by Dennis Speed (EIRNS) — Nov. 09, 2024
Sometimes, it is possible to introduce “frontier concepts” of great power and depth—what are sometimes called “heavy ideas”—into societies that normally prefer to ignore or avoid their world-shaking implications. We are now living in such a moment. Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, speaking in Sochi at the Valdai Discussion Club on a multiplicity of topics, including the Nov. 5 Presidential elections in the United States, offered the following international thought-experiment.
“The rise of nations and cultures that have previously remained on the periphery of global politics for one reason or another means that their own distinct ideas of law and justice are playing an increasingly important role,” Putin said in his opening remarks. “They are diverse. This may give the impression of discord and perhaps cacophony, but this is only the initial phase. It is my deep conviction that the only new international system possible is one embracing polyphony, where many tones and many musical themes are sounded together to form harmony. If you like, we are moving towards a world system that is going to be polyphonic rather than polycentric, one in which all voices are heard and, most importantly, absolutely must be heard. Those who are used to soloing and want to keep it that way will have to get used to the new ‘scores’ now.”
In this way, Vladimir Putin is not merely invoking the “better angels” of the nature of Western Civilization. His reference to a “polyphonic world system” should not be instantly misunderstood as a clever rhetorical pivot from the politically-charged term “multipolarity.” Indeed, the above proposal—the immediate basis for a way out of thermonuclear war, if implemented—is only capable of being competently comprehended for action, from the standpoint of the Ten Principles for a New International Strategic and Development Architecture composed by Schiller Institute founder, Helga Zepp-LaRouche. This document, particularly in the remaining days between last Tuesday, November 5, and the inauguration of the American President on Martin Luther King Day, January 20, 2025, should be closely studied.
For example, Principle Four of that document states: “Since mankind is the only creative species known so far in the universe, and given the fact that human creativity is the only source of wealth through the potentially limitless discovery of new universal principles, one of the main aims of the new International Security and Development Architecture must be providing access to universal education for every child and adult person living. The true nature of man is to become a beautiful soul, as Friedrich Schiller discusses this, and the only person that can fulfill that condition is the genius.”
But aren’t these only “nice words”? How does this Fourth Principle pertain in any way to what Putin said? And, again: Why is Putin’s idea of a “polyphonic world system” not only the immediate, narrow pathway out of otherwise-inevitable thermonuclear war, but also the way forward to a potentially unprecedented, worldwide renaissance out of our present, century-plus trans-Atlantic New Dark Age—the latest phase of which was sparked by the November 22, 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy? That very President John F. Kennedy hinted the answer to this question in his own way, three weeks before he was killed: “The artist, however faithful to his personal vision of reality, becomes the last champion of the individual mind and sensibility against an intrusive society and an officious state…. I see little of more importance to the future of our country and our civilization than full recognition of the place of the artist.”
Polyphony is a musical term, but perhaps our Idea of music must first be expanded, in order to understand what the actual topic is, that what both Vladimir Putin and Helga Zepp-LaRouche are proposing be discussed for an actually new strategic and development architecture to arise in the world today. The late economist and statesman Lyndon LaRouche, who spoke about this matter often, said, in his document “Music and Science: Before and After the 1815 Treaty of Vienna”: “As Beethoven emphasized, for example, the secret of the great Classical composers was the reciting of poetry as the root of musical ideas. It follows, as is the case, that instrumental music is merely an abstraction from the singing of poetry by choruses. Similarly, the music of a nation is differentiated, essentially, according to the differences in the manner in which the most influential poetry is composed in that language, as Schiller’s poetry, according to Beethoven, captures the essence of the principle of composition of German Classical music and as the poetry of Dante and Petrarca is the standard of reference for compositions of music in Italian. Hence, as the poetry composed in a language degenerates, so the power of musical composition of a user of that language degenerates.” The ability of a society to articulate its origin and deeper purpose degenerates. Soon a nation’s population can no longer recognize either their nation, or themselves. Compare, for example, the speeches of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King to the best of public orations from any American figure today. Who recognizes the better angels of America’s nature in the common political or social parlance of our time?
For the Schiller Institute, founded 40 years ago with the original intent to reverse the then-ongoing cultural collapse of Western nations by an emphasis on Classical poetry, drama and musical composition and performance, these matters are not secondary. Two weeks ago, the LaRouche Independent candidates Diane Sare and Jose Vega co-hosted an event, “Build a Chorus of Peace Against the Ghouls of War,” which employed Classical or Classically inspired musical compositions from around the world as the medium through which the speeches by the various participants, and the two candidates, were delivered. At the event, music was not an interlude; it was very fabric of the composition of, and the driver of the message of peace. Candidate Diane Sare conducted the chorus, performed in a brass quintet, and delivered one of the peace addresses, demonstrating the unity of effect of the whole.
Return, now, to consider Putin’s remarks reported above. Russia’s President is identifying polyphony as the potential basis for a renewed relationship with a morally degenerating, economically unraveling trans-Atlantic world—a new polyphonic system of international relations. It would be a good idea, it would seem, therefore if everyone interested in peace investigated what polyphony is. To respond to that proposal, Western nations need to revisit, re-examine and revive one the most powerful and misunderstood revolutions in human thinking of the past 300-plus years—the well-tempered, polyphonic revolution in musical composition and human thought, embodied in the person and compositions of J.S. Bach, and advanced by musicians and composers such as Bach’s sons, Franz Joseph Haydn, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Ludwig van Beethoven, Franz Schubert, Robert and Clara Schumann, Felix and Fanny Mendelssohn, Giuseppe Verdi, Johannes Brahms, Antonin Dvorak, and certain of their associates and collaborators. President-elect Donald Trump should take note of this. A “Special Musical Operation” should be launched by the American people, if not the new Administration, which energetically colludes with Russia, China, and all other nations committed to the cause of polyphony. (It would also help to fully reject the obscene State Department “Global Musical Initiative” that Tony Blinken inaugurated last year with his awful guitar-playing, which is probably a “Color Revolution” front.) Putin knows that Beethoven’s great Missa Solemnis was premiered in his hometown, St. Petersburg, Russia, April 7, 1824, two hundred years ago. Beethoven demanded this because he believed that Russia had many of the best singers in the world, and they were needed. Thermonuclear war may well be able to be avoided, if we dare to think like Beethoven, and build a world system of polyphony.
by Steve Carr (EIRNS) — Nov. 08, 2024
In a social media post yesterday, journalist Glenn Greenwald replied to the message of election denial by Democratic National Committee Chair Jamie Harrison, telling Harrison: “You and the corporatist and militarist party you lead just got your ass kicked all up and down the U.S., because Americans see that you only care about enriching yourselves at the corporate lobbying trough.
“If the humiliation you just suffered doesn’t usher in some humility and self-reflection, nothing will,” Greenwald concluded.
by Carl Osgood (EIRNS) — Nov. 08, 2024
“Despondent” Biden officials are mulling how to protect their national security priorities before President-elect Donald Trump returns to the Oval Office in January, according to a report in Politico. Whether it’s sending funds to Ukraine, or imposing new sanctions on extremist Israeli settlers, an array of options are on the table.
But there’s no formal plan yet for how to lock in President Joe Biden’s big-ticket policies against a Trump effort to dismantle them, a senior Biden administration official said. Some administration officials also believe that having such a plan won’t make a difference.
Trump is sure to quickly halt or reverse much of what Biden’s team manages to push through in these final months, multiple current and former U.S. officials said. He will have broad executive authority to do so, as well as enough support in Congress and in the judiciary, that almost nothing will stop him. “You really can’t ‘Trump-proof,’” one U.S. official said. “You can ‘Trump delay,’ you can throw sand in the gears, but there is no way short of legislation to ‘Trump-proof.’”
The U.S. weapons flowing to Ukraine is the top priority of these folks, with their plan to ram through the remaining $6 billion in military aid to Kyiv before Jan. 20. It’s not clear what Trump will do, if anything, to halt the weapons shipments and contracts with the U.S. military industry for more air defense systems that will arrive in years to come, Politico says. But the Pentagon will likely be unable to send everything it has pledged to bring those accounts down to zero by Inauguration Day, given that it takes weeks, or months, for munitions and other equipment to arrive in Ukraine from whenever the U.S. announces it. Once Trump is in office, he could decide not to send Kyiv those weapons—even if they’ve already been promised.
by Dean Andromidas (EIRNS) — Nov. 08, 2024
Former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant charged that there was no need for the Israel Defense Forces to remain in Gaza, and that it is only Prime Minister Benjamin Netaynahu who wants it. He also charged that Netanyahu has sabotaged the conclusion of hostage deals with Hamas. According to Israel’s Channel 12, Gallant, whom Netanyahu fired on Nov. 5, made the comments on Nov. 7, in a meeting with Israeli hostages’ family members, held in Gaza.
“The head of the Shin Bet, the chief of staff, and I think the head of the Mossad, also agreed with me,” Gallant said, explaining that he told Netanyahu that “the conditions were ripe” for a deal in July, and that he and the prime minister have been in conflict about the parameters for a proposal ever since. “I can tell you what there was not: security considerations. The IDF chief and I said there was no security reason for remaining in the Philadelphi Corridor,” referring to the strip of land in Gaza that runs all along the border with Egypt, which Netanyahu has championed as one of the key strategic gains of the war.
“Netanyahu said that [retaining] it was a diplomatic consideration; I’m telling you there was no diplomatic consideration,” he added. “There’s nothing left in Gaza to do. The major achievements have been achieved,” he was quoted saying. “I fear we are staying there just because there is a desire to stay there,” he added, potentially referring to Netanyahu’s stated insistence on absolute victory over Hamas, and possibly to far-right calls to occupy the Gaza Strip and create Israeli settlements.
Gallant said “it would be bad for Israel to rule Gaza,” over which Israel has to establish a governing body “that is neither Hamas nor Israel, because otherwise we will pay a heavy price.” “If this doesn’t happen, the process will continue” and will endanger more soldiers, if it leads to Israel protractedly remaining in Gaza, Times of Israelquoted him.
by Bill Jones (EIRNS) — Nov. 08, 2024
There was a call between President-elect Trump and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky on November 6. Elon Musk was apparently also on that call, and gave assurances that Starlink would continue to be available to Ukraine. This has caused something of a furor among certain layers of the US establishment, with the New Republic expressing concern over the influence of this “businessman” on official policy. It is no doubt also a matter of concern for the military-industrial complex, who have already been unnerved by the victory of an “anti-war” candidate to the presidency.
by Carl Osgood (EIRNS) — Nov. 08, 2024
Norwegian Refugee Council secretary-general Jan Egeland, who traveled to areas of northern and central Gaza this week, said in a statement Thursday that the “complete destruction” he witnessed there was “worse than anything I could imagine as a long-time aid worker.”
“What I saw and heard in the north of Gaza was a population pushed beyond breaking point,” said Egeland. “Families torn apart, men and boys detained and separated from their loved ones, and families unable to even bury their dead. Some have gone days without food, drinking water is nowhere to be found. It is scene after scene of absolute despair.”
“This is in no way a lawful response, a targeted operation of ‘self-defense’ to dismantle armed groups, or warfare consistent with humanitarian law,” he added. “What Israel is doing here, with Western-supplied arms, is rendering a densely populated area uninhabitable for almost two million civilians.”
“The situation in Gaza today is deadly for all Palestinians,” Egeland continued. “It is deadly for those who are aid workers assisting people in need, and for those working as journalists trying to document the horrors on the ground. Israel has repeatedly struck UN premises and imposed barrier after barrier—both physical and bureaucratic—to aid work. This week I have witnessed the catastrophic impact of strangled aid flows. There has not been a single week since the start of this war when sufficient aid was delivered in Gaza.”
by Carl Osgood (EIRNS) — Nov. 08, 2024
The Iranians are calling on Trump to learn from the mistakes of his first term. “We have very bitter experiences with the policies and approaches of different US governments in the past,” foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei on Nov. 7, reported IRNA. Baghaei added that every new election provides opportunities for revisiting and reconsidering unjust and ill-suited approaches. “What matters for us is the US’s deeds,” he concluded.
In Tehran, former speaker of the parliament, Ali Larijani, described now as an advisor to Ali Khamenei, is cautioning against Iran being dragged into a full-scale war with Israel. “Israel has killed many people in Gaza but has not achieved any of its goals. ... In Lebanon, they [the Israelis] killed many people. But did they succeed in altering the course of the war? Now they want to drag Iran into this conflict. As our leadership says, we must not fall into their trap. ... An emotional reaction would be a mistake; the response should be strategic,” Larijani stated on IRIB TV, reported TASS. He also emphasized that the decision on responding to the October 26 Israeli strike rests with the Supreme National Security Council, adding that it is inappropriate for everyone to voice their opinion on the matter.
The adviser stated that Israel’s primary objective in the Gaza conflict was to forcibly relocate the entire Palestinian population from the enclave to neighboring countries. However, when Arab states recognized this plan, they refused to allow “turning this plot into reality.”
by Bill Jones (EIRNS) — Nov. 08, 2024
Speaking at the Valdai Discussion Club, Russian President Vladimir Putin noted that the new system of international relations characterized by the BRICS and the new role of the Global South, must be polyphonic. “The rise of nations and cultures that have previously remained on the periphery of global politics for one reason or another means that their own distinct ideas of law and justice are playing an increasingly important role,” Putin said. “They are diverse. This may give the impression of discord and perhaps cacophony, but this is only the initial phase. It is my deep conviction that the only new international system possible is one embracing polyphony, where many tones and many musical themes are sounded together to form harmony. If you like, we are moving towards a world system that is going to be polyphonic rather than polycentric, one in which all voices are heard and, most importantly, absolutely must be heard. Those who are used to soloing and want to keep it that way will have to get used to the new ‘scores’ now.
“The former world arrangement is irreversibly passing away, actually it has already passed away, and a serious, irreconcilable struggle is unfolding for the development of a new world order.. It is irreconcilable, above all, because this is not even a fight for power or geopolitical influence. It is a clash of the very principles that will underlie the relations of countries and peoples at the next historical stage. Its outcome will determine whether we will be able, through joint efforts, to build a world that will allow all nations to develop and resolve emerging contradictions based on mutual respect for cultures and civilizations, without coercion and use of force. And finally, whether human society will be able to retain its ethical humanistic principles, and whether an individual will be able to remain human.”
Putin also issued a warning to those who are intent on continuing the same aggressive policy. “I have previously stated that we have reached red lines. The West’s calls to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia, a nation with the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons, reveal the reckless adventurism of certain Western politicians. Such blind faith in their own impunity and exceptionalism could lead to a global catastrophe. Meanwhile, the former hegemons, who have been accustomed to ruling the world since colonial times, are increasingly astonished that their commands are no longer heeded. Efforts to cling to their diminishing power through force result only in widespread instability and more tensions, leading to casualties and destruction. However, these efforts fail to achieve the desired outcome of maintaining absolute, unchallenged power. For the march of history cannot be halted.
“Instead of recognizing the futility of their ambitions and the objective nature of change, certain Western elites seem poised to go to any lengths to thwart the development of a new international system that aligns with the interests of the global majority. In the recent policies of the United States and its allies, for instance, the principle of ‘You shall not belong to anyone!’ or ‘You’re either with us or against us’ has become increasingly evident. I mean to say, such a formula is very dangerous. After all, as the saying of our and many other countries goes, ‘What goes around comes around.’
“Chaos, a systemic crisis is already escalating in the very nations that attempt to implement such strategies. The pursuit of exclusivity, liberal and globalist messianism and ideological, military, and political monopoly is steadily depleting those countries that pursue these paths, pushing the world towards decline and starkly contradicting the genuine interests of the people in the United States and European countries.
“I am confident that sooner or later the West will come to this realization. Historically, its great achievements have always been rooted in a pragmatic, clear-eyed approach based on a tough, sometimes cynical but rational evaluation of circumstances and their own capabilities.
“In this context, I wish to emphasize once more: unlike our counterparts, Russia does not view Western civilization as an adversary, nor does it pose the question of ‘us or them.’ I reiterate: ‘You’re either with us or against us’ is not part of our vocabulary. We have no desire to teach anyone or impose our worldview upon anyone. Our stance is open and it is as follows.
“The West has indeed amassed significant human, intellectual, cultural, and material resources which enable it to thrive as one of the key elements of the global system. However, it is precisely ‘one of’ alongside other rapidly advancing nations and groups. Hegemony in the new international order is not a consideration. When, for instance, Washington and other Western capitals understand and acknowledge this incontrovertible fact, the process of building a world system that addresses future challenges will finally enter the phase of genuine creation. God willing, this should happen as soon as possible. This is in the shared interest, especially for the West itself.
“So far, we—meaning all those interested in creating a just and stable world—have been using too much energy to resist the destructive activities of our opponents, who are clinging to their monopoly. This is obvious, and everyone in the west, the east, the south and everywhere else is aware of this. They are trying to preserve their power and monopoly, which is obvious.
“These efforts could be directed with much better results towards addressing the common problems that concern everyone, from demography and social inequality to climate change, food security, medicine and new technology. This is where we should focus our energy, and this is what all of us should be doing.”
by Bill Jones (EIRNS) — Nov. 08, 2024
In reply to a question from Feng Shaolei regarding the Russia-China relationship, Putin praised the success of the Chinese system. He also upbraided the U.S. for trying to impose sanctions on China, indicating that their relationship has helped China in overcoming problems caused by these sanctions. “As far as our interaction is concerned, the areas in which they are trying to hold back China’s development may well be complemented by our cooperation with the People’s Republic of China,” Putin said.
“For example, we started with energy. This is developing very actively both in the oil and gas sphere and in the field of nuclear technologies. We are also actively working on the creation of new units of nuclear power plants, on oil and gas supplies. But this creates an absolutely reliable system of energy security for China. We have a common border. No one can prevent this, no storms, no blocking of sea routes, nothing can prevent our cooperation, because we have a common border. As the supply goes on, so it will go on—full guarantee,” Putin said.
When Wang Wen raised a question about Trump’s statement about separating Russia from China, Putin replied: “I can hardly imagine such a question from Mr. President-elect, I think he understands that this question is very far from the realities in which we live. Russia is not uniting with anyone against anyone. All the more so when it comes to China, with which we have achieved, as I have already said, an unprecedentedly high level of mutual trust, cooperation and friendship.
I believe that such states as China and Russia, having hundreds, thousands of kilometers of common borders, a common history of coexistence practically in the same space, despite the difference of cultures, having common values, this in itself is a huge achievement, which we should use today and leave these achievements, strengthen them for future generations.
As for the possibility of restoring relations with the United States, we are open to this, but to a large extent the ball is on the side of the United States, because we have not damaged relations with them, we have not imposed any restrictions or sanctions against them. We do not contribute to any kind of armed conflict in the territories close to them. We have never aspired to this and, I would like to emphasize, have never allowed ourselves to do so in practice.
I do not understand why the United States allows itself to do so.
I hope that they too will eventually come to realize that it is better not to do this if we do not want any global conflicts.The President-elect of the United States, Mr. Trump, has made similar remarks. We will see how this will actually function, bearing in mind that the institution of the president in the United States is in one way or another bound by certain obligations. In one way or another, he is bound to those people who helped put him in power.
by Bill Jones (EIRNS) — Nov. 08, 2024
At the Valdai Discussion Club, Nov. 7, Russian President Vladimir Putin was asked, by former New Development Bank vice president and former IMF official Paulo Nogueira Batista, Jr. from Brazil about the role of alternative currencies to the dollar-dominated system.
Putin replied in a lengthy response, in part: “As for today the use of national currencies still has its effect. For Russia, for example, two-thirds of our trade turnover is already serviced in national currencies. As for the BRICS countries, 88% of our trade turnover is serviced in national currencies.
“We are now talking about using electronic tools for exchanging financial information between the central banks of our countries, the so-called BRICS Bridge system. We have discussed it at the expert level with all our BRICS partners. And the second system is also within the BRICS framework: we talked about settlements on securities exchanges. For today, I think this is optimal. This is what we are working on and what we should work on in the near future.
“I have heard a lot of talk, at the expert level and in journalistic circles, that we should think about creating a single currency. But it is too early to talk about it. And we do not have such goals among ourselves. Because in order to talk about a common currency, we need to achieve greater integration of economies with each other—that’s the first thing. And secondly, we need to raise the quality of economies to a certain level, so that they are very similar and compatible in quality and structure. The rest will simply be unrealistic, and may even be detrimental. So there is no need to rush into anything.
“I want to finish by saying what I usually start with when answering questions of this kind. We did not seek to abandon the dollar and we are not seeking to do so. The political and financial authorities of the United States or Europe are doing it themselves when they refuse to settle accounts in euros. The euro has not yet established itself as a world currency, and they are already restricting it with their own hands. This is nonsense.
“As for Europe, the problem there is that economic decisions are made by politicians who are often, unfortunately, not even experts in financial economics. And this is only to the detriment of these countries. That is why we, in Russia, at any rate, we are not giving up the dollar and were not going to do so. We simply refused to use the dollar as an instrument of payment. Well, denied and denied. But I think this is a terrible stupidity on the part of the U.S. financial authorities, because the dollar is the basis for all the power of the U.S. today. They have taken it and with their own hands are undercutting it all.
“And I would think that no matter what happens, the dollar is like a sacred cow, it should not be touched. No, they took it with their own hands and cut off its horns, do not wash its udders, but, on the contrary, exploit it for nothing. What is this? But it’s their own fault. Settlements in dollars are not shrinking in the world yet, as means of savings are also slowly decreasing, even in the near-peer countries.”