has anyone here ever actually read about Lyndon LaRouche?

[© tweed]

I am reading his Wiki page now, which is lengthy and well-sourced.  absolutely fascinating read.

[Redalgo]

Okay, so this guy really creeps me out. It also seems quite possible in hindsight that I once took part in a four-hour debate with either a member of or sympathizer with the LaRouche movement.

[© tweed]

Okay, so this guy really creeps me out. It also seems quite possible in hindsight that I once took part in a four-hour debate with either a member of or sympathizer with the LaRouche movement.

you should add a 31st chapter about LaRouchism to your book.

[CLARENCE 2015!]

He is a cult leader and has been for going on 50 years if I am not mistaken

[© tweed]

He is a cult leader and has been for going on 50 years if I am not mistaken

the devil's in the details, dude.

[memphis]

I met some of his supporters at an Iraq War protest in 2003. They were a colorful bunch.

[Simfan34]

I feel like if the US was to ever become a left or right wing autocracy, he would be in charge of it.

While I feel there are things to like on his platform- NAWAPA, the Russia-US ties, the oddly prevalent scientific lectures on his site- he is still a crazy.

[© tweed]

since he is assuredly a clinical paranoiac (who has gone without treatment, as he would claim mainstream psychotherapy is nothing but some sort of hoax), the 'ideology' is internally inconsistent and is nonsense; in this way it is comparable to Stalinism, a term which I readily use and has some meaning because Stalin had concrete power for a long time, and thus there is a record of the things he did.  but Stalinism has absolutely no theoretical backing, Stalin made no attempt to forward original theory at any point in his life (I do not believe 'Foundations of Leninism', written in the most ecclesiastical and boring 'prose' you will even encounter), can fit this criteria... as evidenced by its fits and starts, its 180s according to his paranoiac whims.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I think LaRouche has the capability to be the next Hitler if given the chance. Is he left wing or right wing? Fascist or Communist?

[© tweed]

the origin is out of the 60s New Left but now most of what he says is more in line with far-right conspiracy theory; however I would claim that LaRouchism is not ideological, if it ever was.

[Redalgo]

Okay, so this guy really creeps me out. It also seems quite possible in hindsight that I once took part in a four-hour debate with either a member of or sympathizer with the LaRouche movement.

you should add a 31st chapter about LaRouchism to your book.

I would probably not include him because he seems to be a politically vicious man and poor role model for the people.

But in my model he would fit into the thirty-second ideological constellation, which represents an array of political views intended to manage forms of social conflict with public policies based upon the five moral virtues of discipline, ambition, magnificence, reverence, and assertiveness. These are opposite of those I am most compatible with, and in all honesty I cannot think of many HP who seem to be more horrible in politics than LaRouche. Nonetheless, a FF could still modify his views without abandoning its priorities by intertwining a corporatist, authoritarian, or totalitarian government with policies of neo-mercantilism, technocentrism, (cultural) imperialism and, perhaps, neo-realism in international relations.

To a follower of LaRouche I would recommend readings on Deng Xiaoping, Chiang Kai-shek, Vladimir Putin, Getúlio Vargas, Georges Pompidou, Charles de Gaulle, Maurice Macmillian, Benito Mussolini, Francisco Franco, José Rivera, Jomo Kenyatta, Park Chung-hee, Abdul-Aziz, António Salazar, and Lee Kuan Yew - who are other politicians in the same constellation who espouse some compatible ideas - or instead the likes of Nelson Mandela, Mikhail Gorbachev, Shirin Ebadi, Tony Blair, Aung San Suu Kyi, Rigoberta Menchú Tum, Evo Morales, Eleanor Roosevelt, and Noam Chomsky if he or she were interested in learning more about and trying to develop an appreciation for their political adversaries.

On the other hand, most of what I'm saying could be cast aside in favor of a completely different explanation as the project progresses. I have been leaning too much on intuition and creativity lately and not enough on research and solid evidence. xD

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I'd be interested in seeing a schema of some kind of this ideological constellation of yours, Redalgo. Have you posted it on here?

[Redalgo]

I've not posted a full layout yet primarily because it is still in a conceptual stage of development and in the book I am writing it does not make a lot of sense on its own without considering it in tandem with a discussion on Aristotelian ethics, a Bourdieuan or neo-Weberian understanding of social conflict, and an upfront disclaimer that I am not trying to convey facts - rather a conceptual model for laymen to use in politics for the purpose of converting moral values into suggestions for the establishment of which political ideologies may be most conducive to their long-term interests and the betterment of society. I could try to start another thread about it though if you are interested - given enough thought I imagine it would be possible to lay out a bare-bones explanation of the model I've fabricated.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I'd be immensely interested in that.

[Yelnoc]

I'd be immensely interested in that.

Me too!

[Oakvale]

I discovered earlier that LaRouche got five percent of the national Democratic primary vote in 1996. Yikes.

[© tweed]

I discovered earlier that LaRouche got five percent of the national Democratic primary vote in 1996. Yikes.

as well as this impressive performance

[muon2]

In 1986 followers of LaRouche won the Dem nomination for Lt Gov and Sec of State. Their nominations cause Gov nominee Adlai Stevenson III to withdraw from the Dem nomination and run as an independent. The result was a big win for Gov Thompson and the GOP. The effects were felt over the next two cycles as Dem nominees had to spend resources convincing voters that they were not LaRouche candidates.

[Oakvale]

I wish LyndonLaRouche would start running again, he's great fun. The Paulites pale in comparison to the LaRouchies.