< Conclusions | BEYOND COMMON SENSE
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Autobiography, ibid, page 195 Autobiography, ibid, 211
Autobiography, ibid, page 62 Autobiography, ibid, 109
Page 112-4, (The Power of Reason) LaRouche was not a Trotskyist, although he belonged to the Trotskyist SWP. He
appears to side with Lenin:
“It was Trotsky who abandoned Lenin (with whom he agreed theoretically) in 1903 in order to be with Menshevik majority of
the RSDLP. It was Trotsky who remained in the Menshevik ‘swamp’ for most of the period from 1903 to 1917. Trotsky whom Lenin rightly denounced as a ‘slimy creature’ for blocking organisationally with those with whom he had no principled theoretical conceptions in common! It was Trotsky who in 1923, betrayed his agreement with Lenin’s firm instruction to make no compromise in booting Stalin out of the Soviet leadership. It was the same Ego-trait in Trotsky which caused him to publicly lie in repudiating his own ‘Real Situation in Russia;’ thus he obliterated the last real possibility of building a viable communist international for that entire ensuing period; his Ego defeated his selfconsciousness, on the premise of ‘working within’ the Menshevik centrist swamp of the Stalinized CPSU -as he had adapted to the Menshevik swamp of the 1903-1917 period. The ‘Leninist theory of organisation’ is not actually a product of splitter, Lenin’s example, but of such examples as Trotsky’s schlemihl episodes; it is the cult of impotence exemplified by Trotsky’s ‘tactical’ capitulations to the Mensnevik, Zinoviev-Stalin, and Cannonite (e.g. Zinovievite) centrist majorities of ethnic organisations in which he was situated at thoserespective points of life.” Feuerbach, ibid.
The Trotskyites had become “impotent wretches” and the leadership and overwhelming majority of members had “become street walkers for the CIA’s domestic counterinsurgency operations.” (Feuerbach)
Page 644, page 619, (Dope Inc.)
Page 62, (The Power of Reason.)
(The Power of Reason), the autobiography of LaRouche downplays the importance of this political period. LaRouche is keen to “prove” that it was not a formative period.
The true economics of Lyndon LaRouche have been obscured. Undoubtedly he was a Marxist economist up until the mid 1970s when he was over 50 years of age. Later the great dirigist tradition was discovered. LaRouche claims to have established a successful new system of economic analysis, but his booklet on economics is a general philosophical outline. The real economics is about 4 pages in length. LaRouche would do a great service if he would write a textbook on pure economics, actually defining National System economics, quantifying and developing the ideas of Hamilton, List, Carey and others such as John Raymond, Horace Greeley and Peshine Smith. Page 63, (The Power of Reason.) Page 63, (The Power of Reason.)
The Marxist concept of “extended reproduction” is to LaRouche the most important concept to come to grips with if workers are to transform themselves and then the world. This was his big complaint against the Marxist Left. It was only he who had understood the concept of “extended reproduction. “
“As we outlined in ‘Beyond Psychoanalysis’, and elsewhere, socialist transformation is based on the self organisation of a majority of the political working class in agreement with a specific notion of world economy, ‘expanded socialist reproduction.’ As we indicated the nature of the case in our “In Defence of Rosa Luxemburg” none of the formerly hegemonic socialist organised tendencies -e.g., socialdemocratic, ‘Stalinist,’ ‘Trotskyism,’ ‘Maoist,’ -had or even sought a conceptual grasp of actual ‘expanded reproduction.’ The mere toleration of the ‘economic writings’ of such incompetents as Rudolf Hilferding, Otto Bauer, Nikolai Bukharin, Ernest Mandel, Paul Sweezey, et al. as even within the bounds of actual Marxian economic theory, is itself indicative of the intellectual bankruptcy of the socialist organisations and of academic circles which treat such constipated literature as serious theorising. “
“Extended socialist reproduction is the fundamental, absolutely distinguishing premise of socialist society, the selfstyled socialist tendencies which shared Left domination of the workers’ movement prior to 1968 do indeed represent leaders without a conception of a goal, lacking even the ability to select the direction in what the undefined goal might be encountered. .. (Emphasis in the original)
“It is not sufficient merely to prescribe that the socialist movement must now master that notion of ‘expanded reproduction.’ The concept to be communicated cannot be understood in terms of heretofore ordinary forms of mental behaviour. To demand clarity on ‘expanded reproduction’ from the old varieties of ‘socialist’ organisation is like buying a mule for a stud-service.
LaRouche’s 1973 article on Feuerbach in The Campaigner.
14 Page 79, (The Power of Reason.)
15 There were certain:
“ugly ideological difficulties to be overcome as a precondition for organising the US working-class forces en-mass. As the result of a self-con-scious reflection on such experience, the Labor Committee tendency was forced to begin pushing the bounds of applied psychology beyond the scope of existing conceptions of psychology on certain ‘fronts.’ The tendency was compelled, like Marx, to locate the individual cadre’s personal resources as a socialist organiser in creative qualities of mind which extant psychology generally did not imagine to exist in that form.” (Feuerbach ibid.)
16 Page 3-4, (Beyond Psychoanalysis.)
17 Page 52, (Beyond Psychoanalysis) by Lyn Marcus (aka Lyndon LaRouche) reads as follows:
“The limited but nonetheless unequivocal advances we have effected during the past months substantiate the conviction that our plunge a few steps beyond psychoanalysis in this respect contributes to saving the human race from the threatened new fascist holocaust. “
18 Page 157, (The Power of Reason.)
19 Page 160, (The Power of Reason.)
20 Page 140-2, (The Power of Reason.)
21 Page 4, (Beyond Psychoanalysis.) From LaRouche’s article on Feuerbach for the Campaigner, December 1973: “our qualitative contribution to psychoanalysis as such is essentially located in our establishment of a fundamental theory of mind. “
23 (The Case of Ludwig Feuerbach), Campaigner December 1973 Part 1
24 Page 4, (Beyond Psychoanalysis.)
25 Page 41, (The SexualImpotence of the Puerto Rican Socialist Party.)
26 The entire passage is as follows:
“To accomplish our purpose -to make the truth clear to the readers throughout Latin America (especially)- we organise our presentations in the following main respects. Firstly, we shaff identify the scientific basis for our analytical method at some length; we shall define sexual impotence and the general cause for this mental disease in bourgeois ideology and bourgeois family relations. Then, we shall document the impotence of the PSP as an organisation. Throughout, we shaff state the psychological truth which every Latin can recognise in his own private thoughts as the essence of “Machismo” as sexual impotence. In that setting we shall show the direct causal connections between this impotence and the extension of it into the domain of so-caffed left politics. “
“Most important, since we are revolutionaries, not ‘psychoanalytical’ commentators, offering the first step toward relief to the would be revolutionaries who refuse to tolerate another wretched night of impotence-ridded despair. “
16. 17.WHAT IS MALE IMPOTENCE
“The immediate objection of the hysterical Latin reader to our entire approach here will be, inevitably. This is not objective politics! We are serious revolutionaries, who have no time to waste in anything b.ut the objective struggle!
There are two immediate replies to that pathological objection. Firstly, as we shall demonstrate, the insistence on ‘objective politics’ is itself the infallible symptom of sexual and political impotence... what possible objective reason could permit any working class person or farmer to tolerate the capitalist system another hour? If we are to have food, we must seize the means of production instantly, that we may immediately begin growing today the expanded production of food for tomorrows survival. There is no objective alternative! Why, then, is it not the case that the world working class is not presently engaged in capitalist revolution? Why will the capitalist system still exist tomorrow moming, when every working person and farmer has the most immediate and fundamental motive to be part of an overwhelming force obliterating capitalism today?”
“The answer, dear comrade, lies in the subjective realm! What is this seff-defeating, seff-destroying flaw seizing the minds of proletarians which prevents them from immediate total mobifisation for socialist revolution? What are the chains of illusion which imprison them to capitalism with a force even greater than that of bombs and bayonet? What is this inner terror obviously so much more powerful a force of enslavement than the terror of external physical destructive force? Objective politics is therefore first of aff fundamentally a subjective question. To ignore so obvious a fact is itself a kind of hysterical blindness, is evidence of sexual impotence rampant in political life.” (Page 35, “Sexual Impotence, “ ibid)
Those who fail to see all this fail to interpret Marx and Lenin properly:
“Here, dear comrade reader, you again display your impotence,
your impotent reading of Hegel, Feuerbach, and Marx...your impotent view of the potent Lenin. “ (ibid, page 35)
The aim is to strip away his (or her illusions), to eliminate the fantasies so that the mind can be concentrated on waging the class war battle, to overthrow the capitalist system. The prime target is the would-be male revolutionaries sexual fantasies:
“Night after intervening night, the Macho beds his whore-wife with an inner sense of bloody violence and self-degradation. In the morning, this miserable existentialist arises from the bed of disgust and self-disgust. He looks in disgust at the sleeping figure of the woman with whom he has shared self-degradation, and trudges, bearing an awful load of anomie, back to the house where he lives with his madonnawife and her children. He needs a drink so desperately, to seem to wash the wretched taste from his mouth, but the drink merely begins the cycle of the new day’s recurring nightmare. Tonight, he wifl sleep beside his madonna-wife, after an evening of being patron to her children, and Friday night the homosexual, he wifl be back with his whore-wife again. “
Then follows directions to the psychosexual revolutionary doctors: “Teff the macho his type is often a schizoid, make this clear to him, show him his miserable childhood swarming with the sadistic mother and sibling and other surrogate mothers, and his self-consciousness wifl acknowledge all this to be the truth of the bloody, tiring matador of an Ego in the bullring below...He wiff confess more. His selfconsciousness wifl confess more. He has never had a self-conscious sexual relation with an actual woman. When he is in bed with women, his sexual performance is under the control of a fantasy..Probe his unconscious processes more deeply, bringing up for him what he has barely concealed from himself for so long, and his self consciousness wifl know that all these women, his madonna-wife and his whore-wives, are surrogates for his possessive, sadistic mother.“
“The immediate target is the “revolutionary offeeling” which is found in the “wretched comprador petit-bourgeois mentality of the PSP leadership, “ which is “in no way more pathetically displayed than in its ritual worshipping at the cult of ‘Island Independence,’” “the purely religious idea of independence.”
Given LaRouche’s later championing of the nation state, it is possible that it was the PSP that was in fact right, and LaRouche that was wrong. LaRouche would now defend those groups genuinely fighting for national sovereignty. Unless of course you’re in the Australian organisation and object to being run from America!
The mind games developed by LaRouche during his Marxist days are necessary to continue the struggle, necessary as his forces march to “world power.” It is all part of the revolutionary struggle:
“The dialectical method is immediately, empirically, a change in the state of mind, in which control by ‘sincerity offeeling’ is ended, and in which the self-conscious of the individual comprehends the selfconsciousness of others intemaffY in a kind of internal dialogue between the ‘f’ and the ‘Thou’... The dialectician is the person who has overcome
sexual impotence... The’ wifl of the worker must become the wifl to do
that which is in the historic interest of the world’s working class as a whole; nothing else. If the workers passionately cling to any contrary sentiment of imaginary self-interest, that sentiment must be seized upon and ripped out of them. No human being has the right to believe or ‘feel’ anything except that which impels him to act in the historic interest of the world’s working class as a whole .... This does not deprive him or her of individual rights to act for the human race is to actively express a certain quality of self as capacity, as developed individual human powers.
The political working class properly demands that each ‘of its members enjoys those individual rights, including leisure and material consumption which are essential to the individual to develop his or her individual human powers to the ‘level’ corresponding to what the individual must do for the working class as a whole. The individual who fights ruthlessly for his family’s consumption, their education, their leisure, to such historic ends, is not being ‘greedy, , but is being class-conscious. Yet this very fact only more forcefuffy demonstrates that there is no rational basis for tolerating any beliefs of ‘feeling’ in anyone which would impel that person to act contrary to the historic interests of the political class as a whole. There exists no (heteronomic) individual, local, or ‘national’ self-interest which is to be tolerated (as ‘legitimate J if it conflicts in the least with the historic interests of the worldwide working class as a whole.
To the extent that anyone is impeffed by false belief or simple consciousness of irrational ‘feeling’ to the belief contrary, that person’s beliefs and ‘feelings’ must be ripped out and replaced with appropriate human beliefs and ‘feelings.’ To do just that is an act of potent loving; to avoid that, to fail to undertake just that task, is an act of sexual and social impotency.” ‘You don’t understand my wife. She’s a devout Catholic, like her mother. ‘
The individual must break with his mother fantasies, before he can become a true revolutionary:
“There are three degrees of relative freedom from sexual and political impotence, respectively associated with the names of Hegel, Feuerbach, and Marx” and each has his own way of “Humanising” people for the political process although Feuerbach is the lesser because of “his relative impotence.”” (Sexual Impotence.) ibid, page 47
“No women has a right to drag her husband-or herse/_ out of an active socialist political life, for any reason. Any man who permits himself to submit to such ‘obligations to my wife’ is a pathetic degraded spectacle, a viTtual Judas to the human race; any women who succeeds in such a counter revolutionary act is not only a counter revolutionary, but a vicious oppressor of her children...” (Sexual Impotence.) ibid, page 59
The bourgeois world is essentially a Mother dominated vision: “Bourgeois life for the worker is essentially a family centred life. The centre of the worker’s life is the mother’s or wife-mother’s home...Organised religion is the super sensuous essence of the universal form of bourgeoisie mother’s magic-mother’s home remedies, mother wisdom, ‘old wives’ remedies. Religion is for and by mothers, who conspire at religion with pseudo-men (priests) and impose the Mother Church upon the household.” (Sexual Impotence.) ibid page 59
“To recapitulate this essential point. The formal essence of bourgeois ideology is the mother’s belief in the unreality of the ‘outer world.’ The outer world is unreal precisely because the victim of capitalist ideology denies the fact that the material conditions of life are totally the wilful creation of human practice and can be hanged according to the wilful change of human practice. Bourgeois ideology sees the outer world as essentially given, as something to be propitiated, not to be changed. The recurring origin of this ideology is the bourgeois family, notably the infantilism of sadistic mother-possession of the infant and child, and the degradation of woman, emotionally and intellectually, into the appropriateness to become bourgeois mothers and wives. The most notable dynamic feature of the interconnection between family and ideology is the separation between family life (real) and the outer world (the alien realm for mother’s propitiatory magic-religion), such that the individual imagines himself without power over the wilful determination of the outer world as a whole.” (Sexual Impotence.) ibid page 60.
27. 28. 29. 30.
Page 62, (Sexual Impotence.) ibid. Page 62, (Sexual Impotence.) ibid. Page 63, (Sexual Impotence.) ibid. (Beyond Psychoanalysis) by L. Marcus (aka Lyndon LaRouche), The Campaigner, Volume 6, Nos. 3-4, September/October 1973) Page 3, (Beyond Psychoanalysis) ibid. (Draft Program) ibid. LaRouche was to claim in his 1986 autobiography (page 121) that he opposed those wanting to develop an “ecology movement. “ Page 52, (Beyond Psychoanalysis.) (The Case of Ludwig Feuerbach) by Lyn Marcus (aka Lyndon LaRouche) The Campaigner, December 1973. (The US Labor Party Campaign) Campaigner, December 1973, page
35. 4. 36.
The infantile Ego which emasculates organisers has been located: “In the extreme, one can say with approximate accuracy that the more pro-capitalist.
The infantile Ego which emasculates organisers has been located: “In or more herenomic worker is decidedly characterised by infantile Ego outlooks: sensual banality, an obsessive notion of ‘mine,’ hostility to ‘strangers, ‘and generally, a strong belief in ‘local control. ‘
The socialist revolutionary is, by contrast, associated with the intellectual and moral qualities of self consciousness: a scientific interest in life and technology, concern for the general progress of humanity, seeking to determine what to do to make his life-activity more useful to the general human interest, a strong moral commitment to serious self-education and general development. ..
The first process is to provoke an “agony of selfconsciousness, “... “an enraged response is the most positive symptom of a conscience aroused,” (Campaigner, December 1973)
The quotes are from Imperialism: The Final Stage of Bolshevism, L. H. LaRouche, New Benjamin Franklin House, New York, March 1984. Longer quotes are from, page 67-8, (Power of Reason.) Page 93, (The Science of Christian Economy.) Schiller Institute, Washington DC, 1991. All quotes from Michels are from R. Michels, (Political Patties,) Free
Press New York, 1962.
Page 23, Max Weber, (On Charisma and Institution Building,) University of Chicago Press.
Page 5, R. J. Lifton, (Thought Reform and The Psychology of Totalism, A study of Brainwashing in China,) Victor Gollcanz, 1962.
Robert Jay Lifton has studied the “brainwashing” techniques applied to victims of the Chinese Communists. Lifton held a psychiatry professorship at Yale University. He has spent time studying the psychological patterns of Japanese youth as well as the psychological effects of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima. Lifton is denounced by LaRouche who points to Lifton’s alleged participation in the MK-Ultra program. This may well be so, this author has no way of knowing, but without doubt, Lifton’s observations are relevant to the LaRouche movement.
Page 420, Lifton, ibid. Page
422, Lifton, ibid. Page 422,
Lifton, ibid. Page 424, Lifton, ibid. Page 426, Lifton, ibid.
Page 426, Lifton, ibid.
Page 428, Lifton, ibid.
Page 429, Lifton, ibid.
Page 430, Lifton, ibid.
(Page 5, comments in (Sovereign Australia, part 2. A Programme to Save our Nation.) Official publication of Citizens Electoral Councils of Australia Group
Page 117-8, (The Power of Reason.)