The individual and his future

The individual and his future

by Jon Rappoport

December 6, 2016

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)

“It’s instructive to read what authors wrote about core values a hundred or two hundred years ago, because then you can appreciate what has happened to the culture of a nation. You can grasp the enormous influence of planned propaganda, which changes minds, builds new consensus, and exiles certain disruptive thinkers to the margins of society. You can see what has been painted over, with great intent, in order to promote tyranny that proclaims a greater good for all.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Here I present several statements about the individual, written in 19th century America. The authors, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, and James Fenimore Cooper were prominent figures. Emerson, in his time, was the most famous.

“All greatness of character is dependent on individuality. The man who has no other existence than that which he partakes in common with all around him, will never have any other than an existence of mediocrity.” James Fenimore Cooper

“The less government we have, the better, — the fewer laws, and the less confided power. The antidote to this abuse of [by] formal Government, is, the influence of private character, the growth of the Individual.” Ralph Waldo Emerson

“The former generations…sacrificed uniformly the citizen to the State. The modern mind believed that the nation existed for the individual, for the guardianship and education of every man. This idea, roughly written in revolutions and national movements, in the mind of the philosopher had far more precision; the individual is the world.” Ralph Waldo Emerson

“If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” Henry David Thoreau

“They [conformists] think society wiser than their soul, and know not that one soul, and their soul, is wiser than the whole world…Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members….Whoso would be a man, must be a nonconformist…. Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.” Ralph Waldo Emerson

Can you imagine, today, any of these statements gaining traction in the public mind, much less the mainstream media?

Immediately, there would be virulent pushback, on the grounds that unfettered individualism equals brutal greed, equals (hated) capitalism, equals inhumane indifference to the plight of the less fortunate, equals callous disregard for the needs of the group.

The 19th-century men who wrote those assertions would be viewed with hostile suspicion, as potential criminals, as potential “anti-government” outliers who should go on a list. They might have terrorist tendencies.

Contemporary analysis of the individual goes much further than this.

Case in point: Peter Collero, of the department of sociology, Western Oregon University, has written a book titled: The Myth of Individualism: How Social Forces Shape Our Lives:

“Most people today believe that an individual is a person with an independent and distinct identification. This, however, is a myth.”

Callero is claiming there aren’t individuals to begin with. They’re a group.

This downgrading of the individual human spirit is remarkable, but it is not the exception. There are many, many people today who would agree (without comprehending what they are talking about) that the individual does not exist. They would agree because, to take the opposite position would set them on a path toward admitting that each individual has independent power—and thus they would violate a sacred proscription of political correctness.

These are the extreme conformists Emerson was referring to a century and a half ago.

Unable to partake in anything resembling clear thought, such people salute the flag of the Collective, blithely assuming it means “whatever is best for everyone.” Such questions as “who defines ‘best’” and “who engineers this outcome” are beyond their capacity to consider. They rest their proud case in vagueness.

Without realizing it, they are tools of a program. They’re foot soldiers in a ceaseless campaign to promote collectivism (dictatorship from the top) under the guise of equality.

Exit From the Matrix

Let me repeat one of Emerson’s statements: “The antidote to this abuse of [by] formal Government, is, the influence of private character, the growth of the Individual.” The corollary: If there is no widespread growth of individuals and their independent thoughts, actions, and moral consciousness, if they don’t widen their horizons and spheres of influence, then in the long run what check is there on government?

Demeaning the individual is, in fact, an intentional operation designed to keep government power intact and expand its range.

Consider this question: If all opposition to overbearing, intrusive, and illegitimate government were contained in organized groups, and if there were no independent “Emersonian” individuals, what would be the outcome?

In the long term, those groups would stagnate and fail in their missions. They would be co-opted by government. Eventually, all such groups would be viewed as “special needs” cases, requiring “intervention” to “help them.”

That is a future without promise, without reason, without imagination, without life-force.

That is why the individual remains vital; above, beyond, and through any blizzard of propaganda.

“Art is individualism, and individualism is a disturbing and disintegrating force. There lies its immense value. For what it seeks is to disturb monotony of type, slavery of custom, tyranny of habit, and the reduction of man to the level of a machine.” Oscar Wilde. The Soul of Man under Socialism (1891)

Jon Rappoport

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 or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

7 comments on “The individual and his future

  1. Oliver K. Manuel says:

    Thank you, Jon, for posting this information on the potential greatness of individuals. I knew one great hero personally, Paul Kazuo Kuroda (1917-2001).

    Kuroda was the first nuclear scientist sent to examine the ruins of Hiroshima after it was destroyed by an atomic bomb on 6 Aug 1945.

    He risked the rest of his life to expose the misuse of science to enslave humanity in a matrix of scientific deception that might save frightened world leaders and guilt-ridden scientists from death by worldwide nuclear annihilation.

  2. noboxplease says:

    Thank you, Jon, for this great article which hits the nail on the head!!! What you say here is getting more visible by the day since the collectivism is soaring from global elites and try to overwhelm common reason.
    I am happy to see, though, also a growing dissent from many indivuduals in social media!

  3. Greg C. says:

    Direct democracy is just another form of collectivism. That is why the Electoral College is vital. We do not want the voice of the people in power, we need the choice of the states. Look at a map of the 2016 presidential election and realize that those isolated blue states (20) would have put Hillary in power over vast swaths of red (30), if not for the electoral college.

    Congressional representatives from the states should be individualists, not part of a national team. We should get rid of the “whip” position in the house. Let every rep. be an individual, not a part of a party bloc.

    Emerson’s words have such energy, while Thoreau is more contemplative. We need both to focus the power of the individual. The senate was designed to be the contemplative branch, but now that we have popular election of senators, they are just more powerful reps of direct democracy. Thank God for Trump’s individualist leadership (truly he hears a different drummer than anyone else in the halls of power), but we also need a radical remodel of the house and senate.

    Lastly, to preserve the power of the individual, we need to constitutionally protect the power of the jury to nullify laws. Jefferson regretted that that principle was not spelled out in the constitution, but it was generally recognized and respected until recent times.

  4. Joy says:

    There are so many of us who understand and believe these truths, and are courageously making our way among masses of sleeping machines. Yet because we are not a “collective,” and because mainstream media will most certainly NOT say a peep about us, we usually have to rely on faith in what we are doing as true individuals, even if it may appear we are solitaries. Jon, there is a definite reason why your blog is my first web stop of each day…thank you!

  5. thsinger says:

    I am surrounded by people who all sing the same song. It’s a lonely existence. More and more I prefer to be alone because I get tired of the look of utter disbelief on people’s faces when they engage me in conversation these days. I literally have not met one person who has a good word to say about the incoming US President and when I point certain things out in his favour (actual policies of which they think he has none!) I see in their eyes a hint of recognition of logic and truth. The damage is deep and although I see that people are waking up to the Orwellian double speak & inversion of morality that has corrupted mankind, out there on the battlefields of society it’s absolute hell.

  6. Gretel says:

    Well, I don’t hold with the crude equation that “socialism = slavery”, or the romantic notion that everything in society must optimally be down to individual initiative. For instance, the physical infrastructure of the USA is crumbling, roads are not maintained, bridges are allowed to go decrepit, and what is the reason? There are “natural monopolies”, and these should never be privatized. I believe taxes are well used to implement projects that benefit each citizen equally. The rich in any country are always against any taxes at all on their income, but poor people are glad to pay from the little they have, as long as they see themselves getting something in return.

  7. We’re ALL being PLAYED, at the end of the day QUEEN and PAWN rests in the SAME BOX!



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.