Subject: Re: Wit & Wisdom of Fascist LaRouche

From: [email-masked] (Steve Crocker)
Date: 21 Sep 1992 01:13:46 GMT

[email-masked] (Tom Warner) writes:

>[email-masked] (Steve Crocker) writes:

>>(2) Pick a quote from Chip's collection. Tell me what YOU think it 
>>means, and/or ask an intelligent question about it. I'll do my best
>>to respond with an intelligent comment or answer.

>Okay, Steve. I pick the Beatle quote. I think Lyndon is saying that
>social engineers from the Tavistock Institute planned out how the
>Beatles would write their lyrics and interact with the press, etc.,
>so as to influence the minds of youths all over the world in a direction
>somehow fitting into the plans of the British Monarchy.

>What I want to know is, following this scheme, what does "Lucy in the
>Sky with Diamonds" *really* mean?

First to recapitulate the quote in question:

>"The Beatles had no genuine musical talent, but were a 
>product shaped according to British Psychological Warfare 
>Division (Tavistock) specifications, and promoted in Britain by 
>agencies which are controlled by British intelligence."
>          "Why Your Child Became A Drug Addict"
>          Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., 
>          Campaigner Special Report, Copyright 1978

The first thing to notice is that a careful reading of the quote 
does not necessitate quite as close a connection to Tavistock as
implied in your interpretation. What is missing here as background
is the general analysis of the LaRouche organization as to what 
Tavistock is and how its influence is conduited. Tavistock is
described as a pioneer instution in the study of methods of social 
control and mass brainwashing. Theories developed at Tavistock are
often implimented by other instutions, and much of Tavistock's impact
is via a network of alumni and co-thinkers who have carried on its
work from their positions in other organizations. I take LaRouche to
mean here simply that the agencies which DID play a role in deploying
the Beatles used social-psychological insights originally derived from
Tavistock and their co-thinkers.

As to who those agencies may have been, I don't know. I doubt very
much that they planned out in detail how the Beatles would write their
lyrics and interact with the press. More likely, they picked out 
a struggling band that they judged would be open to the kind of
cultural influences they wanted to promote, and then just made sure
that John Lennon et al would have access to plenty of psychedelics,
a chance to party with the "right" people, and good business and media
connections. 

As to Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds, it doesn't take a rocket scientist
to recognize psychedelic imagery. I imagine the specific meanings of the
images are probably something very personal to John Lennon, but colorful
enough to appeal to acid heads and their cultural followers generally.

As to the influence of the British elites generally in creating 
psychedelic culture, you might want to check out the background
of Aldous Huxley and his drug-related activities in the fifties.

-Steve

---

From: [email-masked] (Bob Ingria)
Date: 22 Sep 1992 23:56:57 GMT

the Beatles

So what groups do you think have been so ``deployed'' today?  Or was
this a one shot deal?  Were the Beatles and the Stones actually arms
of the same conspiracy?  Were they deployed by competing conspirators?
And where do the Who and the Kinks fit in?  Does Uncle Lyndie have a
conspiracy lover's chart to who was controlling which groups?  What
about the San Francisco sound?  And was the ill-fated ``Boss-Town
Sound'' an unstart conspiracy that was crushed by its older brothers?
C'mon, perspiring minds want to know!  (Also, I'd love to know what
conpsiracy ``deplyed'' The Velvet Underground and The United States of
America.  Not to mention Joe Bird and the Field Hippies.)

	       used social-psychological insights originally derived from
   Tavistock and their co-thinkers.

So, did they know beforehand that they would be successful or did they
have a number of groups on tap, knowing that mass popularity can't be
created or predicted?  (And if you believe it can be, look at a group
like The Knack, that tried to do just that, and now are probably
remembered only by Trivial Pursuit players.)

   As to Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds, it doesn't take a rocket scientist
   to recognize psychedelic imagery.

It occasionally does take a rocket scientist to recognize irony and/or
sarcasm.  Or to feel that hand on the leg.

				     I imagine the specific meanings of the
   images are probably something very personal to John Lennon,

Um, Lennon's son had done a drawing; John asked what it was and
received the reply: ``Lucy in the sky with diamonds.''

							       but colorful

Sigh.  So you mean everybody who liked/likes Sgt. Pepper's was either
an acid head or follower of same?

Did Huxley's experiments create psychedelic culture or was he a high
culture member who engaged in psychedelic culture activities?  The two
are not identical, you know.

Stepping back from this, you mean you actually think that the notion
that the Beatles were deployed by some agency to manipulate popular
culture is a reasonable thing to say and not evidence of paranoia,
delusion, or demagoguery on good ole Uncle Lyndon's part?  You really
expect people to take this sort of claim seriously?  Aside from the a
priori unlikelihood of the whole idea, what is the evidence for it?
That one can a posteriori make up a rationalization for anything ole
Unca Lynda says is not in question; the question is rather whether or
not there is any support for the claim.

-30-
Bob