RationalWiki's 2019 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2020.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $2200Goal: $3000

Talk:Lyndon LaRouche

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

LaRouche and 9-11[edit]

Hey Ed - do you have any sort of citation for LL talking RR into Star Wars? And even if that claim is true, I think using that to try to pin some blame for 9-11 on Larouche is spurious at best. PFoster 10:10, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

I have an article dating back to the 90's somewhere. I'll try to dig it up. I clearly remember the connection and was surprised it was left out in the original article. The 9/11 claim was for lulz, though there is some logic there... YOu are such a party pooper for reverting that. Why don't you leave it until the article becomes long enough, and well-cited enough to be an encyclopedic entry? Rational Edfaith 10:22, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
A guick search on google found a number of sources, three of which I included. A search of the NY Times archives found two hits connecting LaRouche and the Star Wars program, but you have to pay a fee to access the articles. Rational Edfaith 10:30, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
ME? A PARTY POOPER?!?!?! Never - check the logs - some other body made the revert. PFoster 11:19, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
My apologies, PF. It was a rodent. Rational Edfaith 11:51, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
I has aded lulz back teh artkle I can has cookyz now? Secret Squirrel 06:50, 10 April 2008 (EDT)
Have an acorn cookie... humanUser talk:Human 11:56, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

incerpt[edit]

Would it be good to provide an incerpt from his writing. I'm a libertarian and thought those "scketchy" guys were doing a service to America, but then I read the crap and wow. At least I always get what they give me for a good laugh. Jason. — Unsigned, by: 96.241.212.211 / talk / contribs

Learn how to spell "excerpt," then go for it. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 05:50, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

False Equivalency[edit]

Thread title taken from the BoN's edit summary.--ZooGuard (talk) 09:44, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The idea that ron paul has anything in common with lyndon larouche is the kind of wingnuttery/moonbattery that could only be found on the site which redefined misinformation and hypocrisy for a new generation. Namely, Rationalwiki— Unsigned, by: 173.22.37.6 / talk / contribs

Huh?--ZooGuard (talk) 09:44, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Because BoN doesn't like to pay attention to the obvious similarities between two political figureheads with insanely devoted followers. There is a bit of difference -- LaRouche is more openly authoritarian but appeals to the lefty in his followers, while Paul prefers to appeal to the whiny little child in his -- but yeah, it's just "is not!" from BoN. EVDebs (talk) 00:31, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Quite a lot of difference, actually. Ron Paul doesn't make his followers work 14 hours a day for a tiny stipend, keep them confined in group quarters with other cult members when they aren't out tabling, subject them to abusive "beyond psychoanalysis" sessions every day they fail to make their fundraising quota, or engage in paranoid vendettas against people who have been loyal to him for decades, even to the point of driving them to suicide. The LaRouche movement is all about the cult regimen and slavish devotion to the group, whereas Paul's appeal is to extreme individualism and trying to get Ron Paul followers into an organized movement is like herding cats. They're almost polar opposites in that regard. What they do have in common is a history of pandering to the Spotlight newspaper, Liberty Lobby, Willis Carto constituency. That both of them felt the need to appeal to the worldview of Willis Carto is fairly revealing about an ugly undercurrent in American politics. Secret Squirrel (talk) 22:35, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, the results are different, but I'd guess the big difference is the trappings of the ideology. Lyndon LaRouche is a creature of the far Left, even if his politics are pretty much incomprehensible now; for him authoritarian collectivism is the order of the day. Paul's authoritarianism is veiled behind rhetoric about liberty that mostly goes back to "why can't we get the niCLANGs out of town at sunset?", even if it's transformed over the long term into libertarian polykookery that might not directly be about race. Otherwise, the "us against them, but mainly me" message is the same at the bottom. EVDebs (talk) 23:50, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

I lol'd[edit]

...at the template: "Lyndon LaRouche could use some help...." Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 03:04, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Silver?[edit]

Rational shit 💡 rational sHit, thats 💡💡 some rational shit right there(chorus: right there) Plutoniumboss (talk) 16:38, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

So, is he dead or not?[edit]

Twitter's saying he is, but I haven't seen the long-form vault copy of his death certificate. --Gulik (talk) 18:46, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

He was resuscitated on Wikipedia.[1] Bongolian (talk) 19:08, 13 February 2019 (UTC)