Talk:Worldwide LaRouche Youth Movement/Archive 1
The WLYM has security guidlines in place to prevent interneral security agencies from investagating them.
Larouche Youth Resort to Violence
After walking through a block occupied by these pamphleters, talking to (or mostly, as noted below, being preached at and angrily accused by) a young pamphleter, I got about half a block away before being knocked down from behind. When I looked up, it was a young man in street clothes, running away. This was in the financial district of San Francisco at 2:15 p.m., when the sidewalks have cleared; kids don't hang around Montgomery on weekdays. There's nothing to do in front of office buildings but to beg or to pamphlet.
The attack was unmistakeably malicious. I have no explanation for the assault but that the angry Larouche kids decided to punish "a member of the KKK," etc. Ironic, since I'm a Chinese immigrant and this accusation came from a white girl.
Calls to the national organization as well as the Oakland hotline returned responses of disbelief and quick dismissal: "That couldn't have been one of us," "You're jumping to conclusions just because someone bumped into you on the street." The national office volunteer verified that they don't teach any dialogue techniques in the Youth Movement.
Thus the large spectrum of speech one hears from recruiters. And now, assault. There's no proof, but beware -- some of these kids will stop at nothing, to what end I don't know.
No proof, hmmm. Oddly enough despite my looking deeply into this, not a single accusation against this group of interesting young adults has been proven.
===
[edit]I have seen these guys on college campuses in California. They badger passerby until a few weak-willed souls step close and become surrounded by three to five LaRouche supporters, who are typically twenty to thirty years of age.
The LaRouche supporters then proceed to break down the victim until he or she agrees to either donate money or attend meetings. Guilt and fear are the most common tools, but insults are also common. Passerby are made to feel inferior or guilty if they do not help "save the world" by joining the movement.
Often, a doomsday scenario is presented. Two years ago, I was told that the world's economic system would collapse unless Lyndon LaRouche was elected President of the United States, and that this collapse would occur "within a few years."
This may sound rediculous, reading it on an internet BBS, but when you are surrounded by their propeganda, it seems very, very real.
Meetings are fascinating. The entire group will band together and viciously attack any member that strays from the party line. Not physically, but rather with insults and false accusations.
Members of the LaRouche movement consider themselves to be intellectually superior to members of the average population, honnestly believe that the world will end if LaRouche is not elected, and honnestly believe that LaRouche can somehow be elected. It is not a political party as much as it is a religion - with LaRouche replacing God. "LaRouche says" is taken to be gospel truth; members of his organization are incapable of criticizing LaRouche, since to do so would incur the wrath of all nearby members.
Any change of having information from this article linked?: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1340301,00.html I didn't want to edit the article myself incase someone thought I was trolling or vandalising but feel the dark nature of the larouche movement also be included.
== ==
I can relate
[edit]I have started going to UC Davis as a junior(despite being in school for five years) and have too, met the youth group on campus. I lost count on how many times I seen them, but I think I have to talked to them four times despite being interested in joining their movement. As the psoter said above, the supporters would try to intimidate you to donate money. I think these are the same people who were protesting about racism and gay marriages being a sin during Martin Luthur King day. I remember when I first met up with them, they asked me to donate 20 bucks. I, finding it odd that a political movement is asking for donations, lied and said I didn't have any money and that I have to get to class(that part is true.) They then replied if I have a car to donate to them. I said, I don't drive; I usually get by via public transportation and besides, most ppl in Davis doesn't drive. The guy I was talking to, then became a slightly irriated and said that he and the other members will follow me around, even to class if I don't pay up. To get them off my back, I continued saying how I don't have any money, but added how I have some loose change(less than a dollar) and gave it to them. That got them off my case.
I ran into the same people a few weeks later. The member who wanted me to donate money from the last encounter, spotted me by scarcastly saying "Hey, big spender!" He guy continued all this crap about Larouche knows how the world works and that he has the answers for everything. The youth member then asked what was my major. In response, I showed him my psychology book. He then said,(while holding a Larouche book) that I should pick up this book since it will counter everything that I have learned in the psy book. I find it hard to believe and left. He also told me that I should go to the meeting on Saturday. I agreed, though I wasn't planning to. The youth members seem a little nuts after praising Larouche as a savior. It reminded me of scientology.
Oh yeah, he also gave me a big load of larouche magazines to give to other people. Because, i didn't pass them out, i just left them at my folks' home. I think my brother threw the whole thing away. LMAO
The third or fourth time I talked to a representative occured a few weeks ago. This time, it was another person. A girl to be exact. She apporached me while I was looking at one of the signs, which said "Free trade is like Mastrubation, where excitement is only short term. She thought I was looking to the other sign which had two stippers(one that stips metal and another, a nude exotic dancer, showing off her assets.) Above the images, had the words "Which stripper you think is more useful." She asked me which stripper I think is useful in the eyes of the Bush adminstration. I said, the tool. She said, no and that they they think it is the stripper since she makes money. She then compared it to free trade, saying that free trade is short term; basically, more of the same bs I've been hearing from them. I think I spend an hour or so, talking to her. During my one hour(which I now, want back,) She also asked for a donation or get a magazine subscription. She ask me to get a subscription. This is where I made a mistake. Instead of febbing by saying that I have no money or telling the truth and saying that I will spend the money on porn at Towerrecords, I said I have no money on me, but I have it in my bank account(big mistake.) She insisted to accompany me to the atm(which is a building or so, away) to get the money. So, yeah, I gave her the 20 bucks and regret it ever since. I don't know if I am getting the magazine or whatever since she just took the money and asked for my email address. Seem unprofessional. At least I know I may have an alternate source of toiler paper coming from the mail. I should have told the truth and said, "No, I would rather use my 20 bucks as a short term investment for an adult magazine rather than a long term one in receiving some nutjob's magazine every week. I didn't have much sleep that day, hence me being too slow to say that.
During my conversation with her, I found out she was a physics major who quit going to Berkeley. Her reasons of leaving the school is that she believes school is a waste of time and that "real" geniuses like DiVinci didn't went to school. I find this logic flawed since Vinci is a unique person. Not everyone is going to be better off by quiting school. If that is the case, why aren't all the highschool drop offs making more money than someone who went to graduate school? I asked her she does now after quitting college. In other worlds, what does she do as a living. She told me that she is a full time organizer. Of course, I find that strange. I mean, I have a friend who was a political organizer for the democratic party a few years ago and it was a part time volunteer work. I don't see how one can survive by simply being an organizer. I even learned that the members on campus don't even go to school here. One goes to Standford, while another goes/went to school in Las Vegas! It is crazy and realize that these ppl are misguided and possibly brainwashed into believing something that is bs. I even asked her about scienology to see if she can see if there are any similarities between her organization and the cult group. She didn't.LOL
I notice she acted a little weird in how she talked. She kept saying "wild" and such. I am afraid that the Larouche people brainwashed her severly.
I still regret giving 20 bucks to her, though. I wasn't even attracted to her, so we can rule out that sex appeal had anything to do with me giving them 20 bucks. I think I have a deranged fixation to messed with these ppl by pretending that I agree with them. Like hell, I don't.--Doomzaber 00:12, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- Ow. These guys bombed my campus with pamphlets last week. They showed up today, and were fairly eager to talk. I listed for about 20 minutes before I started to cry. That seemed to make them lose interest in me. 30 October 2006
My first hand dissapointing experience with the movement == ==
[edit]I have been to several Larouche meetings and I find it very interesting that the Larouche Movement advocates that we non-members are conditioned by fear (especially baby boomers) not to join their fight when on the contrary they use nothing but catastrophic speculations as recruitment. Larouche has been propagating perpetual nuclear warfare and the collapse of the economy for decades. I have personally been told that I would work at Starbucks after my degree (I have a well paying successful job today), the economy will collapse within a year (this was told to me a few years ago), and I was shown pictures of soldiers being hanged referring personally to my faith if I had not joined their fight to stop it.
You see, by joining this movement, members take a leap over all their earthly problems by being placed in purposeful positions to save the world and receive immortality of the soul in return. Some depressed kids are succeptible to that fantasy world. The lonely recruits receive brotherhood; the ones who have failed in life are given intellectual reverence surmounting any non-larouchie; perfect opiate receptor! Many of these recruits come into the movement as empty slates to be filled up with Larouche tactics, this is why the Larouche "YOUTH" Movement has been the biggest sector in their existence. This is also a reason Larouche recruiters blatantly challenge their contacts not to listen to their parents, professors, or any adults with the explanation that they have become forever impudent by fear through degenerate cultures that us kids still have a chance to overcome.
1) They believe in aristocracy, as their beloved, Plato does. It's interesting how their cause is to invest in the potential of every single human mind when their political system would be setup to discount and make decisions for the non-aristocrats, which would be us underlings. They are so innocent that they do not know they are studying aristocracy, nor have most of them realized in their 'intellectual discovery' of God that Plato is the christian philosophy. Larouche is very religious..
2) They want you to drop out of school because classes are setup in a 1-way pedagogical channel between teacher, books and students, rather than, an open, non-authoritative channel where everyone can facilitate the exchange of diverse ideas. I find this most interesting when i was accused of being a British operative in my attempt to exchange the ideas of philosophers and economic theories they were never exposed to. During a meeting my questions were brushed off and not answered, the speaker called them ‘academic’. The Larouche Movement is so organized that they have already conditioned the new recruits to negate any wake-up theories or opposing ones to be that of British conspiracy against mankind. In conclusion, this is no place to exchange ideas as they preach it is, it’s exchanging Larouche ideas for recruitment only.
3) Larouche writes thousands of pessimistic speculations and when one inevitably hits, he is plumed to be always right as the other forecasts are forgotten. The speculations that are forgotten are thrown under the umbrella of economic collapse and perpetual warfare with only the future to hold the truth. Just read Larouche writings, he tells you that he is the ONLY ONE in the WORLD who can save us from these disasters. His intent and cause seem great, but what does his character tell you about the underpinnings; his Will to Impose himself on others? It is so blatant that even the purblind can see the egotistical style in his writings, and another thing, this is called the "LAROUCHE" Movement.
4) Larouche recruiters are braggarts with the learned skill to make a dreg's blood boil. They insult your sensual way of living opposed to the thinkers, the ones who spend their time developing their minds in the movement. If the Larouchie’s are our intellectual saviors of a new renaissance; well how come none of the members ever made an invention or real impact? They really can use some invention to boost their popularity and finances. The reason this has not occurred is a great irony if you believe in them, but nothing short of shame if you do not. You see, these members are not self thinkers, they are followers, they study only Larouche and even with that knowledge they are too conditioned for Larouche to make new inferences.
All this studying and organizing only embeds the shackles on their minds. It is very unfortunate, because these members truly become psychologically stuck in the movement. It is very hard for one to admit to the Self that all these years were a waist of time and they must now step back to the miserable status of earthly life they left off at. This, accompanied with the fact that these members breathe Larouche 24/7, is why they will and are stuck beyond all fathomable realizations of the world. 23:29, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Interesting. So passion in your claims. I would like proof please. This might be too much to ask.
It's easy to be stupid, but hard to be historic...
[edit]I challenge anyone that truly takes his/her mind seriously, to actually READ the recent writings of Lyndon LaRouche, especially the new book, Earth's Next Fifty years, and then re-read the majority of this insane Encyclopedia. The problem with an editable reference guide in an epoch of history like ours, is that the majority of popularly accepted beliefs are totally wrong. Take for example the case of Free Trade, or Liberal Art. Truth itself is compromised for fear that someone's toes may get stepped on, because their own personal fantasy may be challenged by lawful processes, such as the breakdown of the monetary system. Reality will check the fanaticism, just as the Great Depression put an end to the Elmer Gantry tent revivals...God wasn't gonna come to pay the rent.
Wake up people! You are living on a plantation. The "Massa" is popular opinion, and George Bush is the whip. What you must see is the marionette, George Schultz. Who is this guy? What was his role under Nixon? Who are the Vulcans? The Chicago boys? The Synarchist International? Who is running the central banking systems that now have more power than the true governments of the world? This, as FDR stated so correctly, is Fascism; when the private sector becomes more powerful than governments, you have the conditions for global empire through free trade.
What is needed for the world and ourselves is a reversal and rejection of what got us here, and revival of what has saved this nation in all times of maximum danger. Let us return to governments based on the welfare of it's citizenry, their future, and the benefit of other nations.
Get with it, or civilization doesn't have a chance. Do the work!
_travis lee smith.
watch this: high speed 300k stream http://www.larouchepub.com/eirtoc/confpres/2005/pres_day/session_4_en_vid_hi.asx
low speed stream http://www.larouchepub.com/eirtoc/confpres/2005/pres_day/session_4_en_vid.asx
- Thanks for sharing, Mr. Smith. Here's a link to the transcript, in case anyone is interested but doesn't want to sit through a long lecture about how LaRouche has saved the world. [1] It's really quite interesting. Here's an excerpt:
- The United States, again, because of something embedded in its history, in its character, must again take the leadership, and prevent this crisis from going to its full extent.
- And I'm in the center of it. I have to keep pushing: Because I have the knowledge, the understanding, to do what needs to be done. I have lived my life—as I can say, looking backwards—I have lived my life for these days, these older days in my existence. This, in future history, will be acknowledged as the immortal purpose of my life: To save civilization. To provide a kind of leadership which can not be found, an ingredient of leadership anywhere on this planet, except in me. I have to do it.
- It's a pity that there's nobody else who can save us. I hope Mr. LaRouche has a long life! Cheers, -Willmcw 05:30, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)
- Wowza!!! I have no idea who/what LaRouche is (I was just checking Recent Changes), but Mr. Smith just made major negative progress for his view of him/her/it. If he's agin' it, I'm for it, and vice versa. BTW, what is "Liberal Art"? (I've heard of "the liberal arts", but not this.) BradGad (Talk) 05:36, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- OK, I used this amazing resource we have here (I call it "WikiPedia") to refresh my memory. I *do* know who LaRouche is, and have for some time (I was coming at it out of context). If his rhetoric were not so off-putting, Mr. Smith would have found a fellow traveller in me. I take back my "If he's agin' it, I'm for it" comment. But -- trying to keep this about the article, not the topic of the article -- I do think Mr. Smith's rhetoric is counter-productive and contrary to WikiPedia's guidelines on the purposes of the Talk pages. I hope the level heads can intervene and keep this article on track. BradGad (Talk) 05:49, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Ironically, I think Mr Smith's inappropriate post here actually helps to strengthen a portion of the article. Who else but a cult would abuse a wikipedia discussion page to try and recruit potential followers?204.210.19.5 09:10, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
First of all Travis is a friend and he is no longer in the "cult" but you wouldn't know about the plenty of people who have left the "cult" and don't think it was a cult... Secondly it's funny that his attempt at rebuttal is seen as propaganda and another persons 3 page diatribe about their porn and spending problems is no problem at all because it doesn't offend you. I'm not a big fan of Stephen Colbert but BOY DOES HIS CRITIQUE OF THIS TRUTH BY CONCENSUS WEB CULT CUT RIGHT TO THE MATTER.
I can't wait till Larouche's youth group is as big Scientology. In other words, when are youg guys going to get a giant bust of Larouche in one of your headquarters? LOL
Seriously though, like L. Ron, Larouche is human and therefore, flawed. I doubt he has all the answers and hell, I never heard of the man till those Larouche members on campus demanded money from me to support their battle against the Vice president. I don't agree with his teachings, but that's just me. I hope I don't burn in political Hell for having an opnion. LOL --Doomzaber 00:30, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Criticism Section
[edit]I removed the LaRouche responce to the Washington post article and replaced it with something less obnoxious. It's paranoid and unsubstantiated. Remember, truth is not fairness to all points of view - especially lies. Plus the main portion of the article is LYM friendly. I also changed the back the original wording that states "Many memebers claim". The Post article claims a number ex members feel this way, and its not only Winstead who is quoted even though only his quotes appear here.
non-criticism section
[edit]since this all seems to be bitching and complaints and gossip, I added a non-bitching section. I have met the German party. They are exposing Felix Rohatyn as a Nazi. It seems this is an international exposure. Why is there a nazi behind the Democratic party? Is the USA going facist? --Ibykus prometheus 18:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
A Little Something to Say
[edit]What is so difficult about confronting a movement like this, or cult if you prefer, is that the basis, the soft-sell that brings people in initially has a lot of merit. I joined the "movement" in the early days of the sabre rattling against the Middle East, and I believe there is a pretty solid argument against most, if not all, of the war we have perpetrated in the last 5 years. When I was inside we learned about, discussed, and organized around topics like the paper "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" by The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies [Jerusalem, Washington]. The paper was authored in 1996 by a group led by Richard Perle (who served until 2004 on the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee to the DOD), and many others who were appointed to the DOD under the present Bush Administration. It proposed: Armed incursions into Palestinian areas under the rubric of the "right of hot pursuit", Armed incursions into Lebanon, and possible strikes against Syria and Iran, as well as the removal of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.
We organized around The Rev. Sun Myung Moon, and his influence over congressional members, as well as his newspaper the Washington Times, which very few people understand is a newspaper essentially supported and printed by a large cult, in order to move our nation toward conservative right wing religous politcs. This is tacitly stated by the Rev Moon himself, and not some wild-eyed theory.
We organized around Joe Lieberman being a pseudo-democrat, a supporter of right wing politics in general, and a hawk with ties to Republicans.
A few years later, we see the mess of badly perpetrated wars on flimsy premises, Joe lieberman getting kissed by GW Bush, and we saw on Jon Stewart's Daily Show Rep.Danny Davis (among others) literally putting a crown on Sun Myung Moon's head INSIDE THE HALLS OF CONGRESS in some weird ceremony.
Before the LaRouche movement, noone really picked this stuff up. I feel that if those kids weren't out there in the street talking about it day in and day out, it may never have been picked up. You have three hundred or so people running campaigns 6 sometimes 7 days a week. People don't know who LaRouche is, all they know is they heard some activist say the Washington Times is a cult newspaper, and Congressman takes bribes from his cult. They check it out on the internet and find out its true. They tell a friend. And so on. No one listens to LaRouche, but they hear the rumors.
The poor are getting poorer. This administration showed its chops during Katrina. I recently had a Russian friend who is getting his PHD here at Georgetown tell me that "your news is so censored". A Russian told me our news is censored. Ouch.
So the main problem is this: When there is little or no dissent, real dissent, against what's going on, who can come along and pick up the slack? People like Lyndon Larouche. And when you are one of the few speaking truth to power, what does that give you? Well, it gives you credibility in the eyes of the young, and from there brainwashing is easy, from that platform you can send them out to raise money every day, from that platform you may be able to send people to die. I don't think people understand exactly what has happened to those people, or what is happening. They are being given a chance to speak their minds about the injustice that is going on, to make a difference. In exchange, they lose themselves, their freedom, and most of them lose their sanity. I think that somewhere along the way LaRouche lost his sanity. I don't believe that he is a huckster, I believe he really believes in himself. He began his activities in the sixties. He and many of the older followers watched JFK, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and Malcolm X shot down, and countless unnamed individuals be targeted by COINTELPRO and other operations. Somewhere in all that pressure, they decided it was ok to break a few eggs, to brainwash in order to fight the activities of a government that much of the world thinks is overly militaristic. I see a situation where the insane are fighting the unjust. The unfortunate thing is that the great good a movement like that could do, as well as the truth it does speak, is overshadowed by its religous fervor toward itself as well as the lies it tells necessarrily to indoctrinate its followers.
There are people in the movement who may do something with it once LaRouche dies. It will be interesting to see where they take it.
And thus spoke Nietzsche's invisible friend, the turd fairy.
That is so cool, it only took like two days for some poor soul to try and insult me. Get back on the phone! Can't you see the world monetary sytem (by which I mean the Larouche moevement's finances) is about to collapse?
Cynical.... Looking at Wikipedia I would say merely that what I understand of the arguments on the LaRouche page, they are substantially flawed. You see, there is this idea that in a court of law one looks at the evidence, the original material, not second hand reports. I notice that stuff from this LaRouche organisation is not counted as satisfactory for Wikipedia. If you wish to report on something, take source material first. Also, on the Jeremiah Duggan question, are the German police being accused of being incompetent? Or themselves anti-semitic? Why would the German police not be able to find a single thread of evidence that JD was murdered? This would be good to be answered. This comes from a fellow countryman on JD, who has maybe learned one thing in life, ask questions until a satisfactory answer is given. John Smith (named after the most excellent beer)
"Climate Change Fraud"
[edit]Recently a group of people from the LYM came to my campus and set themselves up near a major entrance. One of them grabbed my attention, and foisted on me a copy of a newspaper produced by the LYM. The headline was "Climate Change Fraud". Interested, I asked him a few questions, and discovered that what the article was about was about how global warming was not caused by people but by the sun. Apparently the thesis was that the sun has increased in output by a factor of 2 over the last century, due to magnetic cycles and fluxes and language I could not understand, despite my sound knowledge of undergraduate physics. I have noticed that your article on the LYM does not seem to have much mention of this publication or, in particular, of this alternative viewpoint to the cause of global warming, which, interestingly, is mentioned as one of the "climate change myths" in the most recent edition of the New Scientist. Perhaps something could be added to this article mentioning this ongoing campaign of theirs. ConfusedGremlin 02:56, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- It looks like we need to add a bit more about the subject's current focus on the "climate change fraud" issue. ·:·Will Beback ·:· 22:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- I added something. --Mr Keck 20:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
This page is not USENET
[edit]Please see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. It says there that The purpose of a Wikipedia talk page is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or project page. Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views. --Marvin Diode 00:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)