Talk:LaRouche movement: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 22:16, 1 August 2008 editDking (talk \| contribs)1,659 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 18:16, 28 September 2024 edit undoChopinAficionado (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users12,201 edits Update banner shell
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Talk header}}
			{{controversial}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=C\|
			{{WikiProject Politics\|importance=low\|American=yes \|American-importance=low}}
			{{WikiProject Skepticism\|importance=low}}
			{{WikiProject Conservatism\|importance=low}}
			}}
	{{LaRouchetalk}}		{{LaRouchetalk}}
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
			\|archiveheader = {{aan}}
			\|maxarchivesize = 100K
			\|counter = 6
			\|minthreadsleft = 5
			\|algo = old(30d)
			\|archive = Talk:LaRouche movement/Archive %(counter)d
			}}
			{{Archives \|search=yes \|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III \|age=1 \|units=month \|index=/Archive index \|auto=long\|
			*]
			*]
			*]
			}}
			{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
			\|target=/Archive index
			\|mask1=/Archive <#> \|mask2=/Trials \|mask3=/Incidents \|mask4=/Sources
			\|leading_zeros=0 \|indexhere=yes
			}}

	==~~Opening~~ ~~comments~~==		== Who is Weld?==
			"According to courtroom testimony by FBI agent Richard Egan, Jeffrey and Michelle Steinberg, the heads of LaRouche's security unit, boasted of placing harassing phone calls all through the night to the general counsel of the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) when the FEC was investigating LaRouche's political contributions.
	Also more critical content. Article is mostly neutral in tone, but the content is a bit one sided. Much more information about the Larouche Movement -- limited information from those who disagree. (of course there should be more about the movement itself, but there needs to be a clearly organized counterpoint for something so controversial) From Eggplantwizard, Feb 17, 2005

			During the grand jury hearings followers picketed the courthouse, chanted "Weld is a fag", distributed leaflets accusing Weld of involvement in drug dealing, and "sang a jingle advocating that he be hanged in public"."
	::Note: Eggplantwizard's first edit was on February 17. ] 23:28, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
			This is the first and only mention of Weld in this article. Who is this?

			] ] (]) 22:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
	:::Yet s/he already knows how to revert. See contribs. ] 23:30, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
	::::And your point is...? I've been around a while -- I was anonymous before, and not as active. That's all ] 02:16, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
	:::If you've been around before you created an account, that would certainly explain why you're so familiar with Misplaced Pages. Don't worry about my comment. We've had some trouble over other articles related to this subject, though not with this article, and there have been a number of sockpuppet and anonymous edits, so I'm on the lookout, and your talk page said you were new here, though I see you've now changed that. But no offense was intended, and you are, of course, welcome to edit any article you choose to. And welcome to Misplaced Pages. ] 03:16, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

			== External links modified ==
	:Thanks for the feedback. Have you looked at the other articles in the series? (See the listing in the box on the right side of the article). The ] is an often critical look at the philosophy espoused by LaRouche. ] is a chronological account of the man, with the good and bad listed. This article has two sections which have been hidden pending more work, one on the movement's funding and the other on its cultic aspects. If you have anything that you'd like to add, then be bold and add it. Cheers, -] 23:25, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

			Hello fellow Wikipedians,
	== reason for removing george w. bush from current villains ==

			I have just added archive links to {{plural:3\|one external link\|3 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If necessary, add {{tlx\|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx\|nobots\|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
	When you listen to their speeches and read their articles, it's striking how much they refer to Cheney and how little to Bush, esp. compared to reading or watching your typical U.S. Democrat or leftist speech/literature. They have made a very conscious decision to go after Cheney as a villain while calling Bush a puppet and ignoring him. ] 04:49, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070430074257/http://www.larouchepac.com:80/pages/breaking_news/2007/04/27/quincy.shtml to http://www.larouchepac.com/pages/breaking_news/2007/04/27/quincy.shtml
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081109211214/http://www.larouchepac.com:80/news/2008/02/19/italian-senator-exposes-secret-plan-fascism-europe.html to http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2008/02/19/italian-senator-exposes-secret-plan-fascism-europe.html
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080908023438/http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2008/02/19/lisbon-treaty-based-program-british-fascist-oswald-mosley.html to http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2008/02/19/lisbon-treaty-based-program-british-fascist-oswald-mosley.html

			When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.
	:That's cool. Thanks for explaining it. Cheers, -] 06:18, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

			{{sourcecheck\|checked=false}}
	== missing pieces ==

			Cheers.—]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">]:Online</sub></small> 10:57, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
	I think there are a few missing pieces about the LaRouche movement that are important here: intelligence-gathering, methods of fundraising and recruiting, more on the nature of the relationship between the different realms of the movement. I believe that some of this should be moved over from ] and that article should focus more on the man himself. Other parts of it we don't have written yet. ] 19:01, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

			== External links modified ==
	:I agree. When I drafted this I included sections for funding and cultic behavior, but haven't gathered enough information to flesh them out. The funding is empty; about all I can say there is that he's raised X amount for campaigns and received X money in FEC matching. I once saw an allegation, which I haven't tracked down, that money paid for subscriptions has been re-categorized as political contributions in order to qualify for matching funds. Please, if you know more, add it. The cultic behavior section has a bunch of notes, but I know there's more. It could include the recruiting. The only thing I know about intelligence gathering is something I found while researching U.S. News &WR's lawsuit against LaRouche, in which they accused his agents of impersonating their reporters. He denied it, but admitted they pretended to be from non-existent publications in order to get access. Even so, how many news agencies have a "Director of Counterintelligence"? As a general rule I agree that the bio should be kept to the man. Feel free to move stuff over. Cheers, -] 21:18, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

			Hello fellow Wikipedians,
	:Re: funding. I was trying to compile a list of running mates for ], and stumbled on what appears to be a significant funding source: campaign debt. Since 1990, LaRouche political committees have left almost $19 million in apparently unpaid expenditures. I am not intimately familiar with campaign committee financing, but I believe that each election's committee is a separate legal entity, as are the exploratory committees. I don't know who is owed the money. Perhaps TV and radio stations, the largest contractors along with LaRouche-owned printing/mailing companies, are required to extend credit to political committees. It may be that the campaign contributions go to pay affiliates and other campaign contractors get IOUs. If so, I think that the creditors would be grousing about it. -] 00:09, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)

			I have just modified 3 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203083630/http://www.patriotledger.com/your_vote/election-1/x128165993/Frank-meets-LaRouche-candidate-Brown-in-only-primary-debate to http://www.patriotledger.com/your_vote/election-1/x128165993/Frank-meets-LaRouche-candidate-Brown-in-only-primary-debate
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120218141859/http://www2.timesreview.com/ST/Stories/T071609_Obama_ES to http://www2.timesreview.com/ST/Stories/T071609_Obama_ES
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080404043228/http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw2001-2/poland.htm to http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw2001-2/poland.htm

			When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
	==Purported cult==
	This material is from the article ], which we are paring down to a pure list. Editors here can best evaluate its statements and decide how to integrate it into this article. Thanks, -] 21:01, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

			{{sourcecheck\|checked=false\|needhelp=}}
	:''] movement
	:''See ]; ], ], ], the ], ] and ]. The Schiller Institute and LaRouche Youth Movement were accused in October 2004 in a British coroner's court of using mind-control techniques on Duggan, a Jewish student from London, England who died in odd circumstances after spending time at one of the movement's "cadre schools".

			Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 22:16, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
	This article should mention the former PRONA party in Brazil and the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine.

			== Far right? ==
	:I would ask whether this is accurate reporting. You go to many sources, I wonder whether the question of truth comes in. Purported cult means to me that the user is making a baseless claim. Would someone please explain the Jeremiah Duggan stuff? The German authorities concluded a suicide and found no evidence to re-open the case. Is it possible that the German authorities got it right, that indeed it was suicide, for whatever reason? If they got it wrong, can we prove this? If they lied, can we prove this? <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 13:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

			Although the article says this organization is far right the other substantive portions of the article seem to indicate that the group is left wing and supports parties generally seem as on the left E.g. Democrats in the United States. Should this be removed? ] (]) 03:28, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
	==One part of the the article I don't understand==
			:The categorization includes it under ]. ] (]) 18:13, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
	From the article: ''Verdi tuning. Agitates in favor of the so-called "Verdi tuning", in which A=432Hz, as opposed to the common practice today of tuning to A=440 Hz.''

			== Europe section ==
	What is this about? What is A?

			I'm copying the whole of the current Europe section here because I'm going to delete most of it from the article. My reasons for deletion are that it has a lot of unreferenced statements, relies excessively and (in parts) exclusively on primary sources, and because most of it does not contain anything controversial despite being in the Controversy section of the article. It's just like a list of "Look this European country also has a branch of the movement, and this European person said they like LaRouche". I won't delete the stuff that is actually about something controversial.
	:Good question. "A" is the musical ] that commonly serves as the baseline for tuning instruments. Before being fixed at 440Hz in the 19th century it had various changing or local intepretations, mostly lower than the current value. A tenet of the Schiller Institute is that the current value of A is too high for the human voice. I'll see if I can improve the brief explanation. Thanks for pointing out that confusing part. Cheers, -] 12:24, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
			So here's the copied European section:

			<!--The first paragraph of this section jumps from BüSo to Patriot party and then back to BüSo again. Might make sense to change order-->The LaRouche Movement has a major center in Germany. The {{lang\|de\|]}} (BüSo) (Civil Rights Movement Solidarity) political party is headed by ], LaRouche's widow. It has nominated candidates for elective office and publishes the ''{{lang\|de\|Neue Solidarität}}'' newspaper.{{cn\|date=August 2024}} Zepp-LaRouche is also the head of the German-based ]. <!-- Die Europäische Arbeiterpartei --> In 1986, Zepp-LaRouche formed the "Patriots for Germany" party, and announced that it would run a full slate of 100 candidates. The party received 0.2 percent of the 4 million votes and "failed to elect any candidates to the parliament".<ref>{{cite news\|url=http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=1986_245831\|title=Narrow state election victory gives boost to Kohl coalition\|work=]\|date=June 16, 1986\|access-date=January 30, 2008\|archive-date=January 14, 2009\|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090114071838/http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=1986_245831\|url-status=live}}</ref> In Germany, the leader of the Green Party, ], reported receiving harassing phone calls that she attributed to BüSo supporters. Her speeches were picketed and disrupted by LaRouche followers for years.<ref>{{cite news\|title=LaRouche Stirs in Germany \|author=James M. Markham \|work=The New York Times\|date=June 30, 1986}}</ref>], a student from the UK attending a conference organized by the Schiller Institute and LaRouche Youth Movement in 2003, died in Wiesbaden, Germany, after he ran down a busy road and was hit by several cars. The German police said it appeared to be suicide. A British court ruled that Duggan had died while "in a state of terror."<ref name=Witt>, By April Witt, ''The Washington Post'' Sunday, October 24, 2004; Page W12</ref> Duggan's mother believes he died in connection with an attempt to recruit him. The German public prosecution service said her son committed suicide.<ref name=Degen>Degen, Wolfgang, , ''Wiesbadener Kurier'', April 19, 2007 (German); .</ref> The High Court in London ordered a second inquest in May 2010, which was opened and adjourned.<ref> {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100523045903/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/8694448.stm \|date=May 23, 2010 }}, BBC News, May 20, 2010.</ref> In 2015, a British coroner rejected the suicide verdict and found that Duggan's body bore unexplained injuries which indicated an "altercation at some stage before his death."<ref> {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170703071242/http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-32828147 \|date=July 3, 2017 }}, BBC News, 20 May 2015</ref>''Solidarité et progrès'' (Solidarity and Progress), headed by ], is the LaRouche party in France. The party was previously known as ''Parti ouvrier européen'' (European Workers' Party) and ''Fédération pour une nouvelle solidarité'' (Federation for a New Solidarity). Its newspaper is ''Nouvelle Solidarité''.<ref>{{cite web \|url=http://www.solidariteetprogres.org/ \|title=Solidarité &; Progrès – Actualit&eacute \|publisher=Solidariteetprogres.org \|access-date=2008-11-23 \|archive-date=May 11, 2011 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110511224753/http://www.solidariteetprogres.org/ \|url-status=live }}</ref>{{primary source inline\|date=August 2024}} Cheminade ran for ] in ], ] and ], finishing last each time. The French LaRouche Youth Movement is headed by Élodie Viennot. Viennot supported the candidacy of Daniel Buchmann for the position of mayor of Berlin.{{cn\|date=August 2024}}]]]Sweden has an office of the Schiller Institute (Schillerinstitutet)<ref>{{cite web \|url=http://www.nysol.se/ \|title=LaRoucherörelsen i Sverige \|website=Nysol.se \|access-date=2008-11-23 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090122022519/http://www.nysol.se/ \|archive-date=January 22, 2009 \|url-status=dead }}</ref>{{better source needed}} and the political party ] (EAP). The former leader of the EAP, ], started as a member of the ] (SSU), and was assigned to investigate the EAP and the ELC. After joining the EAP, he had his membership in SSU revoked. Following the ] on February 28, 1986, the Swedish branch of the EAP came under scrutiny as literature published by the party was found in the apartment of the initial suspect, ]. Soon after the assassination, ] television in the U.S. speculated{{cn\|date=August 2024}} that LaRouche was somehow responsible.<ref name=brainwash>{{Cite web\|url=https://larouchepub.com/exon/exon_toc.html\|title=Has Your Neighbor Been Brainwashed About Lyndon LaRouche?\|website=larouchepub.com\|access-date=September 7, 2020\|archive-date=September 16, 2020\|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200916092832/https://larouchepub.com/exon/exon_toc.html\|url-status=live}}</ref>{{primary source inline\|date=August 2024}} Later, the suspect was released. No connection with LaRouche was shown.{{cn\|date=August 2024}}In Denmark, four candidates for parliament on the LaRouche platform (Tom Gillesberg, Feride Istogu Gillesberg and Hans Schultz)<ref>{{cite web \|url=http://www.schillerinstitut.dk/ \|title=Schiller Instituttet i Danmark \|publisher=Schillerinstitut.dk \|access-date=2008-11-23 \|archive-date=October 11, 2007 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071011054136/http://schillerinstitut.dk/ \|url-status=live }}</ref>{{primary source inline\|date=August 2024}} received 197 votes in the ] (at least 32,000 votes are needed for a local mandate). The Danish LaRouche Movement (Schiller Instituttet)'s first newspaper distributed 50,000 copies around Copenhagen and ].<ref> {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071109233029/http://www.sive.dk/kampagneaviser.htm \|date=November 9, 2007 }} Schiller Instituttes Venner webpage</ref>{{primary source inline\|date=August 2024}}The {{lang\|it\|Movimento Solidarietà{{snd}}Associazione di LaRouche in Italia}} (MSA) is an Italian political party headed by Paolo Raimondi that supports the LaRouche platform.{{cn\|date=August 2024}}Ortrun Cramer of the Schiller Institute became a delegate of the Austrian ] in the 1990s, but there is no sign of ongoing relationship.<ref>{{Cite web \|url=http://www.ispac-italy.org/ngoprof.php?Org_ID=105 \|title=Non-governmental, Individual Experts, Academic, Scientific, Research and Professional Organizations \|access-date=July 23, 2007 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20041214011804/http://www.ispac-italy.org/ngoprof.php?Org_ID=105 \|archive-date=December 14, 2004 \|url-status=dead }}</ref>{{better source needed}}<ref>{{cite web \|url=http://www.larouchepub.com/tv/tlc_programs_2000.html \|title=LaRouche Connection Master List 1995–present \|publisher=Larouchepub.com \|access-date=2008-10-23 \|archive-date=August 4, 2007 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070804164245/http://www.larouchepub.com/tv/tlc_programs_2000.html \|url-status=live }}</ref>{{primary source inline\|date=August 2024}}Polish newspapers{{which\|date=August 2024}} have reported that ], leader of the populist ] party, was trained at the Schiller Institute and has received funding from LaRouche, though both Lepper and LaRouche deny the connection.<ref>{{cite web\|url=http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw2001-2/poland.htm \|title=Antisemitism and Racism \|publisher=Tau.ac.il \|access-date=2008-11-23 \|url-status=dead \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080404043228/http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw2001-2/poland.htm \|archive-date=April 4, 2008 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web \|url=http://www.larouchepub.com/pr_lar/2001/011228poland_lies.html \|title=LaRouche Committee Denounces Polish Press Lies \|publisher=Larouchepub.com \|access-date=2008-11-23 \|archive-date=December 14, 2004 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20041214131939/http://www.larouchepub.com/pr_lar/2001/011228poland_lies.html \|url-status=live }}</ref>], leader of the ], has stated multiple times that she supports LaRouche's ideals.{{cn\|date=August 2024}}In February 2008, the LaRouche movement in Europe began a campaign to prevent the ratification of the ], which, according to the U.S.-based LaRouche Political Action Committee, "empowers a supranational financial elite to take over the right of taxation and war making, and even restore the death penalty, abolished in most nations of Western Europe."<ref>{{cite web\|url=http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2008/02/19/italian-senator-exposes-secret-plan-fascism-europe.html \|title=Italian Senator Exposes Secret Plan for Fascism in Europe \| LaRouche Political Action Committee \|publisher=Larouchepac.com \|access-date=2008-11-23 \|url-status=dead \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081109211214/http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2008/02/19/italian-senator-exposes-secret-plan-fascism-europe.html \|archive-date=November 9, 2008}}</ref>{{primary source inline\|date=August 2024}} LaRouche press releases suggest that the treaty has an underlying fascist agenda, based on the "]" ideas of Sir ].<ref>{{cite web\|url=http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2008/02/19/lisbon-treaty-based-program-british-fascist-oswald-mosley.html \|title=Lisbon Treaty Based on Program of British Fascist Oswald Mosley \| LaRouche Political Action Committee \|publisher=Larouchepac.com \|access-date=2008-11-23 \|url-status=dead \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080908023438/http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2008/02/19/lisbon-treaty-based-program-british-fascist-oswald-mosley.html \|archive-date=September 8, 2008}}</ref>{{primary source inline\|date=August 2024}} ] (]) 21:25, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
	There is documentation on this. It also goes back to Verdi, who had a law passed in the italian parliament, that C=256Hz be the frequency at which the note C was to be set. This did not last forever. LaRouche may base it upon this. Also, from my understanding, if C=256Hz, A=432Hz.--] 22:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

			:Actually decided against deletion and instead moved everything non-controversial to the International section, and kept the controversial stuff in the Controversy section. The relevant edits: ] (]) 21:50, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
	== Non-neutrality of opening comments ==

			{{reflist-talk}}
	The statement "...the movement itself teaches that Lyndon LaRouche is a central figure of international political and cultural importance, and that the movement is a necessary response to save the world from an ongoing and imminent global crisis." is a clumsy sentance. The author sounds like they are stating that the movement is factually a necessary response to save the world from crisis, which sounds more like an editorial. At the very least, the word 'teaches' should be changed to 'proclaims'. <small>—''The preceding ] comment was added by'' ] (] • ]) 21:33, September 30, 2005.</small><!--Inserted with Template:Unsigned-->

	:That's fine. Thanks for that improvement. -] 22:20, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

	== Anon comment ==

	An anon left the following comment (in parentheses) in the article. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 18:42, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

	:"War on ] carriers. Demands identification and isolation of ] carriers, and proposes use of directed energy beams for cure. (Really? Please reference where the LaRouche Movement recommends "directed energy beams" for curing AIDS patients. Somebody?)"


	::''PROGRAM TO PUSH RADIO-FREQUENCY WEAPONS, AS WE PUSHED WHAT BECAME THE SDI''
	::''by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.''
	::''It is now urgent that we present the case for U.S. and allied development of radio-frequency weapons, in the manner we popularized the idea of what became SDI/TDI.
	::''4. Role in cancer and AIDS research.''
	::And other text at the same location. -] 20:22, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

	This is correct. LaRouche has proposed this. But this was before Executive Intelligence Review went online, so it is hard to find internet sources. For more info, check out the older material.
	--] 22:05, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

	== Plato and Aristotle ==

	I think Plato is an ideological hero and Aristotle is an ideological villain for the movement. There are LaRouche.. people (I can't in good conscience put a more specific noun here that isn't derogatory, so I'll refrain) all over my campus constantly seeking debate of passers-by, and a frequent opening line of theirs is "Are you a Plato person or an Aristotle person?" They go on to talk about how Plato's view on education is one where no knowledge is ever inferred and all learning must be done by redoing all the investigation that has ever been done... or something, and this is a view they support. Aristotle, on the other hand is "a slave of inference." I don't know if those people are representative of all LaRouche supporters (though I suspect it), but I make sure not to talk to them anymore. -] 00:34, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

	:Yes, that's about it: Plato and Aristotle represent these two factions, so to speak, that have continued to exist for ever. There's a whole bunch of stuff in Larouche's autobiographies, but for a more, erm, coherent, view, see ''Right Wing Populism in America'' (which is one of the few resources on LaRouche that's not swamped in propaganda).--]\|]] 01:08, 19 November 2005 (UTC)


	Do not place heros or dislikes. There are no arguments in the article just lists of people. That is not good. Remove them. <small>—''The preceding ] comment was added by'' ] (] • ]) {{{2\|}}}.</small><!--Inserted with Template:Unsigned-->
	<!-- I Timothy Clemans do not think this is important
	== Note on organizational security ==
	The street addresses of the LaRouche Movement offices are not generally listed publicly, but are available from reverse directories and other sources. Events are usually not announced as they are open only to invited persons. LaRouche members told me the reason(in Seattle downtown) why when I asked why the organization wasn't in the phone book. ]

	:Be that as it may, is the information really encyclopedic? To begin with, what some members said to you is not verifiable. Can we find a source for this? Secondy, what's the significance? Given all the organizations we have articles in Misplaced Pages on I'm sure there are many that only list a P.O. box for an address. We'd need to have a reason to mention it here to give it relevance. It might fit into the hidden, waiting-to-be-developed "cult-like behavior" section. -] 06:54, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

	It does have a meaning, because people investagate WLYM all the time. The Seattle people(all I know is that it is in Lake City and a guy told why they don't and the boss(the second lady in back on left in picture http://www.wlym.com/~seattle/uw_chorus.JPG) in the field told me that their security is low) tell me that operatives join acting like they are apart of it but really are not. The guy told me that you get the address somewhere. Seattle even has changed phone numbers Internet Archive of WLYM.com.
	Another reason is if you can not even find an address to place like WLYM Seattle where people meet all the time online then people must not care that much about WLYM or they like secrets.
	They have been investagated in Seattle by the FBI, the Washington State Patrol, and the King Country Sherifs Office. People just get sent there (UNVALUABLE SORUCE), but some LaRouche youth members do agree.] King Country Library System and Seattle Public Library System computer usage for this addition.
	-->

	==IMHO==

	I have looked over a number of the LaRouche articles on Misplaced Pages. It seems that there are more of them than necessary. It also seems that they are dominated by a small number of editors, who have something of a jihad against LaRouche. These editors seem to have done a bit of bullying toward newcomers. I think that those of you who belong to this group should have the best interests of Misplaced Pages at heart and allow these articles to become a bit more neutral. LaRouche is controversial and a bit of a weirdo -- just quote him, let his words speak for themselves, don't feel that you have to strengthen your case by a lot of theorizing and speculation about what he really means. --] 20:16, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

	:LaRouche speaks in his own words on his websites, and we provide links to those. The purpose of an encyclopedia, as opposed to a book of quotations, is to summarize conventional wisdom. Is there any issue you have with this specific article? -] 23:35, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

	You put the Jeremiah Duggan section back in, saying he is "notable" and "died at a LaRouche seminar." In fact, he did not die at the seminar; the article doesn't even say that he did. He died running around in traffic. The idea that the seminar somehow caused his death is a pretty far fetched conspiracy theory. I thought that Chip Berlet and his colleagues were against conspiracy theories, but apparently an occasional conspiracy theory is OK when it suits the agenda. Like I said, there seems to be a bit of a jihad against LaRouche going on here, and a general lack of neutrality. --] 15:05, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
	::Duggan died while attending the seminar. He was not in Germany on a social visit. Conspiracies do exist, but that is beside the point. -] 02:22, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

	==]?==
	Are we sure about this decision? Given LaRouche's fear of ] and other sensationalistic art forms as a destracting stimulant that endangers one's ability to think rationally (and thus leaves one suggestable, suceptable to ] ] and other ]es).
	Something does not seem right with this inclusion. -- ] 01:50, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

	:Google -] 02:36, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
	:For example:
	:''Internet audio broadcast for Dec. 20, 2003, featured a discussion with actor, director, and Lyndon LaRouche's collaborator Robert Beltran, after the end of the run of his production of Clifford Odets' ''The Big Knife'' in Los Angeles.'' -] 02:38, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

	:There must be a way we can tell how long he was involved with LaRouche, since he is not merely involved with ] music (again, something LaRouche despises) but also '']'' (LaRouche dissagrees heavily with Rodenberry's vision, which seems in the same mold as ]' and ]'s vision of one world government and cultural pluralism, the opposite policy LaRouche has taken).

	:Is he even ''actively'' involved with Mr. LaRouche, or is he merely a supporter? Because I, myselfe, agree with much of what LaRouche says and have sometimes thought of supporting him wholly, but I still know enough to see that he is a '''cult leader''' who wishes to tightly regulate his society, not to mention his ensnarement over false delema abolutism (] ''is'' '''''evil''''', rather then merely mistaken).
	Or, perhapse I am merely mistaken about Mr. LaRouche, and in this case he is more flexible over the life-style of his followers then I presumed.

	:Again, is their a way we can know how long Mr. Beltran has been involved with Mr. LaRouche and how active in the movement he is?

	Thanks -- ] 03:51, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

	:I just saw that he became active in the movement from 03, and that he is indeed quite involved with them. I guess that means he has modified his lifestyle to suit the ] ideal. Pure logic, he is a ] now. -- ] 04:18, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

	::There may be instances of claiming supporters who have since left the fold. I don't think that the list has to be limited only to current supporters, but we should indicate if a person is no longer associated, or was associated only for a limited time. Also, in the case of Beltran, he's called a "collaborator" in the EIR, so it seems clear that there is a claims from that side that there was a significant relationship. Merely being a non-notable supporter is not sufficient for inclusion in the list, no offense. "Collaborator" is also used for other performing artists who have worked with the movement. Cheers, -] 10:27, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

	==Stanley Dale==
	:::Who is Stanley Dale, and who says he is part of the LaRouche movement? --] 16:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

	::::Dale was an employee of some LaRouche campaigns. He was prosecuted in connection with them. -] 20:58, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

	:::::What is your source, and what makes him notable? --] 16:44, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

	::::::Here is the source:. His case was newsworthy. -] 20:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

	:::::The article says that he was just hired to circulate petitions. That doesn't make him an "associate or manager." --] 16:33, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

	::::::Yes, folks who associate with other people for business purposes are called "associates". He was hired to manage the petition process. -] 17:54, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

	:::::Above, you tell IdeArchos that "Merely being a non-notable supporter is not sufficient for inclusion in the list, no offense." Apparently a person who was not a supporter of LaRouche, who did not share his ideas, and was merely hired to do a job just like the phone company or the garbage pickup, is to be included on the list if it somehow makes LaRouche look bad. This is what I mean about the lack of neutrality in these articles. --] 16:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

	:::::::Dale was notable enough to make the newspapers for his support of LaRouche. I assume that most of LaRouche's supporters on the list are paid too. The fact that many of his associates have been jailed is relevant to the history of the LaRouche movement. -] 20:52, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

	==Deletions==

	SlimVirgin should not be deleting material with no explanation. His behaviour is really no different from IAMthatIAM, who is supposedly pro-LaRouche. --] 16:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

	== Carter ==

	*''Take the case of "deregulation," as set wildly into motion under Brzezinski-misguided President Jimmy Carter. That four-year term, with its fanatical emphasis on the combined follies of "fiscal austerity" and "deregulation," did more damage to the U.S. economy, in four years, than has been done under any other post-1945 Presidency, prior to the drive to "globalization," begun at the beginning of the last decade.''
	*'' Since about the time of the inauguration of the administration of President Jimmy Carter, there has been a persistent, catastrophic collapse of the share of national income of the lower 80% of family-income brackets.''
	*''And in 1976-77, Jimmy Carter from Georgia, became the flag-bearer for the Southern Strategy, the racist policy, inside the Democratic Party.''
	*''"The Men Behind Jimmy Carter's Bid for a Thermonuclear War, 1976"''
	*''The next change came, after '71, with the Carter Administration: which was the Southern Strategy, Democratic Party version. In other words, the Republican Party became dominated under the Nixon Administration, by racists. The Carter election, was a takeover of the Democratic Party, to where the racists had a dominant position. What the Democratic Party did, in effect, was to say, "We're going to defend the Democratic Party, by keeping those who are pro-racists, in the party, to vote; and to vote for our candidates." And, therefore, we picked a dummy, Jimmy Carter, who didn't know what he was doing—a mental case, had a mental breakdown; that's what qualified him to become governor in Georgia. He was the kind of man they could trust. And, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who is also crazy—and dangerously so—and David Rockefeller, took this dummy, Gov. Jimmy Carter, paid him a lot of money, and made him President! And, the way it worked, is, the Democrats argued, "We have to keep the racists in the Democratic Party, to keep them from running over to the Republican Party, and then the Republican Party would run the nation."''
	*''LaRouche also drew widespread attention, for his election-eve 1976 half-hour prime-time TV campaign broadcast, in which, as the U.S. Labor Party Presidential candidate, he warned voters about the menace of a Trilateral Commission-run Jimmy Carter Administration. LaRouche's dire warnings of a global confrontation and economic crisis, in the event of a Carter victory, set the groundwork for international resistance to the Zbigniew Brzezinski-run Carter regime.''
	For these and a dozen similar quotes I think Carter belongs on the list of "villains". LaRouche frequently refers to Carter as a very bad president. -] 21:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

	:Wow Will, that is a very advanced world view you promote concerning LaRouche. Is the world to be separated into heroes and villians? Does LaRouche put Superman as a hero or a villian? How does one define these categories?--] 13:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

	==Fraud Charges==
	Citing a source, disputing and disproving these charges, a source cites shows official FBI documents, should be allowed on this site. LaRouche released a book entitled "Railroad" showing that the whole prosecution was a set-up. Are the Wiki administrators going to allow truth on their site?

	:I didn't delete reference to "Railroad". I deleted tendentious arguments and unsourced assertions (who invited LaRouche to join the Democractic Party? Who brought him into the Kerry campaign?) -] 19:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

	::Does one need an invite to join a party? Does one need permission to work to elect their choice of president? Do I need permission to vote now too? --] 13:26, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

	:::No, but an editor asserted (without any sources) that LaRouche joined the party because he was invited, and was later "brought in on the Kerry campaign". If it is asserted that these happened then we need to provide sources. If a minor party worker invited LaRouche to join the party then that probably isn't noteworthy. -] · ] · 20:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)



	==The LaRouche Movement template==

	What is the argument behind giving Jeremiah Duggan equal billing with Helga Zepp LaRouche or Amelia Boynton Robinson? His connection to the movement seems tenuous at best. --] 22:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

	==POV edits==

	The assertion about "entryism" is clearly POV, and even if it were true, it would be "original research" (see ].) As far as Gene McCarthy is concerned, your claim is false; McCarthy signed the ad in the Washington Post to exonerate LaRouche 10 years earlier. Similarly, I don't see any basis for disputing the Pierre Salinger stuff. If you find a source that says Salinger was hypnotized or brainwashed by LaRouche, include it. --] 05:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

	:Members of one political party running for office in another is a tactic often referred to as ] - no original research is required to establish this, since the entry in Misplaced Pages covers this. As regards the McCarthy/Salinger links, if you can find a source showing actual support, cite it. None of the evidence presented so far shows more than generic support for civil liberties, which can only be taken seriously if it extends to cover unpopular groups. ] 12:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

	The original research comes in where you assert that the LaRouche candidates are practicing "entryism". That appears to be your own opinion. Please cite a source that says they do that. You seem to be under the impression that the LaRouche candidates are not Democrats. What party did you think they belong to? In the "LaRouche Youth" article there is a link to video of LaRouche activists speaking at the Texas Democratic Convention. There is no doubt in anyone's mind that they are with LaRouche. They could hardly be infiltrating it.

	I added another cite on Gene McCarthy that I found in another LaRouche article. There are plenty of them. I did not restore the Salinger one until I find out exactly what your objection is. He dedicated a piano sonata to LaRouche. That strongly suggests to me that he was a supporter. Do you disagree? --] 14:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

	:I've deleted reference to entryism (BTW, entryism is often overt, as in the case you mention, but I'll let that slide). Still, I think it's relevant in assessing cases like Gene McCarthy's. The quoted interview consists (on McCarthy's part) of general criticism of the Bush Administration, of the kind that most Democrats would agree with. There's nothing here to suggest that McCarthy endorsed the views of the LaRouche movement. I've been quoted by EIR myself, and talked to them on the phone (though I tried to avoid doing an interview) and I certainly would not like to be listed here as a supporter. To try and cover this, I've restored the caveat deleted earlier, but without the reference to entryism.] 22:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

	:On Salinger, are we talking about the same guy - ], former press secretary for JFK? There's nothing in his entry to suggest he ever wrote a piano sonata. On the other hand, he was famously gullible in his later years (see the TWA incident) and could easily have been persuaded to sign something without reading it carefully.] 22:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

	::Yes, we are talking about the same guy. However, a more substantial source than an internet posting of the piano sonata would be welcome. // ] 10:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

	The cited message from McCarthy re the Democratic Convention ends with these sentences: "Let me give the youth at this press conference something less material, and perhaps more useful—my outrage at their exclusion and my support for their mission. Let me be a part of their mission." That seems like pretty unambiguous support to me.

	Were you quoted by EIR under the name "John Quiggin"? It doesn't turn up on a web search. Of course, only a little of the printed EIR is available on the web. --] 23:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

	: On McCarthy's message, I think it can equally well be read as a somewhat incautiously phrased statement of solidarity with an excluded group, the kind of thing you hear (or used to hear) a lot on the left. There's plenty of evidence to suggest his views, most obviously on environmentalism, were different from those of LaRouche. As regards EIR, I think there is a separate Australian version - I doubt that it's on the web.] 01:08, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

	== LaRouche Publications and Misplaced Pages Policy ==

	I removed this section:
	:;'''LaRouche Publications and Misplaced Pages Policy'''
	:As a result of ]:

	<blockquote>"Misplaced Pages users who engage in re-insertion of original research which originated with Lyndon LaRouche and his movement or engage in edit wars regarding insertion of such material shall be subject to ban upon demonstration to the Arbitration Committee of the offense."</blockquote>

	:LaRouche publications are considerred unreliable for purposes other than citing the viewpoints of LaRouche and the LaRouche movement.

	Self reference is strongly discouraged. Also, in the overall scale of the article this doesn't seem important. -] · ] · 06:46, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

	:Point taken. I think something should be said though on the accuracy of their publications. ] 11:24, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

	::If you wish to claim inaccuracy, please cite an example of something they published that turned out to be wrong. --] 15:00, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


	== This article ==
	Tells me virtually nothing about the organisation. Seems to be a battleground for different views. ] 23:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

	== Associates and managers ==

	Is it important these people have been convicted?

	If so, what have they been convicted of? <humor> jaywalking? treason? </humor>

	What source says they have been convicted?

	--] 06:59, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

	== This page is in danger of violating several WikiPedia policies ==

	Removed this short section:

	*Other LaRoucher-related websites
	**
	**http://AboutSudan.com A compendium of news and LaRouche writings on Africa
	**, an Internet news service

	AboutSudan.com just contains automated news from so many news sources INCLUDING EIRNS, as does Mathaba.Net. That is not sufficient to be classed under a vague term "Laroucher-related websites". Are these and other web sites simply for containing news from EIRNS to be called BBC related web sites for the news from the BBC on those sites?

	The top of this discussion page says:

	This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	The including of web sites as being related, or even a PART of Larouche's movement as was Mathaba.Net also removed today after being added by the same person who added the above section, when they are NOT, is both unsourced, and potentially libelous. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 06:50, 22 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

	:Maybe "sympathetic websites" or "websites that carry LaRouche news feeds" would be a better heading. We have no way of knowing who runs them, of course, so the conection is subject matter, outlook, and, most of all, material. The "American Almanac" is a major host for LaRouche-related documents. About Sudan is a bit more mixed. Mabatha.net is just plain odd. It belongs to the "(Libyan) Green Charter International", according to site. The funniest thing I've found yet is this Mabetha article written by ], of all people. , "Bill White, a Mathaba News Service correspondent." Its actually one of the more thorough recent analyses of the LaRouche movement that I've read, though it dwells on their mutual enemies. (Separately, White argues over whether he's been a LaRouche supporter.) -] · ] · 10:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

	:: Of course a heading as you propose would be more accurate but what is the point of that? EIRNS is a news agency, of which there are many: Cuba has a news agency, Libya, Iran, etc, would sites that contain news from those agencies be worth mentioning under sections on Cuba, Libya etc? It seems a bit over the top? But what is without any foundation and your methods of research are really wanting if you use such methods - is your reference to the above URL at Overthrow.Com to describe what Mathaba is! Please! Overthrow.com belongs to the more-than-controversial Bill White, and what Bill White says about himself - being a Pravda correspondent, Mathaba correspondent, etc cannot be taken at face value. You should first ask those agencies if he really IS a correspondent. I've search Mathaba, and found nothing to suggest that, nor any item since? See http://www.mathaba.net/authors - again I don't see Bill White there. And what is wrong with what they say about themselves: http://www.mathaba.net/about - why would you reference a self-proclaimed (!) "neo-nazi racist" who revels in controversy as the basis for deciding what some other organisation or agency is about?! I'm sorry, but either you are well intentioned and lacking severely in the logical basis for research, or you are trying to use unsubstantiated biased/crazy sources in relation to LaRouche, which is therefore not objective, and then even those sources you are using in relation to LaRouche you are also using the same dubious methods to reference. The end result will be a completely unsubstantiated random mess, won't it? <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 16:41, 22 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

	:::I'm not using him as a reference, just stuff of interest for the talk page. As far as I'm concerned Bill White isn't a reliable source for the time of day. Regarding "AboutSudan", they describe themselves as having an "affiliation" with ''Executive Intelligence Review''. -] · ] · 19:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
	==Ramsey Clark==
	There seems to be no evidence for listing him as an associate or manger or in any connections. The refs 3 &4 are to Larouch-related sources about his having defended them in one case. I think listing him here is a BLP violation unless there's more evidence than that. He defended SHussein also. He practices criminal law. ''']''' 23:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

	:Yes, the only (known) assocation between Clark and LaRouche is that Clark defended LaRouche in a criminal case. I don't see a problem with removing his name. -<B>]</B> ] <b>] </b> 00:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

	:: --] 05:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
	:::Will Beback, kindly explain why the same reasoning should not apply to Stanley Dale. --] 01:50, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

	::::Dale was not a lawyer defending a client. Dale went to jail for his actions on behalf of LaRouche. Those are two major differences. -]] ] 02:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
	:::::These do not appear to be major differences. Both Dale and Clark were hired professionals, one a petitioner-for-hire, the other an attorney. Dale did not go to jail "on behalf of LaRouche" -- that's a ridiculous assertion, Will. He went to jail because he was greedy and used shady methods to make a buck.

	:::::There is a major difference between Dale and Clark, and that is that Clark appeared at the Mann-Chestnut hearings, of his own volition, and made a speech extolling the good character of LaRouche and his movement. I have an old videotape of this and I can probably dig it up and provide quotes if you like. --] 14:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
	::::::Another difference between them is that Dale achieved his minimal notability solely through his involvement with LaRouche, while ]'s involvement with LaRouche is barely a footnote in his biography.
	::::::"...reedy and used shady methods to make a buck". How's that different from other associates who went to prison? ]] ] 16:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
	::::::Also, did Clark appear at the Mann-Chestnut as a paid professional, or as an unpaid admirer? I doubt we have any way of knowing. ]] ] 16:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
	:::::::The answers to your questions seem obvious. It is reasonable to assume that members of the LaRouche movement support LaRouche's ideas; from what we hear from ex-members, it is not a well-paying profession, so there has to be a motive other than financial gain. Regarding Ramsey Clark, he is not a criminal attorney; he is a specialist in political trials, and he picks and chooses his clients. The fact that Clark is famous and Dale is not does not make any difference with respect to whether they should be seen as "associates and managers." --] 01:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
	::The qy of RC's motivations has been discussed at the page for him, & is not something we're going to settle at WP. Putting him here is plain BLP violation. Listing anyone as a supporter or associate of LaRouche without really sound evidence is in my opinion a BLP violation. I think such evidence is probably there for the others. ''']''' 05:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

	:::I don't think we're saying that all of associates are followers. There is sound evidence that Clark and Dale were both paid associates of LAaRoouche, and Dale was imprisoned for work he did for LaRouche. ]] ] 05:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
	::::This is an article about the LaRouche movement. A business relationship is not the same as an affiliation. Unless there is documentation of some sort of affiliation, both Clark and Dale should be removed. --] 22:53, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

	:::::I agree. The cited article offers no evidence that Dale was affiliated with the LaRouche movement, so I am removing it. Also, including it in this article implies that LaRouche was somehow responsible for Dale's wrongdoing, and there is no evidence of that either. --] 22:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

	==NPOV==

	The intro is not written from a neutral point of view. Please can people try to make this not a piece saying how wrong the larouche-ians are, especially in the lead, and to write in a neutral tone. It's late here but I'll have a go tomorrow.] 02:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
	:::There seems to be a trio of editors here that insists on making every article that mentions LaRouche into an ].--] (]) 15:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

	::You are quite right. The lead leaves out that LaRouche is a convicted felon and runs a widely denounced political cult. Would your lead about Stalin say he was "a forceful leader who helped modernize the Soviet Union?" How about a "totalitarian dictator?" Would that be NPOV for Stalin? How about Hitler? "Improved the german military, reduced population, and enjoyed large rallies?" Maybe mention a totalitarian dictator who murdered millions of Jews and other targeted groups?" NPOV does not mean sanitizing reality.--] (]) 02:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

	:::Good luck, Merkinsmum. NPOV is a rare and precious commodity in these parts. --] (]) 07:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

	:::Before making edits, it would be helpful if you could set out passages you believe are POV and your proposed amendments. ] (]) 11:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

	::::I rearranged the text a bit in a way that I think makes it more neutral. The first paragraph is entirely factual, while the second paragraph summarizes or quotes opinions about the movement. ]] ] 12:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
	:::::I'm happy with it now, thanks Will. I think it was just that the lead started with the criticism very early on. But a bit of shuffling has made it look better, and the amount of criticism in the lead seems proportionate to the worlds view of them by the sounds of it.
	::::::Cberlet- the article doesn't leave out that it's a denounced cult. It says plenty about that, and it's mentioned in the lead. As to him being a convicted felon- for those who don't know of LaRouche, perhaps you can mention that in the criticism section? Because otherwise including a cite saying they are a criminal gang or something in the lead, (as the article does at present) seems a bit strong. I'm not saying it's wrong, but it needs to be explained somewhere in the article, or we don't explain why that's in the lead. Things in the lead should be mentioned later on anyway, especially something of that seriousness, which the reader needs to know. I'm presuming you just don't mean the possible pet killings? As that's all that's in there in a mo, and harrassing of critics.] 23:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

	==current 'villains'==

	I know what the editor meant by current and historical 'villains', but is there a more encyclopaedic word for it? Also groups a lot of people in together about whom they have very different opinions. I'm assuming they are antagonistic to Chip Berlet in a different way to the way in which they view the Duke of Edinburgh.:)] 13:18, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

	::I certainly hope so!--] (]) 18:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

	:::The disctionary definition of "Villain" is: "A wicked or evil person; a scoundrel." I believe it is a correct word. For example,
	:::*"LaRouche: How Bertrand Russell Becaem an '''Evil''' Man."
	:::*''Venice, orchestrating the Hapsburgs, who were always '''evil''', on the one side; and then this emerging new form of '''evil''', later called Anglo-Dutch liberalism, which developed in an imitation of Venice, in the Netherlands, along the northern coasts of Europe, and later, in England...And this was the doctrine of Quesnay, this was the doctrine of Mandeville, who was an apostle of '''evil''', this was the doctrine later of Adam Smith; this was the doctrine of Jeremy Bentham, and so forth and so on...The father of Bentham, the creator of Adam Smith. One of the most '''evil''' men of the 18th Century, and the founder of the modern British System. ..It's coming out of the British monarchy, especially. It's world religion, and so forth. It's the present attacks on the Catholic Church, on all flanks, are part of this. It's Satanic '''evil'''.''
	:::*''What is that? This is called Classical art. You don't like something, because it "feels good" to not like it? That's irrationalism. That's Thrasymachus. That's evil. Rock music is '''evil'''. If you like rock, you are partaking of evil per se, because you've rejected truth and justice, for passion of a cheap kind—mere lust.''
	:::*''Financier Train, an intimate of Vice-Presidential spouse, the '''evil''' Lynne Cheney, has had a nearly 25 years obsession with LaRouche, whom he considers to be his major political adversary.''
	:::*''...the "Southern Strategy" of 1966-1968. That '''wicked''', inhuman legacy of the Nixon campaign, is the same cultural corruption running rampant in the Congress, in our national electoral processes, and in practiced U.S. foreign policy today. It is the same '''evil''', as revived so today, which the voice of the slave indicts, as if by a voice speaking from across the centuries, through the Classical form of the Negro Spiritual. ''
	:::*'' The "anti-globalist" movement, worldwide, is headed by Teddy Goldsmith, who's a very '''evil''' fellow. ''
	:::*''The writings of the Apostles John and Paul represent the Classical Greek science which was the highest form of scientific and related knowledge of that time, in opposition to the pro-Satanic legacy of the worship of the Olympian Zeus and other pro-reductionist excretions of that '''wicked''' Pythian cult of the Delphi Apollo from which the '''evil''' of imperial Rome had sprung in that time... the '''evil''' Emperor Diocletian gave up the tactic of mass-murder, not because he was humane, but because he was a smart and infinitely corrupt tyrant ...From that point on, science progressed along the lines marked chiefly by Fermat, Leibniz, Gauss, and Riemann, in opposition to the reductionists typified by such house-lackeys and followers of Venice’s Paolo Sarpi as the '''scurrilous''' Galileo Galilei, the '''wicked''' René Descartes, the '''morally perverted''' John Locke, and the Eighteenth-Century radical reductionists de Moivre, d’Alembert, Euler, Lagrange, and the Nineteenth-Century followers of Laplace, Cauchy, Kelvin, Helmholtz, et al.''
	:::*''Al Gore's a liar, he's '''evil, pure evil''', and covering for Cheney.''
	:::*''All of the line of today's neo-malthusian argument, such as Gore's, now converges, exactly, on Gore's own copying of the motive of the explicitly, '''monstrously evil''', late Bertrand Russell's own stated, mass-murderously malthusian intention...A human race which persisted in submitting to the '''wicked''', Delphic way of thinking typified by the clear and present danger to mankind implicit in Al Gore's "Global Warming" swindle, would be a people which had abandoned the practical, as well as the moral fitness to survive... the opening chapter of the Biblical book of Genesis also repudiates Gore's '''wicked''' opinions,...In the meantime, approximately A.D. 1580, a masterful Venetian '''scoundrel''', Paolo Sarpi, had consolidated a powerful faction among the Venetians, which, in its later guise as a Netherlands faction, later ruined a France misled by Louis XIV, took over the English monarchy under the Stuarts, and prepared the way for the Thirty Years War of 1618-1648... It is only from this standpoint that the pure '''evil''' embodied as Bertrand Russell and his political devotees, including Al Gore, can be thoroughly understood.''
	:::*''a policy which has been the subversion of America as a republic going back to the '''evil''' policies of H.G. Wells, Bertrand Russell, and Samuel Huntington, and similar evil spirits.''
	:::*''You know, Prescott Bush was clever and '''evil'''. George H.W. was dumb and '''evil'''. George W. is psychotic and '''evil'''!''
	:::And this is only scratching the surface. I could go on with probably a hundred similar citations in which he calls people "evil", "wicked", or "scoundrels". The language may seem odd, but that's par for the course. Notable is that those he opposes are not "misguided" or any given similar assumption of good faith - they are intentionally evil. Another point is that it isn't correct to call them his "enemies", because that might that implies a degree of reciprocation. There's no evidence that Lynne Cheney has ever even commented on Lyndon LaRouche, so the disdain is one-sided. He is attacking them with words and labels, but his living targets mostly ignore him. All in all, "villains" both accurately captures his use of words like "evil" to describe politicians and scientists, and prevents the appearance of reciprocal opposition. ]] ] 18:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
	::::How about 'people Larouche considers to be evil' ? I just think 'villains' is a bit of a pantomime word. It's also inaccurate as I doubt he's frequently written that someone is a 'villain', using that word. Your refs show he uses the word 'evil'.] 00:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
	:::::"Villains" = "evil people". But if you think it wold improve the article then "Evil people" is OK with me. ]] ] 00:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

	==Molly Kronberg==

	Will, you seem to be on a drive to include the Molly Kronberg quote in all the LaRouche-related articles. I have no objection to keeping it in at ] because there is enough background there on who she is and what role she is playing, so that the quote may be understood in context. I object, however, to having the quote spammed. --] (]) 15:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

	:We can add background here. The comment applies to the organization. It seems highly relevant. Kronberg is a longterm member of the governing committee, so her comment is germane. ]] ] 18:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
	::I am opposed to spamming this quote, because then there will be the inevitable bloating of the article(s) as context and rebuttal information is added. I'm thinking of proposing that all these articles, LaRouche movement, NCLC, LaRouche Youth Movement, etc. be consolidated into one moderately sized article. As it stands, they are all battlegrounds for the Berlet/King/Beback crowd versus defenders of LaRouche, and they grow and grow and grow due to tit-for-tat editing. --] (]) 22:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

	:::The only public source records I can find suggest that Molly Kronberg was a leading member of the organization at the time of the interview given to PRA. What evidence is there that she is no longer a leading member?--] (]) 03:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
	::::::The answer to that ought to be obvious -- that she gave an interview to PRA. --] (]) 07:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

	::::I think that a merger is inappropriate at this time. The article are fairly long and the overlap is limited. The quotation seems quite relevant to this article, while I'm not sure how relevant it is to the ] article. And, as Cberlet says, I'm not sure we have any reliable source that Marielly Kronberg is no longer a member of the National Committee. ]] ] 03:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
	::::::::The overlap is to be found in the slander-spam from King and Berlet that receives undue weight in just about every article. --] (]) 15:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
	::::::I don't think that it is especially relevant to this article. It's just a disaffected ex-member, although this one has a name, unlike others that King and Berlet have claimed to interview. Whereever the quotation appears, I'm going to insist that Molly Kronberg's role in the affair be fully explained, and the obvious place for that would be the Kenneth Kronberg article. I don't even think it belongs there, but I am yielding to Niels Gade on this point. --] (]) 07:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
	:::::::I haven't seen a source saying that she's no longer a member of the National Committee. According to Niels Gade's criteria, she is a leading member of the NCLC, not just a disaffected member. The quotation is about the LaRouche movement, not about Kennth Kronberg. If you want to expand the description of MK that's fine. We can mention how she went to prison for the organaiztion, how many years she's been on the NC, and other relevant credentials. ]] ] 07:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
	::::::::I agree with Terrawatt that it is just common sense to assume that no member in good standing would fraternize with Chip Berlet. --] (]) 15:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
	:::::::::As soon as "common sense" is accompanied by a reliable source we can take that as a verifiable fact. In the meantime it's unverifable speculation. ]] ] 19:39, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
	::::::::::Your claim that she ''is'' still a member of the National Committee is also speculative and unverified, in addition to being downright absurd. We can verify that she was at one time a member. To claim she is one now would require a source. --] (]) 22:10, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
	:::::::::::I suppose the claim that Chaitkin and Steinberg are still members, or that LaRouche is still alive, would also be speculative and unverifiable. However the usual practice is to assume that simething remains the same until it's shown to have changed. Regardless, the descrption I wrote of Kronberg didn't say she was a current member, just that she was a longterm member, a fact stated by LaRouche sources. If you have a source that calls her a former member then we can include that. ]] ] 22:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
	Sourcing issues? ]] ] 08:01, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
	::Please see ]. I believe your comments appear there. --] (]) 15:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

	:::I don't see any mention of whether an interview from that source is suitable. The discussion there has been about vague "overuse" of that source. I'll start a fresh thread there to address this specific issue. ]] ] 19:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

	== Promoting a POV ==

	Some of the editors who've posted or defended the material in the intro on the LaRouche movement being "neofascist," appear, due to their other edits, to be sympathetic to the Chip Berlet crowd. Therefore it seems there is an effort to promote negative material about LaRouche in order to further a POV. Misplaced Pages is not a publishing arm of the Chip Berlet crowd. His concepts are thoroughly covered in the the articles about him and his organization, plus the "criticism" sections of this article and others. We don't need to use Misplaced Pages to further his ideas. Therefore the introductory paragraph should focus on mainstream views. --] (]) 03:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

	*] requires that all significant viewpoints be included. The major work describing LaRouche and his movement is titled ''Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism '', which makes it pretty obvious that a major viewpoint is that the movement is neo-fasicist. Do you have a source for mainstream views being any different? As far as I can tell based on reading many sources, the mainstream views of the man and his movment are even more neagtive than just calling it "neo-fascist". ]] ] 03:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

	::The mainstream views of LaRouche are confusing and contradictory, some saying leftist, some rightist. "Conspiracy theorist" is most common. However, the "neofascist" label comes from a very small group centered around Chip Berlet and Dennis King. Dennis King was given grants by LaRouche's opponents to write his book -- it is no "major work," it is defamation for hire. Chip Berlet is using Misplaced Pages for commercial purposes, to boost his organization which gets paid to attack selected political groups and individuals. I am amazed that Misplaced Pages has no rule that prevents business people from using it for commercial purposes. I did a google search to see how many times one of his books appears as a source at Misplaced Pages -- it is truly outlandish: It looks like in a majority of cases, the cites were added by Berlet himself. --] (]) 05:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

	:::Besides non-articles and the page about Berlet, I see twenty occasions that that book has been cited, which doesn't seem excessive. Until there's a decision otherwise, it qualifies as a reliable source, as does King's book. The movement clearly is regarded as neo-fascist by some, and it's one of the viewpoints we need to include. The article didn't belabor it, but just mentioned that it's a viewpoint. That's the minimum required by NPOV, and I think we can all live with that. ]] ] 06:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
	:::::::::::Twenty occasions is a lot, if he's adding them himself. He's using Misplaced Pages as a PR firm. --] (]) 21:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
	::::The article does include it. However, putting it in the lede is undue weight. --] (]) 14:39, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
	:::::The lede should summarize what's in the article. ]] ] 18:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
	::::::Exactly. It need not repeat all the details; as far as criticisms go, the lede should mention only the most common and notable, leaving the weird and exotic ones for later in the article. --] (]) 20:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
	:::::::And your source for this asseriton being "weird and exotic"? ]] ] 20:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

	==Censoring website links==

	Marvin Diode's rationale for removing lyndonlarouchewatch.org from the list of outside links doesn't wash. This is not a matter of spam. The site is a massive repository of archival material and published articles re the history of the LaRouche movement. It contains the full text of "Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism," a history of the LaRouche movement from the late 1960s through the late 1980s. The owner of the site is an acknowledged expert on the LaRouche movement. The owner of the site does not use it to sell products and does not solicit funds via the site. --] (])

	:::I removed Dking's accusation that I am "a follower of LaRouche." First, because it is incorrect: I am no more a "follower of LaRouche" than I am a "follower of ]," even though I have worked hard to keep POV-pushers from using both biographical articles as a soapbox against those subjects. Secondly, if I were a "follower of LaRouche," it would still be a violation of ] to use that as a debating tactic: ''Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views—regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream.'' --] (]) 20:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

	*It's obviously not spam. I re-oriented the link to go straight to the book, which was published by a mainstream publisher and is unquestionably suitable for linking. ]] ] 18:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

	::See ]: ''Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam. Although the specific links may be allowed under some circumstances, repeatedly adding links will in most cases result in all of them being removed.'' It doesn't say that the spammer needs to show a monetary profit in order to be a spammer. In some cases, it may be just to boost a faded reputation for egotistical purposes.--] (]) 20:55, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

	:::The book is undoubtedly a reliable source and a valuable resource to readers interested in this topic. While you deleted the assertion that you are a follower of LaRouche on the basis that it is a personal attack, you make a personal attack on Dking of your own. That's obviously inappropriate. There's not legitimate reason to delete the link. ]] ] 21:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

	::::It's not a personal attack to point out that Dking is violating Misplaced Pages policy, particularly when he has a history of violating Misplaced Pages policy. He should correct his conduct, instead of proclaiming that he is being "censored." --] (]) 22:09, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
	::::::You know which part I mean. Please don't do that again. ]] ] 22:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

	::::::::::::::The links at the bottom of this article are 10 for LaRouche movement web sites, three for LaRouche associated web sites, and four for websites run by LaRouche supporters. For a total of 17. Before I added my site there were four sites listed that contained material critical of LaRouche, and one of them was merely a single article duplicating what was already accessible at the "Cults on Campus" link. So we had essentially 3 sites to 17 (and when I added a link to the home page of my web site it was promptly deleted), which shows the degree to which the LaRouche movement is being allowed to use Misplaced Pages (i.e. to make Misplaced Pages complicit) in its Orwellian control of information. When I complained that this was censorship, Marvin Diode (the LaRouchian who is not a LaRouchian) removed my complaint from the talk page. Well, I'm deleting from the talk page the sentence in which he claims I've been officially reprimanded for spamming, since no such determination was ever made.--] (])

Latest revision as of 18:16, 28 September 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the LaRouche movement article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 30 days

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mediation, arbitration, requests for clarification, and other discussions about the LaRouche movement, 2004-2008
Long term abuse subpage, LaRouche accounts
ArbCom clarification/enforcement, AN/I, 2005-8
Enforcement, Hershelkrustofsky socks, Sep 19, 2008 Enforcement, MaplePorter, Sep 19, 2007 Clarification, Nathan/DLTN, July 23, 2007 Enforcement, Herschelkrustofsky (HK) Clarification, Tsunami Butler", Apr 1, 2007 Clarification, Appeal, Jan 24, 2007 Clarification, ManEatingDonut, Nov 22, 2006 Clarification, LaRouche, Oct 23, 2006 HK probation, Apr 15, 2006 HK/BirdsOfFire, Mar 31, 2006 HK blocked, Sep 29, 2005
Arbitration 2006
HK banned, May 5, 2006.
Arbitration 2005
N_ and others, Nov 2005. Cognition's statement, Nov 22, 2005. Modification of LaRouche 2, Dec 23, 2005. HK indef probation, Dec 23, 2005 LaRouche 2, Jan 25, 2005–Feb 17, 2005. LaRouche 2 talk LaRouche 2 evidence LaRouche 2 proposed decision LaRouche 2 proposed decision talk
Arbitration 2004
LaRouche 1, July 4—Sep 13, 2004. LaRouche 1 talk LaRouche 1 evidence LaRouche 1 evidence talk LaRouche 1 proposed decision LaRouche 1 proposed decision talk
Mediation 2006 and 2007
Med cabal talk, Feb 17, 2007 Med cabal/Tsunami Butler, Nov 26, 2006
Mediation 2004
HK and AndyL, July 3, 2004 HK and DJSupreme23, Jun 14, 2004 HK and Adam Carr, Nov 15, 2004 HK and SlimVirgin, Dec 16, 2004
Article talk 2004-2007
Talk:Lyndon LaRouche Lyndon LaRouche 1, Jan 17–Jun 17, 2004 Lyndon LaRouche 2, Jun 20–22, 2004 Lyndon LaRouche 3, Jun 21–24, 2004 Lyndon LaRouche draft, June 24-25, 2004 Lyndon LaRouche 4, Jun 25–July 5, 2004 Lyndon LaRouche 5, Jul 05–Aug 1, 2004 Lyndon LaRouche/Jewish, June–Aug 2004 Lyndon LaRouche HK list, July–Aug 2004 Lyndon LaRouche HK list archive Lyndon LaRouche 6, Aug 6-9, 2004 Lyndon LaRouche 7, Aug 11-17, 2004 Lyndon LaRouche omissions, Sep 9-10, 2004 Lyndon LaRouche 8, Aug 18–Sep 28, 2004 Lyndon LaRouche 9, Sep 18–Oct 11, 2004 Lyndon LaRouche 10, Dec 2004–Jan 20, 2005 Lyndon LaRouche archive, material missing Lyndon LaRouche 11, Jan 20–Jul 19, 2005 Lyndon LaRouche 12, Jul 2005–Nov 12, 2006 Lyndon LaRouche 13, Nov 2006—Feb 18, 2007 Lyndon LaRouche 14, Feb 18, 2007 - August 1, 2007 Lyndon LaRouche 15, August 8, 2007 - November 18, 2007 Lyndon LaRouche 16, November 20, 2007 - Lyndon LaRouche 17 Lyndon LaRouche 18
Talk:Views of Lyndon LaRouche and the LaRouche movement Political views temp Political views 1, Aug 21–Nov 29, 2004 Political views 2, Dec 2004–Jan 11, 2005 Political views 3, Jan 2005–Oct 02, 2006 "Cooked quotes", Jan 22–23, 2005 Political views mediation, Feb 27–Mar 04, 2006 Political views 4, Oct 23, 2006–Oct 11, 2007 Political views 5, Oct 11, 2007–Nov 28, 2007 Political views 6, Nov 28, 2007–Apr 12, 2008 Political views 7, Apr 15, 2008–Sep 24, 2008
Talk:Amelia Boynton Robinson Talk:American School (economics) Talk:American School (economics)/Archive 1 Talk:American School (economics)/Archive 2 Talk:Anti-Defamation League Talk:Bürgerrechtsbewegung Solidarität Talk:Dirigisme Talk:Helga Zepp-LaRouche Talk:Jeremiah Duggan Talk:Jeremiah Duggan 1, Nov 14–Dec 6, 2004 Talk:Jeremiah Duggan 2, Dec 2004–Jan 2005 Talk:John Train Salon Talk:Kenneth Kronberg Talk:LaRouche Movement Talk:LaRouche Youth Movement Talk:Schiller Institute Talk:Schiller Institute/Archive 1 Talk:Synarchism Talk:Tavistock Clinic Talk:Tavistock Institute Talk:Tavistock Institute 1, Nov '04–June '06 Talk:LaRouche criminal trials Zayed Center
Template talk
Template talk:LaRouche Template talk:LaRouchetalk
Categories
HK sockpuppets
This box: view talk edit

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Who is Weld?

"According to courtroom testimony by FBI agent Richard Egan, Jeffrey and Michelle Steinberg, the heads of LaRouche's security unit, boasted of placing harassing phone calls all through the night to the general counsel of the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) when the FEC was investigating LaRouche's political contributions.

During the grand jury hearings followers picketed the courthouse, chanted "Weld is a fag", distributed leaflets accusing Weld of involvement in drug dealing, and "sang a jingle advocating that he be hanged in public"." This is the first and only mention of Weld in this article. Who is this?

William Weld 2605:A601:A0C0:AA00:7700:61AA:B056:8B0B (talk) 22:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on LaRouche movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:57, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on LaRouche movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:16, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Far right?

Although the article says this organization is far right the other substantive portions of the article seem to indicate that the group is left wing and supports parties generally seem as on the left E.g. Democrats in the United States. Should this be removed? 73.48.251.0 (talk) 03:28, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

The categorization includes it under Category:Syncretic political movements. Dimadick (talk) 18:13, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Europe section

I'm copying the whole of the current Europe section here because I'm going to delete most of it from the article. My reasons for deletion are that it has a lot of unreferenced statements, relies excessively and (in parts) exclusively on primary sources, and because most of it does not contain anything controversial despite being in the Controversy section of the article. It's just like a list of "Look this European country also has a branch of the movement, and this European person said they like LaRouche". I won't delete the stuff that is actually about something controversial. So here's the copied European section:

The LaRouche Movement has a major center in Germany. The Bürgerrechtsbewegung Solidarität (BüSo) (Civil Rights Movement Solidarity) political party is headed by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, LaRouche's widow. It has nominated candidates for elective office and publishes the Neue Solidarität newspaper. Zepp-LaRouche is also the head of the German-based Schiller Institute. In 1986, Zepp-LaRouche formed the "Patriots for Germany" party, and announced that it would run a full slate of 100 candidates. The party received 0.2 percent of the 4 million votes and "failed to elect any candidates to the parliament". In Germany, the leader of the Green Party, Petra Kelly, reported receiving harassing phone calls that she attributed to BüSo supporters. Her speeches were picketed and disrupted by LaRouche followers for years.Jeremiah Duggan, a student from the UK attending a conference organized by the Schiller Institute and LaRouche Youth Movement in 2003, died in Wiesbaden, Germany, after he ran down a busy road and was hit by several cars. The German police said it appeared to be suicide. A British court ruled that Duggan had died while "in a state of terror." Duggan's mother believes he died in connection with an attempt to recruit him. The German public prosecution service said her son committed suicide. The High Court in London ordered a second inquest in May 2010, which was opened and adjourned. In 2015, a British coroner rejected the suicide verdict and found that Duggan's body bore unexplained injuries which indicated an "altercation at some stage before his death."Solidarité et progrès (Solidarity and Progress), headed by Jacques Cheminade, is the LaRouche party in France. The party was previously known as Parti ouvrier européen (European Workers' Party) and Fédération pour une nouvelle solidarité (Federation for a New Solidarity). Its newspaper is Nouvelle Solidarité. Cheminade ran for President of France in 1995, 2012 and 2017, finishing last each time. The French LaRouche Youth Movement is headed by Élodie Viennot. Viennot supported the candidacy of Daniel Buchmann for the position of mayor of Berlin.

Sweden has an office of the Schiller Institute (Schillerinstitutet) and the political party European Worker's Party (EAP). The former leader of the EAP, Ulf Sandmark, started as a member of the Swedish Social Democratic Youth League (SSU), and was assigned to investigate the EAP and the ELC. After joining the EAP, he had his membership in SSU revoked. Following the Olof Palme assassination on February 28, 1986, the Swedish branch of the EAP came under scrutiny as literature published by the party was found in the apartment of the initial suspect, Victor Gunnarsson. Soon after the assassination, NBC television in the U.S. speculated that LaRouche was somehow responsible. Later, the suspect was released. No connection with LaRouche was shown.In Denmark, four candidates for parliament on the LaRouche platform (Tom Gillesberg, Feride Istogu Gillesberg and Hans Schultz) received 197 votes in the 2007 election (at least 32,000 votes are needed for a local mandate). The Danish LaRouche Movement (Schiller Instituttet)'s first newspaper distributed 50,000 copies around Copenhagen and Aarhus.The Movimento Solidarietà – Associazione di LaRouche in Italia (MSA) is an Italian political party headed by Paolo Raimondi that supports the LaRouche platform.Ortrun Cramer of the Schiller Institute became a delegate of the Austrian International Progress Organization in the 1990s, but there is no sign of ongoing relationship.Polish newspapers have reported that Andrzej Lepper, leader of the populist Samoobrona party, was trained at the Schiller Institute and has received funding from LaRouche, though both Lepper and LaRouche deny the connection.Nataliya Vitrenko, leader of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine, has stated multiple times that she supports LaRouche's ideals.In February 2008, the LaRouche movement in Europe began a campaign to prevent the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon, which, according to the U.S.-based LaRouche Political Action Committee, "empowers a supranational financial elite to take over the right of taxation and war making, and even restore the death penalty, abolished in most nations of Western Europe." LaRouche press releases suggest that the treaty has an underlying fascist agenda, based on the "Europe a Nation" ideas of Sir Oswald Mosley. Nakonana (talk) 21:25, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Actually decided against deletion and instead moved everything non-controversial to the International section, and kept the controversial stuff in the Controversy section. The relevant edits: Nakonana (talk) 21:50, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

References

"Narrow state election victory gives boost to Kohl coalition". Houston Chronicle. June 16, 1986. Archived from the original on January 14, 2009. Retrieved January 30, 2008.
James M. Markham (June 30, 1986). "LaRouche Stirs in Germany". The New York Times.
"No Joke", By April Witt, The Washington Post Sunday, October 24, 2004; Page W12
Degen, Wolfgang, "Nur die Legende hat ein langes Leben", Wiesbadener Kurier, April 19, 2007 (German); Google translation.
"Fresh inquest into student death" Archived May 23, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, May 20, 2010.
Student Jeremiah Duggan's death not suicide, coroner rules Archived July 3, 2017, at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, 20 May 2015
"Solidarité &; Progrès – Actualit&eacute". Solidariteetprogres.org. Archived from the original on May 11, 2011. Retrieved 2008-11-23.
"LaRoucherörelsen i Sverige". Nysol.se. Archived from the original on January 22, 2009. Retrieved 2008-11-23.
"Has Your Neighbor Been Brainwashed About Lyndon LaRouche?". larouchepub.com. Archived from the original on September 16, 2020. Retrieved September 7, 2020.
"Schiller Instituttet i Danmark". Schillerinstitut.dk. Archived from the original on October 11, 2007. Retrieved 2008-11-23.
Schiller Instituttet Kampagnaviser Archived November 9, 2007, at the Wayback Machine Schiller Instituttes Venner webpage
"Non-governmental, Individual Experts, Academic, Scientific, Research and Professional Organizations". Archived from the original on December 14, 2004. Retrieved July 23, 2007.
"LaRouche Connection Master List 1995–present". Larouchepub.com. Archived from the original on August 4, 2007. Retrieved 2008-10-23.
"Antisemitism and Racism". Tau.ac.il. Archived from the original on April 4, 2008. Retrieved 2008-11-23.
"LaRouche Committee Denounces Polish Press Lies". Larouchepub.com. Archived from the original on December 14, 2004. Retrieved 2008-11-23.
"Italian Senator Exposes Secret Plan for Fascism in Europe | LaRouche Political Action Committee". Larouchepac.com. Archived from the original on November 9, 2008. Retrieved 2008-11-23.
"Lisbon Treaty Based on Program of British Fascist Oswald Mosley | LaRouche Political Action Committee". Larouchepac.com. Archived from the original on September 8, 2008. Retrieved 2008-11-23.

Categories: