edit SideBar

LaRouche Analyse

< 4.Evaluation | AnalyseIndex


This article is based on personal knowledge gained over many years as well as on fact finding by the author, which formed the basis of the author’s contribution “Die LaRouche Organisation” in Rainer Fromm’s and Barbara Kernbach’s book Europas braune Saat --Die internationale Verflechtung der rechtsradikalen Szene , (Bonn, 1994) (Europe’s Brown Seed – the International Entwining of the Extremist Right).

On the early period, see Dennis King, Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism, (New York, 1989), pp. 11-18. This is the most informative book on the LO and provides a wealth of information.

On the beginnings in Europe, see Hella Ralfs-Horeis, “Menschheitsretter” LaRouche. Innenansichten einer totatlitären Bewegung. (LaRouche the Savior of Mankind. An Inside View of a Totalitarian Movement). (Stuttgart, 1990); Aglaja Beyes-Corleis, Verirrt. Mein Leben in einer radikalen Politorganisation. (Gone Astray. My Life in a Radical Political Organization), (Freiburg, 1994). Both books offer particularly accurate descriptions of the psychological manipulation of young activists.

One of the campaign slogans of the EAP in the 1976 campaign was “we get 5% in the Bundestag or atomic war in 1977 is unavoidable.” (Neue Solidarität, April 15, 1976). The already pronounced fixation on conspiracy theories led to such rare blossoms as a title line in Neue Solidariät “Kissinger’s artificial storm tide to unleash the Third World War” (January 8, 1976). According to the EAP, a mentally ill Nelson Rockefeller, together with Kissinger’s National Security Council, were unleashing “meteorological warfare”.

This control structure made it possible, for example, for the European affiliates to continue to rely for propaganda on hardliners in the communist apparatuses (among others, the Portuguese Communist Party leader Cunhal, Communist Party of the Soviet Union leader Brezhnev, Fidel Castro and Enrique Lister, the recently deceased leader of the orthodox wing of the Spanish Communist Party loyal to Moscow), while in the USA, curiously, feelers were already being extended into the extreme right. On the contacts with the extreme right in the USA, see King, (fn.2), pp. 39-41.

On some high points of activity in the USA, see King (fn.2), pp. 103-111, p. 140 fn. On the main points of the German group’s agitation see Helmut Lorscheid/Leo A. Müller, Deckname Schiller – Die deutschen Patrioten des Lyndon LaRouche (Cover Name Schiller: Lyndon LaRouche’s German Patriots (Reinbek,1986). Lorscheid/Müller have written the thus far only book in German on the LO; they want to “warn about dangerous developments” and are not satisfied with the previous official evaluation of the LO as “not raising security-related considerations”.

For details on the LO’s financial machinations, see King (fn.2), p. 295 fn.; Mira Boland, Paroled: The LaRouche Political Cult Regroups, published by the Anti-Defamation League (Washington, 1994), pp. 14-20 as well as Fromm/Kernbach (fn.1), p. 133 fn.

For example, in July 1992 the establishment of a Moscow branch of the Schiller Institut was announced. According to the Neue Solidarität (October 27, 1993), a certain “International Ecological Academy of Russia” elected LaRouche as a “corresponding member” on the basis of an evaluation of him as a “genuine genius” and potential “founder of a new direction on the natural sciences” by Professors Taras W. Maraniwskij and Bencion Fleischmann. The propaganda in Moscow continues and occasionally resonates in the media there.

Some statements by decision makers in the US administration cited by King are characteristic: on the FEF in the American debate on the SDI program see King (fn.2) (pp .66-74); on contacts in the US administration see King (pp. 121-134 and pp. 159-164). Serious attempts by some members of the LO group to develop expertise in specific subjects (for example, Middle East analysis, terrorism/extremism or agriculture) have been labeled “pragmatism” and “specialized idiocy”, and rejected and undermined by the leadership. This rejection is due to the justifiable fear that such specialized branches could move toward more independence.

See Uwe Backes, Politischer Extremismus in demokratischen Verfassungsstaaten. Elemente einer normativen Rahmentheorie (Political Extremism in Democratic Constitutional States. Elements of a Framework Theory), (Opladen, 1989)(esp. pp. 298-311).

For reasons of space, this discussion is limited to the criteria of absolutist claims, friend/enemy stereotypes and conspiracy theories. The other traits such as utopianism and especially fanaticism/activism will be well enough illustrated through the other criteria.

See Backes (fn.10) pp. 298-300.

Thus LaRouche in an internal paper from August 11, 1991: “In terms of morals, the generation which has come up in the past 20 years, by and large, as a generation, as a cultural force, HAS NO MORALITY. None.” The supposedly close ties to the Vatican during the nineteen-eighties were, despite all propagandistic and organizational efforts, essentially one-sided.

See here, richly: Festschrift für Lyndon LaRouche anläßlich seines 65. Gebutstages (Festschrift for Lyndon LaRouche on his 65th Birthday), (Wiesbaden, 1987). Here LaRouche’s wife puts him on the level of, among others, Friedrich Schiller and describes him as one of the few “intellectual giants” in history who have “overcome the finiteness of man”

Ralfs-Horeis (fn.3), p. 8.

For example, LaRouche in an internal communique from October 27, 1991: “Recognize that what I have done in my fundamental discovery […] is probably one of the most important if not the most important discovery of the past centuries, my refutation of Wiener”.

See Hugo Stamm, Sekten. Im Bann von Sucht and Macht. Ausstiegshilfen für Betroffene und Angehörige. (Sects. Under the Influence of Addiction and Power. Exit Help for Victims and Those Concerned for Them) (Zürich,1994), pp. 125-128.

Beyes-Corleis (fn.3), p. 23. After concepts and programs like the “International Development Bank” and the “New World Order” in the1970s, the grand scheme for solving mankind’s problems is currently being pursued through, among other things, agitation for a “Berlin—Vienna—Paris” triangle.

On this, see Boland (fn.7), especially pp.16-20 where a former “Fundraiser” pointedly describes the instructions to the leading cadres: “If you are talking to a little old lady and she says she is going to lose her house, ignore it. Get the money. […] Most of these people are immoral anyway. This is the most moral thing they have ever done is giving you money.” Or see how leading cadres responded to demands for repayment of a loan: “Piss on him. Fuck him. That’s what he gets for lending us money”, King, p. 305; see further the on-the-record statement of William Wertz, a one time LaRouche lieutenant in charge of fundraising: “There is no such thing as loan” . King, (fn.2), p. 311.

Already during the Group’s building phase in the US in 1973 there were violent confrontations arising from controversies between the Communist Party of the USA and LaRouche supporters. The LaRouche Group called this “Operation Mop-up”, which included attacks on Communist Party meetings using nunchucks.

During the peak of the Guillaume Affair, in spring 1974, a Group flier had still called for support of Willy Brandt; shortly thereafter came his designation of “Nürnberg criminal” and in 1990/1991 he was reinstated as a hero due to his opposition to the Gulf War. Such curious fluctuations between friend and enemy are not rare in LO thought.

See for details King (fn.2), pp. 145-155 (Kissinger) and pp. 252-266 (Cohn). The occasional extreme intensity of these campaigns also serves to advertise the LO’s value as an economical provider of propaganda and smear jobs. These services have benefited the Reagan campaigns and related constellations in the USA as well a number of collapsing governments and dubious regimes under international pressure. Among others, the South African apartheid regime, Marcos, Noriega and Saddam Hussein have enjoyed extensive propaganda support from the LO. More limited episodes involved the Polish Gierek government (1980), the Ceausescu regime (1983), the military government of Guatemala (1985/1986) as well as Argentine and Brazilian, Taiwanese and Thai military governments and regimes. See, among others, King (fn.2) pp. 172-186; Boland (fn.7) pp. 8-12.

Müller/Lorscheid (fn.6), pp. 93-100.

Boland is the author of regularly appearing background reports on extremist American groups (including the LO) and is therefore in demand by investigative agencies. In the winter of 1993 a number of pamphlets were circulated in Boland’s neighborhood, which is populated by many exiled Ukrainians, with a messaged tailored for this audience (relating to the controversial case of the suspected Nazi war criminal and exiled Ukrainian John Demjanjuk). The pamphlets said, among other things: “Did Mira Boland try to “kill” John Demjanjuk?” and “Wanted: for the planning and directing of kidnapping, espionage, theft at the behest of drug dealers, terrorists and murderers.” In Germany in the summer of 1994 LaRouche activists launched a campaign directed toward security agencies and others to smear Boland by claiming that she had links to a number of secret services and criminal organizations.

See King (fn.2), p. 233.

In two internal papers from June 1981 this person was labeled, among other things, as an “agent for pro-genocide political interests”, a “brainwashed person”, part of the “same fascist networks with ties to the Italian P2 freemason lodge”, “morally degenerate” and “morally dead”, “enemy of mankind”, “controlled by the transatlantic porno/drug lobby network that wants to kill LaRouche”, an anarchist who had become a “fascist gangster”, “mentally degenerate”, “insane” and “paranoid”. People like this are “corpses” that should be left to rot at a place of their choosing.

See King (fn.2), p. 231

See Stamm (fn.17), pp. 125-128.

On the early period in the USA, see King (fn.2), pp. 25-31.

King (fn.2), pp.197-207, offers a detailed and accurate characterization of Frankhouser as a gifted conman. The profile of LaRouche as a tough but ready-to-pay security fetishist quickly got around among former members of US security and military forces, so that LaRouche could soon surround himself in the USA with a whole team of highly-paid “consultants”. See King (fn.2), p 195.

On WerBell see King (fn.2), pp. 188-194 and pp. 327-331.

At the end of the 1970s this included a number of former German Intelligence and German Federal Criminal Office officials.

For the statement in a 1984 NBC report that LaRouche called for the murder of Carter and other people, see King (fn.2), pp. 231-232. At that time Carter was labeled in Group jargon as a planner of “genocide” and “nuclear blitzkrieg”.

Some branches in a public forest (Soonwald), which bothered Zepp while she was out riding, were cut down at her instruction. In the pedestrian zone of a town in Baden-Würrttemberg a security guard ordered pedestrians to make way for Zepp and her two dogs (both of which dogs were unpredictable and a constant source of trouble).

Curiously, from the early to mid-1980s the LaRouches were able to get official permission to travel in Paris, Rome, Madrid, Ankara, New Delhi, Bangkok and Brazil. On a trip to Paris in 1982 the LaRouche’s were met at the border by a car from the Rensiegnements Generaux, which smoothed their trip and even allowed them to bring in about 10 pistols and several pump-action rifles.

See Backes (fn.10), pp. 306-309.

See Gerhard Wisnewski/Wolfgang Landgraeber/Ekkehard Sieker, Das RAF Phantom: Wozu Politik und Wirtschaft Terroristen Brauchen (The RAF Phantom: Why Politics and Economics need Terrorists), Munich, 1992, pp.188-190. The three authors recommend making use of the “unusually good grasp of the latest information” of the LaRouche media, and explain their use of several EIR publications in the following pages. As it became clear (perhaps too late), what they had become involved in, Wisnewski attempted to distance himself in an embarrassingly overdrawn way in the SZ-Magazin (magazine of the Süddeutsche Zeitung) of 27 November 1992. Suddenly, it was insinuated that LaRouche – in the camp of the SDI supporters – was implicitly involved in the attack on von Braunmühl, an SDI opponent. In their follow-up book, Operation RAF (Munich, 1994), the authors finally attempted to simply deny their terrible gaffe (p 15.)

This obsession with conspiracies is regularly the subject of endless litanies in internal papers as well as in public announcements. So, for example, in an internal paper from May 23, 1991, LaRouche sees the following events and persons as belonging to the sphere of responsibility of these world-wide British control structures: the First and at least implicitly, the Second World War, as well as potentially a Third; the mental control exercised over the Anglo-American population through a “propaganda/control/training mechanism” embodied in “British liberal philosophy; this “anti-scientific cult” is disseminated by ideologues like “Alistair Crowley, H.G. Wells and Bertrand Russell through the media of Chatham House” as well as by Henry Kissinger as an “agent of Chatham House” as well as by the Council on Foreign Relations; the politics dictated by London to British agents like Kissinger and Scowcroft controlled the Nixon and Ford Administrations.

For citations, see Boland (fn.7), pp. 6-8. Formulations such as “Fascist disease called Zionism” were common well into the 1990s.

Neue Solidarität from 25 January 1979.

Among other statements they wrote: “The Zionist-British circles, which have produced and propagated the film “Holocaust” and whose representatives in the Federal Republic have now provoked a completely artificial and controlled faux-debate around this film, are today at the point of toppling the world into a holocaust next to which the crimes of the Nazis appear to be a charity function. The Zionist-British policy deliberately risks toppling the world into a nuclear holocaust, and precisely because of this, there is not the slightest difference between the morality of the Zionists and that of the worst Nazis.” Further citations in the book by Fromm/Kernbach (fn.1), p. 131.

Compare Müller/Lorscheid, (footnote 6), pp. 115-116 as well as King, (footnote 2), pp. 38-46.

Above all, outbursts against the ADL belong to the basic vocabulary of internal pronouncements by Larouche: Circles allied with the ADL are the powerbrokers behind the assassinations of Indira and Rajiv Gandhi; the ADL is “one of the leading pro-drug lobby organizations in the world.” Supporters of the ADL are “the lowest scum on this planet” (May 22, 1991); the authors of the murderous attack on Jürgen Ponto are “the British. Those were our enemies. Those were friends of the ADL. Bronfman’s friends” (April 3, 1991); Bronfman and Galinski are “butchers and criminals, enemies of mankind” (September 19, 1990). In 1992, the LO in the USA came out with a special pamphlet with the title “The Ugly Truth about the ADL”, where the ADL was, among other things, denigrated as: “a branch of the British intelligence and secret societies”; “closer to the racist Ku Klux Klan than to Judaism”; “closer to the Medellin cocaine cartel than to any civil rights group” or “at the center of the corruption of our most valuable institutions: the schools, the courts and elected representatives of the people.”

In one place, LaRouche claimed in a “campaign statement” from January 10, 1991, that Israel was heavily involved in the “international drug trade from Medellin to the far East”, even if in addition some legal diamonds and “who knows, perhaps also some used foreskins” were also exported. Israel is characterized by the adoption of “evil as such” (February 10, 1991).

See Armin Pfahl-Traughber, Der antisemitisch-antifreimaurerische Verschwörungsmythos in der Weimarer Republik und dem NS-Staat (The Anti-Semitic-Anti-Freemason Conspiracy Myth in the Weimar Republic and the Nazi State), Wien 1993.

For example, LaRouche in an internal paper, “On Methodology in Intelligence Work”, from September 11, 1990. This variant of “Babylonian Jews” is identical with the “Pantheon of the Mother of Satan, Ishtar and her son, Baal, Beelzebub, etc.” or the type of “oligarchs practicing extortion.”

From the mid-1970s to the end of the decade, the LO maintained relationships with the American right-wing extremist “Liberty Lobby” of Willis Carto. The “Liberty Lobby” is one of the most important and best-financed organizations in the US spectrum of right-wing extremists. With the “Institute for Historical Review” (IHR) founded in 1978, this organization functions as a producer and distributor of revisionist propaganda material. Among other places, Carto and LaRouche met in Wiesbaden in 1977. See King (fn. 2), pp.38-46, Boland (fn.7), pp. 27-28. Since the beginning of the 1980s, the right-extreme publication CODE of Ekkehard Franke-Gricksch more or less regularly prints signed articles and other materials from the LO.

See Beyes-Corleis (fn.3), pp.57-60.

Citation from the internal “Morning Grouping”, from January 18, 1991: “Response to Iraqi hit on Israel: ‘Dancing in the streets in Cairo.’ A well-placed source in Amman, Jordan, reported today on the strategic importance of Iraq having hit Israel last night. The whole Arab world is jubilant. They are dancing in the streets of Cairo and every major city of the Arab world, expressing profound pride in Saddam Hussein.” Larouche in an internal paper of October 13, 1990: There are two sides to the world, the “human beings” who have Iraq on their side, and the “anti-human beings, the devils, the Satanists”, who are against Iraq.

See also among others the Neue Zürcher Zeitung from May 11, 1994, with an in-depth description of the evaluation of documents by the American human rights group, “Middle East Watch”, who came to the conclusion that Iraq displayed a system that was reminiscent of the “Nazi henchmen in the extermination camps.”

For example, an interview with the Iraqi trade minister, Dr. Mohammed Mehdi Salih, in Neue Solidarität, from June 1, 1994.

On Schubailat, see among others the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung from 25 September 1992 and the Neue Zürcher Zeitung from November 12, 1992.

German federal authorities believe that in the interim, Sudan has evolved into an important control center for the operations of the Iranian secret service, and that Egyptian and Tunisian Islamists are being trained in Sudanese camps alongside members of the Algerian FIS, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Hizbollah and the Iranian Pasdaran.

Neue Solidarität, May 12, 1993.

Neue Solidarität, June 30, 1993.

Neue Solidarität, Jaunary 11, 1995

So-called “Dope Buster” groups composed of NOI activists have shown successes, for example through the forced eviction of drug dealers from areas of the city and by the political occupation of the vacuum left by political and bureaucratic neglect. (compare also Neue Zürcher Zeitung from June 1, 1994.)

For a more detailed account, see Mira Boland, Partners in Bigotry. The LaRouche Cult and the Nation of Islam, ADL, Washington, 1994.

Neue Solidarität from March 1, 1995.

Beyes-Corleis (fn.3), pp. 50-51, pp. 165-172, as well as Ralfs-Horeis (fn.3), pp. 9-12, and King (fn.2), p. 299. Public humiliations of those deemed to be “weaklings” were not unusual at conferences or group meetings. See among others Beyes-Corleis (fn.3), p. 117.

Beyes-Corleis (fn.3), p. 48.

Ibid, p. 65, p. 71.

In his “Christmas Message” of December 15, 1990, LaRouche instructed the membership in regards to their incomplete grasp of his “secret of, shall we say, my genius” as follows: And I understand, also, why people have difficulty in understanding it. It’s not, shall we say my fault, that people haven’t understood what I’ve said; but it has to do with the relationship between what goes from the neck up, and what goes from the waist down … I challenge you, for once and for all: really see what it is that I represent.” The perfidiousness of such indoctrination is only visible when one considers that Larouche and his wife Zepp-Larouche, sometimes styled “the symbol of the American civil rights’ movement and the poor” led the life of landed gentry (at least from the mid- to late 1980s) – mostly at the expense of the membership: -- luxurious homes in Leesburg, Virginia and in Germany (including the Schloß Soonruhe in Mengershied/Hunsrück from 1987 to 1990); an armored Mercedes-Benz 500 SEL limousine; and internal estimates for payouts to a self-styled security consultant (there were others also paid) from Southern Virginia came out to around US$1,000,000.

Edit - History - Print - Recent Changes - Search
Page last modified on January 11, 2010, at 04:50 AM