Bill Gates: the new Pavlov

Bill Gates: the new Pavlov

by Jon Rappoport

February 7, 2017

“Under the surface of this global civilization, a great and secret war is taking place. The two opponents hold different conceptions of Reality. On one side, those who claim that humans operate purely on the basis of stimulus-response, like machines; on the other side, those who believe there is a gigantic thing called freedom. Phase One of the war is already over. The stimulus-response people have won. In Phase Two, people are waking up to the far-reaching and devastating consequences of the Pavlovian program.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

“From the moment the first leader of the first clan in human history took charge, he busied himself with this question: ‘What can I say and do that will make my people react the way I want them to.’ He was the first Pavlov. He was the first psychologist, the first propagandist, the first mind-control boss. His was the first little empire. Since then, only the means and methods have changed.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

A thought-form is a picture-plus concept in the mind that tends to guide behavior.

A dominant thought-form in Earth civilization today is: universal rule through gigantic, highly organized structures; e.g., mega-corporations that owe no allegiance to any nation.

Imagine a few thousand such corporations with interlocking boards and directorates; colluding with super-regional governments and their honeycombed bureaucracies; combined with regional armies, intelligence agencies and technological elites; hooked to a global surveillance operation; in control of media; cooperating with the largest organized religions on Earth.

Imagine all this as essentially one organization—and you see the thought-form in its wide-screen version.

Top-down as top-down has never been before.

Functions and compartments defined and specialized at every level, and coordinated in order to carry out policy decisions.

As to why such a thought-form should come to dominate human affairs, the simplest explanation is: because it works.

But beneath that answer, for those who can see, there is much, much more.

Individuals come to think that “effective” and “instrumental” and “efficient” are more important than any other issues.

Keep building, keep expanding, keep consolidating gains—and above all else, keep organizing.

Such notions and thought-forms replace life itself.

The Machine has come to the fore. All questions are now about how the individual sees himself fitting into the structure and function of The Machine.

Are human beings becoming social constructs?

Populations are undergoing a quiet revolution. We can cite some of the reasons: television; education; job training and employment requirements; the Surveillance State; government organizations who follow a “zero tolerance” policy; inundation with advertising.

Yes, it’s all geared to produce people who are artificial constructs.

And this is just the beginning. There are a number of companies (see, for example, affectiva.com) who are dedicated to measuring “audience response” to ads and other public messages. I’m talking about electronic measuring. The use of bracelets, for instance, that record students’ emotional responses to teachers in classrooms, in real time. (Bill Gates shoveled grant money into several of these studies.)

Then there is facial recognition geared to the task of revealing how people are reacting when they sit at their computers and view websites.

Push-pull, ring the bell, watch the dog drool for his food. Stimulus-response.

It’s not much of a stretch to envision, up the road a few years, whole populations more than willing to volunteer for this kind of mass experimentation. But further than that, we could see society itself embrace, culturally, the ongoing measurement of stimuli and responses.

“Yes, I want to live like this. I want to be inside the system. I want to be analyzed. I want to be evaluated. I want to accept the results. I want to be part of the new culture. Put bracelets on me. Measure my eye movements, my throat twitches that indicate what I’m thinking, and my brain waves. Going to a movie should include the experience of wearing electrodes that record my second-to-second reactions to what’s happening on the screen. I like that. I look forward to it…”

In such a culture, “Surveillance State” would take on a whole new dimension.

“Sir, I want to report a malfunction in my television set. I notice the monitoring equipment that tracks my responses to programs has gone on the blink. I want it reattached as soon as possible. Can you fix it remotely, or do you need to send a repair person out to the house? I’ll be here all day…”

People will take pride in their ongoing role as social constructs, just as they now take pride in owning a quality brand of car.

The thought process behind this, in so far as any thought at all takes place, goes something like: “If I’m really a bundle of responses to stimuli and nothing more, then I want to be inside a system that champions that fact and records it…I don’t want to be left out in the cold.”

Here is a sample school situation of the near future: for six months, Mr. Jones, the teacher, has been videotaped, moment by moment, as he instructs his class in English. All the students have been wearing electronic bracelets, and their real time emotional responses (interest, boredom, aversion) have also been recorded. A team of specialists has analyzed the six months of video, matching it up, second by second, to the students’ responses. The teacher is called in for a conference.

“Mr. Jones, we now know what you’re doing that works and what you’re doing that doesn’t work. We know exactly what students are positively reacting to, and what bores them. Therefore, we’re going to put you into a re-ed seminar, where you’ll learn precisely how to teach your classes from now on, to maximize your effectiveness. We’ll show you how to move your hands, what tone of voice to use, how to stand, when to make eye contact, and so on…”

Mr. Jones is now a quacking duck. He will be trained how to quack “for the greater good.” He is now a machine toy. Whatever is left of his passion, his intelligence, his free will, his spontaneous insights, his drive to make students actually understand what they’re learning…all subordinated for the sake of supposed efficiency.

Think this is an extreme fantasy? See the Chicago Tribune, June 12, 2012, “Biosensors to monitor students’ attentiveness”:

“The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which has poured more than $4 billion into efforts to transform public education in the U.S., is pushing to develop an ‘engagement pedometer.’ Biometric devices wrapped around the wrists of students would identify which classroom moments excite and interest them — and which fall flat.”

“The foundation has given $1.4 million in grants to several university researchers to begin testing the devices in middle-school classrooms this fall.”

“The biometric bracelets, produced by a Massachusetts startup company, Affectiva Inc, send a small current across the skin and then measure subtle changes in electrical charges as the sympathetic nervous system responds to stimuli. The wireless devices have been used in pilot tests to gauge consumers’ emotional response to advertising.”

“Gates officials hope the devices, known as Q Sensors, can become a common classroom tool, enabling teachers to see, in real time, which kids are tuned in and which are zoned out.”

“Existing measures of student engagement, such as videotaping classes for expert review or simply asking kids what they liked in a lesson, ‘only get us so far,’ said Debbie Robinson, a spokeswoman for the Gates Foundation. To truly improve teaching and learning, she said, ‘we need universal, valid, reliable and practical instruments’ such as the biosensors.”

“The Gates Foundation has spent two years videotaping 20,000 classroom lessons and breaking them down, minute by minute, to analyze how each teacher presents material and how those techniques affect student test scores.”

“Clemson received about $500,000 in Gates funding. Another $620,000 will support an MIT scientist, John Gabrieli, who aims to develop a scale to measure degrees of student engagement by comparing biosensor data to functional MRI brain scans [!] (using college students as subjects).”

When you boil it down, the world-view represented here has nothing to do with “caring about students.” It has everything to do with the Pavlovian view of humans as biological machines.

What input yields what response? How can people be shaped into predictable constructs?

As far as Gates is concerned, the underlying theme, as always, is: control.

In this new world, the process of thinking and comparing and independently judging, and the freedom to make individual choices…well, for whatever that was worth, we can’t encourage it for a whole society. It’s too unpredictable. We don’t have time for that sort of thing. No, we have to achieve reduction. We have to seek out lowest common denominators.”

This is what universal surveillance is all about. The observation of those denominators and the variances from them—the outlying and therefore dangerous departures from the norm.

“Well, we’ve tracked Mr. Jones’ classroom for a year now, and we’ve collated all the measurements of reactions from the students. It was a wonderful study. But we did notice one thing. All the students showed similar patterns of reactions over time…except two students. We couldn’t fit them into the algorithms. They seemed to be responding oppositely. It was almost as if they were intentionally defecting from the group. This signals some kind of disorder. We need a name for it. Is it Oppositional Defiance Disorder, or is it new? We recommend attaching electrodes to those two students’ skulls, so we can get a better readout of their brain activity in real time.”

You see, everything must be analyzed on the basis of stimulus response. Those two students are suffering from a brain problem. They must be. Because if they aren’t, if they have the ability to choose and decide how to respond, then they have free will, and that can’t be measured. Much deeper, that also suggests an X-factor in humans, wherein the flow of chemicals and atoms and quarks and mesons and photons don’t tell the whole story. The rest of the story would imply the existence of something that is…non-material…above and beyond push-pull cause and effect.

The gatekeepers of this world are obsessed with ruling that out. They guard Reality itself, which is to say, their conception of Reality. They are willing to spend untold amounts of money to make that Pavlovian conception universally accepted and universally loved.

Because they own that conception. They are the self-appointed title holders. They are the kings of that domain.

I feel obligated to inform them that their domain is much, much smaller than they think it is. And in the fullness of time, which is very long, the domain is going to fall and crack and collapse and disintegrate. And all their horses and all their men won’t be able to put it back together again.

Perhaps populations will have to endure a hundred years of stimulus-response society, to understand what it means. But eventually, a man like Bill Gates will be forgotten. He’ll be a small footnote on a dusty page in a crumbling book in a dark room on a remote island of one unworkable computer.

A morbid venal fool who chased, for a brief moment, fool’s gold.

There is an irreducible thing. It’s called freedom. It is native to every individual.

Sometimes it rears its head in the middle of the night, and the dreamer awakes.

And he asks himself: what is my freedom for?

And then he begins a voyage that no device can record, measure, or analyze.

If he pursues it long enough, it takes him out of the labyrinth.

Pavlov wrote: “Mankind will possess incalculable advantages and extraordinary control over human behavior when the scientific investigator will be able to subject his fellow men to the same external analysis he would employ for any natural object, and when the human mind will contemplate itself not from within but from without.”

Basically, Pavlov was promoting the idea that whatever an individual perceives and feels about his own experience is a confused mess and an obstruction.

Rather, the individual should ignore all that tripe, and instead, allow himself to be a “natural object,” see himself as a clean and simple response mechanism, as planned inputs cause him to behave in various ways. Then, he’ll be contemplating himself “not from within, but from without.”

In other words, then he will have no life.

Bill Gates and other elite planners are working toward this end.


Exit From the Matrix

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


When Ray Kurzweil talks about hooking brains up to super-computers, he is envisioning a process of downloading that goes beyond choice. Somehow, automatically, the brain and the individual (he apparently believes they are the same thing) will receive inputs that translate into knowledge and even talent. This is another fatuous version of Pavlov.

In Brave New World, Huxley wrote: “Hot tunnels alternated with cool tunnels. Coolness was wedded to discomfort in the form of hard X-rays. By the time they were decanted the embryos had a horror of cold. They were predestined to emigrate to the tropics, to be miner[s] and acetate silk spinners and steel workers. Later on their minds would be made to endorse the judgment of their bodies. ‘We condition them to thrive on heat’, concluded Mr. Foster. ‘Our colleagues upstairs will teach them to love it’.”

Stimulus-response.

If researchers developed this technology, who could doubt that elite planners would push it forward? It would be the culmination of their dream.

The freedom of the individual, his innate capacity to make wide-ranging choices, is the monkey wrench in the program. It is anti-stimulus-response.

This is why you would have to search far and wide to find, in one school, anywhere, on any level, a course that examines and promotes individual freedom.

It is anathema to the plan.

It is the silver bullet for the vampire.

Freedom comes from Within the individual, not from Without.

On the level of political control, freedom emerged and broke through during centuries of struggle.

Now, and in the future, every individual carries that torch.

So it is incumbent on the individual to understand the scope and meaning and power of his own freedom, and to decide for himself what his freedom is FOR.

What will he choose to launch from that great pasture?

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 liberal mind crashes and burns

The liberal mind crashes and burns

Sub-headline: Regardless of who Trump is or isn’t…

by Jon Rappoport

January 10, 2017

For most dyed-in-the-wool liberals, the election was going to be business as usual.

They viewed Hillary Clinton as one of their own, a kind person with extensive political experience who would continue to guide the nation in the direction set by other kind and decent leaders—Barack Obama and Bill Clinton. It was all good. Hope, change, help, share and care, sympathy for the less fortunate, giving back, on the road to a better world. In other words, these liberals were deluded by their own vague ideals.

Nothing new there.

They believe everything big media tells them to believe. They trust in big government. They admire the notion of socialism, such as they understand it, but of course they would never come right out and admit to being socialists. That would be a bridge too far. That might commit them to a specific set of ideas, and you can count on liberals to avoid specificity like the plague. They prefer the warm fuzzy bubbly delusion of “progress” and “improvement.”

Above all, they want to be seen as good.

Under no circumstances do they want to be seen as greedy or ambitious.

They have a tacit deal with their favored candidates: those leaders must never seem to be greedy, either.

The Clinton Foundation operation? A money-laundering machine set up to make the Clintons rich and powerful mountain-top mobsters manipulating US policy for cash? Impossible. Would never happen. Look the other way. Ignore it. Stay in the bubble.

Hillary Clinton playing a major role in the destruction of Libya by air attack, torn bodies lying in the streets, fiery chaos, government dissolved, vicious terrorists fighting it out to see who’ll control the landscape, with the shell-shocked population caught in the crossfire? Never happened.

Sturdy, tough, dedicated family men across America robbed of their jobs by cold-blooded Bill Clinton, Obama, and Hillary Clinton Globalist maneuvers? No, never happened.

Then Trump won the election.

The liberals crashed and burned.

And now they’re curling around the feet of the CIA and the Washington Post and demanding more stories about the Russians—those evil bastards they once adored from a distance—stealing the election and handing it to Trump.

They’re shoving their fangs in wherever they can, desperately hoping to unseat Trump before he takes the Oath of Office.

And if somehow Trump restores some of those lost American jobs? If by chance he doesn’t embark on more wars of Empire? If he destroys a swath or two of foul corruption inside the DC Beltway?

NO, NO, NO, THE LIBERALS SAY. OUR GIRL HILLARY WOULD HAVE DONE WHATEVER GOOD THERE WAS TO BE DONE. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HER JOB. SHE WOULD HAVE DELIVERED.

Sure she would. She would have flown and floated over the White House like an angel made out of cotton candy and pointed her wand at Washington criminals and dismissed them straightaway.

These liberals will now primp and plump up the Obama presidency and, in hindsight, it will become the greatest eight years in the pantheon of human progress. Obama will eventually become Martin Luther King, Abraham Lincoln, and Jesus Christ all rolled up into one.

But behind this, the liberal mind has crashed and burned. Its vague delusions of goodness are falling apart, flaming cinders in the wind. Liberals wander in psychotic grief throughout the land. The ideals to which they pledged their allegiance have been exposed as cover stories:

The ideal of open borders actually means: Let in so many immigrants they overwhelm public resources, while crimes escalate—all for the purpose of making chaos, whose only solution is the closing iron fist of the surveillance/police state.

The idea of one world united actually means: Under the rubric of international cooperation and friendship, keep sending companies and jobs overseas, decimating the economy and families—all for the purpose of making chaos, whose only solution is the closing iron fist of the surveillance/police state, and the government takeover of the economy.

The list of destructive intentions is much longer, and in every case the solution is the same.


power outside the matrix

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


But the presider over this end-game operation never made it into the White House.

And her addled liberal supporters are clueless on every level. They don’t see the forest for the trees, and they don’t even see the trees. They only know that their own narcissistic signaling devices, which broadcast how virtuously their precious hearts throb, are running out of juice. That’s all they ever cared about, and now that, too, is going away.

Their garbling gibbering politically correct psychobabble long ago replaced their minds, so they can’t begin to figure out what has happened and what is happening.

Their beloved symbols—Hollywood liberal celebrities—are saying, in sub-text, “Ignore my tears, I’m digging my fortified bunker deeper. Don’t bother me.”

People can call themselves liberals or progressives. But until they understand how their sentimental ideals have been used to launch destructive operations against the American people, they’re at best a collection of obstructionists who are preventing the dismantling of arch-Globalists.

Those Globalists intend to decimate the nation and drag it down into a bleak future—not a shred of independence or sovereignty left. Instead, America would be a mauled element of an abject planetary “utopia,” which is grotesquely celebrated as “sustainable.”

With justice for no one.

This is the liberal heritage.

This is what seeming-to-be-good has wrought.

This is what a vast pretense of virtue has brought to our door.

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.

Do people still read Brave New World?

Do people still read Brave New World?

by Jon Rappoport

October 14, 2016

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

Rule by technocracy—that is the subject of this article. In such a future, there would be no politicians. They would have been made extinct…

Huxley’s 1932 novel about a World State and its version of Utopia is still one of the most important and relevant novels of our time.

It is the companion piece to Orwell’s 1984. The overt brutal force has been removed from the equation in Brave New World. Instead: all births are synthetic, hatched in artificial womb factories, with accompanying genetic manipulation; no more nuclear families; no more monogamy; education is achieved through hypnotic sleep-learning; a caste system is engineered so the lower, less intelligent classes are happy with their lot, and the upper-level “alphas” occupy the top positions; the castes have little interest in associating with each other.

Technocracy has triumphed.

The theme of life, the basic theme, is Pleasure. Pleasures of the senses. Not of the mind, not of constructive action, certainly not of imagination. Pleasure keeps the citizens of the World State occupied…and if that fails, the ultimate backup is a drug called Soma, which relieves anxiety and depression and stimulates “happiness.”

There are many people living among us today who would opt for that life in a heartbeat. They would see no downside. “Well, of course. Sign me up. I’ve been trying to find that pleasure all along. I’ll take it.”

The 1932 technocrats of Brave New World found a key. Why should they waste time trying to inflict pain on the population as a control mechanism? Why should they risk rebellion and revolution? Go “positive.” Give people pleasure. Absolutely.

All older forms of government fade away. They were just crude experiments in the foothills of the one and only revolution: technology deployed to pacify the world.

By the way, in Brave New World, no one reads books. They’re unnecessary. They make no sense. The “better life” is already a living fact. What possible benefit could a book deliver?

Every time I read Brave New World I see complacent animals grazing in pastures. That’s the picture. Human animals at peace in the fields. Nothing to care about. Nothing to think about. Just bend and chew. Don’t worry, be happy.

As Patrick Wood mentions in his fine and highly recommended book, Technocracy Rising, Huxley began writing Brave New World as a parody of other utopian novels of his time, but he became fascinated with his own ideas along the way, and set his mind to the task of fleshing out a technological end-game civilization.

Brave New World reveals a landscape in which people would be unable to turn around and throw off what has been done to them. They would not consider it. They would have no basis for comparison. They would have no cultural memory. They are living in a universal super-welfare state. Their needs are satisfied—especially the central need: pleasure. It isn’t gained or worked for. It’s given. It’s a fact as basic as rain and sun. It’s there. It’s the shortest distance between the present moment and the next moment.

Isn’t this the fairy tale told about rich and famous celebrities? They can wake up in the morning thinking about what pleasure is immediately there for the taking. They have the means. They have the time. They have the opportunity. In Brave New World, everyone is that kind of creature. By necessity. There is no real choice. Their most base desires are their only desires. Their horizon is shortened.

Here are several choice quotes from Huxley’s masterwork:

“Hot tunnels alternated with cool tunnels. Coolness was wedded to discomfort in the form of hard X-rays. By the time they were decanted the embryos had a horror of cold. They were predestined to emigrate to the tropics, to be miner and acetate silk spinners and steel workers. Later on their minds would be made to endorse the judgment of their bodies. ‘We condition them to thrive on heat,’ concluded Mr. Foster. ‘Our colleagues upstairs will teach them to love it’.”

“Feeling lurks in that interval of time between desire and its consummation. Shorten that interval, break down all those old unnecessary barriers.”

“No pains have been spared to make your lives emotionally easy – to preserve you, so far as that is possible, from having emotions at all.”

“A gramme [of the pleasure drug Soma] is better than a damn.”

The foundation of Brave New World conditioning: with enough basic pleasure, there is no need to think, to contemplate, to assess, to investigate; there is no need to imagine new realities because the current one is more than sufficient; there is no need to rebel because when a person is attuned to pleasure as the highest value—and he has pleasure—what is there to object to?


Exit From the Matrix


Lee Silver, an enthusiastic molecular biologist at Princeton, has written a book, Remaking Eden (1998), about the future of gene science in society. This is how he sees things playing out:

“The GenRich—who account for ten percent of the American population—all carry synthetic genes. All aspects of the economy, the media, the entertainment industry, and the knowledge industry are controlled by members of the GenRich class….

“Naturals work as low-paid service providers or as laborers. [Eventually] the GenRich class and the Natural class will become entirely separate species with no ability to crossbreed, and with as much romantic interest in each other as a current human would have for a chimpanzee.

“Many think that it is inherently unfair for some people to have access to technologies that can provide advantages while others, less well-off, are forced to depend on chance alone, [but] American society adheres to the principle that personal liberty and personal fortune are the primary determinants of what individuals are allowed and able to do.

“Indeed, in a society that values individual freedom above all else, it is hard to find any legitimate basis for restricting the use of repro-genetics. I will argue [that] the use of reprogenetic technologies is inevitable. [W]hether we like it or not, the global marketplace will reign supreme.”

Of course, in the future Huxley describes in Brave New World, there is no marketplace. The powers-that-be have built a World State. It is run by a scientific elite. They have left behind all traditional forms of governing. Programs are followed.

That is all. That is enough.

This vision of technocracy clarifies the agenda. The New World Order eventually travels light years beyond political tyranny. What need is there for laws or courts or traditional office holders or even the inside game of bribery and special favors?

They were old; this is new.

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 passion of ants, the passion of humans

The passion of ants, the passion of humans

by Jon Rappoport

September 9, 2016

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

The passion of ants is for specialized, compartmentalized, automatic, repetitive work. The separate workers conspire to build the whole. Again and again.

The passion of humans starts with the individual. What does he want? Can he break through to the sensation and feeling and vision of what he wants, so that he moves into action?

Can he taste it and touch it and invent it?

Can he rise above the ants?

Can he throw off the restraints of the group and the propaganda of the group and group-think? Can he breathe the air of his own life? Can he exceed a simple pleasure/pain standard? Can he return to his own passion every day without making his pursuit of it mechanical?

Can he?

And through how many levels of small ambitions can he climb to see what he truly desires?

These are lives I’m talking about—the lives of individuals.

Schools do not teach this. If they could and did, the whole meaning of education would change. Teachers would be vested with the highest of purposes, and they would have to live up to the nature of their work.

It’s futile and foolish to wait for it to happen.

By the time of the age of consent, the individual is on his own, relative to what I’m discussing here.

Is he up to the challenge?

Most people define passion for what they truly desire as something beyond their reach. They see it out there in a future they’ll never pursue.

Essentially, they’re saying their own imagination doesn’t inspire them enough. Not enough to take action.

Here are notes I made prior to preparing my collection, Power Outside The Matrix:

“This is the true (and unspoken) tradition of the world: the mind is the ballast for imagination.”

“Through actual education, the mind becomes a sharp instrument. Literate, discerning, logical, capable of making fine distinctions.”

“On that basis of anchoring and grounding, the imagination is able to fly free and go anywhere…and solve problems, innovate out ahead of problems—inventing and creating on every level. Personal and societal.”

“Imagination invents the future. You invent your future with your imagination. Or you take up a default position and surrender to the future designed for you.”

“Imagination, by its natural processes, invents space. Psychological and spiritual claustrophobia has its roots in the absence of deploying imagination.”

“Logic and rational thought can work over the details of any envisioned (imagined) future. They are the troops on the ground.”

“Imagination looks for more space, new space, new energy. That’s what it does. It has no tolerance for boredom. It would rather go to sleep and wait for the next inspiration, the next call to action.”

“Logic is the human mirror for the way things work in the world, how things connect, how causes and effects string out, how processes develop, how information lines up. Among other benefits, logic is its own reward. It keeps the mind clear.”

“Once the basics of an education are fulfilled, the rest of the journey should deeply explore logic and imagination.”

Power Outside The Matrix takes up that journey—

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.

A principle of wholeness

A principle of wholeness

by Jon Rappoport

August 9, 2016

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

Suppose you had a community in which there were families but relatively few fathers. For various reasons, the fathers were absent, gone. But the mothers were there, and they had to raise the children.

A wholeness is gone. You can try to talk your way around it, but you can’t. The children are missing something, and that’s all there is to it.

Now you’re going to step in and “solve the problem.” One thing is certain: you’re going to come up with some bizarre plans, because the actual answer is the missing fathers.

That’s obvious to everyone.

But this is a tricky area, because the complexities of “solutions” have been piled up on each other for a long time. You have some very odd structures now. It seems you are wandering farther and farther afield.

If this were pure mathematics (which it isn’t), you’d have something like this: 1 plus 1 plus 1 equals 3. But then you took away a 1, and you still tried to get 3 as the answer. You would then find many 1’s which are not real 1’s and you would plug them into the equation and pretend it was all working correctly.

But it wasn’t and isn’t.

The answer is way back there where the 1’s went missing. They disappeared.

The fathers disappeared and stopped being fathers (if they ever started). Again, you can try to talk your way around this, but it doesn’t work.

Why did the fathers leave? This is a better starting point. Why did they become fathers if they were going to leave?

Can someone else make them come back? Highly doubtful.

If you could get a few hundred possible fathers-to-be in a room before they became fathers (could you do that?), perhaps you could ask a few questions. Do you think you’re going to become a father? Do you want to become a father? If you do become a father, what are you going to do next? Why do you want to be a father? What do you think the role of a father is? Is that role what you want?

Regardless, this is where the problem begins. Introducing huge amounts of money over time into that community, in the form of “programs,” isn’t going to carry the day.

This problem doesn’t have a cause that no one can ever see. It isn’t a great mystery. The cause surely isn’t something to be blotted out. Once you blot it out, what are your chances of solving the problem?

If missing fathers are the problem—and they are—and you try 4,567 other solutions to substitute for the missing father, what chance of success do you have?

If one major solution is empowering a gigantic organization called government to enact other solutions, what chance of success do you have? If the government is, in effect, standing in for the missing father, is this going to be an authentic remedy? Is it going to work for the child in the family?

No, it’s not.

Since the problem and its cause are so obvious, you might come to the conclusion that the people who are “in charge” of solving the problem don’t really want to solve it, because they’re busy looking at everything except the cause.

You might come to that conclusion.

If the missing fathers don’t want to solve the problem, and then the government doesn’t really want to solve the problem, that makes things worse.


Exit From the Matrix


What is a father?

To ask that question in these communities, and to listen to answers, in churches and schools and informal neighborhood conversations, does it possibly seem that the best people to engage in that dialogue are the people who actually live there? Is that remotely possible?

Are the government, and all sorts of outside experts, quite sure that such a dialogue, undertaken by the people who live there, will never result in any positive outcome? Are they quite sure that nothing good can come of this? Are they writing off the wisdom of the people who actually live there, and instead assuming that these people have nothing to offer?

And if so, is there a way to be more patronizing and dismissive at the same time?

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.

Brexit pushed the stock market down: O the horror

Brexit pushed the stock market down: O the horror

Stocks go up, go down: does it really mean anything?

by Jon Rappoport

July 1, 2016

An investor asked God, “Is the stock market an intrinsically woven part of the universe You created?”

And God said, “Only if you believe I wanted to create a new sucker every minute.”

In the wake of the Brexit vote, and in many other cases where an event is said to be “negative,” stocks plummet. Major media promote these downward actions as evidence that “something bad has happened,” and the “economy is suffering” because of it.

On the other hand, if the general trend of the stock market is up, and “new highs” are reached, media claim the economy is “recovering” or “in good shape,” or “booming.”

Indeed, the movements of the market are used as critiques of political and economic choices and happenings. “X policy-move shouldn’t have been taken, because look at what the market reaction was.”

We need to examine all this blather.

First of all, and this is the big one: what is the connection of the stock market to the companies whose stocks are being traded?

Is the whole landscape of buying and selling stocks intimately tied to those companies?

What is really going on?

Many people believe the sale of stock benefits a company. This is true when a privately held company goes public by issuing stock in what’s called an initial public offering (IPO). During the limited time period of the IPO, money from the sale of stock does go back to the company issuing it, and that money can used for company growth. Yes.

Later, the company can issue more stock in what’s called a follow-on offering, and then, too, money from the sale of the stock goes back to the company.

But…by far the greatest amount of activity in the stock market is the simple buying and selling of shares…and none of the ensuing profits and losses accrue to the companies whose shares are being traded. It’s a pure casino operation.

***This casino operation does nothing to benefit the companies in the way of adding cash to their assets.

The casino is all about trading, perception, prediction (and of course, price manipulation). “What do I think other people are thinking about Stock Z, and what should my response be? Should I buy Stock Z, should I sell it short (bet it goes down)?”

The ups and downs of stock prices have nothing to do with the “health of the economy,” whatever that is supposed to mean. The ups and downs occur according to what investors are willing to pay for a stock or what they are willing to sell it for. In the casino.

None of the action really reflects the condition of the companies whose stocks are for sale. None of the money from buying and selling reverts to the companies. It’s all gambling, all the time. That’s all.

If a company reports a loss of profits for the current year, yes, its stock price may go down. But that merely means stock investors believe it should go down and are willing to pay less for the stock (at the moment). However, the price of the stock might go up, even on the heels of a loss of profits. Or the price could stay the same. Whatever the price does has nothing to do with the condition of the company. It only reflects what casino players believe, because they are the buyers and sellers.

This is hard for some people to understand. They want to imagine that the stock market directly reflects the condition of the companies that issue stock. Wrong.

The market reflects perception of the bettors, plus manipulation (which isn’t the subject of this article).

“Let’s see. I think that other people think that I think stock A is going to go up. They’ll buy it, so I guess I should buy it…”

Idiot’s delight.

Perception of other people’s possible perception. That’s the market.

Of course, much of the trading these days is done automatically, by computers belonging to large investment funds. But that doesn’t change the basic reality—the buying and selling are removed from the companies whose stocks are being passed back and forth. Therefore, whether the prices go up or down has nothing to do with the financial health of those companies or the economy in general.

This stock market casino operation, its ebbs and flows, are fodder for media, who pretend the latest down or up is “how the overall economy is reacting to world events.” This is nonsense.

The overall economy does not equal the performance of the stock market. The performance of the market doesn’t equal the state of the overall economy.

Consider what can happen to a large retirement pension fund. The fund takes in money from employees. It will later pay back that money, plus “bonuses.” Meanwhile, the pension fund invests a great of the money it is holding in the stock market. It buys a variety of stocks and sells them and buys them and sells them. So if those stocks plummet and stay down, and the pension fund isn’t willing to ride out the storm in hopes that the fall will eventually turn into a rise, the pension fund will sell off those stocks and end up losing much money. It gambled in the casino with other people’s money, and it lost.

But even here, the basis of the loss was an incorrect perception/prediction about what was going to happen in the casino. It wasn’t about actualities of the economy.

So when “titans of finance” and media analysts blather about how, for example, Brexit caused a sudden drop in the market, and how this is an indicator of the sudden negative state of the economy, they’re blowing smoke. Assuming the titans didn’t manipulate the market to make it fall in the first place (a risky assumption), in order to fabricate a “gloomy outlook,” the plummeting market says nothing about the economy, any more than an analysis of falling profits in a Vegas casino says anything about the general state of the US economy.

“Stocks fell today on reports of rising oil prices…”

One, the falling stock prices have no direct impact on the companies whose stocks are being traded.

And two, falling stock prices have nothing to do with the price of oil. They might be connected to gamblers’ perceptions of what rising oil prices mean (at the moment), but that’s all.

Let me give you a loose analogy. Let’s say, in a casino, there is a game called One to Ten. Depending on the flow of business, there are usually about 1000 people in a room in Vegas, and each person has to bet on a number between one and ten. You’re one of those people. When all bets are in, if you bet on the number most other people bet on, you’ll win 50 cents for every dollar you bet. So you think, “Most people will pick a number in middle. Five. So I’ll bet on five, too.” You do. And indeed, this time 350 people bet on five. The other 650 people bet on various numbers, but no other number between one and ten garnered 350 bettors. So you won. This time.

While this little operation was going on, media anchors were stationed around the room. They were quickly broadcasting tidbits about floods, hurricanes, military build-ups, political campaigns, polls, celebrity arrests, Hollywood box office receipts, new genetic research, a terror attack in Pakistan, fracking, school picnics, climate change, a man who ate 300 hot dogs in two hours, and so on. And these anchors are claiming that the result of the bet you’re involved in is definitely connected to these events. They’re insisting on it.

That’s a picture of the day-to-day stock market plus what media are spreading around about the market.

The market is a massive and monumental goof for casino gamblers.

If it’s a measure of how the world is going, I’m selling orange groves on Saturn.

Here’s a final analogy. Bird droppings. You’re an investor, and you see there’s a trading market in bird droppings. You decide to put your money into this market.

The price of droppings goes up. You’re doing well.

One day, sitting at your lap-top in the back yard, you think, “Wait. These droppings are worthless. Of course, that doesn’t matter, but suppose a lot of other investors think that same thought I’m thinking right now. The price would go down. Are a lot of other people thinking my thought right now? Or are they going their merry way, buying more droppings because they see the price going up? Which is it?”

All around the world, other investors in bird droppings are having the same monologues with themselves.

Now, if enough of those people don’t care about the intrinsic worth of droppings, the market will hold. But if enough of them are worrying about what other investors might be thinking, they will sell their droppings, and the price will go down.

Prediction. Perception. Speculation about what other people are predicting and perceiving.

A share of IBM, once it has been unhooked from an IPO or a follow-on offering, has no more intrinsic worth than a package of traded bird droppings. People buy and sell that share based on what other investors might or might not be thinking about it.

That’s all.

“Power outages in three Eastern states have resulted in a severe depression of the bird dropping market. Analysts are worried and gloomy…”

They’re worried and gloomy because they’re supposed to connect world events to the market, in order to pick up their paychecks, and “worried and gloomy” is the easiest reaction to have.

If they admitted the power outages had no relation to, ahem, intrinsically worthless bird droppings, they might end up pumping gas in Death Valley or selling canned heat in the Sahara desert.

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.

Cartels of the Mind: a movie that never was

Cartels of the Mind: a movie that never was

by Jon Rappoport

June 27, 2016

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

“Dominoes of the collective begin to fall. The whole rotting structure begins to collapse, a wing here and a wing there, and the robots open their eyes and turn off their cameras.”

Several years ago, after reading an article of mine, a producer approached me about writing a movie script. He wasn’t sure whether he wanted it to be a documentary or a feature. But he wanted it to be “heroic,” he said. And long.

We had discussions. I sent him notes. The tentative title was, “Cartels of the Mind.”

He eventually wobbled, then disappeared.

Here are some of those preliminary notes. They’re not always sequential. And I’ve recently added one or two comments.


If you can’t see the background of a crime, you aren’t seeing the crime, you’re seeing the sensational effects, that’s all.

There are people who want their own minds to look exactly like the world. They want their minds to look like photographs of the world. This is what they strive for. The idea that they could invent something is so terrifying they opt instead for the world as it is.

This is what amused the surrealists. They started turning things upside down and inside out. They were reacting to humans who had made themselves into robots. Into robot cameras.

The Surveillance State is a robot camera. It captures everything, based on the premise that what isn’t Normal is dangerous.

The cartels of the world become the cartels of the mind.

At the outbreak of World War 2, the Council on Foreign Relations began making plans for the post-war world.

The question it posed was this: could America exist as a self-sufficient nation, or would it have to go outside its borders for vital resources?

Predictably, the answer was: imperial empire.

The US would not only need to obtain natural resources abroad, it would have to embark on endless conquest to assure continued access.

The CFR, of course, wasn’t just some think tank. It was connected to the highest levels of US government, through the State Department. A front for Rockefeller interests, it actually stood above the government.

Behind all its machinations was the presumption that planned societies were the future of the planet. Not open societies.

Through wars, clandestine operations, legislation, treaties, manipulation of nations’ debt, control of banks and money supplies, countries could be turned into “managed units”—and then, with the erasure of borders, combined into regions.

Increasingly, the populations of countries would be regulated and directed and held in thrall to the State.

And the individual? He would go the way of other extinct species.

For several decades, the pseudo-discipline called “social science” had been turning out reams of studies and reports on tribes, societal groupings, and so-called classes of people.

Deeply embedded in the social sciences were psychological warfare specialists who, after World War 2, emerged with a new academic status and new field of study: mass communications.

Their objective? The broadcasting of messages that would, in accordance with political goals, provoke hostility or pacified acceptance in the masses.

Hostility channeled into support of new wars; acceptance of greater domestic government control.

Nowhere in these formulas was the individual protected. He was considered a wild card, a loose cannon, and he needed to be demeaned, made an outsider, and characterized as a criminal who opposed the needs of the collective.

Collective=robot minds welded into one mind.

As the years and decades passed, this notion of the collective and its requirements, in a “humane civilization,” expanded. Never mind that out of view, the rich were getting richer and poor were getting poorer. That fact was downplayed, and the cover story–“share and care”—took center stage.

On every level of society, people were urged to think of themselves as part of a greater group. The individual and his hopes, his unique dreams, his desires and energies, his determination and will power…all these were portrayed as relics of an unworkable and deluded past.

In many cases, lone pioneers who were innovating in directions that could, in fact, benefit all of humanity, were absorbed into the one body of the collective, heralded as humane…and then dumped on the side of the road with their inventions, and forgotten.

In the planned society, no one rises above the mass, except those men who run and operate and propagandize the mass.

In order to affect the illusion of individual success, as a kind of safety valve for the yearnings of millions of people, the cult of celebrity emerged. But even there, extraordinary tales of rise and then precipitous fall, glory and then humiliation, were and are presented as cautionary melodramas.

This could happen to you. You would be exposed. You would suffer the consequences. Let others take the fall. Keep your mind blank. Do nothing unusual. Shorten your attention span. Disable your own mental machinery. Then you’ll never be tempted to stand out from the mass.

The onrush of technocracy gears its wild promises to genetic manipulation, brain-machine interfaces, and other automatic downloads assuring “greater life.” No effort required. Plug in, and ascend to new heights.

Freedom? Independence? Old flickering dreams vicariously viewed on a screen.

Individual greatness, imagination, creative power? A sunken galleon loaded with treasure that, upon closer investigation, was never there to begin with.

The Plan is all that is important. The plan involves universal surveillance, in order to map the lives of billions of people, move by move, in order to design systems of control within which those billions live, day to day.

But the worst outcome of all is: the individual cannot even conceive of his own life and future in large terms. The individual responds to tighter and control with a shrug, as if to say, “What difference does it make?”

He has bought the collectivist package. His own uniqueness and inner resources are submerged under layers of passive acceptance of the consensus.

And make no mistake about it, this consensus reality, for all its exaltation of the group, is not heraldic in any sense. The propagandized veneer covers a cynical exploitation of every man, woman, and child.

Strapped by an amnesia about his own freedom and what it can truly mean, the individual opts for a place in the collective gloom. He may grumble and complain, but he fits in.

He can’t remember another possibility.

Every enterprise in which he finds himself turns out to be a pale copy of the real thing.

The deep energies and power and desire for freedom remain untapped.


Exit From the Matrix


Yet a struggle continues to live. It lives in the hidden places of every individual who wants out, who wants to come back to himself, who wants to stride out on a stage.

Freedom and power again. The shattering of amnesia.

In this stolen nation.

…And so the extinct individual returns.

Petty little hungers and obsessions become great hungers.

Dominoes of the collective begin to fall. The whole rotting structure collapses, a wing here and a wing there, and the robots open their eyes and turn off their cameras.

The vast sticky web called “the people” begins to disintegrate in roaring cities and in the mind.

A new instructive message appears:

“Normal=crazy.”

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.