LAROUCHE ADDRESSES CALIFORNIA SUPPORTERS VIA SATELLITE
LIVE WEBCAST WITH SIMULTANEOUS SPANISH TRANSLATION


The following is the transcript of Mr. LaRouche's remarks to a Los Angeles campaign Town Meeting, via satelite, on Saturday, December, 11th.


LYNDON LAROUCHE: Thank you. I want you to keep in mind, as I present a case to you today, keep in mind something I discussed with Harley Schlanger earlier today: the implications of a plan by someone to have the San Fernando Valley escape from Los Angeles. That is symptomatic of a deep problem within the U.S. society, and I shall situate that problem, and what I propose we should do about it, in this report.

So I'll get back to that at a specific point, and you'll see what I'm leading to.

Now, we are presently in the worst crisis in the Twentieth Century. Not only do we have a disintegration of the present world financial system, and I'll describe that as well; but, we are also in what has heated up very rapidly recently as a potential military conflict, not exactly like World War II or even exactly like a nuclear version of World War II. But, something much more chaotic, but nonetheless, in the final analysis, just as destructive.

I refer, of course, inclusively to the reports of the statements by Boris Yeltsin, the President of Russia, during his visit to China, and the comments on Yeltsin's statement, both by Chinese leaders and spokesmen, Russians as well, and also {the reactions of terror which these developments have provoked on the continent of western Europe, and which, despite the attempt to cover over the issue, has evoked a sense, a shudder of fear and awe in large portions of the U.S. population itself.}

The key to understanding our problem, is the fact that 30 percent approximately of the eligible voters, the citizens who would be eligible to vote in the United States, are controlling most state, local, and national elections. This group is controlling the parties, both in the Republican Party and in the Democratic Party in particular.

Most of the constituencies that used to be considered the Roosevelt base of the Democratic Party, are being squeezed out: African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, local labor leaders and their constituents, senior citizens in large numbers, and farmers and so on.

{So the majority of the American people, which represent largely the lower 80 percent of family income brackets, are being squeezed out of politics, or any real influence in politics, especially at the top, and replaced by a dominant role controlled from Wall Street of influence which is exerted largely through those or parts of the population whose family incomes occupy the top 20 percent of the population.} So therefore, we are headed away from {the idea of a republic with a representative government, and into instead the kind of oligarchical society which horrified the founders of the United States in the United Kingdom (that is, Great Britain), during the Eighteenth Century and later.

{Now, the only way we're going to fix the problems which I will relate to you today, is to create a set of coalitions among those who represent the lower 80 percent of family income brackets in the United States.} Our objective should be {to take over} the Democratic Party during the year 2000, to determine who the Democratic Party's leading candidates shall be, and a greater number of such candidates, and also, hopefully, to inlfuence the Republican side in a similar manner. Perhaps not as effectively, but at least to a similar degree.

By doing that, and bringing the control over parties and elections back to organized constituencies of the American people, especially the lower 80 percent of family income brackets, we can revive the kind of response to crisis which many of us remember, either directly or through--by reputation, from Franklin Roosevelt, and what President Franklin Roosevelt did in response to the great crisis of the Great Depression of the 1930s, and the last war.

And we should remember also, with affection, that despite the premature death of Franklin Roosevelt, some at least of his important contributions to the postwar period, were carried out and continued through the 1950s, especially through to 1958, and even until after the death of John F. Kennedy.

{Our objective should be to bring back into government a leadership which has the same view in general, of the responsibility of the government of our republic, to meet the demands of the General Welfare for ourselves and our coming generations: that same outlook which characterized the Roosevelt Administration.}

We will only get that in the way that Roosevelt got it. Roosevelt spoke, when he was running for his first Presidential election, he spoke of "the Forgotten Man.'' Today, approximately 80 percent of the U.S. population, citizens who are eligible to vote, are being treated by the leadership of the parties, by the mass media and so forth, as again the Forgotten Man.

The solution to all problems, the real solution to all problems, is to bring the Forgotten Man of today, back into control of the Democratic Party, and do it quickly, {now.} That means combining the experience of the Civil Rights movement under such brilliant leaders as Martin Luther King--and that's a very important part of the American experience. Remember, slavery in this country dates from early on in colonial times. {And the struggle for civil rights on behalf of African-Americans, is the most important lesson in our national history.}

Some civil rights leaders today, those who were either associated with Martin Luther King, or who carried on his tradition as younger people, represent the continuity of that struggle, and the lessons of that struggle. If we can combine the experience of African-Americans, with the aspirations of the more exuberant Hispanic-American constituency now, and if we can bring the most viable sections of the labor movement constituencies, and senior citizens and farmers, and others who are simply concerned Americans, into a coalition {based on the experience of the lessons of civil rights,} we will have, in government, the selection of people who are qualified to deal with these problems.

Now, on alternatives, let me speak frankly. It's obvious to most of you, that the worst, but most notorious dummy in America, Texas Gov. George W. Bush, Jr., has been selected as their favorite dummy by a Wall Street Gang of ventriloquists. And they are spreading the word that George W. Bush, the best-known dummy in America, is about to become President.

On the Democratic side, we have the so-called leadership of Vice President Gore, a fading leadership of an unelectable man, who is known for his thuggishness and his bad policies, and his knifing of his President, Bill Clinton, in the back repeatedly on crucial issues of international and domestic policy.

George W. Bush is not capable of thinking, and Al Gore is not willing to think. {How could anyone imagine electing this pair of bozos, one of these pair of bozos, to become the next President of the United States, under the conditions of the grave global financial economic and strategic crisis we face in the coming period?} How could we have descended so low, that we no longer care what kind of rubbish we choose to put in the Office of the U.S. President, one of the most powerful and important positions in the world as a whole today?

What kind of stupidity, and folly, and recklessness, would allow us to consent to such a travesty, such a betrayal of our nation, and its people?

[Yet it goes back much to ?] Wall Street. The upper 20 percent of the income brackets, led by Wall Street, orchestrated by Wall Street and by a Wall Street-controlled mass media, are controlling U.S. politics. {These fellas don't want a President who can think! They want a bozo like Al Gore, or George W. Bush, someone who will do as they tell him. They will do the thinking: the Wall Street crowd, the bankers and lawyers of Wall Street.}

They will be supported by an hysterical middle class, the upper 20 percent of the income brackets, who are concerned about one thing: {their money, their ill-gotten gains, and who are willing to sacrifice the health care, the education, and the general welfare of the rest of the population, the lower 80 percent, in order to protect what they consider "my money.''}

And so these are the dupes, like the Brown Shirts under Hitler's -- in Hitler's days, who are prepared to go to whatever means they think necessary {to make sure that 80 percent of the American population doesn't vote for anything which interferes with what the upper 20 percent, or part of it, thinks is "my money.''} And Wall Street controls them, as you can see in the news media every day.

{So, Wall Street WANTS dummies, wants a dummy like George Bush; wants a wretch, an ambitious wretch like Al Gore, as their preferred choices for the next President of the United States.} The plan, of course, is to have Gore take the Democratic nomination, by hook or by crook, especially crook, if possible, which would ensure the ability to elect the biggest dummy, George W. Bush, as the next President. And then the Wall Street crowd, backed up by an hysterical type, as we see among the Stone Age Republicans in the Congress and some Democrats, too, would run the country as they choose. That's the danger. These men are not only {greedy} people, but they're very foolish people. These are the people who want us to get into major wars in Asia and elsewhere. These are the people who {don't care} what happens to the country, as long as their money, their gambling on Wall Street and elsewhere, and in London, is protected.

{There lies the danger.} There lies the importance of having a true Republic, in which the majority of the citizens, suitably informed and educated, and doing some serious thinking, actually control the selection of the politicians who make policy.

{Therefore, the crucial thing that must be done -- OTHERWISE, NOTHING ELSE IS LIKELY TO WORK -- is we must build a mass constituency from among the 80 percent of the lower-income brackets of this nation, the so-called Forgotten Men and Women of this period.} We must do this by bringing together African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, concerned representatives of labor and farmers, and so forth, and as well as senior citizens, and bring them into a {grand constituency} of the otherwise forgotten men and women, who will march into the polls, no matter what the mass media tell them to do, and take over politics in this country again, and select the kind of thinking leaders which they need to deal with what are, in fact, manageable crises coming up fast ahead.

That's the general program which I represent.

Now, as part of this process, what I have to do, is to induce you, and people like you to think. You know, when you consider yourself a person in the lower 80 percent of the family income brackets, and when you believe, effectively and sincerely -- and justly -- that you are being frozen out of politics, that you are not allowed to independently make up your own mind about what's good for the country, and to demand the kind of dialogue that enables you to decide competently what is good for the country, then you sit back and say "I'm not -- I have no sense in my thinking, I have no power. All I have is the ability to choose among one or other of these {bozos} which the Wall Street Gang offers to me. When I go to the press, the press says `Well, here's a list of the issues.' Where do you stand on these issues: Issue Number One, Issue Number Two, Issue Number Three. Are you for or against or neutral on these issues?'|'' You are allowed to choose what other people serve you as the alternatives. {You're not permitted to intervene, to tell the press or the politicians, or the leading parties, what they should be talking about, what they should be thinking about.} Therefore, you sit back and say "There's not much I can do about this. I simply have the power to make a choice among one of the offerings which these cooks are putting on the table. So what's the sense of my thinking? I'll go sit in front of my television set, and try to forget it all, and hope that everything works out, despite the fact that I'm not able to do anything to change it.'' Now, once you get the idea, you citizens--and some of you are, of course, thinking citizens. But let's speak about the generality of the 80 percent, the lower 80 percent of the family income brackets. How do you get them to think? How do you get them to vote intelligently, to intervene intelligently in the national process of making policy?

You have to give them a sense that they have some power, that they're not simply the slaves of the political machine run by Wall Street and dominated by the upper 20 percent of income brackets. How do you do that? Well, you have to build alliances. You have to build political constituencies, which have power.

Now let's look again at this San Fernando Valley issue. What percentile of the population of Greater Los Angeles, represents African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, labor, senior citizens, and so on? Isn't that the dominant population? How can somebody else say that they are the majority, that they represent the majority opinion, or public opinion?

Why does San Fernando Valley want to secede from Los Angeles? Because they don't want to pay for Los Angeles. They want to have their own niche, where the upper 20 percent of income brackets controls politics from the colonial capital, San Fernando Valley, while the poor of Los Angeles are led into some kind of horror show: down, down, down.

{But people in the Los Angeles area are the majority. They are the citizens. If they get together, they have the power to change things. The same thing is true across the country.}

Now the Democratic National Committee, typified by the Democratic Leadership Council around Al Fromm, people like that don't want that. They don't want that any more than that little private dictatorship called the Republican Party. The mass media, which is owned by Wall Street, or foreign interests in London which are about the same thing: this mass media wants a controlled situation. {They have the same impulse that you see in the effort of Fernando Valley, San Fernando Valley, to secede from Los Angeles. There's the problem.}

So thus, what we have to do, is {flank} the situation in the party. There are good people in the party leadership, but they are a little bit cowardly when it comes to taking on the bozos, bozos liike Al Gore, or bozos like the machine behind George W. Bush. So they're frightened.

{We have to create the majority, by assembling it, to turn the party back to the legacy of Roosevelt.} Not everything Franklin Roosevelt said or did was right. He made a lot of mistakes. But at least he had a commitment to the foundation of our Federal Constitution: the Preamble, which includes the emphasis is "to provide and promote the General Welfare, and secure those blessing of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity''--to the generations that come after us. That's the fundamental principle of a republican policy, that is, in the sense of a modern republic as opposed to oligarchy.

{Roosevelt took the right side on that fundamental constitutional issue.} And he fought for the right side. He made compromises, he made mistakes, and so forth. So what? But he was on the right side. His mistakes were made largely on the right side of the political ledger.

And it was the Roosevelt Generation, of which, in a sense, I'm a part; that is, my adolescence was during the Depression. It was the Roosevelt Generation which gave us the legacy which, in the 1950s and 1960s, enabled the Civil Rights movement to change this country in the way that Abraham Lincoln explicitly had intended. That generation is the true Golden Generation, with all its faults. And the best things that were done in this century, apart from a few good things done by Harding and a few others: this is what made our country able to survive this horrible Century of Crisis.

So, what we have to do, is build an alliance, which is based on the principle of the General Welfare as the Constitituion defines it in the Preamble; as Franklin Roosevelt--mistakes or whatever--also understood that principle, as opposed to the Supreme Court and Wall Street of that time. We have to revive that.

My job is to catalyze you into bringing together African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans, labor, senior citizens and other relevant groups, farmers, and so forth, bring that together as a majority coalition, to march in to the Democratic Party, and insofar as possible, the Republican Party: to take politics back for the people, for the cause of the General Welfare.

My specific job is two, has two parts. One, I know what has to be done. I'm an expert in this area, and all the others who are running as competition or against me, are totally incompetent in dealing with this financial crisis.

Yes, I hope to be able to influence and advise President Clinton to do what he must do as this crisis sharpens in the period ahead. And I will do everything, always, always, if we have a viable President, to make that President as effective a President as possible, whatever

his shortcomings or mistakes or whatever my disagreements with him, as I have done with Clinton. That we need a President in the year 2001, who is competent to address and solve these problems, and in the sense, as we recall, Franklin Roosevelt taking office in March of 1933. I'm qualified. {No other visible candidate on the horizon--some of them are not bad people, some of them are qualified for some things--no other candidate visible in the United States at this time, actual candidate or prospective candidate, is presently competent to deal with the fundamental issues of economic and strategic policy issues coming up now. None.}

Secondly, more important than that, though that role by me is important (I'm an older person, I'm not going to be around forever), my job is to make that turn: to lead in making that change in U.S. politics. My other job, probably equally important--more important for the long run--{is to get you to think.} Not to limit yourself to so-called bite-size opinions, largely copied from the mass media or a few protest movements. But to actually think.

{That means to think as if you could imagine yourself as being the President of the United States, or a leader in the Congressional faction, faced with the problems, the deadly problems, which face the United States and the world today. Can you think through what those problems are, and think through what the solutions or the direction of choice of solutions ought to be? That's what I mean by a thinking person.}

Do you know something about the history of the United States and the world? Do you know something about the history of modern European civilization? Do you know about the cultural issue, which are defined in Asia, Europe, Africa, the Americas? Can you think in those terms? Can you think in terms of what might be possible?

Now you might not know the answers, but at least you can think about the questions, and you could discuss the questions and the answers with people who should know some of the answers and questions.

That you as a citizen, whether you're qualified to be President or Senator or not, you can participate and must participate effectively in shaping the way politicians think. You must force the politicians not to give you a bite-sized answer on a proposition. You must force those politicians, to engage with you in a process of thinking in which you are an active, thinking person.

Now, you're not going to do much thinking, if you think that you, as a citizen, have no power. You say "What's the sense of my thinking? I'm not allowed to choose anything. I can only select from that list of candidates, that list of so-called `hot topics' or issues, as the mass media calls them. I can't think of anything. I'm going to sit in front of my television set, or sit with my family and my children, and try to forget all this, and enjoy living as much as I can. I don't feel like thinking. Why should I think? Who's going to listen to me?''

So therefore, to become a thinking citizen, you require two things. You have to be stubborn, like me. I don't care if I was a minority of one, I'd still think. It's my nature. Other people tend to get discouraged, for some, moral, practical, family, and related issues. But they're capable of thinking, every person is capable of thinking. If you haven't done it recently, try it, it's fun.

But what you need, as a group of people, as constituency, {is a sense of power.} If you have no hands and no tools, how can you do anything? You become discouraged, you become pessimistic, you withdraw. You let {THEM} run the country. You watch. You protest a bit, but you watch. You don't think -- (inaudible) -- give you choices, the options that are presented to you.

However, turn around. Create a majority that represents the hard core of 80 percent of the lower-income brackets of this nation. Now you represent some power. And {suddenly,} you find the confidence and the impulse to do some very serious thinking, and to think of joint actions to get the politicians to pay attention to what you're thinking. Then you become a true citizen, a thinking citizen.

And that's what my job is, is to help you become empowered, thinking citizens, and to lead in the process by which you -- not me, but you -- take power back, as it's supposed to be in a republic. Whereas, on the other side, the people who are faced with a crisis, like the big financial interests typified by our own Wall Street layers and bankers' gang, or typified by those people who are corrupted by the fact that they have an advantage of being in the upper 20 percent of family income brackets, and therefore are determined to maintain their advantage, no matter what it means in terms of accelerated death rates among senior citizens, accelerated death rates among the poor, accelerated disease, accelerated suffering, accelerated violence in our school, and so forth and so on.

That's the issue. And that's what my job is, is to give you that kind of leadership, and above all, to get you to see clearly, as I do, that if we can bring these constituencies--African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans, labor, farmer, senior citizens, at least the majority of them--together as a {conscious advocacy constituency,} to take over the Democratic Party from below, to take over as much as possible the Republican Party from below; to re-establish the Constitution in our government; to clean up the Federal Court system; to clean out the scoundrels in the permanent bureaucracy of the Executive Branch; to clean up the horror shows we all see and most are afraid to touch. That's our job. And that's what I'd like to talk about with you, right now.

Thank you. (Applause.)


LaRouche Webcast LA Town Meeting
Questions & Answers
Dec. 11, 1999

{{Q:}} Hello, Mr. LaRouche. My name is Larry Zymon. I have one question: How much money is it going to cost to build your coalition to take over government?

{{Lyndon LaRouche:}} Well, the kind of politics that our opposition represents in the Democratic and Republican party, rely upon money the way Al Gore did. Look, Al Gore raised a lot of money, but he spent most of his money on hiring people to raise the money. And he went almost bankrupt, and he fled back to Tennessee, and I think he's crawling up in the hills there someplace; he's not much seen around Washington these days. And he's losing.

You have the case of George W. Bush, the most incompetent character, one of the screwiest I've seen, a real dummy, and he's got over--what?--$50 million or more money he's raised.

What good does that do? It buys people. It buys advertising. It's trying to buy the opinion, and manage the opinion of the public, and buy off a few people here and there.

So, we can do a lot more with a lot less. You know, we take $5 to $10 million for a campaign behind me--and we're up in the first, between $1 and $2 million so far--we can do more, if we have mass organizing of the type I described, we can do more with less money than all the other leading politicians, candidates combined can do with all the money they have.

So, we don't need a great amount of money. I find--for example, what we're doing in terms of the getting on the ballot in various states: This is being done by volunteers. It's not being done by paid people--people who are out there {paid} to get signatures. These are volunteers.

So, if you have the voluntary effort, political effort, of people who are seeking representation; if you have a mass movement--which is sitting there ready for us to organize it, because nobody else {wants} a mass movement-- The upper 20 percent of the income brackets {don't want a mass movement} in this country. That's what they're afraid of. Al Gore doesn't want a mass movement; George W. Bush doesn't want a mass movement.

I want a mass movement. And if you agree with me, that we're going to build a mass movement by bringing constituencies together, and giving people a sense not just of what I am, but a sense of the power that they represent--if they get together around these kinds of issues, we don't {need} a lot of money, because we have something more valuable than money: We have the efforts of masses of people, who will go out there and fight for their own interests.

That's what I think. So I say, you're talking about $5 million to $10 million, maximum, all the way into August of this coming year. That's big. That would be enough to win, on the basis I've just described.

{{Q:}} Thank you.

{{Harley Schlanger:}} Next. Go ahead.

{{Q:}} Hello, Lyn.

{{Lyndon LaRouche:}} Hello.

{{Q:}} This is George Hanna. You remember me?

{{Lyndon LaRouche:}} Yes, yes.

{{Q:}} First, my first question is, what do think, that everybody should line up, come to the screen, and shake hands with you?

{{Lyndon LaRouche:}} In a sense--well, do something more effective: Shake hands with the person next to you, and get some cross-constituency organizing going.

{{Q:}} You hear that, everybody? [Applause]

{{Lyndon LaRouche:}} If you can take--I imagine we have in the audience a typical Los Angeles, lower 80 percent, largely, audience, huh? We have African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans, people who represent labor, senior citizens, and so forth. Farmers, also; I think there are a few farmers still living in California. That if you can reach around and shake hands with each of these constituents, one with the other, and say, "We represent the majority; we're going to march to power," then you've shaken hands with me, because that's what I want.

{{Q:}} Wow, okay. Thank you. My main question now is: I've been on the Central Committee of the Orange County [Democratic Party] for the last eight, almost eight years, almost nine years. And we broke through the barriers that they had around the LaRouche people. And, however, you find that somebody wants to talk about the homosexual rights, somebody wants to talk about [indistinct], destruction of our nation and the world, and you get all the time, when one of the scum wants to say to you, "Thanks," then they say, "This is not a statement," and they won't let you talk!

Wednesday, we had a meeting at the--for the 67th Assembly District, and I tried to urge all these people, please to send somebody to come and hear what you have to say. And everybody has something to do, everybody is busy. And I raised hell, I said, "I'm not going to run again." And they said, "Why?" I said, "Because you people are {disgusting."} And the first thing I--the response I got, is: "It's not {you} that we are ignoring, it's the {ideas.}" I said, "Hey, listen, people. I'm not here to boost myself like every one of you here. I want to boost the {ideas} of Lyndon LaRouche."

But, you look at these people: They don't think; like you said, they don't think. What are we going to do with those people? Keep hammering at them, right?

{{Lyndon LaRouche:}} That, in part. But let me just do this, because this kind of leads into something.

As Harley mentioned, we have the Democratic National Committee over a barrel. It's fun. What happened is--the story's out there, I won't need to repeat it here--but just the essential of the point, is that, on August 16th of this year, John Keeney, Jr., who is the son of a notorious racist, heading up the permanent bureaucracy of the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, made a proposal to nullify--in court, a proposal to nullify the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Now, that action is explicitly racist. A small group of people in the Democratic National Committee, who had hired Keeney, a known racist, to represent them, who {did} this--did it behind the back of most of the people in the Democratic National Committee, who were shocked and disbelieving when they first heard about it: They couldn't believe that the Democratic National Committee bureaucracy would hire an attorney who would propose to nullify th e Voting Rights of 1965.

But then it became clear. Now, what happened is, the Democratic National Committee, rather than running and correcting its error, began spreading lies to say this was not true. But unfortunately for them, the court transcript from August 16th of this year, and also from November 1st of this year, shows that the Democratic National Committee were putting out saying that {I'm} misleading, are liars.

Now, many people in the Democratic Party, just as in 1964, when Walter Mondale played a key role in heaving Fannie Lou Hamer out of the Democratic Convention--and Mondale says, "Well, I'm not a racist, but I have to get along with the racists we have in certain parts of the Democratic Party."

So, then the Voters' Rights Act was passed against that. It was also passed against the Texas precedent, where they called the Democratic Party a "private club," and used the name "private club" as a club against African-Americans in the state of Texas and elsewhere, where there were certain things done--these various kinds of manipulations.

So, it was illegal. They lied. Now, we {had} them; we had them over a barrel: The Democratic National Committee is lying--from the top!--even though the head of the Democratic National Committee now, the new chairman, is {not} a racist. But, he's "going along, to get along," the same way that labor, a lot of labor, "went along to get along" on endorsement of Al Gore--who's an anti-labor candidate if you ever saw one, more even, as much so as George W. Bush. At least, Al Gore {knows} he's anti-labor; George Bush is too {dumb} to know he's anti-labor.

Now, we've got them, because the fact is, that we have the stain of racism against both those who are racist outrightly--like the backers of Al Gore in the Democratic National Committee--and those who decided to go along with the racists, to get along with them, like others in the Democratic--

Now, you've got to bust that log-jam. Well, how many people in the United States are victims of the following categories: racism: how about African-Americans, to begin with? Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans--not that these people are races: they're {not} races, we're all one human race. But they are targets of racialist hostilities and prejudices, which injured them.

The same thing is true--we've practically declared senior citizens, if they don't have a lot of money, are now a "race" to be persecuted! They're accused by people like Al Gore's friends, of sponging on the public till by {desiring to live too long}--desiring the medical care and pensions which will enable them to live.

Farmers are becoming extinct; they're almost a "race" marked for extinction in the concentration camps.

Who in the United States is a victim of racism in that sense? Labor's a victim of that kind of racism, from certain people, powerful people, Wall Street people. African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, senior citizens, others. So, we are the victims of racism, and what is being done to our brothers and sisters of African-Americans, by Jack Keeney, the father of John Keeney, the guy who's the chief permanent bureaucrat in the Criminal Division of the Justice Department, who is {responsible} for racist operations against African-Americans over several decades, under what's called "Operation Fruehmenschen," that former Rep. Dymally has identified.

We're {all} victims of racism! In one form--it's not that we are races; we're {not} different races: there's only one human race. But we are victims of racist attacks.

So, if we defend our brothers and sisters who are African-Americans against the racism which is coming through Keeney and through his employers of the Democratic National Committee--if we {join} to say that's going to be cleaned up, then we are defending Hispanic-Americans and their rights, Asian-Americans and their rights, labor and its rights, senior citizens and their rights. If we {don't} defend African-Americans against this racism, we'll all go down together, of our divisibility. Eh?

That's the issue. So, what we're going to do, is we're going to organize to break the barriers. The way you deal with the problems of these fools--the foolish people in Orange County, in the leadership--is you impress them with power. The way to impress them with power, is to build these constituencies as a unified constituency.

Don't let them play one against the other. Like this question of so-called homosexuality. Look, take the case of AIDS, which I've been attacked for by all kinds of crazy people. I proposed that we mobilize $40 billion from the Federal government--that's back in the middle of the 1980s--to combat a danger, an epidemic disease of a new type, which implicitly threatens all mankind, which has--it's also in the United States, and it's in Africa: In Africa, because of environmental conditions and other tropical-disease conditions, the rate of spread of AIDS is now that most of the population of black Africa is threatened by virtual extinction--not total extinction, but near-extinction.

We have a little better conditions in the United States. Some people get drugs which they can't afford in Africa, because Al Gore won't let them, among other reasons. But that we're all victims of it. Who {cares} about whether the guy's a homosexual? It's irrelevant! It's a human being who is suffering from a disease, who needs help and protection--in the interests of the General Welfare. Who wants to make a category of "homosexuals"? I don't believe in it; it's not a legitimate category. It's just {people,} people who are suffering and dying.

Magic Johnson, the famous athlete, is fortunate enough, with his Starbuck enterprises, as he described the situation recently in Baltimore, that he can get and afford the regular treatment, the cocktail he requires, which so far has kept him functioning. How many African-Americans, for example, and others, can afford that cocktail, which might keep them alive? Well, Al Gore says Africans shouldn't get that; they have to pay full price. What do you mean, asking an {African,} whose income is like $100 a year, to pay for these drugs to keep them alive, to keep their families from being wiped out? But Al Gore says the prices have to stay up to protect the interests of Wall Street!

That's the problem. It's a way of thinking. You have to realize that what is done to one of us, is done to all of us. You can't say, "Well, the African-Americans are being victimized; that's not our problem." You can't say, "The AIDS victims are being victimized; that's not our problem: We don't have AIDS," or "We're not homosexuals," or something.

It's not right. The commitment of government--the basis for modern government, for modern civilization, which was established only in the 15th century in Europe, and not fully established, which was first fully established here, by our Constitution and Declaration of Independence--the authority of government, and the responsibility of government lies primarily in the ability, and the obligation, of the national government to do what no one else can do: to organize the defense and promotion of the General Welfare of the living and their posterity.

When it comes to {government,} always remember that principle of the General Welfare. Don't talk about African-American rights as special. Don't talk about anybody else's rights as special. {Everybody has to have the same rights.} And the injury to one, is an injury to us all. And when we learn to react that way, as a people--when we learn to {think} that way and {vote} that way, then we won't behave like pigs toward one another, which is the kind of thing you're reporting from some of the people in Orange County. You should hold up a mirror in front of them, then somebody says to them, "Did you ever think that maybe you're behaving like a pig? Why don't you be a human being; you were supposed to be one." That's the way to deal with it.

{{Q:}} Thank you, and I delay the handshake till the Rose Garden in a meeting at the Oval Office.

{{Harley Schlanger:}} Yes.

{{Q:}} Thank you. Mr. LaRouche, I am President of the East Side Ministry Union of Los Angeles, California, the oldest in this city. I would like to know what can we do about so--such a big population of people in jail--a big population growing, a big population in jail. We want to know--so many people there, some valuable people there. We want to know what can we do to improve this situation?

{{Lyndon LaRouche:}} What you have is a policy of bread and circuses, like, as under the Roman emperors in Rome, and even earlier--a population broken, demoralized, dispirited, and kept amused by getting a little bread passed out, a little food passed out to keep them alive, and entertainment such as that of the slaughter in the Roman circuses. That's what's being done today.

Now, what happens is, whole categories of the population--and this is particularly true of African-American young males, and also, increasingly, Hispanic-Americans, especially in certain parts of the country. Now, the purpose of the criminal justice policy: Remember, around the world, most countries in the world today {abhor} the death penalty as an immoral thing. It's been spreading in the United States, since about the time that Rehnquist, now the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, was made an Associate Justice back in the 1970s. And his appointment--and the guy was, if you'd know him from Arizona days, when he was down there, he's not exactly a civil rights person; as a matter of fact, he {leans in a different direction,} the opposite direction.

So, we have a policy, typified by the death penalty policy, by a Supreme Court that says, "Innocence, or indications of innocence, is no reason to take a person off Death Row, but proceed with the execution as soon as possible." George W. Bush typifies that: a complete--a terrible man, a man with no morality whatsoever, a complete disgusting, moronic hypocrite--probably not {born} moronic, but by the way he was raised by that couple of parents he had, who probably destroyed him. The guy who dropped out of Yale with him agreed.

So, we have an inhuman attitude. All right, now we have criminality in the United States. What do you expect? We've got it. It's growing; we've got it. People are convicted and go to prison. But you look at the results. Are we addressing the problem, or are we perpetuating the problem? Do we have a policy of rehabilitation? The Federal government does not have a policy of rehabilitation for prisoners. The policy of rehabilitation of convicts was wiped out. Our whole prison system is {not} based on habilitating people, or rehabilitating them. We're not concerned about creating the employment, to get them back into society as fully functioning citizens. We have excessive sentences.

Everything is wrong with our criminal justice system. And some people {gloat.} If you take the percentile, as you probably know it: The percentile of young African-American males who are virtually taken out of society and destroyed by this process; you take the attitude toward these young males, and their lack of participation in society, and you have something which has to be said is tantamount to genocide, as the United Nations code has defined genocide. And our criminal justice system has become one of the instruments of that kind of genocide, or, our policy about the criminal justice system. This applies to African-Americans; it also applies, as you know, in certain parts of the country, to Hispanic-Americans, who are quickly victimized. These are people who are not educated in large part. They are not given the means. We don't have the kind of employment we used to offer to people to make their way up.

You know, back in the 1930s, and in the 1940s and 1950s, you walked into a place to seek a job, you probably {got} a job. If the employer sensed you really wanted the job, they'd probably hire you, even if you had faked some of your credentials a bit, eh? Because they knew you would learn on the job. If you looked like a person who could learn, who could think, they'd hire you. That's the best they could get, so they'd take it. {And it worked.}

We don't have that kind of employment policy anymore. We have managements who are virtually incompetent--couldn't manage that policy right now.

So, again, this is kind of problems you reference which can be dealt with by only one thing: There has to be a kind of a revolution in many areas of policy and policy-in-practice in the United States. That revolution will come only when we have the 80 percent mobilized. And the 80 percent will be mobilized when they recognize that an injustice perpetrated upon any group of people, of {any} so-called ethnic or related designation, is an injustice to us all.

Then we will fix the problem. We will fix the problem not only because we will take the {measures} which tend to fix the problem, but we will fix the problem by taking these young people, who are being destroyed by this criminal justice system and its correlatives, and taking them out of the pit of pessimism, of personal, cultural pessimism, where they are assured they don't have a chance. They are reduced to existentialists, to people who don't see themselves as {part} of society, but who have been "thrown" into the social situation in which they live. They live like animals, like hunted animals, in one sense or the other. They have no confidence that anybody really cares about them. They have no confidence that real opportunities would be open to them.

The most important thing, is to reach inside the victims of precisely the kind of process you describe, and persuade them, by action, not just words, that we mean business, that they're going to have a way out; they have a better future. Once we have that commitment by government, and the understanding on the part of the victims of this kind of process that there {is} hope, there will be remedies, there {is} a future before them--and not what they could consider a "normal" future for its citizens of this country--we'll win.

But until that, we {can't} win. We must have the coalition, and we must have the power to {impose} this kind of viewpoint on government. We have the people--people represented largely from the lower 80 percent of income brackets. We have the people; we must get them together, and make sure they don't destroy themselves by fighting against one another. We have to join together in a common cause, for the common interest of justice, economic and social, for us all.