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.

I identify as a horse. No, really. I do.

I identify as a horse. No, really. I do.

by Jon Rappoport

May 10, 2016

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

“Faced with two estranged parents in utter disagreement about their daughter’s wish to be a boy, a British Columbia Supreme Court judge has appointed the child a legal guardian to protect her interests… The father not only wants his daughter to cease taking hormone blockers but also to cease all contact with transgender activists or transgender-friendly therapists…Though the case is about whether the 11-year-old can give informed consent to such serious medical treatment, which is intended to delay the onset of female puberty, the judge appears to have already conceded the point by referring to the girl by her preferred, male, initials, J.K., and accepting her male self-identification.” (lifesitenews.com, “Court orders dad to start treating his 11-year-old daughter as a boy,” 5/6/16)

I’ve decided I’m Nyquist, the winner of last weekend’s Kentucky Derby. This in no way subtracts from, or replaces, the Nyquist who ran the race in 2:01.31.

I just want to be Nyquist in my own way. So I’ve moved into a barn in Kentucky (undisclosed location), with other horses who will not be named. They are, for the most part, friendly. I believe they’re on the way accepting me as one of their own.

In the morning, I leave my stall and trot out into a large field where I nibble grass and cavort. It’s much better than working at the Starbucks.

I don’t plan on entering races, but who knows? Do you believe a court will dare stop me if I decide to join a contest at a small track? I don’t think so. It would abridge my right to determine my own category of existence, even if I can’t find a jockey who would saddle and ride me. If I say I’m Nyquist, I’m Nyquist.

Okay, in the interest of avoiding conflict, I’m not Nyquist. I’m Nyquist Two. I’m Ny2. That’s my new name. Ny2.

The question has arisen: what drugs should I be taking? I have found a doctor at the US National Institutes of Health who believes he can design a protocol that will, to a significant degree, turn me into a horse.

How will that change my thoughts? I’m already thinking like a horse, so it’s not a problem, but we’re shooting for the creation of equine impulses to bolster, as it were, my mental processes.

In other words, horse feelings to support horse thinking.

I really want to get into politics. How do you imagine I’ll go over as a self-identifying horse running for Congress in Kentucky? I’m already in talks with a public relations firm, and they believe my prospects are strong. Very strong.

Once elected, I would certainly cause a stir in Washington. No doubt about that.

“Talking horse votes to expand war in Middle East.”

“Horse’s ass wants more war.” Let some columnist or blogger take that tack and I’ll sue for gender discrimination. There are laws. Who’ll risk running afoul of the new identity mandates?

From Congress to the Senate—that’s a manageable proposition. And then, of course, when Hillary runs for her second term, why wouldn’t she slot me on the ticket as her vice-president? I see a clear path. By that time, I’m sure she’ll need all the help she can get.

After she retires to some distant location with Huma, I would be a no-brainer for the 2024 Oval race. I, Ny2, in the White House. Horse-in-Chief. I would live and do the business of the nation on the lawn.

“Animal wisdom.” It rings true. Back to Nature for the most powerful country in the world. Are you kidding? The support would rise like a great wave. Who better to advance the environmental agenda?

“Ny2 decrees 50-percent cut in US energy production, to save the planet.” If you think a 75-year-old socialist riled up the college kids, watch me go to work. By the time I’m finished, the word “human” will be anathema. “Human bias=Privilege.”

I’m ahead of the curve, perfectly positioned.

Aren’t we on the cusp of realizing that everything connected with the dominant species in the world is destructive?

All it takes is a final push over the edge.

Depopulation won’t need a top-down operation. Suicide will become the number-one social-media obsession. “What’s holding you back, Human? Do your duty now, for the planet. Off yourself creatively on YouTube.” People will be lining up, vying for attention. “Day by day, watch me stop eating, all the way to the end, in a homeless shelter with the poor.”

I will appoint my favorites—dogs, cats, cheetahs, mice, snakes, hippos, scorpions, and koala bears—to key posts in my administration. I’ll open the door to unlimited genetic re-configurations in the population.


Exit From the Matrix


And I’ll tell you this. I believe, by the end of my second term as President, I’ll be able to enter and win the Triple Crown. The Derby, Preakness, Belmont. Not because I’ll finish first, but because no one will care where in the field I rank at the wire. They’ll need and want to declare me the winner and champion. Arbitrarily.

You don’t think so?

You don’t have your finger on the pulse.

You’re hopelessly mired in the past—where all the trouble was.

We’re going to a far, far better place. Finally.

I see it as clearly as I see the overwhelming acclaim for surgical castration.

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 psyop called Reality

The psyop called Reality

by Jon Rappoport

February 6, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

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

“People want one story line. Smooth, with no fractures. So that’s what mind-engineers give them. Which tells you what the surrealists were doing. They were blasting the single plot line to pieces and rearranging the bits in fantastical ways. They were disturbing the trance. They were inventing new space and time.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

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, were 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.”

“In a vast subterranean cavern of the unconscious, people are wishing an artist would step forward who can paint an apple so real it can’t be distinguished from an apple on a tree. That, hopefully, will put an end to all creation, invention, imagination. Then everyone can say, ‘Imagination at its highest point gives us nothing beyond what is already there, and we already have that.’”

“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 is inventing his own reality, 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.”

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.