Utopian fantasies vs. a better world

Utopian fantasies vs. a better world

What happened to the Republic? Democracy happened

by Jon Rappoport

November 19, 2017

“When you come to the subject of who should ‘fix things,’ the government or private individuals, you could throw up your hands and confess that neither choice works, in which case you’re left with a terminal disease, and a fine excuse for doing nothing; or you could refer back to the principles of the Republic, and understand why the Founders put chains on government, and you might a find a clue for navigating out of the maze.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

This piece is for anyone who can understand it—but it’s also for THE ENTREPRENEUR, who in his soul wants to do something large and bright and radical and successful, to turn the tide of human affairs in an enormously good direction and, yes, still make a substantial profit.

And no, “the universe” doesn’t rule out those two motives existing side by side.

The United States was created as a Republic.

That meant severely limited central government.

Why?

Because the Founders knew the long experience of Europe: overarching tyrannies; bloated kings emboldened with the doctrine of divine right to rule; theocracies; gigantic theft of land; force, coercion; slavery.

The new 18th century American central government, through enumerated powers and checks and balances, had to be limited and even hamstrung.

On that basis, individual freedom would be maximized.

That was the whole point of a Republic.

The individual would be free to do whatever he wanted to, as long as he didn’t interfere with the life and liberty of others.

INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM—THE HALLMARK OF A REPUBLIC.

However, in order for a Republic to have a chance of success, the population would have to remain small. A Republic is not for an enormous population. The people are too remote from the federal center of power.

And there needed to be a population of moral people, who understood basic rights and wrongs, beyond legislation and law.

As the American population swelled, there should have been many Republics founded on this continent. Unfortunately, that never happened.

Instead, men in and around central government conspired to multiply their own power through a variety of means, thus creating monopolies of great strength, in government and business and money.

And gradually, these men and their descendants came to see they could foist a grand illusion on the people: they could promote the idea that “the people’s wishes were paramount” and should be served at all times.

Thus arrived Democracy.

Rule by “everyone.” Rule by “popular decision.” Rule by “meeting needs,” whatever they might be.

Meeting needs, of course, necessitated a more powerful and extensive government—shattering the severe limits originally imposed in the Constitution.

Marry these democratic elements to a decline in general morality—grab whatever you can at the expense of your neighbor—and the fate of the Republic was sealed.

The Republic was never perfect. Far from it. Perfection wasn’t its goal. But it was a noble effort, and the ideas on which it stood still survive.

Particularly, freedom of the individual.

That freedom is the launching pad for everything the individual can imagine and create, in order to build a greater future.

And the rule barring the individual from interfering with the life and liberty of others is still a basic principle.

Democracy cultivates mobs. It embodies the idea that any group which can gain attention must have its purported needs met.

Just one step to the left of that, we find the socialist/Communist maxim: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

What able individuals produce will be taken from them and given to those of “lesser ability.”

Limited government, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights—these are mere pieces of paper, old pamphlets trampled on in the streets by the mobs shouting their endless demands.

If the ancestors of these groups, at one time, had legitimate objections to the way government was being run (against them), now all that is swept away in a sea of base anger and revenge—which turns out to be the elite plan for the end-game…

If the elites can pull it off:

Chaos. Out of which a new level of order will be imposed—which takes us back to the kind of tyranny that existed before the struggle for individual freedom and limited government was won.

And all the while, these elite planners pose as utopian altruists. Socialists.

And yet…as of 2010, there were 27.9 million small businesses in the US.

Somehow, the heritage of the Republic still lives.

Freedom of the individual.

The core idea on which America was founded.

Liberty of the individual is more than an invented “construct.” It’s a reflection of an inherent truth: the individual is at the heart of what life is all about.

A major point needs to be entered into this mix: ABUNDANCE. Planet-wide abundance of resources, technology, and energy.

As Buckminster Fuller made clear 80 years ago, there is “enough for everyone”—which is to say, every person on Earth can have the essentials of survival. Food, clothing, shelter.

However, Fuller (and others) stalled on the vital question: WHO WILL DELIVER THIS ABUNDANCE TO THE GLOBAL POPULATION, AND HOW?

In the arena of fuzzy thinking, the answer is, of course: “the government” will deliver abundance.

This is fatuous, idiotic, and impossible.

“The government” is controlled by men who, amidst their many crimes, have no intention of sharing the wealth of Earth’s resources and technology. I can’t emphasize this fact enough.

The government is there to promote socialism and technocracy as “better-world” answers right around the corner. THIS IS THE MASK.

Behind the mask is cruel top-down scarcity, upheld and maintained, despite the truth that there really IS enough for everyone.

No, government will not be the provider of abundance.

NOR SHOULD IT BE.

That task falls to…wait for it…private business.

What?

Here is the capper: if private businesses—including major corporations—realized they could sell food, clothing, and shelter to the global population for relative pennies—and make more profits than they’re making now—because of the size of that consumer base—they might reassess their position.

They might…but they won’t. Not without our help.

Boiling down the situation: you have the potential consumer base of some eight billion people; you have the means to sell this base the means of survival—food and clothing and shelter—for pennies; you have the technology needed for the job; you have the bright promise of a better future.

And you have the individuals who, armed with this understanding, could create businesses to bring such a vision to fruition.

Actual capitalism is preserved. Free market is preserved. Profit motive is preserved. Doing good is preserved. And all this WITHOUT GOVERNMENT CONTROL.

No one said this job I’m proposing would be easy. Of course it’s not easy.

But, for example, the next generation of techies—after this generation of air heads who seek to worship at the knee of brain-computer mysticism has faded away—the next generation might be persuaded to revisit the core ideas of the Republic and see how free enterprise, freely undertaken, could work a true revolution and distribute abundance to the planet at the same time.

Imagine a near-future corporate boardroom meeting. The CEO stands up and says:

“OK, people, I’ve brought you here because we’re going to try something new and radical. Face it, we’ve been selling crap to our customers for a long, long time and gouging them in the process. Today, that stops. We’re going to shift over to a different theme. Our board will approve, because we’re going to show them this new effort will expand our bottom line. WE’RE GOING MAKE NUTRITIOUS FOOD PACKS AND SELL THEM FOR RELATIVE PENNIES TO A BILLION PEOPLE. That’s the initial goal. We can do it. On another front, we’re going to sell a billion people good clean food seeds for growing food crops. We’re going to buy acres of land in the so-called Third World and then sell parcels, for farming, to the poor for pennies and take a small share of their profits…

“Now, at first, we’ll have to work through a bunch of foreign governments, because they control their people. This is tricky. But if we give these tinpot leaders enough money, they’ll go along….”

Of course, there will be problems. Serious problems. The CIA, for example, which supports government control and scarcity around the world.

That’s where GOOD AND RIGHTEOUS PUBLIC RELATIONS ENTERS THE SCENE. That visionary CEO and his company will have to publicize the hell out of their radical new plan and expose the problems and barriers and ops the old guard throws up against them.

Wake up the people to what is going on.

“Are you kidding? This will never work.”

That’s what was said in the middle of the Dark Ages, when a few people said THE INDIVIDUAL SHOULD BE FREE.

“This will never work.”

But it did.

With enough courage and determination and intelligence and vision and work and imagination, over a very long period of time, it did work.

Up against forces of evil and deception, it did work.

And it can work again.

“But this time it’s different. The situation is worse, much worse.”

No it isn’t.

Here’s a clue. It’s always worse. That’s the way it always looks. But it’s always possible.

The free and independent and creative individual has been lulled into thinking that he has to limit his entrepreneurial vision and goals to a few self-contained enterprises in a small corner of a much larger space.

That’s called brainwashing.

He can think and plan and work in as large an arena as he wants to. If he wakes up.

If he’s a rocket ship with a range of 100 light years, and he’s operating on an old route that travels 50 miles, back and forth, something is seriously amiss.

There is much more to say…

But this is an introduction. This is a sketch of the core. This is about the individual unleashed. This is about sacrificing nothing in the pursuit of individual success while making abundance into fact.

This is about wiping away the delusion that “the government will generate a new and better world.”

If you want a better world, if you want abundance, you can choose government or the individual as the carrier. You can put your eggs in either basket. You can analyze both answers and decide.

You can roll the dice on either choice.

You can put aside the mantra of “nothing works” and look into the psychology of the individual and government and find truths.

An analogy: you’ve got a gigantic oil tanker that’s been heading in the wrong direction. You want to turn it around. Who is going to take the helm and do it?

On one side, you have 50 individuals, 47 of whom are corrupt and consumed with criminal greed. The other three are different. They glimpse the possibility of doing the right thing.

On the other side, you have that amorphous swollen blob called government. It’s not only consumed with greed, it preaches The Good as a deceptive front to cover its crimes. A few individuals who might want to do the right thing are laden with connections which command the continuance of crimes.

Your choice.


Exit From the Matrix

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


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 NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

What comes after the widespread exposure of sexual abuse?

What comes after the widespread exposure of sexual abuse?

by Jon Rappoport

November 13, 2017

(This is Part 2. For Part 1, click here.)

Marshall McLuhan was fond of pointing out that whatever is happening in the present moment is already obsolete. So, in the current exposure of celebrities’ sexual crimes, what is on the horizon?

It is the further FORMALIZATION of sexual relationships.

For example, this would result in more detailed assurances between two people that they are entering into a consensual arrangement. If that sounds bizarre, it is. Because sex isn’t a contract.

Nevertheless, fear of accusations can make it so.

Sex, therefore, will enter into a wider trend of MACHINE connections.

In the same way that Facebook, with its “likes,” has become a reductionist norm mechanizing social relationships, sex can become a reduced process.

This is not an accident.

Technocracy—which is the leading edge of Globalism, which plans societies according to function and every person’s place in a blueprint—will find a greater home in sex. This suits controllers, who want to eliminate spontaneity—unpredictable happenings—in favor of organization.

The “reasoning” will go something like this: “Well, you see what occurred when sex was linked with freedom. Abuse and violence. To eliminate the abuse, we have to define and regulate sex. We have to make more rules about it…”

When sex is reduced to “procedure,” it’s eventually easier to promote the act of procreation as something that should take place in a lab or a factory, as Huxley described in Brave New World.

Abuse is made into a wide-ranging generality. Another example: “Well, we have a few mentally ill people who are shooting up schools and churches. Therefore, we need to screen the whole population, starting at a very early age, for potential mental disorders. And we need to take away guns from everyone (except determined criminals and the police)…”

Example: “There are twenty confirmed cases of Swine Flu in the world. Therefore, we have to declare this is a global pandemic and immediately vaccinate at least a few hundred million people…”

A Specific is intentionally ballooned into a massive Generality, new rules are imposed, and Freedom is further gobbled up by Control.

If anyone objects, he is reminded of dangers and abuses, and he is declared an outlier.

This is all part of the craft of propaganda. Operatives ask themselves, “What abhorrent event can we use to float a generality that will shrink individual freedom?”

Since schools are shrinking students’ minds to the size of peanuts, these students are vulnerable to all sorts of non-rational arguments. For example: “If you oppose the screening of 300 million Americans for mental disorders, you’re in favor of the schizoid killers who are gunning down parishioners in church.”

So when I write that logic is a vital subject which ought to be taught in schools, I’m not just making an academic abstract point.

Far from it.

“Look, we’re co-workers. We want to have sex with each other. But there are obvious problems. I think we should go to Human Resources and talk with them and have them consult with the lawyers…”

Ridiculous? Yes. But impossible? Don’t be so sure.


The Matrix Revealed

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


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 NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

The violent attack on Senator Rand Paul: will the punishment fit the crime?

The violent attack on Senator Rand Paul: will the punishment fit the crime?

by Jon Rappoport

November 10, 2017

Breitbart reports: “Kentucky Senator Rand Paul’s injuries are more serious than previously reported, following an attack, allegedly by one of his neighbors, last week in Bowling Green, KY.”

“’A medical update: final report indicates six broken ribs & new X-ray shows a pleural effusion‬,’ tweeted the Republican senator Wednesday.”

“Previous medical reports stated that Paul suffered five broken ribs and lacerations to his lungs. Reports indicate a violent attack from Paul’s long-time neighbor, 59-year-old retired doctor Rene Boucher, after a dispute. The exact nature of the dispute remains unclear, but Boucher’s lawyer claimed it had nothing to do with politics.”

“Police arrested Boucher and charged him with fourth-degree assault.”

Breitbart also interviewed several neighbors of Senator Paul. They rejected the story that Boucher’s attack on Paul was the result of a “landscaping dispute.” The neighbors stated the Senator has been a very friendly homeowner, and there is no record of any complaints either against him or from him in the homeowner’s association files.

The Senator’s injuries are serious. I looked up the definition of 4th degree assault in Kentucky law, to understand what his alleged assailant is being charged with:

From reference.com: “According to the Kentucky Legislature Research Commission, fourth degree assault is defined as intentionally causing a physical injury to another, wantonly causing physical injury, or recklessly causing injury to another with a dangerous instrument.”

“The Kentucky Legislature Research Commission lists the possible penalties for fourth degree assault in Kentucky as fines, jail time and probation. Fines resulting from fourth degree assault cannot exceed five hundred dollars, and jail time for those found guilty of fourth degree assault cannot exceed one year. Fourth degree assault is a misdemeanor, and it is considered the least serious of assault charges in the state of Kentucky.”

“Wantonly causing physical injury” is the least serious assault charge? And it carries a maximum of a five hundred dollar fine and a year in jail? And it is a misdemeanor?

Preposterous.

Of course, when we’re witnessing mass shootings and mass murder with cars, it’s easy to view the attack on Senator Paul as a trivial event. But it’s not.

You’re mowing the lawn outside your house. A person sneaks on to your property, runs up behind you, and attacks you. You had no idea what was coming. As a result of this vicious and cowardly assault, you suffer six broken ribs and fluid in your lungs.

And this is a minor offense?

No, we don’t know all the facts, and the defendant has not yet had his day in court. But assuming the reports are correct, the misdemeanor charge and the potential punishment are absurd travesties.

The law has been twisted to allow grave offenses to become minor episodes. The reason is fairly clear: so many crime are being committed by so many people, the system has been adjusted to accommodate criminals.

“Well,” people say, “what about all the high-level felons who serve in government and lead corporations, and are never brought to justice?”

What about them? They too should be charged and convicted and given long prison sentences. Minimizing one group of offenses because another group of offenses goes unpunished is egregious bullshit.

If you need living proof, find a friend and ask him to violently attack you from behind, during the day, when you least expect it and are unable to defend yourself. Experience your injuries, and then think about whether this should be a misdemeanor in the lowest possible assault category.

What about forgiveness? What about loving your enemies? That’s another rationalization that pops up, now and then, after violent events. If you were the victim, would you really find it persuasive?

Would you be worried that having “negative thoughts” about your attacker and experiencing anger against him might “pollute your consciousness” and affect your life going forward? Would you rather paste a smile on your face and opt for marshmallows and rainbows?

Righteous moral outrage is a positive trait.

Young law students, who are considering a future as a money-grubbing sleazeball tactician, should contemplate the meaning of it.

In part, The Law was instituted as an expression of moral outrage. It was supposed to channel that emotion into avenues of fair retribution.

And at the highest level, it was supposed to protect an individual citizen’s private property and the safety of his person.

Apparently, in the case of Senator Paul, both rights were extraordinarily violated.

If current reports of the attack are true, Rene Boucher should spend a long time behind bars. It’s called justice.

No, Virginia, everything doesn’t belong to everybody in some fantasy of a socialist paradise. Individual property and person are real. Crimes against them are real. To demonstrate it, stroll into a bar where there is a very good chance your most precious possessions—your iPhone and iPad—will be stolen. Later, when you’re lying outside on the sidewalk, think about “everything belonging to everybody.” See how that works for you…


power outside the matrix

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


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 NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

In the year 2052 no one can read

In the year 2052 no one can read

by Jon Rappoport

November 5, 2017

In the year 2052, no one can read. Well, those who can, can’t handle more than 50 or 60 words at a time. And they certainly don’t know what fiction is. Or if they do, they don’t like it. It bothers them. WHAT ALREADY EXISTS is so much more compelling. Fiction seems ridiculous. Who cares what might be? Who cares about something someone made up?

Courtroom; the year 2052; the defendant was locked up hundreds of miles away; he did not appear at his trial.

JUDGE: What is the charge against John Doe?

PROSECUTOR: Espousing freedom. Claiming he is a free man.

JUDGE: He knows freedom is an illusion. Our schools teach that above all else.

PROSECUTOR: We have no record of him attending schools.

JUDGE: How is that possible?

PROSECUTOR: Unknown at this time. John Doe is a builder.

JUDGE: What does he build?

PROSECUTOR: Shrines to freedom.

JUDGE: Hmm. Sounds to me like a verdict of life without parole or death is in order.

PROSECUTOR: The psychiatrists want to go to work on him. They say he’d make a fine test subject. Because of his extreme views and actions. If they can turn him into a model citizen, they’d advance the research significantly.

JUDGE: However, there is the contagion factor. John Doe is infected with a freedom plague. No telling what he might transmit.

PROSECUTOR: Agreed, Your Honor.

JUDGE: Can he be kept in a sealed room?

PROSECUTOR: The shrinks say yes.

JUDGE: By statute, if I sentence him to life in prison or death, you and I must expose ourselves to him, in order to discover whether we become infected. It’s a harsh but fair rule. Do you want take that chance?

PROSECUTOR: I suppose so, if you’re willing, sir.

JUDGE: Who knows? It might be interesting to experience this “freedom.” Then of course, we could be treated to knock out the illness.

PROSECUTOR: I was thinking the same thing.

JUDGE: What does freedom feel like?

PROSECUTOR: Hard to say.

JUDGE: One defendant described it as the wind on his face while he was at sea in a small boat. Very bracing, he said. Go anywhere, do anything.

PROSECUTOR: Fascinating.

JUDGE: Psychotic, of course. Still…

PROSECUTOR: The opportunity of experiencing a crime from the criminal’s point of view would be instructive.

JUDGE: Freedom. The ultimate moral temptation. We would be stronger for having resisted it.

PROSECUTOR: Many citizens of the 20th and early 21st century were infected. However, most of them did nothing about it. They didn’t act out. They merely…they refused to believe they had any power, individually.

JUDGE: So I’ve heard. They stumbled at the gate of power.

PROSECUTOR: Imagine if you and I could combine freedom and power.

JUDGE: That would be unique. What would we do?

PROSECUTOR: I don’t know. Nullify a structure?

JUDGE: Which structure?

PROSECUTOR: Any official structure. Doing something like that would border on magic.

JUDGE: We could at least write a new document to recast the role of government.

PROSECUTOR: A what?

JUDGE: A declaration of some kind. Something that changes the constitution of government.

PROSECUTOR: Where did you get THAT thought from?

JUDGE: I don’t know. Suppose, for example, we said people had the right to assemble in public.

PROSECUTOR: You mean to compare smart connections?

JUDGE: To…share ideas.

PROSECUTOR: What does that mean?

JUDGE: The way we’re sharing ideas now.

PROSECUTOR: Is that what we’re doing?

JUDGE: I’m not sure. Maybe…

PROSECUTOR: People talking to each other about ideas?

JUDGE: Strange.

PROSECUTOR: I doubt it would be a popular practice.

JUDGE: People would treat it as some kind of joke.

PROSECUTOR: On the other hand, it could be the start of a pandemic. If you said people could assemble FREELY in public and FREELY exchange ideas, perhaps the temptation would catch on…and then…

JUDGE: If people understood what an IDEA is. I’m not sure what an IDEA is, when I stop and think about it. I’m pretty sure I know what a THOUGHT is, but what is an IDEA?

PROSECUTOR: Let me get back to you on that.

JUDGE: Is freedom an idea?

PROSECUTOR: It’s a virus.

JUDGE: Of course, but is that all it is?

PROSECUTOR: It’s a “psychotic predisposition caused by a combination of endocrine malfunction and neuronal delay.”

JUDGE: Hmm. “People have the right to assemble in public and share ideas.” Even if that statement is gibberish, it’s interesting. It’s like saying a person can own a gun or a cow can fly over the moon. It means nothing, but it has a magnetic pull.

PROSECUTOR: This is why many laws exist: to outlaw magnetic pull. You can’t have magnetic pull in a sane society. It’s a danger.

JUDGE: Yes, of course. But for the defendant in this case, and in other cases, the pull feels real. That’s the key. That’s the experience of freedom. These people are utterly convinced of the delusion…they can’t think otherwise. They’re trapped.

PROSECUTOR: Agreed.

JUDGE: I hereby sentence John Doe to life in prison.

PROSECUTOR: Thank you, Your Honor.

JUDGE: And if while in prison, he continues to spread his malicious thoughts, we will reconvene and consider brain cancelation or burning at the stake.

PROSECUTOR: Now that you’ve delivered your verdict, we’ll both have to expose ourselves to John Doe, to see if we catch his infection.

JUDGE: Exactly. It’s an old law. It was decreed because the original Planners wanted to make sure officials of the court had the courage of their convictions. And also to render those officials immune to the various dangerous plagues. And to root out officials who succumbed to the infections.

PROSECUTOR: I’ve been exposed to a dozen different plague infections, but never to freedom.

JUDGE: Likewise. This will be interesting.

PROSECUTOR: Where is John Doe being held?

JUDGE: In an old building in Philadelphia called Liberty Hall.

PROSECUTOR: Ironic. Never heard of it.

JUDGE: It’s a psychiatric ward. Very heavy security. The CIA and the Pentagon have field offices there.

PROSECUTOR: Well, they would.

JUDGE: Yes. A few years ago, there was a reading outbreak in the area. Several people at a library read pieces more than a thousand words.

PROSECUTOR: They actually got to the end?

JUDGE: Yes. It caused a major flap…


Exit From the Matrix

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


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 NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

If The Group sank below the waves

If The Group sank below the waves

by Jon Rappoport

October 27, 2017

“After all the lies and deceptions are taken apart, what remains is the individual. He always comes up as the final card to be played. He emerges, out of the struggles of centuries, because The Group was formed to replace him, and The Group failed, as it always does, because it is synthetic, a cobbled-together Frankenstein monster pretending to be creative and alive…” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

People are taught they must subordinate their individual goals, concerns, and ideas to larger structures, they must channel their creative impulses into institutions and forego a dynamic life in favor of a stultifying duty to the collective…

When people become enmeshed in large complex structures, they believe those systems are absolutely essential; survival itself is at stake.

They are wrong.

For example, the US State Department and the United Nations could vanish tomorrow, and after a few years no one would notice the difference.

Except of course, the hand-wringing Globalist media, who would howl and shriek and predict doom for all humankind.

Instead of the UN, we could have one small apartment building in New York where countries might send representatives to live. These people, of course, would pay their own rent. They would chat, play cards, sit in community rooms, and have drinks. They could pass a few scribbled notes back and forth. No sumptuous assembly hall, no voluminous charter, no bad art celebrating “the unity of all peoples.” Instead, ping pong tournaments and air hockey.

If the US government had listened to George Washington, when he urged avoiding entangling foreign alliances, the US would have followed a far different course of development at home; and permanent relations with other governments would have been laughed out of court.

Who knows? With a clearer focus on domestic issues, the US might have remained a Republic, instead of devolving into a democracy, a venal form of corporatism, an Empire, and a universal Welfare State.

Permanent foreign diplomacy, with all its bizarre accoutrements, would never have entered the scene.

A proper global charter would read, “Don’t bother us and we won’t bother you.” End of story.

If the people of various nations didn’t like their governments, they could rebel, revolt. Same here.

The “unity of everyone” is a straight con. The idea would never have gained traction, unless international entanglements, with all their attendant crimes, had come first. As in: “Hey, I’ve got a great idea. Let’s get a few of the boys together, incite a war, fund both sides, make a huge profit, and then, in the aftermath of the smoking ruins, preach Togetherness like it came down from heaven, and cobble together new alliances. Then we can start the whole process over again.”

It’s called treason. A capital offense.

By the way, the land where the UN Headquarters in New York sits was originally donated by John D Rockefeller, which should give you some clue about the organization’s agenda. One planet, indivisible, with an absurd pretension of liberty and justice for all. Or to put it another way, endless entangling alliances.

“Let’s wrap everyone on Earth in coils and knots and tendrils up to their eyeballs and call it Love.”

For those who can’t imagine good reasons for dismantling all sorts of titanic bureaucracies, for those who believe these behemoths are indispensable, try a small-scale analogy: one day you wake up and find a dozen strangers occupying spaces in your house. They all claim to be experts, and they all have solutions to problems concerning the home—problems you never knew existed. Their solutions require a council and endless discussions and reports—and this is for “the greater good.” Your relationship with these strangers seems to be imperative, because, well, they are there.

Your ownership of the house is obviously now in question. You’re not in charge. You can participate in the decision-making, but as the days pass, you realize you’re being edged out. You’re not an expert in “home management.” Therefore, your opinions are put on the back-burner.

And everything goes downhill from there.

But don’t worry. The overarching goal of the strangers is “unity,” and unity must be a good thing. It sounds like a good thing.

—Except for the fact that you never needed it until they showed up.

Finally, one day, you wake up with a brilliant idea:

“I’ll kick them out.”

Of course, when I write this, the first thing people think of is: IF WE DIDN’T HAVE LARGE GOVERNMENT STRUCTURES, CRIME WOULD PROLIFERATE BEYOND CONTROL.

Let me give you two answers to that problem. One: crime has already proliferated beyond control.

And two: historically, the law-enforcement system (which was indeed a building block of the American Republic) has been so corrupted, prosecutions for major crimes have gone by the boards.

In other words, when you squash necessary prosecutions for a couple of hundred years, you create the perception that now, in the midst of corruption, the only thing that would save us is a bigger government with more departments and more power over the people.

Example: at the founding of the Republic, it was understood that corporations were chartered to operate by the individual states. If a corporation was doing great harm to the public, the state legislature could summarily yank its charter and exile it permanently. No courts, no trials, no endless legal wrangling, no fines, no “deferred prosecutions.”

Eventually, this simple system was chewed to pieces and refuted.

Now we are told that mega-corporations are actually global entities, and when they shut down domestic factories and throw large numbers of people out of work, and when they go overseas and set up operations where they can pay employees slave wages and pollute the land to their hearts’ content, this is a good thing. This is the essence of responsible and humanitarian enterprise.

The mega-corporation, the mega-bureaucracy, The Group is sold and re-sold as the ultimate triumph of civilization.

And the individual? He was just a strange metaphor, an illusion on the road to an integrated Whole.

And who is telling us this? Well, it turns out to be the men who see themselves as universal rulers of the masses. The wise ones. The superiors.

That’s called a clue.

They “identify with downtrodden” in the same way a tank, entering a village, identifies with a ragged band of rock throwers.


Exit From the Matrix

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


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 NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

The Individual, his freedom, and victory

The Individual, his freedom, and victory

by Jon Rappoport

October 18, 2017

We are in a war.

The State, as now constituted, pretends it favors giving away the farm for nothing “to those in need.” What they really means is: they steal the farm, and then they give it away on their terms.

Genuine entrepreneurs know what it’s like to get up in the morning and re-create their enterprises and make them work every day. They know how much energy it takes. They know it isn’t the easiest thing in the world, but they value the FREEDOM it brings. They know how it feels to follow their own desires. These people are real. They exist.

They experience frustrating days when their business isn’t going well. On those days, they feel trapped in the very universe they created. They wonder how it might be to give up and go to work for someone else. They even wonder how it might be to get a desk job in government and feel the protection of government. But they don’t give in.

They’re too stubborn to give in. They show up every day and they push their enterprise forward.

And these are the people about whom Obama said: “If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

Sure, Mr. President. We weren’t there at all. We’re fictions. We don’t exist. Other people are always standing in for us. It’s not our sweat, it’s not our power, it’s not our imagination, it’s not our commitment that invented and sustained our businesses. It’s all done by remote control from Washington. I’m glad you finally clarified this mystery for us. You’re a genius.

People who’ve never started and run their own enterprises don’t understand. They don’t know what the sweat means and the struggle means and the vision means and the power to keep doing it every day means, and they don’t know what the joy of earning their own way means and what deeper victory means.

There are people who don’t understand what a FREE INDIVIDUAL is. They want a world of Central Planning. They feel a welter of emotions, all negative, when they contemplate THE FREE INDIVIDUAL.

Newsflash: Money is not inherently evil. Profit is not inherently evil.

What is evil is trying to melt the individual into the collective. That has always been evil.

For the free individual, “the highest work possible” doesn’t involve leaving one’s desires behind, in order to become the abject servant of a Cause. He doesn’t suddenly develop an egoless and empty personality in order to “connect” with a goal that floats in an abstract realm.

The free individual isn’t shaped. He shapes.

He doesn’t fall on his knees and grovel to seek public acceptance.

The mob, the herd operates on debt, obligation, guilt, and the pretense of admiration for idols. These are its currencies.

The herd, seeking some reflection of its unformed desire, constructs a social order based on need—and the substance of that need will be extracted through coercion, if necessary, from those who already have More.

This need, and the proposition that the mob deserves its satisfaction, creates a worldwide industry.

Among the industry’s most passionate and venal supporters are those who are quite certain that the human being is a tainted vile creature. Such supporters, of course, are sensing their own reflections.

The great psychological factor in any life is THE DESERTION OF INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM. Afterward, the individual creates shadows and monsters and fears around that crossroad.

Freedom is the space and the setting, from which the individual can generate the thought and the energy-pulse of a great self-chosen objective.

In that place, there is no crowding or oppressive necessity. There is choice. There is desire. There is thought.

“Being absorbed in a greater whole” isn’t an ambition or philosophical prospect for the free individual. He sees that fixation as a surrender of self.

The Collective, whether envisioned as a down-to-earth or mystical group, promises a release from self. This grand solution to problems is a ruse designed to keep humans in a corral, a prison. After all, how are you going to control and eventually enslave people if you promote the notion that each individual has freedom and free choice? The abnegation of self is a workable tactic, as long as it is dressed up with false idols and perverted ideals.

Self is fundamentally creative, dynamic, forward-looking, energetic, powerful, engaged. The Collective looks for shadows of those qualities in the government as its source of survival.

The free individual isn’t opposed to helping others, but he is against a culture that is so preoccupied with “raising up the lowest” that it nurtures a hatred of liberty. And this is a crux, because growing millions of people are all too eager to shed the last fragments of their Selves to join in a fantasy of “everybody gets everything.”

The fantasy doesn’t work. The melting down of all of humanity into a mystical goo is an illusion that can’t stand the test of time. Eventually, a person falls out of that construct and remembers he must depend, to an alarming degree, on his own inner resources.

The free individual doesn’t act in ways that limit the freedom of others.

Self-sufficiency is both an essence and outcome for the free individual.

If America had pursued a path of making the nation self-sufficient, without relying on entangling foreign political and business relationships, it would have avoided the corruption that naturally flows from those relationships, and it would have become living proof that freedom and the principles of the Republic work. It would have become a shining example to the rest of the world, a new standard to emulate.

Far from committing the “sin of isolationism,” it would have provoked others to try the experiment of freedom.

The free individual discovers his way through imagination and creative power, because that is the answer to the question: what is freedom for?

Without exercising imagination and creative power, freedom withers and dies. It becomes an empty slogan. It becomes an empty stage.

We are told, in a thousand ways, that the free individual is the personification of greed and theft and crime. That is false.

The free individual imagines and creates on a scale that supersedes and ignores the Collective. His work naturally spills over and benefits others.

Advocates of the Collective falsely claim the free individual is cold and uncaring and remote and “without humanity.” Meanwhile, their picture of a society based on need is a poisonous affectation; it is constructed because these advocates are walled off from their own power. Therefore, they substitute endless entitlement.

Their only nod of acknowledgment to the individual has been to propagandize him as an outsider, a potential danger, a lurking menace, a person waiting to be diagnosed with a mental disorder.

These days, it is the Group that is elevated. We must absorb the individual in the system so the Group is protected and safe. We must omit mention of the individual in teaching children. We must say that now the nation is nothing more than an interconnected Whole. We must promote interdependency as the highest ideal. We must declare it is obvious that all actions must be judged on the basis of how they will affect the well-being of the Collective.

Even accepting Mill’s specious pronouncement that society should be organized on the basis of the greatest good for greatest number, the questions remains: what is the greatest good? Is it that which makes us, more and more, into a Group? Or is it that which liberates the individual to pursue his highest aspirations?

The greatest good liberates the individual, and then the door is open. Who will walk through it? Every person who has divested himself of collective consciousness.

Then perhaps historians and scholars will be forced to change their stories. Perhaps, some day, they will admit that history, before it was hijacked, revealed a progression away from the Group and toward the individual. Perhaps they will be forced to admit their affected fetish about “primitive societies” was a ruse to convince us that, once upon a time, we lost our way, when we disentangled ourselves from group consciousness.

Oh, there will be screams. There will be many screams. There will be accusations that we are deserting the human race, that we are leaving others behind, that we are refusing to help those who need it.

Eventually, those screams will die on the wind. As many wake up and realize they had sacrificed their lives on the altar of the Group, the protests will fade out.

Because many will see, as if for the first time, what freedom means and how it feels.

And against that, there is no argument.

The titanic myths that have been foisted on humanity and the titanic acceptance of those myths by humanity are all focused on one lie: the individual cannot stand on his own; he must subjugate himself to a system.

I don’t care what form that higher system takes. It’s all a lie. It’s all geared to promoting slavery. It’s all geared to allowing the few to control the many.

And the few WILL control the many, until the day comes when enough individuals throw off ALL the deceptions that permitted them to think The Individual was less than he is.

The day will dawn when the individual knows he is greater than any and all groups and collectives by any name flying under any flag, espousing any gibberish, elevating any fairy tale, seducing with any promise, hypnotizing with any idol or misbegotten legend.

That day will dawn.

But why wait?


Exit From the Matrix

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


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 NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Is Brexit dying on the vine along with England?

Is Brexit dying on the vine along with England?

by Jon Rappoport

October 16, 2017

—The cradle of individual liberty became the cradle of the nanny State—

The deep sickness that infects England infects every large government in the world: once a people’s decision (like Brexit) is made, the leaders who carry out its provisions are the people who rule from the top, along with their sleazy, slime-ridden bureaucratic underlings.

These obstructive underlings, in a free and open market, would be selling sand in the desert, if they were lucky. They certainly wouldn’t be sitting in desks in government offices staring out of windows.

So now we have soft Brexit and hard Brexit, terms used to describe how the Brit vote to leave the European Union could be modified or adhered to. It’s a farce.

Here is soft Brexit: “Well, maybe England will keep all its trade connections with the EU, as before, while pretending to be independent; and oh yes, many waves of immigrants will still be let into the country, even though that was the key issue that swung voters to say LEAVE the EU (EU wants to erase all national borders and flood Europe with migrants)…”

In other words, England would say it’s left the EU, but in every measurable way it hasn’t.

Well, here is my hard Brexit. No matter what crimes the rulers of a nation and their underlings have committed in the past, if that nation once spawned the concept of INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, rebuilding itself means reinstituting that liberty, piece by piece, and person by person, with the full meaning of freedom and responsibility embraced. Otherwise, no dice. All national movement will be fakes and pretenders.

Of course England should desert that clap-trap unelected monstrosity called the EU. Of course, it should offload that burden. The elite and self-entitled Globalists who run the fascist EU are your run of the mill totalitarians.

But to make Brexit work in England, far more has to happen than withdrawal: A revival, a renewal, a rebirth, a throwing off of the sticky web of socialism and everything it means. There has to be an international Brexit and a national internal Brexit.

All this insanity began when the nation of the Magna Carta morphed into the welfare nation of “share and care” socialism. Freedom turned into “here’s how you can get all the government freebies you ever dreamed of.”

The individualism that birthed limited government (instead of a grotesque hydra issuing edicts to the populace in double-speak) died out.

It has to be put back.

Leave the EU and leave socialism.

No one said it would be easy.

But there are individuals in England who want freedom and liberty again. They know what freedom is.

If they don’t lead the way, the only Brexit will be the drone-hum of “we are all disabled, fix us.”

Leaving the EU, while keeping full-blown socialism at home, is like walking away from a rattlesnake toward a nest of rattlesnakes.

To the people of Europe who still believe in freedom:

You can say all you want to about the history of Europe, but you also have to say that Europe was the cradle of liberty for the whole world.

The main struggle was held there. And finally, the clear idea of individual freedom emerged.

Then, gradually, in the wake of two World Wars, a new theme took hold. You could call it comfort, or security, peace for all, share and care, the good life.

Under a dominating tax rate, citizens had “services” provided by their governments. Many pleasant services.

Why not? All was well.

Even when these governments were placed under the umbrella of the European Union, most citizens of member countries perceived no real problems—as long as the services continued to flow.

But there was an addendum to the basic contract. The national governments, and their superiors at the EU…they were the Providers, and they could, at their whim, turn the screw and apply new oppressive rules to the citizenry. And they could, if resistance appeared, drop their pose of benevolence and take on the role of Enforcer.

And if they did, where would liberty and individual freedom go?

It would go away.

Escalating floods of migrants entered Europe. This was a turning of the screw. Brought about by “upper management” of the Providers. The crimes and disruptions of these migrants have been well documented in independent media. The people of Europe had no say about the invasion. In fact, it soon became an offense to write about it or speak about it in a public forum.

The lords of government would brook no opposition.

The basic liberty—speaking freely—was on the line and under the boot heel.

For years, a campaign of political correctness in speech had been waged all over Europe. It covered many areas. The EU had been aiding and abetting it.

The “good life” was cracking at the seams. It wasn’t all good anymore.

The Provider was becoming the Enforcer.

Looking back on the change, it was always obvious that it was waiting in the wings. The Providers weren’t messiahs of a socialist utopia. That pretense was merely an intermediate phase in a much larger operation.

Mollify the citizenry for a time, “give them services,” and then when they were lulled into complacency, when they felt safe and secure, when they’d traded liberty for something that looks like liberty, start the chaos.

And clamp down. Assert overt control.

The EU structure was never extreme enough for the overlords. After all, it was a confederation of separate nations. The covert operation was One Nation of Europe, drained of separate traditions, with all former, distinguishing, national characteristics removed. The goal was one continental entity, seeded with enough migrants to eliminate visible differences, and roiled in conflicts.

To make a stew, heat and stir.

Eventually, eliminate the memory that, at one time, individual freedom was birthed in those countries. And one step further: eliminate the knowledge of what individual freedom is.

Bring in immigrants from cultures where authentic freedom, with its attendant responsibilities, means nothing.

The operation is well underway.

The lords of government never wanted utopia. They wanted, and want, submission. They achieved the soft version. Now they’re aiming for the hard.

This is modern European history not taught in schools. Schools would ban even a hint of it.

So the struggle begins again.

It has many faces—some of them ideological, which is to say, embedded in groups for whom national and ethnic identity is the foremost concern.

How long will it take before The Individual, defined by HIS OWN choice and vision, APART FROM SUCH IDENTITY, reemerges?

That was the original battle of the ages: the liberation of each individual.

It wasn’t easy then, and it won’t be easy now.

But it begins in the mind.

And not the group mind.

Not in any group.

In 1859, John Stuart Mill wrote: “If it were felt that the free development of individuality is one of the leading essentials of well-being…there would be no danger that liberty should be undervalued.”

Escaping from, and dissolving the trap that is now Europe may be the work of cooperating groups; but the reason for the escape will ultimately come back to the individual, his power, and his independent self-chosen destiny.

He carries the torch.

Though it may not seem so, his flame vaporizes collectivism.

It was always so, and it is now.

Europe’s great thinkers and writers were the very people who made this clear: freedom exists and it pertains to the individual, not the group, not some shadowy entity, not a collective; freedom is not simply a word or a floating ideal waving its banner in the air; it is the soul’s platform, from which all good things become possible; it is the starting point of a life; it is the blood that runs through a dream of a created future, a better future; it is the brother of the individual’s accountability for his own actions.

Throw a blanket over freedom, and no one is accountable.

This is why so many people now deny freedom. They want to remain unaccountable.

They want everything for nothing, and they want the right to spend that everything, or burn it, tear it up, destroy it. And then ask for more.

For them, the countries of Europe are just places. Easy places to exploit.

But no matter the circumstances, the inner core of the struggle is the same: the liberation of the individual from all the forlorn hopes that lead him back to searching for the utopia he once believed was coming.

That painted illusion is going away.

The individual, falling back on his own resources, will need to relearn half-forgotten lessons. He will have to ignite his own energy.

The challenge can be bracing, and much more. It can awaken sleeping corridors of the spirit, where he once walked in power.

And can walk again.

Profound dissatisfaction and resistance can breed joy.

Once upon a time, he knew that, and then he abandoned the knowledge for a syrupy potion of a New Age; now the bottle is dry.

Now, he is the creator of his own enterprises; his own destiny.

I say Europe will live again.


Exit From the Matrix

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


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 NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.