LPAC Policy Committee member Mike Steger is the guest during today’s weekly Town Hall event with NYC activists.
DENNIS SPEED: My name is Dennis Speed and on behalf of the LaRouche Political Action Committee I’d like to welcome everybody for our Saturday dialogue with Lyndon LaRouche for Oct. 22nd. We’re going to have our opening statement given by Mike Steger of the LaRouche PAC policy committee and then we’ll go right to questions. The setup’s a little different because we’re in a different room today, so for people who have questions, we have chairs here in the front; and we ask you to come up as you see one or two people get up and the chairs are opened up.
OK, so Mike, we’re ready for your opening, and then we’ll go to Q&A.
MICHAEL STEGER: OK, great. We had a discussion with Lyn and Helga this morning, and Mr. LaRouche had a very clear focus; which is that we don’t have a clear picture. Let me be specific on that, because I think it’s very important.
We do not have a comprehensive sense at this point of what the level of mobilization for war is. Now, many people who have been working with us, or following Mr. LaRouche’s work, know that we just passed the fifth year mark of Muammar Qaddafi’s assassination. At that point, Mr. LaRouche put a very clear warning out to the world that the Obama administration, backed by the British Crown and the British Empire forces, was going for a full-scale escalation of war towards Russia and China; and the stepping stone for that would be Syria. So, a lot has happened in those five years that I’m not going to recount; although we will probably touch on many of those aspects over the course of the discussion today. But the very reason that Obama — as Mr. LaRouche said — is willing and ready to destroy everything, is because he is getting backed up against a wall very quickly; and there is a rushing wall coming at him at the same time.
So, let me clarify that issue, because I think there are three main points to the strategic situation. The first is what I just mentioned. Obama is a very, very dangerous figure in this kind of historical situation. He is willing, and has made it very clear, that he is threatening a nuclear war on the world. Now, another aspect of that, which puts this under a very urgent timetable, is a very rapidly accelerating collapse of the financial system. That is ongoing; it is collapsing. We are very clearly at a point where a certain kind of spark, you might say, could create a kind of global conflagration; a real burning up of the banks. As leading experts have said, 15-20 banks could practically go out of business overnight; become illiquid, just gone. It’s not like a physical process; you’re talking about a digital, essentially, financial system.
That is putting the British Empire and their political assets — primarily Obama — in a very dangerous situation. This is also why this Presidential election is so dangerous; because as we’ve seen from Hillary Clinton’s constant propaganda and rhetoric against Putin and Russia, she is covering for Obama’s escalated war drive. So, you’ve got Obama’s war drive and you’ve got the collapsing financial system.
Many Americans may not be conscious of these factors, but they’re aware of the effects. Unfortunately, they are not aware at all in large part, to the other third significant aspect of the world situation. That is, the fact that you have consolidated — perhaps for the first time in the five decades, since John F. Kennedy’s assassination — for the first time since that point over 50 years ago, you have a very living and consolidated mission for the human species on the planet, on Earth. Perhaps even off Earth, because of the nature of the mission itself.
This is what China, along with Russia and other major nations have been consolidating. They announced just about three years ago, in September and November of 2013; and they have consolidated it ever since. What we’re now seeing with the President of the Philippines, Mr. Duterte, is a very clear expression of a choice of two paradigms. The failing one in the West, in the trans-Atlantic; and this one that’s now consolidated. The very mission that we had in the United States under Franklin Roosevelt and John Kennedy, but that has now been consolidated in China.
I want to make this more clear, just because I think it’s important; but I think we will also get to it in the course of the discussion. This means that for 50 years, there was no clear mission for mankind on the planet; it was very clearly an existential state and a wandering. There was no directed clarity of mankind’s upward direction as a uniquely creative human species. That has been very much the specific efforts of Mr. LaRouche and his organization, nearly for that entire time period. We now have that consolidated; and it opens up a possibility for the very efforts which we’re now making specifically in New York which many of you are a part of. We saw it with the concerts, we saw with the breakthrough on JASTA; and these kinds of breakthroughs are now putting Obama under very weak footing — which means he’s even more dangerous. But it also means a comprehensive cultural change around a Hamilton banking system, but more so than just that; just the Hamilton banking system. It’s a Hamilton mission, a mission-orientation for the United States, which Hamilton above all others, really clarifies as a commitment from an individual, for a mission for this country and its international role in a mission for mankind. So that’s obviously the very foundations for why you’ll be doing the work after this discussion.
But those are points I think are critical. And they make the situation that we’re in today historically one of the most unique moments to act upon a level of creative reason, around a strategic conception than perhaps any other point in human history. Because you can now consolidate, for the first time in human history, a sense of a mission for mankind; the same one that Krafft Ehricke laid out in the 1970s and ’80s in his work. But a clear conception of a mission for mankind that’s pervasive throughout the entire human species. That is a fundamental, strategic change; it’s a species jump in characteristic in the course of human history. And it’s for that very reason that Obama remains such a dangerous risk; and why he has to be politically crushed, eliminated. And the drug culture and the drug money that sponsored him and pushed him, has to be shut down. I think those steps we see now in Asia as well.
I’ll leave my initial comments there, because I’m sure there are some questions and discussions. But these three facets and the global international one are a dominant factor in how we’re going to change and bring a Hamilton perspective not only to this country, but also to a new international system. So, I’ll leave my comments there, and I look forward to your questions.
SPEED: OK, great. So, let’s just start with our first question.
Q: Good afternoon. It’s Bruce from New Jersey. A couple of weeks back, I mentioned the fight that had been waged around JASTA and the victory in overriding the veto of Obama. Also, I had brought up in the meeting of my local Congressman, that victory and making it clear that we had to take it further. I discussed with him sitting down to discuss Glass-Steagall; restoring that. I haven’t had a chance to actually have a one-to-one sit-down with him; but in the meantime, I wrote a letter to my local newspaper — which actually covers a good portion of the southern section of New Jersey — and had it published, in which, I mentioned the fight and the victory around JASTA, and also the need to restore Glass-Steagall. This coming Monday, he’s also going to be holding a meeting where they’re going to be discussing the heroin epidemic in the area that I live in; but obviously, that’s an epidemic that’s across the country and elsewhere. I’m glad you brought that up in your initial remarks. So, I think it’s important, because I watched the webcast last night, and the discussion of the creation of this new web page which people should take advantage of; and I hope you have a chance to mention a little bit of that.
The thing is, I think we should identify where we need to this now; and I hope you bring that up. But I did also want to point out to people that when Obama initially became President, the salvo that we had launched around the health care issue; which obviously, everything that we said around that has now come to pass. But I wanted to leave it to you to remark on that.
STEGER: Good, thanks. I think it’s just important to take a look at where we are on a global picture. The nations of trans-Atlantic are collapsing; they’re collapsing quickly. The political structures of these nations are collapsing quickly. The foreign policy orientations of these nations that have been maintained — I mean, we’re still in a Cold War structure; we’re still operating, as we know, with this whole Russia situation. So, this is a 70-plus year structure that we’re operating in, and it’s collapsing. You see this from the comments specifically as kind of an indication of a field, by the comment of the President of the Philippines; where he says, Obama has lost. The U.S. has lost; we’re working with China, we’re working with Russia. We’re going to shut down the drug dealers.
He says he has 4 million addicts in the Philippines; that’s 4% of their population. We probably have upwards of 10% of our population on drugs. That’s something like 25-30 million people in the United States who are probably on drugs in this country. You’ve got a fundamental breakdown in the trans-Atlantic system on a physical economic level. Forget the stock market! Look at the actual capacity of your human population in the United States, in Western Europe. This is a collapse; it’s a collapse politically, it’s a collapse financially, but it’s also a collapse culturally. So, this is the kind of breakdown that we’re facing.
This is why Hamilton is so important; because what Hamilton raised at that time was not simply a sense of a banking system. He was facing the dissolution, the fundamental breakdown of his country following the Revolutionary War. The war itself was existential; the war itself was a point where they realized that any freedoms, any distinct kind of culture outside of the degeneracy of Europe. They left Europe; Cusa said get out of here. Nicholas of Cusa said, get out of this continent. We’ve got to develop a different conception of mankind. We now have one; but it will not take root politically, culturally here in the way necessary. So, Hamilton was part of that; he recognized it. The war was fought to defend that opportunity, which he waged. But it was a crisis point. This nation was going to be pulled apart.
Hamilton also recognized that they were operating within the world situation. Unfortunately, too many of the members of Congress and the American people generally, operate within a very small, parochial window. You’ve got to look at the global situation.
Consider it from this perspective: When Lincoln won the Civil War, it was the final consolidation of what we had fought for in the United States. We had eradicated the greatest contradiction to our founding principles; the system of slavery. And in Lincoln accomplishing that, and setting forth the economic projects that were ongoing even during the war, we opened up potentials for nations like Germany; which had not even have been a nation. It would have been a small set of principalities. Now, under Bismarck’s leadership, you had a fundamental change in the course of Germany, and a fundamental change in the course of Europe itself. And Germany today still plays a major role; we just had — as you guys may know — we just had a conference in Essen with a number of leading figures from Germany. The steel industry; engineering; science; as well as a number of special guests from China and so on. Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche are very focussed on getting a shift in Germany, as they were back in the 1980s around the fall of the Berlin Wall. Germany still today plays a significant part because of the kind of optimism and shift that Lincoln had created. Lincoln captured that same sense of mission that Hamilton had put forth.
In the article in this week’s Hamiltonian paper, you get a sense that Hamilton’s fight against Jefferson was not simply manufacturing versus agrarian culture. Hamilton wasn’t advocating against farming; he was an advocate against slavery, against an imperial economic conception of man and of economic practice. Now, that’s what’s really destroyed the United States. That’s the kind of moral shift you see in China and Eurasia generally.
It’s interesting, President Duterte of the Philippines will be going to Japan next week. There is real panic that what China and Russia have created as a political intervention into the world, is becoming contagious; that it’s becoming undeniable. The nations like Japan, that have a major demographic crisis, cannot deny it. If they want a future for the Japanese people, they’re going to have to orient more and more. And what Duterte did, was draw a very hard line on the distinction; there is a choice you have to make. U.S. policymakers today, as he described, are a bunch of convoluted idiots. Constant invasions and wars; massive drug addiction; major problems in the United States as we well know.
So, one, thinking of a global picture and a global strategic situation is important; because it restores a sense of optimism. We’ve got to end this drug epidemic in the United States. If you’re going to rebuild this country, you have to get this generation not just off drugs, but out of the drug culture; out of this music — it’s not even music, this noise culture; this constant distraction; this constant existentialist state. You have to give their minds the kind of capacity to respond to the kind of optimistic mission that China and Russia have put forth; a collaboration of real nations. This is the New Silk Road — it’s a much bigger conception; this is also Hamilton.
We’re talking about a comprehensive cultural transformation that must take place in the United States over the coming decade if we’re really going to rebuild this country. And we’re at a decisive point now. This financial system is coming down. You have to bring back Glass-Steagall; but you have to bring it back with a comprehensive sense of a change in the culture of our country, and of a change in the human species that is now ongoing.
And I think if we have that, we’re operating from a strategic perspective, and that’s what wins wars, this highest strategic conception. That’s how Lincoln won the Civil War, from the highest strategic devotion and conception. As Lyn was asked once, shouldn’t we take on the British? He said, we’ll first take the British here; and then we’ll take the British on there. But he knew he was fighting the British Empire; he was very clear on this. We fight it from the highest strategic conception, and we can win this war.
And I think as Mr. LaRouche has said, if we stay focussed and on track. in this Hamilton work — and we can say more on this — but this Broadway stuff. What is this? It’s so artificial, it’s so superficial.
What we’re representing with Hamilton, reading his papers, looking at who he was as a person, his networks, his conspiracy, his devotion; where he came from, this sense of a true human creative spirit, this is really the culture of the United States that has to be revived. And I think that’s where we have to go, to answer your question specifically.
Q: Hi, this is Rick from Bergen County, New Jersey. On the Thursday night call, somebody brought up the issue of free trade. I think there’s a lot of confusion on that phrase so maybe you could clarify it. And specifically Jeff mentioned a guy called Shelburne from the British East India Company, who said that even if we lose the land mass of the Colonies, it doesn’t matter because we can still dump our products there and make money for the Crown, or however it was phrased. Which brought out to me the concept that the way this imperial system operates, and how Wall Street and the City of London are an integral part of it, and really represent it, is through this bogus concept of free trade.
And I also look at the phrasing of free trade and job creation, and those to me are made up propaganda terms that really mean something entirely different. Free trade has nothing to do with freedom, it has to do with exploitation. So it’s exploitative trade, and they’re not creating jobs, they’re eliminating jobs.
So the question is can you say a little bit about the idea of free trade and how it enters into this imperialist exploitation.
STEGER: Free trade is the drug trade. That’s what the Opium Wars against China were. So it’s a drug culture, it’s an attack — that’s what it fundamentally is. It’s an ability to control and destroy the minds of the population; because if you’re not going to commit to developing them, they will revolt and reject that political and financial system. So you have to destroy their minds. You have to destroy their will, you have to destroy that unique human emotion, a certain love of mankind; you have to just throw people into existential state, impose on them an existential culture.
That’s what free trade is. It’s an imposition of inhuman cultural system, and it’s known as the drug trade. Because all the bad philosophy, all the bad music and art, noise, bad entertainment you have out there today, wouldn’t be tolerated if you don’t have 25-30% of your population on drugs. You’ve got people, and you’ve got — and I’m talking largely illicit narcotics — you’ve got something like 20-25 million just on dope, on coke, on heroin, on the street drugs, let alone the prescription drugs which are probably now the most prolific of addiction in the United States, as we all very well know, from just the reports we’re getting. Has this been addressed at all?
I mean, Duterte looked at what is a life and death for his country, if he doesn’t address this drug problem. So where is the political leadership?
So to reject the drugs, think about how attacked Duterte was for going after the drug dealers? He was evil himself; he was nearly Hitler. Because now he was going after the drugs.
That’s the very question. That’s been the question since the 1800s, this question of the drugs. And it was, when Kennedy was killed, when you had a real political mission and political mission and political leadership in the United States; when Kennedy was killed, and the British were clear on this, the space program was awakening a sense of scientific optimism; implicitly they identified, you are awakening the creative the creative powers of the human minds of an entire generation. They killed Kennedy , and they ushered in the drug culture. It was done with intent. That was free trade. That’s their argument for free trade. And all of their banks have now largely been indicted in that same process, that we’ve had identified by both the Russian and the UN drug envoys, you wouldn’t have a banking system today functioning if it wasn’t for the illegal drug trade. The banking system wouldn’t even have the cash to function.
What is the drug trade? It’s an attack upon the human mind, upon the very optimism and emotion and creative reason, that not only a nation’s comprehensive economic policies allow a foreign policy of collaboration and a sense of mankind as a single human species, it allows for a mission to be adopted. And that’s what we have to go after. We have to go after that culture.
I think it’s worth noting on this, this was how Obama was brought. It was George Soros’s drug money, and Lyn’s pointed at this numerous times, through Texas from Mexico, it funded Obama’s campaign, that made his Presidency even possible. That’s what free trade is. This is Obama mass death policy. And it’s nothing else.
Now, you can have trade agreements all the time, and they can call them “free,” they can use nominal terms, but the specific question we’re after, the real threat to this imperial system, is this drug culture, this destruction of the human mind. And why the concerts, why the 9/11 Requiem concerts, why the music work we do in New York, this cultural question is why it’s such an immediate threat to this imperial system, because it really is the antidote. It brings people out of that, much like a unified space program for this planet would do as well, and even more comprehensively. Those are my thoughts on free trade.
SPEED: Before we go to the next question let me just interject here: This is the Manhattan Project and we have a certain responsibility. Our responsibility, as I understand Lyn to have charged us with it, is to seek to have a dialogue discussion which advances the strategic outlook of the United States. And I’m going to ask people to consider that you may want to ask a question, “how do I ask a question?”
That’s not a joke. There’s a certain method of inquiry that you have to have to really be able to get to the bottom of what of what’s actually happening, that there is a great degree of panic in the United States right; there’s a great degree of frustration and Mike mentioned this drug program, and let me be very clear — 60% of American adults take prescription drugs. Sixty percent. Sixty percent: six zero. That’s an official figure. Which means it’s higher than that. The primary drug problem we have is in that domain, but that’s not the point. The reason you can have this election, is that level of disorientation of this population.
And of course, many people have been seduced into trying to believe that there is some way of addressing reality via that election and there is not. I say this because in part, what happens when you need to have a discussion about what to do, and as Mike began, he said, Mr. LaRouche’s evaluation for us is that we need an evaluation. We’ve got to actually get, via our intelligence work and our discussions here, we have to be able to supply him with a kind of a picture, at least enough to be able to help to determine exactly what is Obama, what are the British doing? We know they’re in trouble; we know that Putin is doing his job.
But the question is, we have to have some evaluation ourselves, so we know what we need to do. Mr. LaRouche considers this meeting to be essential in his evaluative process. So when you come to the microphone, I want you to think about what you’re attempting to ask, from the standpoint of contributing to that evaluative process, not merely to get an answer to question that may have been on your mind, or to say something that you may have been thinking as you were coming up in the subway. This is, I think, an important thing, because we can deliberate and we can come up with what we need to, even if that may not seem to be within our capability, we’ve demonstrated it several times and I just wanted to say that before we go to our next questions.
Q: Before I speak, I would like to say thank you. Because the knowledge that you spoke was very informative.
My name M—H— and what I wanted to ask was that, by any chance do you have knowledge of when the choice would be made to go ahead with the agenda of establishing the breakdown of the banking system? I just want to know if you have any knowledge of that. Not — you know — I just want to know if there’s any knowledge that you may have or anything you may have heard from colleagues or anything like that?
STEGER: Well, it’s ongoing now. These banks are collapsing as we speak; that’s public. That’s clear. That’s the discussion. What’s lacking is a quality of leadership inside the trans-Atlantic system, and predominantly the opposition is going to come likely from the United States, though in all countries you see a real failed leader, as we see with this Presidential election.
So the situation we have to look at, you have to take it from a global perspective. You can’t just see the collapse of the system independent of what’s developing in Eurasia. You have to see the perspective of what’s been accomplished, in terms of an in-depth commitment towards a different quality of humanity that’s now radiating out of China, to Russia, to India, now intensively to Southeast Asia, and it will continue to consolidate in an increase number of nations, nations in Africa, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, other nations are beginning to move more and more aggressively to this orientation. Now, why is that important? Because it’s the very reason, while this British Empire system, the drug system, the finance system; the war program, the one that Bush and Cheney pushed, the one that Obama has been pushing for seven and a half years, that is now at the point of being extinguished, of being eradicated. Now, that’s dangerous, it’s incredibly dangerous.
And Obama was specifically put in office because he was the kind of person — Mr. LaRouche had said in early 2009, “this is the kind of person that’s hard to find. This is a psychopath, a kind of person who will be willing to pretend he’s your closest friend while he’s killing off all of your children.” So there’s a quality of commitment from this kind of figure which will be willing to plunge the world into a state of total self-destruction, a nuclear war, even. A kind of Emperor Nero-like personality.
This is a kind of factor that too many people want to ignore, this kind of danger, this profile of who this guy really is. That strategic danger has to be addressed. That has to be a basis of a turning point within American political discussion that eliminates this guy’s political program, his political power and any legacy he might have. And that we break the Presidency from this level of British influence.
In essence we have to return the Presidency to a Hamilton perspective, and that means today, to LaRouche, that you go with the LaRouche option. Because we’re the only entity, we’re the only organization in this country, that has the moral courage to take on Obama and fight him the entire time. And we’re the very basis today, while we can still bring this guy down now and stop his war drive.
But not just stop the war drive — you’ve changed the Presidency. You have to have a fundamental shift in the orientation of our country politically. That means Glass-Steagall, it means dealing with the drug problem and the wars; it means working with nations like Russia and China with that kind of perspective. And we’re at a point where this guy is desperate; he’s panicked. What we did with the JASTA fight was real. We pushed him to associate publicly with the Saudis, with the terrorists. That was a significant shift politically.
But the danger of war, people want to overlook. And that’s what we’ve got to change and we can do that right now.
Q: [follow-up] I just want to ask one more question? Through my research, I’ve come across the fact of something being explained, there was something I was watching, saying that he either already has, or is planning to establish martial law. I wanted to understand how far does that go, and if you have any knowledge based on on that…?[crosstalk]
STEGER: Well, that’s been the danger. I mean, essentially we’ve been in martial law, since Obama’s Presidency, or even since the 9/11 attacks. You essentially have a level of a surveillance state, attempting to control the population. You have FBI so-called planted terrorists — every terrorist we seem to find, you had one recently, that that put bombs in the streets of Manhattan and New Jersey. The FBI was well aware of this guy, from his own father, over a year prior to these incidents. So you have an ongoing, orchestrated kind of police-state/terror operation inside the United States. You have a publicly acknowledged surveillance state in the United States.
You have an ongoing financial breakdown, beginning in 2008. We’ve had decreasing interest rates since that crisis to the point where they’re now negative! Some are even talking about going negative 6%, these kinds of financial bankruptcies! I mean, just publicly admitted total bankruptcy. You’ve had nonstop bailouts, nonstop printing of money, $85 billion a month coming from the Federal Reserve. In the course of October, November and December, there’ll be more money printed and distributed by the main central banks on the planet, Europe, London and Japan, than at any point since 2008.
You’ve been living the last eight years in a nonstop total economic and financial breakdown of this United States, in an ongoing, perpetual war state, a mass murder program run by Obama.
I mean, and sometime the problem is that we normalize where we are, because you’re living in it! So you say, “yeah, but we’re going to get to a point to a break point.” We are getting crushed and destroyed by this Obama Presidency, and it’s an ongoing process. And the problem is, that because of the global strategic changes, because of the optimism now radiating out of Europe, there is a very real threat, a very real threat to this British imperial system.
And that means that our forces, our patriotic forces in the United States in Europe, and other parts of the world, must move and move aggressively. And I think our responsibility here is to shut down this Obama program, and to really forced a sense of what a new banking and economic system looks like, beginning with Glass-Steagall. But we have to move on this now. The timeframe is very short, in terms of our opportunity to pull a major shift off.
Q: [follow-up] Thank you very much, I really appreciate it. I’m very much into the rest of what’s going on. It’s my first time here, and I’ll do my best to get involved as much as possible; I have some friends and colleagues that invited me. But thank you very much; your knowledge is very informative. Thank you, I appreciate it.
Q: My name is C—S— and I’m a student at LaGuardia Community College from here in New York. I live in Brooklyn. My question is about the situation that is occurring currently with Mosul, which has a lot to do with money, because any war money is involved.
So how is this going to affect us even further with going into other countries and trying to get involved, when we can’t even do something within our own country?
STEGER: The situation in Mosul is unclear, that’s the problem. It’s not clear what we’re doing in Iraq right now. It’s not clear what the operation is. But what we know for sure is that Obama cannot be trusted: this is by far the most dangerous President you hopefully will ever see in your lifetime. The United States has had many bad Presidents; this is a different magnitude of insanity. For your entire almost conscious life, you’ve dealt with an insane Presidency. Bush and Cheney were criminal, sociopaths in the way they operated; mass lies, mass deception for destruction of entire countries like Iraq.
But Obama has been even more nefarious in its nature, because Obama presented himself as a somehow hopeful figure, a person who could solve problems, who could bring people together, but this was a very Satanic show, emphasis on Satanic. It was evil. This guy intended to go into power with a mass-kill agenda, and that’s what he’s done: He started out with a health care program modeled on massive rationing like the Nazis did in Germany in the 1930s. it was a Nazi health care program, they wanted to lower the cost of health care, lower the amount of money we were spending; they wanted to go for a mass murder program against the people that were the most helpless, the elderly, the chronically ill. And so, instead of addressing the economic crisis, he moved in this direction.
So the situation in the Middle East is right now dominated by that Satanic force. The problem in Syria, as even Bashar al Assad, the President of Syria, has said, will be easily solved as soon the Satanic operations by Obama and the British, with their Saudi forces and Qatar backing the terrorists, as soon as that is shut down, the problem in Syria can be solved very easily. The problem in Iraq can be solved easily. The orientations of Russia and China are comprehensive; it’s deal with the terrorism, deal with the drugs, because the drugs fund them; deal with the fact that you’ve got to develop these nations according to a policy of international law.
That is now possible. Eight years ago when Obama came into office, this option, this new paradigm was not possible. You’re now talking about a commitment to world peace and global development; you’re talking about a commitment to eradicate poverty on the planet within the coming decades, within your lifetime, as emanating today from China, from India, from Russia, and increasingly other nations. This is over 4 billion people on the planet are now part of a political and cultural orientation to eradicate these basic problems; while we, in the West, while we in the United States under Obama are driving for nuclear war!
And it’s that kind of contradiction we’ve got to make more clear to the American people. Not to shame them, though they should be somewhat ashamed with what they’ve accepted; but they should also be emboldened by the fact that we can now accomplish the very things we want to accomplish in our country. We can address this perpetual war policy, we can address the bankruptcy of the country. But, and this is why you should stick around for the Hamilton reading, because what Hamilton did as a young man, was he recognized that even under total bankruptcy and devastation of a country, like we face today in our United States, with the right policies and vision, we can very quickly manifest the most remarkable economic and cultural recovery we’ve ever seen. And that’s what you should be a part of.
Q: Good afternoon, Jessica, from Brooklyn. It’s good to see you. Your answer to the young lady’s question is pretty much in keeping with what I’m going to raise right now, and you might want to elaborate a little further; but the Thursday night conference call, the national conference call, my sister, who lives in Virginia Beach, called into the call. [https://youtu.be/_Z1Q7saDvTo] We’ve been talking lately about many things, and I just want to remind people that this is the same sister who three or four years ago almost tossed me out of her house at Thanksgiving, because she was an Obama-lover. So we’ve come a long way.
She said that after the conference call, we are going to talk extensively this weekend. But one of the things that we talked about that was raised, and I don’t want to get into the election at all, but one of the things that came up in her conversation was, this emphasis on trying to make Russia look like an aggressor: That this puppet thing, this Hillary thing, where she went into great lengths over and over again, to talk about how these military people are saying that the surveillance that Russia’s doing is trying to undermine our elections and all these things that are demonizing Putin, and making it appear that they are the aggressors. And she, having a brain, actually felt that this was some type of deceit, this was some kind of ploy.
And I’d like, in keeping with what you were saying already, but just comment on what this while demonizing thing is, and this war drive.
STEGER: I think it’s important to first state that Putin knows what he’s doing. I mean, this guy, you could say he’s a cool cookie — he knows what he’s doing. He knows that the American people, the ones that are thinking, are going to be capable seeing through a lot of this crap. He knows that his policy orientations are the right ones, they’re truthful, they’re just. Not that Russia’s perfect or anything of that nature, but that what he’s committed to as a world conception is a truthful one.
And specifically, with Putin and Russia, their collaboration with China, they know they represent a very real alternative to the world, an alternative to the West. This is why you have this Obama program; and Hillary is just operating from this Obama program. She’s totally compromised under it. Who knows what’s even there after this? After she’s so submitted and compromised by Obama, no one knows what’s even there. But this Obama program has really been an attempt to cover up this new paradigm.
So I’d say that the specific aspect that we’ve got to get across to more Americans is the quality of mission that’s now been adopted on this planet within the human species. For most people alive today, you’ve lived most of your life with no mission for mankind — anywhere on the planet! Mankind was very well headed towards a major Dark Age, because without a mission, without a sense of where’s mankind, what’s the next leap, the great leap mankind’s going to take, the advancements made from the Renaissance collapse. You have to maintain an upward direction. And you have to maintain it by great leaps towards something of a higher conception of mankind. For 50 years, we were looking at world that was getting destroyed, and as we know, over the last 15-20 years, an accelerated rate of total destruction.
And what’s been consolidated by these nations is real. We’ve looked at what China’s done with the outreach to the Philippines. Duterte’s got a lot of pressure on this so-called war on drugs. There was an interview where someone pushed him, “why aren’t you building rehabilitation centers?” So he showed them a newspaper cover, and he said, “I was left with no money, I was left with no money” — now what he was showing them was a picture of a rehabilitation center, and he said, “but I was left with no money — nothing! The former administration didn’t even address the drug epidemic, let alone leave me some money to deal with it.” What was he pointing to? It was a rehabilitation center that was gifted by China! It was built for the Philippines by China as a gift to deal with the drug epidemic.
China is now working with Vietnam. You see the same level of political fight in Indonesia. There is a real comprehensive attempt, to eradicate that Satanic evil, this cultural evil that has been destroying mankind now for this 50 years, that now exists on the planet. And unfortunately most Americans just have no idea of it. If we communicate the Silk Road, from the standpoint of some railroads, or power plants, then you can say, — there’s an argument today that says “they’re going to build too many railroads, that’s why they’re not going to make it. China’s going to go under, just building too many railroads.” They’re not building just railroads, they’re having a comprehensive development of their entire nation and people, and the entire surrounding geographical area. They’re going for a cultural upshift of mankind in identity. They’re igniting a mission for mankind, and offering that opportunity to any nation.
Now, Americans have got to get a sense of that. And the problem is that concept is so far away, they’ve forgotten what it looks like! They’re not going to get it, you can’t just describe it — “Oh, yeah! I remember that!” There’s not a nostalgic sense for that, it’s lost. It was in the World War II generation, why Lyn has such a strong sense of what mankind can accomplish. He did at least exist at a time when there was that.
But the young people today in college, their entire adult life or conscious life has been under Bush-Cheney and Obama. So we’ve really got to make it clear, — to the members of the Congress, to the state assembly — there are opportunities today that exist that are far beyond what we had conceived prior! Fundamental shifts in how we can approach and deal with our country. That’s why Hamilton’s banking system is now more possible than ever. Because it’s implicitly already there in the BRICS! We see this credit system in the New Development Bank and the AIIB. Maybe not conscious enough; maybe the Hamilton conception, really, we have to contribute that to the world. This is a strategic conception! It’s a very specific one that Lyn’s laid out in his Four Laws. It’s the most scientific advanced conception we have of the human species, what Lyn’s presented. We’ve got to make that more clear.
But on a strategic level, we’ve got to move more Americans, like your sister, like members of Congress, around what’s really developing in the world. Because that’s where the fight is, that’s the strategic fight. And I think if we do, we’ll find ourselves even more successful. I would say, that’s the very thing we did with the JASTA fight, what the Manhattan Project has been. It’s been an international fight, a much higher strategic and cultural fight that we’ve waged in Manhattan over these last two years, that have made us so much more powerful and so much more effective.
SPEED: This will be our final question, and in order for us to get to our Hamilton work we’re going to make this the final question.
Q: Hi Alvin here in New York. A brief report of a very small intervention, but perhaps more significant than I think of it to be earlier this week. There is a very small exhibit at the New York Public Library on Hamilton and a tour was offered earlier this week and I attended, and you see one of the problems right away when there are only five other people there. And I don’t think one of them was less than 70 years old.
The tour guide was very friendly, went through a formula, a straightforward, matter of fact if you just read the problem which I have, that’s pretty much what she went through. But of course, there are some useful documents there — the Federalist Papers are there in their original form. So again, it’s not uninteresting to go through.
What was interesting, was at the end of her little tour, as she was about to announce it, a couple of times questions came up here or there; and it was welcomed and very friendly, but what seemed to be a question I was posing at first, took over the presentation and people were responding very well to the principle of Hamilton, his genius; and of course, they go through the Burr murder, though they don’t call it that. But they do mention the swindle that he pulled off with the promise of a water system that turned into Chase Bank. And I used that to parlay into that’s the problem we have today; that’s what you people here need to do, the platform is there. The LaRouche organization has been fighting for this principle, just like FDR — these types of things, and I probably went on for two or three minutes. And it was a lot of fun. At the end of it, she thanked everyone for attending and then turned to me and said, “And thank you very much.”
So then, the questions came up: Who are you? Where do you get all of this stuff from…? I unfortunately only realized later that I left out the all important BRICS involvement as the Hamiltonian principle. But Hamilton, in that little room, was alive and well, and we kicked that around a little bit. And it was not unimportant that I began working on the credit report, leading into this by the way; that was a big, big help.
Just wanted to share that with you, and respond as you wish.
STEGER: Yeah, that’s great. I think you guys are going to take up more of Hamilton’s work and I think your report stands on its own.
So let me make a point Hamilton would appreciate and what Lyn emphasized today, just so it’s unambiguous: We are really at a decisive point, and the great danger is the breakout of a broader nuclear war. Now Obama is weak, as Mr. LaRouche was very clear on, after the JASTA victory, our enemy is panicked, they’re weak and they’re desperate. They’re losing their pathways to create the kind of war and destruction that they had thought was possible.
So I think we have to be very sharp in the coming days, to pull together an assessment and to make sure we continue to mobilize with all the energy necessary. Because of the timeframe of this financial collapse, and because we are very close to winning something remarkable for mankind, and it really takes a certain focus in the short timeframe ahead to really create a shift in the Presidency around this Hamilton conception.
SPEED: Good. We apparently have, Mike, a person that came — go ahead.
Q: Hi. I’m T— from New York. You spoke a lot about the drug culture, and I was wondering what you meant by that? Do you mean the money that comes from the selling of drugs? Or do you mean the effect that drugs have on those who take them? If it’s the latter, then what is that effect? Do you mean narcotics or do you mean prescription drugs, or both? If so which prescription drugs and which narcotics?
STEGER: All of the above, right? You’re starting to get a sense of it, but you have more to do. So, it’s all of it. And you have to realize that the entire orientation is a commitment, the current system we live in, the current system you spent your life in has been set up and more financial resources and physical resources have been dedicated to one fundamental thing, to destroying your creative ability. Now that means you can destroy it from an analytical level, you can destroy it on an emotional level, you can destroy it on a philosophical level. And you destroy the social process around it. So even if you can emerge with some level of creative orientation, there’s nothing by which you can associate with around you. You’re almost kind of in a wilderness kind of thing. So you lose that sense of social fabric of a mission.
So what you’ve got to do is you’ve got to eradicate every aspect of it. Now some of these things are a little easier. Some of the questions, of shutting down the banks that launder the money, we’ve identified that since the 1970s in a book called Dope, Inc., which identified the banks were all conduits for a British Imperial system for the drug trade specifically, and the arms trade and the terrorism. So that’s one aspect.
So you’ve got to go after those. You’ve got rehabilitate people who are addicts, who not only have physical addictions but there’s going to be psychological and emotional effects, of a population, which are extensive. You’ve got a health care system gone mad! This is the Nazi health care program, it’s palliative care: You’ve got a problem, take a painkiller. There’s no real ability to actually address physical health. You’ve got a philosophical orientation which is existentialist, which has been pumped in; it’s been pumped in by Nazi philosophers like Heidegger or Nietzsche, or others, contrary to the philosophical orientations of people like Hamilton or others; Mr. LaRouche is probably leading philosophical figure today representing this tradition.
So you’ve got to revive a certain sense of what is mankind, actually? What is the human species? What makes us so distinct? Now, I could describe that, but that’s not the point. You’ve got to make a culture of reliving that discovery. And you’ve got to give it a reason, you’ve got to give it a mission.
One of the things that China has done, which gives you an indication of what a truly human culture looks like, versus the drug culture we have, is that an unbridled commitment to go far beyond anything mankind’s ever done before, to make major breakthroughs in things like fusion energy technology. We used to have a commitment like this. Why did we lose it? It fundamentally changes the entire characteristic of human economy, of the human species. It was identified by the Department of Energy, it was possible. All we needed was to fund the specific research programs, and we funded it at below bare minimum, far below.
So it was a lack of commitment: Why would we all of a sudden have a lack of commitment to advance as a country? Why would all of a sudden, would the American population accept it? Accept a police-state, surveillance state? A perpetual war program? The drug addiction of most Americans? Why would we accept these things?
What you see in China, is you see the capacity to reawaken the quality of a creative spirit. And we are one human species, so once this is adopted at the depth that it has been in China, you start to reawaken a quality of optimism, of potential, of possibility that might not exist within your own nation, but you see it as part of the human species. And that’s what we have to reawaken in young people. And if we have that kind of mission, we’ll begin to solve all the other problems.
But first and foremost, you’ve got to shut down the banks. You’ve got to shut down Obama and the war drive. That’s an immediate mission. And then we’ve got to restore a real culture to this country, and awaken a certain optimism.
That’s not going to answer your question entirely, but hopefully it provokes you to look into it more and do more work with us.
SPEED: I would just say in closing, and thanking Mike for what he had to say, and he may have a little bit more, to say this: We here have a three-phase program. We start it with our solfège class; we had this presentation; and now we go to the reading of Hamilton. This represents an upgrading of our Manhattan Project process. All three components will remain in effect and be improved, and I say this because you have to have something in evidence somewhere, that is an expression as a seed crystal of the alternative culture to precisely what was just described. And that’s what we’re trying to do.
So Mike, do you have anything else, is that your summary? Would you like to leave it at that?
STEGER: I’ve said my piece: You guys have fun!
SPEED: OK, very good. Thanks. [applause]