Shofar FTP Archive File: people/l/larouche.lyndon/larouch-bevel
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:55:34 PDT 1992
Article: 12173 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12173 alt.politics.clinton:14647
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche /Bevel program pamphlet: part 1
Message-ID: <164-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:10:46 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 174
front matter
The LaRouche-Bevel Program to Save the Nation
Reversing 30 Years of Post-Industrial Suicide
Independents for Economic Recovery, LaRouche for President
Leesburg, Virginia
October 1992.
- Contents -
Preface
Introduction
Meet the Candidates
Chapter 1: Why We Are Suffering Through a New Great
Depression
Chapter 2: Solving the Fresh Water Crisis
Chapter 3: Building New Railways, Waterways, and Highways
Chapter 4: Mag-Lev: The Technology of the 21st Century
Chapter 5: Nuclear Fission: Bridge to Fusion Power
Chapter 6: The Best Health Care for Every American
Chapter 7: Restore Literacy and Classical Education
Chapter 8: LaRouche's Program for 6 Million New Jobs
Chapter 9: `Jumpstart' for the U.S.A. from the `Productive
Triangle'
Chapter 10: Great Projects to Develop the World
Chapter 11: Frontier in Space: LaRouche's Moon-Mars
Program
LaRouche on America's National Purpose
Chapter 12: Revive Family Farming and Feed the World
Chapter 13: LaRouche's Program for a War on AIDS
Chapter 14: Why LaRouche Calls NAFTA `Auschwitz Below
the Border'
Chapter 15: How the United States Became a Police State
{The Theological and Constitutional Alternative to
the Death Penalty} by the Reverend James L. Bevel
Appendix: The LaRouche-Bevel Announcement
Appendix: Proposed Federal Reserve Nationalization Act of 1992
- Preface -
This book presents the program of independent presidential
candidate Lyndon H. LaRouche and his vice-presidential
running mate, the Reverend James Luther Bevel, to create 6 to
8 million jobs during the first months of their
administration. It outlines the emergency economic measures
through which the current world depression can be ended,
including 1) declaring a national economic emergency; 2)
constitutionalizing the Federal Reserve; 3) undertaking
needed large-scale infrastructure and development projects in
the areas of transportation, energy production, water,
education, and health care; and 4) implementing international
and domestic debt restructuring and moratoria.
The program that the LaRouche-Bevel ticket proposes
was successfully implemented during the era of President John
F. Kennedy's space program, and before that, during the later
years of the Franklin Delano Roosevelt presidency. It was
successfully implemented by our greatest President, Abraham
Lincoln, even in the midst of a bloody civil war.
Today, the LaRouche-Bevel program--known during the last
century as the American System--represents the only hope for
a world that is financially and economically bankrupt and
filled with starvation, disease, unemployment, poverty,
terrorism, civil strife, and increasing desperation. Can we
fail to act at a time when we know that the drug-infested
schools of our nation are threatening the destruction of the
hearts and minds of our children? Can we fail to act when we
see the starving and terrified faces of children fleeing from
war-torn Bosnia? Do we see not only terrible, personal
anguish, but the beginnings of European-wide and worldwide
conflict and war?
We are losing generations of our young people because of
a neo-Malthusian economic policy, imposed on the nation since
the 1963 assassination of President Kennedy. Since the murder
of Kennedy, every American President has helped implement
this post-industrial policy. Industry and agriculture have
been abandoned for real estate and commodities speculation,
junk bonds, and communications ``industries.'' Shopping centers,
office towers, and mobile phones have replaced factories and
farms. MacDonald's is one of our nation's largest employers;
at thousands of hamburger outlets across the country, young
people serve up McMuffins and Big Macs, but don't know
how to make change without a computerized cash register.
Meanwhile, America's highly skilled steel and machine-tool
workers have been put out of work and/or placed into
low-skilled jobs. Our workforce is either unemployed or
underemployed.
We are creating economic disasters within the recently
emerged democracies of eastern Europe by insisting that they
also tear down their industry and implement radical free
trade doctrines. Lyndon LaRouche has demonstrated that the
collapse of the Third World economies and the destruction of
the economic base of eastern Europe is a result of a colonial
economic doctrine administered through the
``conditionalities'' austerity policies of the International
Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Colonial policy calls for
abandoning industry and growing cash crops for export which,
for many nations in Ibero-America and elsewhere, increasingly
has become marijuana and cocaine. This policy turned inward
has created a United States that increasingly resembles a
Third World country where the middle class, made up of
skilled blue collar and white collar workers, shrinks, and
more and more people are impoverished.
This book presents the alternative. The LaRouche-Bevel
ticket has outlined a program that can restore economic,
political, and social justice to the nation and the world.
The LaRouche-Bevel ticket opposes the North American Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the GATT proposal because they
are colonialist, radical free trade doctrines that are designed
to destroy the last remnant of economic independence
remaining to farmers and the labor movement. To restore the
principles of redemptive justice to this country, their
campaign has called for ending the barbaric practice of
capital punishment. They have also called for opening the
files on the Kennedy and King assassinations and the
politically motivated incarceration of Lyndon H. LaRouche.
LaRouche and his associates have led a decades-long
battle against the drug mafias and the colonial policies of
the IMF and the World Bank which spawned them. Reverend Bevel
brings to the ticket a wealth of experience.
He served as director of non-violent political
action for Martin Luther King; was leader of the Children's
March in Birmingham, Alabama; helped lead the Selma Right to
Vote movement; and served as director of the Mobilization to
End the War in Vietnam.
During recent years, Reverend Bevel has devoted his
energies to the organization of Precinct
Councils, which involves engaging communities in political
actions that strengthen the individual and community
comprehension of constitutional processes. Reverend Bevel has
also called for putting prayer and classical education back
into the schools, where drugs and the teaching of so-called
alternative lifestyles have become a substitute for real
education.
The political combination of LaRouche and Bevel brings
together defined economic alternatives to the colonial
destruction of the world, together with the best of the
leadership and the hopes and aspirations of the civil rights
movement. The LaRouche-Bevel ticket provides hope for the
voters, who hitherto have been offered the
lesser-of-two-evils alternative of George Bush and Bill
Clinton. Now there is a choice. The responsibility for the
outcome of this year's presidential election is with you, the
voter. Your vote can determine the course of history.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:52:35 PDT 1992
Article: 12174 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12174 alt.politics.clinton:14648
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 2
Message-ID: <165-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:12:44 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 300
- Introduction -
As of this point, the world has officially entered
into the second and greatest worldwide depression of the
20th century. Ironically, this new depression began in
London, 61 years to the week after the collapse of the
pound in September 1931 unleashed what is called, in
memory of us older folk of the present day, the Great
Depression. Ironically, it also occurred about 650 years
after the greatest financial crash in medieval or modern
European history. This occurred in 1342, when the king of
England repudiated England's debts to the banking houses
of Bardi and Peruzzi and so forth, the usurious banking
houses which had caused the plunge of Europe into a New
Dark Age, as it was called, as a result of their practice
of usury,@s1 or, shall we say, their practice of the
measures introduced in our own recent history by former
Federal Reserve Chairman Paul A. Volcker.@s2
You don't hear much about that depression from the
political campaigns. The Bush campaign and the Clinton
campaign are ducking the issue. Oh yes, they are all
talking about economic recovery. One is worse than the
other. Bush, Clinton, and Perot, thus far, are proposing
nothing but what we know from the 1920s and 1930s as
Mussolini-style fascism.@s3 Underlying the fact that these
gentlemen, so far, have apparently not the slightest idea
of what to do about the new Great Depression, is the fact that
they are all thinking in terms of increasing taxes,
(although George says he won't do it), and cutting
entitlements and other federal expenditures and state
expenditures savagely. What they're proposing--increasing
taxes and cutting budgets--will not work. In fact, it will
make the problem worse.
The reason we have budget crises is not that we have
spent too much. We may have spent on things we shouldn't
have spent for. But it's not that we're spending too much
money. The problem is that there is not enough tax
revenue, and not because we are not taxing people enough.
We could tax the speculative capital gains sector much
more heavily, but in general we're already overtaxing
ordinary households of ordinary families. The problem is
that we don't have enough tax revenues because the economy
is collapsing, because too many people are either
unemployed, underemployed, or employed at such low
incomes that they can't even support their families with
the miserable pittance they receive for some terrible
service job.
Obviously the only way this problem is going to be
solved is to increase the number of people who are working
and to increase the level of productive technology
employed by our labor force.@s4 In other words, we have to
increase the tax revenue base of state and federal
governments without increasing the tax rates, particularly
the tax rates on ordinary productive businesses or on
ordinary family households. Yes, tax the speculators as
much as you choose; dry speculation into extinction. That
would not be a bad thing. But don't tax industry, don't
tax farms, don't tax infrastructure, and don't tax the
normal family household any more than they are already
being taxed. In fact, in some cases we should have
reductions on the lower end and tax incentives to certain
businesses. That is the only way we're going to bring the
economy into balance and get out of the depression.@s5
But none of the other candidates are willing to do
that for a very simple reason: Because they are appealing
to--one could use some very unpleasant words, but I
shan't--they are appealing, or playing up to popular
delusions which are associated with submission to the big
financial powers, the big financial families, the big
financial foundations, and the national news media which
is controlled together with the major entertainment media,
by those wealthy parasites who control our society.
The problem with Bush's program, the problem with
Clinton's program, the problem with Perot's program, is
that they are all playing into the hands of parasites. For
example, Felix Rohatyn of New York's Lazards Fre@agres
investment banking house. He's the fellow who gave you the
Big MAC bankers' dictatorship in New York. He's smart, but
he represents the parasites. Each one of these fellows is
more or less capitulating to the proposals of these
parasites as expressed through the mouth of their resident
philosopher, Felix Rohatyn. They are unwilling to address
the problem.
The problem is essentially this: First of all, a long
time ago, the United States moved away from what we used
to call the American System of Political-Economy, which
was premised on the fact that the U.S. government, as we
see in Article I of our federal Constitution, and also in
{Section 8} of that Constitution, has a monopoly
over the issuance and control of its own currency.@s6 Under
the Federal Reserve Act, in particular, a scheme involving
the backers of Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, the
U.S. surrendered its sovereignty, illegally and
unconstitutionally, to a private corporation created by
the Warburg interests and chartered by the federal
government--the so-called Federal Reserve System. Under
this arrangement, a group of financial bankers,
international financial bankers, to put a fine point on
it, actually controls the currency and credit of the
United States, not the government of the people of the
United States.@s7 That is what these fellows--Bush, Clinton,
and Perot--are refusing to face. That is the first
problem.
The second problem is that since the death of
President John F. Kennedy, the U.S.A. has adopted a new
set of axioms for policymaking. The name for this set of
axioms is the rock-drug-sex counterculture. The
rock-drug-sex counterculture was invented by an avowedly
satanic cult, the cult of Aleister Crowley in Britain, and
imported from Britain into the U.S.A. That's a fact.@s8
Family values are out the window. We have new sexes, we
have new this, we have new that. A diminishing number of
children are living in families with their own parents.
The number of step-children, the number of children with
single parents is rising catastrophically in the United
States, and that's a big part of our cultural and social
problems.
At the same time that the counterculture was
introduced, about the middle of the 1960s, the U.S.
government, under the rubric of the so-called Great
Society, adopted what was known by the ideologues as a
neo-Malthusian post-industrial policy--that is, a move
toward a utopia called a post-industrial society.@s9
It's a lunatic utopia, but it's the one we're moving
toward.
The combination of neo-Malthusian and rock-drug-sex
counterculture morals and assumptions in shaping policy
have brought the U.S.A. into the decade of greed--the
decade from 1982 to 1992, the decade of the yuppie, the
decade of the person who makes a million on Wall
Street--unearned income, doing nothing--while the
industries, the farms, and the local communities collapse.
Many people are fascinated with Wall Street income, but it
is nothing more than pure speculation, unearned money,
nothing to do with production of food, nothing to do with
production of things we use from industry. This outlook
has dominated our policy, and it came as it must to an
end. The whole system has collapsed. The system which had
been praised, the system of deregulation, the system of
so-called free trade, has collapsed.
Do you want to get out of the depression? Not only
must we go back to the philosophy of government, and
philosophy of policy, we had at least in the Kennedy
administration. But even so, we're not going to recover.
There is no bottom to this depression as long as we
continue to do what, so far, Bush, Clinton, and Perot have
proposed to do: To try to save the disease at the expense
of the patient. To try to preserve these parasites behind
Felix Rohatyn, the bankers, the private bankers, the
international bankers who loot this country, to save that
system at the expense of the economy by means of what's
called austerity.
I know this austerity very well. Not only is it
specifically fascist, that is, it was invented as a policy
during the time of Mussolini and was Mussolini's Italy
policy, but we have a famous case in Germany of this in
the early 1930s, under the chancellor named Bruening.
Bruening ruined the German economy, which paved the way
for Hitler.@s1@s0 Do you want the same thing repeated today?
What we have today around the globe in foreign policy
and domestically is a growing World War III. This World War
III did not break out in the form of an exchange in
nuclear weapons. It could have, but it didn't. Instead,
the Berlin Wall came down, because the Russian economy
collapsed itself in the effort to prepare to launch war
against the United States. The economic collapse imposed
upon the Russian economy and the eastern European
economies by looting to sustain this war effort brought
about the conditions which led to the 1989-1990 collapse
of the Soviet imperial system.@s1@s1 So the war didn't come with
nuclear weapons. The war came in the Balkans, the war came
in the Middle East, the war came in Central Asia, the war
threatens in Southeast Asia. What we have is a spread of
little wars, of revolutions, of murderous riots, and so
forth, such as the Sendero Luminoso terrorists in Peru or
the similar narco-terrorists in Colombia and Brazil and so
forth.@s1@s2
War is spreading around the planet. The underlying
reason it is spreading is that the economy is collapsed.
There is nothing to hold nations together. Therefore, they
are splitting up into little micro-nations. There is no
common interest, because of the cultural and economic
policy changes which have occurred over the past 25 years.
If you vote for one of the media-approved candidates,
you're voting for your own destruction. You may not
deserve it, but if it comes and you've voted for one of
these candidates, you will have brought that misery upon
yourself. The time has come in which you must address the
problem. You must recognize that something has gone
wrong--that the policies of the post-Kennedy period,
except a few early things under Johnson in the direction
of civil rights, were generally wrong. The philosophy of
policymaking was and is wrong, and you have to take it
and throw it out the window. It's the utopian experiment that
failed. And we have to go back to the values we had no
later than the time of President John F. Kennedy.
I'm not holding up John F. Kennedy as an angel or a
saint or something of that sort. I'm simply indicating
that under his administration, we had the kind of policies
which have really kept the nation going, which would have
avoided the crisis to which we have come today. That's an
historical fact!
This is all underlined by the fact that it was about
61 years ago, prior to this week's collapse of the pound,
allowing the British pound to begin to float, plunging the
entire world into chaos, that in September 1931, the
British goverment also set the pound to float, plunging
the world into a Great Depression, and that in the year
1342, 650 years ago, there was a decision by the British
king, at that time a good decision, to repudiate London's
debts to the Bardi, Peruzzi, and other Venetian bankers,
which launched the great financial collapse of the
fourteenth century. The point is that we didn't get into
this mess accidentally. We got into it through policies
which were wrong, policies which every administration over
the past 25 years has supported, and policies which the
majority of the voting Americans have supported. The error
lies with the policies chosen by credulous voting
Americans, or a majority of those voters, who allow the
mass entertainment and news media, and not common sense,
to dictate the way they vote.
{Rochester, Minnesota
September 18, 1992
1. LaRouche, Lyndon H., ``The Pestilence of Usury,''
New York: National Democratic Policy Committee, 1981.
2. ``LaRouche Warns: Volcker's Measures Wil Lead to
Disaster,'' reprinted in {A Program for America.}
Washington, D.C.: LaRouche Democratic Campaign, 1985.
3. ``Project Democracy's Program: The Fascist Corporate
State,'' in {Project Democracy: The Parallel
Government Behind in the Iran-Contra Affair, EIR Special
Report,} Washington, D.C.: Executive
Intelligence Review, 1987.
4. Hamilton, Alexander, ``A Report to the Congress on
the Subject of Manufactures,'' (1791) reprinted in
Spannaus, Nancy and White, Christopher, {Political
Economy of the American Revolution,} New York:
University Editions, 1977.
LaRouche, Lyndon H., ``The World Economic Depression
in Progress: Why It Happened, and How Recovery Must
Be Organized,'' Leesburg, Virginia: LaRouche Democratic
Campaign, 1986.
5. LaRouche, Lyndon, ``Summary of Federal Loan Measures
to Stabilize State and Local Tax Revenue Bases,''
published in {New Federalist,} Dec. 16, 1987.
6. Hamilton, Alexander, ``Report on a National Bank,'' (1790)
reprinted in Spannaus, Nancy and White, Christopher,
{Political Economy of the American Revolution,}
New York: University Editions, 1977.
7. Salisbury, W. Allen, {The Civil War and the
American System,'' New York: University Editions, 1978.
8. {Satanism: Crime Wave of the '90s, Executive
Intelligence Review Special Report,} Washington,
D.C.: Executive Intelligence Review, 1990.
``Is Satanism in Your Schoolyard?'' Leesburg, Virginia:
{New Federalist} pamphlet, 1990.
9. LaRouche, Lyndon H., {There Are No Limits to
Growth,} New York: New Benjamin Franklin Publishing
Company, 1983.
10. LaRouche, Helga Zepp, editor, {The Hitler
Book,} New York: New Benjamin Franklin House, 1984.
11. ``Global Showdown: The Russian Imperial War Plan
for 1988,'' {Executive Intelligence Review Special
Report,} Washington, D.C.: Executive Intelligence
Review, July 1985.
12. {Destroy Sendero Luminoso!} Leesburg,
Virginia: {New Federalist} special report,
1992.
``Bush's Surrender to Dope, Inc.: U.S. Policy Is
Destroying Colombia,'' {Executive Intelligence
Review} special report. Washington, D.C.: Executive
Intelligence Review, 1991.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:52:59 PDT 1992
Article: 12175 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12175 alt.politics.clinton:14649
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 3
Message-ID: <166-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:14:25 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 321
- Meet the Candidates -
- Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. -
$Economist and statesman Lyndon LaRouche has been a
highly controversial international public figure for
two decades, because of his opposition to
neo-Malthusian economic and population policies; his
insistent campaign for global monetary reform based on
equity for the Third World; and his role in exposing
the powerful financial interests which control
international drug-trafficking.
As of March 9, 1992, LaRouche had been held as a
political prisoner of the Bush administration for 1,133
days, serving a 15-year sentence at Rochester,
Minnesota federal prison as a result of one of the most
shocking judicial railroads in U.S. history. The United
Nations Commission on Human Rights announced on
February 7, 1992 that it is investigating the LaRouche
case as a possible violation of human rights by the
U.S. government.
LaRouche was born on September 8, 1922 in
Rochester, New Hampshire. He was educated in the
Massachusetts public school system and attended
Northeastern University from 1940-42 and from 1946-47.
Mr. LaRouche served in the China-India-Burma theater
during World War II. He has been employed as an
industrial consultant to footwear manufacturers and
other industrial concerns.
Mr. LaRouche was married on December 29, 1977 to
German political leader and author Helga Zepp-LaRouche.
Mrs. LaRouche is the founder and director of the
Schiller Institute, and the founder of the
international Club of Life. She is a published
authority on the work of 15th century churchman and
philosopher Nicolaus of Cusa, and 18th century German
poet and dramatist Friedrich Schiller, who repeatedly
treated the theme of the American Revolution.
- The LaRouche-Riemann Method -
LaRouche describes himself as an economist
specializing in physical economy, and lists as a
leading accomplishment of his adult life his
contributions to the advancement of economic science.
He is the discoverer (1952) of what is today known as
the LaRouche-Riemann method of economic analysis, the
most accurate method of economic forecasting in
existence. His work in economics is an advancement of
the American System of political-economy (of Gottfried
Leibniz, Alexander Hamilton, Friedrich List, and Matthew
and Henry Carey). The central feature of his
contribution to economic science is the successful
application of work of leading 19th century
mathematical physicist Bernhard Riemann, to solve the
problem of correlating rates of technological progress
with rates of economic growth: the LaRouche-Riemann
method. He is the author of the 1984 textbook, {So,
You Wish to Learn All About Economics?} and the
1992 trilogy {The Science of Christian
Economy}, written while in prison, among hundreds
of other book,s magazine articles, and economic policy
proposals for governments.
In 1974, LaRouche founded and became an editor of
the hard-hitting international weekly news magazine,
Executive Intelligence Review (EIR). EIR has
established a reputation among governments and business
circles in various parts of the world as one of the
more influential publications in its price-class ($396
per year), and the news organization behind EIR is
rated by some specialists as among the most outstanding
private intelligence capabilities in the publishing
field.
In 1976, LaRouche was among the founding members
of the Fusion Energy Foundation, a nonprofit scientific
foundation which lobbied for the rapid development of
nuclear energy technologies, a revitalization of the
space program, and increased American participation in
experimental work on the frontiers of science. LaRouche
was a frequent contributor to the popular
{Fusion} magazine, until that publication was
forcibly closed down by the U.S. Department of Justice
in April 1987. He was a founding editor of {New
Solidarity}, a mass-circulation weekly newspaper,
also closed by the DoJ in April 1987.
In 1977, Mr. LaRouche first publicly proposed the
U.S. crash-basis development of anti-ballistic missile
systems based on new physical principles, what later
became the Reagan administration's Strategic Defense
Initiative (SDI). In the months leading up to President
Reagan's March 23, 1983 announcement of the SDI,
LaRouche and associates collaborated with the White
House National Security Council in formulation of the
policy.
- - The LaRouche Candidates' Movement - -
LaRouche ran for the presidency in 1976, 1980,
1984, and 1988, and campaigned for Virginia's 10th
congressional district seat in 1990. In 1986--having
already announced for the White House run of 1988--he
led a slate of more than 2,000 LaRouche Democrats in
local, state and federal elections. On March 18, 1986,
LaRouche associates won Illinois Democratic primary
elections for the posts of lieutenant governor and
secretary of state. Other candidates in 1986 primaries
and elections received between 15% and 25% of the vote
in a number of states, as an average of winners and
losers.
LaRouche names as a leading enemy the
Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith (ADL) and its
collaborators within the U.S. Department of Justice and
federal executive--a combination he has nicknamed the
``Get LaRouche Task Force.'' This animus developed
following an April 1975 visit by LaRouche to the nation
of Iraq, at the invitation of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath
Party. In consultations with Arab leaders, LaRouche
proposed a Middle East peace plan based on Arab-Israeli
cooperation for the development of the region. En route
back to the United States from this trip, LaRouche
proposed his International Development Bank program for
global monetary reform and development at a press
conference in Bonn, West Germany. Mr. LaRouche later
met with Israeli leader Abba Eban in New York, to
discuss the peace plan.
In 1978, LaRouche commissioned the book {Dope,
Inc.}, which exposed the ``citizens above
suspicion'' on the financial side of the global drug
traffic, and traced ADL ties to the international drug
cartel. A best-seller, Dope, Inc. is now in its third
edition.
LaRouche has also been associated with the
National Anti-Drug Coalition; the National Democratic
Policy Committee, a bipartisan political action
committee; the Club of Life, the leading institutional
opponent of the neo-Malthusian Club of Rome; the
Schiller Institute, an international think tank; and
the International Caucus of Labor Committees, a
philosophical association on the model of American
founding father Benjamin Franklin's ``junto''
organization.
- National Goals for America -
LaRouche has emphasized the need for a return to
classical art, music, science, and culture as an
antidote to today's prevailing moral degeneration and
cultural pessimism. He has outlined three goals for our
nation: 1) eradicating poverty across the globe; 2)
establishing a durable peace among nations; and 3)
colonization of the Moon, Mars, and the solar system
beyond. To produce the citizens of the 21st
century--who can meet these goals, as young Americans
of the 1960s met the goal of landing a man on the
Moon--LaRouche urges an immediate return to the
classical curriculum which trained the geniuses of the
Renaissance, and an end to cultural relativism and
environmentalism in our nation's schoolrooms.
During February and March of 1992, in two national
television broadcasts and a series of 11 full-page ads
in the {Washington Times}, LaRouche presented
to American voters his unique program to reverse
today's deepening economic depression, with the
creation of 6 million new jobs within the first year of
his presidency. LaRouche's approach features the
reshaping of the Federal Reserve System into a new
National Bank of the United States, to direct $300
billion dollars of low-interest credit each year into
desperately needed government-funded infrastructure
projects of water management, transportation, energy
production, health care, and education services. Jobs
created on these projects, and spinoffs in private
industry, will put 6 million Americans back to work in
1993, says LaRouche.
In conjunction with this economic recovery program
at home, LaRouche urges deepened economic collaboration
with the western Europe and the nations now emerging
from under the yoke of communism in large-scale
development programs to end the famine and disease now
engulfing the Third World. The Bretton Woods economic
system which has enslaved the developing sector and
created economic crisis in the West, and the Versailles
system upon it was based, says LaRouche, are rotten
beyond repair, and must be replaced with a just, new
world economic order.
- The Reverend James L. Bevel -
The Reverend James L. Bevel, 55, who has agreed to
run as Lyndon LaRouche's vice presidential candidate
(see article, p. 1), is a prominent name in the history
of the American civil rights movement, in the history
of the movement against the Vietnam War, and other
milestones of 20th-century American political life.
Born Oct. 19, 1936, in Itta Bena, Miss., he is an
ordained Baptist minister, having attended the American
Baptist Theological Seminary in Nashville, Tenn. from
1957 to 1961. He has pastored churches in Tennessee,
Illinois, Ohio, and New York.
In his theological studies, and later as a
minister, the Rev. Bevel came to the understanding of
Christianity as what he characterizes as the ``science
of human consciousness,'' underlying and mandating each
and every individual citizen to take responsibility for
the human community overall. It was on the basis of
that outlook that he came to non-violence, and came to
assume responsibility for the pivotal role in the civil
rights Movement of the 1960s.
At the same time, he says he came to see expressed
in the Declaration of Independence the fullest
sociological manifestation of scientific human
consciousness, the goal toward which all people must
strive.
It was those two concepts, he says, that
formed--and form--the twin bases of his thinking,
social action, and educational and economic development
theories and processes.
- Non-Violence -
As a young pastor of a congregation, the Rev.
Bevel was introduced to Leo Tolstoy's ``The Kingdom of
God is Within You'' and Mahatma Gandhi's ``My
Experiment with Truth,'' and as a result, his ministry
turned in a radically different direction as he became
involved with a non-violent study group in Nashville in
1959. In 1960, he became a leader of the sit-in
movement in Nashville; from that day forward, he says,
he was involved in consistently applying the theology
of the Sermon on the Mount to social problems and
personal needs alike.
It was under his chairmanship of the Nashville
Student Movement that the Freedom Rides were
continued--the Freedom Rides which led to the ending of
segregation in interstate transportation.
As a member of the Student Nonviolent National
Steering Committee, the Rev. Bevel assumed the
responsibility for the Mississippi Project, one of three
projects being set up in 1961-62 by the Student
Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), the other two
being the Albany Project and the Selma Project. It was
his work in, and his success in, these non-violent
projects that led Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to ask
him to function as the Mississippi field organizer for
the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC),
and, later, as the director of the SCLC's Direct
Action.
It was while serving in this capacity that the
Rev. Bevel developed the Children's Marches in
Birmingham and initiated the world-famous March on
Washington in 1963.
After the 1963 bombing of the Sixteenth Street
Baptist Church in Birmingham, he proposed, developed,
and executed the Alabama Right to Vote Movement, which
culminated in the Selma campaign and the March on
Montgomery in 1965. Those movements led, in turn, to
the passage of the 1965 federal Civil Rights Voting
Act.
Wanting to test the theory of non-violence in a
Northern context, he developed the Tenant Unions and
the Open Housing Movement in Chicago in 1965 and 1966,
which led to a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court to
outlaw racial segregation in housing. He had previously
challenged the non-violent movement to oppose the use
of violence in foreign policy. As a result, in 1966, he
became the director of the Mobilization to End the War
in Vietnam. Under his directorship, the Mobilization to
End the War in Vietnam produced the largest
demonstration in the history of the United States to
that date, at the United Nations building in New York,
on April 15, 1967.
Bevel was the director of Non-Violent Education in
the Poor People's Campaign, and was present with Martin
Luther King at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tenn. on
April 4, 1968, when King was shot.
- Leaving the SCLC -
His insistence on a fair trial for accused Martin
Luther King assassin James Earl Ray led to his
departure from the Southern Christian Leadership
Conference.
About the same time, Bevel was also attempting to
get the SCLC to fight against the buildup of militarism
around the world, and to fight for the scientific
education of American children. Not finding support in
the SCLC leadership for his ideas for a fair trial for
Ray, or for a worldwide citizens' movement to fight the
military buildup and to fight for scientific education
for all American children, he was voted out of the
organization; thereupon, he attended Vanderbilt
University Divinity School to further his theological
studies.
Discovering that psychology and psychoanalysis
were not sufficient to address the problems of mental
disorder created by segregation and oppression, Bevel
developed the Man Non-Violent Clinic in Baltimore, Md.,
to study and rectify the psychological damage done to
both European-Americans and African-Americans by the
practice of slavery and racial segregation. It was out
of this study that Bevel developed the Human and
Community Development Institute in Nashville, Tenn.,
and the Organic Farm Project in Hiram, Ohio.
In 1984, Bevel ran for Congress in the 7th
Congressional District in Illinois, introducing the
Precinct Council as a means for character,
institutional, and economic development. Running as a
Republican, he received 33% of the vote in a
predominantly Democratic district where Republicans
normally receive 8-10% of the vote.
After the murder of a young basketball star in
Chicago, Bevel developed the SEED (Students for
Education and Economic Development) Process, to give
inner-city children a tool that is more powerful than
gang membership.
He has recently been elected as the Director of
the Bettis Academy in Trenton, S.C., where he is
developing a comprehensive educational and economic
development curriculum that will leave students
economically independent and institutionally sovereign.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:53:14 PDT 1992
Article: 12176 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12176 alt.politics.clinton:14650
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 4
Message-ID: <167-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:16:1 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 278
- Why We Are Suffering Through a New Great Depression -
``Last year, 49 out of 50 blue-ribbon economists
were saying there would be a recovery by this year.
They were wrong, and I was wrong.''
--George Bush, Jan. 15, 1992.
{Lyndon LaRouche was the 50th economist.}
The record of the 1980s, through the
accelerating economic crisis sweeping the United
States from 1989-1992, is that Lyndon LaRouche was
the only political leader who knew what was
happening, and {what was going to happen if we
did not make a ``bootlegger's turn'' in economic
policy.}
On the campaign trail in 1988, George Bush said
``Lyndon LaRouche deserves to be in a lot of
trouble;'' LaRouche was put in prison in the week
Bush was inaugurated President. He has been in
prison for the entire three years of economic
disaster of Bush's presidency. The country has gone
from economic decline to banking collapse; unable to
meet the most elementary needs of our own people;
unable to help any of the new nations emerging from
the Soviet empire; trying to bully our ``allies''
into bailing us out.
For allowing this to happen, you are suffering
now through a worsening, and accelerating, economic
depression. For staying away from ``the extremist
LaRouche,'' for backing politicians who are economic
incompetents and fools, chattering ``deregulation''
or the latest ``free market'' phrase of the moment,
your suffering is going to get a lot worse.
LaRouche is a political prisoner. Use your
imagination and figure out a way to help get
LaRouche elected President--and out of prison--or
get ready for this depression to get much, much
worse: worse than the 1930s Great Depression; worse
than any economic collapse since the 14th century.
- LaRouche's Record -
It isn't necessary to quote to you what
LaRouche says {now} about the failure of the
British-American economic policies of the 1980s, the
failure which all the politicians and economists are
just now discovering for the 1992 campaign. Unlike
those others, we can tell you what LaRouche said
{at that time}, when he was trying to
{reverse} those policies; when the U.S.
banking system could still have been saved.
In {Spring 1980}, with the economy in
recession due to Federal Reserve Chairman Paul
Volcker's high interest rates, LaRouche's news
service, Executive Intelligence Review News Service
(EIRNS), was the {only} one to forecast that
``deregulation'' policies would produce a second,
deeper recession in 1981-82. All the other economic
think tanks were going in the opposite direction
from the actual economy, wishfully foreseeing
nothing but ``recovery,'' as the chart shows.
On {February 4, 1984}, in a half-hour
prime-time broadcast purchased from ABC-TV,
candidate LaRouche said: ``The rot and misery in our
economy is increasing, and unless we launch an
emergency economic mobilization, that rot and misery
will begin to spread much faster. This weakness in
our national economy, combined with worsening
conditions in world trade, has already become a
major strategic threat to the future of our
country.''
On {May 10, 1984}, again on prime-time
network TV, LaRouche repeated: ``As in 1931, while
the government in Washington speaks of recovery and
prosperity just around the corner, the United States
is sliding into a new, deep economic depression.
Employers, desperate for profits under worsening
depression conditions, are seeking to cut the real
wages of Americans.''
{What did the White House say?} That it
was the 19th consecutive month of economic recovery.
{What did LaRouche's Democratic opponents
say?} That the ``recovery'' needed to be more
``broad-based.'' More than that, the Anti-Defamation
League and NBC-TV put on a half-hour show claiming
LaRouche was a dangerous extremist plotting to
assassinate political and military leaders.
On {November 11, 1986}, in
{EIR} magazine, LaRouche wrote: ``the Reagan
`economic upsurge' never occurred, and under present
U.S. economic policies, the United States is sliding
into a new world depression.... A spiral of
indebtedness of government, consumers, and
businesses has been promoted, to attempt to conceal
the depressive effects of bad, `post-industrial'
economic policies, by promoting a wild spree of
buying on credit.''
{What did the White House economists
say?} That it was the 49th month of
uninterrupted recovery. {What did LaRouche's
Democratic opponents say?} Chairman Manatt of
the Democratic Party, with Mario Cuomo and Patrick
Moynihan at a press conference, vowed to keep
LaRouche candidates off primary ballots by any means
necessary.
On {May 5, 1987} in {EIR},
LaRouche wrote: ``A crash in October would not be
absolutely certain, but it would be at least a very
good guess. This forecast is based on the
observation, that even now, President Reagan is
clinging stubbornly to belief in a `Reagan economic
recovery' which never actually occurred.... As long
as the official line of the administration is to
stick to the `successful economic policies' of the
past five years, ... an October crash would be very
probable.''
{What happened?} In October, the stock
and bond markets crashed. {What did the
administration do?} Pumped huge amounts of money
from the Federal Reserve into stocks and banks, and
tried to continue the same policies.
On {October 23, 1987,} in an ``Open
Letter to Democrats on the Crash,'' LaRouche wrote:
``Once the collapse of the international financial
bubble hits into the highly leveraged layer of real
estate holdings, banks around the country will be
swept away in a tidal wave--unless federal
regulatory action intervenes to prevent this.
Contrary to the President's wishful assertions, the
economy is not sound. Agriculture, manufacturing,
and basic economic infrastructure have been
collapsing at an accelerating rate since February
1980; a growing portion of the workforce has been
shifted out of productive employment into much
lower-paid administrative, sales, and services.''
{What did the White House say?} That
despite the October 1987 crash, it was the 60th
consecutive month of recovery. {What did
LaRouche's Democratic opponents say?} Dukakis
said that his state was the model for the ongoing
economic recovery! {What happened?}
Massachusetts led the nation in the collapse of real
estate, banks, and the plunge into depression.
On {July 4, 1989,} LaRouche, in a
pamphlet written in prison, said: ``Coming
generations will remember President George Bush for
the worst crisis to have struck these United States
in more than a hundred years. Among these crises
will be the deepest financial collapse of this
century.''
- Germany and Europe -
In foreign policy too, LaRouche in the 1980s
was the only political leader who remembered who our
nation's allies were, and what we must support as a
nation--the independence of sovereign nations from
imperial tyranny. All other political leaders of
both parties redefined Germany and Japan as our
{adversaries,} and committed what LaRouche
called ``the folly of supporting Gorbachov'' rather
than the newly independent nations of the former
Soviet empire.
On {October 12, 1988,} before anything
was stirring in Eastern Europe, LaRouche held a
press conference in Berlin, and his campaign paid to
have it broadcast on American television two days
later. He said: ``The time has come for steps toward
the reunification of Germany, with the obvious
prospect that Berlin might resume its role as the
nation's capital. I base this possibility on the
reality of a terrible food crisis which has erupted
during the past several months.... The economy of
the Soviet bloc itself is a terrible and worsening
failure.... The Soviet bloc economy has reached the
critical point. In its present form, it will
continue to slide downhill from here on.
``We must rebuild our economies to the level at
which we can provide, to the nations of the Soviet
bloc, an escape from the terrible and worsening
effects of their economic suffering. If the nations
of the West adopt an emergency agricultural policy,
those nations, working together, could ensure that
we reach the level of food supply represented by 2.4
billion tons of grain annually. It would mean
scrapping the current agricultural policies of many
governments ... I shall propose that we act to
establish `Food for Peace' agreements, with the goal
that neither the people of the Soviet Union, nor the
developing nations, shall go hungry.... We of the
United States and Germany should say to the Soviet
bloc: `Let us show you what we can do for the
peoples of Eastern Europe.'|''
{What did then-Vice President Bush
say?} Visiting Moscow the previous year, Bush
said, ``We need some of those Red Army mechanics
over in Detroit, to get things in more productive
shape.'' {What happened?} October 3, 1990,
two years after LaRouche's public forecast, Germany
was reunified; Berlin became its capital and it has
since tried, without American help, to solve the
huge food crisis in Eastern Europe and the former
Soviet Union. {What did Republicans and
Democrats agree on, as that food crisis got worse
since 1988?} They agreed on the need to continue
to {reduce} food production in the United
States, Europe, and the other most productive
agricultural countries.
- And the Solution -
In Lyndon LaRouche's case, unlike that of all
the other candidates for President, we don't have to
tell you what economic recovery strategy he just
made up two months ago, after consulting the polls.
We can tell you the economic recovery strategy he
laid out {then}, when we could still have
averted this deepening misery of our people. We can
tell you what he has been saying {since
1981} had to be done, and must be done now.
On {February 4, 1984,} for example, on
the same ABC-TV broadcast quoted above, LaRouche
said: ``To solve the problem, I propose specifically
this. That we `federalize' our Federal Reserve
System according to Article 1, Sections 8 and 9 of
our Federal Constitution. We shall take away from
the Fed its power to print money as it chooses ...
we shall prevent the Fed from continuing to operate
its favorite game, that inflationary `Keynesian
multiplier.' [Then,] to supply an adequate amount of
credit to our private banks, to get the economy
going again, the Congress must authorize an initial
issue of about $500 billions of gold-reserve
currency notes.... These notes must be loaned at
discount rates between 2% and 4%, for the kinds of
loans that I shall indicate to you--manufacturing,
and capital improvements in basic economic
infrastructure. The purpose is to put 5 million or
more of our unemployed back to work fairly quickly,
and to get our farms and factories moving again.''
{What did the White House and the
Democratic Party leadership say?} They
{agreed} on the `Gramm-Rudman' strategy,
that cutting the budget deficit took priority over
stimulating the economy or anything else. {What
do they say now?} They admit that that strategy
was a failure, and a straightjacket against dealing
with the depression, as LaRouche said it would be in
1987.
{Now,} when LaRouche tells you that
George Bush's proposed ``free trade'' agreement with
Mexico (NAFTA) will be a disaster, sending millions
of remaining American workers' jobs to a
south-of-the-border Auschwitz with wages of $2.65
{per day}, do you believe him? Do you know
that the other Democratic candidates for President
all also support this NAFTA or ``free trade with
Mexico'' in one form or another?
Nothing has changed, except for the worse.
LaRouche is still the only candidate whose candidacy
{means anything} to you, as far as whether
your grandchildren will survive and have a country
to live in.
Today LaRouche has a plan for 6 million jobs
building desperately needed infrastructure--not
makeshift labor, but necessary jobs--using the form
of national banking of Alexander Hamilton,
nationalizing the Federal Reserve, to generate
low-interest credits to rebuild our economic
infrastructure.
LaRouche's three years political imprisonment
is {your problem.} Enough is enough! Help
figure out a way, to put him in the White House in
1993.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:53:21 PDT 1992
Article: 12177 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12177 alt.politics.clinton:14651
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 5
Message-ID: <168-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:18:54 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 217
- Chapter 2 -
- Solving the Fresh Water Crisis -
Some foolish people think that the water supply
shortages now hitting many states are somehow
predetermined by nature. Nothing is further from the
truth. What is required is to start up the long-delayed
water improvement projects, and nuclear desalination
programs to reverse the ecological and biological
catastrophe now in the making.
{Won't You Please Let Your Grandchildren Have
Drink of Fresh Water?} was the title of a
mass-circulation report commissioned by Lyndon H.
LaRouche, Jr. in 1982. The document called for using
``plain common sense'' to advance nuclear desalination
technologies and the North American Water and Power
Alliance (NAWAPA). In the preface to the pamphlet,
LaRouche wrote: ``next to a general thermonuclear war,
the greatest single environmental danger to the
American people over the coming two decades is the
danger that whole regions of our nation will simply run
out of usable fresh-water supplies.''
Whenever we as a nation have failed to make the
necessary investments in water supply infrastructure,
we have suffered. If we ignore these needs today, we
will suffer again. We are already seeing the return of
water-borne illnesses, such as cholera, which were
epidemic during the decade of the 1890s. Dustbowl
conditions, like those of the 1930s, are threatened
once again.
Today, serious water supply problems are worsening
in California and other western regions; Florida and
the Southeast; the upper Missouri Basin; the coastal
regions of New Jersey, Virginia, and the Gulf. Across
the country, local water treatment facilities are
breaking down; coliform bacteria contamination is
rising. Conditions are so bad in the Rio Grande River
Basin that cholera will break out soon.
People in these locations are suffering water
supply problems because necessary water works
developments were systematically stopped over the past
25-30 years. Moreover, wherever you live, you and the
entire U.S. population are feeling the effects of
drastically inadequate per household supplies and usage
of water, in terms of declining amounts of water going
into farming, food processing, manufacturing,
transport, and power generation, nationally.
Look at the amount of water that goes for making a
car. George Bush--and his loyal opposition--talk of
selling thousands more cars? To manufacture one car,
takes an average of over 10,040 gallons of water
directly, and thousands more indirectly. If a purchase
order from Japan came in tomorrow for thousands of
cars, many auto plants couldn't fill it because the
effort would drain local water supplies. Will they
blame that on foreigners too? Or maybe, on ``nature?''
- The National Water Budget -
Most people think of rivers, lakes, aquifers, and
water wells as resources fixed by nature, to be either
conserved or consumed. On the contrary. The only
relatively fixed feature of the water cycle in North
America is the overall annual precipitation, which
amounts to an average 4,200 billion gallons a day
(bgd.) Of that, about 1,200 bgd reaches the 48
coterminous states, where man's intervention over the
past 200 years has directly affected what water
engineers call the average dependable supply of runoff.
Today this dependable supply totals about 515 bgd, and
it is not a fixed figure, but the result of man's
activities to clear channels, drain swamps, prevent
evaporation, and create storage capacity. (You can
think of the quantity of 1 billion gallons as a column
of water whose base is the size of a football field,
and whose height is over four times that of the
Washington Monument.)
As of the 1960s, the United States, with over 190
million people, was using overall about 308 bgd, which
was 60% of the average dependable supply of 515 bgd at
that time. This supply reflected the dam-building of
the interwar period--the Grand Coulee, the Hoover, and
the Colorado River development, the Tennessee Valley
Authority, and the post-war California Water Plan
(adopted in 1957) to date. Plans were made to continue
large-scale water projects to provide for the future.
To serve a population in 1990 of 250 million, it was
projected that 588 bgd were required.
Toward this objective, the U.S. Geological Survey
conducted a systematic analysis in the 1960s of the
nation's water resources in order to assay which river
basins had a water surplus or deficit; and where
man-made interventions were necessary to increase flow.
The map shows 18 of the hydrologic regions drawn up by
the U.S. Geological Survey. Most of the 48 coterminous
states receive between 20 and 40 inches of rainfall a
year; but one-third of the area has less than 20 inches
of annual precipitation--mostly in the dry western
states.
Designs were drawn up in the 1960s for a
continental water development program, called the North
American Water and Power Alliance (NAWAPA). The
idea--shown on the map, is to divert water southward
that otherwise flows unused, into the Arctic Circle.
NAWAPA would add at least 135 bgd to the lower United
States, and additional water supplies to Canada and
Mexico.
- Ecological Degradation -
But the NAWAPA project was abandoned. Regional
water projects were also stalled; and desalination R&D
was all but shut down. The results are today's water
shortages and ecological degradation--all man-made. The
hydrologic region map shows some of the worst water
problem areas.
@sb|{California}. The state has been
obtaining 40% of its annual water needs from pumping
ground water, which in 11 of 50 major aquifers, has led
to an overdraft crisis. For example, thousands of
square miles of farmland in the San Joaquin Valley have
sunk.
@sb|{Florida.} The water supplies for
Miami, Tampa, Jacksonville, and many other population
centers are threatened by the saline intrusion into
ground water sources, because of heavy pumping.
@sb|{East Coast.} Long Island, N.Y.
supplies are threatened because the underlying aquifer
has been mined to the point of sea water intrusion.
Virginia Beach, in the James River system, is in a
similar crisis.
@sb|{Texas.} Land subsidence as a result
of ground water pumping has occurred in the Houston and
Galveston areas, causing costly damage to bridges,
buildings, roads, and underground utilities.
@sb|{Rio Grande, Lower Colorado River
Basins.} This region, plus southern California, the
U.S. border zone of {maquiladoras}--slave labor
assembly plants--has become a biological breakdown zone
because of the lack of safe water. Water-borne diseases
are spreading, and cholera is expected soon.
The present-day national water budget is seen to
be even more inadequate if measured in terms of what
should be the minimum per capita, per household and per
acre water supplies in a growing economy. During the
1980s Reagan Bush ``recovery,'' water use has been
drying up along with economic activity.
Per capita, water withdrawals (removal of water
from the annual precipitation flow) for all uses
increased from about 528 gallons per person per day in
1900, to nearly 2,000 gallons per day in 1980. The
development of modern agriculture, and the application
of electrification, account for the lion's share of the
increase.
But since 1980, per capita withdrawals have, for
the first time in the past 100 years, gone into
decline! The estimated per capita use of water in 1985
was 1,673 gallons a day, down from over 2,000 gallons
daily in 1980. This reflects economic policy shifts,
not drought.
Water use is declining for American households in
each of the three major categories of use: household
functioning and related urban uses; irrigation for
agriculture; and for meeting the needs of power
production and industrial plant requirements.
- And, the Solution -
@sb|{DESALINATION.} The Atlantic and
Pacific Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico constitute
``reservoirs'' of virtually limitless capacity, given
the installation of advanced technology nuclear
desalination facilities--the modular high-temperature
gas-cooled reactor (MHTGR) design. If these plants are
sited at key points along the Pacific, Gulf, and
Atlantic coastlines, their sweetwater output can
reverse the ecological decay now taking place.
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California--bigger than many national water systems,
has before it a custom design by General Atomics for an
MHTGR modular installation that could produce 106
million gallons of fresh water a day, in addition to
466 MW net electric power output. This prototype is
adaptable for other locations.
@sb|{NAWAPA}. The northwestern region of
North America receives about one-quarter of all the
rain and snow hitting the continent. The NAWAPA plan
would divert 15% of this flow (now draining northward,)
into a natural wonder reservoir--the 500-mile-long (up
to 10 miles wide) Rocky Mountain Trench in British
Columbia.
The project should proceed in three phases, so
that the benefits of each stage lay the groundwork for
succeeding development. {Phase I}: Send water
eastward across the Canadian Plains provinces,
providing water for irrigation there, as well navigable
channels that would connect the Pacific Ocean to the
Great Lakes, allowing for the regulation of Great Lakes
and St. Lawrence Seaway levels for the first time.
{Phase II}: Sending water southeast across
Montana and the Dakotas, where it would recharge the
depleted Ogallala Aquifer on the High Plains, augment
the flow of the Missouri and Mississippi rivers, and
link the Canadian Plains with the Mississippi by a
navigable canal. {Phase III}: Channeling water
to the dry Southwest.
@sb|{REGIONAL PROJECTS:} Lift the
arbitrary bans--imposed in the false name of
``environmentalism''-- on tapping such flows as, for
example, the runoff of the northern California rivers,
now going out to sea unused.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:53:25 PDT 1992
Article: 12178 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12178 alt.politics.clinton:14652
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 6
Message-ID: <169-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:20:32 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 208
- Chapter 3 -
- Building New Railways, Waterways, and Highways -
Three times in the past twelve years, Lyndon LaRouche
has put before the U.S. electorate proposals for
rebuilding the nation's transportation grid. Such
proposals were key features of his economic recovery
programs in the 1980 election campaign, again in 1984, and
also in 1988.
LaRouche told people that the deregulation of
trucking, airlines, and railroads which had been launched
during the presidency of Jimmy Carter in 1978, and has
continued to this day thanks to the
``magic-of-the-market-place'' free enterprise fanatics of
the Reagan and Bush administrations, was {economically
insane}, and a sure recipe for disaster.
Was he right, or not? The disaster LaRouche warned of
over more than a decade ago has already happened.
@sb|{Air Traffic:} Before deregulation, U.S.
airlines were world leaders. Where are they now? The
once-proud flag fleet, led by Pan Am, Trans World, and
Eastern is either in bankruptcy court, or about to be.
Equipment replacement and maintenance schedules have been
sacrificed to the debts incurred in the course of
post-deregulation price wars and leveraged buy-outs.
Consolidation of carriers has concentrated traffic in
fewer and fewer, but larger and larger airports. The
result? Traffic congestion in the air and on the ground
and millions of passenger-hours wasted ({Figure
1}). No new airport has been built since 1978.
@sb|{Railroads:} 1980 passage of the Staggers
``RRRR'' Act did for the post-Penn Central bankruptcy
railroad system what deregulation did to airlines. Mergers
and the so-called consolidation of the industry have cut
railroad employment in half, and track mileage by 25%. The
production of railroad rolling stock--locomotives,
passenger cars and freight cars--plummeted to below
500 for each category in 1989 ({Figure 2}).
@sb|{Highways:} To keep the nation's highway
system as it is, pot-holes, collapsing bridges and all,
would require government expenditures in the order of $100
billion per year. To maintain the present capacity of the
congested system would require a 30% increase in urban
highway miles before the end of the decade. To keep up
with population growth, $150 billion and more would have
to be allocated {each year} by government, for
highway construction and maintenance. The Surface
Transportation Act passed into law before Christmas,
provides $150 billion over the next five years. Economic
costs of congestion have already exceeded spending on the
highways in some parts of the country.
@sb|{Waterways:} There is no East Coast or
Gulf Coast port capable of handling the size of vessel--in
excess of 100,000 tons--which for the last generation has
been the standard in world shipping. Long Beach and Puget
Sound on the West Coast can handle bulk carriers up to
150,000 tons. The Louisiana Off-shore Oil Port (LOOP) can
handle large oil tankers. But the U.S.A. is no longer
producing large ships ({Figure 3}). The famed St.
Lawrence Seaway was rendered obsolete before it opened to
traffic, because of the growth in international vessel
size. Great Lakes traffic is further constrained by
refusal to invest in improvements at the Welland Canal and
locks at Sault St. Marie. Internal waterways, such
as the Monongahela and Allegheny reaches of the upper Ohio River
have been constrained by lack of investment in the
improvement of locks and dams.
Separately, each of these crises is a matter of the
nation's very existence. Taken together, they are a leading
symptom of the economic breakdown which has been caused by
the policies which have prevailed, not just since 1978,
but for the 28 years since the assassination of President
John F. Kennedy.
- What Is Required? -
The transportation network is to the economy as a
whole as the arteries and veins of the circulatory system
are to the body. It ought to be capable of moving goods
and people where they are needed, in the most timely and
effective way. By the end of the 1980s, the U.S. transport
network as a whole was moving about 5 billion tons of
goods through the economy every year. This can be assumed
to approximate the total physical goods throughput of the
economy. Truck movements accounted for over 40% of the
total, rail for about 28%, pipelines for about 17%, and the
waterways for about 12% ({Figure 4}). Approximately
half of the total freight moved was accounted for by the
combination of coal shipments and movements of crude oil
and refined petroleum products. Grain shipments, at about
13% of the total, were the next largest commodity item
shipped. About 56 tons of goods moved through the economy
for each household in the nation.
Not since the 1950s has the per-household volume of
goods shipped been so low. Back in 1967, 82 tons of
freight were shipped, by all modes of transportation, for
each of the country's households. This was the highest
level reached in the postwar period ({Figure 5}).
The transport network's capacity to deliver the goods has
collapsed since then by more than 30%, though over the
same period the number of people per household has also
collapsed by more than 20%, from 3.4 to 2.7.
To reverse this collapse would require a transport
grid with the capacity of moving between 6.5 and 7 billion
tons of goods per year, and an economic policy which would
create the employment opportunities which would permit the
needed goods to be produced.
If the total goods moved are divided by the
goods-producing operatives of the manufacturing sector,
450 tons of product enter into circulation for each person
productively employed. To produce the increase which would
restore the per-household goods throughput of the late
1960s requires the capital investment to create in the
range of from 3.5 to 4.5 million new productive jobs in
the manufacturing sector.
LaRouche's present campaign commitment to create 6
million jobs in basic economic infrastructure and
manufacturing would set a floor for the present capacity
required to move freight at about 8 billion tons per year,
or nearly 90 tons of goods moved per household, per year.
- How Do We Compare? -
How does this compare with other developed economies?
In the late 1960s, the transportation systems of both
Japan and Germany moved roughly the same volume of goods
per household per year as the United States. By the late
1980s, Germany's transport grid had grown to the point
that 114 tons, double the U.S. level, was being
transported per household. Japan was transporting 170 tons
per household, more than three times the U.S. volume
({Figure 6}). Both countries produce for export,
to pay their way in the world. A U.S. economy which was
functioning as a world-class exporter would be generating
between 10 and 15 billion tons of goods to be shipped each
year.
As the nearly 200-year history of national
infrastructure development in the United States attests,
infrastructure, like transportation, ought to be built to
last, not from year to year, but from generation to
generation. What should be on the agenda now is not simply
the matter of what volume of goods and passengers we ought
to be capable of moving through the transport grid, but
what kind of grid ought we to be designing and building
now, to be improved on over the period from 2020-2050.
This, after all, is simply considering in what shape the
country will be during the adult lifetimes of our
grandchildren and their children.
Deregulation and budget-cutting has brought us to the
point that merely fixing up the system is no more
possible. The nation's infrastructure needs a massive
overhaul, with a price tag of trillions of dollars. If
LaRouche was right, then those who opposed, or ignored
him, were wrong. Have we learned our lesson?
- And, the Solution -
The cheapest mode of transportation is by water, but
water-borne commerce is limited in speed, such that the
mode is suited to movements of those bulk goods, such as
coal and grain, which do not require speedy delivery.
For most other purposes, rail ought to be the mode of
choice. The standard for assessing relative costs is
provided by the measurement of how many tons each mode can
move how many miles in an hour. On this basis, a
two-track railroad operating three trains an hour, at only
60 miles per hour (mph), moves the same bulk of goods as
far in an hour as a fleet of 330 20-ton trucks driven at 60 mph for
an hour. Relative labor and energy costs follow from this
performance ratio. Additionally, the same two-track
railroad requires only one-twelfth the land area of the
highways used by trucks. Since the speed of trucks is
relatively bounded by the limitations of internal
combustion engines, the advantage in favor of rail
increases dramatically with increases in speed. Diesel
engines cannot function above 125 mph.
But high-speed rail systems function for passenger
traffic at speeds in the range of 200 mph. France, with its
Train a@ag Grande Vitesse and Japan with the Shinkansen, have
pioneered the development of rapid rail transit over the last
20 years. The next step, being pioneered in Germany, France,
and Japan, is employing the technology of magnetic
levitation, in which passenger and freight trains can reach
300 miles per hour travelling without friction along a
cushion of air generated between the train and the track.
European nations are now moving to construct a high-speed
rail network which will integrate their continent from east
to west and north to south.
The United States should undertake to develop such
high-speed rail systems, with the objective of rebuilding
the railroad system as the freight mover of choice. This
high-speed rail network should be interfaced with water
transport, through ocean and internal waterway ports, to
take advantage of the benefits of both modes for
rebuilding the country's industrial base. Our program to
rebuild the nation's transportation grid should begin with
the depression-ravaged areas along the Eastern Seaboard,
the area known since 1978 as the ``rust belt,'' bounded by
the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers, and centered on Chicago,
and the area bounded by the Tennessee, Tombigbee, and
Mississippi Rivers.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:53:31 PDT 1992
Article: 12179 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12179 alt.politics.clinton:14653
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 7
Message-ID: <170-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:22:19 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 206
- Chapter 4 -
- Maglev: The Technology of the 21st Century -
>From downtown Boston, 450 miles to the center of the
nation's capital, Washington D.C., in 90 minutes, at
prices cheaper than Amtrak's {Metroliner}? For
the more than 1 million people who make that journey
every year by air, this may seem like a fantasy. But it
isn't. Such is the prospect which lies before us early
in the 21st century, if we implement Lyndon LaRouche's
program for invetsment in magnetic levitation (maglev)
transport systems.
Here's what such a trip would be like. Passengers
arrive at Boston's main station via a network of maglev
commuter lines, at more than 50 miles per hour, shortly
before the scheduled 7:30 a.m. departure of the morning
express service to Washington, D.C., perhaps to be
known as {The 21st Century Unlimited.} There
are no worries about traffic jams or parking spaces. On
board, passengers relax in quiet comfort, while
{The Unlimited} accelerates at nearly three
feet per second per second to a cruising speed of about
300 mph.
Following a re-engineered route from Boston to
Providence, R.I., and then along the Connecticut
coastal strip, (see map) the first, and only stop, New
York City, would be at about 8:15 a.m. From there,
{The Unlimited} would speed toward Washington,
D.C., along roughly the same path Amtrak's
{Metroliner} now follows, arriving at around
9:00 a.m., the beginning of the working day.
- A New American Railroad -
Sound far-fetched, like science fiction? Outside
the United States, maglev train systems are fast
becoming reality. Germany has such a system ready, now,
for commercial application. Japan will also, before the
end of the decade. Rapid development of maglev
technology for the U.S.A., and the construction of a
maglev transportation network, will be a cornerstone of
the LaRouche administration's transportation policy for
the United States, without waiting for any more
wasteful cost-benefit analyses from the bureaucrats.
A high-speed line through the dense population
concentrations of the Eastern Seaboard would be the
first part of the new national network. To help revive
manufacturing in the nation's heartland--the area
bounded by Lake Erie and Michigan to the north, the
Illinois River to the west, and the Ohio River system
to the south and east--LaRouche would also drive lines
westward, through Buffalo, N.Y. in the north, and
Pittsburgh in western Pennsylvania. These would connect
the industrial centers along the shores of Lake
Ontario, Lake Michigan, and Lake Erie, and central
Ohio, with the East Coast and the Chicago-northern
Indiana industrial belt.
The 900-mile journey from New York to Chicago
would be completed in three hours--city center to city
center. Intermediate stops on the southern route would
include Pittsburgh, Columbus or Dayton, Ohio, and on to
Chicago through Union City, Marion, and Peru in
Indiana. The northern route would pass from Boston
through Albany, Rochester, and Buffalo in New York,
Cleveland and Toledo in Ohio, then across the southern
Michigan peninsula, and Gary, Indiana to Chicago (map).
The next step in construction of the new American
railroad would be north-south lines to connect the
cities of the Lake Shore belt with the cities of the
Ohio Valley, and points farther south and west.
- In Germany and Japan -
High-speed maglev transportation systems are
already being built in Germany and Japan. In Germany,
the Transrapid system has received government approval
for commercial operations. Its first phase will connect
the airports of Cologne-Bonn and Duesseldorf, and later
Essen. The Transrapid soon expects approval for
mainline, intercity operations. This program is about
seven years ahead of the the maglev program in Japan,
where the MLU system is scheduled to begin transporting
passengers in the densely populated 320-mile
Tokyo-Nagoya-Osaka corridor by the end of the decade.
Germany and Japan have also developed systems such
as the M-Bahn, the 50 mph magnetically levitated urban
transit system, which functions in Berlin, and the HSST
Corporation's systems, which have provided vehicles for
exposition sites in Tsukba and Yokohama in Japan, and
Vancouver, British Columbia, in Canada. Maglev
technology is already set to meet a family of
transportation functions, from short-distance, but
relative high-speed urban commutes--Japan's HSST can
function at between 60 and 250 mph--to intercity travel
at speeds in excess of 310 mph.
The Transrapid TR-07 is capable of carrying up to
200 passengers at speeds of up to 310 mph. With a
one-minute headway between units, Germany's TR-07 can
transport between 10,000 and 20,000 people per hour.
Japan's commercial design maglev train will consist of
14 cars capable of carrying 900 passengers, and is
intended to move 75-100,000 people per day between
Tokyo and Osaka.
Maglev is set to revolutionize passenger and
freight transportation worldwide by early in the next
century, just as the steam engine revolutionized
transportation more than 150 years ago. Given the
spinoffs which will follow the development of the
transportation systems themselves, such as impetus
given to so-called ``high-temperature'' superconductor
scientific research, the effect will be even more
profound.
- Made in the U.S.A. -
And where is the United States in all this?
Precisely nowhere. It will take a President of the
stature of a Kennedy or a Roosevelt to organize the
catch-up required, without whining about ``unfair
competition.'' After all, these maglev trains are
nothing but modern versions of a technology outlined by
U.S. space pioneer Louis Goddard early in the 20th
century.
The linear electric motor, the power source for
all current maglev prototypes, was developed in the
U.S.A. under a Federal Railroad Administration program
sponsored under the High Speed Ground Transportation
Act of 1965. In 1971, contracts were awarded the Ford
Motor Company and Stanford Research Institute for
experimental development of maglev power sources.
Low-speed propulsion systems for cities were advanced
by Rohr Industries, with Boeing taking up the
development rights. In 1974, a world speed record of
255.4 mph was set by a prototype linear induction motor
vehicle at the Department of Transportation's Pueblo,
Colorado test facility.
Just one year later, in 1975, federal funding for
the program was cut, when the Ford administration and
Congress allowed the 1965 act to lapse. At least 10
years ahead of the rest of the world at the time, the
United States is now completely out of the running.
LaRouche is the President to make up for the lost time.
- Maglev Systems -
Maglev systems feature two basic types of
propulsion and guidance systems: those in which the
systems are onboard the vehicles, such as Japan's HSST
models, and those which are propelled and controlled
from the track on which the vehicles run, known as the
guideway. Both the German TR-07 and the Japanese
MLU-002 models make use of what are called passive
systems. However, the German and Japanese programs make
use of different electromagnetic principles to provide
the suspension, propulsion, and guidance of their
vehicles.
The German Transrapid is based on the attractive
power of magnetic forces, a system called
Electromagnetic Suspension ({Figure 1}). The
vehicle's underframe ``wraps around'' the guideway and
pushes the vehicle up and off its rails. The Japanese
make use of repulsive forces, a system called
Electrodynamic Suspension ({Figure 2}), to lift
the vehicle away from the guideway. These systems must
employ an undercarriage-like landing-gear, for lift-off
and landing, because the vehicles only levitate at
speeds in excess of 25 mph.
The system's potential is completely obscured by
the cost-benefit analysis idiocies tolerated in the
United States--which have been used to destroy our
nation's infrastructure and speed our transformation
into a malthusian, post-industrial society. Comparable
in effective travel time over distances from 200 to 900
miles with aircraft, a maglev unit can carry twice the
passengers at half the cost of a plane such as today's
Boeing 737. The system is cheaper than the movement of
passengers on today's railroad system. Best estimates
of maglev operating and maintenance costs per
passenger-mile are 5.2@ct in 1988 dollars. This is
vastly less than the passenger-mile cost of today's
{Metroliner}, figured at between 16.2@ct and
36@ct, depending on book-keeping methods used.
Maglev systems would actually pay for
themselves--in wasted passenger-hours saved. Estimates
are that $40 billion of economic value is lost to
traffic delays in the nation's eight most congested
urban centers--a sum which could finance the
construction of 3,000 miles of maglev rail networks
every year. The industries and jobs which will be
created to build such a national system will return far
more, in increased productivity, and permanent
improvements to the nation's depleted capital stock, as
will the network itself, than the construction will
ever cost.
As President, Lyndon LaRouche will use such
industries as the leading edge of an export drive, in
which the United States will begin shipping
state-of-the-art capital goods to help the nations of
the Southern Hemisphere develop the economic
infrastructure they need to prosper in the 21st
century. The jobs and industries LaRouche creates,
under his New American Railroad maglev program, will be
here to stay.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:53:36 PDT 1992
Article: 12180 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12180 alt.politics.clinton:14654
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 8
Message-ID: <171-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:23:32 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 211
Nuclear Fission: Bridge to Fusion Power
The next President of the United States will be
confronted with the greatest energy crisis yet seen.
This time, it will not be the result of a shutoff in
oil supplies, nor supposed threats to the supply of
this so-called strategic commodity which helped
motivate last year's genocide against Iraq. This time,
it will be the result of the insanity of the national
energy policy which we have tolerated since the early
1970s. The crisis is scheduled to erupt as a breakdown
of what used to be the world's most productive and
cheapest electricity generating system. For that we
have only ourselves to blame.
The energy crisis could erupt as early as the
first half of the next President's term in office.
Lyndon LaRouche is the only candidate with the
qualifications to deal with it. If voters had not
ignored the energy policy platform he put before the
country in 1980, and again in 1984, we would not now be
facing the crisis which is looming ahead. Even as late
as 1988, LaRouche's policy, if it had been adopted,
could have helped avert what is now becoming all but
inevitable.
- Three Aspects of the Crisis -
There are three aspects of the new energy crisis:
{1. National Science Policy.} The question
here is whether the nation is prepared to rebuild its
dismantled scientific and engineering capacity to the
end of realizing the potentials of controlled
thermonuclear fusion power. Using sea water as its
resource for the fusion of hydrogen and deuterium,
fusion power will bring the energy source of the stars
down to Earth, for a cheap, virtually inexhaustible
energy source.
{2. The Role of Nuclear Fission}. Can
Americans muster sufficient rationality to accept the
scientific fact that nuclear energy is our only means
to reverse the depression collapse at home and end the
genocide against the Third World? Without a commitment
to rebuilding the nuclear industry as rapidly as
possible, there will be no future, either for the
United States, or for the rest of the world.
What is needed is the establishment of an industry
for the mass production of modular nuclear plants, such
as the Modular High Temperature Gas Cooled Reactor
(MHTGR) proposed by General Atomics (diagram).
Development of our nuclear fission capabilities will
provide the bridge to the energy source of the 21st
century: nuclear fusion.
{3. Time to Dump Environmentalism}. Will
Americans wake up and realize that the
``environmentalism'' and ``magic of the marketplace''
obsessions of the last years are shameless frauds?
These are the cover stories for the deliberate
deindustrialization of America. In the case of our
energy industry, environmentalism has brought us to the
point at which America's lights are about to go out.
- Blackout -
The energy crisis has been made inevitable by the
refusal to invest in new generating capacity to meet
increasing demand for electricity. It will be
exacerbated as the provisions of the Clean Air Act,
especially as they apply to coal-burning utilities, go
into effect.
Since the mid-1980s, government and utilities have
insisted that demand for electricity has slowed to the
point that capacity planned to come on line by the end
of the decade will suffice. It won't. Their projected
increase in demand, at less than 2% per annum, has been
consistently wrong. Growth reported by the Energy
Information Administration has consistently been nearly
twice what utilities and government have forecast. The
capacity to meet the added demand does not, and will
not, exist.
By the end of the 1980s, the National Electric
Reliability Council (NERC) had estimated that, with
approximately 2% annual growth in demand for
electricity, 200-300 gigawatts of generating capacity
(a gigawatt is approximately enough energy to supply a
city of 1 million people) would have to be added to the
inventory of generating equipment. By the early 1990s,
about 86 gigawatts could be accounted for as planned,
of which 28.7 gigawatts were under construction. These
estimates were intended to assure that there would be
no shortages by the end of the decade. With a 10-year
lead time to complete construction of even a coal-fired
plant, anything not yet under construction will not be
part of the generating grid 10 years from now, unless
policies are changed.
A shortfall in energy supplies will lead to
voltage reductions and power interruptions--Third World
style. Brownouts and blackouts will happen during
extremes of weather--winter cold and summer heat--which
define the peak demand for electricity. Increasingly,
they will become an ever-present fact of life.
The 1991 amendments to the 1972 Clean Air Act,
which will knock out more than 12 gigawatts of
capacity, will make things worse.
The Bush administration proposed in its 1991
National Energy Plan legislation that the reduction of
the growth of energy consumption would provide a
solution to the supply crisis. William Reilly, head of
the Environmental Protection Adminstration, espoused
his ``green lights campaign,'' to have corporate
consumers of electricity commit to ``energy efficient''
forms of lighting to help reduce demand. The Bush crowd
has also proposed to ``deregulate'' the electric
utilities, opening up electricity generation to
manufacturers of generating equipment, windmill owners,
dung-burners and who knows what else, all in the name
of ``increasing competitiveness.''
These are proposals which will kill people--the
old and the sick, the poor and the defenseless--as such
policies have been killing, inside and outside the
United States, for more than a generation. But that is
what they are designed to do.
- Shutting Down the Nuclear Industry -
Since the February 1978 sabotage of Pennsylvania's
Three Mile Island nuclear plant, the pretext which
permitted the green Jimmy Carter to begin the shutdown
of the nation's nuclear industry, enough nuclear-based
electric generating capacity been cancelled to have
averted the crisis now before us. This includes nearly
100 power plants ordered before 1978. (No new nuclear
plant has been ordered since 1978.) But it also
includes the cancellation of 80 coal-fired plants,
destined for operation as ``base-load'' generating
units, that is, units which would have been producing
power 24 hours a day. This has been done in the name of
protecting the environment. It has been enforced by the
financial dictatorship imposed on utilities, since
former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker's high
interest rate policy of 1979 plunged U.S. manufacturing
industries, especially capital-goods producing
industries, into a depression from which they have
never recovered.
The eruption of a crisis in the nation's power
supply has been temporarily delayed by the depression.
Back in the 1960s, manufacturing industries used to
account for about half of the nation's electricity
consumption. In the intervening period, manufacturing's
share of electricity consumption has fallen to around
30% of the total. If we still produced the shoes and
the socks and the shirts and pants, as well as the
steel and machinery we need to survive, energy
shortages would have become apparent many years ago.
Until the Carter administration, the growth of
U.S. electrification, doubling every ten years, was
unique in the world. The 1970s broke the pattern, as
growth fell from over 7% per year in the 1960s to
around 3% per year, and since then has collapsed by
half again. The growth of electrification was crucial
to the production of what used to be America's high
standard of living. Since the East Coast blackouts of
1965, when the National Electric Reliability Council
(NERC) was formed, America's regulated electric
utilities were mandated to ensure, as first priority,
reliability of electricity supplies. Now, America's
high living standards have disappeared. The reliability
of electricity supply is about to disappear, too.
The conceit, propagated by Harvard, popularized by
Carter and company, and enforced by the
environmentalists and the Wall Street banks, was that
the link had been broken between growth in energy
supplies, and the growth of the economy as a whole. The
same babble comes from the free-marketeers, who now
boast idiotically of how much they will reduce the
energy content required to increase the GNP by the end
of the century.
Human history proves that this is nonsense.
Current events prove that it is genocidal. Advances in
the human condition {require} advances in the
quality and amount of energy available to power the
machinery on which man's continued existence depends.
Conservation was tried before, by the Roman Emperor
Diocletian, who banned labor-saving devices from his
empire. With the fall of the Roman Empire, the
population of the Mediterranean Basin collapsed by 40%,
just as the populations of the developing sector are
today being murdered by lack of technology. Today, the
environmentalist Clean Air Act bans additions to
power-generating and manufacturing capacity by
``capping'' so-called emissions. Under the act, new
capacity can only be added if old capacity is withdrawn
from service.
This is the prescription for energy crisis now,
and economic disaster a short way down the road. Since
the availability of raw materials is defined by the
science and technology employed to produce raw
materials, any attempt to halt technology ensures that
the economic cost of those raw materials increases as
the resource is depleted. And thus, what is now called
``conservation'' does the reverse of what it claims to
do. A society which seeks to emulate Diocletian's Rome
will destroy the very basis for its own existence, as
the Roman Empire did.
LaRouche's alternative would provide the power
needed to put the country back to work producing what
it needs for itself, and as its contribution to the
well-being of the rest of the world.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:53:41 PDT 1992
Article: 12181 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12181 alt.politics.clinton:14655
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 9
Message-ID: <172-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:25:36 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 221
- Chapter 6 -
- The Best Health Care for Every American -
nAmerican citizens are rightly up in arms about the
crisis in the U.S. health care system. Prices for
everything from medication to physician services are
soaring beyond the means of an increasingly
impoverished citizenry, while the cost of health
insurance is going sky high, forcing employers and
employees alike to drop coverage in order to stay
financially solvent. At the same time, health insurers,
led by Medicare and Medicaid, are covering fewer and
fewer categories of treatment, while paying medical
providers lower proportions of their costs and
demanding ever-higher premium payments. They are
forcing sick patients out of hospitals and financially
strapped hospitals out of business. The ones that
remain have had to limit or deny treatment for those
without insurance.
But the crisis in U.S. health care is not just one
of affordability. The fact is that our health care
system is in a {breakdown crisis,} caused by
the accelerating collapse of the entire U.S. economy
from nearly 30 years of incompetent economic policies
and financial swindles.
This breakdown is embodied by the now-evident
reality of the 1980s Reagan-Bush ``recovery'': the
surge in diseases like syphilis and hepatitis, the
epidemic emergence of new diseases--most notably
AIDS--and the re-emergence of long-dormant strains like
measles and turberculosis ({Figure 1}). The
failure to maintain basic public health screening and
treatment practices--especially in regard to AIDS--and
to provide elementary preventive medical services like
vaccinations, has put the United States on the verge of
a biological holocaust.
Furthermore, there is a dire shortage of hospitals
and hospital beds, by even normal standards. Up until
the ascendancy of Ronald Reagan and his bogus
free-market economics in 1980, the U.S.A. had steadily
increased the number of general hospital beds, to
attain 97% of the postwar standard of 4.5 beds per
1,000 population ({Figure 2}). By 1990, the
nation had only 83% of the beds needed; 761 hospitals
had been shut down.
While there is no doubt that improved medical
technologies have reduced hospital stays, the main
driver has been cost-cutting. In West Germany, which
arguably has the best overall health care in the world
today, there are more than 7.4 beds per 1,000 people,
which is nearly {double} that of the United
States.
Far worse is the inability to care for the growing
number of our aging citizens and for those who are
mentally disabled. Since 1950, the number of beds for
chronic long-term care patients has dropped by 65% to a
mere 25,000--barely 5% of the 500,000 needed.
Similarly, the number of beds in mental institutions
has dropped by 78% since 1960, to just 160,000 out of
the 1.25 million needed in 1990.
On top of this is the murderous closing of 65
trauma units, which have reduced the trauma death rate
by 64%. Lack of funds endangers the remaining 370
centers. In our largest cities, overwhelmed hospital
emergency rooms treated more than {twice} as
many patients in 1990 as in 1980. Each day, they are
besieged with AIDS victims, the homeless, the
chronically mentally ill, and drug-induced or
violence-related emergencies, as well as sick,
uninsured patients who lack access to primary care.
In California, where 56 hospitals have closed in
the last decade, more than a dozen other hospitals have
shut their emergency rooms permanently. Ambulances
carry patients to four or more hospitals before finding
an available bed. Los Angeles emergency room doctors
acknowledge that their patients have died on gurneys in
the halls while waiting for beds.
In 1989, while emergency room patients lined the
walls of New York City hospitals waiting for beds, over
1600 beds were certified and available but closed due
to lack of nurses. In a New York State Health
Department survey of city hospitals at midnight on Jan.
10, 1989, 599 emergency room patients admitted were
found waiting for a bed. One year later, on Jan. 10,
1990 at midnight, another state audit found 960
admitted patients waiting for beds.
- Prescription for Death -
Every candidate but LaRouche has ignored this
breakdown. Almost nowhere can one find even a mention
of the necessity for the enormous {expansion}
of our collapsing health care system. Instead, the
focus of the health crisis debate is on the form and
cost of insurance coverage that should be provided, the
means of reducing treatment in order to control costs,
and the measures for increasing ``cost efficiency'' of
the ``delivery system.'' {Every single one of these
so-called solutions--including the push for
``universal'' or ``national health care,'' ``managed
care,'' and so-called ``pay-or-play'' options for
employers--would only further wreck health care in the
United States.} They would actually
{worsen} the financial straits of hospitals and
medical providers, and precipitously lower the quality
and availability of medical treatment for the
population.
That in fact is the {intention} of George
Bush and the Bush Democrats.
It is the inevitable result of 30 years of pushing
the United States, and the world, into the New World
Order of ``post-industrial society,'' in which we have
failed to invest in the basic infrastructure and
industry that could have produced enough goods and
services to maintain an expanding population at
ever-higher standards of living. It is the result of
two decades of financial speculation in real estate,
commodities, and corporate mergers that have saddled
our industry and citizens with $25 trillion of
inflationary, unpayable debt, rendered our government
and banking system bankrupt, and turned us into a
debtor nation. Such a policy now deems much of this
population as ``expendable,'' especially the
depression's swelling ranks of unemployed who are
elderly, sick, or infirm--the targets for the growing
Right to Die euthanasia movement.
It wasn't always that way.
- Commitment to Life -
On the eve of America's victory over the Nazis,
Sen. Lister Hill of Alabama submitted legislation to
Congress that expressed the essence of the nation's
renewed commitment to the fundamental preservation and
enhancement of life. The Hill-Burton Hospital
Construction Act of 1946 embarked the United States on
a decade of unprecedented expansion of the nation's
hospital and public health system. Along with other
programs, such as upgrading nursing services and
locating veterans' hospitals near medical schools so
that medical students could both staff and train at
them, the U.S. health system became an integral feature
of the postwar economic expansion and a scientific
optimism that would soon enable man to soar into space.
The rising standard of living and solid gains in
productivity brought medical care within the budgets of
more and more Americans. In 1952, for the growing
number of people who purchased health insurance, the
combined premiums for Blue Cross/Blue Shield hospital,
surgical, and physician coverage was just $6.65 a
month, or $80 a year--just over one week's wages. Back
then, the average hospital stay cost just two weeks'
wages for such a production worker; now it costs
{12 weeks} pay, with much worse care
({Figure 3}).
The free-market insanity of the Reagan-Bush
administration has increasingly forced hospitals into
the arms of Wall Street financial wizards, who
increasingly moved in to run hospitals as a business
rather than as a dedicated professional service.
Far from augmenting ``efficiency,'' the
cost-control measures imposed by these bloodsuckers
have sent administrative costs soaring. The nitpicking
over each and every medical charge, the establishment
of legions of accountants and forms and financial
regulations, have resulted in an 8% annual increase in
administrative costs for both doctors and hospitals,
{above} the inflation rate! This is
{double} the average annual increase in overall
medical costs.
{Administrative costs now conservatively
comprise 25% of medical costs.} When combined with
the growing army of poor seeking medical care and
government cuts in Medicare and Medicaid payments,
hospitals and physicians have shifted more and more of
the costs onto the shrinking base of those with
insurance--to the point where the average hospital bill
now costs the equivalent of more than 11 weeks of a
manufacturing worker's wages.
- The LaRouche Program -
1. The prerequisite for restoring our health care
system is to commit the nation to LaRouche's program
for building our way out of the depression: the
creation of 6 million new productive jobs as the result
of federalizing the Federal Reserve, and pouring
low-interest credit into necessary public works. At the
top of the list will be the revitalization of the combined
public and private county hospital system, which once
adequately served the needs of our citizens, financed
from public funds garnered from an expanding tax base
of employed Americans.
2. We must build more hospitals and add hundreds of
thousands of beds, as part of this drive to revitalize
America's economic infrastructure. We must greatly expand the
number of intensive care beds, re-open closed emergency wards
and trauma centers, and build new ones. A new Hill-Burton
Commission shall be established to upgrade our health care
system, to oversee the construction of new hospitals and
medical centers and equipping them with the most advanced
technology.
3. We must launch an Apollo-style, crash research
program to fight degenerative diseases and epidemics
with the best technology available, especially
employing the frontier technology of optical biophysics
to find a cure for the species-threatening AIDS virus
and other infections now careening out of control.
4. Fourth, the federal government shall regulate
health insurance companies to ensure full payment of
medical costs and complete medical coverage for policy
holders, with premium prices based on an average cost
for entire communities, not on an individual's ``risk
factors.'' The federal government will also provide a
safety net for those without insurance, through both
Medicare and Medicaid and a new catastrophic health
insurance plan.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:53:52 PDT 1992
Article: 12183 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12183 alt.politics.clinton:14657
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 10
Message-ID: <173-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:27:45 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 216
- Chapter 7 -
- Restore Literacy and Classical Education -
As we enter the 1992 presidential primaries, the
problems in America's schools have become so evident
that all those in the running, even self-named
``Education President'' George Bush, have been forced
to concede the magnitude of the crisis. But only one
candidate--Lyndon LaRouche--has identified the economic
and cultural factors that have ruined our schools, and
outlined the program required to restore them. LaRouche
has presented the case that the increasing illiteracy
of our population is due to the post-industrial
economic policies imposed on the United States over the
past 25 years, and the promotion of the rock-drug-sex
counterculture among our youth by the very same
neo-Malthusian policymakers responsible for the
post-industrial debacle.
- How Our Schools Were Ruined -
In an open letter to the United Federation of
Teachers in July of 1985, LaRouche described how the
bankers' budget-cutting and union-busting policies have
destroyed our schools, beginning in New York City:
``The collapse in ... public education dates from
developments in New York City during the 1968-1975
period of the Ford Foundation's provocation of the 1968
New York Teachers' strike, through the establishment of
`Big Mac' during the 1975 municipal debt crisis.
Although parallel developments in educational policy
were pervasive throughout the nation, it was the
breaking of the back of the high standards once set by
the New York City Board of Education, which set the
precedent for erosion of education in the nation at
large.''
No longer can talented students with limited
financial resources count on the public schools for
education, LaRouche wrote. ``The ghetto-neighborhoods
in which pupils might presumably conduct their
homework, were turned into something resembling
bombed-out cities in postwar Germany.... The reaching
of what had been once considered civil-rights goals in
educational opportunity, intersected an accelerating
plunge into `post-industrial society'; the employment
orientations, early associated with first-class public
education, were made increasingly meaningless in
practice, especially so in the traditionally
industrialized urban centers....
``During the past 20 years, the average quality of
teachers in public schools has fallen catastrophically.
The quality of instruction given has, on the average,
fallen way below the potentials of the average of
current teachers,'' LaRouche added. ``In large degree,
this reflects the worsening of the pervasiveness of
drug-usage and drug-culture-related conditions in the
schools and in the classrooms. In the largest part,
this deterioration has been the intent of powerful
lobbies which have shaped national educational
policy.''
How far has America's public education system
collapsed? Consider the so-called political correctness
movement which has spread through America's schools and
college campuses. Scientific rigor and competence have
been thrown out the window--in favor of the political
fads of the post-industrial society. It is no longer
necessary for the teachers, let alone the students, to
be familiar with Shakespeare and Poe; history textbooks
are being rewritten to castigate such ``western
imperialists'' as Christopher Columbus and the Founding
Fathers. Even worse is what is being inserted
{into} the schoolbooks. Courses on alternative
life styles--lesbianism, witchcraft, etc.--have become
standard fare. Institutions which adhere to a God-given
standard of morality in human behavior, such as the
churches and the family, are branded as authoritarian.
- Preconditions for Recovery -
There are two preconditions for rebuilding
America's public education system. The first is {a
winning war on drugs}. As President, LaRouche will
launch such a war. Instead of targeting only the
lowest-level street dealers, he will work with Congress
to enact new banking transparency laws, which enable
law enforcement to identify and confiscate the hundreds
of billions of dollars of illicit profits laundered
through the banks, and to jail the bankers responsible.
Along with this campaign to strangle the dope traffic
by cutting off its funds, LaRouche will institute a new
foreign policy regarding the foreign producers of the
drugs that are destroying our children: The United
States will reject the International Monetary Fund
austerity ``conditionalities'' which force developing
sector nations to grow dope as a cash crop, and replace
this genocidal policy with programs to develop modern,
capital-intensive agriculture in these countries.
The second precondition is an {emergency
program for national economic recovery.} In
testimony to the House Ways and Means Committee on
February 5, 1992, LaRouche explained his program to
create 6 million jobs during his first adminstration.
These new jobs, 3 million in the public sector building
needed economic infrastructure, and 3 million in the
private sector supporting these enterprises, will
greatly expand the nation's tax base, and generate
needed resources at the local, state, and federal level
for returning to excellence in education. This means
that our cities and counties will once again have the
funds to hire the best teachers, bring class sizes down
to no more than 16 to 20 students, equip new science
laboratories, purchase new textbooks, and more. In
these improved circumstances, teachers will once again
be provided with the means to teach: proper training,
adequate preparation time (between 1 and 2 hours for
each hour of classroom teaching), and the means to
follow and evaluate the progress of individual
students. Computer-scored ``multiple choice'' learning
and testing--which almost always means that little or
no real teaching is going on--will be ended.
Just as the Apollo Moon project gave the last
boost to education, a series of Great Projects
initiated and funded by the federal government will
have a profound positive effect on our schools. As we
undertake the tasks of curing AIDS, colonizing the
Moon, and engineering fusion power, our national
laboratories and other government projects will become
training centers for upgrading science at every level
in the schools.
- A Classical Curriculum -
While it is largely up to state and local
government to finance and operate our schools, the
federal government must play a leading role, by setting
national goals, delineating the role of the public
schools in meeting these goals, and establishing a
standard for excellence in performance by the education
system.
LaRouche has outlined three goals for our nation:
1) eradicating poverty across the globe; 2)
establishing a durable peace among nations; and 3)
colonization of the Moon, Mars, and the Solar System
beyond. To produce the citizens of the 21st
century--who can meet these goals, as young Americans
of the 1960s met the goal of landing a man on the
Moon--our schools must return to what LaRouche calls
the classical curriculum. This curriculum, which
trained the geniuses of Renaissance Europe and the
outstanding leaders among our Founding Fathers,
contains the following elements:
1) Classical language, literature, poetry, and
history, in English and foreign languages as well. This
would include Shakespeare, as well as English
translations of portions of Cervantes, Lessing, and
Schiller, and others, and an appreciation of our
Judeo-Christian Western European culture, as
transmitted through the Indo-European family of
literate forms of spoken and written language. LaRouche
emphasizes the importance of history for students: ``We
learn from past history how the conditions of nations
and our civilization as a whole were bettered or
worsened by the shaping of policies in one way or the
other,'' he wrote in 1981. From history, ``we learn ...
a sense of our individual selves as more or less
influential individual persons in a long historical
process.''
2) Plastic arts, in tradition of Leonardo,
Du@aurer, Raphael, and Rembrandt, to name a few of the
great Renaissance artists. Most education ``experts''
today either dismiss the arts as impractical and
irrelevant, or else make the category a dumping ground
for what would, by any sane criteria, be considered
garbage. LaRouche, however, has a very defined sense of
how art and science unify in a classical unified
curriculum. ``Classical art is essential,'' he has
written. ``Simple drawing, introducing Albertian
perspective at an early age, should lay the basis for
the plastic arts ... At a later age, the advances in
perspective contributed by Leonardo da Vinci should be
introduced.'' LaRouche outlines a complete curriculum
to teach children not only about architecture,
sculpture, and drawing, but beauty and harmonics as
well.
3) Physical science in tradition of the University
of Go@auttingen. Taking the German university of
Go@auttingen as his model, LaRouche has outlined a
detailed program of study from basic geometry (the
tenth through thirteenth books of Euclid) to advanced
physics (Reimann, Cantor, and Gauss.) Even more
important than the specific areas of study is the
method that he has stressed. ``By living through the
experience of those past discoveries ... the student
learns to recognize, much better than he or she could
otherwise, what kinds of activity within his or her own
mental experience corresponds with the power to
generate and assimilate new knowledge of the way in
which the physical universe is organized.''
4) Classical music. Similar to art, music in most
school systems has been relegated to either the
superfluous or the ridiculous. In the classical
curriculum, however, music is a fundamental element.
``Music should be presented as classical poetry sung
according to principles of well-tempered polyphony,''
LaRouche writes. ``The basis for this is best
established on the primary school level, by development
of children's choruses based upon a) the bel canto
method of singing and b) strict adherence to a
well-tempered scale set at middle C=256.'' Performance
on orchestral instruments and work in classical musical
composition, should continue throughout secondary
schooling.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:53:58 PDT 1992
Article: 12182 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12182 alt.politics.clinton:14656
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 11
Message-ID: <174-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:29:12 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 215
- Chapter 8 -
- LaRouche's Program for 6 Million New Jobs -
By now, it is almost accepted wisdom that the United
States economy has been in a sharp decline since 1973.
Wages and living standards have gone down, debt in both
the public and private sectors has skyrocketed, and the
productive sector of the economy has shrunk to a
pitiful shadow of our country's former greatness.
Lyndon LaRouche is the only presidential candidate who
forecast that this would happen, if the policy of usury
and post-industrialism adopted in the 1960s were not
changed.
LaRouche's approach has been consistent. While
others have demanded austerity and budget cuts, he has
insisted that the economy will be put back on track
only if 1) the fiat money policies of the Federal
Reserve are replaced by those of sound national banking
with gold-reserve backing at low interest rates; and 2)
credit is applied to creating millions of jobs in the
productive sector of the economy, including industry,
agriculture, transportation, and other infrastructure.
The fundamental problem with the economy is that
it has subordinated people's welfare, to the demands of
the bankers. As a result, real production has been
replaced by the post-industrial service economy. The
source of the problem, LaRouche has insisted over and
over again, is that the portion of the work force
employed in productive jobs has declined from 50% in
1940 to less than 20% today.
- A Third National Bank -
In 1976, when he first ran for President, LaRouche
proposed the Emergency Employment Act, which called for
the Congress to declare an economic emergency, put the
government through bankruptcy reorganization, and put
the country back to work rebuilding itself and the
world. He combined this program with the demand to
replace the Federal Reserve with a Third National Bank
of the United States, which would invest preferentially
in infrastructure and high-technology development.
Many Americans are programmed to respond
negatively to the idea of a national bank. But
Alexander Hamilton, our first Treasury Secretary and
founder of the American System of economics, conceived
of it as a way to ensure that we became an independent
nation, with credit available for necessary
manufacturing and infrastructure. Together with a
policy of selective tariffs and taxation which promotes
investment and penalizes speculation, such a national
bank is an essential protection for private industry
and agriculture.
By contrast, Gerry Ford called for continuing the
austerity program of the Nixon administration. The
Democrats, led by Jimmy Carter, were even more
aggressive in demanding ``conservation'' and energy
cutbacks, which led to both a domestic and
international economic disaster. This led to the
Federal Reserve Bank taking drastic measures in the
fall of 1979, by hiking interest rates up over 20%.
On October 16, 1979 Democratic presidential
candidate LaRouche said: ``I herewith submit a demand
for the prompt impeachment of recently appointed
Federal Reserve Chairman Paul A. Volcker.... As one of
the world's leading economists, I have caused my staff
to conduct a computer-based analysis of the near-term
consequences of Volcker's measures. Those results,
coinciding with the estimates of other analysts
reporting independently, indicate that the measures
already enacted by Volcker will cause a 15% recession
in the U.S. economy, probably putting the United States
into a recession twice as severe as that of 1974.
``There are two immediate measures which would
ameliorate the present crisis. First, U.S. gold
reserves must be valued at an adjusted current world
market value, a value to be negotiated with both the
European Monetary System member-nations and the OPEC
`petrodollars' holders. This would stabilize the value
of the dollar and take the worst pressures off dollar
liquidity. Second, the Federal Reserve must immediately
implement the kind of selective credit-flow controls
which Senator Sarbanes proposed.''
The Volcker measures went ahead and the projected
plunge in production did occur. The collapse in
production which LaRouche projected occurred. To
compensate, the Reagan-Bush administration launched the
most massive binge of speculation and ``creative''
financing ever seen, through a process of deregulation,
leveraged buyouts, debt rollovers, and real estate
``development.'' And all of this with money borrowed at
Volcker's usurious interest rates.
- The Debt Bubble -
That is one reason why the federal expenditures
for interest on the debt have gone sky high
({Figure 1}), and we have no economic growth to
show for it. That's one of the basic reasons for the
explosion in debt in all areas of the U.S. economy--to
over $21 trillion today ({Figure 2 }and{
Figure 3}).
LaRouche addressed the problem again in his 1984
presidential campaign. On February 4, 1984, in an
ABC-TV broadcast, LaRouche said: ``I propose
specifically this. That we `federalize' our Federal
Reserve System according to Article 1, Sections 8 and 9
of our federal Constitution. We shall take away from
the Fed its power to print money as it chooses ... we
shall prevent the Fed from continuing to operate its
favorite game, that inflationary `Keynesian
multiplier.' [Then,] to supply an adequate amount of
credit to our private banks, to get the economy going
again, the Congress must authorize an initial issue of
about $500 billions of gold-reserve currency notes....
These notes must be loaned at discount rates between 2%
and 4%, for the kinds of loans that I shall indicate to
you--manufacturing, and capital improvements in basic
economic infrastructure. The purpose is to put 5
million or more of our unemployed back to work fairly
quickly, and to get our farms and factories moving
again.''
{What did the White House and the Democratic
Party leadership say?} They {agreed} on the
``Gramm-Rudman'' strategy, that cutting the budget
deficit took priority over stimulating the economy or
anything else. {What do they say now?} After
three years of deep cuts and soaring budget deficits
({Figure 4)}, they admit that their strategy
was a failure, and a straitjacket against dealing with
the depression, as LaRouche said it would be in 1987.
As a result of the Federal Reserve's policy of
fostering banking deregulation and speculation, we saw
the collapse of the savings and loan industry, some of
the largest commercial bank failures in modern history,
and a scandalous series of leveraged buyouts followed
by forced bankruptcies, after the companies could not
pay for the debt they incurred.
In his 1988 campaign, LaRouche addressed the
question of the Federal Reserve again. As he wrote in
{A Program for America} when he launched his
campaign:
``There are two fundamental shifts which must be
made in order to bring the United States into an actual
economic recovery, in contrast to the deepening
depression which administration public-relations men
call `the recovery' today. First and foremost, the U.S.
government must take back its sovereign authority over
the creation of credit. This means either the
elimination of the Federal Reserve Bank, or a drastic
reform of that institution, which puts the authority
for control of credit and the currency back in the
hands of Congress, where it constitutionally belongs.''
Every other national candidate has avoided this
issue, arguing that the federal budget must be cut, or
that lending should be extended through the current
banking system, especially at consumer credit rates of
16 to 22%. This will simply make the crisis worse,
because credit will not be directed into the vital
wealth-producing areas of the economy.
After the debt crisis had strangled corporations
and governmental bodies to near-death, President Bush
began to demand that the Federal Reserve lower interest
rates. But, by then it was too late for such
lowerings--which have brought rates down to dramatic
lows--to have any appreciable effect in bringing the
economy out of depression.
- Six Million Back to Work -
In December 1991, candidate LaRouche reiterated
what has to be done to reverse the depression:
``My recovery program depends on the initial
action of federalizing, nationalizing, the Federal
Reserve System. That is, to take away its status as a
quasi-independent corporation controlled by bankers,
and to make it an institution of the U.S. government,
the kind of bank that the United States Bank
represented under President George Washington.
``This bank would be a means, not for emitting
currency, but for putting federal currency, legal
tender, out as loans at very low interest rates to get
the economy moving.
``We are talking about loans on the order of
magnitude of over $300 billion a year for public works,
and a comparable amount of lending into the private
sector for investment primarily in employment in
high-tech and engineering types of activity.
``We are talking about 3 million people in the
public sector, working for federal, state, and local
infrastructure projects, such as railway projects,
water system projects, power system projects....
``We are talking about, on the other side, another
3 million people at least, employed as a result of
vendor agreements, which are made with spinoffs of
these public projects.
``So we are talking about an increase in
employment of about 6 million people within a year.''
The interest rates on such loans would be between
2% and 4%. How would the money be paid back? Through
increased tax revenues as a result of the productive
economic activity that would be generated! The creation
of skilled jobs and the construction of infrastructure
to support the retooling and reindustrialization of our
economy, is the only way of increasing a tax base
ravaged by debt creation and declines in employment.
If we're going to get out of this depression,
we're going to need a flow of credit from a national
bank. LaRouche has proposed it since 1976--and people
are paying for not having listened. In the 1992
election, American citizens have one more chance.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:54:03 PDT 1992
Article: 12184 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12184 alt.politics.clinton:14658
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 12
Message-ID: <175-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:30:40 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 417
- Chapter 9 -
- `Jumpstart' for the U.S.A. for the `Productive Triangle' -
{This outline of LaRouche's ``Productive
Triangle'' plan was presented by his German associate,
Ralf Schauerhammmer of the Fusion Energy Foundation, at
a March 1-2, 1991 conference in Bonn.}
The concept of the ``Productive Triangle'' was
published at the end of 1989 by the American politician
and economist Lyndon H. LaRouche--directly after the
successful revolutions in the Eastern European
countries concluded--and submitted by a work group at
the beginning of 1990 in a well worked-out form. The
essential features of this report have in the meantime
appeared in every major language, and been circulated
among specialists.
The ``European Productive Triangle'' proposal
(named for the Paris-Berlin-Vienna triangle which forms
the industrial and economic core of Europe) is to meet
the great challenge of the freeing of more than 20
nations from communism, with a new Marshall Plan on a
bigger scale. It is a plan to {rebuild the economic
infrastructure of the whole continent}--transport,
communications, electric power--with the most modern
technologies; in the process reconnecting western and
eastern Europe which were split apart by the Iron
Curtain for 50 years under the Yalta agreements.
Before I present a summary of the essential points
of the concept of the Productive Triangle, I would like
to present the cornerstones on which this concept is
constructed, since that is the only way to understand
why this concept has been, through the present day, the
only realistic and practically realizable proposal for
the future of Europe.
I would also like to do that because various
proposals that have taken up parts of the Productive
Triangle--the proposal of Deutsche Bank chief economist
Norbert Walter; or the proposal of the Thuringian prime
minister, Joseph Duchac--show that the authors have not
taken these conceptual cornerstones seriously enough,
or have not sufficiently understood them.
These cornerstones are:
1) The concept of the Productive Triangle is
intended as an intervention into the world economy. In
this connection, it should be noted that a) the command
economy of currently existing socialism has ruined the
national economies subject to it; b) the march into the
``post-industrial society'' in the West has brought
most national economies of ``the free market'' to the
brink of collapse; and c) the physical existence of the
nations of the developing sector is threatened through
the so-called debt crisis.
2) Given a realistic evaluation of the existing
physical potential of all national economies, only a
Europe working together in a Productive Triangle,
together with Japan and some emergent developing
countries, can pull the world economy out of this
precarious condition.
3) The investments proposed for the Productive
Triangle presume that the principles of ``physical
economy'' will again be considered. These are the
principles that in the last century made America into
the leading nation economically.
4) The backbone of the policy of the Productive
Triangle is investments in infrastructure. Only on this
foundation can the productive mid-range of industry
come into existence. Along with the energy sector--here
the irrational anti-nuclear policy must finally be
stopped--the transportation sector is of decisive
importance.
- Paris-Berlin-Vienna -
Consideration alone of the population density and
the heavily populated regions of Europe allows us to
identify the topology of the Productive Triangle. It is
characterized by an area in the center--the Triangle
Paris-Berlin-Vienna--with linear regions going out from
there--which we call, borrowing from the structure of
galaxies, ``spiral arms,'' that reach throughout all of
Europe to North Africa and the Soviet Union.
The core is the curved triangle with apexes in
Paris, Berlin, and Vienna. The northern side runs from
Paris through the steel region near Charleroi, through
the Ruhr region to Braunschweig to Berlin. The southern
side runs from Paris through the
Metz-Nancy-Saarbru@aucken region through
Stuttgart-Munich to Vienna. The eastern side of the
triangle stretches from Vienna through Prague and
northern Bohemia through Dresden to Berlin.
The area of this triangle is approximately 320,000
square kilometers--almost exactly the area of Japan.
Even now, by global standards, it has the greatest
density of industrial infrastructure and the highest
standard of education and culture. The most dense and
productive areas of northern France, Belgium, and what
was formerly West Germany are part of the Triangle, as
are what was formerly East Germany, western
Czechoslovakia, and northern Austria.
Today, almost 92 million human beings live in this
core region, which gives an average population density
of 288 humans per square kilometer. Also characteristic
of this region is that half of these 92 million human
beings live in the immediate commuter-belt around the
ten large industrial areas of the region.
Important infrastructural corridors radiate out
from this central Triangle in all directions. We can
give as an example the axis Paris-Berlin-Warsaw, which
branches a) to Ukraine (Kiev-Charkov); b) to White
Russia (Minsk and then to Moscow); and c) to Lithuania,
Latvia, and Estonia (through Leningrad). A further
``spiral arm'' stretches from the region of
Chemnitz-Dresden-Prague through Breslau to the triangle
of Katowice-Ostrav-Krakow and further to the Ukraine.
Another development arm reaches through all of
Italy to Sicily and North Africa, and another, from
Lille in France to Metz-Nancy to Strasbourg and from
there to Lyon and Marseilles along the Mediterranean
coast to Spain. From there, it can be continued through
Barcelona to Tarifa across the Straits of Gibraltar to
North Africa.
Corresponding spiral arms spread out in western
and northern directions.
Altogether, the spiral arms encompass a region of
1.07 million square kilometers--three times the area of
the center. The total region has a population equal to
that of the United States, but in only one-seventh the
area.
- Canals -
Central Europe, with the river system of the
Seine, the Rhine, the Elbe, the Oder, and the Weichsel
in a south-north direction, as well as the Danube in a
west-east direction, has a unique ``fundamental
structure'' for a shipping network. A northern
east-west channel connection from the Rhine to the
Weichsel in large part exists, and the Main-Danube
canal, which will soon be finished, will complete the
link from Rotterdam to Odessa. Along with making these
rivers navigable for freighters of the
{Europa} class--that is, those which carry up
to 1,600 tons of freight--the establishment of
connections from the Oder and Wichsel to Danube, and
from the Seine and Rho@afne to the Rhine, are the most
important preconditions for a European inland
navigation system for the next century.
I would now like to make clear, using a concrete
example, how important the question of a transportation
network is, a fact that is always forgotten in the
calculation of profitability and utilization of
individual sections of the network. A firm in the
vicinity of Regensburg was forced--since the
Main-Danube canal is not finished, and the unit was too
large for surface transportation--to send a boiler unit
to be delivered to Ludwigshafen down the Danube,
through the Strait of Gibraltar to Rotterdam, and from
there up the Rhine to its destination. Freight costs
were 500,000 deutschemarks [$295,000]; after completion
of the canal, the freight costs will be less than
one-tenth that.
- A European Rapid Train Corporation -
If we consider the different transportation
technologies, with regard to their potential flow
density, we recognize that the backbone of the
transportation infrastructure of the Productive
Triangle can only be created by means of a high-speed
rail network. The Trade and Industry Council of the
state of Baden-Wu@aurttemberg has just published a
report on new rail construction proposals, in which
they take this back to the mid-nineteenth century:
``Practically, the work of Friedrich List and Heinrich
Harkort, who in their time introduced a German rail
network optimal for conditions then, must today be
repeated for Bahn 2000 on a European scale.''
Incidentally, the rapid development of the railway
network in List's time, in a politically completely
fragmented Germany, proves how the continually cited
technical, juridical, or economic barriers that will
supposedly hinder the buildup of a modern
transportation system in Europe can very probably be
overcome.
For the Productive Triangle, we propose the
creation of a European Rapid Train Corporation that
will construct and operate a completely new high-speed
rail network. This network will then set the standards
by which national rail corporations and transportation
firms can orient themselves. If we go about the matter
in that way--and not, as previously, by considering
integration as strictly the closing of gaps between
various national projects--then it will be possible to
make development leaps in the practical realization of
the high-speed network. Especially in Eastern Europe,
there is the option to not first bring specific rail
lines up to a standard that was attained in the 1980s
in the West, but rather to immediately embark on the
technologies of the next century. Concretely, that
means immediate investments in magnetic levitation rail
lines to achieve speeds of 180 mph or more, rather than
construction of rail lines for 100 mph speeds.
Therefore, we propose the following:
1) Formation of a European Rapid Train
Corporation, in which national rail corporations,
airline corporations, and private firms can
participate.
2) Construction of a completely new high-speed
network 7,200 kilometers long, of which 4,500
kilometers must be constructed as a first priority.
3) Separation of passenger and freight transport
in the network.
4) Establishment of the goal of 500 kilometers per
hour speeds for passenger transportation on the
European-wide network, with connections to airports and
commuter traffic of large population centers.
5) Containerization of high-speed freight
transportation, with use of standardized cars for
``piggyback'' truck-train transportation.
6) Construction of a European research institute
for rapid transportation (the proposed site is
Dresden).
- Reconnecting East and West -
The most important high-speed lines will run along
the development corridors already sketched, in which
the development of east-west connections will receive
particular importance for historical reasons: 1) The
north east-west corridor: Paris-Lille-Ruhr
region-Berlin-Warsaw (with a spur from the Ruhr to
Erfurt-Dresden, on to Krakow). 2) The central East-West
corridor: Paris-Metz-Frankfurt-Dresden-Krakow. 3) The
southern East-West corridor:
Karlsruhe-Munich-Vienna-Budapest-Belgrade. 4) Important
north-south corridors are, for example:
Hamburg-Berlin-Dresden-Prague-Vienna;
Hamburg-Stuttgart-Milan; London-Paris-Marseilles.
High speeds on railroads are meaningless if time
is lost because of long waiting and switching times.
For that reason, new loading depots will be necessary
for high-speed transportation in which, upon the
arrival of trains, the appropriate loading palettes are
so arranged that they can be coupled to the cars to be
loaded or unloaded as the train comes in. The loading
process will then be done perpendicularly to the
direction of travel, and will be done simultaneously
for all cars, which will enable the unloading of the
entire train to take hardly longer than that of a
single car. Easily steerable mag-lev technology is
especially appropriate for these loading lines.
For passenger transportation, an attractive
alternative to the still sharply increasing individual
transportation can only be offered by general
{separation} of freight and passenger transport
and with new technologies such as mag-lev technology.
Mag-lev transportation attains its importance not only
because of higher final speed, which is of primary
importance in the spiral arms of the Triangle, but
primarily through its travel dynamics, which has a
special importance for the shaping of the network in
densely populated areas. We must consider, for example,
that important stations there will lie on the average
only 90 miles from one another, but often only 35 to 50
miles. If the number of transfers for individual
passengers is kept small, that promotes not only rapid,
but also dynamic travel. In this connection, it is
interesting that the Transrapid 07 (Magnetically
Levitated Train now being tested) covers a stretch of
100 miles more rapidly than the high-speed ``ICE''
train, even while making a stop at the halfway point.
Previously, the importance of mag-lev rail has
been misunderstood, just as the importance of
high-speed transportation generally was 25 years ago.
The development of high-speed locomotives began in
Japan with the Shinkansen that went into operation in
1964 on the Tokyo-Osaka line. In Europe, it was still
another decade before this concept was seriously taken
up, since there were doubts about its economic
feasibility. The Shinkansen reaches a speed of 220
kmph, and covers the 513 km line in 169 minutes. Daily,
130 trains run, with 10-minute intervals maintained
during rush hours. With $5.2 billion revenue and $2.2
billion in expenses per year, the Shinkansen is the
most profitable rail operations in the world. In Japan,
a mag-lev line from Tokyo to Osaka is already planned
for the year 2000 that should reduce travel time by
75-90 minutes, reaching a speed of 500 kmph. It is
certain that, with the new ``Mag-lev Shinkansen,''
today's 200 million travelers per year can be doubled.
As an example of how new mag-lev routes can even
be sensibly tied to existing plans for the construction
of the ICE network, we have proposed a mag-lev line
from Berlin to Frankfurt, with connections to the new
ICE north-south connection of Hamburg-Munich, a
proposal that has already been taken up politically.
With regard to the transportation infrastructure
of Europe's future, I would like to state in closing
that, within the concentrated regions as we will find
them in the core of the Productive Triangle, a
transportation system can only be practically realized
if it makes possible extremely high transportation
flows, as we have proposed, through integration in
``transport pipelines'' on streets, rails, mag-lev
lines, and, possibly, energy transport arteries.
- Energy -
The second essential infrastructural pillar of the
Productive Triangle is energy supply. The energy supply
of the future will strengthen the trend toward
increased use of electricity. All future technologies,
such as laser, plasma processes, direct reduction
processes, industrial heating, and so forth, point in
this direction. Merely for the replacement of the
economically totally unfeasible facilities in Eastern
Europe and Soviet nuclear reactors of the
Chernobyl-type, as well as for an urgent emergency
program for Italy, a capacity of 84 gigawatts is
necessary.
That makes one thing clear: Without a renaissance
of nuclear energy, it won't work! The momentary trend
toward noble gas installations, with low investment
costs but higher operational costs, will prove to be an
economic boomerang in a few years.
The importance of the nuclear energy question goes
far beyond this purely economic question. An example
was established in the campaigns, fueled with conscious
lies, against nuclear energy that even today frighten
away major investments in great projects. If, however,
industry cannot trust political perspectives to be
stable enough that investments in long-term
infrastructural projects--for example, nuclear
power--do not become too risky, then that will be the
death blow for every industrial area.
The renaissance for nuclear energy means also,
however, that we must learn from the errors of the
past. The decisive error with nuclear technology was
that, although its special advantage of being
universally applicable, which makes it independent of
geographical conditions and occurrence of raw
materials, was certainly constantly emphasized, the
development of the technology did not do justice to
that, and was too much limited to use in industrial
states. From the standpoint of world energy supply,
small, inherently safe units make sense, in which
connection it should be considered that 25 years ago
``small'' units of around 500 megawatts were considered
to be large power plants, even in the industrial
nations.
The high-temperature reactor in this connection is
particularly suitable. This reactor type, however,
primarily makes possible the introduction of nuclear
energy into the heating market. Of course, in the
Productive Triangle alone, there will be an additional
need for nuclear plant capacities, merely in the
electricity sector, of 135 GW(e) if we set as a target
to secure 70% of the need for electricity through
nuclear power--as France did in reaction to the oil
crisis of the 1970s. But it is only through the
incorporation of nuclear process-steam and
process-heating that the universal character of nuclear
technology become clear. Today, hardly any politician
wants to hear anything about that; if, however, we wish
to protect the responsibility of the Productive
Triangle as the locomotive for the world economy, we
must state this simple truth.
A further advantage of the high-temperature
reactor is that its prestressed concrete construction
is possible without the complex knowhow for large
reactor pressure containers. That means that countries
of the Southern Hemisphere could build this reactor
type within the foreseeable future. Ultimately,
complete units can be built in centers of production in
the Productive Triangle and then shipped to developing
countries on pontoons. Because of the special fuel
element construction, which uses no metal, but rather
ceramic material, the safety reserves of the reactor
are large, and the demands on maintenance personnel
reduced.
Without nuclear technology, no practical energy
infrastructure can be realized in the Productive
Triangle. Let me tell it like it is. At a time on Earth
in which, every 11 seconds, a child dies who could be
saved with food or medicine that costs a few dollars,
it is immoral to give out millions of dollars for the
``decontamination'' of supposedly radioactive powdered
milk, whose radioactivity is far below that of the
fertilizer that day in and day out we spread on our
fields.
These infrastructural measures are the basis for
the construction of productive, mid-size industrial
firms, whose central importance to the national economy
will discussed further.
A massive expansion of investment goods export
will accompany the realization of the Productive
Triangle. This transformation of the investment areas
will lead to a clear shift in the structure of
employment, with 5% of those employed in the near
future being involved in research and development. The
service sector will decline in importance, while
research and development will increase. Flexible,
mid-size industrial firms will play the key role in
this high-tech market, firms that can especially
quickly adapt to, employ, and disseminate new
technologies.
I have presented the elements of the fundamental
structure of the Productive Triangle. To breathe life
into this politically and economically is the greatest
task that stands before us. Unfortunately, it must be
said that a year has just been wasted in relative
inactivity. May a stimulus go forth from this
conference that will change the situation as quickly as
possible.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:54:22 PDT 1992
Article: 12185 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12185 alt.politics.clinton:14659
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 13
Message-ID: <176-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:33:24 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 283
- Chapter 10 -
- Great Projects to Develop the World -
Since 1976, when he first put himself forward as a
candidate for President of the United States, economist
Lyndon LaRouche has stressed that the only way for the
United States to make its way out of deepening economic
depression, is to {build itself out}--to once
again begin investing in Great Projects of
infrastructure, both at home, and abroad. Improving on
plans put forward by others, ranging from close
associates to engineering firms, governments, and
institutions such as the Mitsubishi Research Institute
of Japan, LaRouche has detailed infrastructure
development programs for every corner of the globe.
These range from grand designs for continent-wide
networks of railroads, industrial centers run by
nuclear power, and waterways, to the construction of
new, modern canal links between the great oceans of the
world.
In the fifteen years since LaRouche first put
forward his Great Projects perspective, the lack of
such development projects--coupled with usurious
looting of nations by the Anglo-American financial
establishment--has created a regime of famine, disease,
and death in the developing sector on a scale never
seen before in human history. At the same time, under
the same bankers' austerity conditions, the United
States economy has collapsed to the point that we here
in America are unable to produce the capital goods,
skilled labor, and other inputs needed for these
large-scale infrastructure projects; we must rely on
the productive capabilities of, in particular, our
European allies. One measure of the insanity of the
Bush administration is its allies-bashing trade war
against Japan and West Germany--whose cooperation we
desperately need to reverse the depression.
Why has LaRouche emphasized the importance of
Great Projects, and why are so many of his development
programs focused on the Third World? Great Projects of
infrastructure--waterworks to irrigate, control
flooding or drain swamps, bridges, roads, tunnels,
power plants, etc.--are the most efficient way to
improve and expand an economy, in many cases taking
totally useless land and transforming it into
productive territory, as was done by the irrigation of
California's Imperial Valley.
Sadly, America today is in no position itself to
implement a global recovery program based on Great
Projects. The U.S. economy requires a jump-start from
the highly productive, population-dense ``Productive
Triangle of central Europe, in the same way that the
productive strength of the U.S.A. was essential to
jump-start the economies of Europe and Japan after
World War II. If, as LaRouche has specified, the
Productive Triangle of Europe is freed from the insane
free market shock treatment economics espoused by such
as Harvard University's Jeffrey Sachs, the
implementation of these global development projects is
possible. Under these conditions, the underdeveloped
nations of Asia, Ibero-America, and Africa will become
the new frontier of economic growth, an almost
unlimited opportunity for the creation of vast new
markets for America's capital goods.
Without the Great Projects, the Third World faces
an entirely different future: economic collapse,
famine, disease, and depopulation. As is shown by the
the spread of the killer virus AIDS across Africa, once
unleashed, the Four Horsement of the Apocolypse will
mow down all national borders.
Today, the world stands on the threshhold of a new
era--if we choose the right path. We can take up the
challenge of carrying out great infrastructure projects
and in this way pull this nation out of economic
collapse, or we can let the United States devolve to a
Third World country, with its industrial capacity
ruined and its population resources beaten down in
poverty. These great projects are absolutely necessary
in order to maintain on the globe a human population of
more than 6 billion persons, growing to 12 billion
around the middle of the 21st century. They will serve
as the basis for transforming and uplifting the economy
of the globe, making it possible for a growing
population to live at standards as high or higher than
the United States during the decade that the Apollo
Great Project to put man on the Moon was pumping wealth
into the U.S. economy. The next step will be the
colonization of the Moon, Mars, and beyond. Most
important, the Great Projects will inject optimism and
a vision of progress into a world now dominated by the
cultural and scientific pessimism of the environmental
hoaxsters.
(projects to be illustrated)
1. The European Productive Triangle
A triangular region approximately the size of Japan,
created by a transportation grid connecting Paris,
Berlin, and Vienna, must become the generation point
for Western economic recovery and rapid
industrialization of the Third World. Nuclear power and
mag-lev transportation technologies will be featured.
2. Spiral Arms of the Triangle
Great infrastructure corridors of modern
communications, high-speed railways, canals, and
industrial ``nuplexes,'' will draw a total market area
of 430 million people and thousands of small,
high-technology business, into an economic development
era that will unify eastern and western Europe.
3. Linking Scandinavia to Europe
Scandinavia's 23 million people will be linked to
continental Europe by a new system of bridges, tunnels,
high-speed railways, and modern highways.
4. North American Water and Power Alliance (NAWAPA)
Proposed by California's Parsons Engineering Company in
the 1960s, NAWAPA would provide 180 million acre-feet
of fresh water for agriculture and cities in Canada,
the United States and Mexico. This is the only
long-term solution to the water crisis of the western
United States.
5. New American Railroad
A network of high-speed magnetically levitated trains
to relieve congestion of major highway systems,
especially in the Northeast, and bring the U.S. up to
par with Japanese and German transportation
technologies.
6. Water Projects for Ibero-America
Today caught in the grip of a murderous cholera
epidemic and vulnerable to all water-borne disease, all
of Ibero-America from Mexico to Cape Horn needs fresh
water management and hydroelectric power projects. Four
major projects include: two north-south canals in
Mexico; two canals linking rivers in Brazil to the
Atlantic; the trans-Andean water pumping project in
Peru; and waterworks in the Llanos area of Colombia and
Peru.
7. Rio de la Plata Water Projects
Also designed for water development of Ibero-America is
the complex of projects for utilizing the entire La
Plata River Basin, including improvements of the Parana
River-Paraguay River and connection of that water
system of more than 3,000 kilometers in length, made
fully navigable, to the Amazon system, in part by the
planned Guapore-Paraguay canal. This would make
possible massive irrigation projects in the fertile de
la Plata region.
8. Railway Grid for Ibero-America
To include the completion and improvement of a
trans-continental railway from Rio de Janeiro and Sao
Paolo, to Santa Cruz and La Paz, through the Andes to
the Pacific Ocean, opening up the rich mineral
resources of Bolivia and of the whole region. The goal:
to achieve a continental rail system in South America,
plus a high-performance rail line from Colombia through
Central America to Mexico.
9. The Kra Canal
This project, first proposed on 1793, would connect the
South China Sea with the Indian Ocean. It would relieve
growing congestion at the Straits of Malacca past
Singapore, and create vast industrial development
potential based on construction of deep sea ports at
one or both of the canal outlets.
10. Mekong Cascade
Control of the Mekong River and development of the
Mekong Delta could create a new breadbasket in
Southeast Asia. The Mekong Cascade, an integrated
system of dams and reservoirs, has been studied since
1956. The plan envisions the construction of eight dams
and five major power projects, at a cost of about $20
billion 1990 dollars--approximately 4 percent of the
annual take from the world drug trade.
11. North-South Grand Canal in China
This north-south water diversion project centers on the
modernization of the famous Grand Canal, an ancient
waterway over which grain taxes were once shipped to
the northern imperial capitals from the grain-producing
regions of the South. This canal could now play a major
role in facilitating modern transportation within
China, which has had historic problems with North-South
transit, due to the fact that most of the country's
rivers flow east to west.
12. Sun Yat-sen's Railway System for China
The infrastructure program developed by Dr. Sun Yat-sen
to bring China into the 20th century included
waterways, communications, and energy technologies, but
focused heavily on the development of a national
transportation grid: at least 100,000 miles of
railways, complemented by a million miles of roads.
13. India Water Control Program
The Fusion Energy Foundation developed a continent-wide
30-year program to control and harness India's vast
water resources, with dams, reservoirs, canals,
nuplexes, and hydroelectric plants. It would break the
centuries-old cycle of droughts and floods which has
slowed modernization of agriculture, and quadruple
hydroelectric production of electricity for industry.
14. Oasis Plan for the Mideast
This Great Project includes construction of the ``Peace
Pipeline'' proposed by the Turkish government to pipe
3.5 million cubic meters of fresh water per day from
eastern Turkey down into the thirsty countries of
Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia and building
nuclear-powered desalination centers generating
``artificial rivers'' of fresh water for irrigation and
consumption.
15. Dead Sea Canal
Also proposed for the Middle East is engineering and
construction of a canal from the Mediterranean to the
Dead Sea, with nuclear plants and desalination
facilities along the way.
16. Congo Basin-Jongeli Canal
These two major water diversion projects will transform
the face of the African continent: 1) completion of the
Jonglei Canal improving water use of the White Nile; 2)
diversion of water from the Ubangi River in Zaire via
canals, pipes and pump stations to refill Lake Chad and
provide for massive irrigation of the Sahel.
17. Okavango-Zambezi Water Project
A system of pumps, reservoirs, and canals to regulate
southern Africa's water resources, and boost hydropower
production.
18. Africa Rail Network
This plan by the Fusion Energy Foundation would begin
with construction of an east-west line from Djibouti to
Dakar, linked with upgraded and newly contructed
north-south lines across the continent.
19. Second Panama Canal
The Panama Canal is overcrowded and obsolete; it is too
small for today's largest sea-going vessels. A new
sea-level canal is needed. The new canal could generate
sufficient income to pay for itself in no more than 30
years.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:54:28 PDT 1992
Article: 12186 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12186 alt.politics.clinton:14660
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 14
Message-ID: <177-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:37:7 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 478
- Chapter 11 -
- Frontier in Space: LaRouche's Moon-Mars Program -
President Kennedy will forever have made his mark in
history as the President who put man on the Moon. It is
not too much of an exaggeration to say that it was for
this that he was murdered.
More precisely, it was the policies related to the
space program, the policies supporting high technology
and infrastructure investment in the U.S. economy as a
whole, which made him unpopular with oligarchical
circles, who were committed to an alternate policy for
the United States.
Whoever was responsible for pulling the trigger,
the massive coverup of the conspiracy surrounding his
assassination involved the same circles in the
Anglo-American elite, such as Prince Philip, who wish
to see the United States become a pagan fascist
state--the new form of fascism, in this age, being
Malthusian ``ecological'' fascism. LaRouche's proposal
that America assume the task of building a city on Mars
within a timeframe of 40 years--and that that city be
dedicated to the study of astronomy, and to the purpose
of effecting an economic and cultural ``paradigm
shift'' in the United States--epitomizes the optimistic
vision which has made him the rallying point for those
determined to resist fascism today.
Since Kennedy's death, the United States has sunk
deeper and deeper into the morass of
deindustrialization, hedonism, and cultural despair. We
cannot bring Kennedy back to life, but we must undo the
harm, already almost irreparable, done to the United
States by the judicial railroad of Lyndon LaRouche and
his political associates--a railroad run by the U.S.
Justice Department in complicity with the
Anti-Defamation League-coordinated ``Get LaRouche''
Task Force.
- Science and Physical Economics -
Lyndon LaRouche was one of the leading figures in,
and a member of the board of directors of, the
prestigious Fusion Energy Foundation, an association of
scientists and entrepreneurs committed to the
development of nuclear fusion energy and related
technologies, all of which are crucial to the space
colonization effort. In fact, it can be said that
LaRouche was the one who inspired the founding of the
group in 1975, by drawing together scientists eminent
in their respective fields.
As a physical economist, LaRouche had intensively
studied the work of Gottfried Leibniz. As with Leibniz,
a fundamental tenet of LaRouche's thought, is the
connection between constant advances in scientific
technology and the application of those scientific
technological advances to increasing industrial
productivity, on the one hand, and the spiritual,
moral, and therefore aesthetic health of a culture.
Conversely, LaRouche argued back then, as he does
now, that an ecology movement which pretends to protect
the environment by limiting the application of
technology and strangling the advance of science, must
be Malthusian. In fact, exactly opposite to what the
Malthusians argue, the high-technology route for an
economy allows it to support an increasing population
at an improving standard of living, and at the same
time allows it to protect the environment more and more
efficiently.
The least polluting energy source known to man is
fusion power, with fission energy running a close
second. Even high-temperature plasma reactions, which
are not nuclear, are superior, less polluting forms of
combustion. If we consider--as we should, and as
LaRouche has urged--space to be our next frontier, then
clearly our problem will be that we have too few people
to do the job, rather than ``too many people,'' as the
Malthusians lie. Rather than overpopulation, the
complaint will be: The world needs more people.
The Fusion Energy Foundation
The Fusion Energy Foundation (FEF) was launched in
1975, and in 12 short years it became an
internationally recognized scientific body which
published {Fusion} magazine, in English and
many other languages; a magazine which appeared in
Asia, Europe, and Ibero-America, as well as in the
United States. {Fusion} magazine had a
circulation of 114,000 in the United States, at the
point that it was shut down by the federal government
in 1987. FEF also published the {International
Journal of Fusion Energy} and {The Young
Scientist.}
On April 21, 1987, the foundation was summarily
shut down in a forced-bankruptcy action by the U.S.
government. That attempt at forced bankruptcy was
overturned by the courts in 1989 and 1990, and judged
to have been carried out in bad faith, but the verdict
on behalf of the Foundation came two years too late:
FEF and its publications had already been put out of
business, in an unprecedented attack upon the First
Amendment to the Constitution.
The reason for the government's vindictive actions
against the Foundation was clear: Lyndon LaRouche was
by 1987 a primary target of the lawlessness of the U.S.
Justice Department, and so was everything associated
wtih him.
- A City on Mars -
What was the significance of LaRouche's Moon-Mars
proposal?
The political and anti-NASA upheaval created by
the disaster when the Space Shuttle
{Challenger} blew up im January 1986, was
peaking just at the point at which President Reagan was
prepared to endorse a proposal by the National
Commission on Space, headed by former NASA
Administrator Tom Paine, for a manned Moon-Mars
mission, to establish a manned colony on the Moon which
would act as the basis for developing an industrial
base on Mars.
The report was issued in the spring of 1986, and
President Reagan went on record as subscribing to the
goals of the program, but still today the project
remains to be implemented.
LaRouche reviewed the perspective set out by
Paine's commission and came to the conclusion that it
was not sufficiently ambitious to accomplish the
necessary job. He took exception to the extent to which
the commission relied upon existing, off-the-shelf
technology to accomplish the task.
LaRouche's objection was that a prerequisite for
manned flight to Mars was the development of
fusion-powered rockets. Only thus could we guarantee
the safety of a crew, and colonists, who would
otherwise be out of reach of help from Earth should
they get into trouble, and who would have to suffer a
nine-month-long journey from Earth to Mars, on a
ballistic trajectory.
The fusion-powered space flight proposal was
typical of LaRouche's approach to all questions of
scientific research and development. If the U.S.A.
decided to develop fusion rockets, then a byproduct
would be development of a fusion-based economy here on
Earth. This would mean an enormous increase in
productivity on Earth, which would in turn transform
the ``costs of the space program'' into gains in the
civilian economy.
The example of the payback to the civilian
economy--a ratio of more than 10:1 payback to
investment--from investment in the Apollo program was a
case in point. The fact that America succeeded in
placing a man on the Moon, gave us an edge in
semiconductor technology, the development of computers,
and of course of satellites as well--an edge that,
unfortunately, we are in process of losing because of
stupid decisions by the Presidents who succeeded
Kennedy in office.
In the November-December 1986 issue of
{Fusion} magazine, LaRouche's proposal, titled
``The Science and Technology Needed to Colonize Mars''
was the cover story. Here he developed a timeline for
the steps necessary to reach the Moon and Mars. This
program became a featured part of LaRouche's 1988
campaign for President, which included a half-hour
television broadcast, run nationally on prime time, on
March 3, 1988.
Unfortunately for the nation, LaRouche was not
elected; instead, his enemies went all out to see that
his program would not be implemented. Key to this was
the frameup which sent him to prison. Even from this
unlikely location, he remains undaunted and continues
the campaign for the space program, nuclear energy, and
major infrastructure development projects, with the
kind of reorganization of the financial system and
government financing which could move the long-range
goals of our manned space program from the domain of
rhetoric to that of practical politics.
- LaRouche's Proposal -
The following quotations from the {Fusion}
magazine article touch upon the leading elements which
LaRouche introduced into the debate on America's future
in space. The extraordinary optimism which he evinced
then, was in sharp contrast to the naysayers who used
the tragedy of the {Challenger} accident to call for
contraction of the program.
He wrote: ``The Mars colonization mission is not
only feasible, both technically and economically; it is
urgent that we undertake this project, both for
scientific reasons, and also for economic reasons.
There are certain classes of technical and economic
problems now developing on Earth, which we shall not
solve on Earth without help from some of the scientific
and economic byproducts of a Mars colonization project.
``Above all, it is time that we begin work on that
project.
``For several reasons, the colonization of Mars
cannot be accomplished with the technologies we had
either developed, or were working to develop, at the
beginning of the 1970s. Essentially, the difference
boils down to the fact that Mars is a far greater
distance from the Earth than the Moon is. We need more
advanced technologies to overcome the several kinds of
effects of that great distance.
``Therefore, setting the date for colonizing Mars
had to wait, until we had begun to master four kinds of
new physics breakthroughs: controlled thermonuclear
fusion, as the primary source of energy used; lasers
and other forms of coherent electromagnetic pulses as a
basic tool; new developments in biological science of
the kind now emerging around optical biophysics; and
much more powerful, more compact computer systems to
assist us in handling these new physics technologies.
``During the past dozen years, we have made some
spectacularly promising breakthroughs in the four areas
just listed. At an easily foreseeable rate of continued
progress in these four areas of technology, all the
conditions for establishing the first permanent colony
on Mars could be met approximately 40 years from now.
``For example: To bridge the long distances
between Earth and Mars, we need continuous acceleration
for about half the journey, and continuous deceleration
for the second half....
``On the surface of Mars, we shall require a great
deal of artificial energy. We shall consume much more
energy per person than in the most developed industrial
regions of Earth today, simply to maintain an agreeable
artificial environment. The basic industries we develop
on Mars, to produce essential materials from the
natural resources available there, will operate at much
higher temperatures than are used in any basic
industries on Earth today.
``For these uses, we require energy generated at
very high energy densities. This requires what we call
today the second-generation level of controlled
thermonuclear fusion, which should be on-line about 25
to 30 years from now.
``The most common industrial tool we shall use on
Mars is advanced forms of what we call lasers and
coherent particle beams.''
In 1985, LaRouche was the keynote speaker at a
memorial conference called to honor the memory of the
great space pioneer, Krafft A. Ehricke, who had
recently died. Ehricke was one of the German-American
scientists responsible for America's great achievement
in the Apollo Project.
Ehricke went on to develop a whole conception for
the industrialization of the Moon, which should be
still the basis of all serious planning for the
development of a manned Moon base.
The conference was sponsored by FEF and the
Schiller Institute.
LaRouche opened his speech with a beautiful
tribute to the meaning for all future generations, of a
life such as that of Krafft Ehricke. LaRouche said:
``As each of us is born, each of us must die. Within
that brief interval of life, what distinguishes a life
as human, as exalted above the condition of mere
beasts, is that which the individual contributes to the
enduring benefit of future generations. Our beloved and
most accomplished friend, Krafft Ehricke, has
bequeathed to future generations a beautiful and most
valuable gift.''
LaRouche took the occasion of this meeting to call
for a crash effort to develop the Strategic Defense
Initiative, but develop it as a subsumed feature of a
major new space effort by the United States.
- What Is a Crash Program? -
Most great projects have essentially been crash
programs, as LaRouche developed in his speech.
``Although,'' he said, ``many of the valuable lessons
of the Manhattan Project and of the Apollo Project, are
embedded in the knowledge of some of our military
specialists and scientists today, the essence of the
principles of a successful `crash program' is not
competently understood....
``The possibility of correlating fundamental
scientific progress directly with increases of the
productive powers of labor, was opened up by Leibniz's
founding of economic science, with emphasis on
Leibniz's defining the meaning of the term
`technology,' in the context of study of principles of
heat-powered machines....
``In terms of SDI and related classes of military
assignments, the first two categories of new
technologies are the source of firepower and mobility
of weaponry, and the auxiliaries that are needed for
acquiring and aiming at targets, as well as delivering
the systems to their firing positions.
``To grasp the general implications of the new
technologies for both the economy and military science,
the most efficient view is developed by giving our
`crash [SDI] program' teams the mission assignment of
establishing and maintaining colonies on both the Moon
and Mars.''
- The Woman on Mars -
LaRouche's conceptions have a special poetic
beauty. He began his March 1988 television show,
concerning his proposals for America's space future,
with a simulation of the first broadcast from the new
city on Mars. He called the show ``The Woman on Mars,''
referring to a famous movie {(The Woman in the
Moon)} made in 1929 by Fritz Lang, working with
German space scientist Hermann Oberth, which forecasts
space travel.
In the LaRouche broadcast, an announcer's voice is
heard, saying, ``Are you there, Dr. Gomez?''
From many million miles deep in space, a woman's
voice is heard, answering, ``Yes, John. I have the
announcement for which you have been waiting. As of
five minutes ago, our environmental systems were fully
stabilized. Man's first permanent colony on Mars is now
completely operational.''
Had LaRouche's proposals been implemented in 1988,
had he been elected to the nation's highest office, we
might look forward to hearing just such a message from
Mars, within 40 years. Unfortunately, that now seems much
farther away, as our country continues to sink into a
deeper depression every month.
Notwithstanding that, LaRouche's programs are as
sound today as they ever were. We can turn the
situation around, and in the process offer new hope to
billions of people around the world, in Africa, in
Asia, in Ibero-America, for a truly human life.
As LaRouche said on his 1988 television show, a
child born today might be that woman on Mars.
- Lyndon LaRouche on America's National Purpose -
{We quote here from the conclusion of Lyndon
LaRouche's 1984 presidential campaign platform
}Mastering the Grave Crises of 1989-1992.
- Three Missions of the United States -
There should be no illusions about the ``good old
days'' of the 1940s and 1950s. Many Americans were
infected with, and practiced various forms of racial,
ethnic, and religious intolerance. The persons who
might be classed as ``average Americans'' from that time
were often infected with mean-spirited parochialism,
shallow thinking, and the substitution of shallow
pragmatism for morality. Yet for all those and other
unpleasant things which might be said of the young adults
of the 1940s and 1950s, the overwhelming majority among
us shared one noble quality which has been greatly lacking
during the recent dozen or so years.
This noble quality we shared so widely then is
typified by the response to President Kennedy's
declaration of a commitment to reach the Moon during that
decade. Few were not inspired by that, when the young
President announced it, and through the following years.
This response was symptomatic of one among our leading
redeeming qualities: we were capable of being inspired to
great national missions.
Put aside the debates over the conduct of wars, and
the mistakes made in choice and implementation of other
kinds of national missions. The very fact that we could
be so inspired by a national mission that we could
dedicate our emotions, our wealth, and sometimes hazard
our lives to ensure its success, was the best aspect of
us as a nation. Then, as earlier, great leaders were
those who, in government or private life, inspired the
nation or some portion of it to an important mission.
Too often, and too much, those aspiring to places
in government speak of enacting this or that set of new
laws, of using the power of government more and more to
regulate those forms of behavior some prefer to dislike.
Thus, we have already too many laws, so many that it
were desirable that the next sessions of Congress devote
much of their attention to removing at least half of those
statutes from the books.
True, law-making and administration are
characteristic day-to-day functions and responsibilities
of government. We have habituated ourselves to overlook
a far more urgent function of elected government,
especially in the Executive Branch. That function is
leadership, the role of the leader in defining great
tasks around which the nation rallies its capabilities,
to bestow upon our posterity a better world than exists
today. The action of President Kennedy, in promulgating
the Moon mission, is an excellent illustration of the most
durable accomplishment of any administration.
Look into the face of the child or youth. Ask that
young person, ``What will you do when you grow up?''
Listen carefully to the response. Think what that
response would have been but two generations ago, as
contrasted with the most probable response today. The
fortunate, happy child, might say, ``I am going to be a
doctor,'' or an engineer, or an excellent practitioner
of some other worthy profession or craft, or simply to
produce a happy family. Lately, during the past
twenty-odd years, we have taken that happiness from the
child and youth. Too often, we hear a response to the
effect, ``There is no future,'' except finding some new
pleasure each passing, jaded moment of pleasure-seeking,
from day to day and week to week.
With us, the individual mortal life is brief. It
is approximately twenty years of childhood and youth,
followed by forty-odd years of active economic life, and
then ten to twenty years of retirement at most. The
child's or youth's response to our question presumes that
he or she have some assurance that the coming forty-odd
years of adult life will be filled with opportunity for
meaningful activity. Once the child or youth comes to
grips with the reality that people eventually die, the
young person is being confronted with the question: How
do you wish to live your life, so that something good
will have come of it all once you are dead?
It is the function of society, including the
institutions of government, to assure to every person,
especially the young, the opportunity to live a life
full of confidence in the fact that their living will
be fruitful for present and future generations in some
meaningful degreee. We accomplish this, in part, by
providing for the education and related circumstances
of cultural development of the individual. We
accomplish this, in part, by honoring and protecting
the good which the individual contributes, to the
advantage of present and future generations. We
accomplish this by adopting national goals, missions in
the sense of the Kennedy Moon-mission, which assure the
young that the circumstances of adult lives over 40-odd
years to come permit the young person's choice of
profession to be a secure choice.
Thus, the crucial function of government is to
define those great tasks of the nation for a period as
far distant as 40 to 50 years into the future. This is
not so distant a time; for the operson entering a
profession today, 40 years reaches no further than the
date of their probably retirement, not much further
than the day the mortgage on the new home will be paid
off.
There are three missions which may be selected as
outstanding examples of policies to be adopted as
commitments now.
1. Since we either possess, or can soon possess
the technologies adequate to eradicate oppressive
poverty from this planet, the contribution of the
United States to that mission, at home and in
international affairs, ought to be a leading choice by
the next administration.
2. We may hope that by approximately 40 years from
now, we might have progressed beyond the immediate
possibilities of mere war-avoidance, to the cultural
preconditions among nations assuring durable peace on
this planet. That must be the long-range mission of all
aspects of the foreign policy of the United States.
3. New technologies in process of development now,
afford mankind the possibility of establishing a
city-sized permanent colony on Mars as early as 40
years from now. It is man's clear destiny to undertake
such exploration and colonization of space. In addition
to those various and incalculable benefits obtained
from space-exploration, the mobilization of
technological progress to the purpose of accomplishing
this mission assures the highest potential rate of
growth of the economy per capita on Earth.
So, let it be ordered, that every child and youth
of this nation, when asked whether his or her adult
life will be important to mankind, might answer
confidently, that that life will be a contribution to
making the success of these three missions possible. Let
each young person be given so the right to say with
confidence, ``My life will be important for present and
future generations of mankind.'' In a well-ordered
state of affairs, every individual life will have such
potential importance, and each individual will walk
happily through life, in the confidence that this is
so.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:54:33 PDT 1992
Article: 12188 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12188 alt.politics.clinton:14662
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 15
Message-ID: <178-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:38:29 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 318
- Chapter 12 -
- Revive Family Farming and Feed the World -
June 1992 marked an historic point in U.S. food and
farm policy, when the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) announced that federal food stocks were too low to
continue domestic food relief at the high level demanded.
This announcement came at a time when an estimated 40
million Americans are dependent on some form of
supplementary food--the WIC (Womens, Infants and Childrens
Program,) TEFAP (Temporary Emergency Food Assistance
Program) for the elderly, the young, and others. One in 10
Americans, or 25 million people, were getting food stamps
as of mid-summer 1992. August 1992's Hurricane Andrew
pushed that number even higher.
The response of the USDA? Spokesmen told House
Agriculture Committee hearings in July that, hungry people
are not the concern of the USDA. The ``surplus'' food is
gone, and that is ``good'' for the American farmer.
In fact, thousands of American family farmers are
likewise being ruined by the policies of the USDA, and the
food cartel companies that have come to run the USDA.
- No Food for the Hungry -
In mid-June 1991, the USDA suspended distribution of
relief foods from its central warehouse in Atlanta,
Georgia, cutting off thousands of households from needed
staple foods--wheat flour, canned vegetables and fruits,
oils, rice, and other basics. As of July 1, the government
stopped all flows of surplus federal stocks of wheat flour
given as ``bonus'' grants to U.S. schools, hospitals, and
feeding programs for the poor. As of a year earlier, the
USDA began phasing out bonus dairy foodstuffs.
The same policy has been put into effect
internationally: no food for the hungry. While agriculture
output potential has been systematically obstructed in
recent decades by International Monetary Fund (IMF)
austerity policies, the United States, and other potential
food donor nations, have decreased, not increased their
relief food shipments. In the mid-1980s, international
grain relief was about 14 millions of tons annually. For
1992, it may be less than 10 millions of tons. Yet the
need is far greater.
Africa is facing food shortages on the level of
genocide. In 1992, Africa was hit by the ``Drought of the
Century,'' and by the calamitous effects of decades of
colonialism and neo-colonialism under the IMF. Russia and
the former Soviet Bloc are likewise reeling under IMF
``shock therapy'' economics. In 1988, LaRouche warned that
this situation was imminent, and called for a ``Food for
Peace'' orientation to mobilize for emergency food relief,
and all out food production.
This approach was particularly called for in 1988,
since in that summer, a ``Killer Drought'' hit the U.S.
cornbelt, and production fell by half. LaRouche, at the
time of the 1988 Democratic Party Convention in Atlanta,
initiated the call for the founding of emergency food
mobilization organization. In September 1988, the Food for
Peace effort of the Schiller Institute was founded at a
conference of 400 people in Chicago.
Since that time, as food output potential has fallen
worldwide, the Food for Peace organization has grown to
force of collaborators that span the globe. The summary
points of the program that LaRouche had fought for are
immediately below, followed by excerpts from his October
1988, ``Food for Peace'' strategy proposal given in
Berlin.
- What Is Required -
The food and farm program advocated by LaRouche
includes the following essential points:
{1. Emergency action against famine.}
Mobilize for domestic food relief and against famine in
Africa and other points of need. Collaborate with other
nations, to vastly increase world food output, in
particular protein-dense foods--meat, milk, eggs. More
area planted, higher inputs per unit area, more energy per
acre and per farm worker. Provide advanced food processing
and preservation, especially food irradiation, to provide
lifesaving relief, and improved diets as rapidly as
possible.
{2. No more foreclosures.} Implement a freeze
and rescheduling of farm debt. Stay foreclosures on family
farms, along with all home mortgages and essential
businesses, health care, and other vital services.
{3. Low-interest production credits.} Make
available low-interest credits for food and fiber
production and family farm capital improvements.
{4. Constitutionalize the Federal Reserve System.
} Nationalize the Federal Reserve System, bringing it
once again under control of the Congress as specified in the
Constituion, in order to resume control over national
monetary and credit policy and resume production
levels--agriculture, industry and infrastructure and
essential services, to the needed per household volumes.
Initiate the needed infrastructure construction and repair
projects to provie 3 million jobs directly, and another 3
millions indirectly.
{5. Dump GATT, NAFTA, U.S.-Canada FTA and all
other ``free trade'' impoverishment schemes.} No free
trade usury. Bust up the food cartel companies' worldwide
control over farm production, prices, food processing,
shipping and sales.
{6. Ensure parity prices to producers. }
Enforce 100 percent parity farm price leveles in the
United States, and support the same policy for all
nations.
{7. Set aside is genocide.} End the programs
to prevent food output on potentially productive farmland.
Offer inducements for land repair and improvement.
{8.} Emergency action against famine.
Mobilize--collaborate with other nations, to vastly
increase world food output, in particular protein-dense
foods--meat, milk, eggs. More planting, more inputs, more
energy per acre and per farm worker. Provide emergency
shipments to Africa and all points of need to stop the
starvation now on the level of genocide.
{9.} End environmentalist madness. Back real
science. End the Environmental Protection Agency bans on
the safe use of chemicals, in particular DDT. Back
fullscale research into such areas as genetic engineering
to potentially enhance photosynthesis, and in ``cold
fusion'' and related phenomena (sonoluminescence,
superconductivity, anomolous behavior in water, etc.,) in
order to further breakthroughs in basic nuclear science,
and future applications for energy, agriculture and
medicine. Extend the NASA research into CELSS (controlled
environment agriculture systems--hydroponics, aeroponics,
and other high input-high output systems) throughout the
land-grant university research systems.
{10.} Build infrastructure. Initiate the
water, power and transport projects to bring supply lebels
up to requirements for growth. In particular: The North
American Water and Power Alliance; nuclear pwoer for
plentiful, inexpensive electricity and saltwater
desalination; high speed rail lines and magnetically
levitated trains.
{11.} Emergency financial relief to family
farms. Free farmers from the usurious Federal Reserve
policies, in which the Farmers Home Administration, the
Production Credit Associations, Federal Land Banks and
private lenders have been denying farmers the means to
produce, and dispossessing them of their farms on a mass
scale. Investigate and prosecute those individuals and
entities--such as the giant Dutch-based Rabo bank, that
have used the government-backed farm loan guarantees to
profit off the ruination of family farms.
{12.} Trust bust the food cartel companies.
Initiate anti-trust and prosecution actions aimed at
dismembering the select few food cartel companies now
dominating food production, trade and government policy at
the USDA and other agencies. Top of the list are: Cargill
Inc., ConAgra, Archer Daniels Midland/Toepfer, Grand
Metropolitan, Garnac/Andre, Continental, Labatts, Louis
Dreyfus, IBP, Tysons, Bunge and similar monopolies.
- LaRouche Presents Food for Peace Strategy -
On October 12, 1988, Lyndon LaRouche, running as an
independent presidential candidate against George Bush and
Michael Dukakis, delivered a now-famous speech at Berlin,
Germany's Kempinski-Bristol Hotel. LaRouche, accompanied
by his wife, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, forecast the
reunification of Germany and the political crisis which
was to sweep the Soviet empire only months later, and
called for the creation of an international Food for Peace
organization as the leading edge of America's foreign
policy. Excerpts of LaRouche's presentation follow:
I see a possibility, that the process of
reunification could develop as de Gaulle proposed. I base
this possibility upon the reality of a terrible worldwide
food crisis which has erupted during the past several
months, and will dominate the world's politics for at
least two years to come.
The economy of the Soviet bloc is a terrible, and
worsening failure. In Western European culture, we have
demonstrated that the successes of nations of big
industries depend upon the technologically progressive
independent farmer, and what you call in Germany the
{Mittelstand} (Germany's small and medium-sized
entrepreneurs). Soviet culture in its present form is
not capable of applying this lesson. Despite all attempts
at structural reforms, and despite any amount of credits
supplied from the West, the Soviet bloc economy as a whole
has reached the critical point, that, in its present form,
it will continue to slide downhill from here on, even if
the present worldwide food crisis had not erupted.
I do not foresee the possibility of genuine peace
between the United States and Soviet Union earlier than
thirty or forty years still to come. The best we can do in
the name of peace, is to avoid a new general war between
the powers. This war-avoidance must be based partly on our
armed strength, and our political will. It must be based
also, on rebuilding the strength of our economies.
At the same time that we discourage Moscow from
dangerous military and similar adventures, we must heed
the lesson taught us by a great military scientist nearly
four centuries ago, Niccolo Macchiavelli: we must also
provide an adversary with a safe route of escape. We must
rebuild our economies to the level at which we can provide
the nations of the Soviet bloc an escape from the terrible
effects of their economic suffering.
I give a concrete example.
Recently, in response to the food crisis, I sponsored
the formation of an international association, called Food
For Peace. This association has just recently held its
founding conference in Chicago Sept. 3-4, and since then
has been growing rapidly inside the United States and in
other nations represented by delegates attending that
conference.
One of the points I have stressed, in supporting this
Food For Peace effort, is that the Soviet bloc will
require the import of about 80 million tons of grain next
year, as a bare minimum for the pressing needs of its
population. China is experiencing a terrible food crisis,
too. As of now, the food reserves are exhausted. There are
no more food reserves in the United States, and the
actions of the European Commission in Brussels have
brought the food reserves of Western Europe to very low
levels. Next year, the United States and Western Europe
will be cut off from the large and growing amount of food
imports during recent years, because of the collapse of
food production in developing nations throughout most of
the world.
During 1988, the world will have produced between 1.6
and 1.7 billion tons of grains, already a disastrous
shortage. To ensure conditions of political, and strategic
stability during 1989 and 1990, we shall require
approximately 2.4 to 2.5 billion tons of grain each year.
At those levels, we would be able to meet minimal Soviet
needs; without something approaching those levels, we
could not.
If the nations of the West would adopt an emergency
agricultural policy, those nations, working together,
could ensure that we reach the level of food supply
corresponding to about 2.4 billion tons of grains. It
would be a major effort, and would mean scrapping the
present agricultural policies of many governments and
supranational institutions, but it could be accomplished.
If we are serious about avoiding the danger of war during
the coming two years, we will do just that.
By adopting these kinds of policies, in food supplies
and other crucial economic matters, the West can foster
the kind of conditions under which the desirable approach
to reunification of Germany can proceed on the basis a
majority of Germans on both sides of the Wall desire it
should. I propose that the next government of the United
States should adopt that as part of its foreign policy
toward Central Europe.
Rebuild the Economies Of Eastern Europe
I shall propose the following concrete perspective to
my government. We say to Moscow: We will help you. We
shall act to establish Food for Peace agreements among the
international community, with the included goal that
neither the people of the Soviet bloc nor developing
nations shall go hungry. In response to our good faith in
doing that for you, let us do something which will set an
example of what can be done to help solve the economic
crisis throughout the Soviet bloc generally.
Let us say that the United States and Western Europe
will cooperate to accomplish the successful rebuilding of
the economy of Poland. There will be no interference in
the political system of government, but only a kind of
Marshall Plan aid to rebuild Poland's industry and
agriculture. If Germany agrees to this, let a process
aimed at the reunification of the economies of Germany
begin, and let this be the {punctum saliens} for
Western cooperation in assisting the rebuilding of the
economy of Poland.
We, in the United States and Germany, should say to
the Soviet bloc, let us show what we can do for the
peoples of Eastern Europe, by this test, which costs you
really nothing. Then, you judge by the results, whether
this is a lesson you wish to try in other cases....
I recall the famous case of a certain German
gentleman of the Weimar period. This gentleman was
persuaded that a second world war was inevitable. He
searched the world for a place to which he might move his
family, to be out of the areas in which the next war would
be fought. So, when the war erupted, he and his family
were living in the remote Solomon Islands, on the island
of Guadalcanal.
In this period of crisis, there is no place in which
any man or woman can safely hide in a crisis-ridden world
without food. One can not duck politics, with the idea of
taking care of one's career and family, until this storm
blows over. There is no place, for any man or woman to
hide. There is no room for today's political pragmatists
in the leadership of governments now. If we are to
survive, we must make boldly imaginative decisions, on the
condition that they are good choices, as well as bold
ones.
type for captions, graphics:
Figure 1: Cholera at U.S. Borders
Figure 2: Zones of Contaminated Water in the Rio Grande
Hydrologic Region
Figure 3: Mexico's Maquiladoras
Figure 4: Maquiladoras Grow, Mexicans Starve
Figure 5: Mexico's Cumulative Interest Payments, Foreign
and Domestic
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:54:38 PDT 1992
Article: 12187 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12187 alt.politics.clinton:14661
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 16
Message-ID: <179-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:39:40 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 381
LaRouche program on AIDS
- Chapter 13 -
- LaRouche's Program for a War on AIDS -
It was 1985 when Lyndon LaRouche, already his 1988
presidential campaign, sought to mobilize the country
around a crash program to defeat the AIDS virus. Having
listened to the experts, LaRouche proposed emergency
action to prevent this virus from creating an unstoppable
pandemic. Unfortunately for the tens of thousands who have
died and been infected with HIV since that time, LaRouche
was not heeded.
The fact is, that the U.S. government carried out a
deliberate coverup on the nature of the AIDS pandemic, and
how it should be dealt with. The officials who implemented
that coverup are guilty of {criminal malfeasance}, because
they both suppressed what they did know, and deliberately
refused to carry out the elementary public health measures
which would slow the spread of the incurable disease.
Instead of fighting AIDS, our government and health
establishment have effectively acted to spread it. They
have refused to implement mandatory testing, except in the
military, thereby preventing the most basic means of
protection. They have encouraged ``safe sex,'' the
``condom campaign,'' which has in fact promoted the very
kinds of intimate behavior which spread AIDS. They have
skimped on the funds absolutely required for hospital
care, not to mention the need for billions in a crash
research program at the frontiers of science.
Those who participated in suppressing LaRouche's
program, didn't all do so for the same reasons. Some were
more witting, and criminal, than others.
On the level of pure venal stupidity were most of the
political and Hollywood types who went on TV to denounce
LaRouche as an ``extremist.'' They acted out of ignorance
and defense of their own perverted lifestyles--demanding
the freedom to ``do their own thing'' even if it kills
others. Their excuse was to rely on the word of the
``experts.''
Much more criminal were those in the health
establishment and their political command, including the
holders of the pursestrings. The bureaucrats at the
Centers for Disease Control, the World Health
Organization, and the Surgeon General's office were aware
that they did not {know} how AIDS was spread. They were
aware that the necessary research was not being done on
transmission, and that the link between overall health
levels, and the economic environment, and the incidence of
AIDS was overwhelming. {They suppressed the information.}
Treasury Secretary Don Regan himself responded to
communications from LaRouche's associates on the
relationship of AIDS to public health collapse and
poverty, by saying that such considerations would go {far
beyond the budget} considered possible to deal with this
problem. The truth is, the officials of the U.S.
government did not want to spend the money which it would
take to clean up mosquito swamps, vaccinate for normal
diseases, and provide for clean water supplies and
plumbing--not to mention for mass testing. They didn't
want to admit the scope of the problem--because they
didn't want to spend the money.
This pennypinching has costs hundreds of
thousands--perhaps millions--of lives, primarily in
Africa, where whole countries have been cut off from
credit, and left in hideous poverty. But the same
conditions are being created in other parts of the Third
World, and in pockets in the United States, most
especially the migrant labor camps.
But there is an even more criminal element behind the
rejection of LaRouche's rational AIDS proposals. Those are
the Depopulators, the crazed set of oligarchs and
``academics'' who have determined that the world has too
many people, and believe that AIDS is a ``natural'' way
to cull the race.
In this category we find such individuals as Prince
Philip of England, head of the World Wildlife Fund for
Nature, who quips that he would like to be reincarnated as
a deadly virus, to deal with the supposed overpopulation
problem. We find ecology freaks like the head of Earth
First!, who says AIDS will be useful in cutting the world
population down to size. The whole zero-growth lobby
contains many more of this ilk.
- The Three-Point War Plan -
On June 4, 1988 Democratic presidential candidate Lyndon
LaRouche delivered a half-hour nationwide prime time
television address, urging an immediate mobilization for
``a war against AIDS--nothing short of victory.'' LaRouche
reiterated the three-point program for the nation's war
against the AIDS virus which had been at the center of his
fourth run for the White House since his announcement in
September 1985:
1. Not less than $3 billion a year for an
Apollo-style ``crash program'' of research to develop a
cure for AIDS.
2. Application of time-tested public health measures
against the virus, including universal mass-testing for
the infection, combined with public health and out-patient
medical services to all infected persons and their
families.
3. A large-scale program of constructing hospital-bed
capacity for handling the expected case-load of
AIDS-infected persons requiring hospital care.
We elaborate LaRouche's war plan here, drawing from
pamphlets, press releases, and campaign speeches by the
candidate and his leading advisors during 1988.
- 1. Apollo-Style Research Effort -
{Warren Hamerman, a leading member of the
Biological Holocaust Task Force of }Executive
Intelligence Review { magazine, wrote the following
article in 1988. It was first published in a LaRouche
Democratic Campaign pamphlet titled ``My Program Against
AIDS'' by Lyndon LaRouche.}
As scientists have already learned, AIDS poses one of
the toughest biological challenges ever faced by research.
Therefore, we should not limit ourselves to off-the-shelf
medical capabilities, hit or miss so-called ``miracle''
drugs and existing molecular biology approaches, but force
through a succession of major breakthroughs at the
frontiers of basic physics, biology, and chemistry. Such a
broad-based ``crash'' scientific program along the lines
of the Manhattan Project of World War II or the Apollo
Program of the 1960s, not only maximizes the chances for
an early scientific solution to AIDS, but also returns the
greatest profit in the form of new technology and
increased productivity into the economy as a whole.
Among the most fruitful areas of interdisciplinary
research is an advanced area of science known as
{optical biophysics,} or the area which studies
the electromagnetic radiation ``tuning'' properties in
living systems. The healthy living cell is much more than
the sum of its chemical elements; it is a highly ordered
electromagnetic domain defined by complex interactions.
Many of the scientific achievements of our space program
and Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) program--from the
free electron and x-ray lasers to high-power pulsed
magnetic fields--have direct relevance to this domain of
basic biological science.
Among the most important basic science questions for
AIDS will be to explore the ``nonlinear spectroscopy'' of
mitosis, or cell division. The unique biological feature
of the slow-acting AIDS virus is that when it infects a
cell, the genetic message migrates to the cell's nucleus,
where it incorporates itself into the normal genetic
message of the cell. The message may lie dormant across
many cell divisions before it receives an ``activation
signal,'' and turns the cell during the process of mitosis
into a virus factory. What is the origin of the
``activation signal''? Can the cell nucleus be sent a
``deactivation signal'' instead? Is the AIDS virus tuned
more to the neurological system or the immunological
system or to the ``whole body,'' or does its tuning vary?
We don't need gimmicks. We require fully-backed basic
science in depth. Already, certain projects have
demonstrated the fruitfulness of such an approach as the
following brief outline of a representative sample of
pilot projects in the area indicates:
{1. Electromagnetic Waves May Kill AIDS Virus in
Blood.} Low-power laser light can destroy viruses in
the blood--including possibly the AIDS virus--according to
a leading physiologist. His work under contract with the
Strategic Defense Initiative Office is a form of
photodynamic therapy which has already been used
successfully against tumors. Non-toxic dye particles are
attached to the virus envelope. A laser frequency that
excites the dye to a higher energy state is then used to
irradiate the virus. The laser-excited dye alters the
viral envelope and ``inactivates'' the virus. In future
experiments the Free Electron Laser (FEL) may prove to be
an ideal instrument because it can be tuned to a wide
range of frequencies.
{2. Microwaves May Inactivate the Virus.} One
physicist has proposed to pass AIDS-infected blood through
an intense, solenoidal magnetic field where the field is
changing most rapidly, forcing the electron-dense RNA
nucleus of the virus to align its symmetry axis parallel
to the direction of the blood flow. While held in this
position by the magnetic field, the nuclei are to be
irradiated by polarized microwaves propagated directly
into the oncoming flow of blood. The patient's blood could
be circulated outside of the body in the manner of renal
dialysis, in order to treat it. Various other scientists
throughout the United States and Western Europe are
working on similar approaches to deactivating the AIDS
virus.
{3. The Signal Between the AIDS Virus and Its
Targeted Cell May Be Jammed.} A leading biophysicist
is working on experiments based upon ``radar jamming''
techniques to interfere with the electromagnetic tuning
signal between the AIDS virus and T-lymphocyte cells.
Essentially, the horns on the outside of the virus
function like broadcasting antennae to the receiving
antennae or (receptors) on the T-lymphocytes. Using basic
radar, science experiments are under way to see if the
radar signals can be jammed with electromagnetic means.
{4. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) and Radio
Frequency Therapy Against AIDS.} For several years NMR
and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), devices have given
scientists graphic images of the way in which the virus
alters the brain and neurological system of AIDS patients.
Experiments have demonstrated that certain experimental
NMR techniques, at least with cancer, can go beyond mere
``picture taking'' to actual radio frequency magnetic
therapy. Several biophysicists are engaged in long-term
experiments to assess the possibilities of applying such
approaches to AIDS.
If we could successfully send our citizens to the
Moon and bring them back healthy and happy to Earth nearly
two decades ago, there is no reason we can't achieve a
total victory over AIDS. We have a lot of scientific work
to do before we conquer this disease. But with basic
science we shall.
- 2. Traditional Public Health Measures -
{On June 7, 1988, hundreds of thousands of
Californians voted for Proposition 69, the second public
referendum to have been placed on the statewide ballot by
supporters of Lyndon LaRouche. Unfortunately, Proposition
69, like its 1986 predecessor Proposition 64, was defeated
at the polls. Had the public health measures called for in
the LaRouche-backed referenda been voted up and
implemented, it is likely that thousands of California
residents now infected with AIDS could have been spared.
We excerpt here sections of Proposition 69, which was
written to serve as a model of similar legislation by
other states.}
- Section I -
The purpose of this Act is to:
A. Enforce and confirm the declaration of the
California Legislature set forth in Health and Safety Code
Section 195 that Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
(AIDS) is serious and life-threatening to men and women
from all segments of society, that AIDS is usually lethal,
and that it is caused by an infectious agent with a high
concentration of cases in California;
B. Protect victims of Acquired Immune Deficiency
Syndrome (AIDS), members of their families and local
communities, and the public health at large; and
C. Utilize the existing structure of the State
Department of Health Services and local health
communities, and the statutes and regulations under which
they serve, to preserve the public health from Acquired
Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS).
- Section II -
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is an
infectious, contagious and communicable disease and the
condition of being a carrier of the HTLV-III virus or any
other viral agent which may cause Acquired Immune
Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is an infectious, contagious
and communicable condition, and both shall be placed and
maintained by the director of the Department of Health
Services on the list of reportable diseases and conditions
mandated by the Health and Safety Code 3123, and both
shall be included within the provisions of Division 4 of
such code and the rules and regulations set forth in
Administrative Code Title 17, Part 1, Chapter 4,
Subchapter 1, and all personnel of the Department of
Health Services and all health officers shall fulfill all
of the duties and obligations specified in each and all of
the sections of said statutory division and administrative
code subchapter in a manner consistent with the intent of
this Act, as shall all other persons identified in said
provisions.
- Argument in Favor of Proposition 69 -
Proposition 69 extends existing public health codes
for communicable diseases to AIDS and AIDS virus carriers.
This means that the same public health codes that already
protect you and your family from other dangerous diseases,
will protect you from AIDS. Proposition 69 will keep AIDS
out of our schools, out of commercial food establishments,
and give health officials the power to test and quarantine
where needed. These measures are not new; they are the
same health measures applied, {by law, }every day,
to every other contagious disease.
Today AIDS is out of control. Present ``policy'' is a
disaster. There were about 500,000 AIDS carriers in
California in 1985, according to health authorities. At
that time the number of cases of this highly contagious
disease was doubling approximately every 6-12 months. Even
assuming that the doubling rate had slowed to every 24
months, this would mean an estimated 1 million
Californians infected with the AIDS virus today. Many of
these newly infected persons can thank those who fought
against Proposition 64 for their tragic condition.
The number of ``unexplained'' AIDS cases--cases not
in ``high-risk'' groups, such as homosexuals and
intravenous drug-users--continues to grow at alarming
rates. Indeed, the majority of cases worldwide fall into
no identifiable ``risk-group'' whatsoever. The AIDS virus
has been found living in many bodily fluids, including
blood, saliva, respiratory fluids, sweat, and tears, and
it can survive upwards of seven days outside the body.
There presently exists no cure for the sick, and no
vaccination for the healthy. It is 100 percent lethal.
AIDS is the gravest public health threat our nation
has ever faced. Traditional California public health law
clearly states that certain proven public health measures
{must }be taken to protect the public from
{any} communicable disease, and no competent
medical professional denies AIDS is ``communicable.''
Nevertheless, politicians and special interest groups have
circumvented the public health laws. California's current
``AIDS testing confidentiality'' statute even prohibits
doctors from disclosing AIDS infection status to health
authorities, endangering medical and law enforcement
personnel and the general public. For the first time in
our history, a deadly disease is being treated as a
``civil rights'' issue, rather than as a public health
issue.
Under present policy, since health officials
generally do not know who is infected, there is little
they can do either to prevent the infected person from
infecting others, or to get that person proper medical
attention before they develop full AIDS. Many who spoke
against Proposition 64 now call for testing and contact
tracing. Had it passed, these measures would already be in
effect. How many more Californians must become sick and
die before we act to stop this epidemic?
The medical facts are clear. The law is clear. Common
sense agrees. You and your family have the right to
protection from {all} contagious diseases,
including AIDS--the deadliest of them all. If you agree,
vote {yes }on Proposition 69.
- Hospital Construction Program -
{The following is excerpted from pre-broadcast
material prepared by Lyndon LaRouche for his half-hour
television broadcast on AIDS on NBC-TV, June 4, 1988, at
10:30 p.m.}
The problem is that the United States has presently
no capability for handling the hundreds of thousands of
AIDS cases who will require hospitalization each year
beginning the early 1990s. AIDS patients require special
kinds of hospital facilities, not only because they are
very infectious in that stage, but because they are
helpless to resist opportunistic infections. We must
invest in building the required number of hospital-bed
facilities now....
There is no denying that this will cost a lot of
money, but there is no price too high for saving human
lives from this terrible infection....
The best guesses on costs of medical treatment for
each AIDS-infected person are between $100,000 and
$150,000 total for each case hospitalized. This must come
from a combination of federal, state, local and private
agencies. With the number now infected, this will cost
about $100 billions a year or more by sometime during the
early 1990s. We have no choice; our morality will not
permit us to see millions of Americans dying helplessly in
hospices which are simply death camps.
Don't worry about the money. If I become the next
President, the average real income in this country will
increase by between 20 percent and 30 percent over the
coming four years. We shall simply have to pull millions
of Americans out of the bottom-wage jobs created under the
Reagan-Bush administration, and put those people to work
in jobs where they produce real wealth and once again earn
the level of real wages industrial employees used to earn
back at the end of the 1960s.
If we continued to do little but send silly letters,
as Washington is doing today, this infection is fully
capable of making the human species extinct by sometime
during the first half of the next century. That need not
happen. Let us declare war against this virus, bring it
under control, and wipe it from the face of the Earth by
the end of this century. An end to penny-ante moaning and
groaning about costs. With the aid of science we can win
this war; therefore, let us act now, and proceed to total
victory over the worst plague which mankind has ever
faced.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:54:43 PDT 1992
Article: 12189 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12189 alt.politics.clinton:14663
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 17
Message-ID: <180-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:40:44 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 379
< - Chapter 14 -
- Why LaRouche Calls NAFTA `Auschwitz Below the Border' -
On August 12, 1992, officials of the Mexican, U.S., and
Canadian governments shook hands on a treaty to break down
all tariff and other barriers to complete ``free trade'' in
North American--the so-called North American Free Trade
Agreement, or NAFTA. George Bush has been pushing for NAFTA
since he came into office, and has made his support of NAFTA
a central plank of his reelection campaign. The Democrats,
led by Bill Clinton and House Majority Leader Richard
Gephardt, Senate Finance Committee Lloyd Bentson, and others,
agree in all essentials with Bush, and have backed NAFTA
since May of 1991. Ross Perot, likewise, supports free trade.
All agree in claiming that the treaty will help launch an
unprecedented era of economic prosperity across the
continent, creating new markets for exports, and new jobs for
Americans.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
As leading officials of the U.S. trade union movement
have already asserted, NAFTA is a frontal attack on what is
left of the nation's labor movement. But it is more than
that. It is a blueprint for looting and destroying the labor
force of all of North and South America, to prop up the
bankers' bankrupt financial institutions and unpayable
foreign debts. Since 1982, the International Monetary Fund
(IMF), the international banks and the Western governments
led by Washington, have enforced a brutal regime of debt
looting, extracting from the impoverished economies of
Ibero-America over $250 billion in interest payments alone,
even as the debt rose. The IMF has forced every government to
slash wages, cut social services, sell off government
industries, lay off millions of workers, and cripple economic
investment.
Now, NAFTA and free trade are intended as the next step,
to turn the entire continent into one huge plantation, worked
by slave labor, to produce wealth under a new colonial system
for export to the United States. NAFTA is intended above all
to lock Mexico into this arrangement, by international treaty
agreement, such that no subsequent government could reassert
Mexico's traditional nationalism and try to back out of the
arrangement. The intent is to extend free trade agreements to
the rest of the hemisphere as rapidly as possible, and in
this way keep the bankrupt international financial system
afloat for another brief period.
- NAFTA Means Slave Labor -
A look at the condition of Mexican workers in the
unregulated factories along the U.S.-Mexican border--the
so-called {maquiladoras}--gives us a picture of the future
intended for all Mexican workers--and soon, for workers
throughout the continent. The {maquiladoras} are plants set
up under a special arrangement 25 years ago that removed most
tariffs on goods exported from the U.S., processed in Mexico,
and reexported to the U.S.--exactly what NAFTA will expand to
all industries. The conditions of these ``runaway shops'' speak
for themselves, as documented by many groups, such as the
AFL-CIO, other labor, church, social welfare, and
environmental organizations (see {{Figure 1}}):
@sb^Wage levels are abominably low. Contrary to some
claims, the average wages paid by the {maquiladoras} are far
below even the already abysmally low wages paid in the
non-{maquiladora} manufacturing sector of Mexico. According
to AFL-CIO figures, average {maquiladora} wages are
$.98/hour, compared to $1.56/hour for manufacturing in the
rest of the country. But many maquiladora workers receive
substantially less even than $.98. {{Figure 2}} contrasts
this low, and declining, {maquiladora} wage to the average
manufacturing wage in the United States, which has risen
slowly over the years. While in 1980, the wage differential
was about 5:1, it is now worse than 11:1. And even these
figures understate the comparison, as some U.S. workers still
receive fringe benefits up to 50 percent the value of their
wages; the {maquiladora} workers receive none. Meanwhile, the
average Mexican's consumption of staple foods has dropped
considerably ({{Figure 3}}).
@sb^The profile of the {maquiladora} labor force reads
like something out of Charles Dickens or New York City's
tenement factories before the first child labor laws at the
turn of the century. Two-thirds of the 500,000 workers in
them are females, and most of these are young girls, either
trying to supplement the income of desperately poor families,
or earning their first living away from home any way they
can. Turnover rates in the {maquiladoras} reach 120 percent
per year.
@sb^Working conditions are also 19th-century, with
widespread violation of worker safety laws, blatantly unsafe
working conditions, failure to inform the workers of hazards,
failure to use proper protective devices on machinery, and
other abuses amply documented by others.
@sb^Living conditions are crushingly poor, with the vast
majority of the 500,000 workers, plus dependents, living in
the so-called {colonias,} urban slums reminiscent of Brazil's
notorious {favelas.} Almost none of these residents have
indoor running water, many do not even have access to running
water at all, and drink from water collected in huge barrels
formerly used by local companies to contain toxic substances.
Sewage facilities are almost unknown in the {colonias,} and
open sewage runs through the camps. Conditions, according to
first-hand observers, are as squalid and hideous as anywhere
on earth today. It is scarcely an exaggeration to call them
concentration camps. Needless to say, health care and
treatment are all but non-existent as well, making these
camps ripe ground for cholera and other epidemics, which,
once unleashed, will not respect national borders. ({{Figures
4, 5}}).
Ciudad Jua@aarez, where fully one-third of all the
{maquiladora} workers live, graphically illustrates the
situation. 315 {maquiladoras} employ 135,000 workers, 65
percent of them women, 10 percent under 16 years of age.
Wages are $3.60 a day, and turnover is so high there is a
constant need for more workers. The city has been destroyed
by the {maquiladora} plague. Teachers there earn one-third of
their real wage a decade ago, and now spend more time earning
income in the informal economy than they do teaching--the
schools have become public markets for their wares. Housing
rents are double the levels across the Rio Grande in El Paso;
incomes are less than one-tenth the U.S. levels.
NAFTA will turn all of Mexico into one giant maquiladora.
It will also be used to smash the U.S. labor
movement, collapse wages, and eliminate a million or more
industrial jobs over the next few years. U.S. manufacturing
companies have been fleeing to Mexico for the past several
years, and many more are expected to follow as soon as NAFTA
is passed. Many more are already using the threat of pulling
up stakes to force their workers to accept lower wages and
other ``give-backs.'' In the context of the rapidly deepening
depression in the United States, this threat will become more
and more effective in sharply lowering wage levels,
eliminating health and safety provisions for workers, and
effectively eliminating the right to strike or bargain
collectively.
This process is already sweeping Mexico, as the Mexican
government has launched an assault to smash its labor
movement in order to attract foreign investment. In August,
the Government decertified the largest autoworkers union in
the country, at a Volkswagen plant in Puebla, allowed the
company to fire all the workers, and then to rehire only some
of them, who had to join a new, company union, with total
loss of seniority and benefits. Mexican President Salinas de
Gortari has made clear he wants an end to collective
bargaining.
In the U.S.A., the machinations of the auto companies are
paradigmatic of what will happen to unions, wages and working
conditions in the U.S. Citing huge losses, GM has led the
field in plant closings, with more to come. The message to
workers is clear: The unions are to give up the income
security and health insurance components of the contract, and
accept wage cuts, or face the flight of investment and
employment to Mexico. GM spokesmen off the record have made
clear how they view matters: with U.S. auto worker wages
averaging $16.50 an hour, and GM's 42,000 workers employed in
Mexican {maquiladoras} averaging $1.10 per hour, they say:
``The discrepancies are huge. Even with this subsidy from
Mexico, if auto sales in the U.S. keep collapsing, we will
not be able to produce cars in the United States.''
Chrysler is perhaps in worse financial shape. Now the
company is under pressure from the government's Pension
Benefit Guaranty Corporation. Chrysler has $3.62 billion in
unfunded pension liabilities, which are due, but cannot be
paid. Chrysler, like GM, wants to reopen its contract.
The textile industry, for its part, fears that with the
elimination of remaining import tariffs on certain classes of
goods produced in Mexico, the industry in the U.S. will be
wiped out, perhaps in its entirety.
Many other industries are equally threatened, including
electronics, light machinery, and chemicals, not to mention
the entire U.S. farm sector. As one NAFTA ideologue
succinctly put it, U.S. companies will tell their unions:
``We don't want to move to Mexico. But in Mexico they want 57
@ct an hour and you guys want $15. Now you're going to have
to meet us half way, or at least part of the way.''
NAFTA is not limited to manufacturing, either. By one
provision, Mexican truck drivers, who earn one-tenth the wage
of American teamsters, will be permitted to drive in the
United States, threatening the jobs of hundreds of thousands
of teamsters, and the wage levels of all truckers. By other
provisions, U.S. fruit and vegetable farmers will find
themselves competing with low-wage Mexican plantation labor
and stand to be wiped out. The agriculture secretary for the
State of Florida has warned that Florida agriculture stands
to collapse if NAFTA is passed in its present form.
Where does this leave the United States? {{Table 1}}
summarizes the employment and wages of some targeted sectors.
Although no precise forecasts are possible on the employment
side, if just 10% of employment in the textile and clothing
industries were displaced to Mexico, in all likelihood a
conservative estimate, that would represent a loss of 146,000
jobs--which would grow to 292,000 jobs if another 10% fled in
the future. In the auto industry, a 10% shift of employment
would lose 60,000 high-paying auto jobs, and hundreds of
thousands of ancillary jobs in the industries that supply the
auto industry. And so on. While the Bush administration only
concedes that some several hundred thousand jobs may
disappear (and they lyingly claim new jobs will be created to
replace them), most competent estimates indicate that at
least ten times this number, well over 1,000,000 jobs, are
in jeopardy in the next several years.
This is a recipe for upheaval and chaos inside the
United States.
- NAFTA Loots Mexico Too -
Although it hurts the U.S., NAFTA doesn't thereby help
Mexico, as some U.S. opponents of NAFTA maintain. NAFTA is a
``negative sum'' arrangement--everyone loses, except for the
banks--as its key provisions make clear:
1) lifting, minimizing, or phasing out tariffs and
import quotas; ending other national border controls such as
inspection, license control of cross-border drivers, etc.
This is what will encourage runaway shops to relocate from
the U.S., but the only effect in Mexico will be to pay slave
labor wages to some workers. But many more Mexican jobs will
be lost than gained through the effect of cheap imports from
the U.S.A. in other industries which have already wiped out
hundreds of thousands of smaller companies in Mexico that
used to serve the domestic market.
2) lifting, minimizing or phasing out impediments to
foreign ownership and/or control of resources, foreign
companies and individuals doing business in Mexico. Already,
billions of dollars are flowing from the U.S. to Mexico, not
to invest in new industries, but to purchase existing
industries, starting with those the Mexican government has
``privatized,'' sold off to foreign investors. Many more
billions have flowed into speculative sectors such as the
stock market. Mexico is seen as a place to be looted, not
genuinely invested in.
3) opening up Mexico's banking sector, in particular, to
foreign involvement and ownership. U.S. banks will be allowed
to set up subsidiaries, and also to acquire 100% interest in
Mexican banks. The U.S. banks will gobble up Mexico's
financial institutions, allowing them to suck capital out at
will. Also, NAFTA will allow U.S. subsidiaries in Mexico to
operate in the United States under Mexican, not U.S., banking
law, thereby avoiding all U.S. banking regulation, including
the Glass-Steagle and other regulatory acts.
4) opening up much of Mexico's petroleum sector. While
lip service has been given to maintaining Mexico's national
control over the exploitation of petroleum, as required by
the Mexican constitution, most of Mexico's oil refining and
petrochemical sector is now open to foreign investment, and
foreign firms can participate with Pemex, the national oil
company, under special terms that augur the near-term opening
up of even the oil exploration and exploitation sector to
foreign capital.
5) Mexican farmers will be subject to competition from
U.S. grain producers, which will undercut the livelihood of
several million Mexican peasant farmers, who will be forced
off the land and into the cities looking for work. A large
percentage of these will also attempt to cross the border
into the U.S., in search of mere subsistence. It will also
hit the U.S. cattle industry, as the U.S. ships cheap feed
grain to Mexico to feed Mexican herds that are then
reexported back to the U.S.
- Behind NAFTA: The Push for Free Trade -
About 15 years ago, the Council on Foreign Relations
publicly launched the present campaign for ``free trade'' in
North America, and worldwide, on behalf of the Anglo-American
financial elite, as part of a drive to wipe out national
boundaries and impose new and deeper private looting
arrangements to back up their own increasingly unpayable
debts, real estate speculation, and other worthless
accounts--now blowing apart in the 1990s.
The record is clear on free trade. It is a form of
centuries-old find usury. Over 200 years ago, the American
Revolution was fought, in part, against the London policy of
``free trade,'' and the theories of its advocate Adam Smith.
Under this policy, colonial America was told by the British
East India Company and the British crown that colonial
enterprises were forbidden to produce, export, or utilize
home-produced products such as nails, hats, and a list of
other proscribed manufactures.
Following the Revolution, leaders of the new nation,
from George Washington through Abraham Lincoln and McKinley,
were vigilant in their opposition to renewed attempts by the
British to attempt such ``free trade'' practices as dumping
goods onto the U.S. market, and undercutting American
producers. U.S. leaders instead supported selective
protectionism on behalf of fostering the domestic industrial
and agricultural base, for reasons of security and
prosperity.
Starting in 1986, Mexico began lowering tariff barriers
as part of the GATT (General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs)
effort to foist free trade on the entire world. Together with
the effects of paying $10-$12 billion a year in interest on
the foreign debt ({{Figure 5}}) and imposing a severe
IMF-dictated austerity program on the Mexican population,
Mexico suffered terrible effects, such as rises in disease,
malnutrition and impoverishment in Mexico.
Now the banking elite wants this process intensified by
treaty agreements, such as NAFTA and GATT.
In 1986, the GATT--the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade agency of the United Nations--convened in Punta del
Este, Uruguay, and began a GATT ``Uruguay Round'' of talks
aimed at producing a sweeping global treaty that would
override national rights ranging from banking to medicine
patents, and even to food and farm policy. The original
deadline for the treaty was 1990. When it wasn't met because
of dissension among GATT member nations, especially between
the Anglo-American bloc and continental Europe, the free
trade interests demanded negotiations continue, and talks
scheduled for fall 1992 mark the seventh year of sessions.
GATT represents on a global scale the same economic
warfare that NAfTA represents against Mexico and the rest of
Ibero-America. It is just as bad as NAFTA. Both must be
defeated. Although it is the 11th hour, it is still possible
to defeat NAFTA and GATT. These treaties and the Malthusian
policies underlying them must be reversed permanently, in
favor of pro-growth measures which will lead to the rapid
industrialization of the Americas--North and South.
- NAFTA: Myth and Reality -
The Bush and Salinas de Gortari administrations have
launched a full-scale public relations drive to convince
their respective populations of the marvels of NAFTA. In
reality, each of their principal claims of the benefits that
will supposedly be achieved, is patently false. Chief among
these are:
{Myth #1}: NAFTA means more jobs for Americans.
U.S. exports to Mexico will increase sharply under NAFTA--by
as much as $14 billion, according to former Commerce
Secretary Robert Mosbacher. Since each $1 billion in exports
translates into 25,000 jobs for U.S. workers, he claimed,
NAFTA means millions of new jobs for Americans.
{Fact}: NAFTA means fewer jobs for Americans.
Vastly cheaper wage rates mean that U.S. runaway shops will
flee to the }maquiladora} zone, which will soon be
extended to encompass the entire nation of Mexico. As for an
export boom to Mexico, it won't happen. The market for
exported U.S. consumer goods is limited by the terrible
poverty of the majority of the Mexican population. The IMF
and Mexico's creditor banks will not permit it anyway: They
are demanding that Mexico export more and import
{less}, in order to pay off the country's gigantic
debt to the banks.
{Myth #2}: NAFTA means that U.S. investment will
pour into Mexico, and help Mexico develop. The Bush
administration is projecting rates of $5 billion per year and
higher.
{Fact}: Under NAFTA, most of the ``investment''
that will go into Mexico will be to take over existing plant
and equipment. It is a transfer of ownership into the hands
of foreigners, not the creation of new wealth.
{Myth #3}: NAFTA will create millions of new
jobs in Mexico and thus help stem the tide of illegal
migration across the border into the United States.
{Fact}: NAFTA will mean a net destruction of
jobs in Mexico. Domestic manufacturing will be wiped out by
the dumping of cheaper U.S. imports on the market. The only
jobs that will be created will be those in the expanding
{maquiladora} zone, under conditions so horrendous
that ``Auschwitz'' is the only word that properly describes
them. This will foster the very conditions driving desperate
Mexicans across the border looking for jobs in the United
States.
{Myth #4}: NAFTA will make the U.S. competitive
once again with Germany and Japan, by reducing the labor
component of manufacturing costs.
{Fact}: There is no doubt that the wage bill in
{maquiladoras} on the Mexican side of the border will
be far lower than in the U.S. today. But this will destroy
the U.S. economy, and, in particular, the educational and
technological training that comes with a higher standard of
living, which are the true sources of productivity and
competitiveness.
{Myth #5}: NAFTA will open up the Mexican
banking and financial sector and modernize it. This will
attract vast flows of international finance capital.
{Fact}: NAFTA's banking takeover will open up
the banking system of the Americas to all sorts of
speculative hot money flows--including those of the drug
trade. Such activity does not aid production; it destroys it.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:54:49 PDT 1992
Article: 12190 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12190 alt.politics.clinton:14664
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 18
Message-ID: <181-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:41:42 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 428
- Chapter 15 -
- How the United States Became a Police State -
The United States was founded as a nation based on
the rule of law, as a country ``with liberty and justice
for all.'' Our Constitution and Bill of Rights are
supposed to be the supreme law of the land, and their
guarantees of fundamental rights and privileges are
supposed to be inviolable.
Sadly, this is no longer the case.
The United States has become a nation which flouts
international law among nations. We ignore and disregard
our own fundamental law--our Constitution--at home. We
have the highest rate of incarceration in the world, and
we execute far more people than any other civilized
nation. Yet, despite all the ``tough-on-crime'' measures,
crime rates and criminality continue to rise.
Consider the following:
@sb|On June 15, 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court said that
the U.S. government can kidnap a foreign citizen abroad
and bring him to the U.S. for trial. The ruling, which
violates all notions of international law, was immediately
condemned by nations around the world, including many of
our closest allies.
@sb|The United States locks up more of its citizens
than any other country in the world. We have the highest
rate of incarceration--much higher than the next two
countries on the list, South Africa and the former Soviet
Union. On any given day, well over one million people are in
jail or prison in the U.S.
@sb|The U.S. is on a bloodthirsty binge of executions.
We have over 2,500 prisoners on death row. If one prisoner
were executed every day, it would take the rest of the
decade to kill all the condemned prisoners.
@sb|The U.S. Department of Justice, and its member
branches--most notably the Office of Special Investigations
(OSI) and the FBI--concentrate their resources not against
hardcore criminals, but so-called white collar crime, in many
cases manufactured by the government itself. Leading members
of the Congressional Black Caucus, for example, have scored
the Justice Department for its role in the harassment and
prosecution of black elected officials, through such
extra-legal operations as the FBI's racist Operation
Fruehmenschen of 1979-1982. Trade union and elected officials
have been targetted by the Justice Department's Abscam and
Brilab sting operations. Finally, naturalized U.S. citizens,
such as Cleveland autoworker John Demjanjuk and space
scientist Arthur Rudolph, have been hounded and virtually
destroyed by the OSI ``Nazi-hunting'' unit.
The ``criminal justice'' system doesn't work. It is
a colossal failure. Despite all the hot air about
``loopholes'' and ``technicalities,'' the truth of the matter
is that the criminal justice system is overwhelmingly
stacked against the individual accused of a crime--even
if that person happens to be innocent. The reality is that
there is no justice in the U.S. today.
In 1989, after he was railroaded to prison, candidate
LaRouche warned that if his conviction were not reversed,
that the United States would become a fascist police
state. So flagrant were the constitutional violations in
the LaRouche case, that over 800 lawyers and jurists from
across the U.S. and around the world signed ``friend of the
court'' briefs urging the U.S. Court of Appeals to overturn
the LaRouche conviction. Yet despite the overwhelming
evidence of the innocence of LaRouche and his associates,
and the blatant violations of their constitutional and
human rights, the federal appeals court and then the U.S.
Supreme Court have refused to overturn the convictions.
Was LaRouche right? Let's look at the state of the
U.S. justice system today, and see what that system has
become. And in doing this, we should start right at the
top, with the biggest outlaw of all: William Rehnquist,
the Chief Justice of the United States.
- The Rehnquist `Neo-Taney' Supreme Court -
In its term that ended last June, the U.S. Supreme
Court reached new depths in its assaults on the
fundamental freedoms of American citizens. Under the
direction of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, the court's
majority has been reversing previous precedents
willy-nilly, in their rush to destroy the role of the
federal courts as the guardians of constitutional rights,
particularly as those rights are encroached upon by the
states.
The Rehnquist court is properly described as a
``neo-Taney'' court, in the sense that it is following in
the footsteps of the evil Roger B. Taney, chief justice
from 1835 to 1864, and author of the infamous 1857 {Dred
Scott} decision, which declared that human beings
may be chattel slaves. Taney destroyed much of the
nation-building accomplishments of the Supreme Court under
John Marshall, the chief justice from 1801 to 1835, who
made the Supreme Court into an instrument for enforcing
the Constitution over the states, and who created the
constitutional framework for the American System of
political economy. Rehnquist has shamelessly praised
Taney as a ``first-rate legal mind'' who used his state's
rights doctrine to undermine the ``nationalist
constitutional jurisprudence of the Marshall Court.''
The Rehnquist court is a court which has lost any
moorings in the principles of the Constitution. There is
no longer any search for truth, or for justice, in the
court system. The court's assaults on the First
Amendment betray the most fundamental principles of the
Bill of Rights. Its most publicized decision last term,
that in the {Casey} abortion case, was an unprincipled
me@aalange of opinions. Those in the so-called
``conservative'' bloc, who would overturn {Roe v. Wade}, would
do so only to leave the decision up to the individual
states as to whether to permit abortion on demand, or to
outlaw it. The hypocrisy of these ``pro-life''
conservatives is best seen in their rulings on the death
penalty.
The Rehnquist court's death penalty rulings are driven
by pure blood-lust, disguised as a campaign for judicial
``efficiency.'' The priorities are administrative: Stick to
the schedule, carry out the executions on time--even if a few
innocents get fried here or there. Give prisoners too much
time to appeal, and they are likely to come up with new
evidence of their innocence, which impedes the swift
execution of sentences.
How does this work? For a number of years, the
Supreme Court has been narrowing the ability of
prisoners--especially those on death row--to obtain review
of their convictions in federal courts. In the court's
June ruling in the case {Sawyer v. Whitley,} this process
got to the point where a number of pro-death penalty
justices issued strong attacks on the reasoning of the
Rehnquist-led majority.
In the {Sawyer} case, Rehnquist and the court's
majority bloc further extended the barbaric line of
reasoning shown in earlier cases involving death row
prisoners Warren McClesky and Roger Coleman. Rehnquist
declared that a constitutional violation is of no concern,
unless the prisoner can show that he is ``actually
innocent'' of the offense charged, and therefore the
federal courts should ignore the constitutional violation
and refuse to entertain a {habeas corpus} petition. Unless the
prisoner can show that, except for the constitutional
error, {no} reasonable juror could have found him guilty,
the courts will pay no heed to the constitutional error.
This led Associate Justice Harry Blackmun, in a concurring
opinion, to express his serious doubts that the death
penalty can be fairly applied any longer. Blackmun said
that his own ability to enforce the death penalty ``has
always rested on an understanding that certain procedural
safeguards, chief among them the federal judiciary's power
to reach and correct claims of constitutional error on
federal {habeas} review, would ensure that death
sentences are fairly imposed. Today, more than 20 years later,
I wonder what is left of that premise underlying my
acceptance of the death penalty.''
Another Associate Justice, John Paul Stevens,
attacked Rehnquist's reasoning as creating a more
difficult standard of proof for capital cases than
non-capital cases. ``The court's ruling creates a perverse
double standard,'' wrote Stevens. ``While a defendant
raising defaulted claims in a non-capital case must show
that constitutional error `probably resulted' in a
miscarriage of justice, a capital defendant must present
`clear and convincing evidence' that no reasonable juror
would find him eligible for the death penalty. It is
heartlessly perverse to impose a more stringent standard
of proof to avoid a miscarriage of justice in a capital
case than a non-capital case.''
In contrast to Rehnquist's eagerness to ignore
constitutional violations, Blackmun and Stevens argued
correctly that ``a fundamental miscarriage of justice occurs
whenever a conviction or sentence is secured in violation
of a federal constitutional right.'' Since 1986, says
Blackmun, the Supreme Court has shifted the focus of
{habeas} review of certain categories of cases--those it
calls ``procedurally defaulted '' (i.e., one day late), or
``successive'' or ``abusive'' (i.e., bringing a second
{habeas} petition when new evidence is discovered).
Thus, for example, even if the prisoner can prove
that the prosecution suppressed exculpatory evidence, or
that witnesses lied, or that his own confession was
coerced, he will not get a hearing unless he can prove to
the satisfaction of the federal court that he is
``actually innocent.'' Legally, this is an almost
impossible standard to meet (since some contradictory or
circumstantial evidence exists in virtually all cases); so
the sentence will stand and the prisoner can be
executed--notwithstanding the constitutional violation.
The ``actual innocence'' standard also
unconstitutionally shifts the burden of proof. In a
criminal case, the burden of proof is on the {government}
to prove that a defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt, not on the defendant to prove that he is innocent
beyond {all} conceivable doubt.
The Supreme Court has not yet decided pending cases
on the issue of whether ``actual innocence'' itself is a
bar to execution, but it is anxious to decide the issue.
Such a case is now before the court and will be argued
this fall. But the {Sawyer} ruling already sets a standard
which is almost impossible for any prisoner to meet, and
which will result in more rapid killings of the more than
2,500 prisoners now on death row in the United States.
(Virginia, for example, is now executing about one
prisoner per month.)
- The Criminal Injustice System -
The U.S. has the highest rate of imprisonment in the
world, a rate of 455 per 100,000 population. The rate for
South Africa (the world's second highest known rate) is
311 per 100,000. The U.S. rate of incarceration is 10
times higher than those of Japan, Sweden, Ireland, and the
Netherlands.
Yet the United States also has some of the highest
crime rates in the world.
Let's look at how the system actually functions, and
we will see why it doesn't work, either in deterring
crime, or creating respect for the law.
The blunt truth is that there is no justice in the
criminal justice system in the U.S. today. Let's take one
example to illustrate the point. The jury system--the
right to be tried by a jury of one's peers--is supposed
to be the pillar of the U.S. system of justice.
Yet few prisoners today have been through a jury trial.
The jury trial is an anachronism in the U.S. Approximately
90 percent of criminal cases are settled by pleas of guilty--without
a trial. Most plea bargains are rotten deals cooked up by
defense lawyers and prosecutors conspiring against the
defendant. The defense lawyers--often
government-paid--convince their clients that they don't stand
a chance if they go to trial, that they are better off
copping a plea. (Certainly, the lawyers are better off; they
collect their fee for settling a case in a couple of hours,
instead of having to actually prepare and try the case.)
Let's take a walk through the federal court system.
What chance do you think you have if you are charged with
a crime: 50-50, you say? Are you so naive as to think that
if you go to trial you've got an even chance?
At the moment you are charged with a crime in the
federal system, your chances of conviction are already
4-to-1, or 80 percent. But of course, not all cases are
prosecuted; some are dismissed, usually at the request of
the prosecutor who might want to use you as a witness
against one of your codefendants, for example. If the
prosecutor decides to prosecute you, that is, threaten you
with trial, the odds that you will be convicted are 97 out
of 100! This breaks down as follows: 85 percent of cases end in
guilty pleas. Of the remaining 15 percent that go to trial, 12 percent
will end in guilty verdicts, and only 3 percent in acquittals.
Still want to take your chances on a trial?
The jury system simply doesn't function any more.
Juries in the United States used to acquit most
defendants. It used to be hard for a prosecutor to get a
conviction. Even in the 20th century, the rate of
convictions by juries was less than 60 percent, 40 years ago, in
federal court. Now it's 80 percent.
The destruction of our constitutional rights is a
major cause of this situation. Look at some of the
protections Americans used to have. The protection against
arbitrary searches and seizures, as granted in the 4th
Amendment, has been all but eliminated by the Supreme
Court.
The Fifth Amendment says, among other things, that
you have to be indicted by a grand jury if you're going to
be charged with a serious crime. The grand jury used to be
considered a {protection} against politically
motivated prosecutors. That's how the founding fathers described it.
Grand juries used to refuse to indict people. Today, as
the saying goes, a prosecutor can get the grand jury to
indict a ham sandwich if he wants. The grand jury is a
pure rubber stamp for the prosecutor. We've lost one of
our major protections against the over-zealous, arbitrary,
politically motivated prosecutor.
The Sixth Amendment gives you a right to a fair trial.
It is supposed to give you the right to an impartial jury,
and the right to {present your case} to the jury. Various
recent Supreme Court cases have destroyed the right to
pick a fair jury, and allow judges unfettered discretion
to bar a defendant from presenting a defense.
The second trial of Lyndon LaRouche, that in federal court in
Alexandria, Virginia in winter 1988, was a flagrant example of these
abuses. LaRouche and his co-defendants were rushed to
trial 35 days after their indictment, thus preventing them
from preparing their defense in an extremely complex case
involving over 100 witnesses and over a million
pages of documents. The jury was handpicked by the judge
in less than two hours (as opposed to three weeks for jury
selection in the first LaRouche trial in Boston). Only
later did the defense learn that the jury foreman was a
member of a government body packed with avowed enemies of
LaRouche. At the trial, LaRouche and his codefendants
were then prevented by court order from presenting the
most important facts of the case to the jury, thus
stripping them of their right to present a defense.
This sort of thing happens every day. What made the
LaRouche case unique is that the defendants fought the
frameup every inch of the way, and that the railroad was
carried out with international attention on the case.
In most cases, defendants have no way of fighting, or
of getting public attention drawn to their cases. Most
can't even afford the expense of a trial, the way the odds
are stacked against them. Their lawyers convince them to
plea bargain rather than go to trial, thus giving up their
constitutional right to trial by jury.
LaRouche, and his associates who have been through the
federal prison system, can tell you that it is a rarity to
find anyone in federal prison who has had a trial. Nearly
all are there as a result of guilty pleas, and a lot are
very bitter at their lawyers for having compelled them to
do it. Contrary to what you might expect, few inmates in
federal prison claim that they are completely innocent.
Most readily admit that they are guilty of some offense,
but many will tell you that they aren't guilty of what
they pled guilty to. They thought they had to plead guilty
because the prosecutor had cooked up fraudulent evidence,
often by ``turning'' a codefendant to get him to lie about
his fellow defendants, and the lawyers told them it was
the best deal they could get, so they had better take it.
The new federal sentencing laws make this situation even
worse, giving prosecutors enormous power to determine
sentences and making cooperation (``snitching'') the only
way of getting a reduced sentence. Even the judges are
unhappy with this system, which takes away the discretion
they used to have in sentencing defendants and tailoring
the sentence to fit the circumstances of the particular
case.
What's the result of all this? The most recent
figures issued by the government's Bureau of Justice
Statistics, for 1991, show that the total prison and jail
population for the United States is about 1,250,000.
And in fact, the pace of increase in federal
prisoners is running at twice the rate of increase of
prisoners in the state systems. This is, of course, a bit of
a paradox for a Republican administration and a Supreme
Court which constantly prattle on about reducing the size
of the federal government and letting the states solve
their own problems. In fact, U.S. Attorney General William
P. Barr recently attacked the state governments for
allowing too many loopholes and technicalities in their
criminal justice systems; Barr bragged that federal laws
are much tougher and do a better job at locking up
criminals than state laws do.
The United States can now claim the dubious
distinction of having the highest rates of incarceration
in the world. One out of every four black youths is in
jail. What more dramatic evidence could you find, that
this country has written off an entire generation of its
poor?
Look at the death penalty again. This is pure blood
lust. No one has ever shown that ``an eye for an eye'' deters
crime. Killing in hot blood--in war, in self-defense--may
often be necessary. Killing in cold blood--executing a
prisoner--is not. It's a blood ritual, like the Roman
circuses. (It doesn't even save money. Studies have shown
it's cheaper to lock someone up for life than to kill them.)
The United States stands alone among the so-called
``advanced nations'' in its application of the death
penalty. Only seven countries in the entire world still
execute juveniles--persons under 18--but the U.S. is
one of them, along with Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, and so
forth.
There are over 2,500 prisoners on death row in the United
States today. Some 40 percent of these are black--even though
blacks are only 12 percent of the population. Your chances of
being executed are much higher if you're black, especially if
you're black and kill a white person. That's been proven--but
the U.S. Supreme Court says it's not important. The U.S.
Congress says the same thing.
The rates of imprisonment are still going up, rates
of conviction are going up, but of course crime is also
still going up. Are our homes and neighborhoods any safer
today than they were ten or twenty years ago? The
government is filling up the jails and prisons with
low-level drug dealers and drug users, while the
money-laundering bankers who make it all possible are
still walking the streets. The real story of the
Iran-Contra affair was that William Casey and Oliver North
(and George Bush!) were supporting a bunch of drug dealers,
who were helping to flood the U.S. with illegal narcotics.
Yet Special Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh has spent at least
$40 million trying to prove that somebody told Congress a
fib, while continuing the coverup of the real crimes
of the Iran-Contra operation.
And then, in this election year, we see lying,
cynical politicians claiming that our system is ``soft on
criminals,'' that we need to lock more people up as
prisoners, and then we need to kill more of the prisoners.
Democrats and Republican candidates vie for who can kill
the most prisoners, and make the toughest speeches on
crime. Bush and Quayle attack Clinton for being
half-hearted about the death penalty, and then Clinton
responds by boasting that he is the only one among the
candidates who has actually carried out the death penalty.
Clinton's rushing back to Arkansas during the primary
campaigns to oversee the execution of a mentally impaired
black man--as a campaign stunt--epitomizes the
disgusting nature of the use of the death penalty issue in
the elections.
But the candidates get away with it only because of
the brutalization of our population itself, which is
frightened by the collapse they see on all sides--moral
collapse, economic collapse, a loss of any security in
their daily lives or for the future. Lacking the courage
to fight the establishment on the real issues, much of the
population applauds the demagogy coming from the
politicians, like Roman citizens cheering on the lions in
the Coliseum. (After all, they think, if you fight the
system you can get in trouble--look at what happened to
LaRouche!)
Until this country gets back on track, and we start
producing our way out of the depression and offering a
future to our youth, we cannot expect to reverse the wave
of criminalization that is sweeping the nation. A country
whose fastest-growing industry is its prison system
will never solve its crime problem.
LaRouche's warnings have been borne out. The United
States has become an ``administrative fascist''
police-state, in which judicial efficiency takes the
priority over the true administration of justice, and where
there are virtually no constitutional restraints on the
power of the police-state apparatus. To straighten the
system out, we have to start at the top: Implement
LaRouche's economic program, and then clean the
neo-Confederate, freemasonic influences out of the Supreme
Court.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:54:54 PDT 1992
Article: 12191 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12191 alt.politics.clinton:14665
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 19
Message-ID: <182-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:42:46 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 82
- The Theological and Constitutional Alternative -
- To the Death Penalty -
- by the Reverend James L. Bevel -
{The Reverend Bevel circulated the following paper
at the July 1992 National Convention of the Democratic
Party in New York City.}
Greetings to 1992 Democratic National Convention delegates
and my fellow citizens,
In the Spirit of the {American Revolution}, let me
offer my most sincere and deepest apology for not having
been as vigilant and committed, as I should have been
to the American Revolution.
However, in spite of our collective failing, we can
be thankful to God for allowing us to see the light and
hear the voices of our Founding Fathers: ``We hold these
truths to be self evident, that all Men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
inalienable rights, and that among these are Life, Liberty,
and the Pursuit of Happiness--That to secure these rights,
Governments are instituted among Men....'' While our
negligence and ill-will has allowed criminals, gangs,
crowds, mobs, and tyrants to threaten and take the lives
of our People, the voices of our Forefathers still resonate
loudly and clearly--reminding us of the fact that Governments
are instituted among men to secure these Rights.
Yes, governments are instituted to secure the right
of life. The Forefathers did not say that {{electric chairs,
gas chambers, and lethal injections}} were instituted
to secure these Rights. No, my fellow Americans, Governments
are instituted to secure these Rights.
Our freedom of religion, which was so well protected
by our Founding Fathers, teaches us to confess and repent.
This gives us the ability to forgive. When we do this,
we can clearly see our errors of the past, take
responsibility for our present, and see the options and
opportunities for our future. There were those who fought
against the American revolution in 1776, in 1865, and
in the 1960s, and today there are still those reactionary
Confederate forces that fight against the American
Revolution.
Shall we contend with the threat upon the lives of
the American people by joining the criminals, gangs, crowds,
mobs, and tyrants? Absolutely not! We shall follow the
wisdom of the Founding Fathers and create a more perfect
Union. We shall work to get the malice, racism, and revenge
out of our hearts. We shall disengage from perverse,
trivial relationships, and relate to our family and neighbors
for no reason less than the reason for which we were created.
We shall work and implement education curriculum
and policy that educates all of our children and citizens
to economic independence and institutional sovereignty.
We shall work and implement economic development policies
that utilize the gifts, skills, talents, and time of our
citizens. We shall work and implement a constitutional
development policy that creates and organizes precinct
councils in every precinct, so the American people have
the ways and means to address their social questions, issues,
problems, and needs, and can hold themselves and their
elected officials accountable.
We oppose the {{death penalty }}because we are resolved
to give our lives, our fortune, and our sacred honor to
uphold the principles of the American Revolution, and
to establish a more perfect Union. Are we not mandated
to give light and leadership to the world? Does not the
best of the civilized world look in dismay as we abandon
the fundamental principles left to us as a sacred trust?
By opposing the {{death penalty, }}joining in the Spirit
of the American Revolution, and working to create a more
perfect Union, you will help to defeat the reactionary
Confederate forces and actualize the vision of Abraham
Lincoln.... A Nation of the People, for the People, and
by the People that does not perish from the earth.
Yours against the death penalty and yours for a more
perfect Union,
Reverend James L. Bevel
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:55:06 PDT 1992
Article: 12192 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12192 alt.politics.clinton:14666
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 20
Message-ID: <183-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:43:50 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 601
- Appendix -
- The LaRouche-Bevel Announcement -
{What follows are the texts of the Reverend James L.
Bevel's announcement for vice president on the ticket of
independent presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche, in
Washington, D.C. on August 4, 1992, and Lyndon LaRouche's
comments on the Bevel announcement.}
- LaRouche: The Nation Faces Depression and War -
This is presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche
speaking, on the occasion of the public announcement of
the vice presidential candidacy for our campaign of the
noted veteran of the civil rights fights of the 1960s and
later, the Reverend James Bevel.
What is the significance of this candidacy at this
time, particularly in the aftermath of businessman Ross
Perot's abrupt quitting of the race to secure an
independent candidacy in the November elections?
We in the United States and those around the world
who are affected by what happens in the United States,
face a devastating situation, a catastrophe.
The Bush administration in and of itself, has shown
itself to be the worst presidency in the history of the
United States since that of the treasonous President James
Buchanan.
The alternative posed nominally by the Democratic
Party, that of Clinton and Gore, is on the record as the
program offered by the Democratic Leadership Council, an
{outrightly fascist organization} which
represents, if anything, possibly an administration which
would be worse--far worse--than that of the Bush
administration thus far.
What will happen at the Republican Convention, I do
not know; I know President George Bush is a very sick man.
I know that from watching his televised press conferences,
since the famous one in the middle of the invasion of
Panama in December 1989. This man is very sick, and if he
had anything but a Bush compulsion, he would have resigned
from the candidacy for reelection before this time, as
many of his fellow Republicans are clamoring for him to
do.
- The Problem Our Nation Faces -
But the problem here that we have to address, is more
than the disaster that either a Bush or Clinton election
in November would represent. A Bush reelection or a
Clinton election could represent the onslide of a process
of disintegration of the United States itself over the
coming next several years. But the problem we face goes
much deeper. The problem which my vice presidential
candidate and I and others must address in this campaign,
goes much deeper.
For more than 25 years, the United States has been on
a slide toward disaster. We have turned away from the best
features of the Kennedy administration economic recovery
program, which was quite successful. We have turned since
the second half of the 1960s in the United States, as the
Wilson government in Great Britain did, into attempting to
impose a post-industrial utopia upon the world in place of
the kind of world that the Kennedy administration had
bequeathed to us as a policy.
We are now a wreck, a post-industrial society, a
rotting, starving, decaying post-industrial society. We
can only console ourselves with the fact that former prime
minister Mrs. Thatcher's Britain is much worse than the
condition of our own country. But that is poor consolation
indeed.
What this indicates is that the policies of
Britain--especially since the beginning of the Harold
Wilson administration back in the 1960s, through Thatcher
and John Major today, and the policies of the United
States since the later years of the Johnson administration
through every presidency since the middle 1960s--have been
{wrong}, and those directions in policy in Britain
and in the United States, must be changed.
It is an understatement to say that what is happening
presently and what has been in process--since
October 1987, to put a specific date to it--has been the
worst economic depression worldwide in the twentieth
century.
People talk about recovery. There is no recovery. It
is occurring {no place}. What there has been and
is, is a resistance to this depression in western
continental Europe and in Japan and a few other spots in
Asia, such that these countries are collapsing at a much
slower rate so far than have been the English-speaking
countries which have been leading the collapse.
- Kissinger and World War III -
As concerns the Soviet empire, let's look at the
world under George Bush and look at the kind of
world--worse than Bush's world--which we would face
under the leadership of Bill Clinton.
We are actually in World War III.
The Balkans crisis has been lying there waiting to be
exploded. I spoke about this issue in a television
broadcast in 1988, outlining the danger of Serbs very
close to a faction in Moscow unleashing war against their
neighbors. That precisely has happened. The potential was
there. Who unleashed it?
Well, the friends of Henry Kissinger unleashed it:
Lord Carrington in Britain, for example, and Eagleburger
in the State Department in the United States and those who
supported their policies. They deliberately backed a
Serbian faction which has shown itself on performance to
be worse than the Nazis in its crimes against humanity.
They backed it, telling Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia,
Macedonia, and so forth, to submit to Serbian whims, the
whims of the fascist gang behind Milosevic.
Look in Romania and Ukraine, formerly of the Soviet
Union: war there. Look at the Transcaucasus. Look at the
eruptions in Central Asia. Look at the destabilizing
condition in the Near East; look at the growing threat of
a war involving China, Kashmir, and India--not up front
yet, but it's cooking on the burner. Look at the
instability which is growing in Southeast Asia; again
fostered by the U.S. government to a large
degree. The Philippines is no longer the proud nation that
it was once. Southeast Asia, a prosperous region
relatively speaking, in terms of rate of growth, is
threatened by destabilization, largely because of U.S.
policy.
Look at Africa. The South Africa policy of the U.S.
government has disintegrated, is blowing apart. All of
Africa is a region of desolation.
Look at Central and South America. The greatest
failure in U.S. policy in the Western Hemisphere, is
exploding in our face in Mexico, but more so in Peru, in
Colombia, in Brazil, Argentina, and so forth. The entire
region is going to blow up.
The policies of George Bush, of course, have been the
worst of any administration to date in respect to these
areas. Bush's policy toward the former states of eastern
Europe once they were liberated, Bush's policy toward the
former Soviet Union once it was liberated from communism,
have been a disaster. The stubborn insistence of the
United States on imposing what it calls ``shock
therapies'' on eastern Europe or upon Poland, have ruined
Poland; and threatened to blow up the former Soviet Union.
Russia is on the verge of some form of change of
government which would use its military and other power to
free itself of the succubus of International Monetary Fund
and Jeffrey Sachs shock policies, which are unworkable in
any case.
The whole world is blowing up in the face of
Washington and London as a result of 25 years of
failure.
- Disaster in Domestic Policy -
Now, look immediately at the American voter. What is
the American offered?
We have masses of homeless, a phenomenon we never had
in this way in our life before until recent years: Nothing
is done about it. The proposal for health care from both
the Bush and Clinton camps is to kill people, in effect,
by denying medical care they need, in order to create a
fund to appear to carry the health insurance of the
survivors.
These are Nazi-like methods, and if you read the
program and policies of the Democratic Leadership Council,
the force behind Clinton, you see where these ideas come
from. This is pure, murderous fascism.
The Rust Belt is the rust belt. Under Clinton or
under Bush, there's no hope for people who live in the
states which were formerly the northeastern industrial
region.
Look at what's happening in California, a state that
can no longer even issue IOU's to pay its employees.
Look at the United States as a whole. People talk about
balancing the budget. But the budget cuts at the federal
and state levels are already {sinking} the tax revenue
base of the United States by a greater margin than the
budget cuts represent as putative savings.
There is no solution for these problems, unless one
speaks of a high-tech industrial recovery based on
large-scale investment in infrastructure. We're talking
about $600 billion to $1 trillion a year, not of debt, but
of credit, issued through the mechanisms of Section 8,
Article I of the U.S. federal Constitution to state and
federal authorities, and to vendors to those state and
federal authorities, for large-scale water projects, for
large-scale transportation projects, for large-scale
energy projects, for improvements of our medical system
and facilities, for improvements of our school facilities,
and in addition to that, large-scale credit for vital
sections of industry to push ahead with new technologies
and to diversify their industry, such as the auto and
aerospace complex, in order to save what the United States
is losing, most essentially in the tool-making industry. We
no longer have the ability or are rapidly losing the last
vestige of the ability to produce new technology. We will
be importing technology if we can get it, if we can afford
it, from Europe and from Japan, and even from some Third
World countries at the present rate.
This problem has to be addressed. There is no hope
that this problem or the problem of any other great social
evil will be addressed under a Bush or a Clinton
administration.
- The LaRouche-Bevel Alternative -
If the American people think that they have to
choose between Bush or his Republican replacement or
Clinton, they have to realize this is no choice.
It's not a matter of lesser evil, it's a matter of
which is the worst evil. There is no alternative, except
what now the Reverend Bevel and I represent with our
independent campaign.
You have a choice of voting for us or voting for
either nothing at all, or something which is worse than
nothing at all. The so-called credible or likely winners
are a disaster. You must hope that neither win--otherwise
the world will become, from your present standpoint,
pretty much an unthinkable place over the remainder of
this decade.
Let us bring you a message which of course the very
person of the Reverend Bevel signifies. Let us bring you
the biblical message: ``Blessed are the meek, for they
shall inherit the earth.''
If you know Reverend Bevel, he's not meek in some
respects, but in terms of the people he represents, he
represents the meek; and together, we represent all of the
meek. We say, that the meek shall inherit this earth. We
say, beginning with the United States itself, we say, that
while Clinton takes the Democratic Party away from its
constituencies and into the suburbanite delusions of the
Yuppie constituency, {we} speak for and will
defend the constituencies: labor, ethnic groups, the
racial minorities, and so forth, which Clinton and his
crew have abandoned.
Join us. We shall attempt to do in politics, what
Perot promised to do and then quit. We shall not quit.
Without a new independent voice in politics, there is no
hope for the United States.
As to what we might be able to do practically, that's
difficult to say. Obviously, we start at a fantastic
disadvantage. {But} we have the means to jam up this
election process. We have that potential. And our
potential to jam the process up, is a potential to force
some institutional changes upon the policy-making
processes of this country, changes without which this
country might not make it. We are in fact the only choice,
but I don't suppose our fellow Americans will awaken to
that in sufficient numbers fast enough; but we may expect
that enough are angry enough and concerned enough to cast
a protest vote--not just a negative protest vote, but a
positive protest vote. To cast a vote for the kinds of
policies which we represent; to demand that the next
government of the United States and other relevant
institutions consider and adapt to the policy proposals
which are associated with this campaign.
If we can jam up the election in a few states, change
the result in a few states, we can, we hope, change the
way things are going. It is the best shot in sight for
anyone in the United States. We urge you to take it.
- Vote for the Good -
- Text of the Reverend James Bevel's Announcement for -
- Vice President on the LaRouche for President Independent Ticket -
{WASHINGTON, D.C., Aug. 4--What follows is the text of
the Reverend James L. Bevel's announcement of his
candidacy for vice president on the LaRouche for President
independent ticket here today.}
Before I get into the text, I want to
share with you some realities. I would be amiss not to
mention the phenomenon of the illusion by the media
Establishment that they can dictate, through unscrupulous
conduct, the outcome of this campaign.
I was not aware that plantationism (slavery tactics)
was so effective in the nation. This press conference
reminds me of the press conference we had in Mississippi
back in 1961, when we were jailed as Freedom Riders--of
course you know the state of Mississippi was against the
Freedom Riders--so all the press was bound to come to the
press conference. We thought at the time that the press
would tell the people the truth about what we were doing;
they somehow had the power to keep us from transmitting to
the people. So I just want to make note of that, because I
don't see the media here.
This is interesting, because what we'll be doing in
the next four months, is to teach people the science of
how government really works, because that's what most
people don't know. So I want everybody to keep up with us
from now until Nov. 3, and in particular, till the next
election in 1996--so we'll show you how scientifically the
American government system works--because it's so
scientific, it's beautiful!
It doesn't have to do with what the opposition does,
it's what you do, and the science bears its fruit.
Let me just give you an example of what I'm talking
about.
Did you know that ABC, CBS, NBC, UPI, and AP, none
of those guys were around when Moses came across the Red
Sea? [Laughter] They didn't make it happen! And they
couldn't stop it. And yet they know all about it?
So, they came out after King died and tricked black
people into believing that if we're with you, we can make
a movement. And if we ain't with you, we can kill the
movement. So they got all the black guys--which meant that
all the black leaders started compromising to get the
approval of the press--assuming that if the press approved
in print the foolishness you were talking about, that that
approval makes you a leader. But leadership has nothing to
do with the American slavery system.
It has to do with scientific decisions made by
people.
My situation is a difficult situation. I was in
pursuit of doing education and evangelism work, because I
recognized that the situation is so crucial in this
country, that you can hardly find a person capable of
thinking about it all the way through, because everybody
is caught up in rituals, habits, and routines. So I said
to Mel [Klenetsky--campaign manager] and these guys, look,
I can go and do educational work and evangelism work. And
they said, yeah, but the election is coming up. We've got
to have the American Revolution defined and defended.
We've got to have a context--a political campaign--we
can't settle for the doctrine of the lesser of two evils
in America. And I can live with that.
However, I had prepared to play the snare drums; I
did not want to blow the trumpet.
But I am a trumpeter. So I agreed to blow the
trumpet; and we are going to wake up the people. And we're
going to get the American people in 1992 to vote on the
real issue. In a constitutional, cooperative republic, do
you vote for the lesser of two evils, or do you vote for
what you know is right? And that's the issue in this
election. There's no other issue in this election. That is
the issue in this election. And we have to give the
American people the opportunity, whether we like it or
not--that's hard work--to make a decision about that.
- The Death Penalty Issue -
Now let me explain to you how I got to this point. I
went to the Democratic Convention, because under our
church law, under our Constitution, it is against the law
for the elected officials to kill the citizens. That's our
law. I don't know about Cuba, China, or Russia, or places
like that; but under our system of law, that is our law.
So I went to the Democratic Convention to pass this
out. It's called the ``Theological and Constitutional
Alternative to the Death Penalty,'' to capital punishment.
And I wanted to share with you the scientific phenomenon
that all of us have got to deal with, because I want all
of us to become active assistants, full-time workers in
the campaign. I want you to listen to this. Now we move
into science:
``We hold these truths to be self-evident.'' If you
notice, it doesn't say this is an opinion, this is not a
belief; this is not a rumor, this is not hearsay. ``We
hold.'' Some individuals, each of them unto themselves,
and collectively as a group, have come to understand a
{self-evident truth}, that all men are equal, and are
endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.
And that among these rights, are {life}--now let me hold
right there--that is the first{ right }to these guys which
is self-evident God gave to man was the {right of life.}
It's an inalienable right, never to be transgressed by
anybody. Can't nobody claim that they're doing something
so important, or have so much wisdom, that they have the
right to take another human being's life. But they go a
step further; and this is where science comes in: ``To
secure these rights governments are instituted among
men.''
An international legend is about to take place, all
over the world--chaos. The Founding Fathers saved us. So
now when your life is threatened, as an individual, or as
a group; you don't go around and begin to threaten other
folks' lives in retaliation to the threat upon your life,
but {governments }are instituted among men.
That's our option. Which means, then, that when life
is threatened, governments are not instituted
sufficiently; and that's why you got into the whole
doctrine of ``Let us form a more perfect union.'' So we
have to not look for who is evil, but what is being
practiced. Because if life is threatened, and the founders
have given us an option, and that option is that we can
perfect the union, and that governments are established to
secure that right, then we're calling on the American
people to establish that kind of government that is
necessary to secure the rights for themselves and their
fellow-citizens--but not settle for this assumption, that
your only choices are the lesser of two evils; that you've
got to have a Texas killer, or a Tennessee killer; and
that there are no more sane, intelligent men in the
nation, that everybody has bowed and been bought out, and
nobody had the courage to define and defend the American
Revolution, or to help defend the rights of the American
people.
And I join with Lyndon LaRouche in saying to you, to
the media establishment, to the military-industrial
establishment, to the murderous racist and homosexual
establishment, that they're a bunch of liars; and the
American people will not buy into that; and we will offer
an alternative.
- I Join the Struggle -
Now, I want to read from this statement, because I
learned something. Everything teaches me something.
Sometimes you don't know the problems you're having, until
certain questions are raised. I just want to share this,
because this is not a public relations ploy, this is a
piece of paper that came out of a problem. And if I wasn't
prepared to die about this, I wouldn't be doing this:
Today, as I contemplate the appropriate response to
my young colleagues' question [`in that we as Americans
have only the lesser of two evils for which to vote in the
1992 general election, will you give us the opportunity to
vote for the good?'], I am painfully made aware of the
effectiveness of terror and intimidation upon and within
the American people as I am brought to the consciousness
of the fear and terror I experience within myself.
Listen: you know, sometimes you really don't know how
courageous other people are. You see a guy walking around,
big burly guys, taking a lot of abuse; just keep right on
trucking; and I really had never thought about how
courageous LaRouche was, until I was asked to be on the
ticket with him. Because he was stoned and kicked, and
spat on, and lied about and vilified and scorned--crazy
stuff. Simply because he basically opposed prostitution
and usury, and ignorance and the murder of people.
And I oppose all these things, too, but I was
skillful enough not to get attacked, while being against
them.
But there's a question of, will you sit on the
platform with him, while these crazies attack him?
And let me tell you something. I'm from Mississippi.
And in Mississippi, the thing that's hated most, is a
thing called a ``crazy nigger.'' Then there's another guy
hated worse than a ``crazy nigger,'' which is a guy called
a ``nigger-lover.'' In America today, Lyndon LaRouche is a
``nigger-lover''; because he proposes an economy that
{ends} prostitution--in which most white men are
not interested--and that {ends }economic
exploitation--in which most industrial thugs are not
interested. He proposes this. So this disturbs the
vulgarity and the sickness and the diseased state in most
American males. Because he proposes an economy where you
relate to sisters based on the principle of our Father and
you relate to other people the same, and that you have one
system of law on which you relate it; that's a principled
system of law that does not violate the definition,
nature, and purpose of man, whether it's male or
female--and most males are not prepared to push themselves
to that level of competency and responsibility. So instead
of admitting who he is, everybody hides that fact and
insists on their vulgarity and throws stones and rocks at
this guy.
So I didn't want to sit on the podium with this guy.
But I knew who he was; and when I was challenged to be on
the ticket with him, I then came to understand how the
fear suddenly controls you. Because I was getting mad with
these Negroes and kept asking them, ``Why don't you
support LaRouche? He's against the death penalty.'' ``No!
Hide! Pull the curtains!'' And then I finally understood,
that in the South, in Mississippi, when the mob and the Ku
Klux Klan is beating up on a ``nigger-lover,'' if you go
and help the ``nigger-lover,'' you're called a traitor to
the Negro, because you know you're going to get killed.
So then I had to experience all this terror in
myself; but then I had to dig it out, and to overcome that
fear, and you've got to dig that fear out of the American
people. The American people are not afraid of LaRouche,
because if you ask anybody, has he ever killed anybody,
has he stolen anything, has he raped a daughter of yours,
has he molested one of your sons, has he proposed anything
be carried out to hurt you? They're not afraid of
LaRouche. They're afraid of Bush and Clinton; they're
afraid of the Ku Klux Klan; and the White House is afraid
of who is trying to get into the White House. The black
folk down South weren't afraid of Martin Luther King; {they
were afraid of the establishment. }And so people are not
afraid of LaRouche; they're afraid of what the
establishment will do to them if they were seen with
LaRouche.
That's terror. So we've got to break that up. And so
I join the struggle to help break up that level of fear
and intimidation and terror in the American people.
- Bush and Clinton -
Now, let me say this, that I'm not particularly
disturbed about Bush and Clinton. They are like the men
who were caught making stagecoaches and ox-carts when
Fulton invented the steam engine. They're usually
associated with marginal technology that is obsolete and
outdated, and has never been effective anyway.
They believe that when there is a difficulty in the
social system, you should kill folks and get folks scared,
and make folks toe the line. No! We proved beyond
reasonable doubt in the 1960s, that if you go in to solving
the problem, rather than hurting the people, that you try
and enlighten, and encourage and strengthen inside, and
that people are capable of solving the most difficult
problems, if you use love and truth as a method of
operation; and if the American citizens who use and learn the
truth, can change the nation, how much more powerful our
nation will be if the elected officials use love and
truth?
And what this says to Mr. Bush and Mr. Clinton, to
America, is if you insist that the citizens use principles
and truth to solve our social problems, then the officials
must use it also; and that we're not going to agree with
being non-violent and peaceful and loving and solve
problems according to law, and then let these guys come
along and claim that they have to skin us. No! That's an
obsolete sociological technology. If these guys will agree
to come and learn physical economy, and the science of
bringing about change without violence--I certainly would
not run for vice president and will try to convince Lyndon
LaRouche of your support.
But we have to run when we have men running who
refuse to use updated technologies, and who insist on
their right to kill people. And who, themselves, advance no
economic education, economic development, or
constitutional development policies, that address any of
the problems of this nation. And so you have no choice,
but to be in this election, until we {win} the election. Do
you all hear me?
We have no choice. A lot of the press might be
like--I don't know--it's like most preachers, they work
for chicken dinners and cocaine and cadillacs, but not for
principles.
But we have to be in this revolution until we win it,
because I don't know whether you ever really sat down and
read ``The Star-Spangled Banner,'' ``O say can you see/By
the dawn's early light.'' As the story goes, this guy
Francis Scott Key was searching for the flag, and when the
cannons were shooting and the artillery were exploding,
what happened is that, through all the smoke they could
see the flag still flying. And so a lot of you people may
have some idea that there's no hope. Let's rob the
battlefield. Let me give you some information. I just
found my hope on the battlefield, and the flag is still
flying. And as long as I live, the flag will still be
flying. And we will not surrender, not one inch, of the
American Revolution; we will not bow and buckle; the
American government belongs to the American people, and
we're going to uphold it for the American people, and
we're going to teach the American people how to
effectively use it; and we're going to knock the terror
out and not be intimidated or defeated, by Bush and
Clinton, and all of the Ku Klux Klansmen who hide behind
their black robes.
And I say to American judges: You're dangerous to the
American people. If you're going to sit on the bench and
kill the boys, I would advise you to go back and get your
white robes; because I'm not going to abide Klansmen
wearing black robes killing and pretending they're judges.
Like in the 1960s, it's true. So I'm going to tell the
judges: You're not going to be Ku Klux Klansmen wearing
black robes killing children in America. So if they're
going to kill, they'd better go back and get the white
robes. But they hide: ``Be honorable about it.'' So don't
think they're going to hide behind black robes and kill
Jim Bevel's children in America. Those children are not
going to die.
- Vote for the Good -
So we have a war on our hands. And like I said, the
conspicuous absence of the press is the evidence of that
war. And we've come to fight it and we've come to win it.
And we're going to leave this press conference and we will
be working and organizing, and teaching, and we will be
looking for 51% of the American people to make just one
answer:
Will you vote for the good, rather than the lesser of
two evils? And would you join a party which is committed to
the revolution, which will live the revolution, which will
manifest the revolution; and which will go out and get
others to come and join the party? Because now, we have to
stay in the race until we've won. And I'm going to be
counting you, just to see how powerful these cats are. I
haven't tested our fast ball and our screwball and our
curve ball for a long time; but they said they could play
ball. And so we will see, and we will be in this to get
the White House, for the American people, and we ask all
of you to join us in that pursuit. It's necessary for the
good of the whole world.
If this is not a free nation, there is no light in
the world; and so we have to have a free nation. And our
Constitution, and our Declaration of Independence, give us
the authority to do that. And that's not true in Japan,
China, England--there's nowhere else that's true, but
America. So the responsibility falls on us as American
citizens to take our responsibility.
Let me just stop here and take questions.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
From cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici Thu Oct 22 10:55:11 PDT 1992
Article: 12193 of alt.activism
Xref: oneb alt.activism:12193 alt.politics.clinton:14667
Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!uunet!ccs!covici
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: LaRouche/Bevel pamphlet: part 21
Message-ID: <184-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com>
Date: 22 Oct 92 9:45:29 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 425
- Appendix -
- Supporting Brief -
- - Proposed Federal Reserve Nationalization Act of 1992 - -
The presidential campaign organization of Lyndon LaRouche
announced the release of a draft Federal Reserve
Nationalization Act of 1992 on February 25, 1992, to reshape
the U.S. central bank along the model of the First National
Bank of Alexander Hamilton. The act would nationalize the
Federal Reserve System to create a new National Bank of the
United States, in order to direct credit to an expansion of
production of physical wealth, and away from the speculative
Wall Street ``junk finance'' of the 1980s.
The legislation is based on the proposal by
Democratic candidate Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., to return
the United States to the method of central banking
originally envisioned by Hamilton, the nation's first
treasury secretary, and mandated in Article I of the U.S.
Constitution.
The current Federal Reserve System's method of
monetary creation via Federal Funds ``open-market
operations'' is ''{unconstitutional},'' LaRouche states,
because it leaves ``the power to create fiat credit in the
hands of a powerful cartel of private bankers led by
Citibank and Chase Manhattan Bank, ``who dominate the
Federal Funds markets.'' This system encourages the
majority of funds to flow to speculative, non-productive
activities such as junk bonds, Leveraged Buyouts, and
other inflationary activities.
LaRouche called instead for a return to ``the
constitutional obligation of the federal government'' to
ensure that the nation's credit goes to productive
manufacturers, agriculture, basic infrastructure, and
other necessary public services. The text of the legislation
follows.
- Amendments to the Federal Reserve Act -
The Federal Reserve Nationalization Act of 1992
completely revamps the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, which
created the Federal Reserve System, to create a National
Bank under the Department of the Treasury. This is done
through a series of amendments which:
1) Forbid the creation of new fiat credit through the
Federal Reserve's current mechanism of {open market
operations,} known as creation of ``money supply'';
2) Create instead large amounts of credit through the
new National Bank's {discount window}, providing that all
loans presented for discounting by private banks to the
National Bank are earmarked for new real physical capital
investment, production, or transport of tangible wealth;
and
3) Re-regulate {reserve requirements} on deposits of
private banks and use them to ensure banks maintain an
adequate proportion of lending for purposes of real
physical production.
- 1) Curtailing Open Market Operations. -
The core of the problem with the Federal Reserve is
to be found in the way in which it creates money. The Fed
now adds new money supply to the banking system each week,
by printing fresh Federal Reserve Notes, the familiar
dollar bills, for the purpose of {buying a certain
portion of the U.S. Treasury debt} (Treasury bonds or
bills), that portion of government debt which would not
otherwise be purchased by money already in circulation in
the banking system. This is known as ``monetizing the
government debt,'' printing fiat money to finance the U.S.
budget deficit. It is thus axiomatic that since the
nation's deficit has ballooned to the $200 billion annual
mark during the 1980s, that the inflationary effects of
Federal Reserve open market operations have taken off.
Worse than the question of ``how much fiat money?'' is
the question ``whose''? In practice, the Federal Reserve
does not purchase Treasury debt directly from the
Treasury, but from the two dozen leading Wall Street
government debt houses, such as Salomon Brothers and
Goldman Sachs, which have bought up the debt from the
Treasury Department in anticipation. The level of
corruption this arrangement almost automatically entails
has been but partially exposed by the recent indictments
of Salomon Brothers officials in a major Fed Open Market
Operations fraud.
These Treasury security dealers then deposit the
proceeds of their Treasury debt sales--the new fiat money
just printed by the Federal Reserve--into accounts at the
top 20 New York commercial banks, led by Citibank and
Chase Manhattan. These commercial banks now have
additional deposits virtually created for them out of thin
air, at the expense of American taxpayers, who have to
pay the interest on the wildly expanding Treasury debt.
The banks then demonstrate the principle of the ``money
multiplier'': they create more money out of thin air, by
loaning out these deposits to a loan customer; the
customer's loan is then redeposited, and becomes a new
deposit; is again reloaned, and so on.
Until 1982 there were minimal ``reserve
requirements'' limiting this ``money multiplier'' to about
2.5 times the original amount printed {de novo} by
the Federal Reserve. But under the deregulation of the
1980s the total phase-out of reserve requirements has
allowed the multiplier to grow at infinite rates. With
all this credit, why then is the economy crashing?
The reason is that the control of the nation's credit
rests with the above-described {private banking
cartel}, not with U.S. government as provided under
the Constitution. The Fed shares its monopoly power over
money-creation with a handful of big money center banks.
If these banks made most of their loans to the
goods-producing sector of the U.S. and world economy, many
of America's economic problems might have been avoided.
The banks, however, do precisely the opposite. Half
the profits of the U.S. money center banks during the
1970s and early 1980s were made speculating in the
inflationary offshore Eurodollar market, making usurious
loans to foreign nations which could never be repaid.
During the later 1980s the speculation turned inward, to
the S&L debacle, real estate speculation, and assorted
Wall Street junk-securities schemes.
Now the banks themselves, caught with all this
worthless paper, are desperately absorbing every bit of
new Fed credit issued just to keep their own balance
sheets from day to day. Even while the Fed is pumping
money hand over fist, the money does not reach the
capillary system of the physical economy, because the
aorta has a leak.
The Federal Reserve Nationalization Act of 1992
therefore limits the new National Bank's open-market
operations such as to prohibit that manner of creation of
new fiat money. Section 3 of the act sets a statutory
limit to the amount of U.S. government debt the National
Bank may hold. The Bank may continue to perform the other
necessary functions of open market operations, such as
short-term buying and selling of Treasury debt to stablize
the debt markets, but may not buy net new debt.
This means Article I of the Constitution, which
arrogates to the U.S. government a monopoly in emitting
legal tender, will be re-implemented, for new Federal
Reserve notes will no longer be issued as the currency of
the United States. Rather, they will be gradually
withdrawn from circulation, and replaced by U.S. Treasury
bills, as described below.
- 2) Expand Productive Credit Via Discount Window -
The Act then proposes that new, long-term,
low-interest credit in the amount of approximately $1
trillion per annum be issued by the U.S. Treasury via the
new National Bank to the U.S. physical economy by an
entirely new mechanism. The National Bank is to open wide
its {discount window} for general lending of
{directed credit} to the productive,
infrastructure, and related sectors of the physical
economy. The bank may in fact create such credit
indefinitely without fear of inflation, as long as it
serves to create new productive wealth.
All new credit and currency of the U.S.A. is to be thus
issued by the U.S. Treasury under Article I of the
Constitution, as {U.S. Treasury bills,} gradually
replacing the old Federal Reserve notes in circulation.
This will return constitutional control to the U.S.
government over the creation of new money and new debt
obligations of the Treasury and taxpayers.
Of the total $1 trillion per annum issued, approximately
$600 billion is to be spent by the U.S. Treasury itself in
the form of {basic economic infrastructure projects}, run
by federal, state, and local agencies and subsidiaries.
The objective is to employ approximately {3 million
people} directly in water projects, power generation and
distribution, transportation, urban infrastructure,
construction of medical facilities, schools, etc.
These goverment projects will generate additional
credit demand in the area of another $400 billion per
annum of purchases and investments by private-sector firms
to be engaged in supplying these government projects, for
a total of $1 trillion new productive activity. The
results in the private sector are estimated to increase
employment by an additional 3 million operatives for a
total new increase in productive employment of some {6
million persons}. This means that the Treasury will
receive more than the initial monies outlaid through
increase in the tax-revenue base of the government.
The Federal Reserve's present discount window
currently provides marginal amounts of credit, largely for
the bank's use, in their own emergency cash flow needs.
Via the window, the Fed loans money to the banks, at a
{discount}, against financial paper and bills of
trade on third parties presented by the banks.
The advantage, however, of conducting general
national bank credit operations via the discount window,
is that the window may easily discount large amounts of
bills of trade. These bills, held by the banks as loans
to productive enterprises, are chits representing actual
{physical production} of goods and services, so as to
guarantee that new national bank credit goes to creation
of new productive wealth.
This will constitute a system of {directed credit},
or what has been called a ``two-tier credit system.''
Private enterprise will be encouraged, but wisely managed
enterprises more than others. Enterprises seeking to
borrow at the banks for productive purposes, and their
bankers, will find the banks can readily discount this
paper for cheap credit. Those seeking to borrow for more
speculative purposes will find the paper may be discounted
only at much more expensive rates by the National Bank,
or not at all.
For example, Chrysler Corporation would be easily
able to get a low-interest, long-term loan from a Detroit
bank, if it can document that the funds will be used to
build new plants, or modernize existing capital equipment
for production purposes. This is because the bank knows it
will be able to take the loan agreement to the National
Bank and borrow cash immediately, at interest rates in the
range of 2-4%, up to 50% of the value of the entire loan.
The National Bank's 50% requirement is to ensure that
private enterprise continue to be privately run, and to
ensure the private sector bear its share of the risk. If
the bank bears a 50% share of the loan risk, banks will
make sounder loans.
If Chrysler, however, seeks loans to diversify into
real estate or casino gambling, or to relocate old plant
and equipment to cheap-wage Mexican
{maquiladoras,} its Detroit bank will advise them
that the National Bank will likely not discount such a
loan and therefore the bank must decline, or charge higher
interest rates.
The new Act states in Section 4: ``Upon the
endorsement of any U.S.-chartered bank, any branch of the
National Bank may discount up to 50% of the face value of
notes, drafts, and bills of exchange arising from the
production of tangible wealth or capital
improvements.... This shall be defined as the purchase of
raw and intermediate materials and capital goods,
construction of facilities, or employment of labor to
produce or transport manufactured goods, agricultural
commodities, and construction materials; to work mines; to
build manufacturing, transportation, and mining facilities
or dwellings; to produce and deliver energy in all forms;
and to provide public utilities....''
- 3) Protective Reserve Requirements. -
To protect the safety of the banking system, and
prevent banks from re-depositing for re-lending, for
{non}productive purposes, large amounts of the new cheap
discount credit, the act re-regulates {reserve
requirements} for private banks.
Until the deregulation of the 1980s, the Federal
Reserve required banks to keep on deposit with the Fed a
standard reserve fund, for use to pay depositors when
loans went bad, which until 1982 was roughly calculated at
an average rate of 16% of a bank's total deposits. This
cost banks money, since the funds could not be loaned out
at interest, and thus prevented banks from
multiplying the number of times they re-deposited and
re-loaned Federal Reserve credit. Those safety reserve
requirements, however, were largely done away with by the
deregulation of the 1980s, making U.S. banks part of the
off-shore Eurodollar market. The resulting speculation is
a major cause of U.S. banks' problems today.
Under the new Act, the 16% reserve requirement which
was standard post-war U.S. practice will be re-imposed.
Banks which maintain at least 60% of their loan assets in
the real physical productive activities listed above will
be subject to that standard requirement. However, for
every 1% by which the banks proportion of tangible
wealth-creating loan assets falls below 60% of total
assets, the National Bank shall require an additional 1%
reserve requirement charge. That will discourage banks
from falling below the 60% productive asset limit.
- Excerpts From the Federal Reserve Nationalization Act of 1992 -
{Sec. 1} Sec. 1 of the Federal Reserve Act of
1913 is hereby amended to read: ``Under Article I of the
Constitution pertaining to the monopoly of the U.S.
government in emitting legal tender, the Federal Reserve
System is hereby nationalized and placed under the
jurisdiction of the Department of the Treasury of the
United States. Its name is hereby changed to the `National
Bank of the United States.' Regional headquarters of the
Federal Reserve System shall henceforth be known as the
appropriate regional branches of the National Bank of the
United States....
``Offices and personnel of the former Federal Reserve
System shall continue normal functions at the new National
Bank except for the amendments set forth below...
``Private-sector `member banks' of the former Federal
Reserve System shall henceforth be known simply as
U.S.-chartered banks ...
{Sec. 2} Section 1 of the Federal Reserve Act
is hereby amended to read: ``The Federal Reserve shall
immediately cease issuance of Federal Reserve notes as
legal tender. As of the passage of this Act, the successor
National Bank of the United States shall commence issuance
of all new legal tender obligations of the United States
in the form of U.S. Treasury bills, to be deposited with
[the National Bank by the Treasury Department...
``Previously issued Federal Reserve notes may continue
to be circulated as currency until such time as the
Department of the Treasury shall formulate a currency
reform plan for their orderly withdrawal, said plan to be
promulgated no later than one year from the passage of
this Act ...''
{Sec. 3} Section 14 of the Federal Reserve
Act of 1913 is hereby amended to include the following:
``The power of the National Bank of the U.S. to purchase
or sell bills, notes, and bonds of the United States shall
be limited to these functions:
``a) The anticipation of tax revenues accruing not
more than one year form the date of purchase of said
bills, notes, and bonds, in order to help maintain an
orderly flow of disbursements by the United States
Treasury;
``b) To maintain an orderly market in the bills,
notes, and bonds of the United States, and to meet the
temporary liquidity needs of regional branches of the
National Bank system and commercial banks in their
districts;
``c) The purchase of such liabilities of the United
States as may be presented by foreign governments for sale
to the National Bank by said governments;
``The Federal government, however, may not create
money supply by monetizing United States govenment debt.
To ensure this, the total holdings by the National Bank of
bills, notes, and bonds of the United States shall be set
as an annual ceiling as of the enactment of this act.
Said holdings may vary in size in the course of each year,
but may not increase in size at the end of the year,
following enactment of this act and at annual intervals
thereafter, except as a result of purchases of official
liabilities of the United States from foreign
governments.''
{Sec. 4} Section 14 of the Federal Reserve
Act of 1913 is hereby amended to read: ``Any regional
branch of the National Bank may receive from any bank, and
from the United States, deposits of current funds in
lawful money, National Bank notes, Treasury bills or
notes, or checks and drafts upon solvent U.S.-charted
banks, payable upon presentation; or, solely for exchange
purposes, may receive from other regional branches of the
National Bank, deposits of current funds in lawful money;
or checks and drafts upon solvement private banks or other
branches of the National Bank, payable upon
presentation....
``Upon the endorsement of any U.S.-chartered bank, any
branch of the National Bank may discount up to 50% of the
face value of notes, drafts, and bills of exchange arising
from the production of tangible wealth or capital
improvements ... This shall be defined as the purchase of
raw and intermediate materials and capital goods,
construction of facilities, or employment of labor to
produce or transport manufactured goods, agricultural
commodities, and construction materials; to work mines; to
build manufacturing, transportation, and mining facilities
or dwellings; to produce and deliver energy in all forms;
and to provide public utilities for communications.
``Such definition shall not include notes, drafts,
bills, or loans issued or drawn for the purpose of
conducting business except in the areas so defined, or for
carrying on or trading in stocks, bonds, or other
investment securities.
``Any National Bank branch may discount the full value
of acceptances which are based on the exportation of
goods, or 50% of the value of acceptances which are based
on the importation of goods, provided that such goods
conform to the restrictions set forth in the preceding
paragraphs.
``All National Bank branches shall meet all such
requests for discount of or participation in notes,
drafts, bills, and loans made by U.S.-chartered banks,
once the National Bank has determined that the purpose of
such credit conform to the restrictions set forth above.
There shall be no restrictions applied to such discounts
in furtherance of tangible wealth creation on the basis of
private banks capital positions...
{Sec. 5} Section 19 of the Federal Reserve
Act of 1913 is hereby amended to include the following:
``The above reserve requirements shall apply in the case
that private banks maintain 60% of their total assets in
the form of loans, bills, drafts, and advances to tangible
weath-creating borrowers, of a type eligible for discount
under Sec. 4 of this Act. For every 1 percent by which
the bank's proportion of tangible wealth-creating assets
falls below 60% of total assets, the National Bank shall
require that banks place an additional 1 percent of demand
deposits in reserve with the National Bank system. To
permit orderly transition to this reserve rule, however,
the formula shall apply only to new assets appearing on
the balance sheets of banks after the date of enactment of
this Act.''
For more information:
Washington, D.C. 202-547-1492
Northern Virginia, 703-437-1266
Pittsburgh, PA 412-885-7270
Philadelphia, PA 215-734-7080
Baltimore, MD 301-247-4200
Norfolk, VA 804-531-2295
Richmond, VA 804-323-7462
Houston, TX 713-789-6900
Chicago, IL 312-907-4000
Detroit, MI, 313-942-0652
St. Louis, MO 314-961-6302
Minneapolis, MN 612-874-1860
Los Angeles, CA 213-259-1860
Livermore, CA 510-449-3622
Seattle, WA 206-362-9091
Ridgefield Park, NJ 201-641-8858
Boston, MA 617-380-4000
Paid for by Democrats for Economic Recovery, LaRouche
in 92. P.O. Box 690, Leesburg, Virginia, 22075.
----
John Covici
covici@ccs.covici.com
Home ·
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Search
Nizkor
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and
to combat hatred.
Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.
As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may
include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and
provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist
and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.