(left, Lyndon Larouche, 90, economist, political theoretician and cult leader)
For our reader, the LaRouche movement was part
Hare Krishna cult, part first-rate university.
“There was a untenable paradox in the
air: How could the youth be saved when a
lifelong contribution to the movement like Ken’s couldn’t spare him from Lyn’s
I know it’s tempting to link to larouchePAC articles, but as former Larouchie myself, you may easily just toss the thing away. It will only hurt your credibility.
It is a cult… because Lyndon Larouche is really just like a Guru in his movement. We can’t contradict him, and there’s as much internal power structure fighting (or should I say purges by him) as there is International intelligence gathering.
(Kronberg with wife, Molly. Kronberg had a printing business that did the Larouche publications.)
I became convinced of this when Kenneth Kronberg committed suicide. He was a longtime contributor to his movement, and assumed debts for many of Lyndon’s publications. (Ken was the Editor of Fidelio magazine). When all this was too much to bear (as most of Lyndon’s publications are mostly not profitable) Ken killed himself when Lyndon told us (the youth) that babyboomer’s should simply commit suicide. So he did. What did Kenneth have as eulogy from Lyndon? Nothing. Nada. Simple contempt (and attacks) for him for having creating havoc in HIS movement.
When you invest your life, your money, your integrity for someone who in the end tells you to commit suicide, there just no way you should respect him anymore.
By the way, Larouche calling for the impeachment of the President is nothing new. This polemic has been the one catching my interest in 2003. What is Lyndon saying 10 years later? SAME THING!! Impeach the president! The novelty and impact fades the more you use it. He’s been telling us about the economic crash for a much longer time.
You know.. A broken clock still gives you the right time twice a day.
Although I respect the way he wanted the youth to educate themselves (reading only original papers of discoverers.) I guess his Pride has taken to his head too much. Sad.
Happily, I realized I should only trust and humble myself before Christ. I hope he does too before he dies…
My involvement in the Larouche Movement was at quite a low level, and it’s not really “bad” per se. I am grateful for having had this experience. I am now much more aware of crucial matters than most people I encounter (mathematics, economics, arts, history) due to my involvement. So my experience was more positive than negative. (Without my Larouche experience, I probably wouldn’t have followed your writing Henry.)
I left mostly because I wanted to go back to a normal life and to have a family (which is rather impossible when living in that movement).
But my experience was good because EVERYDAY, we would be practicing our voice to sing in “Bel Canto” method (the method of the Renaissance). We would read Classics in groups, either be Socrates’ Republic, Friedrich Schiller’s plays, the Fundamental theorem of Algebra from Carl Freidrich Gauss or the Habilitation Dissertation from Bernard Riemann, or Gottfreid Leibniz’s Monadology, calculus or metaphysics. Constitutional papers was also read like the Federalist papers and so on. Geometrical papers were also read and practiced.
The Larouche movement was my university. We were briefed every morning (morning briefings) on how the political landscape was evolving and what would be our position, and how to be efficient. This helped our organizing in the streets. I thought we would change the world for the better.
But at some point.. I had used up all my savings and wanted to get back to a normal life. I still attended some classes, read Lyn’s papers, organized from time to time.
(left. Kronberg committed suicide by jumping off a busy freeway bridge)
KEN KRONBERG’S DEATH
But when Kenneth Kronberg died in 2007 and I saw the briefings following his death, I realized how lucky I was not to be forced to follow the narrative. There was no compassion for Ken and gratitude for his lifelong contribution. The youth group had to rationalize Ken’s death in terms of Lyn’s contempt against Baby Boomers. The gist was that Baby Boomers had no idea how to create wealth (or that they only know how to consume, instead of producing).
There was a untenable paradox in the air: How could the youth think they could be saved when a lifelong contribution to the movement couldn’t spare him from Lyn’s contempt? So what could spare you? This is where the cult thing comes up. I guess you have to follow everything Lyn’s says. Even if you have to crumble under major debt ON BEHALF OF HIM doesn’t mean you’ll get his respect. Just thinking about this makes me puke.
Lyn created a tension between the youth and the Baby Boomers. The Baby Boomers had to work hard trying to get donations (in telephone boiler rooms) while the youth were outside on the streets trying to persuade people and sell books. But Lyn kept the tension that the youth were doing “right” by singing in the street, while Baby Boomers were “wrong” because they could never grasp the idea of being productive.
This tension could lead to “purges” from Lyn. At some point he would simply fire a bunch of people. We would always be told what to think at the morning briefings. We would never get the other side of the story. I was really sad when I heard that Jonathan Tennenbaum was in a group that got “fired”. Jonathan Tennenbaum was probably the best science guy we ever had. He was teaching the youth about scientific history, method and debates, all in a humorous fashion. I just can’t understand why Lyn would get rid of him when he was such an asset.
[There is a large percentage of Jews in his movement. When you look
at names of leaders – Jeffrey Steinberg – Debra Freeman – Phil
Rubinstein – Ken Kronberg, Jews are a main part of the movement. Jews are very idealistic and guru prone. I
wouldn’t say they are Zionist though because we were told Zionism was a
control mechanism from “London.” He’s mostly in agreement with you on this
subject except the satanic part. The whole time I was organizing
(roughly 2 years), I never heard of Satanism or Luciferian doctrine.
Maybe that’s the whole point. Attract people with great ideas while
diverting them from the real problem: Satanism in secret societies /
politics. You probably won’t ever see the word Satan / Satanism or
Lucifer in most of the literature. If those words are there, they are
not evoking the same seriousness as your articles.]
When reading through anti-Larouche forums, I guess the “purges” were nothing new. This keeps a tension going inside the group so that Lyn could have some leverage to go against either parties if push came to shove against HIM. (Usually this involved people high in the movement as they also show leadership). I guess this is why I could call this a cult. The leader has somehow power over his disciples, however it is applied.
But it is not exactly a cult because we can leave whenever we want. We may be shamed by peers who stay in the movement, but I didn’t value the shame as I didn’t respect Lyn anymore.
In the end, I feel sorry for Lyndon. Having written “the science of christian economy”, I think it is another trick to deceive people that he is Christian. Having no humility himself, I think he is light years away from the kingdom of God, which should be inside each and every one of us.
Related – The Death of Ken Kronberg
Makow comment – Thank you “Belantorzorius.” Some of the best historical research available anywhere has come out of the Larouche movement: the works of Jeff Steinberg, Anton Chaikin, Webster Tarpley and Carol White to be specific. I briefly supported Larouche but was turned off by the constant telephone solicitations from an intense NYC Jew always connected with an imminent hyped up “crisis” ; and the naivety of Larouche and his followers in regard to FDR. I recall this Larouche booklet “Satan’s Children” ; so it shows there is a disconnect between having an awareness of evil and personifying goodness.
In response to my questions, Belantorzorius added:
“You can keep the children of Satan line. Because yes.. Larouche did often refer to ancient gods (Isis, Osiris) and a little of freemasonry. But It never got to satanic rituals, which is what opened me to realize Lucifer’s power. I guess it’s only me that wasn’t “open” for that kind of knowledge at the time.
I guess what I want to point out is that without Christ, all the knowledge you have won’t save you.
This is where the Luciferian Doctrine could sneak in. I say “could”. Because we were so much into intellectual knowledge, technology, science, arts, we could be duped with the Luciferian Doctrine because we would trust technology and scientific achievement (Intellect or knowledge of good vs bad) which is what Lucifer gave humans, instead of simply have faith in God and be cultivated by him.
But we weren’t prevented from works of discoverers that were very Christian. And I remember having discussions about “agape” . I guess it was just so “intellectual”. I wasn’t touched by the spiritual aspect in the Larouche movement.
I guess it’s not black and white as I first looked at it.
The youth that participated in the movement were from geeks, nerds, dorks, losers to normal people. Jerks were rare. Mostly.. we were very inspired and motivated by all the resources at hand and discoveries that were right around the corner.
Male female ratio I guess was the same as a university one without the “affirmative action” towards female. SO I guess 60/40 Male -female.
Love relations was not what I was looking for in the movement and usually you would have traditional boyfriend-girlfriend relationships. You know.. I remember sleeping underneath a grand Piano with 25 other youth members sleeping on the ground, couch, what have you. Having sex was hard because we couldn’t have much intimacy. But you could have a love relationship. Nothing really different than what you would have in a university setting. (there could be some hookups, but it was rare) Unless I wasn’t “open” for that sort of behavior at the time so I couldn’t “see” it. Trying to “game” women was practically impossible because we would read and learn 14 hours a day.‘