Why there are no days off for LaRouche's cadre:


Factnet posting by "European," March 14, 2009, 11:57 PM:

(replying to LaRouche loyalist "retour," who had suggested it's okay for LaRouche followers to work long hours seven days a week without a break)

Retour! You wrote: "As far as the other things, you should know the drill: we're at war and in war you fight. Right? Important people don't take vacations."

YOU ARE WRONG! If you study military science you would see that war exhaustion is an important subject, and how to avoid it. It is the ABC of elementary military tactics WHILE AT WAR to never overuse your troops MORE THAN SHORT PERIODS OF TIME! And I am talking about short periods of perhaps some months.

If the troops are forced to fight for days and days without rest, war exhaustion occur and the troops fight less efficiently.

This is why a GOOD general always keeps some brigades or battalions behind the front RESTING so that they can replace the troops that are under constant fire and let them rest!

I know how it was during my time in the organization and how the American [LaRouche org] policy of "deployments" and "organizing" seven days (or six-and-a-half days) a week was justified by the talk that "we are in war." For heaven's sake, we all knew in reality that labor-intensive work seven days a week is lousy economics, (right!) so the only argument left is the warfare argument!

But as can be easily proven, that is a flawed and dangerous argument!

And one which proves the fascist nature of the LaRouchian labor-intensive dogma. Look at Mussolini and you will soon see that he talked about the need to let the society be in a state of constant war mobilization and war. This, in order to control them!

Read more here:



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Factnet posting by "European," March 15, 2009, 01:03 AM:

retour, I have to ask you, since you are up to date as you write:

Do the "boomers" in the offices still work seven or six-and-a-half days a week at fundraising?

If so, ask yourself what military commander would let their troops constantly fight like that since the seven-days-a-week policy was instituted eight or nine years ago? What did the World War Two generals say about this? General Grant? Lincoln? Frederick the Great? I know, but do you?

And even Patton and Sherman, whom I believe were two of those that often used their troops to fight constantly for 24/7 (or 14/7 the LaRouchian way), also knew the need to let their troops REST for some days!

That is why "vacation" is very important in military warfare! Without it your troops will fight less efficiently. That is a fact!

Note by DK:

Here's what the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe (1943-45) says in his memoirs:

"The effect of prolonged combat is always bad. If a unit is brought out of line before the processes of physical and mental fatigue have gone too far and before its losses have become excessive it can, with the assimilation of new recruits, be ready for re-entry into battle far sooner than one that has been kept in line too long. Moreover, the periodic rests for the front-line soldier have a splendid effect upon morale--and in any kind of warfare troop morale is always a decisive factor."

--Dwight D. Eisenhower, Crusade in Europe, New York: Doubleday, 1948, p. 454.

Of course, LaRouche can't follow this advice. If he gave his LaRouche Youth Movement slaves periods of rest, they'd have time to think. And they'd start thinking, "What the hell am I doing here?" Many would then call their parents and ask for money for a bus ticket home.