New Paradigm for Civilization

You probably don't know about it yet because the mass media are not covering it but in reality mankind has entered a completely new era already in BRICs countries. They are in process of realizing a completely new economic and financial system. China is building a new silk road which brings development and peace to all the countries which participate in it. China's culture is oriented towards a better future of mankind and the entire Chinese population is optimistically participating in that joint mission. The Indian Prime Minister, Modi, has expressed it this way. The BRICs countries are the first alliance in history which is not defined by its present capacities, but by the potential of the future and that is the creativity of its people. Let us do everything to get the European nations and the United States to join in this optimistic perspective for the future.

One Belt One Road & New Thinking With Regard To Concepts And Practice

"'One Belt and One Road' & New Thinking With Regard To Concepts And Practice"

Prof. Shi Ze,Director for International Energy Strategy Studies, and China Institute of International Studies Senior Fellow, Beijing, China

October 19, 2014 Schiller Institute International Conference "Mankind is the Only Creative Species! The New Silk Road and China's Lunar Policy"

English Transcript:

Honored Schiller Institute President Madam LaRouche, honorable experts, distinguished friends, hello. I am from Beijing, China, a senior research fellow of the China Institute of International Studies. Today, I’m very happy to be able to attend the Schiller Institute’s 30th anniversary activity. I must, towards the Schiller Institute and Schiller Institute President Madam LaRouche, for her earnest invitation, express my deeply felt thank you.

Within China, I’ve attended many conferences on “One Belt and One Road”. However, this is the first time that I’ve attended a conference outside of China that touches upon China’s governmental policy and international diplomacy. So, very importantly, I must earnestly express my heartfelt thank you to Madam LaRouche, for having provided me with such a great opportunity to introduce to you the relevant concepts and thoughts of our “Silk Road Economic Belt”.

Madam LaRouche is someone who, in China, is received by everyone as a much liked and respected social activist. I have, in many of China’s media outlets, read her speeches and interviews. Her expert opinion regarding China is something that I deeply respect. And as a friend of China and the Chinese people, she has provided many sincere and earnest ideas towards China’s development. So, we very much honor and respect such an old friend of China.

Today, I will discuss some of my thoughts on the “New Silk Road Economic Belt” innovation. Everyone knows that in 2013, our Chinese leader [President Xi] presented two very important development proposals: the Silk Road Economic Corridor and the 21st century Maritime Silk Road. These two new proposals, are to develop and deepen cooperation in a new form, and have very meaningful implications for the development of the relationships between China and the other nations along the New Silk Road. So, how do we actualize these proposals that China’s leader proposed? Well, first, from the standpoint of ideas and concepts, we must have innovation. In the detailed development of the New Silk Road Project, we must also have innovation in the implementation. So the topic of my speech today is “Silk Road Economic Corridor and the Innovations on its Conceptualization and Implementation”. I’d like to discuss its four main points.

First point, the innovation in conceptualization/outlook

In the innovation of conceptualization, I’d like to emphasize three areas. Firstly, China in the course of its “reform and opening up”, initially adopted a “bringing-in” strategy, that is, to attract outside countries’ technology and investment to do development in China. We call it a policy of “hitching a ride,” to draw in support from international assistance to push forward our economic development. This kind of policy in the beginning of our opening up of China achieved obvious results in developing China. A lot of international financial organizations and friendly nations came to China to invest and engage in economic cooperation. The second phase, is the “going-out” strategy. That is, to better accelerate the development of China’s economic policies, we pushed for our Chinese companies and enterprises to go out, to go out abroad to do international development, to develop everywhere in the world; to go out for international economic cooperation. This, I think had very obvious results in the recent past. This very well used national resources to go aboard and allow Chinese enterprises to learn more advanced technology. This advanced our R&D capability and facilitated the foundation for our own advancement. So in the ‘walking out”, we broadened and expanded the scope of our “reform and opening up”, increasing the scale and the momentum of economic development. At this point, the central government proposed the New Silk Road Economic Development Corridor —the “One Belt and One Road” strategic concept, which lawfully took the foundation brought about from the “bringing-in” and the “going-out” strategies, and both expanded and merged the two concepts. So, when China’s friends study our “One Belt One Road” development proposal, this policy possesses a much broader and richer conceptual significance. This is the first, the innovation on the conceptual level.

The Second Innovation in Conceptualization: following China’s own economic development, in what way do we adapt to the needs of our own “reform and opening up”, while at the same time interacting in a process with the countries on our periphery and along the Corridor, giving them a share in the benefits of our own development, and then proceeding in broadening collaboration between China and the other countries of the world, in order to achieve our common development? That is, to allow our cooperation to achieve mutual and equal benefit. This is not that China is alone receiving benefit, but rather, how in our cooperation, we all share in the development dividends. This is a very important shift in development of China’s international policy.

Furthermore, our leaders have brought about new concept on “Benefit”. That is, in terms of “profit/benefit”, to consider how we, in our cooperation with our partners, allow our partners to achieve benefit and development, so that our partners will not receive diminished benefits against what we achieve in the course of our cooperation. This is something that our leaders, especially President XiJinPing, have recently emphasized as the necessary outlook for our cooperation with other nations. And I think that in our “New Silk Road Economic Development”, he also emphasized a very important concept—that this kind of development must be both balanced and equal; that this is not only China having increased development in both its own scope and quality, but rather, that in the course of this cooperation, it will allow our partners to benefit from a parallel as well as equal scope and quality of development as China. This is important, because recently some friends have said to me that China’s proposal of the New Silk Belt only considered how it will be beneficial to China. I think that is only half right. That is, any proposal for China’s international development project will, of course, consider the benefit that it will have for China. But in that course, we are also considering its benefit to our cooperative partner, and that it is both a mutual and equal pace of development for our partners. I think that this equal development for our partners is a very important point to emphasize for the “One Belt One Road” policy and development of the New Silk Road Economic Development.

Thirdly, in sponsoring the “One Belt One Road” policy, our leader emphasis the concept of the “Three No’s”. That is, first, we do not interfere in the internal affairs of other nations; second, that China does not seek to increase the so called “sphere of influence”; and third, China does not strive for hegemony or dominance. That is, we are all equal partners. So our leaders are proposing this “three No’s” concept. I think that for all of our friends present today at this conference, this is something to heavily empathize about China’s foreign policy and to emphasize that such policy is on the basis of “peaceful development” with others.

I think that the promotion of the New Silk Road Project reflects how China seeks to position itself internationally—to propose such an important concept and such an innovative proposal, China is proposing a stand on how we seek to align ourselves in our relationship with the international community. This is to say, after the Cold war, in the Eurasian region, we are seeking to provide equilibrium. In this area, all the major countries, including China, Russia, United States and European Union, there exists a situation of checks and balances between the major powers where not one single major country in Eurasia has dominance. That is, be it United States, Russia, or China, or the EU, none in the Eurasian area should have a dominating or hegemonic position. China’s goal, in promoting the “One Belt and One Road”, is not to disrupt this equilibrium in the Eurasian area, but rather, to ensure the stability of this area. We seek that each region form and develop mutual assistance, mutual friendship, and mutual cooperation. This, I think, is a necessary development, is a necessary basis, and pre-condition, as well as reason for our development of the New Silk Road Project.

I would like to say a few more words about the fact that in the Eurasian region, there are many regional economic cooperatives, including the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and other European cooperative organizations. What is the relationship among these organizations? I don’t think that these organizations are there to negate or work against each other. Rather, I feel that these organization are there to learn to work with, to cooperate with each other, to benefit from each other. To motivate each of these cooperatives to investigate in our mutually beneficial development. Only that way, can our New Silk Economic Corridor have real development. So, I feel that our New Silk Road Economic Corridor is a proposal that is of the nature of spearheading and opening possibilities rather than the closing or blocking out of relationships. Today in the audience, we have mostly European friends, and our New Silk Road Economic Corridor’s basis is that Europe will be at one end of its center and China at the other end. It’s just like a linked dumbbell; the development of this corridor between China and Europe not only will strengthen both Europe and China on each end, but will bring about the social and economic development in the whole of all of the regions of Central Asia, South Asia, Middle East and Eastern Europe. So, I think that the New Silk Road Economic Corridor can have direct impact and importance to the European nations. The European nations in this regard, already have a great foundation in their technological basis and the New Silk Road Corridor is something that we think will greatly develop all of these nations. Again, we must emphasize that in promoting the New Silk Road Corridor, we seek friendly cooperation with all major nations on concept of “求同存异”—finding common ground while existing differently—especially the seeking of common ground. This is central to our conception. So, we do not oppose the United States joining us in this, or Russia or European nations. We welcome all nations. That is why this proposal is inclusive and open.

This is my first major point. My second major point is that for our New Silk Road Corridor’s “One Road One Belt” Concept, I’d like to emphasize the question of how to innovate on a model of cooperation.

How do we advance the building of “One Road One Belt”? Typically, whether in discussions inside or outside China, when people talk about the overarching idea (理念) of the New Silk Road, the discussion centers more on the practical concepts (概念)―when China makes the proposal, what is the content of its proposal, as in “what regions will it cover”, or “what is China’s goal”. But what we often leave out is, how do we cooperate together? That is, what is the model for cooperation? How do you develop cooperation? If we don’t solve that question, in actuality, this initiative will not be realized.

So, I think that the point to emphasize is that when we consider how we promote the New Silk Road Project–the level of economic development in these areas surrounding the corridor is very different. There are developed nations, large countries, relatively developed nations, and some underdeveloped nations. So under the condition of very large differences in the level of economic development among these nations, to push forward the process of this project, I think, involves high degrees of difficulty. We are not proposing that in the future three or five years, or even ten years, to have already developed the New Silk Road Corridor Project. I think that this is a long-term goal on the part of China. It has no definite end. Where and when we can push forth the cooperation, we will. So, when China promotes the New Silk Road initiative, this not on the basis of force, of forcing anyone. Our cooperation partners are only those who freely and willingly join us in this project. Whoever is interested is welcomed to join us. Also, for those joining us in the project, we want for each side to enjoy equal privilege. So the New Silk Road Project, for any nation, is a development opportunity, utilizing China’s “Opening Up” policy to broaden each other’s economic cooperation. This provides all kinds of opportunity for entrepreneurship and employment.

So what is the cooperative model? In the Eurasian region, the economic development level is varied, unlike the European region which is mostly developed. So in the Eurasian region, the differences is very large and it is something that must be considered. Second, in the course of considering the model of cooperation, when we talk about the Eurasian region, we’re talking about a process of strengthening the region (调壮). It is not like some of the other existing economic regions around world, where the purpose is that of “expansion” or “encompassing”. For example, the ASEAN or EU cooperation or Latin American cooperation, they are all a kind of “encompassing”. However, our emphasis for the Eurasian region is that of strengthening it. So, whether we can use ASEAN or EU or the Latin American experience, I think that we do not exclude their experience. We must study and learn from them. More importantly, we must enjoin the unique potential of our various regions along the corridor. I think the important thing for us is how do we set up our cooperation? That is, this process of strengthening the region, how do we go about it? We cannot simply take from the existing models. Often, economic experts, even our own in China, take the Western European model and attempt to simply impose the whole of that model on the new concept. Well, we don’t reject others’ models, but we must seek to develop new ones. In this regard, I very much hope that our European friends will provide us with their thoughts and new suggestions.

So this New Silk Road Project is very new and this type of cooperative vision has little precedent in world history―the regions that it encompasses are many; the length of the Corridor is very great; the countries that it will reach are many. So, there is no precedent. So the road in front of us is, that we must innovate, we must develop new ideas and thoughts, to find a way that would work for the common goals and aspirations of China, and the nations along the new Silk Road Corridor.

Third point: I like to talk about the content of cooperation for our New Silk Road Corridor

First, I talked about conceptualization and methodology. Now, I will talk about the details of the areas for development, the content of development. First, I must again emphasize, that building the “One Road One Belt” long-term process of development is not something to be finished in a few years. We are very clear about that. There are opportunities and at the same time, there are challenges. So we must retain a clear head about this.

I feel that in the process of building the “One Belt One Road”, in the innovation of the character of its development, there are a few elements that must be noted and emphasized. In accordance with the existing economic foundation and condition, and the pre-conditions of our cooperation, our efforts must first be put to energy resources, the transportation grid, electricity systems, communications networks, other such basic infrastructure platforms, and the networking together of such platforms. There is a saying in China, “to develop wealth, you have to first build roads”. The development corridor’s economy can only prosper when human resources, logistics and economic flow (人流, 物流, 资金流) have all been brought on-line and integrated. These basic conditions must be there.

In promoting the development of the “One Road One Belt”, we are not talking about creating a new cooperation mechanism. I must emphasize this. Rather, we are building on the foundation of existing cooperation and existing regional cooperation, ever expanding the scope. This is a cooperative process, not imposing any specific kind of mechanism over the process. Second, we must improve and strengthen each nation’s development strategy and development planning as well as advance the mutual communication and integration of these improvements. We do this so that nations can understand what each other’s next five-ten-year development goals are, and cooperate on that basis; what areas of your strategy are similar to mine; and we must find particular areas and projects for cooperation on the basis of those mutual and common strategies. China, in promoting the “One Belt One Road”, is not seeking unilateral oneness. We only seek to push forward the process of cooperation. Third, I think that in the course of cooperation, we must walk on the frontier of technological advancement. We must nurture and pay serious attention to the most advanced scientific achievements that are being developed in the world. We must take the existing level of development in the Eurasian region and carry-out large scale cooperation on a non-natural resource-taking and non-energy-resource-taking basis. Because in the Eurasian region, each nation’s economic endowment―its national and natural resources―plays a large role in existing cooperation. So I think that there is not enough cooperation not based on natural resources. This means especially development of agriculture, of infrastructure, of the manufacturing industry, and such areas which I think are all retarded areas of needed improvement. We must emphasize a basis of cooperation based on non-natural resource-taking basis, so that it will allow our economic advancement to reach a new high-standard of cooperation.

Lastly, I must place emphasis on the multi-sided attributes for our “One Belt One Road”. We must emphasize high-level multi-dimensional cooperation. For example, we can and should, for the nations along the Silk Road Corridor, develop the effect of “city alliances”. We should develop urban industry alliances―for example, international railroad associations, international transportation associations and other similar associations, including international cooperative-network associations. That is, to develop cross-regional, existing industry cooperation, so as to develop bi-lateral or multi-lateral cooperative networks and cooperation systems. At the same time, China encourages plans and programs that would develop the “One Belt One Road” proposal even though they do not include China as a participant. So that some of the programs China will not participate in, but such program will be beneficial to all. What we seek is to be able to promote regional development, and any such program that develops regional economy, China supports. It is not that we will only support those programs that China participates in. No: programs that belong to and are developed by others, we also support. So we seek an inclusive and open cooperation framework.

Fourth point: innovation of the System

The “One Belt One Road” is a grand vision. For China, the challenges are great. First, it not only touches on the necessary cooperation of some of the regions and department within China, but also on China’s overseas organizations and entities. It not only concerns the domestic interests and prerogatives of each region and department, but also private and state-owned enterprises abroad, as well as international enterprises with muti-income and profit sources. And we must consider the development of these multi-profit sources. We must consider coordination between these national and international policies. So, in order to facilitate the development of the New Silk Road Corridor, our central government has been compelled to increase the pace and reform of our economic system, so that this system can better facilitate the development of the New Silk Road Corridor.

In promoting the New Silk Road, we have taken examples from how other nations have carried out their international strategy. For example, the United States, in conducting its own “New Silk Road Plan” looked at South Asia and Central Asia as an entity with regard to their own development needs and combined the original Department of Central Asian Affairs and the Department of South Asia Affairs into a single Department of South and Central Asia Affairs. I think that this kind of experience is something that we can learn from. Russia, in order to promote the development of the Far East and regional cooperation created the Ministry for Development of the Russian Far East. In this manner, we intend to be able to take those examples that suit the development of the “One Belt One Road” system and utilize them to develop our proposal. So, in the future, in the course of our development of the “One Belt One Road”, we earnestly hope to work with the international community, the various nations, the different regions, and on the basis of equal and mutual developments, to promote a program that benefits all of mankind. Thank you to everyone!

Schiller Institute Presents Tribute to John F. Kennedy: Mozart Requiem

The Schiller Institute Chorus, augmented by additional singers and an orchestra largely comprised of volunteers from the New England Conservatory of Music, presented Mozart’s Requiem in its entirety to an audience of 1,200 at Boston’s Cathedral of the Holy Cross, performed exactly 50 years to the day, of a 1964 Solemn High Requiem Mass specially requested by the Kennedy family.



Lord have mercy upon us.
Christ have mercy upon us.
Lord have mercy upon us.

Day of wrath, that day
Will dissolve the earth in ashes
As David and the Sibyl bear witness.
What dread there will be
When the Judge shall come
To judge all things strictly.
A trumpet, spreading a wondrous sound
Through the graves of all lands,
Will drive mankind before the throne.
Death and Nature shall be astonished
When all creation rises again
To answer to the Judge.
A book, written in, will be brought forth
In which is contained everything that is,
Out of which the world shall be judged.
When therefore the Judge takes His seat
Whatever is hidden will reveal itself.
Nothing will remain unavenged.
What then shall 1 say, wretch that I am,
What advocate entreat to speak for me,
When even the righteous may hardly be secure?
King of awful majesty,
Who freely savest the redeemed,
Save me, O fount of goodness.
Remember, blessed Jesu,
That I am the cause of Thy pilgrimage,
Do not forsake me on that day.
Seeking me Thou didst sit down weary,
Thou didst redeem me, suffering death on the cross.
Let not such toil be in vain.
Just and avenging Judge,
Grant remission
Before the day of reckoning.
I groan like a guilty man.
Guilt reddens my face.
Spare a suppliant, O God.
Thou who didst absolve Mary Magdalene
And didst hearken to the thief,
To me also hast Thou given hope.
My prayers are not worthy,
But Thou in Thy merciful goodness grant
That I burn not in everlasting fire.
Place me among Thy sheep
And separate me from the goats,
Setting me on Thy right hand.
When the accursed have been confounded
And given over to the bitter flames,
Call me with the blessed.
I pray in supplication on my knees.
My heart contrite as the dust,
Safeguard my fate.
Mournful that day
When from the dust shall rise
Guilty man to be judged.
Therefore spare him, O God.
Merciful Jesu,
Lord Grant them rest.

Lord Jesus Christ, King of glory,
deliver the souls of all the faithful
departed from the pains of hell and from the bottomless pit.
Deliver them from the lion's mouth.
Neither let them fall into darkness
nor the black abyss swallow them up.
And let St. Michael, Thy standard-bearer,
lead them into the holy light
which once Thou didst promise
to Abraham and his seed.

We offer unto Thee this sacrifice
of prayer and praise.
Receive it for those souls
whom today we commemorate.
Allow them, O Lord, to cross
from death into the life
which once Thou didst promise to Abraham
and his seed.

Holy, holy, holy,
Lord God of Sabaoth.
Heaven and earth are full of Thy glory.
Hosanna in the highest.

Blessed is He who cometh in the name of the Lord.
Hosanna in the highest.

Agnus Dei
Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the world,
grant them rest.
Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the world,
grant them everlasting rest.

May eternal light shine on them, O Lord.
with Thy saints for ever, because
Thou art merciful.
Grant the dead eternal rest, O Lord,
and may perpetual light shine on them,
with Thy saints for ever,
because Thou are merciful.

“A Vision For The Future Of Humanity” – Helga Zepp-LaRouche · Rhodes Conference

The following address was delivered by Helga Zepp-LaRouche to the Oct. 7 closing plenary of the World Public Forum Dialogue of Civilizations, Oct. 4-7, 2012 in Rhodes.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

There were many important issues discussed during the last days, but I agree with Professor Dallmayr, that we cannot conclude this conference without focusing again on the reality that we, as a civilization are on the verge of thermonuclear war. The possibility of a military attack on Iran, the escalation of the situation between Syria and Turkey, the deployment of U.S. aircraft carriers in the Western Pacific close to these contested islands, and Hillary Clinton's statement that any attack on these islands would bring the U.S.-Japan military treaty into play, the agreement of the Spanish government to participate in the NATO anti-missile defense shield, all of these developments demonstrate that we are in mortal danger.

During the last weeks, the existential danger in which the human species now finds itself has become clear for all thinking people. The almost continuous policy of "regime change," which after the collapse of the Soviet Union, "bombed Iraq back to the stone age," plunged Libya into anarchy, turned Afghanistan into a nightmare, and victimized the secular state of Syria with foreign intervention and religious warfare, in the case of military operations against Iran, could lead to an uncontrollable worldwide wildfire. The Near and Middle East threatens to become a new Balkans, in which existing alliances like those before World War I lead to a conflagration. The unthinkable could occur, that Mutual Assured Destruction no longer functions as a deterrent, but becomes the consequence of a war in which thermonuclear weapons are deployed, leading to the extinction of the human race. Not at some possible time — but within the next weeks.

The dynamic which is driving the war danger, is accentuated by the accelerating collapse of the transatlantic financial system. Bernanke's euphemistically named "quantitative easing III" liquidity expansion is just as hyperinflationary as Mario Draghi's "whatever it takes," unlimited purchase of state bonds through the European Central Bank. Hyperinflationary money printing, in connection with brutal austerity — in the tradition of Reichschancellor Brüning — against the population and real economy has already had a life shortening effect upon millions of people in Greece, Italy, Spain, and Portugal and threatens to plunge Europe into a firestorm of social chaos.

Humanity is in the process of crashing into a brick wall at full speed. The question which we urgently must answer is whether the human species, confronted with its own self-destruction, is intelligent enough to change course in time, from the presently ruinous paradigm of attempting the consolidation of a world empire and the feigned legitimation for resolution of geopolitical conflicts by means of war, and replacing it with another, which is viable for humanity?

To solve this problem, we have to address an epistomological problem: We must repudiate the relics of the methods of thinking that are anchored in the oligarchical system, including deductive, positivist, empiricist, monetarist or linear statistic projection concepts expressing a bad infinity, as they belong to a worldview that has nothing to do with the laws of the real physical universe, nor the creativity of human reason.

Instead we must craft with the same creativity and love of humanity, as that of Nicholas of Cusa, Johannes Kepler, Gottfried Leibniz, Johann Sebastian Bach, Ludwig van Beethoven, Friedrich Schiller, Vladimir Vernadsky, or Albert Einstein, to name but a few, a vision of a better future for mankind, which of course can only be realized only when enough forces unite themselves for this good cause.

Such a vision can never be the result of Aristotelian thinking, or become a "consensus" of solutions for many small side issues, i.e., thinking from "below," but comes from thinking "from above." Nicholas of Cusa had, with his method of Coincidentia Oppositorum, the Coinicidence of Opposites, whereby the One has a higher order of power than the Many, laid the cornerstone on which not only the Priniciple of the Peace of Wesphalia and International Law were built, but also a universal method of problem and conflict solving, which is still valid today. This means we must begin with the definition of the common aims of mankind. What could be more important than the ontological question of "esse," being, that we are able to secure the prolonged sustainable existence of the human species?

By virtue of the anti-entropic lawfulness of the physical universe, the enduring existence of humanity requires a constant rise in the potential relative population density and a continually expanding energy flux density in production processes. If we want to find a solution to the twofold existential threat to mankind, the danger of thermonuclear world war and the systemic economic crisis, then the new paradigm must bring itself into cohesion with the order of creation. We need a plan for peace for the 21st century, a vision, which simultaneously inspires the imagination of hopes of man.

Despite having all the scientific and technological means at hand to guarantee humane conditions of life, while there are over 1 billion people subject to hunger and malnourishment, while 25,000 children — a small city — die daily from hunger, while 3 billion live in poverty and are denied their human rights, is it not then our sacred duty to actually deploy those means? We need a large-scale development strategy, building on the ideas of the United Nations Development Decades of the 1950s and '60s, rejecting completely the paradigm change of the past 40-50 years as the wrong track, and thus reviving the idea of "Peace Through Development."

Such a vision could be the implemention of the World Land-Bridge with its many great projects like NAWAPA, the tunnel under the Bering Strait, the development of the Artic, expansion of the Eurasian Land-Bridge, above all into the Near and Middle East and the Indian Subcontinent, including linking Africa to the World Land-Bridge through tunnels, under the Strait of Gilbratar linking Spain and Morocco, and also between Sicily and Tunisia.

There are two large regions of this planet where lack of development cries for vengeance, one being the African continent, that was never allowed to recuperate from the centuries-long colonial exploitation; and the second being the Near and Middle East, which are currently way behind their golden periods, when Baghdad was the center of world culture, or when Pamyra Tadmur in Syria was a pearl on the ancient Silk Road. We must put on the agenda for discussion a vision for an economic and cultural Renaissance for these regions, representing an element of reason at a higher level than the local, ethnic, and historic conflicts. Were the representatives of a group of large nations to bring such a message to the world community, showing that in fact, there is a real alternative that would make possible the survival of all people on this planet, then that element of hope could be brought into the debate, which is presently completely lacking.

The same kind of thinking using the standpoint of Coincidentia Oppositorum, thinking from "above," as applied to overcoming the underdevelopment on Earth with the World Land-Bridge, we also need for defense from the dangers to all of us on the planet which come from space. Russia, with its project for Strategic Defense of the Earth, SDE, has made a proposal for the cooperation of Russia and the U.S.A., and potentially more countries, for joint missile defense and the protection of Earth from asteroid and comet impact, which can replace the current geopolitical confrontation and the existential threat of its escalation. The SDE project is in the tradition of the SDI, the Strategic Defense Initiative, the proposal for overcoming the nuclear threat and division of the world into military blocs, which my husband Lyndon LaRouche developed over 30 years ago and which President Ronald Reagan made the official policy of the American government in 1983.

The SDE project, which includes early warning systems for manmade and natural catastrophes, as well as cooperation in manned space flight, is the absolutely necessary economic science driver that the crisis-ridden world economy needs in order to achieve higher levels of productivity and create the new scientific and technological capacities that are also needed for the solution to the problems on Earth. Joint manned space travel is the necessary next step for the evolution of mankind, and with this "Extraterrestial Imperative," as called for by renowned scientist and rocket engineer Krafft A. Ehricke, mankind can now enter into an age of adulthood, leaving behind itself, like childhood diseases, the solving of conflicts through war.

If we promptly succeed in unifying ourselves around the vision of achieving the common aims of mankind, and consciously present this perspective as a war-avoidance strategy, then it can inspire the imagination of the younger generation, which is now threatened worldwide by mass unemployment and desperate hopelessness. If the young people develop the same passion and elevated concepts as the pioneers of space travel once had, who now are encouraged with the instruments which the Mars rover Curiosity is deploying, and which has now "shifted the sense experience of Man," admittedly, with a 14-minute delay, the world has entered a new phase space; if young people develop that passion, then we have won. In the next phase of mankind, man will think like scientists and the composers of great works of Classical art.

We either act now, in this moment of existential danger, on the common aims of mankind, or we will not exist.

Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche is President of the international Schiller Institute.

Impeach Obama for Criminal Complicity in Murder of U.S. Ambassador


This is an immediate release from the LaRouche Political Action Committee.

To Mr. Obama:

You are complicit in the murders of Ambassador Stevens and the three other American diplomatic personnel. Provided with 48 hours notice, you did nothing. These patriots, who dedicated themselves to the United States, are now victims of your criminal mind. Mr. Obama, you are not now, nor ever were fit to serve as President of the United States. Had you given the direct order for the murder of these US diplomatic personnel in Libya, there would be no difference. You, Mr. President, are mentally unfit to serve and must step down. You must be impeached now!

You willingly failed to prioritize security at the US Embassy in Benghazi, yet were given clear evidence of threats and intelligence warnings. You were given 48 hours notice and did nothing! Were you waiting for their murders, Mr. President? This is the case. You let the murders happen. You are complicit.

You have violated US and International law with the illegal invasion of Libya and the murder of Muamar Qadaffi, and now have their blood on your hands.

You are complicit with Prince Bandar, the head of Saudi Intelligence and sponsor of the first and second 9-11 attacks. With your actions, you have unleashed a wave of Islamic-extremist terror throughout the world. How dare you! Having knowledge of Saudi involvement of 9-11, you provided in the spring of 2009, immunity to the Saudi family. By doing so, you have protected the British Empire and its reign of international terror. You have continued to conceal key evidence in 9-11 one, and are now complicit in 9-11 two.

You have issued extra-judicial murders against American citizens, and continue to perpetrate weekly murders and executions through decree.

Through the Tony Blair doctrine, you have violated the principle of national sovereignty, and have now brought the world to the edge of thermonuclear extinction, with threatened attacks on Syria and Iran, Russia and China. What kind of sonofabitch are you?

You are a traitor and must be held accountable by the US Congress immediately.

Mr.President, - you are a criminal of the worst kind, comparable only to that Royal disease, Queen Elizabeth. If you are not removed now, millions more, possibly billions, will perish. You must be impeached now!

Mr. President you are a killer. Let’s look at the facts:

On September 14th, the London Independent reported, quote, “The killings of the US ambassador to Libya and three of his staff were likely to have been the result of a serious and continuing security breach...According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and ‘lockdown’...”

The President and Secretary of State, in these circumstances, alone have the power to act and they did not.

From the beginning of your administration, you have protected the British-Saudi global terrorist network. You are now complicit in the second, British directed - Saudi sponsored 9-11 attack on the United States.

In an interview on September 12, Michael Hayden, a four star Air Force General, and former director of the CIA, said:

“The U.N. Security Council resolution on Libya was bait and switch. It was never just humanitarian assistance, it was to overthrow the regime...As for how that affects the Russians, think about Syria....Actions have consequences. These are reasonably predictable consequences, so I do think that someone who set this chain of events in motion bears some measure of responsibility.” So do we.

Mr. Obama, you have violated international law and must be tried in a court of law for murder. The defense of national sovereignty, the defense of the inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, must now be upheld. Mr. Obama, you - must - go!

Former Senator Bob Graham, co-author of the 9/11 Inquiry Report, states in an article released on September 11, quote:

“The passage of time since September 11, 2001, has not diminished the distrust many of us feel surrounding the official story of how 9/11 happened and, more specifically, who financed and supported it. After eleven years, the time has come for the families of the victims, the survivors and all Americans to get the whole story behind 9/11.

“It is not merely a question of the need to complete the historical record. It is a matter of national security today.

“...A 28-page chapter in its report, centered on sources of foreign support for some of the September 11th hijackers while they were in the United States. That chapter remains censored, denied to the American people. Sadly, those 28 pages represent only a fraction of the evidence of Saudi complicity that our government continues to shield from the public, under a flawed classification program, which appears to be part of a systematic effort to protect Saudi Arabia from any real accountability for its actions.”

So when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asks, “How could this happen? How could this happen in a country we helped liberate?” Perhaps you should remind her that in 2009, when the families of the victims of the first 9/11 attacks filed a lawsuit against the Saudi Royal family, for their role in 9/11, you intervened to ensure that Saudi government officials and members of the Royal family enjoyed sovereign immunity and would not be held accountable.

Mr. President, you were knowledgeable of these threats, and are culpable for malicious negligence and complicity in murder against American citizens. You have earned every hair of your mustache. Worse, you have betrayed our country on behalf of the British Empire. For this, you are a traitor of the most vile kind. Unfortunately, had you not been renominated by the Democratic Party, this would not have happened. Now, the members of the US Congress must hold you accountable in a court of law. They must stop your murders Mr. President. Our nation, and mankind today must be saved. Until this trash is hauled out, our economic crisis, our nation’s collapse, will not only continue, it will become magnitudes worse.

We are now on borrowed time. Members of Congress, we demand you stay in session, and Impeach him now!