersection of the near with the far, the part with the whole, the microcosm with the macrocosm, the temporal with the eternal. As Furtwängler describes elsewhere, the mission of the artist is always to seek “the fulfillment of the moment within a larger process. Each individual thing has its own function and this within the development of the whole. The two meet and intersect at each moment. It is not always easy at first to grasp the fact that every detail has its function within the whole, and is not only ‘arranged’ within this whole, but often has an effect on the whole that goes far beyond its individual importance… This single-mindedness of purpose, this clear and unmistakable cohesion of the whole can only be created through real laws, based in nature.” – W. Furtwängler, Notebooks, 19466

“If I Have Not Love, I Am Nothing”

“Love – love that is forever being seized and shaken by the work – can never be replaced. Love alone creates the preconditions for the visionary and correct understanding of ‘the whole’ in the work of art, for this whole is nothing but love. Each individual part can be more or less understood intellectually, but the whole can only ever be grasped by the living feeling of love. It is the only thing which is appropriate and fitting to the whole work of art as an image of the active and living world. Everything else, however skillful it may be, is limited, and therefore profoundly boring to me.”— W. FurtwänglerNotebooks, 19367

As the 19th Century drew to a close, Johannes Brahms’ setting in his Four Serious Songs of the words of St. Paul speaks almost as a prophesy, a warning to musicians, a eulogy for art in the century to come:

“Though I may speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but I have not love, so am I become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.”

Furtwängler insisted, without the dedication to the “the living feeling of love” which is required to grasp the understanding of a work of art in its wholeness, music dies, and becomes nothing more than the intellectualized assembly of individual separate parts rather than a single, living, organic whole. In the essay cited previously8, Furtwängler asks the question: what is the emotion which is required by the artist to grasp this fundamental unity of the whole?

“Corresponding to the power that works inwards, from the whole to the parts, a power which proceeds from a more or less complete vision of the whole, is an emotion that springs from the artist’s relationship to the world at its most profound and most meaningful – an emotion one may call love, humility, reverence, worship, awe, and many other things… a love of the world, which comes to us as the eternal gift of God. If only modern man would grasp that it is impossible to understand and shape the world as it confronts us without loving it! And that it is equally impossible to love it without seeking, in the context of this love, to understand it!”
Portrait of Ludwig van Beethoven, of whose music Furtwängler wrote: “In the form of Being, a constant Becoming is at work… to experience Becoming in Being, and to let others experience it — to grasp the fleeting life of the moment in the solid form — that is true reproduction.”

For Furtwängler, the late compositions of Beethoven represented the high-point in this ideal of cohesive artistic unity in which the parts became absolutely subordinated and inseparable from the whole – an ideal which, however, was increasingly abandoned following Beethoven’s death.

“With Beethoven, the parts increasingly lost their independence, to the point where they were incomprehensible without reference to the whole; no part made sense without reference to that which preceded it and that which followed. Up to the time of Beethoven, musical development had taken place with the tacit assumption that the work of art emerged like an organism… Whereas Beethoven sought to bring out the whole with ever greater clarity and power, his contemporaries but even more his successors turned away from this approach, and the concept of the work of art as an organic whole crumbled in their hands…”

The irony, however, of the rejection of the concept of the organic whole, is that since the very existence of the parts depends upon the existence of the whole, in the absence of this whole there also ceases to be the possibility of the parts!

“Today the concept of overall form has lost its central, dominant position. No longer does it appear to be able to assert itself over the material. No longer is it the whole that controls the behavior of the parts. …The whole has been consumed by the parts, with the result that, not only is there no longer a whole, but there are also no longer any parts, because these can only exist so long as there is a whole to which they can refer! Everything exhausts itself in the individual moment, no heed being paid either to what has gone before or to what follows. The consequence is a concentration on the effect of the moment, effect for its own sake, in harmony, in rhythm, in orchestration, and through numerous little titillating details.”

Thus, quite literally: “Though I may speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but I have not love, so am I become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.” Furtwängler clearly identified what he saw as the tragedy of music’s decline as being fundamentally rooted in the loss among his contemporaries of the capacity for love.

“Our only hope of salvation, a return to the inspiration that comes from the living masterpieces of music, is all too often stultified by bad performances. The inability to feel the fundamental emotional content of a work through its entire course, from beginning to end, is at its most glaringly obvious in those works of whose living example we stand in greatest need today. It is those works that receive the worst performances because they are the very ones that make the greatest spiritual demands on the performer.”


The Music of Our Soul

Pope Francis recently stated in an interview, that for him, the most “Promethean” of all conductors is Wilhelm Furtwängler, citing Furtwängler’s performances of Beethoven and especially Bach, specifically his St. Matthew Passion, saying: “The piece by Bach that I love so much is the Erbarme Dich, the tears of Peter in the St. Matthew Passion. Sublime.”9

And indeed, Furtwängler’s music has a reverential, devout, almost religious quality to it. The orchestra under Furtwängler, becomes fused into a single instrument, a single organism, and becomes in his words “a point of entry of the divine.”

“The sense of the orchestra as an artistic medium is that this body, constituting of 90-100 different people, different heads and hands, becomes one instrument through which a soul, a feeling, an intuition is communicated to the listener in its tiniest details. The more it achieves this, the more it loses its vanity of wanting to be something itself, the more it becomes the mediator, the communicator, the vessel and point of entry of the divine, speaking through the great masters.”— W. FurtwänglerNotebooks, 192910

Furtwängler sought to transport his audiences from the mere temporal experience of the passing moment and into the universal, the eternal, the whole. This becomes the almost sacred devotion of the true artist and the true scientist alike. As Albert Einstein wrote in 1930 in an article published in the New York Times Magazine11, describing the what he called the “cosmic religious feeling” which motivates the great scientist:

“The individual feels the futility of human desires and aims, and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought. Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prison and he wants to experience the universe as a single significant whole.”How can this cosmic religious feeling be communicated from one person to another…? In my view, it is the most important function of art and science to awaken this feeling and keep it alive in those who are receptive to it.”— A. Einstein

Furtwängler’s music allows us to do just that. Furtwängler enables his audiences to escape that prison of shadows and sense-experience, and to experience instead the unheard music which lies beyond the notes. Each sound may quickly die, but the music which created it is eternal.

As Furtwängler’s great friend and collaborator, the violinist Yehudi Menuhin said:

“There are many conductors, but very few of them seem to reveal that secret chapel that lies at the very heart of all masterpieces. Beyond the notes, there are visions, and beyond those visions, there is this invisible and silent chapel, where an inner music plays, the music of our soul, whose echoes are but pale shadows. That was the genius of Furtwängler because he approached every work like a pilgrim who strives to experience this state of being that reminds us of Creation, the mystery which is at the heart of every cell. With his fluid hand movements, so full of meaning, he took his orchestras and his soloists to this sacred place.”— Y. Menuhin12


Recording of Yehudi Menuhin performing Ludwig van Beethoven’s Violin Concerto in D major, Op. 61 with Wilhelm Furtwängler in 1953, one year prior to Furtwängler’s death.


Posted in Classical Culture | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

LaRouche’s Mission to Restore the American Presidency, What is Yours?


Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., had arrived in India with a group of U.S. forces, when word arrived in April, 1945, that President Franklin Roosevelt had died. A group of soldiers asked to have an evening meeting with LaRouche. He simply told them: the President is dead, and we have to, ourselves, all the more, assemble ourselves, and devote ourselves to the mission of President Roosevelt.

That was the beginning of Lyndon LaRouche’s mission, now almost exactly seventy years old, which still today is not over,— although it has now come to a critical fork in the road over the past roughly two weeks.

“We were coming towards the end of the actual conflict in Europe, and then beyond,” LaRouche remembered today. “And so, what I was left with, was the Southeast Asia area. I got more or less tied to that region, plus Russia. And what I otherwise had gotten into.”

LaRouche wrote to General Dwight Eisenhower in 1948, asking him to run for President, which would have denied the wretched Harry Truman a second term, and replaced him with someone who aspired to what Franklin Roosevelt had represented. At that time, Eisenhower was being brought in as the new president of Columbia University in New York. “Eisenhower was the one person I had access to,” LaRouche said today. “He was then going into his position at Columbia; that was my access to him.”

We now know that all four of Franklin Roosevelt’s surviving sons, were themselves also writing just such letters to Eisenhower at the same time. Nevertheless, he waited out Truman’s term before running, and winning, in 1952.

What some regard as LaRouche’s excursion into the socialist movement during the 1950s and early 1960s, was actually much more specific. He supported and then joined the Socialist Workers Party, an American Trotskyist party, because it was fighting McCarthyism (better called Trumanism), as LaRouche was also doing on his own. No other such national organization was doing this, including the Communist Party.

Later, LaRouche intervened into the “New Left,” such as the Students for a Democratic Society, in the interests of bringing forth something productive in the wake of the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy. “My commitment was very, very clear,” he remembered today, “but the times were changing. And therefore, the things that you dealt with at an earlier time, no longer fit the situation.”

His crushing defeat of the leading British Keynesian Abba Lerner, who had been flown direct from London into a Queens College debate with LaRouche in 1971, prevented a British takeover of the US and its economy at that time. “It was the birth of the time when people began to congeal themselves around me,” LaRouche said today. “It was an easy fight for me; Abba Lerner was just a damn fool. A self-important damn fool. But the whole crew of Keynesians was really freaked out at the fact that I had defeated them.”

LaRouche’s Strategic Defense Initiative proposal of 1977 and thereafter, was publicly adopted by President Reagan, and also unofficially supported by the then-existing Russian government, nominally under Leonid Brezhnev. This was the highest point of success ever achieved to that point, of LaRouche’s mission to reshape the U.S. Presidency to that which Alexander Hamilton had originally intended, which included what later President John Quincy Adams had termed a “community of principle” among republican nations girdling the globe. Not only did the SDI include an agreement between the US and the Soviets for development of devices based on “new physical principles” to overcome thermonuclear missiles. It also included the joint US-Soviet use of these technologies for economic development of Africa, Asia, and Ibero-America.

President Reagan suffered an assassination attempt by Bush-linked forces, two months after his inauguration. Although he survived, he was severely wounded, and he loosened or dropped the reins of government, which were taken over by the Bush family, which killed the SDI and railroaded LaRouche to jail.

LaRouche’s arrest (before his frameup trial and five-year incarceration in Federal prison), was actually intended to have been an assassination, which was only prevented by an intervention from the White House. The intention was also to kill LaRouche in prison, but patriotic forces kept him safe there.

The way LaRouche got to Russia, was that he got permission to go into Germany, to be with Helga. And she had already adopted a course of action, which was the same as his.

“I was in Europe,” he said today, “and then, in the process, because of Helga’s Russian connections, I found myself flying into Moscow with Helga. I found myself parked there.

“At the special meeting with the leaders of Russia at that time, they asked me for my decision. What should they do? We agreed on that. Then, Bill Clinton did not oppose it,— in fact, he agreed with it, in principle. But he was not going to act so as to put me, directly, in front of this stuff. But Bill actually did do a lot, in order to coordinate his views with me.

“Also up to that point, we had a friend in the Papacy. That Pope was also wounded in an assassination attempt. What happened is, the other party, shall we say the radical, left-wing party of the clergy, took advantage of the fact that the Pope had an impairment in his functioning, and they came in like gang-busters. Therefore, the whole Catholic operation disintegrated, and, interestingly, the disintegration of the Catholic Church from that point on, meant that the whole church kind of faded because of this kind of disintegration.

“The new Pope Francis is trying to make sure that that’s not going to be repeated.”

Out of the bankruptcy of Russia, which also involved the bankruptcy of the whole world financial system, LaRouche brought back a proposal of his from Russia, which was eventually adopted by President Clinton.

“I came back again,” he said today, “at the same time that Putin was rising in power, and dealing with the Chechens. I was also without any direct connection to Putin at that time. I didn’t really know him much, but I just knew about him. But the Chechen issue was the same issue I was working on. And that’s the whole racket we’re dealing with right now.”

Clinton went with the proposal; then he was sex-gated and impeached in a phony process.

“It was simply an operation done by a bunch of Republican whores on behalf of Queen Elizabeth II herself,” LaRouche said today. “Agents of the Queen [like Ambrose Evans-Pritchard] directed and controlled the Republican Party. It’s probably still true today. What you can say, is what’s the difference between the Republican Party,— well, most of them are queens.”

The hounding of Bill Clinton out of office entailed the loss of Glass-Steagall, followed by two terms of George W. Bush and almost two of Obama. It gave us a world economic catastrophe, and a series of U.S. wars of aggression, leaving us now on the brink of thermonuclear World War III.

Now, we’re come back to where we were, only again it’s different. But Obama can be out at any day of this week or next week; his crimes have been exposed, and he can’t recover.

“He could not have won the so-called election, nor could he have maintained his influence in the United States now, except for the British monarchy,” LaRouche says. “He’s just the Queen’s tool. You need to know what his gender is; because you look at the women that work around him,— you wonder what his gender is.”

Now with O’Malley doing what he’s doing, we’re at the position where we can win the Presidency; the real American Presidency, as Lyndon LaRouche has been fighting for, for all these seventy years.

“There’s a good way of looking at that,” LaRouche said today, “because O’Malley had not, on a formal basis, had not seemed to be, what he has become now. But, really he hasn’t changed. What happened is, is that he, like most politicians,— even good ones,— he will always try to wear the costume which fits the constituency. And that was the case with him, at an earlier stage.

“When he ran up against this Obama problem and what went with it, then, he un-masked himself, and what he did, was not something he had intended to do earlier; even though his actual feelings about the matter, had not been much different from what they are now. But, it didn’t show that way under the earlier conditions. Now, he gets to the point where he’s at the period of his life where he’s saying, ‘Hey, I’ve got to get back into the fight here.’

“And that’s exactly what has happened.”

Posted in Lyndon LaRouche | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment