SITREP U.S.A., PART III

Why We Fight

by Barbara Boyd

[Print version of this article]

Sept. 20—In celebration of Constitution Day, September 17, President Donald Trump delivered an extraordinary defense of that which makes America exceptional and declared an open cultural war to bring back to life the intellect and spirit of the American Revolution. If the coup against the United States is to be defeated and the nation to be reunited, the President has just specified the most essential weapon.

Celebrating the same event, Attorney General William Barr, now the subject of daily character assassinations by the seditionists seeking the overthrow of Trump and the Republic, delivered a low key, but nonetheless scathing attack on a Justice Department which in recent decades has largely abandoned its charge to “do justice.” Barr called those who participated in such atrocities as the Mueller investigation, amoral “headhunters.”

These speeches occurred before the death of legendary Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Friday, September 18th. As Democrats pledge that they will never concede the election and Barack Obama’s retired generals advocate and map a military coup to replace Trump, they are simultaneously saying, right out of the gate, that if the President appoints Ginsburg’s replacement and the Senate confirms Trump’s appointee, there will be “war in the streets.”

Refuse Fascism, one of the coordinating arms for the present street riots in the U.S., was already planning for national demonstrations and riots starting September 21. They now say that the death of RBG, as Justice Ginsburg was affectionately known, should clear anyone of any delusions about the Constitution or the lack of necessity for overthrowing the government of the United States.

The RESIST effort to paralyze the Supreme Court, the highest court in the third branch of our government—at this point in the ongoing insurrection, with a contested election looming—should be obvious in its intent to destabilize the country. Simultaneously, the Democrats and their oligarchic funders are also advancing an agenda that includes packing the Supreme Court, abolishing the Electoral College, making Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C. states, and otherwise supporting secessionist movements aimed at dismantling the American Republic into something resembling a European parliament composed of squabbling confederated city states, controlled top down by the globalist financial elites.

On September 12, 2020, Colonel Richard H. Black (ret.), decorated combat veteran and former chief of the Criminal Law Division, Office of the Judge Advocate General, the Pentagon, detailed aspects of a planned military coup against the President as the culmination of the continuing insurrection and sedition against the Trump Presidency.

Other aspects of that plot have now become clearer as we place the activities of the Transition Integrity Project against the chronology of the military side of the coup against Donald Trump dating from first suggestions of the use of military force in January of 2017.

Lyndon LaRouche repeatedly examined the conditions for conducting a successful countercoup or counterinsurgency. Culture is the most essential weapon in such a campaign and the President’s recent speech indicates that he now understands that also. We will examine the President’s speech in the context of a 1988 piece by LaRouche on this topic: “The Impact of the American Ideology Upon the Failures of U.S. Strategy.”

We will then take these ideas up in the context of the present pre- and post-election deployments of the Transition Integrity Project (TIP) and related organizations. That examination demonstrates that it is entirely plausible that the recent riots were, in part, an exercise determining whether the “street forces” could reliably perform their intended roles in a coup and to establish firm lines of coordination and communication. This would explain the silence of the Harris/Biden campaign as parts of major cities burned and their bizarre description of these events as “peaceful protests.”

The Elements of Conducting a Countercoup

Like all great works by LaRouche, there are aspects of this work which are framed by the strategic realities of the time. This was a founding document for what LaRouche called a necessary “Anti-Bolshevist Resistance,” within the dynamics of the still ongoing Cold War.

In the paper, LaRouche emphasized that both the Soviet and Chinese economies of the time were on the verge of physical economic collapse, so that even were the United States to be reduced to the status of a Soviet client state, the actual danger faced by the world was that of a New Dark Age, brought on by the fact that globalist financial policies of looting and primitive accumulation, instigated by the actual evil Empire—the modern Anglo-Dutch one—could never produce the constantly expanding economy required to support the world’s population. Today, that same imperial entity, functioning, as LaRouche later said, like a slime-mold, employs a dangerous strategy of tensions betwixt and between the U.S., Russia, and China, to prevent the type of cooperation which could end their imperial rule, risking a war fatal to the human race.

These neo-Malthusians propose to preserve their power by wiping out whole populations, based on a resource war of attrition, and actual wars and the total information-control deemed necessary to police and subdue the populations which remain. This, they have widely and incessantly lied and propagandized, will be necessary to confront catastrophic climate change, a “scientific fact” wholly as fraudulent as the idea that the Earth is the center of the universe.

In this piece, LaRouche examined the concept of a “People’s War” such as that which the President is presently implicitly proposing as a countercoup. He makes the following critical points which I have applied to the present:

1. Warfare is essentially a matter of political will, with respect to which weapons are but the material means for the expression of that will. People’s War, LaRouche said, is approximately 1% lethal conflict and 99% cultural war. The most fundamental question in any countercoup, such as that which is proposed now, is the task of separating the actual armed insurgent forces from their actual and potential political base. It this can be done successfully, the insurgents can be effectively mopped up.

2. Success in this venture is a cultural question. In the case of the United States, can the revolutionary identity of the American people—situated, as the President said, in 1,000 years of Judeo-Christian civilization, and the Renaissance—be successfully captured and resurrected? Or, are we stuck with the Satanism and hedonism which attacked us after World War II in the form of pragmatism and classic British liberalism, and then morphed, like a deadly virus, into the 1960s rock-drug-sex counterculture, destroying our will to fight against those who would destroy us. The 1960s belief systems and ideologies are what you see on the street now. The New Left is in the institutions and in the board rooms and a whole generation of children has been educated based on these synthetic ideologies. Donald Trump is the first President to ever take this on directly, if incompletely. Winning wholly depends on whether the people take up the same ideas calmly, strategically, with the future of the next 50 years in mind, and with complete and total attention and focus.

3. The most fundamental principle of People’s War, LaRouche said, can be found in the following from President Lincoln’s Gettysburg address, memorializing those who had recently fallen on that battlefield:

The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us, the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us, that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave their last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the earth.

Sun Yat-sen used the same three-part principle, LaRouche says, namely, “of the people, by the people, and for the people” in shaping the Kuomintang in China. “Call it the idea of freedom achieved through the creation and defense of government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Call it the determination that such political creations should prosper and to be defended at any price,” LaRouche notes.

4. In looking at the present military plans for a coup, for which the present street violence now being waged against us must be seen as a dry run, the most important force to focus on is the political insurgency that is infecting the military of which the Antifa and terrorist elements are but mere auxiliaries. If you can neutralize the forces of cultural warfare by undermining the political will of the non-military political/cultural insurgency, an armed military insurgency cannot prevail. Friedrich Schiller’s historical studies in preparation for writing his Wallenstein, LaRouche says, are a full exposition of what you need to understand here.

5. The relevant characteristic for winning People’s War is the cultural penetration of virtually the entire range of public and private institutions of a society. The objective of our penetration is to turn these institutions against the adversary, either to transform them into vehicles for the furtherance of our policies or simply to neutralize their effectiveness as instruments of the adversary’s policies.

6. Patriotism, a simple defense of present institutions under attack, cannot supply the quality of political will required now. The quality of courage needed now means finding deep within oneself a cause which is worth more to you than mortal life itself. It is the lack of this quality which defines cowardice under the conditions in which we find ourselves now.

7. Like the President, LaRouche finds his best allies in the founders and the cultural conditions which existed when the Constitution was adopted. The ratification of the U.S. Federal constitution was accomplished by the circulation of the Federalist Papers and their debate and assimilation by a developed citizenry known at the time as the North American Latin farmer. The population of that time had twice the literacy rate, twice the physical productivity, and an average of twice the income of our adversary, the British. Earlier American patriots could look within themselves to find values worth more to each than life itself. But no more, LaRouche notes. Today, only a minority finds such values and those values are diluted.

8. The primary cause for the moral degeneration is the influence of the New Left and the correlated radical rock-drug-sex counterculture in shaping the way the majority of the population responded to the Viet Nam war experience.

9. LaRouche goes on to identify the Frankfurt School and the spread of outright Satanism through the New Left and counterculture as the key ideologies which must be understood, confronted, and superseded by reintroducing Americans to the classical principles of science, reason, and individual freedom directed at accomplishing the common good—the cultural matrix which must be again brought into being:

The New Left was launched in western Europe with key social democratic sponsorship during the second half of the 1960s ... it was not developed as a mass-based insurgency until the 1963-1965 interval. The radical rock-drug-sex counterculture was imported from the Satanist Aleister Crowley’s circles in Britain. The two combined [the New Left and the counterculture] did not emerge as a reshaping of the cultural matrix of the population until the 1968-1970 period, culminating in the 1969 countercultural “rainbow coalition” and Earth Day 1970.

By 1967-68, the crash program features of NASA had been taken down, “consumerism” had been introduced as a hegemonic idea, and post-industrial utopianism replaced the fundamental cultural driver of scientific and technological progress.

10. LaRouche writes that the Frankfurt School’s primary intellectual, Georg Lukacs, had found the culture of western Christian civilization largely resistant to the spread of Bolshevism. To spread Bolshevism, Lukacs argued, the “cultural matrix of western Christian civilization must be destroyed.” Western civilization, LaRouche states, had been developed around the idea of an “inner-directed individual, the individual who is controlled by reason.” This, the Frankfurt School’s Theodore Adorno identified as the “authoritarian” personality, which would inevitably become totalitarian or fascist. This, of course, is the primary defamation hurled at Donald Trump. According to Critical Race Theory, it is the central component of “whiteness.”

11. So, to unite the country, we have to put our shoulders to the wheel and rapidly recreate the cultural matrix of the Latin farmer, the high language and scientific imaginations of Poe, Longfellow, James Fenimore Cooper, Shakespeare, and Schiller, and the “harmony of interest” envisioned by Henry Carey. We need to reintroduce the fundamental idea that the human mind shares in the divine by the capacity to discover and understand the fundamental laws of the universe and create new laws and forms of “nature.” This, indeed, is the premise of Lyndon LaRouche’s Four New Laws to Save the U.S.A.

President’s Trump’s Speech

In that context, let’s revisit the President’s speech. If you don’t hear the words of Lyndon LaRouche resonating here, you are not listening. President Trump declared that the founding documents of the United States, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, were what makes this country “exceptional.” The Constitution was “the fulfillment of a thousand years of Western civilization ... the product of centuries of tradition, wisdom, and experience. No political document has done more to advance the human condition or propel the engine of progress,” the President began.

He then outlined the recent attacks on the very ideals embodied in those documents by:

These radicals, aided and abetted by liberal politicians, establishment media, and even large corporations.

Whether it is the mob on the street, or the “cancel culture” in the boardroom, the goal is the same: to silence dissent, to scare you out of speaking the truth, and to bully Americans into abandoning their values, their heritage, and their way of life.

We are here today to declare that we will never submit to tyranny. We will reclaim our history and our country for citizens of every race, color, religion, and creed.

The radicals burning American flags want to burn down the principles in our founding documents, including the bedrock principle of equal justice under law. In order to radically transform America, they must first cause Americans to lose confidence in who we are, where we come from, and what we believe.... The left-wing cultural revolution is designed to overthrow the American Revolution.

The President went on to attack “Critical Race Theory,” that Frankfurt School invention, which is at the center of the synthetic ideologies driving the present riots—ideologies that permeate the nation’s schools and have been used to brainwash an entire generation. He noted:

A perfect example of Critical Race Theory was recently published by the Smithsonian Institution. This document alleged that concepts such as hard work, rational thinking, the nuclear family, and belief in God were not values that unite all Americans, but were, instead aspects of “whiteness.”

He said that the proponents of this ideology were trying to impose a new segregation rather than striving for the “prize” envisioned by Martin Luther King—

“where children are not judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”... Critical Race Theory, the 1619 project, and the crusade against American history, are toxic propaganda, ideological poison that, if not removed, will dissolve the civic bonds that tie us together. It will destroy our country.

Trump has banned Critical Race Theory diversity seminars in the federal government. They had been widely taught. He also announced in his speech an offensive to restart the teaching of actual American history.

The Transition Integrity Project and
the Military Coup

On Monday, September 13, Attorney General Barr let loose on the current propaganda barrage driving plans for a military coup. “You know, liberals project,” he told the Chicago Tribune’s John Kass. “You know—the president is going to stay in office and seize power and all that s—-? I’ve never heard of that crap. I mean, I’m the Attorney General. I would think I would have heard about it.”

In the same interview, Barr also warned that the current insurrection is resulting in the country approaching “near mob rule.”

The fake “bulls—” that Attorney General Barr was talking about—that Trump would not leave the White House if a Democrat won the election—has been the chief stock-in-trade of the Transition Integrity Project since its founding in December 2019, when it was clear that impeachment of the President would fail. TIP was founded by Rosa Brooks, currently teaching law at Georgetown University, and Dr. Nils Gilman, Vice-President of Programs at the Los Angeles-based Berggruen Institute. This “weaponized narrative” has been repeatedly amplified by the deliberate full-spectrum information warfare operation being run against the President in the mainstream media since July.

While it presents itself as “non-partisan,” the main funding for TIP comes from the Protect Democracy Project and United to Protect Democracy. Both of these TIP funders themselves were launched in January 2017 by former Obama Administration lawyers, including former Deputy White House Counsel Ian Bassin, with the explicit purpose of undermining the Trump Administration. The Berggruen Foundation, funded by Nicolas Berggruen, is a major transnational elite, futurist fascist outpost, planning the major transformation of the world which must occur, according to them, because of climate change, and, more recently, due to COVID. They publish the WorldPost in conjunction with the Washington Post.

Rosa Brooks is a former Obama Pentagon official who served as an aide to Michèle Flournoy, the chicken-hawk Under Secretary of Defense for Policy from February 2009 to February 2012. Flournoy, who also headed Barack Obama’s Defense Department transition, is slated to become Secretary of Defense in a Harris/Biden administration. Brooks has served as a fellow at Anne Marie Slaughter’s New America Foundation (Slaughter was Director of Policy Planning at State under Hillary Clinton) and a fellow at the joint project of New America and Arizona State University on “the future of war.” Brooks knows much about weaponized narratives as the New America/ASU project spends substantive efforts studying precisely this topic. Prior to her ascent to the Pentagon, Brooks served as counsel to the President of George Soros’ Open Society Foundation and remains on the advisory board there. The fact that someone associated with Soros held a major post at the Pentagon is itself a testament to the security damage wrought by Barack Obama.

On January 30, 2017, Rosa Brooks authored an article in Foreign Policy magazine titled, conveniently, “3 Ways to Get Rid of President Trump Before 2020.” She favored impeachment as an immediate tool, making the same unconstitutional claim echoed by her Democratic Party colleagues, that Congress could impeach “for any reason whatsoever.” She also cited invoking the 25th Amendment, a tactic which came into being when Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein tried to implement it following the firing of James Comey. Finally, Brooks cited a military coup.

On September 7, 2017, an Australia-based, worldwide university consortium publication, The Conversation, picked up the coup idea and filled it out in an article called “Thinking the Unthinkable: Could There Be a Military Coup in the US?” authored by Luke Foster Middup, an academic specializing in “civilian-military relationships” at the British spy training nest, the University of St. Andrews, in Scotland. Nonetheless, the idea was in the background as impeachment was pursued through the bogus Robert Mueller inquisition and Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s impeachment show trial in the House.

The Pentagon, to date, has remained largely unscathed in the investigations of the sedition against the President. Evelyn Farkas, an ally of Brooks and Flournoy and the inheritor of the Eurasia and Ukraine portfolio at the Pentagon through 2015, after Brooks and Flournoy left the building, caused a stir in March of 2017 when she mouthed off on MSNBC about funneling classified information about the U.S./British spying operation against Trump to Congress. Stefan Halper, the British/CIA/FBI spy deployed against the Trump Campaign, clearly was paid for his work through the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment (ONA). Michael Flynn’s attorney, Sidney Powell, has filed papers in which sources attributed the felonious leak of the classified intercepts of calls between Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak to the Washington Post’s David Ignatius, to the Pentagon, and the ONA.

There were, of course, atrocious leaks and damaging media stories each and every time President Trump tried to implement his campaign promise to end the endless wars by pulling U.S. troops out of Afghanistan, the Middle East, and Germany. And, because of the enormous power of the Pentagon and the even more powerful private defense contractors, known colloquially as the Beltway Bandits, President Trump has only been partially successful in implementing his promise to bring the troops home and end deadly, dangerous, and self-defeating American campaigns abroad.

In addition, Trump’s corrupt Republican Party allies have thrown war hawk after war hawk at him for the key posts at State, Defense, National Security Advisor, and Director of National Intelligence—all of whom have openly conspired to thwart the President. Many of these people, like General James Mattis and former White House Chief of Staff General John Kelly, had longstanding personal relationships with each other before serving in the Trump Administration.

According to Bob Woodward’s recent book, former Defense Secretary James Mattis was telling former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats already in May 2019, that there would come a time when “some of us” would have to physically remove Trump from office. General Mattis, along with Obama’s Joint Chiefs Chairman, General Joseph Dunford, were the primary authors of the Pentagon’s 2018 National Defense Strategy, which declares Russia and China “revisionist” powers subject to military suppression, and sets the stage for a very, very dangerous new Cold War in which mistakes or incompetence could too readily lead to nuclear war. Michèle Flournoy has declared her outright “love” for Mattis in articles reviewing war policies under Trump.

Mattis, a bachelor who promotes himself as the “warrior monk,” is a devotee of the corrupt and genocidal Roman Empire, daily reading the writings of the stoic monster, Marcus Aurelius. He has had a decades-long relationship with both the fascist Satanist George Shultz and the equally genocidal Henry Kissinger. He takes his military strategy from British cold warriors, most prominently from Colin Gray.

In June 2020, the nationwide riots hit full force in Washington, D.C., becoming so violent at points that the Secret Service evacuated the President to a secure bunker in the White House.

When Joint Chiefs Chairman General Mark Milley joined Trump in a walk to St. John’s Church, to honor that national landmark set on fire the previous night by arsonists, the press and the insurrection corps within the ranks of retired generals went wild. Trump’s proposed use of the military to quell the riots was met with equal disdain and public condemnations, by Generals Mattis, Colin Powell, John Allen, David Petraeus, and John Kelly. Current Defense Secretary Mark Esper, a Beltway Bandit most recently located at Raytheon, denounced the proposal to use active duty troops. Milley apologized publicly for appearing with the President at St. John’s Church. Mattis told The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, a key player in the Pentagon’s disinformation runup to the Iraq War, that President Trump was “a threat to the Constitution.”

At the very same time, in late June 2020, TIP conducted a tabletop exercise using establishment Democrats and Never-Trump Republicans to map out the realities of a potential coup d’état. This exercise received a calculated PR rollout and has been widely publicized, in order to establish it as normative in the public mind.

In the exercise, the governing assumption is that the President is an unscrupulous, authoritarian would-be dictator seeking to consolidate his power with a base composed of “white power” and “extremist” networks, who would need to be neutralized and eliminated post-election. The Biden forces are portrayed as pluralist defenders of democracy whose adherence to “norms” would result in the loss of the United States to Trump’s fascism, unless they radically change their behavior.

As has been widely covered, there are two constants in the results. The election outcome will not be decided on election day because of widespread mail-in voting, a fact that is already being brought into being on the ground through Democratic Party efforts to promote widespread mail-in voting and accompanying fraud. In addition, the Harris/Biden allies in Silicon Valley and in the media say they will refuse to call the result on election day. Secondly, whether Trump or Biden wins, according to the faux exercise, there will be widespread street violence. The scenario in which Trump wins has the Democrats refusing to concede, seeking to fix the electoral college or abolish it, making demands to pack the Supreme Court, to assure statehood for Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C., and to allow western states to secede from the Union.

There are two major uncertainties in the scenario according to TIP: how the military will respond, and how much control the Democrats have over the street rioters. According to the official papers of the exercise, the June military response in Washington, D.C., in effect a generals’ revolt, was “reassuring.” With respect to the rioters, it is unclear how totally they can be controlled even if “mobilized.” The exercise counsels that the Democrats should work earnestly now on establishing even more direct connections with these groups to assure their performance. As Colonel Black pointed out in his presentation of actual coup planning, like that undertaken by the very same Pentagon and State Department actors in Ukraine, the street forces in this type of action merely serve as cover for trained military provocateurs who kill people and steer the action.

On August 11, 2020, in the wake of the July propaganda campaign about TIP’s exercise, Defense One, a magazine controlled by Democratic Party funder and New America associate David Bradley, published an article by retired colonels John Nagl and Paul Yingling blatantly calling for a military coup. Bradley also formerly owned The Atlantic, but sold his majority share to the Emerson Collective, an entity owned by Laureen Powell Jobs, the widow of Steve Jobs and a major force in Kamala Harris’ political career.

There was an immediate reflexive backlash to the call for the coup and Defense One followed up, on August 18, with a call to make this a matter of reasoned debate within the military, rather than a reflexive rejection. That article, if you can believe it, was authored by none other than Thomas Crosbie, an associate professor at the Royal Danish Defence College’s Centre for Joint Operations, Institute for Military Operations. A sociologist by training, his research focuses on military politics, the military profession and the conduct of war.

So, as might be expected, NATO has entered the fray. On September 4, 2020, The Atlantic further stoked the flames in this seditious campaign by running the completely fake claim, under Jeffrey Goldberg’s byline, that Donald Trump routinely disparages the troops as “suckers” and “losers.”

The reaction to all of this must be first and foremost an overwhelming electoral victory for Donald Trump, demoralizing the seditionists. This must be accompanied by a political program, based in Lyndon LaRouche’s Four Laws for economic recovery of the United States, which puts shovels in the ground and begins to turn on a massive economic recovery, with major emphasis put on large-scale infrastructure and rebuilding the nation’s cities. This undertaking, as Lyndon LaRouche specified, is not only necessary for the nation’s economic survival. It effectively separates the armed insurrectionists from their political allies. The cultural offensive identified by the President in his Constitution Day speech must also be immediately implemented—mobilized and taken out to every nook and cranny of the nation.

At the same time, the networks identified here must be put under full-scale surveillance and law enforcement scrutiny for the crime of sedition, including the retired generals and their allies in the Pentagon. Colonel Black’s warning must be circulated as if it were Paul Revere’s warning, revisited via the viral internet. The investigation of these insurrectionists must be a facet of what Attorney General Barr and John Durham have been considering with respect to the longstanding operation against this President. How far back does this actually go?

Nothing less will ensure the survival of not only this Republic but, also, given the clear and present danger posed by the perspective of the generals and chicken hawks like Michèle Flournoy, the world as a whole.