The vision of technocracy

The vision of technocracy

by Jon Rappoport

May 24, 2017

“Well, boys, we’ve got this strange thing called THE INDIVIDUAL. Could somebody tell me what he is? He’s not conforming to our algorithms. He’s all over the place. And while we’re at it, what the hell is this IMAGINATION? It keeps slipping out of our grasp, it doesn’t fit the plan…”

PART ONE

—Technocrats say they want to wipe out poverty, war, and inequality. But in order to achieve these lofty goals (or pretend to), they need to re-program humans—

Technocracy is the basic agenda and plan for ruling global society from above, so we need to understand it from several angles.

Consider a group of enthusiastic forward-looking engineers in the early 20th century. They work for a company that has a contract to manufacture a locomotive.

This is a highly complex piece of equipment.

On one level, workers are required to make the components to spec. Then they must put them all together. These tasks are formidable.

On another level, various departments of the company must coordinate their efforts. This is also viewed as a technological job. Organizing is considered a technology.

When the locomotive is finished and delivered, and when it runs on its tracks and pulls a train, a great and inspiring victory is won.

And then…the engineers begin to think about the implications. Suppose the locomotive was society itself? Suppose society was the finished product? Couldn’t society be put together in a coordinated fashion? And couldn’t the “technology of organizing things” be utilized for the job?

Why bother with endlessly arguing and lying politicians? Why should they be in charge? Isn’t that an obvious losing proposition? Of course it is.

Engineers could lay out and build a future society that would benefit all people. Disease and poverty could be wiped out. Eliminating them would be part of the blueprint.

This “insight” hit engineers and technicians like a ton of bricks. Of course! All societies had been failures for the same reason: the wrong people were in charge.

Armed with this new understanding, engineers of every stripe began to see what was needed. A revolution in thinking about societal organization. Science was the new king. And science would rule.

Of course, for an engineered world to work, certain decisions would have to be made about the role of the individual. Every individual. You couldn’t have an air-tight plan if every human were free to pursue his own objectives. Too many variables. Too much confusion. Too much conflict. Well, that problem could be solved. The individual’s actions would be tailored to fit the coordinated operations of the planned society.

The individual would be “one of the components of the locomotive.” His life would be connected to other lives to produce an exemplary shape.

Yes, this could imply a few problems, but those problems could be worked out. They would have to be worked out, because the overriding goal was the forming of a world organization. What would you do if one bolt (an individual human) in one wheel of a locomotive was the wrong size? You would go back and correct the error. You would re-make the bolt.

Among technocrats, the overall vision superseded the glaring need to “remake” individuals who would fit in. It was perfectly all right to re-program the individual.

Other people entered the game. High-echelon Globalists saw technocracy as a system they could use to control the population.

Essentially, an already-misguided vision of a future technocratic utopia was hijacked. Something bad was made much worse.

In a nutshell, this is the history of technocracy.

A locomotive is a society? No. That was the first fatally flawed idea. Everything that followed was increasingly bizarre.

Unfortunately, many people in our world believe in Globalism, if you could call a partial vague view a legitimate belief. They dreamily float on all the propaganda cover stories—greatest good for the greatest number of people; no more poverty; equality of sharing; reducing the carbon footprint; a green economy; “sustainable development”; international cooperation; engineering production and consumption of goods and services for the betterment of everyone; and all of this delivered from a central platform of altruistic guidance.

If you track down the specifics that sit under these cover stories, you discover a warped system of planning that expresses control over the global population.

The collective utopia turns out to be a sham.

Waking up is hard to do? Breaking up is hard to do? They must be done.

A workable technological fix is a very nice achievement when the project is a machine. But transferring that glow of victory to the whole of society is an illusion. Anything that calls itself education would tackle the illusion as the first order of business.

Engineering society requires engineering humans.

That is the fatal flaw.

It’s called mind control.

PART TWO

Any genuine artist, any builder of communities, any sane activist, any honorable visionary stands outside technocracy, and is not part of this program.

Instead, his thrust is toward more individual freedom and a more open society with greater decentralization of power.

Decentralization is the key.

The use of technology does not imply living inside its control. The use of technology does not imply that society should be laid out like a giant machine with fitted parts.

Those futurists who have offered “overall plans” for the disposition of society generally ignore or sidestep the issue of who is going to administer the plan. To say this is an error is a vast understatement.

Where is one far-reaching center of power in our world that would run society with a primary concern for the freedom of the individual?

We are looking at an inherent contradiction. All such centers of power are, first and foremost, dedicated to their own survival. And after that, they are dedicated to control of the territory they believe they own. THE INDIVIDUAL is a messy thing that needs to be sidelined or dealt with as a disruptive element.

I speak to those people who understand that the idea of the free, independent, powerful, and creative individual is being sidelined, shelved, sent down the memory hole. This is no accident. This isn’t just a devolutionary trend. Technocrats see this as a necessary action, in order to “clean up” their equation for the civilization they’re building. The individual is a slippery variable that throws a monkey wrench into formulas.

PART THREE

Imagination never dies.

It belongs to the individual. It isn’t property of the group.

It enables solutions that eradicate problems and get out ahead of problems before they raise their heads.

Time and time again, the individual, as he wends his way through life, encounters persons and organizations that consider imagination a negative. In the clearly defined shapes of society, imagination must take a back seat to planning.

Is the individual resistant to such manipulations, or does he give in?

This is the key question.

Does the individual view society as an operation that can potentially lift up individuals and empower them? Or does he give in to the idea that society should create more and more dependent people?

The individual can be a source of spreading freedom, or he can defend the notion that there are an endless number of “entitlements” that must be honored.

Technocracy promotes entitlements as a doorway into the future. Its ultimate entitlement goes this way: you have the right to be re-programmed to believe you have a slot in the future world; we will make this slot as attractive as possible; you will serve the overall good as we engineer it.

That is the fundamental justification for the Welfare State. It’s the justification for a future technocratic policy which will assign citizens energy quotas. A citizen would be permitted to consume a set amount of energy in a given time period. (So-called smart meters are a step in that direction. The meters enable more specific measurements of energy consumption.)

This is how technocracy imagines the future…


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.

Delusions about private property and the fantasy of equality

Delusions about private property and the fantasy of equality

Ownership 101: a five-minute course

by Jon Rappoport

May 18, 2017

“Once private property is abolished, the advocates for utopia win. They build their heaven on earth, which means they can take what they want and run civilization, top-down. They can keep saying nobody owns anything, but in fact they own it all. They execute this squeeze play as if they were messiahs eradicating the prime evil: private ownership. This is such a preposterous stage play that, in a sane society, it would close down after one night.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Newsflash: There is a difference between an idea and the way that idea is applied in practice.

For example, certain groups will take the idea of freedom and interpret it to mean, “We have the freedom to steal everything we can.”

Based on this practice, many people will claim freedom was always a failed and corrupt idea at the core. This is wrong, absurd, and dim. Very dim.

In the same way, the idea of private property can certainly be twisted to mean, “I will steal what you have, make it my own, and then declare it is my property, over which I have control.”

But the idea of private property remains independent of what people will do to distort it. A child used to be able to see this.

Centuries of struggle resulted in a shift from monarchs and priest classes owning all available land, to individuals having the right to own land.

Once that principle was firmly established, groups immediately tried to modify the principle to their advantage.

In 1776, a group called the Illuminati declared its existence in Bavaria. One of its guiding ideas was: the abolition of all private property. That concept traveled down to Karl Marx and the Communist agenda.

Private property was called an inherent crime. Instead, the people/everybody would own all property. This garbled incoherent pronouncement would be backed up by the ruling government, who would act as stewards for the masses—meaning the government would take control of all property until such time as the people evolved to the point where the State was unnecessary.

As a straight con, it was very weak. A two-bit hustler on a street corner with a folding table and three cards could see through it in a second.

The people evolving? The State withering away on its own? Equality defined as everybody owning everything?

Of course, if people injected their own utopian fantasies into the mix, if people assumed the government was a beneficent force for good, if people assumed there was an “everybody” operating unanimously, if people fantasized about a history of tribes (who fought wars against each other) gracefully abdicating the whole notion of individual property…well then, yes, the abolition of private property became a marvelous proposition.

In the light of day, however, with a clear mind, the idea was terrible. It was quite insane. It signaled a transfer of property from the individual to power-mad lunatics.

Needless to say, this idea of no-private-property is alive and well on planet Earth today. We are in another round of fantasy-drenched propaganda.

In a nutshell, the threat of pure private property is: it establishes individual rights that stand against the unchecked force of the government-corporate-banking nexus. It implies the individual is free, independent, and the ruler of what he owns.

To which the addled mind replies: “But suppose a person is polluting his land and the poison is running beyond his borders and endangering others?”

Well, that is called a crime. It should be prosecuted. It should be stopped.

The fact that it is often ignored doesn’t negate the whole assumption of private property. It points to the corruption of public officials who refuse to prosecute the offender.

Here is utopia laid bare: the government and its partners, who are doing everything they can to limit, squash, and outlaw the individual right to own property, are the same force that is acting as the wondrous representative of all the people; surrender to this force; give it power to appropriate all property and hold it in trust, for that day when the population has risen to enlightenment, when the open sharing of “everything” is a natural impulse. Then victory will be ours.

Not the iron fist. The open helping hand. Not the hammer. The smiling guide. Not the monarch. The servant of humanity.

If you buy that one, I have waterfront condos for sale on Jupiter’s four moons. No terms. Cash up front. Construction begins in 2058. Promise.

The Homeowners Association actually owns the condos and the land. They are a subsidiary of the Jupiter Government Authority. There are rules. No flags of any kind flying from porches. No privately owned electricity generators. No growing of vegetables or fruit on the land. No weapons. Domiciles must be shared with migrants arriving from Earth. The migrants are given beds, meals, and clothing. Possessions are shared. The prime directive: everything belongs to everybody. Power to the people.

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 dream of flying

The dream of flying

Therapy in the year 2067

by Jon Rappoport

May 3, 2017

Mr. Johnson, a troubled man who worked in a warren of offices at the Department of Acute Analysis of Trends and Energy Quotas, sat in the familiar quiet room of his therapist, Dr. Bright. Another weekly session.

Bright: What is it today, Johnson?

Johnson: Well, Doctor, I had a dream.

Bright: About what?

Johnson: I dreamed I was free.

Bright: Free? What does that mean?

Johnson: I don’t know. The word came to me. It rang a bell in my thoughts. I tried to understand it, but I failed.

Bright: Perhaps because the word means nothing.

Johnson: I considered that. But I couldn’t dismiss it.

Bright: You’re doing the State Meditation? You’re taking your medication?

Johnson: Of course. But in the dream I was excited.

Bright: Excited. That’s another vague word. We’ve gone over this before. Certain words give rise to feelings. You therefore pursue a path and you wind up in a dead-end.

Johnson: I know. In the dream I was flying.

Bright: You were what?

Johnson: Flying. Up in the air. I was circling a structure. I was looking at it. It was black and gray. It had many sections. It was stretched from where I was all the way to the horizon.

Bright: You were up in the air. Unsupported.

Johnson: Yes. The more I tried to come down, the higher I rose.

Bright: You were flying.

Johnson: Yes. Moving in the air. I could go here and there.

Bright: Were you afraid?

Johnson: Not really.

Bright: It’s a rare condition. Flying Disorder.

Johnson: I’ve never heard of it.

Bright: Because it’s rare. The patient believes he’s above the ground. Of course he isn’t.

Johnson: Not even in a dream?

Bright: That’s correct. You were suffering from a delusion in your dream. You thought you were flying. But you weren’t.

Johnson: What was I doing?

Bright: Deluding yourself.

Johnson: Why would I do that?

Bright: Because you have a disorder. When a person imagines he’s doing something he can’t do, that’s the very definition of a disorder.

Johnson: What causes Flying Disorder?

Bright: The specific cause is unknown. You have a deep-seated issue. You’re fighting against the structure you saw in your dream. The structure is Unity.

Johnson: Then how can you help me?

Bright: Help is not the objective of our therapy. I’m here to keep making assessments of your condition. I have now, finally, made my judgment. You have Flying Disorder.

Johnson: What happens now?

Bright: You will be treated. You’ll be repurposed.

Johnson: How?

Bright: By becoming a therapist. The immediate national goal is to enlist at least half the population in that line of work. One half analyzes the other half. By focusing on other people’s disorders, you’ll forget your own. You’ll “come down to Earth.”

Johnson: Interesting. You think I’m suited to be a therapist?

Bright: Yes. You’re inquisitive. Instead of wondering about your own dreams and about this “flying,” you’ll immerse yourself in other people’s troubles. You’ll understand that every human has at least one disorder. We need to get all this out in the open. We can’t hide from our own delusions. We have to expose them.

Johnson: What happens to the people I diagnose?

Bright: You see? That’s a good question. You’re thinking about the situation. Ultimately, those people will be turned into therapists, too. When they’re ready. And finally, everyone will be a therapist. It’s the only possible outcome of our work.

Johnson: We’ll all be cured of our delusions by analyzing other people’s delusions.

Bright: Exactly, it’s the only way.

Johnson: What’s your disorder, Doctor?

Bright: I don’t have it anymore. It used to be Freedom Hallucination.

Johnson: What?

Bright: I used to believe I was free.

Johnson: I see.

Bright: I used to believe I had a future I could shape myself.

Johnson: Sounds dangerous.

Bright: Oh it was. I was put under constant surveillance. But all that’s in the past. I’m all right now.

Johnson: So you do understand my dream about flying.

Bright: You thought you were free.

Johnson: Yes.

Bright: Terrible.

Johnson: It was wonderful while it lasted.

Bright: But that’s the whole point, Johnson. A disorder has to have some attractive feature. It’s the lure. The trap. The sensation of something positive.

Johnson: I see.

Bright: Good.

Johnson: What symptoms did you display, Doctor, when you were suffering from Freedom Hallucination?

Bright: I traveled. I went from place to place to see new things. I had certain spontaneous reactions to new experiences. I felt optimistic urges that had no focus. At one point, I was even thinking about starting a new political party. I was a difficult case. But you see, it eventually made me a better therapist. I knew what it was like to go off the rails.

Johnson: Do you think I have enough problems to become a good therapist?

Bright: I do. You’re certainly not the most troubled patient I’ve ever worked with, but you know what a delusion is. You may cling to it a while longer, but your resistance will stand you in good stead, when you become a doctor. All patients resist. You bring them around at their own pace. You can’t rush it. You keep playing out the line, and then you reel them in.

Johnson: Empathy.

Bright: Perhaps. You wait and watch. You assess. Then at the right moment, you make your diagnosis. Just as I did today. You see? You’re ready to take the next step.

Johnson: We’re all patients who become therapists.

Bright: If you truly grasp that, you perceive the direction in which society is heading. You know why you’re here. You’re stabilized.

Johnson: I want to be stabilized. I don’t want troubling interferences.

Bright: Of course. There is no need to keep having problems. Destabilizing influences are the bane of existence. At one time in history, they may have been useful, as motivations. But now we’re in another age. We’ve matured as a civilization. We need to consolidate our gains.

Johnson: I like that picture. Once I’m a therapist, will I continue to receive therapy myself?

Bright: Of course. The process never ends. But the need for it diminishes over time. Eventually, you’ll be a patient simply because it’s the right thing to do. You see? Doing the right thing is paramount. It flattens out the emotional responses. Never too high, never too low.

Johnson: That’s the vision of the State.

Bright: Yes, but we are the State. Keep that in mind. We’re the people who maintain the structure.

Johnson: When I was flying in my dream, I felt I could rise higher and higher and eventually leave the planet. I could go on indefinitely.

Bright: That’s a key symptom of the disorder. It’s also included in the Delusion Index.

Johnson: What’s that?

Bright: You’ll learn all about it in your training. Your particular symptom is listed under the Infinity category. People have hallucinations regarding the “endless properties of experience.” They imagine there is no boundary. They believe they can extend their energy without limit.

Johnson: Yes. I think that does describe my peculiar feelings.

Bright: I’m confident you’ll bring it under control.

Johnson: I sometimes dream I can create something gigantic. I don’t know what it is, but I sense it.

Bright: Yes. Gigantism. Another symptom. Another road to disappointment.

Johnson: I need to turn down the volume of my energy.

Bright: It’ll come to you. You’ll solve the problem in pieces, over the years ahead. All the high, wide, expansive feelings that divert us…they can be brought to heel. The wild horses can be trained. And then the disappointments will diminish.

Johnson: I’m glad to hear that.

Bright: You can hear it from me, but when you learn and know it yourself, then you’ll be settled.

Johnson: I look forward to that day.

Bright: But don’t look forward with too much enthusiasm. It could set you off on yet another round of unsuitable delusion.

Johnson: I want to be like you, Doctor.

Bright: You are like me, as I was many years ago. Your future work will take you into the muck of human problems. That is the ultimate teacher.

Johnson: Good. Very good.

Suddenly, Johnson wondered how it could have escaped him that the national goal was to turn the population into therapists—from patients into therapists. It must have been public knowledge, yet he knew nothing about it. And Dr. Bright seemed to have sensed this. Johnson was puzzled.

It occurred to Johnson that perhaps he was cut off from essential and basic knowledge. Perhaps he was living in a compartmentalized space. Perhaps other people were, too. Perhaps there were many compartments.

He had a vision of a nation divided into sub-sections. Different realities for different people. According to some plan. In his sub-section, life was all about the therapeutic approach. Maybe that was not the case in other spaces.

Johnson: Doctor, what space are we in? Does it have a name?

Bright: That is above your pay-grade, Johnson. Suffice to say, every space is the total space. I know, it sounds like a contradiction. But think about it. People need to believe they are existing in the overall zone, the zone that encompasses All. This is vital.

Johnson: But such a belief would be a delusion.

Bright: There are useful and deleterious delusions. They are not all the same.

Johnson: Is it possible to move from one zone to another?

Bright: Under certain conditions, with the proper licenses.

Johnson: And how would I obtain a license?

Bright: You don’t apply. If you’re deemed worthy, people will approach you.

Johnson: I want to be worthy.

Bright: First, we have to be convinced that your desire to travel among zones isn’t a manifestation of your disorder. We’re very insistent about that.

Johnson: And if I want to fly above all the zones and look down and see them?

Bright: Too much, too soon. Stick to the zone you’re in.

Johnson: I like flying.

Bright: Of course you do. That’s your problem.

Johnson: Are you sure?

Bright: It doesn’t matter what I think. It matters what you think.

Johnson: But you have the final word.

Bright: If I didn’t, things would fall apart. Somebody has to make the crucial evaluations and decisions.

Johnson: Can you travel between zones, Doctor?

Bright: I can do anything I want to.

Johnson: What do you want to do?

Bright: Fly.


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 manufacture of reality vs. the power of individual imagination

The manufacture of reality vs. the power of individual imagination

by Jon Rappoport

PART ONE

“People want one story line. Smooth, with no fractures. So that’s what mind-engineers give them.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

This article is an introduction to my 3 collections: The Matrix Revealed, Exit From The Matrix, and Power Outside The Matrix. I invite you to read about these collections at nomorefakenews.

Reality is a psychological operation.

At the most primitive level, “Reality” basically means some group has force, money, and access to fawning media. They can define what exists.

A psyop depends on being able to engineer one story line.

A psyop depends on selling one centralized story.

In the case of Ebola, for example, the whole unfolding storyline depended on selling basic assumptions: a) there was an unusual outbreak; b) the outbreak was caused by a single virus and nothing else.

These assumptions and the ensuing storyline were sold by major media, with no exceptions. There were no defectors.

If, tomorrow, the head of the CDC announced that no one had ever extracted the Ebola virus from a human being, isolated it, and seen it, he would be locked up in a psych ward.

He defected from reality, which is to say, the psyop.

If, tomorrow, the head of the FDA announced that GMO crops and the herbicide Roundup were a clear and present danger to the population of the world, and constituted a grave crime, he would be fired and blacklisted.

If, magically, overnight, you found yourself in possession of overwhelming force and a direct pipeline to elite media anchors and their bosses, you could tell your story about What Exists, and you would find millions of people believing you.

This is how reality works.

What would happen if the three major networks, each with considerable power, had come up with three vastly different versions of the Boston Marathon massacre?

CBS: “FBI and local police killed one terrorist and captured the other in what observers are calling one of the bravest days in the history of law enforcement in America.”

NBC: “After a violent gun battle on the streets of a great American city, during which a suspect in the Boston massacre was killed, an FBI source stunningly revealed they had ended the life of a cooperating informant. He put it this way: ‘The Tsarnaev brothers were recruited by a secret Bureau unit to plant the bombs. The plan was to blame the bombing on so-called patriots, but that fell through, so the Bureau exercised their only option. They put their informants front and center and blamed the whole thing on them’…”

ABC: “Today, the tragic loss of life and wounding of more than 180 persons at the Boston Marathon were, amazingly, traced back to three pipe bombs in a CIA storage locker in Maryland…”

Suppose, in the midst of an uproar heard and echoed around the world, the networks stood by their contradictory versions of events and wouldn’t back down.

A massive blow would hit psyop-land. Centralized story? Poleaxed.

People wouldn’t know what to do. They expect one story line and they get three, from the highest hypnotic and influential media giants.

In a literal, though unconscious sense, familiar time and space would begin to fall apart.

But actually, it’s far more surreal for the three major television networks to agree on the substance of every significant event than to come to radically different conclusions.

Unfortunately, people don’t see it that way. They don’t see that three behemoths dispensing the same information represents a highly unnatural state of affairs.

On this subject, here are a few notes from a work-in-progress, The Underground:

“Fractured reality is approaching like a huge wave. Defections from the ranks of consensus are exploding. Therefore, the spaces of the mind are changing. Those who are holding the fort are trying to minimize the effect. That’s why they’re staging more ‘crises’. Crises are magnets. They attract the mass, the collective, the reality-addicts, the joiners, the people who will buy official images and feelings pumped out of the central factory.”

“Group-ideas which are obviously foolish and depleting and destructive are relatively easy to reject. But group-ideas that seem to herald a better world are the big deceptions. These ideas, in a vacuum, may be attractive and interesting, but because they emerge from a group they are going to induce a deep trance, in the long run. That is the intention. Not ‘a better world.’”

“Bargain price! We’ll shave down your perceptual field so you can fit in with eight billion androids. You’ll never miss what you can’t see. Yes, folks, we’ll cement you into the limited spectrum, where all the action is. There is a sense of family in this reality. People liking people. We’re all in this together.”

“Asking someone to imagine what his mind would be like if it were missing its entire collection of consensus-ideas goes over like lead matzos balls at a Catholic communion.”

“Very few people care about the space, time, and energy of psychological propaganda. They think it’s just lies. It isn’t. It’s a parallel world.”

“Escaping from the psyop called Reality occurs in stages. But unless the escapee opts for inventing his own reality and making it fact in the world, much as a painter invents on a blank canvas, he’ll fall back into the op. He’ll exist in a kind of limbo, knowing something about the truth but never rising to a level of true power. And he’ll spend his years making excuses, pulling himself further down in the process.”

PART TWO

“There is something you could call ‘machine perception’ or ‘system perception.’ A person sees through the filter of a system. How does he defeat that, change that? Not through the retraining of his eyeballs. No. But if he used his imagination widely enough, he would find that the filters dropped away. That’s quite a discovery. That’s why I developed many imagination exercises.” (Notes on Exit From The Matrix, Jon Rappoport)

Things are never exactly as they seem.

There is a good reason for this. Things are made. The ‘making’ aspect or the ‘created’ aspect is not readily visible. If it were, people would be waking up at a stunning rate. They would see the fuller dimension. They would realize how (hypnotically) focused they were on the result, as opposed to the individual inventor and the process of inventing. And their viewpoint on reality would expand and change forever.

Think of reality as a machine. A machine that produces objects.

You look at all the objects. You accept their existence. This acceptance is so pervasive that you believe reality equals the array of all those objects.

However, you press on. Lo and behold, you discover the machine. You look at it from all sides. What a find.

Then, you come upon an idea: if you go into the machine and see how it works, see how the parts mesh and function, you’ll know more. You’ll fathom the basis of reality.

After many years of exploring the guts of the machine, you understand it. This is metaphysics; the working of the machine. This is where traditional philosophers went. Of course, they came up with many different blueprints.

But there was yet another layer. The inventor of the machine. And how he put it together. How he made it work.

I’m not talking about religion. I’m talking about something less complicated: the perception that a machine comes from the imagination of an inventor.

My grandfather was an inventor. In the early years of the 20th century, he put together a machine that would create links of chain. In one end, you fed wire. At the other end, the machine had tongs that looked like lips, and these lips chewed and twisted the wire into connected links. Long lines of chain piled up on the factory floor.

Reality—the things of reality—can be perceived as having come from imagination. This goes beyond metaphysics. This goes beyond blueprints. This suggests that you can also imagine and create reality.

And what you create doesn’t have to resemble what others have invented.

The road is open.

The artist in front of the blank canvas is free. He can go anywhere. He can start in one place and end up at another. He can wipe out sections of what he’s painted and insert something different.

Obviously, society is concerned with the output of the machine. That’s where the visible action is. The inventor, creator, the one who imagines—he has to carve out territory for himself.

Another aspect of the reality machine is propaganda. It promotes what it manufactures. It never stops promoting it.

And a third aspect of the machine is “the system of manufacture,” the fact that reality is put together as a system by a system. This enchants many people. They believe that by discovering the structure they will arrive at some ultimate destination. The inventor and the artist, however, see it differently. All systems are provisional, no matter how hard-wired they appear. Many systems work. They yield up results. However, there is no cosmic prescription about how new realities must be imagined or created.

What looks like a closed world is very, very open. This even extends to the space-time-energy continuum itself. For instance, the ability to achieve telepathy violates the standards of this “one-continuum” premise and its rules about energy transmission.

The reality machine is a device with several intentions, one of which is the induction of hypnotic focus on the output of the machine. In that sense, you could say this is a consumerist universe. As usual, the “products on the shelves” are sold by extolling their status in a grossly exaggerated fashion, to the point of claiming they are sacred—meaning they are turned out by some religious force.

Outside all this, outside the machine, there is you. With unlimited imagination and creative potency.

Which can be reclaimed again. Along with a non-machine world.

PART THREE

This is a backgrounder. It is not a canned list of instructions. Its purpose is to stimulate your own thinking.

Once upon a time, human beings lived in cultures where images were alive. What we now call superstitions were, to them, gods and demons and intermediary entities that transmitted or stole the juice and the energy and the power of life.

It’s nearly impossible to project ourselves into such an environment and experience the burgeoning passions that infused experience—because a great shift has occurred.

The West entered, with anticipation, a temple of the bald Sampson, where images disappeared, were swallowed up, were replaced by so-called rational faith.

This eventually precipitated a crisis. If you don’t have, or believe in, images that live and breathe and are intimately connected with life-force, how do you replace them? How do you avoid becoming pallid skeletons of science, whose productions never impart that same fire?

This crisis is reflected all around us every day.

We have become liberated, and in this liberation we are left with emptiness. On top of that, we have decided to assume that passions of the soul should be modulated, like elevator music, to somehow join with our advanced knowledge, in harmonic balance.

It’s no balance; it’s timidity, and this attitude makes people prey to an eerie tolerance of all opinion and custom and point of view and aspiration and stretched-out egalitarianism and even criminal action. Giving no offense, under any circumstances, for any reason, is now the coin of the realm.

You might say, with accurate assessment, that these are qualities of the successful salesman. And that is what so many people have become: ambassadors of the vague pulse of our “rational culture.”

We even think of it in religious terms. The message of this church is the honed and blown-dry embrace of Anything. As if this were the message of Jesus and Buddha and Krishna and other teachers of our blurry past.

To counterbalance this bleached present, many are drawn into dark theaters to watch suburban humans turned into bloodsucking harpooned-tooth neck fetishists and genetic mistakes and hair-sprouting wolves and irradiated monsters or heroes.

It’s the instant-coffee version of ancient Dionysian adventure. And the accompanying depiction of gym-sex on the screen wouldn’t stir the interest of a mouse in a barn.

Was this why and for what we abandoned the mysteries of the epoch of magic?

For freckled children in a British academy laboring through a paranormal costume drama, tricked out with the accoutrement of grottoes and dark halls?

The crisis on our hands now is not one that is going to go away. It is not going to recede as magic once receded. Because there WAS a reason we liberated ourselves from the Middle Ages and even the Renaissance—a reason beyond technology—and until we find it and face it and deeply accept the new struggle, we are going to see this simulacrum culture of ours make endless cartoons of itself in dried out oceans of concrete.

For what we need to do now, pharmaceuticals and brain research and genetic manipulation and cyber-affectation and instant global communication and worship (or desecration) of profit-making idols hold no answers.

Suppose what took us into the age of rationality was, in some way, connected to the realization that we were, all along, inventing our own demons and gods and demigods and entities of great life-force—and although that knowledge has been shoved into the background, as trivial and passe, while technology has soared, it is still with us, and it overshadows all our machines and their power.

Suppose this is the message: we are the majestic and wild creatures we built the temples to.

We are the makers; we are the architects of all the dreams—and not through some compensatory impulse, but because WE CREATE. That is our natural inclination and the source of our ecstasy. It is only civilization that seems to cast us in other roles.

Our societies and civilizations are arranged to make it seem as if imagination is a preposterous choice—when, in fact, that is what we are here for. That is what got us here.

Societies are actually in a satellite universe, and the prime universe is all imagination.

The underlying hidden and deeply buried cry of our age is: HOW CAN I CREATE?

The conclusion is: most people will do anything to avoid it.

And the universal compliant is: I DON’T UNDERSTAND.

NEVERTHELESS, WE ARE THE ARTISTS AND THERE ARE NO LIMITS.

While, in the deep past, we sucked the marrow out of the bones of the gods we invented and thereby felt enormous passions, we knew there was a missing piece, and that piece was an abyss over which we were hanging. So we came all this way to find out that we authored the labyrinth. We built the paths that gave us joy and terror, and now we can consciously and spontaneously make new worlds without end. Not simply as engineers, but as artists.

Swallowing that stark truth may be hard, may be upsetting, but it IS why we made the voyage.

And then pulled our punches.

This is no archaic revival. It’s now, today and tomorrow.

The universe is waiting for imagination for revolutionize it down to its core.

BUT THE REALITY SALESMAN CALLS

Step right up, folks. This is a deal you can’t afford to miss. You know that thing you cling to like a drowning man in a turbulent sea?

It’s called reality, and I represent the company that manufactures it. I’m proud to say I’ve held this job for over a hundred thousand years. So as far as product knowledge is concerned, you just aren’t going to find anybody like me.

Some folks believe reality is rocks and trees and desert and sun and rain, and brick and concrete and steel and glass, and the mountain ranges, the sky, the moon and the stars. They believe reality is a house and all the things in it, and the mementos you hold on to, to remind you of the past.

But I’m really selling…guess what? A little thing called perception. It sounds odd, but that’s what it is:

How you see things, and what you think about what you see.

Because to tell you the truth, no matter what time period you live in, whether on Earth or another planet, it all comes down to that. How you see what’s in front of you.

And believe it or not, perception comes in different forms. My company makes the perception that endures. It’s the package you’re living with right now. It’s the down-to-earth here-it-is straight-ahead common-sense type. We call it: IT IS WHAT IT IS. That’s trademarked, by the way. ISWIS. It is what it is.

ISWIS was invented by a very smart guy whose name has been long forgotten. He was a flaming genius, and he realized something great. People would go for ISWIS because it would lock them in.

People didn’t want a wobbling here-and-there kind of perception. Who wants to wake up on a Tuesday morning and suddenly see life in a completely different way? Who wants that kind of shock to the system?

ISWIS is the most popular perception package in the universe, bar none. Reliability. Consistency.

All those centuries and epochs ago, when I was a rookie training for this job, the guys let me try on a whole bunch of different perception packages, so I could see what kind of competition I was up against.
I saw things I wouldn’t want to describe to you. Horrible things. And when I was given ISWIS, our product, I felt like I was home.

ISWIS gives you the kind of stability you can count on for your whole life. And, believe me, that’s no small feat. We’ve built slow decay (SD) into the package, so things gradually deteriorate—because, think about it, do you really want that tree in your back yard to stay at one stage of growth forever? Do you? It might seem like a nice idea, but it would screw up the need for replacement, and then you’d get into the whole conundrum of THE BODY, too, and how long it should last. People like to think they want physical immortality, but if you give it to them (via some other package), they go crazy after a while. Because their problems, as well as their triumphs, never go away. I could show you a little planet where the inhabitants went for one of our competitor’s products. The suicide rate is over seventy percent! The place is a nuthouse!

ISWIS is time-tested. It’s as solid as solid can be made. It doesn’t break down.

But it does need boosters from time to time, and that’s why I’m here today talking to you.

Every twenty thousand years, we institute a planet-wide upgrade, just to make sure nothing goes wrong. And you’re all due.

Now, you could refuse, in which case you’ll have to take full responsibility for the ugly consequences, or you could do the right thing and just re-up. I have to tell you, our re-up rate is 99.859 percent. I’m proud of that figure.

By the way, the holdouts, the deniers, and the self-styled rebels? The governments of your planet keep track of you. I feel obligated to let you know that. They assume they need to. Without boosters, when your ISWIS breaks down, you’re going to fail to fit in. Most definitely you’re going to experience some things other people just won’t understand. And your governments will hunt you down and lock you up, or worse.

That’s not my doing, because I believe in the free market, but it’s part of my service to clue you into the whole picture.

But here is the good part. You can get your booster now, during our pre-op special, by simply signing for it and taking the pledge, and continuing to pay a mere sixty percent of your annual income for the rest of your lives. Which when you think about it, is nothing for what you’re getting. Again, reliability, and consistency.

In the small print, the pledge lays out a few details concerning IMAGINATION. This is for your own protection—because if you take imagination too far (and who knows how far that is, until it’s too late), you’ll set up what we call an interference field, which means ISWIS will tend to malfunction. You don’t want that.

So here’s the contract and the pledge. Sign on the dotted line, and pay the fee, and we’re done.

Thank you very much.

I love you guys. Really, I do. I admire your tenacity and your willingness to stay with our perception package. Our company continues to prosper because of you. Visit the ISWIS website and Facebook page and find out about upcoming picnics and vacation tours. We’re hosting booster events at thousands of locations.

If you don’t come to us, we’ll come to you.

We’ve got you on our list.

BEYOND STRUCTURES

We are fascinated with structures and systems because they work, and because some of us feel an aesthetic attraction to them.

They work until you want to do something different.

Magic, for example.

Magic is non-system.

Which puts it out of the reach of most people.

Because most people want to grab a structure and pull it around them and sit there like a bird in a cage. They want to go from A to B to C and feel the satisfaction of knowing it works every time.

Nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong at all.

But go into a corporation and say you want to teach them creativity and they’ll say, “What’s the system?”

Once I told a personnel chief at a big company, “The system is to stand on your head.”

“Literally?” he said.

“No. People would find a system for that. But figuratively, that’s what you want to get people to do.”

He scratched his head.

“I don’t know what you’re talking about,” he said.

“Exactly,” I said. “That’s where we start. I say something and you don’t understand. Then we have a chance.”

“What are you?” he said. “Some kind of zen teacher?”

“No,” I said. “If I said I was, you’d pigeonhole me. I teach non-systems.”

He laughed in an uncomfortable way.

“We don’t operate on non-systems here.”

“No, but if you let three or four people do that, they might come up with a product you never dreamed of.”

That he could understand. Vaguely.

Here’s how things work at some very big corporations. The second-tier honchos decide it’s time for a new product. They call in the chief of production and ask him what could be done. He suggests a whiz-it 4, which is basically a whiz-it 3 with a few more bells and whistles.

The honchos give him the green light, and he goes to work. He sets up a structure, which means he basically triggers the structure he already has. He gets underlings to make sketches of whiz 4, and with those he assigns compartmentalized tasks to various departments under him. The timetable is eighteen months.

He appoints a project supervisor to oversee the whole thing.

The project supervisor pretty much knows what’s going to happen. The six departments in charge of bringing in the whiz 4 on time will do okay—except one key department will fail miserably, because three guys in that dept. are lazy bums. They find ways to delay operations. They ask meaningless questions. They let work pile up on their desks. They meddle in other people’s business.

Twelve times, the production supervisor has tried to get these idiots fired. No go.

So everybody settles down to grind of bringing in whiz 4 on time.

Structure.

Manuals, rules and regs.

DMV, IRS. Play it by the book.

This can make magic the way an ant can fly to the moon.

So long ago it was in another life, I taught private school in New York. There were six kids in my class, all boys. I was supposed to teach them math. They were all at different levels. They had no ambition to learn math. No matter what I did, they performed miserably. Add, subtract, multiply, divide, decimals, fractions—it didn’t matter. If they managed to learn something on Monday, they forgot it by Tuesday. It was rather extraordinary.

So I took them to an art museum one morning. They were as lost there as they were in the classroom. But I wasn’t. That was the key. I was already painting in a little studio downtown, and I was on fire.

So I began to talk about the paintings. The Raphael, the Vermeer, the Rembrandt. The De Kooning, the Pollock, the Gorky. I had no plan, no idea. I just talked about what they could see if they looked.

And then we walked back to school and I set them up with paints and paper and brushes and told them to go to work. I said I didn’t care what they painted. Just have a good time. Do something you like.

All of a sudden, they weren’t making trouble. They were painting. No more whining and complaining.

I walked around and watched them go at it. I pointed to this or that area and mentioned what I liked.

There was no way to measure or quantify or systematize what the kids were doing that day, but they were coming alive, out of their sloth and resentment.

Then we got back to math, and it was as if they’d all experienced an upward shift in IQ.

That night, back in my studio, I made a note in my notebook. It went something like this: Give them a non-structure, and then follow that with a structure, it works.

So that was that.

There used to be something in this culture called improvisation. People understood what it was, even if they wouldn’t do it themselves. Now the word has almost vanished. Same with the word spontaneity. The moment when eye, mind, and brush meet canvas. When mind meets the new. When the inventor suddenly gets up from his chair and trots over to his workbench and starts putting pieces together.

The old zen guys called it no-mind. That didn’t mean you were a robot, it meant you had a very sharp mind, actually, but you just transcended it, you skipped through it like a flat stone on water. Structureless.

This becomes magic when imagination jumps into the fray. When the inventive urge takes the foreground.

The trouble with all these Asian spiritual practices now is that they have a long and distinguished history, and the history tends to infiltrate everything that’s happening. It’s venerated. That’s like throwing a heavy wrench into an engine. You need a clean slate, a wide open space. You need Now.

You need Now, which is dry tinder to the spark of imagination.

If you have enough history at your back and you stand away far enough, everything looks like pattern and structure and system. That’s the illusion. That’s the deception.

Magic doesn’t work that way.

The only problem magic has is: if you create it, who else will see it? That’s the only glitch—and that can be worked with.

You see, systems make people blind. If they can’t fold an event into a structure, then for them it isn’t there. This is very interesting. This is where all the myths of Hermes (aka Mercury) sprang from. He was the figure who flew and passed through walls and had no barriers in the space-time continuum—the tin can we call universe. So people pretended, at a deep level, that they were unable to comprehend him. In a real sense, he was invisible. His response to all this was to become a supreme joker. A trickster. He toppled idols of the hidebound, rule-bound, system-bound society.

If you read the myths of ancient Greece, you begin to see he ranked very high in the pantheon of the gods. There really was no reason he couldn’t be considered the king of the Olympians.

But he didn’t want the throne or the lineage. That was just another system, erected by his god-colleagues, who were bored out of their minds and desperately needed the entertainment and distraction it could provide.

Hermes was deep in the fire of his own imagination and speed and improvisation and spontaneous action.

Magic.

He didn’t need or want metaphysics, cosmology, ultimate truth, illumination, enlightenment, or Oneness and Bliss. He already embodied of all those things and much, much, much more.

The notion of shared, consonant, and structured reality as the final goal became an enormous joke.

The structure and system of life and society, from a certain live perspective, is a joke.

Many marriages become impossible because husband and wife find themselves trapped in a system, and they don’t know what to do. That’s the beginning and end of their problem. If they could move in and out of the system, while remaining married and loyal, they would realize everything is wonderful. It’s a magic trick.

To make it work, you need imagination, which is the thing that allows you to see structure as putty that can be moved around and reshaped at will. Imagination has all the creativity there is, and yet it is non-material, it’s outside the shapes people build to run their lives.

From the point of view of civilization, structure should be a sturdy platform, from which people can take off and create.

When I was 19, people thought I had a few problems, so I was sent to an office in New York to take a Rorschach Test. The specialist opened up a large notebook to a page of inkblots. He was a technician who did one thing in his job. He interpreted what people told him about those inkblots. He had a complex system that enabled him to categorize people according to various subtle shades and types of neuroses.

So he showed me an inkblot and said, “Tell me everything you see in it.”

“Everything?” I said.

“Yes.”

He was a stern neutral android, and he followed his playbook to the letter.

“Okay,” I said.

So 20 minutes later, I was still talking about that first inkblot. I think he had a dozen of those blots in his notebook, and he was supposed to show me every one.

But I was still chirping away on the first one. Birds, animals, planes, kitchen utensils, ancient symbols, articles of clothing, wars, interstellar collisions, underground caves, noses, beaches, leaves, insects, clouds, forests, gnomes, ships, streams, rivers, idols, chewing gum, coins…I was “seeing” all of that.

I was cheating, of course. Which is to say, I was using my imagination. This was outside the rules, really.

The technician was sweating. He was squirming in his chair. Contemplating how many hours it would take to get through all the inkblots. We’d take a supper break and then come back for more, far into the night.

Finally he said, “That’s enough.”

“But there’s more,” I said.

“No,” he said. “That’s all right.”

He stared at me.

I stared at him.

Standoff at OK Corral.

In his system of universe, you could have two things. Normal and neurotic. I didn’t fit into either slot. He didn’t understand that. So to him, I was invisible.

As I left his office, I thought about my favorite radio show, The Shadow. Lamont Cranston renders himself invisible to the bad guys, and proceeds to torment them.

It was a good day.

In the house of joy

In the house of joy

by Jon Rappoport

April 23, 2017

In the house of joy, winter fades away not only because of hope, or dreams, or the determination to follow a new path, but because for a hundred thousand years people have been, through gesture and word, transmitting to one another the idea that joy exists.

No matter what the present moment suggests—any present moment—that idea has been passed from hand to hand and mind to mind.

The odds don’t matter, the “score” doesn’t matter, the conditions don’t matter; the idea lives.

If this doesn’t say something about the human race, nothing does.

Problems, mistakes, tragedies…and still the idea is never eliminated.

There is more than the transmission—there is the invention. Joy is invented and reinvented time and time again—as if it were a secret that must be maintained. And so it is.

As children, we found it every spring. The winter was devastating. It wiped out all life. It froze life. How could anything come back? Impossible. But, just as now, outside my window, spring always made a return, unstoppable—sometimes it came back in the space of a few days, and we couldn’t see it happening until it had happened. Spring waited until you and everyone else weren’t looking, and then it broke through. Spring knows how to play a game.

For some reason, trees don’t seem to care about newspapers or television news. They’re on their own timetable. They set their own pace. How many branches on all the trees in the world are there? They all know what to do and when. They don’t have to wonder or plan or consider. It’s time for leaves, for green. Now.

Here they come.

When we feel joy as we’re in the middle of green, we could conceal it and bury it and go off in a dozen directions, but we never do. Not entirely. We stand on a road or a street or a field and when we meet another person, we make some gesture with our hands or we say a few words and we both look out and see the trees and we know.

We’re in the house of joy. We’re there. It’s not hard to understand.

We’re in a kind of game, and we have a new chance of winning. In this game, no one is ordered or destined to lose. Isn’t it strange?

In these moments, we don’t have to have an ironclad plan. All we have to do is stand and look.

Tickets weren’t printed. There isn’t a box office.

And then, yes, there are the hopes and dreams and the determination to take a new path, but for this short space of time, we’re looking at the house of joy.


Exit From the Matrix

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


More of my writing like this can be found at my other blog, Outside The Reality Machine. Here’s one, 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 “dependent victim” psy-op

The “dependent victim” psy-op

by Jon Rappoport

March 31, 2017

“American and British feminism has amazingly collapsed backward again into whining, narcissistic victimology…Too many of today’s young feminists seem to want hovering, paternalistic authority figures to protect and soothe them, an attitude I regard as servile, reactionary and glaringly bourgeois…” (Camille Paglia, the National Catholic Review, 2/25/15)

I could have titled this piece: “What government fears: the black entrepreneur.”

But the situation is much wider than that—-

ANY person who comes out of an “officially designated victim-group”…and then succeeds in life on his own…and then goes one step further and refuses to identify his entire existence with his group…but instead stands as a unique individual…why, that person, at the very least, must be a criminal, if not a terrorist, right?

That’s the crux of the issue: never leave your group.

That’s how society, civilization, and culture are promoted these days.

“Groups have needs, agendas, and problems, and the solution will come from government.” That’s the all-embracing formula.

The fake appearance is: victim groups are fighting for recognition and special status, and the government is pushing back—but that’s now a ruse. That’s a cover story. In fact, victim groups and government have the same goal: a relationship based on dependence. One side depends and the other side gives and protects.

The individual is out of the equation. He is portrayed as the greed-obsessed reason these victim groups exist and need help in the first place.

Banks, Wall Street, and mega-corporations are depicted as the end result of individualism, whereas the government is valiantly striving to solve this endemic problem.

In fact, government, banks, Wall Street, and mega-corporations are joined at the hip. They brush each other’s teeth first thing every morning.

Political correctness and the burgeoning movement to outlaw “offensive language” are merely tactics to: preserve groups’ separate identities; foment conflict between them; and ultimately foster their dependence on government authority.

The truth is, you can’t get free individuals to depend on government. Only “besieged groups” can be relied on for that purpose.

In the State’s eyes, a perfect society would be composed of groups who have entirely forgotten the concept of the individual, as if it never existed.

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.”

When Callero writes “identification,” he isn’t talking about ID cards and Social Security numbers. He’s asserting an absence of any uniqueness from person to person. He’s claiming there is no significant distinction between any two people. There aren’t two individuals to begin with. They’re a group.

This downgrading of the individual human spirit is far from accidental. It’s launched as a sustained propaganda campaign, the ultimate purpose of which is top-down control over billions of people organized into groups.

Here are several remarks, meant to defame the individual, from people I would call high-IQ idiots (at best):

“The cold truth is that the individualist creed of everybody for himself and the devil take the hindmost is principally responsible for the distress in which Western civilization finds itself — with investment racketeering at one end and labor racketeering at the other. Whatever merits the [individualist] creed may have had in the days of primitive agriculture and industry, it is not applicable in an age of technology, science, and rationalized economy. Once useful, it has become a danger to society.” (Charles Beard, 1931)

Beard, a celebrated historian, sees no difference between individual racketeering and the individual freely choosing and living his own life. In making this judgment, he becomes an intellectual/propaganda racketeer of the highest order.

“British empiricist philosophy is individualist. And it is of course clear that if the only criterion of true and false which a man accepts is that man’s, then he has no base for social agreement. The question of how man ought to behave is a social question, which always involves several people; and if he accepts no evidence and no judgment except his own, he has no tools with which to frame an answer.” (Jacob Bronowski, Science and Human Values, 1956).

Bronowski is quite sure that hearing other people’s evidence and then keeping one’s own counsel is wrong. One has to accept that evidence on its face. This is sheer idiocy. Individuals are capable of deciding, on their own, what social agreements to enter into.

On the other hand, here is a quite insightful statement from a contemporary journalist.

Here’s what journalist Glenn Greenwald (who is gay) wrote about the symbolic nature of the American Presidency, before the election. Though not making reference to the group vs. the individual, Greenwald’s remarks illustrate the degree to which victim-symbology has taken hold in the US:

“…Hillary’s] going to be the first female president, and women in America are going to be completely invested in her candidacy. Opposition to her is going to be depicted as misogynistic, like opposition to Obama has been depicted as racist. It’s going to be this completely symbolic messaging that’s going to overshadow the fact that she’ll do nothing but continue everything in pursuit of her own power. They’ll probably have a gay person [as president] after Hillary who’s just going to do the same thing.”

Regardless of the fact that the State and its allies are real oppressors who contribute mightily to creating real victims, what I’m talking about here is something quite apart from that: growing numbers of people who voluntarily take on the victim-mantle and seek comfort in nests of self-promoting groups who exaggerate and distort their own claims to special status.

The State needs these people. The State wants these people. Increasingly, the State employs these people.

Edward Bernays, the father of modern public relations, wrote: “It is sometimes possible to change the attitudes of millions but impossible to change the attitude of one man.”

Bernays understood that the basis of successful propaganda is a mass audience, an audience composed of groups, not individuals.

Retired high-level propaganda operative, Ellis Medavoy (pseudonym), once told me, “There are two aspects of propaganda. There is everything you do to get people to think of themselves as group members. And then there are all the messages you send to those conditioned group members. You need both aspects.”

When a group assigns itself solid “victim-status,” it creates one basic rule: a member must not leave the group. Why? Because if he does, he’s claiming he is no longer a victim—and that assertion is a betrayal.

Nice and neat. A prison.

“I’m a free individual.”

“You’re crazy. There is no such thing. Now get back in the group where you belong.”

Down at the root, betrayal begins as self-betrayal. The individual gives up the ghost. From that point on, his politics don’t matter. He forgets what he could have been. He defines himself by race and religion and country and rank ideology and group. He finds words and feeling through which he can express his role in a stage play that decays him from the inside out.

Eventually, if lunatics have their way, every person on planet Earth will be designated a victim. That will be the group of groups.

It won’t matter why and how everyone supposedly turns out to be a victim. The reasons will be forgotten. People will “instinctively” sign on to the agenda.

And the management team running the world will put another check mark on their sheet of objectives:

“Earth is beginning to resemble one giant hospital/mental institution. Break out the champagne.”

There is only one problem. That plan is fraying at the edges. People are waking up and swimming to the surface through layers of deception. They’re returning to themselves. They’re recognizing group-ism for what it is: a meltdown into self-sabotage.

The artifact is the collective. The self is real.

Power, choice, and freedom never go away.

They may hide, but they can be resurrected.

Then the whole fake game crumbles.


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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

The political movie projected on the screen of the subconscious

The political movie projected on the screen of the subconscious

by Jon Rappoport

March 28, 2017

This article has to do with people who pick a political side or candidate and refuse to budge an inch, no matter how much troubling evidence is presented to them.

Their filter is firmly in place.

They have a vague impression of a politician—but vagueness is not an indicator of weakness. In this case, vague is mighty and powerful and immovable.

Such people feel an attachment, which they adore. The politician reflects back to them a belief they already hold. That belief, too, is vague. For example, “We must be kind to everyone.” But again, the vagueness is not a weakness. It is unshakable. Can the believer consider evidence that, in a particular situation, kindness is inappropriate or wrong? No. Never.

Based on a vague impression of a politician, and a vague belief, the person will go to his grave and beyond, gripping his attachment to both politician and belief. The entire power of the universe, focused on him, wouldn’t alter his stance.

“But you see, your candidate was instrumental in launching an unnecessary war that killed a hundred thousand people and turned a country into a hell hole, and here are the specifics…”

“Doesn’t matter. A few mistakes may have been made along the way…”

It’s vague, it’s forever, it’s adoration, it’s love. Or a perfect imitation.

“Do you see that giant rock sitting on top of the hill above our village? It’s getting ready to fall. Let me show you some video and measurements.”

“I always loved that rock. It looks like a heart. Have you ever noticed? Don’t you dare try to split it in half or disturb it! When I was a child, I used to sing a song about The Granite King. We’d sit around the fire and roast marshmallows…”

It’s as if the person’s eyesight is becoming hazier as time passes, and yet his belief and attachment are gaining in strength.

“I’ve got my perception-filter, and I’m seeing everything through it, and I never put the filter aside and look at things as they are. Now, what was it you wanted to discuss?”

Of course, most politicians and their handlers capitalize on this hazy crazy psychological condition. Their prime goal is to impart a vague impression to the constituency. Why bother to strive for more?

George Bush the Elder spoke of a “kinder, gentler” society. Bill Clinton said, “I feel your pain.” These are rational political positions in the same way that the Rockefellers are, first and foremost, philanthropists.

Once a person’s perception-filter is fixed in place, he can be whipsawed without let-up. His candidate is good and glorious, and the other candidate is a monster. No facts necessary.

Evidence? Never heard of it.

One side endlessly good; the other side endlessly evil.

Even if that proposition were true, it wouldn’t matter. What matters is how perception can be managed.

Now we’re talking about real triggering. Actual Pavlovian stimulus-response. The mere mention of the “monster’s” name or a cartoon of his face or a quote from him about the weather is sufficient to set off a foaming drool of rage.

Is this externally induced programming? Yes. But at a deeper level, the person is shaping his own response. He’s the author. He’s installing the conditioning.

And at a high enough perch of power, the opportunities are abundant. “We can set both sides against each other and provoke warfare. We can make the most ridiculous claims and feed them to the rabid dogs…”

Again, the degree to which one politician or the other is a monster or a proponent of virtuous progress is irrelevant. The divide-and-provoke-and-conquer operation is all that matters to controllers who are running the op.

Then there is this factor: the all-important initiation of an adrenaline reaction.

When people become tuned to that feeling, they seek it out. This is what they want. If a situation isn’t fight or flight, they’re not interested. They yawn and turn away.

“Where’s the action? I need the action.”

“I don’t want to see a movie. I want to see a movie with fifty titanic explosions and bodies strewn on the street and buildings collapsing. And there’d better be athletic sex, too. And the hero has to experience at least ten close calls. I’m talking imminent death.”

Linking adrenaline surges to politics is vital.

“Supporting my candidate has to feel like love dangerously poised on the edge of a cliff, and the other candidate has to have a live nuclear bomb in his hand. That’s the movie I want to watch. I want to be inside that movie…”

The mere suggestion that one candidate might have a small flaw, while the other candidate is not quite Satan incarnate in every aspect, ruins the show. It dampens the hormonal rush.

“Who wrote that script? Give me my money back.”

Politics must be a movie projected on the screen of the subconscious. It must enter that territory unimpeded. Once there, it must take root and give birth to uncontrollable impulses.

Movie studios and high-level political manipulators are looking for this sweet spot. It’s cash and psychological payoffs and lines around the block.

“Look, we want love versus hate in this script. But it has to be ramped up to a fever pitch. No holds barred. We have to make the evil feel like EVIL, and the good feel like GOOD. At the same time, the hero and villain have to seem real. The audience has to experience being in their shoes and pants and underwear. We’re spending three hundred million on this piece of dreck, and it has to work…”

If the movie-studio gods can make half the audience root for the hero and the other half root for the villain, that’s pure gold. If they can provoke serious animosity between viewers, THEY CAN DEGRADE THE WHOLE NATURE OF THE ENTERPRISE and, when we’re talking about politics, that’s exactly what they’re shooting for.

“We can pit people against people and create a stalemate, where very little gets done—except the provocation of conflict. Then we’re home. Everyone sinks lower into a stimulation-response universe. We own that universe. We built it.”

Yes, they did, and they do. Ushering people into it makes it easier to control both sides and ultimately lower an apolitical boom on their heads. Otherwise known as erasing freedom.

“Political policy? Ideals? We don’t have that kind of agenda. The only agenda we have is installing chains around the mind.”

Achieving this goal, in the current American political landscape, only requires a quick inventory of: ratings. Where was the real heat? Where were the real numbers? Why, of course, it was during the campaign leading up to the election. Everybody was tuned in. Therefore, the campaign must never end. We must return to that time. Trump must never be president, and Hillary must never go away. Her shadowy presence and symbolic value—and surrogates—must persist. Thus, the endless challenge to Trump’s legitimacy. He didn’t win. The election was fixed. Perfect. That throws us into the furnace. Again.

Let us return to those days of yore, when families split apart, when the dire flow of energy and desire and vague impression and eternal attachment were King. That’s where we have to build the flames. That’s the subconscious target.

That’s the bulls-eye.

The mind.

Issues and scandals are gasoline pumped into the conflagration.

THIS person’s subconscious will veer THAT way, and THAT person’s subconscious will veer THIS way.

Those people who can see and argue actual evidence will be swallowed up in the noise and the roar.

The movie is called Degradation.

The box office is sensational.

It’s surround-sound and holographic.

Move past partisan payoffs to understand such a strategy. Even move past divide and conquer. The purpose, intent, and objective is eventual mental, emotional, hormonal, and energetic exhaustion.

The whole movie is a trap. The ending, if it ever comes, creates profound passivity in the mind.

Therefore, stepping outside the theater is an absolute necessity.

It’s the first move toward clarity.

And actual 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.