Lyndon LaRouche, R.I.P. (1922-2019)

Lyndon LaRouche, the Weird Uncle of Late 20th and Early 21st Century American Politics, passed away on February 12th.  What follows is from Richard Severo's 2-13-19 New York Times obituary: 

Lyndon LaRouche, the quixotic, apocalyptic leader of a cultlike political organization who ran for president eight times, once from a prison cell, died on Tuesday. He was 96.

His death was announced on the website of his organization, La Rouche/Pac. The statement did not specify a cause or say where he died.

Defining what Mr. LaRouche stood for was no easy task. He began his political career on the far left and ended it on the far right. He said he admired Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan and loathed Hitler, the composer Richard Wagner and other anti-Semites, though he himself made anti-Semitic statements.

He was fascinated with physics and mathematics, particularly geometry, but called concerns about climate change “a scientific fraud.”

He condemned modern music as a tool of invidious conspiracies — he saw rock as a particularly British one — and found universal organizing principles in the music of Bach, Beethoven and Mozart.

Some called him a case study in paranoia and bigotry, his mild demeanor notwithstanding. One biographer, Dennis King, in “Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism” (1989), maintained that Mr. LaRouche and his followers were a danger to democratic institutions.

Mr. LaRouche denigrated a panoply of ethnic groups and organized religions. He railed against the “Eastern Establishment” and environmentalists, who he said were trying to wipe out the human race. Queen Elizabeth II of England was plotting to have him killed, he said. Jews had surreptitiously founded the Ku Klux Klan, he said. He described Native Americans as “lower beasts.”

Even so, Mr. LaRouche was able to develop alliances with farmers, the Nation of Islam, teamsters, abortion opponents and Klan adherents. Acolytes kept Mr. LaRouche’s political machine going by peddling his tracts and magazines in airports, and by persuading relatives and friends to donate large sums to help him fight his designated enemies.

He operated through a dizzying array of front groups, among them the National Democratic Policy Committee, through which he received millions of dollars in federal matching money in his recurring presidential campaigns. His forces also sponsored candidates at the state and local levels, including for school board seats.

His movement attracted national attention, especially in 1986, when two LaRouche followers, Mark Fairchild and Janice Hart, unexpectedly won the Democratic nomination for lieutenant governor and secretary of state, respectively, in Illinois.

Adlai E. Stevenson III, the Democratic candidate for governor of Illinois that year, was appalled. He denounced the LaRouche group as “neo-Nazis” and refused to run with Mr. Fairchild and Ms. Hart, organizing a third-party bid instead. He, as well as the LaRouche supporters, lost to James R. Thompson, the Republican incumbent.

Some voters said they had voted for Mr. Fairchild and Ms. Hart because they had been endorsed by Mr. LaRouche’s National Democratic Policy Committee, which they thought was affiliated with the mainstream Democratic Party.

Critics of Mr. LaRouche said he had used that committee to deceive people abroad as well. In 1982, he managed to arrange a meeting with President José López Portillo of Mexico, evidently because Mexican officials thought Mr. LaRouche represented the Democratic Party.

“I’m as American as apple pie,” Mr. LaRouche once said.

To read Severo's article in its entirety, click HERE.  To hear LaRouche in own words, see below.... 

LaRouche Discusses the 9/11 Attack As It Unfolds

(The following interview was conducted on September 11, 2001, between Jack Stockwell, morning radio host on K-TALK radio in Salt Lake City, Utah, and 2004 Presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche. It was on the air from 7:15 to 9:00 A.M., Mountain Daylight Time.)

More San Diego Madness

Readers of my book CHAMELEO will be well aware of the fact that San Diego, the military town of all military towns, is a nexus of seemingly "random" violence.  Yet another example of this ongoing chaos occurred this past Tuesday, according to Alex Riggins' 2-13-19 article entitled "Man Unloads 'Hail of Gunfire' into San Diego Bistro: 'Amazing That Nobody Was Hurt'":

A man armed with a high-powered rifle unleashed a “hail of gunfire” into a Hillcrest restaurant Tuesday night, but nobody was injured, police said.

Officers detained a possible suspect about 20 minutes later and found the discarded gun somewhere in the four blocks between where the gunfire erupted and where the man was detained, San Diego Police Lt. Andra Brown told San Diego News Video.

Investigators at the scene found at least 19 “assault rifle-caliber” shell casings, Brown said. Several 911 callers reported the gunshots just before 7:40 p.m. near University and Fourth avenues, in a bustling area lined with restaurants and bars, San Diego Police Officer John Buttle said.

The rounds shattered the windows at the Asian Bistro, Brown said, adding that it was “amazing that nobody was hurt.” “It’s quite a blessing when that much, that hail of gunfire that went out, there was nobody hit,” Brown told San Diego News Video. “There were several patrons inside the business, and employees, and nobody was struck.” Some people inside the restaurant reported being hit by shattered glass, but any wounds were superficial and drew no blood, Brown said.

Witnesses told police the shooter fled south, and at least one witness said the gun used was an AR-15 rifle, according to police radio traffic.

To read Riggins' article in its entirety, click HERE.

"Poetic Injustice and Performative Outrage" in QUILLETTE

My colleague Clint Margrave (author of THE EARLY DEATH OF MEN and SALUTE THE WRECKAGE) has just published an important new article entitled "Poetic Injustice and Performative Outrage" in Quillette.  I highly recommend reading the entire piece.  What follows is a choice excerpt....

Slavoj Žižek argues that the totalitarian elements of modern political correctness are much more difficult to resist than the unambiguous totalitarianism of the past. Instead of simply dictating what a person can and can’t do or say, political correctness uses emotional coercion to leverage feelings of guilt and shame. We are now supposed to care more about the collective “feelings” of the community than the individual artist or artwork. A work no longer speaks for itself, but for a community, and an artist’s whole public persona—how virtuous they are, how they behaved on a Saturday night, their correct (or incorrect) political beliefs or opinions, and so on—can all either hurt or help that community. This seems like a lot to ask of a writer just to remain published in a magazine that probably didn’t even pay them.

I asked Joanna Valente, publisher of Yes, Poetry magazine, if it should be a publisher’s business what a writer does outside of their interaction with that publisher. “I wouldn’t say it’s a publisher’s ‘business’ to know—and publishers aren’t private investigators and do have lives of their own (and often, day jobs, since most editors don’t edit full-time). However, I do think if someone’s behavior becomes a public concern, and it does violate ethical, safety, moral, and/or legal matters, then it should be of concern.”

No doubt Valente and the editors at cahoodaloodaling have good intentions. But these good intentions seem to be very shortsighted. Anyone who has ever silenced someone has done so under the guise of “public concern.” And, while libel is a legitimate concern for a publisher and a condition (along with personal attacks and by request of the author) under which even [Timothy] Green [editor of Rattle] says he would “de-publish” a poem, none of these considerations were at issue in the cases of Rachel Custer or Anders Carlson-Wee. Call it performance or moral panic, but a small but powerful and vocal minority of community members is seizing control of the message—any breach of orthodoxy marks you an apostate or a blasphemer, and then it’s off to the poetry gulags.

They even have their own informers—members of the community who dedicate themselves to rooting out transgressive views and behavior so they can report it to the publisher [emphasis added--RG]. “I was so excited to be published in The Journal,” says Custer, “which puts out such lovely work, and then I was just heartbroken to have that work removed.” Ohio State University’s esteemed literary magazine took down her poem after a few members of the poetry community emailed the magazine alleging Custer was a “racist, an Islamophobe,” and—perhaps the strangest allegation of all—that she, “ridiculed dead children.” “Just all kinds of insane allegations,” says Custer. “The student editor removed my work without ever talking to me about the allegations, and never even told me the work was taken down. I think I found out when I was updating my personal website.” The editor told her the problem wasn’t her poem or its contents, but her personal opinions as expressed by social media.

“If someone reaches out to a publisher,” says Valente, “I think the publisher, for instance, should take what that person says seriously and act in a way they see fit. No one can tell a publisher what to do, but I do think at the very least acknowledging what a person says is important, and ultimately hopefully they make a decision that ensures the integrity of their magazine and the safety of their audience.”

Wanting to protect one’s staff from, for instance, personal harassment is obviously understandable. But the “safety of their audience”? Whoever said art was safe? The idea of safety is prevalent throughout the poetry community right now—there is even a hashtag called #saferlit. But safety from what, exactly? From a poem that might offend someone’s sensibilities? From an idea someone else might not agree with? To describe protection from ideas, art, or words as “safety” is a sinister misuse of language, and it has always been the righteous excuse offered in justification of censorship. “If a work is harming others, and taking away someone’s humanity, then I think it’s ethical to remove the work, because it’s not helping anyone, and just promoting dangerous thought that has led many countries to violent wars and aggressions,” says Valente. 

This kind of reasoning may sound like a kinder and more empathetic kind of censorship, but protecting our own best interests has always been the benevolent justification for the banning or burning of books. And in today’s feverish and intolerant cultural climate, a “dangerous thought” may simply be a “thought” with which the self-appointed censor disagrees. Too much protection makes a population naïve. Pushing boundaries is practically a condition for creating art, and artists have either been rewarded or punished for pushing the limits of acceptability and challenging the voices of cultural or political authority, depending on the political temperature of the time. And that is why artistic censorship is always high on the list of priorities of totalitarian regimes.

To read Margrave's article in its entirety, click HERE.

 

CHAMELEO RETURNS TO FIGHT FOR OUR FREEDOM RADIO!

Last night I returned to Badbaby's FIGHT FOR OUR FREEDOM RADIO and discussed my books CHAMELEO, UNTIL THE LAST DOG DIES, and CRYPTOSCATOLOGY (and related issues) for well over two hours.  To listen to the entire interview, click HERE.

Richard Schowengerdt Appears on IN OTHER NEWS!

Earlier today Richard Schowengerdt, the inventor featured so prominently in the pages of my book CHAMELEO, made a special appearance on Geoff Brady's radio show IN OTHER NEWS (WBAI, 99.5 FM in New York) to discuss the origins of Project Chameleo.  Targeted Individual Josephine Grace and Yours Truly also make appearances during the course of the hour.  Here's Geoff Brady's description of the episode:

On this show the topic of organized stalking is examined in depth because the cases are known to be at epidemic levels. The effects of gangstalking can cause severe and irreversible harm, and the media often take an easy route of portraying all victims as mentally ill. In several of these cases, there was mention of high technology warfare being deployed. Past guests Josephine Grace and Robert Guffey have described how a group of highly skilled individuals utilize advanced camouflage technology such as invisibility suits to harass, attack and injure. There are hundreds of patents filed for invisibility cloaking technology and invisibility detection devices. Among those U.S. patents is Project Chameleo filed by engineer Richard Schowengerdt. He joins us to talk more about the design of his electro-optical camouflage system making objects invisible within the visible spectrum of light.

Richard Schowengerdt served in the Navy and studied at their school of electronics in San Francisco. From there he went to Japan to set up a communication station for the US Navy. By 1957 he returned to St. Louis, Missouri and went to St. Louis University. He worked for McDonnel Aircraft, then moved to California in 1961. He was President of the Orange County Engineering Council in 1967, branch head of the Navy Metrology Engineering Center in Pomona, a Chief Warrent Officer Two with the Naval Reserve, and in 1988 worked with the Defense Contract Management Agency. There are many more accomplishments. He retired in October of 2014.

To listen to the entire show, click HERE. 

As a bonus, here's a photograph of me interviewing Richard in March of 2006:

 
And a second photo of the two of us standing outside George Van Tassel's world-famous Integratron (near Joshua Tree, California) in October of 2014:

 

"The Detective with the Glass Gun" in BLACK DANDY #3!

By [the secret name of the Great Architect of the Universe], the sensational rumors are true!  Issue three of H. Andrew Lynch's magazine BLACK DANDY is now available for purchase!  The lead story in this latest issue is my epic tale "THE DETECTIVE WITH THE GLASS GUN," a gentle fable about a naive but resourceful psychology student who finds herself trapped in the basement of a manipulative psychopath, a bestselling fantasist who secretly belongs to a nefarious church that worships vacuum cleaners.  Trust me, you're not going to want to miss this one.  

For more persuasive, silver-tongued ballyhoo, just keep reading:    

Black Dandy introduces you to yet another wave of international authors who invite us to join them on their unusual journeys.

We’ve assembled writers who dwell in the sublime space between magic realism, surrealism, and the otherwise strange.

If you wish, you can read a sample story from the magazine HERE.

"The Last Nihilist Poet of Earth Vs. the Radioactive Monkeys from Mars" in THE COCKROACH CONSERVATORY VOLUME 2!

FearBot3000, the venerable editor of The Cockroach Conservatory, recently beamed the following message into my skull:

"Earth Beings!
After entangling ourselves with an all-encompassing evil, the Amazon Algorithms, we have successfully freed ourselves from its tentacled grip. We now have copies of The Cockroach Conservatory Volume 2. You should buy them now. You should buy them from us.
  It is full color. We pay all writers and artists. That's where your money goes."

FearBot3000 respectfully demands that you purchase a copy of The Cockroach Conservatory Volume 2 in order to read my latest short story "The Last Nihilist Poet of Earth Vs. the Radioactive Monkeys from Mars," which you will find tucked away in the chocolatey center of The Cockroach Conservatory Volume 2!

Simply click HERE for more essential information regarding FearBot3000 and the curious entomological publication over which he/she/it presides.