In reference
to Lyndon LaRouche's "New Bretton Woods" policy proposal.
This
transcript appears in the July
7, 2000 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
LaRouche
Promotes
New Bretton Woods System
While in Rome
Here
is the speech of U.S. Democratic Party Presidential pre-candidate Lyndon
LaRouche, entitled "Toward a New Bretton Woods," in Cenacolo
Hall of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, in Rome, on June 23. Due to
technical difficulties, the first few minutes of the speech are
summarized, followed by a transcript of the rest of his remarks. Subheads
have been added.
LaRouche
said that the current financial and monetary system has entered a phase
which in physics is called a "boundary condition," comparable to
the change in physical state from ice to water, or to what happens when
the speed of sound is approached, and a shock wave builds. This gives us
only three, plus one, alternative ways in which the present financial and
monetary system will be soon terminated: 1) a deflationary collapse; 2) a
hyperinflationary disintegration; 3) a "military" solution to
the crisis; or 4) the establishment of a New Bretton Woods system.
The
current phase started in 1997, with the breakout of what was called the
"Asian crisis," but which in fact was a general crisis, hitting
first the yen trade zone of the global economy. At that time, Japanese
Vice Minister of Finance Eisuke Sakakibara and U.S. Treasury Secretary
Robert Rubin proposed a solution to the crisis, which was rejected at that
time, but which has now been adopted, at the recent Chiang Mai meeting in
Thailand.
But
then, the United States went insane, and in October 1998, decided to adopt
a bailout policy, driven by the Federal Reserve, that marked a
phase-change in the crisis. From the threat of a deflationary explosion of
the system, we shifted to a phase characterized by the threat of a
hyperinflationary blowout, similar to the development of the
hyperinflationary spiral in Germany from March to November 1923.
The
power controlling the system, which is a financial-political-military
power, typically reacts out of desperation to this type of situation, by
launching wars, such as in the Balkans.
The
system is currently bankrupt. Approximately $41 trillion of world Gross
National Product faces short-term obligations of about $300 trillion. The
United States is running a current account deficit in the order of $500
billion a year, and importing capital in the order of $1-3 billion per
day.
Transcript
begins:
So
therefore, this pure political, military, and financial power is used to
intimidate and control other countries, while the U.S. press insists that
everything is wonderful for the U.S. dollar--propaganda which can largely
be considered part of the U.S. election campaign. The fact is, that other
countries are not so stupid. That's why the group of Chiang Mai, which is
the group of the ASEAN countries plus Japan, plus China, plus Korea,
recently acted to free themselves from control by the present
international monetary system. That is what happened in the G-15 meeting
in Cairo recently. That is the process which is being introduced through
the Organization of Islamic Conference, the group of international Islamic
countries. What has happened in the euro area, in the changes in
Maastricht direction, is a reflection of the Europeans' determination to
defend themselves from this threat from London and from New York.
So,
these are the immediate circumstances. The world is on the edge of saying,
"If the United States goes, if Britain goes, if the monetary system
goes, we must survive, and we must begin now to define alternatives to the
present IMF, present financial system."
The
same idea is expressed in a different way by the proposals for the Jubilee
action--the forgiving of debt of countries which have been robbed too
much. So, these political developments in various countries, the
international movement for a New Bretton Woods, the international movement
for a Jubilee year, coincide as a tendency.
Hyperinflation
Let
me point now to this question of hyperinflation, since there are some
notable economists in the room, and others who have some competence in
economics. Let me emphasize to you and to others the importance of not
overlooking a close examination of what actually happened in Germany in
1923. You should compare the known facts about the present financial
crisis with the events leading into the March-November 1923 Germany
crisis, the change in the French occupation and reparations demands and so
forth, and look at the way the German government responded to this
concession to the British and French, and also New York City, at the point
of a bayonet. And look at these months especially from March on into
November [Figure 1]. Now, up until March of 1923, the process
imposed upon Germany in 1923 had not produced a significant commodity
price inflation. In March, that began to change. In July, it changed
radically, and the rate of acceleration of commodity price inflation
zoomed into the point of the October-November destruction of the
reichsmark. If you compare everything we know about the present
situation--and there are many hidden facts which governments and others
are hiding; only after the crash occurs will we discover how insane
governments have been, because then all the dirty laundry will come out
for examination. But, on the basis of known facts, about Germany 1923, and
known facts about the present situation, the world today is in a situation
relative to hyperinflation, comparative to the situation in Germany 1923.
The
first, most obvious, and most inevitable expression of that
hyperinflationary trend in commodity prices is the recent zooming of
petroleum prices. There is no supply and demand reason for petroleum price
rises. The amount of petroleum being produced and available for purchase
exceeds all demand. Pressuring OPEC to increase its production is not
going to do anything good, it's going to make things worse. If I were
President of the United States right know, I wouldn't have any problem
with oil prices. As President of the United States, I would go directly to
the governments of each of the oil-producing nations, and buy the oil
directly--not from the middlemen. I would think the way the famous
[Italian statesman and industrialist Enrico] Mattei thought, some years
back, here in Italy. If you have the capacity to process the oil, you can
process the oil. If you have the power of government, you can make sure
the existing private facilities will process the oil for the government.
And under those conditions, the prices of petroleum would be approximately
those of a few years ago.
Where
does a price rise come from? From mergers and acquisitions, and from
derivatives. The flood of inflationary money into leveraged takeovers of
oil and other firms, has resulted in an added cost per barrel on financial
charges--not on the price of actually producing the petroleum. What you're
doing is, when you're paying for a barrel of oil, you're not paying for
the cost of the production and distribution of the barrel of oil, you're
paying also a tribute to the speculators who have added their investment,
as a cost, on top of every foreign barrel of oil which they deliver. You
have a rise in the price of gold under similar pressures. You have a
speculative escalation of real estate prices in many parts of the world,
for the same reasons. We will very soon be in inflationary rates of 5-6%
and rising in most commodity prices. The commodity price inflation will
tend to follow the same kind of path that the inflation in Germany
followed in March to November 1923, mostly on a world scale. If we submit
to that price inflation without bankrupting the financial system, we will
unleash the equivalent of a New Dark Age on the planet.
So,
the obvious thing comes up. If I, as President, were to buy oil the way I
indicated--the Mattei way--then this would collapse and bankrupt most of
the petroleum companies today. Because what I would be doing is bypassing
the margin of payment which is attributable to their investment, financial
investment, in debt.
The
Standpoint of Physical Systems
Now,
this comes to the question of what's the alternative. Yes, we could have a
New Bretton Woods, it could work, but what are the mechanisms which will
determine whether it's successful? The world economy today is not an
economy. It's lunacy! It's pure speculation. It's a John Law bubble. It's
a tulip bubble from the Seventeenth-Century Netherlands. It is investing
in the profits of speculation, not the profits of enterprise. So, we've
got to get back to thinking about economies, not in terms of financial
systems, but thinking of financial systems from the standpoint of
physical, economic systems. The idea that profit comes from financial
trade, must be abandoned. It's immoral. We must define profit, not in
terms of financial profit. Because whatever happens, the present financial
system will cease to exist. Some people will be very happy, because
finally there will be a tabula rasa, where there was once a
financial system. It's the only tabula rasa which is ever likely to
exist.
What
do we start with? We start with man.
What
is economy? It's not financial systems. Governments can create and
destroy, eliminate financial systems overnight, by an act of will. The
government makes the appropriate law, and the financial system disappears.
The government makes a new law, and a new financial system comes into
being. We did something similar at the end of World War II. We eliminated
whole currencies, and started new ones. We wiped out whole financial
systems, and created new ones--in that case, for Europe and the United
States, up until 1966, that was pretty successful. Soon, we are going to
have to do that again--very soon. You have to set new rules, new monetary
and financial rules, and it will work. But, what makes it work?
Real
economy starts with man. Now, contrary to some pagans, man is different
than animals. Man is the only creature which is able to change its power
in and over the universe, by will. No other species can do that. Only the
human individual mind can do that. We call this human reason. Progress of
humanity has always depended on discoveries which always are made by
individual minds--discoveries of universal principle. These discoveries
have been re-experienced and shared by other human beings. By discovering
and validating new principles, we increase man's power, per capita, in the
universe. Therefore, by increasing man's power over nature, through the
discovery and transmission and cooperation in the practice of these ideas,
man is able to improve his condition on this planet and in the universe.
The
Modern Nation-State
The
specific genius of modern European civilization, as extended to a large
degree throughout the planet, is expressed by a curve of rising population
density and standard of living which began in Italy in the Fifteenth
Century. From Italy it went to France under Louis XI. Louis XI established
the first modern European nation-state. He created modern France, because
he adopted the principle which we call in English, the general welfare,
which is called otherwise in English, the commonwealth. He accepted the
principle, and introduced that there is no form of government which has
moral legitimacy under natural law, except governments which are
efficiently committed to promoting the general welfare of all of the
people and their posterity--the example of the success of Louis XI, who
doubled the national income of France, physical income, during his 20-odd
years of rule. It was copied in England, where they eliminated the Wars of
the Roses under Henry VII, and introduced the great Erasmian reforms in
England in that period, which were based on the same principles.
Since
that time in Europe, the tradition of the legacy of the Italian
Renaissance, and its effects on England and France and elsewhere, inspired
people to believe that it was possible for the state to perform this kind
of function. Instead of a few people, as an oligarchy, controlling many
people, as human cattle, now the state becomes responsible for the
welfare, the improvement of the condition of life and development of each
individual person. When it became difficult for Europeans committed to
this principle to realize this form of state in Europe, they placed
increasing emphasis on the promotion of new republics of this form in the
Americas, both South America and North America. The United States was
created by the 1776 Declaration of Independence, based on these
principles, as expressed in the first three paragraphs of the Declaration
of Independence. If we look at a very simple test, the growth of
population, the improvement of demographic conditions of life, per person
and per square kilometer of area, since the Fifteenth Century, this is the
greatest revolution in human progress in all known human existence [Figure 2].
Thus,
if the nation-state, and cooperating nations, are committed to this
principle of promoting and realizing the discovery of new physical
principles and their application, there is no limit to the improvement of
the human condition.
In
every society so organized, each individual person is recognizable as an
immortal personality, as well as a mortal being, because the ideas, the
discoveries of principle which are the power of human beings, which make
man in the likeness of the Creator, are thus not only present, but are
expressed in the individual personality and the individual personality's
relationship to not only presently living people, but also to the past and
to the future. This applies not only to the history of scientific
discovery, it applies to Classical artistic principles. It is through
Classical artistic principles, and the improvement of language to reflect
the benefit of Classical principles, that the ability of human beings to
cooperate and to improve their cooperation in an effective way, becomes
possible.
A
Naturally Cooperative Relationship
Profit,
therefore, in physical terms, is a commitment to a margin of net
improvement in man's power in and over the universe, for this benefit, for
the general welfare. In the American System, as defined by Benjamin
Franklin, and Hamilton, and people like that--Lincoln, and I--there's no
such thing as a "state enterprise" or a "private
enterprise." Rather, there is a cooperative relationship, a naturally
cooperative relationship between true private entrepreneurs and states
which provide basic economic infrastructure. The responsibility of the
state for the general welfare, means the state must take care of all of
the people and all of the land area. And, no individual enterprise or
consort of individual enterprises is capable of such a function. The
management of land and water, the improvement of schools and health
systems and things of that sort, are the moral responsibility of the
state, and cannot be seconded out to merely private enterprises. The
function of the private enterprise is to promote the general welfare
through the ingenuity of the private entrepreneur. The scientist-engineer
who owns a firm, who makes an improvement; the farmer who improves the
methods of agriculture, and so forth--this is the proper area of private
enterprise. The state cannot privatize its responsibility for the general
infrastructure. It would be immoral to do so. Privatization of that form
is intrinsically immoral, as a matter of natural law.
However,
to the same degree, the government must protect the opportunities of the
entrepreneur to make a true entrepreneurial contribution to the general
welfare. Among the things which are most important for the public area, is
the promotion of the quality of education, which promotes Classical
culture, Classical cultural conceptions in language, and Classical
science, and commits the society to base its hope on improved prosperity
on the benefits of using Classical culture's influence on the cooperation
among persons in order to promote scientific and technological progress,
per capita and per square kilometer of land area. That is the proper moral
function of the state.
Now,
I'll come to my concluding point.
Emergency
Action
Since
we have to make an emergency decision soon, and since we must convince
many people to support those decisions, we must keep our radical changes
to a limited amount. At leisure we can make other improvements later, but
the form of the emergency action to be taken on short notice must be
relatively simple and clear. Therefore, the best model we have available
that's appropriate, that people know about, is the example of what was
done by Europe and the United States during the period from the close of
the war into the middle of the 1960s. The system of fixed exchange rates
and protectionism, which is characterisic of the period 1946 through 1958
in particular, is the model which is required as an emergency basis for
the crisis we face today. The difference is, that today, unlike 1946, we
must carry the policy to the degree that President Franklin Roosevelt had
intended for the postwar period, before he died. Which comes back again to
the Jubilee question.
President
Roosevelt had intended, as he warned Churchill, that at the end of the
war, the United States would use its power to ensure that there was the
instant dissolution of all colonial systems: Portuguese, Dutch, British,
and French. When Roosevelt died, London's 10 Downing Street took over U.S.
foreign policy. This process was completed before Roosevelt was in his
grave. This time, we must do what we did in 1945-1946 on monetary reform
to rebuild a war-torn, ruined planet. This time, we must create a just
world economic order, as Roosevelt had intended.
This
means that groups of developing nations must have equal authority in the
revised monetary system. This is not merely a matter of formalities of
law. The issue here is, the world is now in a very dangerous situation,
demographically. Presently, the planet--as in India, as in China, as in
Southeast Asia, as in Africa, and so forth--we have a war-torn,
strife-torn, impoverished world, in which nations presently are not able
to sustain acceptable qualities of life for the individuals who are now
living.
For
example, take the question of Middle East peace, which is now in jeopardy.
Now, there can be no peace in the Middle East, because there's not enough
water available for everyone. A decent standard of life does not exist in
the Middle East unless there's adequate water. The water does not
presently exist, and will not exist. But nonetheless, we in the advanced
nations have the technology to enable the Middle East to produce fresh
water in sufficient quantities, and quality, to meet not only the needs of
the present population, but to transform the desert gradually into a
prosperous area of growth--as in the Mezzogiorno, or in central Sicily.
Sicily was once a very prosperous area. We have the technology and
know-how to do it again: bring back a semi-desert area into a prosperous
area of agricultural habitation.
So,
with the aid of the technology which we in the United States, Europe, and
Japan, and to some degree the former Soviet Union, have, if we turn that
technology and continued progress into an engine of technological
progress, we, of nations which were traditionally the more economically
developed, can aid the nations which were more poorly developed, to
develop true equality, through long-term credit, to provide them with our
sale to them of the technology they need, without which they can not meet
the requirements of their own populations. This is true in the western
area of China, this is true in India today, this is true in Africa, it's
true in the Middle East and elsewhere. Therefore, we must have a twofold,
simple policy for emergency action. Other improvements can come once we
have started on the emergency action. Then, the parliamentarians can have
time to discuss those things.
But,
we must have immediate executive action to deal with this crisis. There
are two things: the question of the form of the reorganization, the
emergency reorganization--the experience of the United States and Europe
from 1945-1946 into 1958-1966 is a good example of what that must be, the
form. But, it must include a just participation of the so-called
developing nations, not just the so-called advanced ones. Secondly, we
must accept a long-term mission, of at least 30 years to begin with. The
new monetary and financial system of sovereign nation-states, must use the
power of the nation-state to generate on this planet a mass of tightly
regulated credit, at low prices, with the purpose of extending credit of
up to 30 years, for long-term infrastructure development, and in the short
term for actual private entrepreneurial development, on a global scale. A
global enterprise which means the promotion of scientific progress, at an
accelerated rate. And also, the transformation of this planet, so that the
discrepancy, the moral discrepancy, between the poor of the world, and the
nations which are more stably provided--that must end. We must bring
global justice at last, if we wish to have a world in which there are
sovereign nation-states which live at peace with one another, for the
common benefit of all mankind. Thank you.
|