Why Did The London and Wall Street Bankers Turn on Hitler, Who They Created?

Why Did The London and Wall Street Bankers Turn on Hitler, Who They Created?

Why Ignorant Bankers Believe Schacht Succeeded

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr

(An Excerpt)

The creation of Nazi Germany by the initial backing of the Rockefeller family and others is a fact which begs the question:

How was it, then, that Adolf Hitler, an Atlanticist puppet, became the principal enemy of the U.S. and Great Britain during World War II?

An understanding of Hjalmar Schacht's and Adolf Hitler's monetary policies is absolutely

key to that problem.

AtIanticist backing for Schacht's protege, Adolf Hitler, had two principal objectives. More immediately, the entire structure of pre-World War II imperialist debt rested upon the foundation of the reparations debt imposed upon Weimar Germany by the victorious World War I Allied Powers.

Schacht's 1928 "wizardry" amounted to no more than a proposal to drastically cut wages and social services as a trick for maintaining payments to foreign debtors.

The specific problem of Schacht's 1928 proposal was solely that it resulted in massive unemployment. It was not this unemployment which concerned Schacht's Atlanticist backers, it was the fact that collapsing employment

meant that the thus-dwindling amount of total

looting of both industrial capacity and of the population was insufficient to meet foreign debt-payments! Therefore, by restoring to forced-draft employment, including the slave labor Nazi primitive Bauarbeit projects, the rate of per capita looting of German bodies and industrial capacities was increased. Again, not an economic solution to the insufficient

production of wealth, but a simple mercantilist's swindle.

Without German military conquests, Schacht's policy would have brought about immediate collapse of the German economy sometime shortly after 1936.

Thus, the first immediate objective of Hitler's New York City and London backers was to stabilize Germany's external debt-payments using the vicious Nazi machine of Adolf Hitler as the only existing instrument capable of

delivering that result.

The second objective, openly mooted in leading U. S. circles from the 1936 Roosevelt election campaign, was the Atlanticist

military objectives for their puppet, Adolf Hitler.

The key to Atlanticist military policies for their Hitler puppet is the Anglo-German Parvus project of 1915-1917.

Certain forces among British AtIanticists had reached the conclusion that only the colonization of Eastern Europe,

especially Russia, could provide a viable material basis for reviving the already-waning British Empire.

Lacking the direct military means to accomplish this, the relevant British circles - with increasing concurrence from certain

New York-based circles - adopted the policy of utilizing German military potential to accomplish British objectives.

Thus, Parvus was successfully insinuated into the confidences of German intelligence beginning in mid-1915 - after unsuccessful earlier efforts to the same end.

It was for this reason that the French Army did not go into the Rhineland in 1936. It was for this reason that the Munich agreement - inexplicable from a military-strategic

correlation of forces at hand at that time - was enacted; that Admiral Canaris was ordered not to proceed with his army project for overthrowing Hitler, and that the inital phase of the Western Front War of 1939-1940 was described as a “phony war.” It was because of Stalin's real, if foggy, perceptions of this pattern that the Hitler-Stalin pact as adopted.

Stalin, rightly fearing a joint Allied-Nazi War against the Soviet Union attempted to place in Nazi hands, the means for Hitler's turning first against France and Britain. This is not to imply that Stalin was anything resembling a genius in this matter, he was enormously credulous as the Tukachevsky affair illustrates. The fact is that the outlines of the plot were that obvious. Stalin's efforts to divide his opponents were also obviously a delay reaction to the British and French aIIies - rejecting the Tukachevsky plan and rushing into the clear signals of policy in the Munich agreement.

Weimar Germany and its fascist movements, originally created by AtIanticist intelligence agencies working through the Occupying Powers in Berlin, did not come to such a

posture accidentally. From the beginning of 1919, at the latest, as today, Atlanticist policy for Germany was to use that nation as a gambit-pawn of "forward defense" for containment and invasion of' the Soviet Republic. This project proved unfeasible during the immediate post-war period, and thus was deferred without being abandoned.

The basic British policy, as embodied in the essential points of the Parvus plan, has never been abandoned since by the hardcore of Atlanticists.

This is not to imply that the immediate current objective of Rockefeller and his allies is an actual invasion of the Soviet Union. As the Schlesinger Doctrine appropriately emphasizes. Rockefeller's immediate military objectives are a crushing of all political opposition to his fascist economic schemes within both the advanced-capitalist sector and the developing sector. The danger of general thermonuclear war during either the immediate weeks ahead or no later than the

summer of 1977 arises, first because Rockefeller envisages a 1962-style capitulation of the Soviet leadership to a thermonuclear

showdown as the most efficient means for

terrorizing Western Europe and the developing sector into total submission, and second, because Rockefeller and other circles foresee that 1977 is the last possible opportunity for a

successful thermonuclear showdown with the Warsaw Pact.

Because those Rockefeller forces are maddened by their current financial desperation, they are acting as blinded

lunatics to the fact that any such confrontation as they propose inevitably means immediate general thermonuclear war.

Thus, from 1936 onwards, Atlanticist Nazi policy shifted to a posture of using Hitler as a "breakaway" or "outlaw" ally - just as the Rand Corporation has proposed to employ Israel's

Dayan-Peres and South Africa's Vorster of today.

Hitler, militarily contained in the West, was to solve his internal economic problems by looting in the Balkans and to the East, and, after the attrition of fighting a war against the Red Army, both the Nazis and the conquered Soviet Union were to be subjected by the waiting Atlanticist military forces and

their credulous French allies.

As we have emphasized in other treatments of this general problem of Nazi World War II policies, the Atlanticist creation of the Nazi Frankenstein as a military power in Germany produced a monster which could no longer be controlled as a mere puppet of the sponsoring New York City based and London-based Atlanticist forces. Hitler, from mid-1940 onwards, became visibly a greater danger to Atlanticist power than the conquest of Russia represented an urgent material necessity for those same Atlanticists.

Hence. the abrupt mid-1940 change in Atlanticist policies leading into the later developments of that war.

Once Schacht and his Atlanticist backers had created the Hitler-pest on the basis of Schachtian monetary policies, the

sequelae; including the slave-labor death-camp systems, followed as inevitable rigorously determined consequences of Schacht's monetary policy.

To support Schacht's monetary policy, which requires then as now a certain type

of political regime, is to commit oneself to the same and worse crimes which the Nazis accomplished during the period following Schacht's formal degradation - for reasons

of incompetence - from power.

Why Bankers Become Fools…..(continued)

https://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2021/eirv48n42-20211022/eirv48n42-20211022_039-why_ignorant_bankers_believe_sch-lar.pdf

https://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1976/eirv03n21-19760525/eirv03n21-19760525_025-us_labor_party_presidentia