www.heritage.org Open in urlscan Pro
2606:4700:10::ac43:1f74  Public Scan

Form analysis
3 forms found in the DOM

GET /search

<form action="/search" method="GET">
  <div class="search-form__input-wrapper">
    <input type="text" id="search_overlay_input" class="search-form__input" name="contains" placeholder="Start typing">
    <button type="submit" class="search-form--input-submit"><span>Submit</span><i class=" heritage-icon-search_desktop"></i></button>
  </div>
</form>

<form id="mktoForm_2024" novalidate="novalidate" class="mktoForm mktoHasWidth mktoLayoutLeft" style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); width: 261px;">
  <style type="text/css"></style>
  <div class="mktoFormRow">
    <div class="mktoFieldDescriptor mktoFormCol" style="margin-bottom: 5px;">
      <div class="mktoOffset" style="width: 5px;"></div>
      <div class="mktoFieldWrap mktoRequiredField"><label for="Email" id="LblEmail" class="mktoLabel mktoHasWidth" style="width: 100px;">
          <div class="mktoAsterix">*</div>Email Address:
        </label>
        <div class="mktoGutter mktoHasWidth" style="width: 5px;"></div><input id="Email" name="Email" placeholder="Enter email address" maxlength="255" aria-labelledby="LblEmail InstructEmail" type="email"
          class="mktoField mktoEmailField mktoHasWidth mktoRequired" aria-required="true" style="width: 150px;"><span id="InstructEmail" tabindex="-1" class="mktoInstruction"></span>
        <div class="mktoClear"></div>
      </div>
      <div class="mktoClear"></div>
    </div>
    <div class="mktoClear"></div>
  </div>
  <div class="mktoFormRow"><input type="hidden" name="tHFAcquisitionURL" class="mktoField mktoFieldDescriptor mktoFormCol" value="" style="margin-bottom: 5px;">
    <div class="mktoClear"></div>
  </div>
  <div class="mktoFormRow"><input type="hidden" name="tHFAcquisitionCampaign" class="mktoField mktoFieldDescriptor mktoFormCol" value="" style="margin-bottom: 5px;">
    <div class="mktoClear"></div>
  </div>
  <div class="mktoFormRow"><input type="hidden" name="tHFAcquisitionContent" class="mktoField mktoFieldDescriptor mktoFormCol" value="thf-homepage" style="margin-bottom: 5px;">
    <div class="mktoClear"></div>
  </div>
  <div class="mktoFormRow"><input type="hidden" name="tHFAcquisitionDateAdded" class="mktoField mktoFieldDescriptor mktoFormCol" value="" style="margin-bottom: 5px;">
    <div class="mktoClear"></div>
  </div>
  <div class="mktoFormRow"><input type="hidden" name="tHFAcquisitionMedium" class="mktoField mktoFieldDescriptor mktoFormCol" value="" style="margin-bottom: 5px;">
    <div class="mktoClear"></div>
  </div>
  <div class="mktoFormRow"><input type="hidden" name="tHFAcquisitionSource" class="mktoField mktoFieldDescriptor mktoFormCol" value="" style="margin-bottom: 5px;">
    <div class="mktoClear"></div>
  </div>
  <div class="mktoFormRow"><input type="hidden" name="tHFThisWeekatHeritageSubscriber" class="mktoField mktoFieldDescriptor mktoFormCol" value="TRUE" style="margin-bottom: 5px;">
    <div class="mktoClear"></div>
  </div>
  <div class="mktoFormRow"><input type="hidden" name="heritageFoundationSubscriber" class="mktoField mktoFieldDescriptor mktoFormCol" value="TRUE" style="margin-bottom: 5px;">
    <div class="mktoClear"></div>
  </div>
  <div class="mktoFormRow"><input type="hidden" name="tHFSubscriber" class="mktoField mktoFieldDescriptor mktoFormCol" value="TRUE" style="margin-bottom: 5px;">
    <div class="mktoClear"></div>
  </div>
  <div class="mktoButtonRow"><span class="mktoButtonWrap mktoNative" style="margin-left: 110px;"><button type="submit" class="mktoButton">Subscribe</button></span></div><input type="hidden" name="formid" class="mktoField mktoFieldDescriptor"
    value="2024"><input type="hidden" name="munchkinId" class="mktoField mktoFieldDescriptor" value="824-MHT-304">
</form>

<form novalidate="novalidate" class="mktoForm mktoHasWidth mktoLayoutLeft" style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); visibility: hidden; position: absolute; top: -500px; left: -1000px; width: 1600px;">
</form>

Text Content

Skip to main content
Heritage Foundation The Larouche Network
Back to Top
Submit

Frequently Searched

 * Critical Race Theory
 * Life
 * Index of Economic Freedom
 * China
 * The Kevin Roberts Show
 * Budget and Spending


The Heritage Foundation
Open Navigation Open Search
Donate



SECONDARY NAVIGATION

 * About Heritage
 * Events
 * Renew
 * Press
 * Contact

Donate
Explore Issues
open search

Top Issues

 * Asia
 * Election Integrity
 * Immigration
 * Life
 * Technology


SECONDARY NAVIGATION

 * About Heritage
 * Events
 * Renew
 * Press
 * Contact

Political Thought

 * American History
 * Conservatism
 * Progressivism

International

 * Asia
 * Europe
 * Global Politics
 * Middle East

Government Spending

 * Budget and Spending
 * Debt
 * Taxes

Energy & Environment

 * Climate
 * Energy
 * Environment

Legal and Judicial

 * Courts
 * Crime and Justice
 * Election Integrity
 * Second Amendment
 * The Constitution

National Security

 * Cybersecurity
 * Defense
 * Immigration

Domestic Policy

 * Education
 * Government Regulation
 * Health Care Reform
 * Technology
 * Welfare

Culture

 * Gender
 * Life
 * Marriage and Family
 * Religious Liberty

Economy

 * International Economies
 * Markets and Finance
 * Trade




THE LAROUCHE NETWORK

Report


THE LAROUCHE NETWORK

July 19, 1984 15 min read Download Report
Michael Copulus
Visiting Fellow in Russian and Eurasian Studies and International Energy Policy
in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign and National Security
Policy, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for
International Studies, at The
...
Copied

Select a Section 1/0


Toggle open close

(Archived document, may contain errors)

July 19, 1984

THE LAROUCHE NETWORK

INTRODUCTION*

While most Ameri-cans would readily list the names Hart, Mondale, and Jackson as
among this year's contenders for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination,
viewers of late-night television might also mention the name Lyndon H.
LaRou'che. Since the onset of the primary season in January, LaRouche has been
featured in a series of periodic, late-night television broad- casts promoting
his candidacy, and his bizarre political and economic theories. F- Billing
himself as a "conservative Democrat" LaRouche has regaled his audience with
predictions of imminent disaster that can only be averted through his
leadership. Coupled with his ominous forecasts of catastrophes that range from
"global thermo- nuclear war" to worldwide economic collapse have been his wild
assertions that individuals such as Henry Kissinger and Lt. Gen. Daniel Graham
are "Soviet agents of influence." What makes such claims particularly ironic is
that this "conservative Democrat" was in fact a self-proclaimed Communist, who
once called himself "the American Lenin,"' who helped found the violence-prone
U.S. Labor Party, and who leads what may well be one of the strangest political
groups in American history.

THE LAROUCHE NETWORK

Emerging from within the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) during the late
1960s, LaRouche has managed to attract a small, but fanatical following to his
conspiratorial view of the world. Despite their small numbers (estimated at from
one to three thousand), he has managed to fashion them into a surpris- ingly
broad network of organizations that not only encompasses many major cities in
the U.S., but which extends to Europe and Latin America as well.

Although all of the groups, at their core, adhere to LaRouche's ideology, which
holds that a "super elite"--including such di-s- parate elements as the
Rockefeller family, the British Royal Family, the Anti-Defamation League, the
Soviet KGB, National Review, and The Heritage Foundation--controls world events,
many are set up ostensibly as academic or charitable organizations. The use of
various fronts has been among the LaRouche network's most suc- cessful tactics,
enabling it to attract unwitting, well-intentioned citizens to its cause. While
these individuals generally break any connection as soon as they realize the
real nature of LaRouche's organizations, in some cases longer term,relationships
are estab- lished.

Even innocent individuals who do not directly participate in LaRouchd-sponsored
activities often -end up unwitting financial supporters of the-network through
airport purchases or subscrip- tions to LaRouche publications. Hawked by
clean-cut young people manning tables with signs that carry slogans such as
"Feed Jane Fonda To The Whales," magazines like the slick Executive Intelli-
gence Review (EIR), Fusion, The Young Scientist-, and Campaigner, are a major
source of funds. In fact, some estimates of combined airport and subscription
sales put the annual revenue LaRouche generates this way at as much as $3
million.

Because the LaRouche network contains such a large and ever-changing list of
political organizations, publications, and business enterprises, it is useful to
categorize the network's elements into three groups: publications and publishing
enter- prises, political groups, and businesses. A list of current and former
elements of the network includes:

Political Groups

The National Caucus of Labor Committees (NCLC) The International Caucus of Labor
Committees (ICLC) The National Democratic Policy Committee The Fusion Energy
Foundation (FEF) The Lafayette Academy for the Arts and Sciences The Humanist
Academy The LaRouche Campaign (TLC) The U.S. Labor Party (dormant) The National
Anti-Drug Coalition The Club of Life The Revolutionary Youth Movement

The National Unemployed and Welfare Rights Organization (NUWRO) The
International Workingman's Association (IWA) The Labor Organizer's Defense Fund
The Committee for a Fair Election (CFE) (dormant)



Publications and Publishing Enteprises

New Solidarity (a newspaper) New Solidarity International Press Service (NSIPS)
Fusion Magazine International Journal of Fusion Executive Intelligence Review
(EIR) Investigative Leads (an EIR spin-off) War on Drugs The Young Scientist The
New Benjamin Franklin House Publishing Company Campaigner Magazine Campaigner
publications American Labor Beacon (reported to be currently in the hands of
dissident members of the network) NSIPS Speakers Bureau

Business Enterprises

Computron Technologies (now bankrupt) Compittype (a financial printing firm)
WoXld Composition Services* PMR Printing Company, Inc.

ACCESS TO PUBLIC OFFICIALS

A major concern regarding the LaRouche network arises from its apparent ability
to penetrate high government circles-- especially within the intelligence and
police communities. This ability was underscored by a documentary which aired
earlier this year as part of the NBC newsmagazine "First Camera." The broad-
cast featured, among others, Dr. Norman Bailey, a former member of the National
Security Council Staff. In the press release announcing the program NBC stated
that Dr. Bailey "spoke of LaRouche's value to the Administration.112 Moreover,
reports by former members3 of the LaRouche network indicate that it main- tained
regular and frequent contacts with officials of the Depart- ment of State, FBI,
Drug Enforcement Administration, and even the Central Intelligence Agency. While
some of these claims may be overstated, and some of the contacts may have been
low-level or self-generated, the potential for security breaches and other
problems arising from such relationships remains very real. A recent incident in
France illustrates this point.

A minor furor erupted earlier this year following the dis- closure of a
confidential French Cabinet memorandum by LaRouche followers there. The memo,
which ironically was intended to warn French officials about possible ties
between the LaRouche network and Moscow, had been circulated to less than a
dozen top people within the French Cabinet. After obtaining the document,
LaRouche followers published it as part of a full-page newspaper advertise-
ment. Although the document's contents were a minor embarrassment, what was of
real concern was the fact that to have access to it, the leaker also had to have
had access to a wide range of sensitive material, including defense information.

In addition to gaining access to official circles, the LaRouche network
frequently has succeeded in insinuating its followers into positions with
organizations it sees as part of the worldwide conspiracy. one of the most
celebrated incidents involved a secretary who was a network member working for
the Council on Foreign Relations. In the course of her normal duties, she worked
at least part of the time for William P. Bundy, editor of their prestigious
journal, Foreign Affairs. She even attended the super-secret Bilderberg meeting,
a meeting which includes much of the world's business and foreign policy elite,
with him and had access to its proceedings.

What puzzles most casual observers of the LaRouche opeiation is just what it is
that the organization really stands for, and what it is that it ;;ants.0
Depending on the moment and the issue, LaRouche can appear to be ultra left
wing, ultra right wing, or somewhere in between. There are, however, certain
themes that run consistently through his network's ideology. Among them are 5 a
virulent anti-Semitism, a belief that world events are guided by a conspiracy
aimed at eventually causing a new "Dark Ages," and that Lyndon H. LaRouche is
the only individual who has the insight to prevent this calamity from overtaking
mankind. The question to be asked then is: Who is Lyndon LaRouche?

WHO IS LYNDON LAROUCHE?

Born of Quaker parents in Rochester, New Hampshire in 1922, LaRouche spent most
of his formative years in Lynn, Massachusetts. Initially a conscientious
objector during World War II, LaRouche had an apparent change of heart while
performing alternative service, and subsequently served in the Army in Burma and
India. It was also at this time that LaRouche was first attracted to communist
ideology.

After leaving the service, LaRouche surfaced in 1948 as a member of the
Socialist Workers Party, a Trotskyite communist group. Although he left the SWP
in 1957, he continued to be active in communist circles, and supported himself
by working as a management consultant and systems analyst. During the late
1960s, LaRouche was listed as a faculty member at several of the Marxist
"alternative schools" which sprang up at the time, using the name "Lynn Marcus."
In June 1968, LaRouche became active with the radical Students for a Democratic
Society (SDS), teach- ing a course at their "Summer Liberation School" organized
at Columbia University. From this, he was able to assume a leader- ship role in
the SDS Labor Committee which eventually evolved into the National Caucus of
Labor Committees.

During a dispute over support of striking teachers in New York City, LaRouche
split with the SDS leadership by taking a position on behalf of the strikers,
and broke off the NCLC from the SDS. This group, which remains in existence
today, formed the core of what would become the LaRouche network.

Although LaRouche publicly eschews violence, over the years members have been
charged with a variety of offenses, including assault, possession of weapons,
possession of explosives, and kid- napping. There have, however, been few
convictions.

e In 1973 LaRouche undertook "Opefation M9p Up," as a means of consolidating his
hold on what was a de facto attempt to take full control of the U.S. Gommunist
Party. Operation Mop Up was initi- ated after Lakouche returned from an extended
trip to Europe, and took place during Spring 1973. During this action, more than
60 incidents of violence took place, with some victims of LaRouche's forces
requiring hospital treatment. Ironically, according to published reports, it was
this move towards violence that cemented LaRouche's leadership of the U.S. Labor
Party, and helped to increase its membership and coffers.

ATTEMPTS TO ESTABLISH TIES WITH CONSERVATIVES

In 1974, the LaRouche network began an active campaign to establish links with
conservative groups. An internal memorandum written at the time stated "Right
wing organizations offer four opportunities: 1) Sources of fund raising related
to our organiz- ing, 2) Political contacts to circulate our perspectives in
anti-Rocky political financial military circles, 3) opportunity to expose and
discredit Rocky's Buckley-FBI-CIA penetration of' the right, 4) potential USLP
members and periphery. 16 The "Rocky" refers to the late Nelson Rockefeller,
while the Buckley is William F. Buckley, editor of National Review.

In making contacts in the conservative and business communi- ties, fronts like
the National Anti-Drug Coalition and Fusion Energy Foundation were particularly
valuable. The slick publica- tion Executive Intelligence Review was also aimed
at this audience.

Typically, USLP members would approach conservatives or businessmen by appealing
to their concerns over issues such as economic growth, nuclear power, or drug
use. They would then try to solicit a donation for one of the LaRouche fronts
declaiming on these issues, or ask for other assistance. Throughout the 1970s
the LaRouche network was particularly successful in obtain- ing financial
support for the Fusion Energy Foundation from the business community, in the
form of direct contributions and sub- scriptions to FEF's slick magazine Fusion.

Its most successful publication, however, seems to be Executive Intelligence
Review, with a claimed circulation of 10,000. The Review deals with a wide range
of topics, but fre- quently focuses on security matters and terrorism. The
magazine's success in attracting readers for such material gave rise to the
creation of a spin-off newsletter "Investigative Leads," which is specifically
targeted at law enforcement officials.

-

While in most cases LaRouche's attempts to work directly with conservatives and
business groups have been short-lived, his network hashad considerable success
in selling their high-priced publications to this audience. At a subscription
rate of $400 .per year, Executive Intelligence Review's 10,000 claimed sub-
scribers would garner revenues oT__$4_m_'I`llion annually. Thus, often without
realizing it, the magazine's subscribers are sup- porting the LaRouche network's
other activities.

Another means by which the LaRouche network establishes links to business is
through the operation of commercial firms that specialize in printing services
and computer software. Some of America's largest corporations have been
unknowing clients of LaRouche-controlled companies, and some of his followers
are reported to hold high-level postions with at least one major manufacturer of
small computers. Included among the firms linked to LaRouche are Computron
Technologies Inc., The New Benjamin Franklin House Publishing Company, World
Composition Services, and PMR Printing Company.

ANTI-SEMITISM AND TIES WITH HATE GROUPS

One of the most disturbing turns in the path of LaRouche's ideology has been his
incorporation of strong anti-Semitic themes into the grand conspiracy he claims
steers world events. As part of this move, LaRouche has established ties with
organizations which promote racial hatred and anti-Semitism, including the Ku
Klux Klan and the Liberty Lobby.

In promulgating these themes, LaRouche has made claims that Jewish organizations
and prominent members of the Jewish community are linked to the international
drug trade, that they deal in pornography, and are linked to international
terrorism and criminal violence. According to reports,8 LaRouche even alleged in
a radio interview that the Ku Klux Klan was founded on behalf of B1nai BIrith,
and has stated that he found a "kernal of truth" in the "Protocols of the Elders
of Zion,119 one of the most vicious anti-Semitic fabrications in history.

In addition, according to the Anti-Defamation League, LaRouche and his followers
have alleged that "Jews were largely responsible for bringing Hitler to power,
and that the Nazi Holocaust is one of the hoaxes produced by the Zionist
demagog.1110 He also has saved particular venom for the Anti-Defamation League
itself, labeling the organization "Britain's Zionist Gestapo.

The move by the LaRouche network to establish links with hatemongers dates from
1974. At that time, the National Caucus of Labor Committees was the primary
vehicle for LaRouche's fol- lowers. In September of that year, the NCLC made
contact with Ken Duggan, publisher of The Illuminator, a racist and anti-
Semitic magazine. Through Duggan, according to an account published by an
ex-LaRouche follower in National Review, LaRouche was introduced to a number of
individuals associated with anti- Semitic or racist groups including Roy
Fraiikhouser, a leader of the Pennsylvania Ku Klux Klan, and Willis Carto of the
Liberty Lobby- From then on, anti-Semitism became an increasing component of
LaRouche's overall conspiracy theory.

What makes the hatemongering aspect of the LaRouche network .a serious concern
is that the organization has had a history of violence, and has even had some of
its members undergo paramili- tary training. Over the years, LaRouche followers
have been charged with--although infrequently convicted of--criminal acts
including assault, kidnapping, possession of weapons, and pos- session of
explosives. Moreover, LaRouche generally travels with armed bodyguards, and is
reported to keep armed guards outside his New York apartment. The potential to
turn the network's proclivity for violence against a specific racial or ethnic
group is real.

LAROUCHE AND THE PRESIDENCY

It is LaRouche's attempts to gain the U.S. presidency, more than anything else,
that have brought him into the public eye.

His first attempt was in 1976 when he ran under the U.S. Labor Party's banner.
Although he got on the ballot in 24 states, he polled only 43,043 votes. Still,
this campaign give rise to one of the odder political match-ups in U.S.
political history: a joint suit charging election fraud entered into by a
coalition of the U.S. Labor Party, elements of the Republican Party, and some
members of the American Party.

The dismal 1976 showing may have convinced LaRouche of the futility of running
on a third-party ticket. Thus when he ran in 1980, he did so as a Democrat. On
the ballot in some 16 states, LaRouche polled 185,000 votes and qualified for
$526,000 in federal matching campaign funds. However, a subsequent ruling by the
Federal Election Commission (FEC) held that LaRouche's failure to win at least
10 percent of the vote in two successive primaries disqualified him from
eligibility for matching funds after April 17, 1980, requiring the organization
to return $110,618. This decision was appealed, and in March 1982, the federal
court barred the FEC from conducting additional investigations until the one
under way was completed. In November 1982, Citizens for LaRouche reached a
settlement with the FEC, admitting to a variety of violations of the Campaign
Financing Act, including the submis- sion-of "false or misleading informat@ionll
to the FEC.

After the 1980 campaign, LaRouche established the National Democratic Policy
Committee as a vehicle for his and his followers, candidacies." Claiming 2,600
members, the 4TD.PC is a source of considerable dismay within the Democratic
National Committee, with which it is often confused. It also indicates
LaRouche's new strategy, which is to represent himself as a "conservative
Democrat." In fact, it is merely the successor of the now defunct U.S. Labor
Party as LaRouche's political arm.

A number of state and local candidates have been fielded from within the NDPC's
ranks over the past several years. Included among them are Mel Klenetsky,
LaRouche's campaign manager, who ran for Mayor of New York, and William Wertz
who ran for the U.S. Senate from California in 1982.

Often running unopposed for seats on local party committees, or for offices
where the other party's candidate would be unop- posed, LaRouche followers are
becoming a more frequent presence on ballots around the nation. And their effort
at the polls is not limited to the U.S. During last year's West German Bundestag
elections, Helga Zepp LaRouche, wife of the network's founder, ran
unsuccessfully as a candidate. The thrust of all of these electoral efforts,
however, is to boost LaRouche's perceived credibility as a major political
influence. This is perhaps as important for LaRouche in terms of maintaining his
hold over his followers as for giving him any real effectiveness within the
political process.

WHAT DOES LAROUCHE WANT?

In trying to determine just who Lyndon LaRouche is, and what it is that he
wants, a confused picture emerges. on the one hand, his known links to hate
groups might place him beyond the respectable political spectrum; yet his
continuing advocacy of communism would tend to place him at the far left. To
further confuse matters, he has recently taken to attacking the Soviet KGB, and
accusing various individuals of being "Soviet agents of influence" or KGB moles,
while at the same time taking positions which in the end advance Soviet foreign
policy goals. Some insight into the possible motivations behind LaRouche's
seemingly erratic ideological shifts can be gained from a March 1979 expose of
the U.S. Labor Party written by Gregory Rose, a former member of that group.

writing in National Review, Rose noted that LaRouche main- tained contact w-Pth
@theSoviet government through Gennady Nikolayevich Serebreyakov, an official
with the Soviet Mission to the U.N. in New York. Moreover, LaRouche himself was
reported to have met with Serebreyakov at least twice. Rose reports that after
these meetings, "The NCLC's Trotskyite line was replaced with a pro-Soviet
line." More important, he speculates that "The NCLC is in a position to promote
a pro-Soviet line on such issues as U.S. defense posture within certain
conservative circles, whereas the Soviets could not make such an approach
directly. It is equally obvious that information on conservative attitudes and
personalities gained from NCLC contacts would be helpful to Soviet
intelligence." Rose conclu(ies 11 ... the evidence of a Soviet connictionois
extensive and well-founded. Conservatives should regard the NCLC with hostility
and should warn, and if necessary repudiate those on the Right whom it has
ensnared."

Since Rose's article appeared in March 1979,,other evidence to suggest that the
LaRouche network is at a minimum supporting some of Moscow's foreign policy
goals has continued to mount. For example, in its August 6, 1981 issue, New
Solidarity, the principal LaRouche political publication, stated "One year ago
Poland was the 10th-ranking industrial nation in the world. Today--after one
year of destabilization by the British-infil- trated Solidarity union--the
country faces economic ruin, starva- tion, and social chaos .... 11 In January
1982, commenting again on Poland, New Solidarity called U.S. Secretary of State
Alexander Haig "a i'eading spokesman for the forces Pravda charged are seeking
to provoke direct Soviet military n-tervention in Poland."

LaRouche network publications also frequently engage in attacks on leading
opponents of Soviet-inspired terrorism, includ- ing such well-known experts in
the field as Robert Moss and Arnaud de Borchgrave and on leading anti-communist
figures such as the late Reps. John Ashbrook and Larry McDonald. More important,
they have also on occasion attempted to obtain sensitive defense information
from contacts on Capitol Hill, and within the govern- ment. In one specific
instance, a member of the LaRouche network attempted to obtain from a member of
the House Armed Services Committeee staff the range of the U.S. cruise
missile--one of America's most sensitive military secrets.

Whether witting or unwitting, it remains clear that ulti- mately the
publications and rhetoric of the LaRouche network will end up with positions
that are favorable to the Soviet Union. The fact that their positions are
cloaked in ostensibly conserva- tive rhetoric merely makes-their pro-Soviet
slant harder to perceive. what remains true, however, is that their efforts in
the long run can only serve to further Soviet propaganda aims within a sector of
the population that Moscow could never reach directly.

CONCLUSION

Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of the LaRouche network is its ability to
adapt whatever coloration is best able to hide its real nature at any given
moment. Through its fronts and publica- tions, it continues to influence
thousands of Americans, who have no inkling of the bizarre and viciously
anti-Semitic conspiracy theories that underlie its philosophy. Moreover, this
tendency to create a new front whenever it appears that a new issue has emerged
and can be capitalized on makes it necessary to remain ever watch- ful for the
latest of the cult's creations.

The persistent reports of high-level access and the continu- ing, albeit
obfuscated support of Soviet foreign policy goals that are so much a part of
LaR6uche's rhetoric, make his network more than merely a fringe group that is
essentially a nuisance. At a minimum, its 'anti-Semitism is an affront to
decency, and its proclivity for violence a threat to civil oraer. In the worst
case, it may well be the strangest asset for the KGB's disinforma- tion effort.

Milton R. Copulos Senior Policy Analyst

Show References

Gregory Rose, "The Swarmy Life and Times of the NCLC," National Review, March
30, 1978. Also see Francis Watson, "U.S. Labor Party," Heritage Foundation
Institu- tion Analysis No. 7, June 1978.

2 NBC Press Release dated March 4, 1984.

3 Information Digest, March 30, 1978.

4 Paul Blum and Paul Montgomery, "One Man Leads U.S. Labor Party on Its Erratic
March," The New York Times, October 8, 1979.

5 In October 1980, New York State Supreme Court Justice Michael Dontzin held
that the Anti-Defamation League's characterization of a LaRouche Group as
anti-Semitic constituted "fair comment," and that the facts presented in the
case "reasonably give rise" to such characterization.

6 Rose, op. cit.

7 Ibid.

8 Information Digest, op. cit.

9 Defamation League handbook on extremist groups.

10 Ibid.

11 _'_'T__he LaRouche Network: A Political Cult," ADL Facts, Spring 1982.


AUTHORS

Michael Copulus

Visiting Fellow in Russian and Eurasian Studies and International Energy Policy
in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign and National Security
Policy, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for
International Studies, at The

Read Full Report


SECONDARY NAVIGATION

 * About Heritage
 * Events
 * Renew
 * Press
 * Contact

Subscribe to email updates

*
Email Address:













Subscribe

Follow us

Privacy Policy Copyright

© 2024, The Heritage Foundation