Category Archives: Freedom

In the year 2052 no one can read

In the year 2052 no one can read

by Jon Rappoport

November 5, 2017

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

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

JUDGE: What is the charge against John Doe?

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

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

PROSECUTOR: We have no record of him attending schools.

JUDGE: How is that possible?

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

JUDGE: What does he build?

PROSECUTOR: Shrines to freedom.

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

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

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

PROSECUTOR: Agreed, Your Honor.

JUDGE: Can he be kept in a sealed room?

PROSECUTOR: The shrinks say yes.

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

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

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

PROSECUTOR: I was thinking the same thing.

JUDGE: What does freedom feel like?

PROSECUTOR: Hard to say.

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

PROSECUTOR: Fascinating.

JUDGE: Psychotic, of course. Still…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

JUDGE: Which structure?

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

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

PROSECUTOR: A what?

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

PROSECUTOR: Where did you get THAT thought from?

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

PROSECUTOR: You mean to compare smart connections?

JUDGE: To…share ideas.

PROSECUTOR: What does that mean?

JUDGE: The way we’re sharing ideas now.

PROSECUTOR: Is that what we’re doing?

JUDGE: I’m not sure. Maybe…

PROSECUTOR: People talking to each other about ideas?

JUDGE: Strange.

PROSECUTOR: I doubt it would be a popular practice.

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

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

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

PROSECUTOR: Let me get back to you on that.

JUDGE: Is freedom an idea?

PROSECUTOR: It’s a virus.

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

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

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

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

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

PROSECUTOR: Agreed.

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

PROSECUTOR: Thank you, Your Honor.

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

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

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

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

JUDGE: Likewise. This will be interesting.

PROSECUTOR: Where is John Doe being held?

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

PROSECUTOR: Ironic. Never heard of it.

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

PROSECUTOR: Well, they would.

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

PROSECUTOR: They actually got to the end?

JUDGE: Yes. It caused a major flap…

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

If The Group sank below the waves

If The Group sank below the waves

by Jon Rappoport

October 27, 2017

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

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

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

They are wrong.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It’s called treason. A capital offense.

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

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

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

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

And everything goes downhill from there.

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

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

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

“I’ll kick them out.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That’s called a clue.

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

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

The Individual, his freedom, and victory

The Individual, his freedom, and victory

by Jon Rappoport

October 18, 2017

We are in a war.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The free individual isn’t shaped. He shapes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And against that, there is no argument.

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

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

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

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

That day will dawn.

But why wait?

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Is Brexit dying on the vine along with England?

Is Brexit dying on the vine along with England?

by Jon Rappoport

October 16, 2017

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It has to be put back.

Leave the EU and leave socialism.

No one said it would be easy.

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

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

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

To the people of Europe who still believe in freedom:

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

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

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

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

Why not? All was well.

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

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

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

It would go away.

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

The lords of government would brook no opposition.

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

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

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

The Provider was becoming the Enforcer.

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

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

And clamp down. Assert overt control.

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

To make a stew, heat and stir.

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

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

The operation is well underway.

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

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

So the struggle begins again.

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

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

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

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

But it begins in the mind.

And not the group mind.

Not in any group.

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

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

He carries the torch.

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

It was always so, and it is now.

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

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

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

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

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

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

That painted illusion is going away.

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

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

And can walk again.

Profound dissatisfaction and resistance can breed joy.

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

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

I say Europe will live again.

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

A truly free and open market

A truly free and open market

by Jon Rappoport

October 2, 2017

As an example, take modern medicine.

I’m not simply talking about health insurance companies competing for your dollar in a free market. Nor am I only talking about your ability to choose your own doctor.

I’m talking about health practitioners of every stripe free to care for patients, as long as they don’t use remedies that are more harmful than the standard allopathic modalities, for any given condition.

If you’ve been reading my work exposing, citation by citation, the destruction modern medicine wreaks on the population, you know natural practitioners can operate without danger of overstepping that boundary.

And if that were the case? If we were living in such a free and open health economy?

For one thing, independent research would be stimulated to the hilt. For another thing, alternative practitioners would mightily expand their territory. Patient choice would rule the day.

With practitioners no longer looking over their shoulders to watch what the government and medical boards are doing, we would have fair competition.

Let the patient chose his own method of managing his health.

Of course, that would shift responsibility from the State to the individual. There is nothing the State fears more than many, many individuals willing to step up to the plate on that score.

The State wants utter dependence and surrender, and nowhere is this more clearly spelled out than in the medical arena.

If the FDA approves a drug as safe and effective, no one will ever go to prison if the drug winds killing thousands of people. Indeed, the passive patient, relying on the FDA (government) for wisdom, will absorb the full force of the drug’s devastating impact. But no matter: the patient will have discharged his duty to the State. He has behaved correctly. His family can say that (and some families do) as he is lowered into his grave.

In a free and open health economy, one province or several provinces will take the lead. They will open their doors wide to natural practitioners, who will move in and set up shop. Many, many patients will follow, and suddenly that province’s economy will experience a sharp upturn. And the people (patients) who relocate to that province will be of high caliber, because they are willing to take responsibility for their own health choices.

Such people have already evaluated standard allopathic medicine. They have seen that the State’s seal of approval is no guarantee of protection from harm. Not by a long shot.

Such people understand there is a certain amount of risk in taking charge of their own health. They are willing to take the risk. And if, on occasion, they want to rely on a standard MD, they are willing to take that risk, too.

The State does everything it can to drop a curtain between questioning medical authority and choosing to defect from medical authority.

Regardless, over the past 50 years, we have seen an unprecedented explosion of natural health activity in the culture. This mirrors the rise of the individual.

This is, by and large, a positive development, despite so-called science experts pointing out a case here and there where, it is claimed, a patient should have consulted with a standard MD, and failing to do so cost him his life.

Every year in the US, the medical system kills 225,000 people and maims millions more. (B. Starfield, JAMA, July 26, 2000, “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?”)

These experts avoid that review and other supporting studies like the plague.

As well they should.

They want compliance. They want monopoly. They want the illusion of fantastic success. They want the individual to render up his health and life for adjudication before the totalitarian bar of decision.

This republic was not founded on that principle.

Therefore, the citizenry must be taught to forget there was a republic.

Coincidentally, the drugs help by inducing amnesia.

Nevertheless, millions of people are waking up.

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

The Free Individual is greater than the State

by Jon Rappoport

September 20, 2017

(To join our email list, click here.)

In a sane society, the Bill of Rights would be studied in great detail, in every school and college.

The historical incursions on, and the crimes against, the Bill of Rights would be laid bare and excoriated.

“Grand juries” of students would be formed to investigate, in detail, these incursions and crimes, and wherever possible track them to their sources.

Reading the Bill of Rights, the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution, it is plain that the natural rights of the individual are confirmed—and also, the attempt to exercise any sort of excessive power over the individual is shackled.

Why?

Because the Founders saw the handwriting on the wall, engraved for centuries in totalitarian regimes and theocracies.

Here are the basics of the Bill of Rights:

Freedom of speech, religion, and the press.

The right to bear arms.

Housing of soldiers: “No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”

Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.

Protection of rights to life, liberty, and property.

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”

“In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the common law.”

Excessive bails, fines, and punishments are forbidden.

“The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

What do these 10 Amendments say about the individual? They say he is of greater importance than the State.

They say the purpose of basic law is protection of the freedom of the individual.

They say that, no matter how many scurrilous critics and logic-choppers may come along and parse the Bill of Rights to their advantage and against the individual, these critics should be cast aside, at the very least.

They say that there is something potentially glorious in the individual.

They say today’s collectivists are deluded, and in many cases are consciously attempting to hijack the basic notion of freedom—and substitute instead, a plethora of free goods and services derived from the State, which collects overbearing taxes and invents money out of thin air, for the purpose of creating unfree and dependent individuals.

Most importantly, in today’s society, these 10 Amendments stand on their own, as robust and profound Ideas, no matter who first conceived them, no matter what those men’s motives may or may not have been at the time of conception.

The ideas are alive. Now.

Centers of education may promote the decimation of the Bill of Rights, may attack the primary sources, may try to wage war against these ideas, but their assault is transparent to those who can see and think.

Those little would-be dictators of the mind are themselves already slaves. And so they want to make other slaves.

Europe, whose great thinkers invented the cradle of liberty, is falling under the sway of collectivist vultures. As a group, those gnawing birds of prey are centered in the European Union, the “share and care” face of fascism.

During decades of unearthing what corrupt European and American fascists have been trying to achieve, I have seen individuals rise up from the swamp of sticky economic, political, and spiritual collectivism and reassert and regain their natural freedom.

It’s a sight to behold.

It embodies a dawn that reawakens the mind and spirit.

It’s a call to all of life.

It reestablishes the great adventure of living and making a future of one’s own choosing.

The education system blacks that out. Major media do, too.

The whole idea of public education, at the beginning, in America, was to educate children about what it meant to be a free and responsible citizen in the new Republic.

That mission was abandoned.

In the early 20th century, powerful foundations (Carnegie, at the forefront) completely derailed education by removing significant study of the founding documents of the nation. This was no accident. It was an effort to control society, to make it over in the image of worker-drones fitting into slots, for “the greatest good of the greatest number.”

From its inception, the Carnegie Foundation was consciously focused on the most effective way to control a population. Its first choice was war. In its absence, the number two method, it decided, was education.

The individual, nevertheless, still possesses his natural freedoms. These freedoms are prior to any laws enacted to confirm them.

But the individual has to find/assert those freedoms within himself, on his own.

His future rises and falls on that profound effort, which begins with recognizing he is separate from any and all forms of the collectivist “equality” glob…

William James, American philosopher (1902): “Probably a crab would be filled with a sense of personal outrage if it could hear us class it without ado or apology as a crustacean, and thus dispose of it. ‘I am no such thing,’ it would say; ‘I am myself, myself alone’.”

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Individual power and ethics: the conversation that never was

Individual power and ethics: the conversation that never was

by Jon Rappoport

August 7, 2017

It’s no accident that the concept of individual power is surrounded by clouds of timidity and fear and cultural resentment.

People are warned that touching it produces a substantial electric shock.

“Me? Individual power? I never said I was in favor of it. Great individual power? Don’t pin that on me. Who’s accusing me? I’ll sue them! I’m for humility in all things.”

Perhaps the most famous statement ever delivered on this subject came from Lord Acton (1887): “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

For many, this closes the book on discussion.

But in fact, it is a wobbling prelude.

What about the creative power of the individual?

Especially, what about that power when it is deployed by a person who has a personal code of ethics?

What if that code is summarized in the simple statement: I am free to do what I want to, as long as I don’t interfere with another person’s freedom?

We’re not talking about what happens when a king has a position of ultimate authority. That throne, of course, carries with it an implication of interfering with the freedom of the king’s subjects. The corruption is there from the start.

But the creative power of the individual, his goal to exert as much power as possible to fulfill his desires in the world, to launch and sustain an enterprise of his own choosing, to imagine and extend the reaches of such an enterprise—suppose he possesses ethics—suppose he refuses to interfere with, and override, the freedom of another person.

Many people have a fear of their own creative power, of what they would do if they removed the constraints on their own “proper place in the world.” Therefore, because of that fear, they oppose others having power.

Organized religion has always stuck its nose into the drama as well. What a religion claims is the ultimate power, and where it comes from, is inserted into the mix. A religion always assumes its picture of the Deity is the correct one, AND IT OWNS THAT PICTURE.

The notion of unlimited individual power, backed up by personal ethics, is anathema. It threatens the spiritual monopoly. So the religion invents cautionary tales that pile up into the sky.

One of the tales, time-honored, and adopted in one form or another by governments and “humanitarian groups” is: people are inherently weak and greedy, so allowing them to exercise ANY kind of power at all is madness. Instead, power must be managed by “the people,” by “those who care,” by “the needs of Mother Earth,” by “the Universe,” by “socialists,” by “economic and political planners (technocrats),” by “the oppressed (it’s their turn),” by “the big We,” by “international cooperation,” by “a wise global court (who runs it?),” by the man in the moon, by the beneficent aliens from the Galactic League…

Then there is language manipulation. An individual seeking to imagine and create his most profound dream as fact in the world is “acting like a god”—and that is a cardinal sin of the first order. (Therefore, be humble, be weak, be passive. You’ll earn a cosmic gold star on the blackboard.)

Or such an individual must be “a greedy capitalist,” representing “the worst system ever devised for human interaction.”

Or such an individual is “dangerous,” because “he places his needs before the needs of others.”

Or such an individual is “mentally ill,” because no one in his right mind would display such confidence in his own vision of his future.

In every case, the people behind promoting these perverse distortions want to wield power over others themselves. Quite a coincidence.

They’re always playing a shell game. They’re trying to take power from the individual and transfer it to themselves or those they support.

They always assume they know who “the good people” are, the people who won’t abuse power.

To put it in a slightly different way, they believe they don’t have the capacity to create and build an enterprise based on their deepest desires, if left to their own devices. Therefore, no one else should be allowed to.

They have no substantial ethics. Therefore, no one else has authentic ethics, either.

This discussion moves into the realm of “the many” vs. “the few.” It goes this way: suppose there are a few individuals who can, in fact, take their most profound vision and turn it into reality. They are the exception. For most of humanity, this is impossible. THEREFORE, stop the few. Why? Because their ability is inherently unfair.

That argument, rarely voiced, champions “democracy” as the lowest common denominator. Lift no one up. Instead, sink everyone in a shared swamp.

These days, this perverse approach has added a new topping: every difference of talent, will power, determination, ambition, imagination, creativity, refusal to surrender is a sign of privilege. Privilege is society’s bias. Eliminate it, thereby eliminating all the above qualities.

Then what remains? Nothing of substance.

If the independent individual looked outward to discover what standard he should uphold, what voice he should adopt, what theory he should cling to, what behavior he should imitate, he would cease being what he is in an hour.

He would order himself to stop thinking about power. It is the most loaded word and concept in this culture.

And naturally, it is also one of the most fruitful to contemplate, apart from the madding crowd.

Within it can be born great achievements and futures.

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Collectivist mind control: “save the planet”

Collectivist mind control: “save the planet”

by Jon Rappoport

August 6, 2017

“The planet wouldn’t need saving if willing prosecutors had gone after high-level criminals (corporate, banking, war-mongering) with hammer and tongs. Now, the very people who escaped such prosecution have emerged as the leaders of the ‘save the planet’ movement. That’s called a clue.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

The word “collectivism” sounds old-fashioned today. It’s supposed to.

It’s supposed to sound like a label from a bygone age when people were combing US government offices for hidden Soviet spies.

Collectivism is tied to other obsolete slogans like “Better dead than Red” and “America, love it or leave it.” In other words, we’re supposed to think collectivism was simply a trendy idea that ran out of steam.

You know, a bunch of crazy paranoids were warning everybody the sky was falling, but it wasn’t. They yelled COLLECTIVISM IS COMING, WATCH OUT, but nothing happened.

Well, the truth is, collectivism won its war.

So it changed its name. It became a thousand names behind a thousand masks.

If we win this fight to preserve freedom in America, will people understand what The Individual means? Or will we they be so brainwashed that they’ll preach and teach freedom for The Group, the Collective?

Consider the actions and words of the last few presidents. Have any of them made The Individual the basis of their rhetoric?

The answer, of course, is no. And Obama has been the worst of them in that regard. Obama is, you might say, the natural evolution of the eradication of The Individual. He’s focused all his attention on groups.

He bemoaned the unemployment rate in “the public sector,” which is the drone-core of the collective. He emphatically demeaned the individual entrepreneur (“you didn’t build that”).

Under Obama, the collective became a messianic force. As if, in its vague and undefined way, it would save us all.

Yet, for every significant enterprise in human history, the individual vision comes first.

It is the launching pad.

The energy and inspiration of one person is the thing without which nothing happens.

Where is this taught in our schools? Where do we hear this in churches? What corporations explain this? How many parents make this clear to their children?

The major media certainly don’t bother with it. Psychologists don’t study it or comment on it. Who is funding studies on the power and vision of the free individual?

The Individual is supposedly passe.

An overwhelming number of Americans can no longer conceive of themselves as free and powerful individuals.

I, for one, think about the free and independent individual every day. The very idea is a North Star that allows a person to navigate his life.

In uncountable ways, we are being drawn into the orbit of The Group. One group or another. We are told, directly or subtly, that everything we do is connected to other people, and that connection is the defining impulse which shows us what we are. We are THAT and nothing else.

Why did George Orwell write 1984 about Winston Smith, one individual? Because he wanted to show the effect of the all-consuming State on its primary target: one person. Is that the way the book is read and taught now?

Operation Mind Control, or collectivism, has triumphed so fully in our time that most people can’t imagine themselves as distinct and separate and free and powerful individuals. They feel guilt when they try. They feel they are betraying the Mass. They feel they are breaking the law. They feel they must retreat back to a position of safety. They feel that, if they step out in front of The Group, they are losing their innate “religion.”

Through devious means, the media twists “individuals” into “lone individuals,” a phrase we’re all too familiar with. These are the mysterious psychopaths who commit vicious crimes.

According to collectivism, to be saved IS to recognize that one is a cell inside an interdependent collection of cells. That is the premise. That’s the trendy thing to believe.

What do you think Globalism and the New World Order are all about? They are the apotheosis of The Group, disguised as humanitarian service to The Good.

This is a cold calculated propaganda operation. It sells because people, when they become aware of suffering, want to reach out and end it. That impulse is preyed upon by the Globalist vultures, twisted, redirected, and harvested.

On a personal level, many individuals become aware they can discover and invent visions of grand achievements and futures; then they hesitate; they balk, they feel alone; they don’t have the staying power to rebel against the Mass. They find a group into which they can retreat. They remain there. They hide from themselves there. They hope their self-induced amnesia will last. They invent reasons and stories and myths to explain their retreat. They seek confirmation they’ve made the right choice. They find other individuals like themselves, who’ve surrendered. They form bonds. They collectivize.

Now we are told the individual’s highest aspiration or vision must be service to the group. Thus the whole matter of “the greatest life” is presumed to be settled. It’s no longer worth re-thinking.

This, of course, is propaganda. In many ways, from many angles, it’s taught and implied in our schools. Children learn to parrot the appropriate phrases. They utter them proudly.

Look at how “one world striving together” has been used by Globalists in the last 65 years. We have, for example, the GATT Treaty, which gave birth to the World Trade Organization. And we have lesser treaties, like NAFTA and CAFTA, which were designed along the same lines.

These treaties have led to the enormous outsourcing of jobs and the flight of industrial factories. As Sir James Goldsmith pointed out, this is a completely criminal and insane policy. It means that the industrial countries have had to compete on impossible terms with countries where workers will produce goods for next to nothing.

It is economic suicide—planned economic suicide. Behind the psyop, this is the real and brutal face of the slogan, “We’re all in this together on planet Earth.”

From the World Trade Organization has come the pernicious standard called Harmonization. It means that food policy and medical policy and health policy and trade policy—and eventually military policy and limited free-speech policy and judicial policy—are all arranged on an international basis. No more sovereign choices and no more sovereign nations. Again, this is the real and brutal face of the collectivist slogan, “We’re all in this together on planet Earth.”

At the heart of the operation is the premise that the free and powerful individual, seeking his highest vision, seeking his greatest achievements, is defunct.

Some people, reading this, will think I’m against any group action, that I don’t believe group action has ever been effective. They miss my point entirely. I’m not talking about REAL group action. I’m talking about ENGINEERED group action devised to destroy life, under the guise of saving it.

And most of all, I’m talking about the individual human being SURRENDERING to the idea that he is unimportant, that he only counts in reference to other people, that he has no real power, no real imagination, no great vision, no great status.

Status ultimately is reserved for the collective.

In my life, I’ve known people, and I’ve seen people, who’ve launched and built and created enterprises of one kind or another…and then turned around and preached the primacy of the group.

Instead of standing as an example of what one person can do, a TRUTHFUL example, they betrayed all that and became advocates for the collective.

Some of these people have been co-opted, but many just failed to understand their own psychology. And then there were people who refused to think of others as individuals:

“Well, yes, I built that, but I know you can’t. So I’m here to help you, to put you into the mass, the group, the collective.”

Could they be more patronizing?

“Yes, I’m a big person, but you’re a little person. Don’t worry. I’ll show you the way. WE’RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER.”

And standing nearby, the real movers and shakers in the Globalist Club are cheering.

They live for the erasure of the individual. And they have lots of friends.

But here’s an irreversible clue. They don’t have THE INDIVIDUAL.

They never will.

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

Consider this idea: a college is formed on the basis of one question, aimed at each entering student: WHAT DO YOU REALLY WANT TO CREATE IN YOUR LIFE?

For four years, every student wrestles with that question, writes about it, talks about it—and every course comes back to that point of view. History, literature, biology, logic, mathematics—it’s all framed around the student learning and using that learning to answer the one burning question that will guide his future.

As an individual.

As an individual, shaking off the dead coils of The Collective.

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

If the EU goes down, all life ceases to exist

If the EU goes down, all life ceases to exist

by Jon Rappoport

July 16, 2017

I’ll get to the European Union in a minute, but first a bit of background.

System building—how do you do it? In particular, how do you build a perverse structure?

There are three sequential steps:

One: Secretly create the system.

Two: Once it’s up and running and established, act as if you’re a mere participant in the system.

Three: Claim that the system is absolutely necessary, and without it, things would collapse.

When those three steps have been accomplished, you can add other flourishes. For example, sometimes you can get away with saying the system was never created at all; it arose organically because there was a need for it. That’s a good one.

THE EU IS SUCH A SYSTEM.

The propaganda: “It wasn’t planned from the top. It came about as a response to the need for peace among nations, the need for a common market and a uniform currency, the need for an end to brutal nationalism, etc.”

Actually, the EU was created as an extension of World War 2 by other means. Hitler’s dream of a united Europe was accomplished, with a reborn Germany as the economic powerhouse. But other key players were involved: the Vatican, the City Of London, Swiss banks, etc. And after 1973, the Rockefeller Trilateral Commission. Globalists all.

The EU’s current support of the migrant flood into Europe is a case of: this is how we erase borders, destroy the traditions of separate cultures, take down separate nations once and for all, and make Europe into a single entity.

Brexit was “a disturbance in The Force,” but it is being used to advantage by the EU. In actual game theory (not the ludicrous version taught in universities), you must have threats to the system, in the wake of which the system survives. This “proves” the structure is sound and necessary, and continues to meet the needs of the people.

The EU is painted as a kind of heroic soldier who has endured many battles. This picture sells.

As time passes, expect more and more news stories featuring the propaganda theme, “The EU is on the comeback, stronger than ever.”

The truth is, the EU could vanish tomorrow, and the individual nations of Europe would find ways to connect, cooperate, and do business.

In fact, one or two adventurous countries could change the face of Europe (which tells you why the EU tries so hard to pass so many binding regulations that apply to all its members). Here is an example:

Suppose one European country decided to cancel all the odious EU regulations restricting the sale and use of nutritional supplements? Suppose the whole area of nutrition was turned over to the free choice of every citizen?

You can bet your bottom franc or pound that this nation would suddenly undergo an economic renaissance. Nutritional companies by the hundreds would set up shop. Citizens from all over Europe would move there. Jobs would multiply. In turn, this country would become a haven for all sorts of natural health practitioners and their clients.

Watching this happen, other European countries would follow suit. Suddenly, health freedom would become an economic tiger.

Big Pharma, one of the driving forces behind the EU, would be exposed as a pernicious monopoly. Never a bad thing.

Who knows how many other areas of the economy (aka free market) would suddenly reappear, free of repressive regulations?

What about GMO crops? From what I can discover, 50 GMO crops are permitted in Europe. A nation can submit a request to the EU to ban a GMO crop, and the EU makes the final decision. Suppose—if the EU vanished—one country stood up on its hind legs and declared: “We are banning ALL GMOs. If you live here, all your food will be non-GMO. That is our commitment.”

Do you think that might result in many people moving to that country?

Do you think the mega-agri GMO corporations favor the EU? Of course they do, because they believe that, in the long run, they can exert sufficient influence to have their way—whereas on a continent of separate and autonomous nations, the risk factor would be higher.

All ruthless mega-corporations embrace the EU. That is their preferred system: predators cooperating with other predators. Eventually, you look at the EU and the worst corporations in Europe, and you can’t tell the difference. They’re blood brothers.

Breaking up and dissolving the EU would smell very much like freedom, if enough citizens could remember the scent.

The EU is betting it can sustain control; its program of opening borders and letting in what amounts to a massive crime wave will somehow be given a pass by Europe’s traditional population. The EU is betting it has reduced the people of the continent to such a degree of passivity that any insult is accepted.

“The people don’t want freedom, they want the system.”

That’s a risky gamble.

The EU is showing its teeth for all to see. It’s essentially assaulting the population and daring it to rise up in rebellion.

Which is another aspect of real game theory: launch a series of insults and challenges and tests to those under your rule and see if you can grind them down further and further.

Europe was the cradle of individual liberty. Not China, not India, not Argentina, not Japan, not Bolivia, not Egypt. Europe. That’s why the Globalist EU has Europe in its sights and wants to flatten it.

The Matrix Revealed

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

The biggest systems of control are often built after the biggest wars. Those who engineer and finance those wars, on both sides, understand this. They draw up those systems, in the ashes of the prior conflict. It was always their intention. Just as key members of the Rockefeller Council on Foreign Relations were tasked with designing the Union Nations before World War 2 was finished, key Globalist players were already laying out the roadmap to the European Union at the same time.

You could say World War 2 was instigated and fought for the very purpose of bringing in these huge systems of post-war control.

War creates the perceived need for the systems.

Make no mistake about it, the ultimate plan is to erase all separate nations and turn them into distant memories.

Freedom would be the other distant memory.

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.

Robots are inventing their own languages

Robots are inventing their own languages

The programming and design of artificial intelligence

by Jon Rappoport

July 14, 2017

Along with assurances that we’re facing an imminent takeover of industrial production by robots and other artificial intelligence (AI), we’re also being told that AI can develop its own systems of communication and operation, without help from humans.

Here is a sprinkling of quotes from the mainstream and technical press:

The Atlantic, June 15, 2017: “When Facebook designed chatbots to negotiate with one another, the bots made up their own way of communicating.”

Tech Crunch, November 22, 2016: “Google’s AI translation tool seems to have invented its own secret internal language.”

Wired, March 16, 2017: “It Begins: Bots Are Learning to Chat in Their Own Language.”

The suggestion is: AI can innovate. It can size up situations and invent unforeseen and un-programmed strategies, in order to accomplish set goals.

Who benefits from making such suggestions? Those companies and researchers who want to make the public believe AI is quite, quite powerful, and despite the downside risks (AI takes over its own fate), holds great promise for the human race in the immediate future. “Don’t worry, folks, we’ll rein in AI and make it work for us.”

Beyond that, the beneficiaries are technocratic Globalists who are in the process of bringing about a new society in which AI is intelligent and prescient enough to regulate human affairs at all levels. It’s the science fiction “populations ruled by machines” fantasy made into fact.

“AI doesn’t just follow orders. It sees what humans can’t see, and it runs things with greater efficiency.”

Let’s move past the propaganda and state a few facts.

AI is not running its own show.

It isn’t innovating.

It isn’t creating its own languages.

It isn’t doing any of that.

AI operates within the parameters its human inventors establish.

Any honest AI designer will tell you that.

If, for example, an AI system is given a goal and a set of “options” for achieving the goal, AI will select which option is best ACCORDING TO STANDARDS ITS HUMAN OPERATORS HAVE PROGRAMMED INTO THE SYSTEM.

Think of it this way: AI is given a set of options; but it is also given instructions on how to select what is presumably the most effective option. So AI is bounded.

There is no choice. There is no freedom. AI isn’t “jumping ship.”

“We gave our robot Charlie the task of getting from Chicago to New York. The whole plan was laid out as a vast hiking trip, with internal street maps built in. But then Charlie suddenly took a cab to O’Hare and boarded a United jet for JFK…”

No he didn’t.

AI performs as it is programmed to perform, within set parameters.

“We sent Charlie to LA to marry the actress who ordered and paid for him. But then, at the church, Charlie suddenly said, “This is a mistake. You should go back to your first husband. He never had sex with that waitress in St, Louis. She was his sister, and he was trying to help her escape from a terrorist cell. He never told you that because then he would have had to tell you he isn’t a banker, he actually works for the CIA. He’s a good guy. Talk to him. The truth will set you both free…”

Won’t happen.

But this kind of thing will happen: “According to scientists at Blah-Blah University, programmed robots are not only capable of inventing solutions to problems that ‘go beyond their internal software,’ the robots also make choices that benefit people. They’re very similar to people, except they tend to be smarter and invent more effective courses of action…”

Sell it, sell it.

“Alice, a medical technician in Minneapolis, claims her robot saved her life. ‘I was on the verge of swallowing a whole bunch of pills, but Charlie came to the rescue. He showed up in my bathroom and took the pills out of my hand. I learned something important that day. My free choice is important, but kindness and concern are more important. Charlie is the most vital companion in my life…’”

Sell it, sell it.

And of course, we’ll see more debates and court cases featuring questions about robots having rights, “just like humans.”

***Actually, in an entirely illogical fashion, we’ll see more and more “evidence” showing humans don’t have free will, because their brains dictate all thought and action, while robots will be touted as “free and creative.”

Some college professor will argue robots should be granted more “privileges” than humans, because the robots aren’t inherently “prejudiced.”

Another professor will insist that robots must be subjected to committee investigations, to make sure they aren’t “racist.”

“Today, in New York, a former Burger King employee, who is a refugee from Somalia, filed suit against a robot named Charlie, claiming Charlie uttered a racial slur while ordering a cheeseburger for his employer, a wealthy real estate developer…”

Behind all this, the fact remains that, no matter how many complex layers of “decision-making” are programmed into AI, the machine is always acting within rules and guidelines laid out in advance. It is never choosing.

Individual humans are capable of free choice, and are also capable of changing their own rules and standards.

Humans are free to say they aren’t free, as well, if they want to.

Let me make a psychological point here. There are many people who want to dominate relationships. They want to be in charge. They will want robots. They will want sophisticated robots THAT SEEM TO BE CHOOSING TO COMPLY WITH THEIR EVERY WISH AND DEMAND. These people will believe the robots are real and alive and human, in order to fulfill a fantasy in which they have found partners who want to go along with their agenda.

This is a pretty good definition of psychosis.

The AI designers and inventors and technicians tend to have their own bias. They want to believe they are creating life. They don’t want to think they are just putting together machines. That isn’t enough. The technocratic impulse involves faith in MACHINES AS LIVING ENTITIES.

Thus, we arrive at all sorts of myths and fairy tales about humans merging with machines, to arrive at a new frontier, where, for example, human brains hooked up to super-computers will result in higher consciousness and even the invocation of God.

Technocrats will say, do, and believe anything to turn machines into what machines aren’t.

They’ve crucially abandoned THEMSELVES and their own potential; so all they have left is THE MACHINE.

And if you think these technocrats should be allowed within a thousand miles of State power, I have communes for sale on Jupiter. Naturally, these utopias are run from the top by robots. They know what’s best for you.

Finally, understand this about propaganda: Those who control the output of information will admit to problems and mistakes with the issue they are promoting. Such confessions add to the “reality” of the information. And naturally, the propagandists will also claim that the problems can be solved. In the case of robots and AI, the problems are couched in terms of bots taking power into their own hands—but this “unexpected” situation a) demonstrates how capable bots are, and b) the power can be dialed back and modulated. So all is well. The future is bright.

It’s bright, if you want planned societies run by AI, where humans are fitted into slots, and algorithms determine who eats, who doesn’t, who has access to water and who doesn’t, how much energy can be used by each human, and all production and distribution are controlled from a central planning center.

Unless freedom lives—human freedom—you’ll be treated to something like this:

“Today, executives at the North American Union headquarters announced that several key bots broke through their programming and invented a new solution for clean water distribution to the population. This innovation will guarantee a more equitable water supply for millions of citizens. Control over the ‘rebel bots’ has been re-established, and their ‘amazing solution’ will now be incorporated into their standard operating framework. Three polls indicate that a lofty 68% of respondents support the bots in their efforts to better serve us…”

power outside the matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.