A principle of wholeness
by Jon Rappoport
August 9, 2016
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)
Suppose you had a community in which there were families but relatively few fathers. For various reasons, the fathers were absent, gone. But the mothers were there, and they had to raise the children.
A wholeness is gone. You can try to talk your way around it, but you can’t. The children are missing something, and that’s all there is to it.
Now you’re going to step in and “solve the problem.” One thing is certain: you’re going to come up with some bizarre plans, because the actual answer is the missing fathers.
That’s obvious to everyone.
But this is a tricky area, because the complexities of “solutions” have been piled up on each other for a long time. You have some very odd structures now. It seems you are wandering farther and farther afield.
If this were pure mathematics (which it isn’t), you’d have something like this: 1 plus 1 plus 1 equals 3. But then you took away a 1, and you still tried to get 3 as the answer. You would then find many 1’s which are not real 1’s and you would plug them into the equation and pretend it was all working correctly.
But it wasn’t and isn’t.
The answer is way back there where the 1’s went missing. They disappeared.
The fathers disappeared and stopped being fathers (if they ever started). Again, you can try to talk your way around this, but it doesn’t work.
Why did the fathers leave? This is a better starting point. Why did they become fathers if they were going to leave?
Can someone else make them come back? Highly doubtful.
If you could get a few hundred possible fathers-to-be in a room before they became fathers (could you do that?), perhaps you could ask a few questions. Do you think you’re going to become a father? Do you want to become a father? If you do become a father, what are you going to do next? Why do you want to be a father? What do you think the role of a father is? Is that role what you want?
Regardless, this is where the problem begins. Introducing huge amounts of money over time into that community, in the form of “programs,” isn’t going to carry the day.
This problem doesn’t have a cause that no one can ever see. It isn’t a great mystery. The cause surely isn’t something to be blotted out. Once you blot it out, what are your chances of solving the problem?
If missing fathers are the problem—and they are—and you try 4,567 other solutions to substitute for the missing father, what chance of success do you have?
If one major solution is empowering a gigantic organization called government to enact other solutions, what chance of success do you have? If the government is, in effect, standing in for the missing father, is this going to be an authentic remedy? Is it going to work for the child in the family?
No, it’s not.
Since the problem and its cause are so obvious, you might come to the conclusion that the people who are “in charge” of solving the problem don’t really want to solve it, because they’re busy looking at everything except the cause.
You might come to that conclusion.
If the missing fathers don’t want to solve the problem, and then the government doesn’t really want to solve the problem, that makes things worse.
What is a father?
To ask that question in these communities, and to listen to answers, in churches and schools and informal neighborhood conversations, does it possibly seem that the best people to engage in that dialogue are the people who actually live there? Is that remotely possible?
Are the government, and all sorts of outside experts, quite sure that such a dialogue, undertaken by the people who live there, will never result in any positive outcome? Are they quite sure that nothing good can come of this? Are they writing off the wisdom of the people who actually live there, and instead assuming that these people have nothing to offer?
And if so, is there a way to be more patronizing and dismissive at the same time?
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.