Category Archives: Perverse Magicians

The psyop to neuter The Rebel

The psyop to neuter The Rebel

by Jon Rappoport

July 6, 2015

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

If you want to track a civilization as it collapses, watch what happens to the concept of the rebel.

On a profound level, mass shootings and assassinations (whether staged or not) are used to define the ever-present “lone assassin” as the REPRESENTATION AND THE SYMBOL OF WHAT THE INDEPENDENT INDIVIDUAL IS.

You’re a separate and distinct individual? An outsider? Watch out. Overnight, you could turn into a raging killer.

You happen to know an outsider, a loner? He’s dangerous. He doesn’t live by the rules the rest of us accept. He’s deranged. Stay away from him. Shun him. And if you see the slightest indication of (insert your own term here), report him to the authorities.

“See a rebel, say something,” to paraphrase the DHS motto.

Any human being who has courage, intelligence, eyes to see, and a determination to express his power in uncompromising terms can now be redefined as a potential threat to the stability of society—if he criticizes the prevailing Authority.

From the 1960s onward—starting with Lee Oswald and the assassination of JFK—the whole idea of “the rebel” with power has been sequentially updated and repackaged. This is intentional.

The objective is to equate “rebel” with a whole host of qualities—e.g., runaway self-serving paranoia; random destruction; out-of-control drug use; generalized hatred; the commission of crimes—qualities that defeat the very notion of powerful opposition to fascist authority:

On a lesser, “commercialized” level, the new rebel can define himself by merely showing up at a concert to scream and drink heavily and break something, having already dressed to make a dissident fashion statement. He can take an afternoon off from college classes and have his arms tattooed. All the while, of course, he functions as an avid consumer of mainstream corporate products.

You even have people who, considering themselves rebels of the first order, support a government that spies on its people 24/7, launches military attacks all over the world, and now funds a Manhattan Project to map every move of the 100 billion neurons of the brain, for the ultimate purpose of controlling it.

More than ever, the individual has to explore and discover, with intelligence, a position that is FOR himself and AGAINST the concocted and sustained illusion called consensus reality.

When the individual embarks on this path, the external false definitions of him as rebel or outsider or mentally ill or criminal no longer matter. Instead, what matters is his deepest nature.

Even going back as far as the 1950s, the so-called decade of conformity, psyops professionals sculpted notions of The Rebel: He was the person who didn’t want to take part in the emerging bland corporate culture.

He was imagined and presented as troubled, morose, a wobbly unfocused JD Salinger Holden Caulfield, or a beatnik, a Madison Avenue caricature of somebody who opposed Madison Avenue.

In other words, the people who were shaping the consumer culture were creating the image of the rebel as a cartoon figure who just didn’t want to buy into “the good life.”

Time Magazine ran a cover story on the beatniks, and characterized them as a disaffected trend. Marlon Brando, heading up a bunch of moronic motorcycle riders, invaded a town of pleasant clueless citizens and took it over, wreaking destruction. The 1953 movie was The Wild One. James Dean, who had the same trouble Brando did in articulating a complete sentence, was “the rebel without a cause” in the “iconic film” of the same name. He raced cars toward cliffs because his father couldn’t understand him.

These were all puff pieces designed to make rebels look ridiculous, and they worked. They also functioned to transmit the idea to young people that being a rebel should be a showbiz affectation. That worked, too.

Then the 1960s arrived. Flower children, in part invented by the major media, would surely take over the world and dethrone fascist authority with rainbows. San Francisco was the epicenter. But Haight-Ashbury, where the flowers and the weed were magically growing out of the sidewalks, turned into a speed, acid, and heroin nightmare, a playground for psychopaths to cash in and steal and destroy lives. The CIA, of course, gave the LSD culture a major push.

For all that the anti-war movement eventually accomplished in ending the Vietnam war crime, in the aftermath all those college students who had been in the streets—once the fear of being drafted was gone—scurried into counselors’ offices to see where they might fit into the job market after graduation. The military industrial complex took its profits and moved on, undeterred.

The idea of the rebel was gone. It later resurfaced as The Cocaine Dealer, the archangel of the 1980s.

And so forth and so on. All these incarnations of The Rebel were artificially created and sustained as psyops, for the purpose of deflating attempts at genuine and powerful rebellion. And, at bottom, the idea was to discredit the Individual, in favor of The Group.

Now, in our collectivist society of 2015, The Group, as a rapidly expanding victim class, is the government’s number one project. While extolling this group as heroic and in constant need of help, the government is doing everything it can to crash the economy and widen the population of victims. It’s a straight con. “We’re here to make you worse off while we lift you up.”

In the psyop to demean, distort, and squash the rebel, there is a single obvious common denominator: the establishment media are doing the defining; they are the ones who are setting the parameters and making the descriptions; they are the ones who build the cartoons; looking down their noses, pretending to a degree of sympathy, they paint one unflattering picture after another of what the rebel is and does and says; they have co-opted the whole game.

These days, the ultimate rebels, the media would have you believe, are “the Tea Party and their affiliated gun-toting racist bitter clingers who have religion.” Another distorted unflattering portrait, meant not only to drive people away from the Tea Party, but also to prove the guilt, by association, of any person who says the federal government is unconstitutional and out of control.

“All the fascism is on the political Right. There can be no fascism on the Left.” This is the major domestic policy of this administration—this absurd assertion.

The Rebel is real. He has been covered up by media fabrications and caricatures.

You can take a whole host of political films and television series of the past 50 years, and look at them for signs of the Rebel: Seven Days in May, Advise and Consent, The Candidate, The Seduction of Joe Tynan, Dave, Primary Colors, The Contender, Good Night and Good Luck, The American President, West Wing, Scandal, The Newsroom…

Good acting, bad acting, drama, message—at the end you’re looking for the core. What do the rebel heroes really stand for? What are their principles? It’s all bland. It’s vague. It has the posturing of importance, but little else.

As I was finishing this piece, a friend wrote with a quote attributed to Robert Anton Wilson: “The universe is a war between reality programmers.”

This is exactly where the real rebel enters the scene. He’s not trying to program people. Freedom means cutting loose from programming.

The rebel dismantles inhibiting and artificial structures.

He doesn’t go to the market and choose which reality program he wants. They’re all used up as soon as they come out of the package.

The political fancy or trend or program of the moment is a hardened dream somebody borrowed to make mincemeat out of the population. The rebel has no allegiance to any of this.

Albert Camus one wrote: “The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience. It would be easy, however, to destroy that good conscience by shouting to them: if you want the happiness of the people, let them speak out and tell what kind of happiness they want and what kind they don’t want! But, in truth, the very ones who make use of such alibis know they are lies; they leave to their intellectuals on duty the chore of believing in them and of proving that religion, patriotism, and justice need for their survival the sacrifice of freedom.”

“THIS or THAT” is the history of Earth: choose reality program A or B. The choice was always a con.

Exit From the Matrix

We’re well into a time period when the experts and scientific authorities are settling on the human being as a biological machine that can only respond to programming. That’s their view and their default position.

It’s sheer madness, of course, but what else do you expect? We’re in an intense technological age, and people are obsessed with making things run smoother. They treat their precious little algorithms for control like the Crown Jewels. They’re terribly enthusiastic about the problem they’re solving, and that problem is us.

We’re the wild cards, a fact which they take to be result of our improper and incomplete conditioning. They aim to fix that.

There is—and has been, for a long time—a blended sequence in operation: a) observe; b) predict; c) control; d) re-create. “Well, we can see many patterns in this society. So we can make some predictions about what is going to happen. Actually, if we covertly introduce certain elements from the outside, we can control what happens. Why not stop diddling around and just make the whole thing over? Why not reshape humans?”

Having decided that, the battle begins between competing programmers of the mind. Which program for humans is better?

The rebel is against all such programming, no matter how “good and right” it sounds. “Good” and “right” are the traps:

“Well, certainly we could make a list of qualities we want all people to have. You know, the best qualities, like bravery and determination. Who could be against that? So suppose we could actually program such qualities into humans? Wouldn’t that be a fine thing? Then people would just BE that way…”

The ultimate rebellion is against programming, whatever it looks like, wherever it occurs.

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 stimulus-response Empire

The stimulus-response Empire

by Jon Rappoport

June 25, 2015

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

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

I’ve spent the past 30 years analyzing, taking apart, and exposing highly centralized structures:

Government, supra-government, corporate, energy, intelligence, education, medical, mind-control, media, organized-religion structures; those are some of the targets.

They all operate on the basis of stimulus-response.

The elite future is stimulus-response. It’s based on the premise that humans are inherently (biologically) programmed to be dangerous and the programming must change. In other words, a better Pavlovian dog must be created.

Stimulus-response has been the guiding principle of elite rule since the dawn of history. The priest-class searches for the most effective inputs it can find, which in turn will produce the desired responses from the population.

Mainstream media, which are actually disseminated propaganda, aim to produce three overall responses to stimuli: a) “conflicts and major problems are never resolved”; b) “I should be afraid”; and c) “this is all too confusing,” which results in viewers and readers sinking into passivity.

For the most part, political leaders have paid no attention to the idea of freedom, regardless of which documents they’ve signed and given lip-service to. Why? Because freedom implies something beyond stimulus-response. Freedom implies action by choice. And politicians know their power depends on managing conditioned response in populations.

In that light, the 20th century was the century of PR, advertising, propaganda, and it was also the launching pad for a number of drugs targeting the brain and its responses.

But now, further technological paths are being followed. The alteration of the human genetic structure. The probing of brains with electronic interventions, so that, for example, it will be possible to insert images directly into the visual cortex, bypassing what humans would ordinarily perceive.

This is called the transhumanist agenda, and it is. But it is also stimulus-response at a more sophisticated level. And it is another way of attempting to eliminate freedom, while never admitting that freedom exists in the first place.

What are the requirements of a future society in which conditioned responses are locked down and pervasive, on chemical, biological, and electronic levels? Well, there is one basic requirement:

The population must believe they are happy.

That’s the end game. That’s the triumph of Brave New World over 1984.

“Happiness” is an elusive word. It can refer to a number of feelings and thoughts.

If you recall, from your childhood, a peak experience, a few moments of sheer ecstasy, you are certainly remembering happiness. But you are also remembering freedom.

That’s not what the elite controllers are aiming to produce as a mass societal effect. No; for them to succeed, they must create, in people, an article of faith:

People must believe that happiness is shallow, tepid, “average.” If they accept that premise, the game is over.

Because, through genetic manipulation, through chemicals, through electronics, that happiness-target stands a chance of being reached.

Then you would have a population ruled by stimulus-response, by conditioned reflex—a population that nevertheless interprets that state of affairs as acceptable, because it carries “happiness” with it.

This is how you drastically reduce the possibility of unending rebellion, revolution, and war between the people and the leaders.

This is the goal of elite empire.

Counter to that, as I mentioned above, is freedom.

In its fullness, freedom implies a personal and individual knowing that one is free. No doubts, no conditions.

Travel anywhere is the world, visit every college and university from Tierra del Fuego to the North Pole, and count how many courses are called Freedom. Count how many courses are taught with the explicit intent of exploring, deeply, what individual freedom means and is.

If, reading this far, you are beginning to suspect that the discredited and ugly word “philosophy” is creeping in, you’re right. Yes, that old saw, that ridiculous subject.

Back in the Stone Age, when I went to college, I majored in it. I have a good memory, and I can tell you that nowhere in the department’s curriculum was there a serious and extensive treatment of individual freedom.

Philosophy is supposed to take up and illuminate fundamental questions of existence and fundamental conflicts embedded in opposing views.

Such as the conflict I’m discussing here: stimulus-response vs. freedom.

Exit From the Matrix

Let me boil this titanic issue down to something I’ve introduced before: my analysis of two concepts: understanding and meaning.

You are reading this article, these words on the page. If you are nothing more than responses to stimuli, if you are merely atoms in motion, none of which are conscious in and of themselves, then how can you possibly understand the meaning of what you are reading?

Yet you do understand the meaning of the words.

So do I.

We are not merely atoms in motion. We are not merely matter. We are not merely pre-programmed responses to stimuli.

Which is a way of saying: we can choose, we can decide, we are free, each one of us.

The princes of Pavlov would have us accept that there is no “you” or “I.” Instead, there is the just the unceasing flow of particles in the universe. That’s all.

But again, you are here, right now. You, beyond particles, are reading these words and you understand them.

This is what has happened to the human race, through unceasing tons of propaganda and false science: people have come to believe that the arena of stimulus-response is gigantic. But the opposite is true:

It is individual freedom that is gigantic.

Which leads to the question every individual must ask himself: what is my freedom for?

For what action?

Is it for bowing down to the Reality that has been artificially constructed for me and everyone else?

Or is it for imagining and creating and inventing the reality and the future I most profoundly desire?

Now we are getting to the pivot of this civilization. Which way will it ultimately swing? Toward the stimulus-response empire, or toward individual power?

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.

Bill Gates: the new Pavlov

by Jon Rappoport

June 20, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

Are human beings becoming social constructs?

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

It’s all geared to produce people who are artificial constructs.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Exit From the Matrix

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

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

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

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

Sometimes it rears its head in the middle of the night, and the dreamer awakes and believes he was having a nightmare.

But sooner or later, he realizes he was visiting a part of himself unlike anything in the society around him.

He knows it.

And then, eventually, he asks himself: what is my freedom for?

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

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

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 OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

The Truman Show, Facebook, The Social Network: life under a dome

The Truman Show, Facebook, The Social Network: life under a dome

by Jon Rappoport

June 8, 2015

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

“Huxley’s Brave New World trumps Orwell’s 1984, because it posits pleasure as the ultimate control device. Genetic and pharmaceutical innovators will engineer brains along a narrow bounded channel of satisfaction. Brave New World is a countrified suburb of the mind. Accept all the feedback signals and you’ll have your miniature package of ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’. You’ll have the outcome, as if you’d done something to gain it, when in fact no effort was necessary. Skip right to the end of the story. You’re already under the dome. There was no story.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

The 1998 film, The Truman Show, presents a character, Truman Burbank, who unknowingly stars in a 30-year soap opera/reality show about his own life, under a giant dome whose boundaries are hidden from him. The show is broadcast to a global audience of billions.

The fake town Truman lives in, Seahaven, is populated by a massive number of actors playing real people. Seahaven’s creator, director, executive producer, and god, Christof (“Cue the sun”), is convinced that the deception is benign, because Truman’s life in the synthetic town is far happier than anything he could find in the real world, a “sick place.”

As Truman begins to suspect he’s existing in an elaborate set, a movement arises, among the show’s audience, who avidly root for him to escape. That becomes the hook. That becomes the primary item of suspense and tension.

Watching the film, we see the false reality and the viewing audience hoping for Truman’s liberation.

That viewing audience, of course, is vicariously wishing and hoping for their own rescue, because they, too, are trapped. Their real world is very much like Truman’s. But, when all is said and done, audience is audience. For isolated moments, the adrenaline pumps, the highs are felt, and then “normality” sets in.

Truman escaped; wonderful; change the channel; find another program.

Now, if we had a Truman Show II, where Truman lives in the real world and talks with people and shares his 30-year illusion…we might find some truly interesting material.

The escapee reflects on his velvet-lined trap. The escapee recalls how it felt to discover, bit by bit, the trap. The escapee meets the creator (Christof). The escapee sits down with a few loyal viewers, who followed his artificial existence for the full 30 years, and they explain their fascination with the Show. They see Truman now, beyond the character they rooted for inside their television sets.

“You know, Truman, I don’t find you as interesting in the flesh.”

“Really? Why not?”

“Because the Show allowed me to look in on a whole different world.”

“But now?”

“You’re here, in my world. Now we’re both trapped in something we can’t see clearly. We’re inside it.”

Cue Facebook. It was inevitable that audience would want to become actor, and Facebook was invented, with CIA-connected money, in order to make that happen (while also providing an ideal voluntary framework of users to accommodate the voracious appetite of the Surveillance State).

Facebook is a safety valve: “Here, people, now you can star in your own media creation. Reveal mundane details about your lives and share them with other FB stars.”

The award-winning 2010 film, The Social Network, is a fictional representation of Facebook’s creation. At the heart of the film is a legal/money struggle over FB’s ownership. In other words, the film is a melodrama about who profits from a meaningless business that allows audience to become small-time actor.

Facebook is The Truman Show happening on the Internet. “Celebrate your lives under the dome by connecting with other inhabitants—picnic photos, vacation videos, all the acceptable details of a fabricated existence…and you can demean a few personal and petty enemies along the way.”

The Surveillance State, of which FB is a functioning piece, is The Truman Show control room, where directors and technicians deploy cameras to watch all the Truman Burbanks live out their lives.

In both cases, the promise is the same: toe the line and you’ll be happy and protected.

These days, we have another dome—the Capitol, under which the 535 members of the US Congress do their work. Several of these elected officials are protesting the secrecy surrounding the negotiations and content of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) treaty.

Yet not one of them is willing, so far, to step forward and reveal, in complete detail, what he knows about the treaty, which will create a form of international governance over the United States.

These 535 legislators are also living in a synthetic Seahaven. They’re Truman Burbanks, minus the desire to escape. They would doom the population of America to a future of mega-corporate oligarchy, rather than risk spending a night in jail for breaking silence.

Their Truman Show is playing 24/7. The viewing audience isn’t rooting hard for them to break protocol on the TPP, because the audience holds little hope for such an outcome, based on past performance.

The public approval rating for Congress is hovering at about 19%. You can’t get sink lower than that. But their Truman Show goes on. Ratings in that venue don’t matter.

Viewership and readership for large mainstream news outlets have been on a fade for years. That Truman Show endures because the media companies are actively constructing and maintaining the synthetic Seahaven. Without them, it would disappear.

Christof: “We accept the reality of the world with which we are presented, it’s as simple as that…If his [Truman’s] was more than just a vague ambition, if he [Truman] was absolutely determined to discover the truth, there’s no way we could prevent him…I’ve given Truman the chance to lead a normal life…Seahaven is the way the world should be…I am the creator…of a television show.”

As Truman is finally about to open the exit-door hidden in the fake sky of Seahaven, Cristof contacts him. His voice descends on Truman from that sky:

Truman: [to an unseen Christof] “Who are you?”

Christof: [voice-over] “I am The Creator – of a television show that gives hope and joy and inspiration to millions.”

Truman: “Then who am I?”

Christof: “You’re the star.”

Truman: “Was nothing real?”

Christof: “You were real. That’s what made you so good to watch.”

Of course; Truman was the only one, in all of Seahaven, who believed the town and the set and the actors were real. Until his moment of discovery, until he now exits.

What will therefore happen to Seahaven?

The show’s producers will have to turn off the lights. It’s of no use anymore.

It’s been exposed.

The Matrix Revealed

So it is with the matrix of consensus. Each person who sees through it can have an effect, beyond what is ordinarily supposed.

In the late 1980s, I embarked on an extensive research project with a brilliant hypnotherapist, Jack True. One of Jack’ strategies with patients involved having them invent “vignettes, dreams, alternate realities.”

Jack wrote: “These aren’t merely stories. Each vignette has its own space and time, and if the patient becomes acutely aware of it, he will then deal with this space and time, where we spend our days, in a different way. He’ll cease to feel trapped. He’ll begin thinking in a new fashion. He’ll spontaneously come upon ideas that otherwise would never have arisen. He’ll know more about freedom than he ever did before.”

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 OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

The extinct dinosaur called The Individual

The extinct dinosaur called The Individual

by Jon Rappoport

March 19, 2015

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

“Give up your dreams, if you must. Cease dreaming altogether. Call those dreams and ambitions and visions…delusions. Then you will be ready. Then you can truly serve humanity. You can fall back into the arms of the many who will receive you with love. You’ll become an empty vessel through which miracles are channeled. One day Oprah will interview you.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

In a BBC documentary, “Google and the World Brain,” the question of author-copyright is explored. Google has scanned and published out-of-print books that are still covered by copyright.

Interviewed, Kevin Kelly (twitter) (also here and here), the co-founder of Wired, makes a startling remark. In his view the whole issue of copyright is archaic. He explains that all authors draw their ideas from previous authors and therefore don’t own their own ideas.

It’s wonderful to witness such bloviating on the cusp of the New Civilization, in which “you didn’t build that” is taken to unprecedented levels.

Kelly should start a publishing firm; all his authors would work for free. After all, nothing is original, nothing is new, and these writers are merely rearranging other people’s words.

You might be surprised at how many people actually believe this tripe Kelly is passing along.

It’s part of the vastly expanding operation aimed at the individual.

The “modern” position is, we’re all one great big group.

Rimbaud was just redoing Shelley. Dylan Thomas was adding a few exhibitionist touches to Shakespeare, who was aping Sophocles. Plato was mimicking generations of Egyptian high priests. Socrates was staging dialogues based on arguments between cave men.

And if we could climb into a time machine, we could travel back to the age of the Neanderthals and see that Neanderthals were stealing thoughts after listening to what ants and gorillas and cabbages were saying.

Yes, it’s all spiritual collectivism, and we’re melting down into one cosmic goo-glob, and it’s marvelous.

“It’s all information” is the code phrase. Ideas, thoughts, sentences, books; nothing is original, nothing is new; we all “share” information floating in the collective consciousness; the individual invents nothing.

The move to wipe out the entire concept of the individual and erase it from human consciousness is a propaganda op. It is far easier to wield control over a group.

It therefore comes down to the individual vs. the goo. So be it.

Actually, if anyone cares, “the people” is a convenient term for “every INDIVIDUAL.”

This has been lost in translation. It has been garbled, distorted, just as the proprietor of an old-fashioned carnival shell game distorts the audience’s perception with sleight of hand.

Are “the people” one group? Well, that’s the ultimate Globalist formulation.

However, from the point of view of the free individual, things are upside down. It is HIS power that is primary, not the monolithic corporate State’s.

From his point of view, what does the social landscape look like?

It looks like: THE OBSESSION TO ORGANIZE.

I’m not talking about organizations that are actually streamlined to produce something of value. I’m talking about organizations that PLAN MORE ORGANIZATION OF LIFE.

If you want to spend a disturbing afternoon, read through (and try to fathom) the bewildering blizzard of sub-organizations that make up the European Union. I did. And I emerged with a new definition of insanity. OTO. The Obsession to Organize.

OTO speaks of a bottomless fear that somewhere, someone might be living free.

People tend to think their own power is either a delusion or some sort of abstraction that’s never really EXPERIENCED. So when the subject is broached, it goes nowhere. It fizzles out. It garners shrugs and looks of confusion. Power? Are you talking about the ability to lift weights?

And therefore, the whole notion of freedom makes a very small impression, because without power, what’s the message of freedom? A person can choose vanilla or chocolate? He can watch Law&Order or CSI? He can buy a Buick or a Honda? He can take a trip to Yosemite or Disney World? He can pack a lunch or eat out at a restaurant? He can ask for a raise or apply for a better job with another company? That’s it? He can swim in his pool or work out at the gym?

He can take Prozac, or Paxil, or Zoloft?

Mostly, as the years roll by, he opts for more cynicism and tries to become a “smarter realist.” And that is how he closes the book on his life.

Every which way power can be discredited or misunderstood…people will discredit it and misunderstand it.

And then all psychological and physiological and mental and physical and emotional and perceptual and hormonal processes undergo a major shift, in order to accommodate to a reality, a space in which the individual has virtually no power at all.

I’d be remiss if I didn’t include this one: “power=greed.” Mountains of propaganda are heaped on people to convince them that having individual power to make something happen is the same as committing crimes against humanity.

Globalism=collectivism=Glob-consciousness. We’re all one Glob. We exist in that great Cheese Melt.

Even the radical Left of the 1960s, who rioted at the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, because they believed the nominee, Hubert Humphrey, and his allies wouldn’t stop the war in Vietnam…even that radical force on the Left eventually gave in and morphed into romantic sentimentalists who came to love the State under Clinton and Obama.

Sooner or later, it comes down to the question: does the individual conceive of himself as an individual, or as part of The Group?

Shall the individual discover how much power and freedom and imagination he actually has, or shall he cut off that process of discovery at the knees, in order to join a group whose aims are diluted and foreshortened versions of consciousness and freedom?

The individual answers these questions overtly, with great consideration, or the questions answer and diminish him through wretched default.

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.”

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. Groups.

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.

Exit From the Matrix

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 certain 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 individual 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.

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 world.

…Suggesting the premise of a new stage play:

The extinct individual returns.

Petty little hungers and obsessions become great hungers.

Dominoes of the collective begin to fall. The stinking structure collapses, a wing here and a wing there, and the robots open their eyes.

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

A new instructive message appears on billboards and screens:

“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.

The Group Is All

The Group Is All

by Jon Rappoport

March 17, 2015

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

“A single thought simultaneously held by several people isn’t some miracle. The course of history is a process of liberation from that circumstance, and the emerging miracle was one individual thinking his own thoughts. That was the great change. And now people want to reverse it. They want to go back. They want to call it evolution.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

More and more, education is entraining children to think of themselves as part of a group.

This is one basic way to cut off the consciousness of being an individual and what it really means.

The government, the State, has now become the beneficent leader of The Group, and if you need confirmation, just ask any politician. He’ll give you a sound bite or two.

People enmeshed in the current culture don’t realize that, as recently as 25 years ago, the promotion of America as One Group played like a faint tune in the far distance.

Now, it’s being urged by the State with wall-to-wall rhetoric straight out of some cheesy TV church; and the pastor-hustler is taking in contributions with one hand while doling out bribes with the other.

Only he’s got militarized police all over the land and an awesome surveillance apparatus to back him up.

But he loves you. He really cares.

And suckers from Maine to Chula Vista are buying in. Count on the brief appearance of some messianic figure in the Presidential Primaries who will try to out-Obama, Obama, if only as a keynote speaker at a convention.

Behind the freebies and the “we’re all in this together” lurks, however, the same monolithic State, obsessed with control. Domination.

The Individual is the target. The objective? Convincing people that conceiving of themselves as distinct from the herd is a delusional, outmoded, cruel, psychotic, hopeless act.

“You’re against The Group. You don’t care about humanity. You reject the force that is trying to bring aid to everyone everywhere: that force is government.”

This is part of the con. The hustler’s larger role involves strolling up to his mark and purring in his ear, making promises, offering sympathy.

It’s ancient.

It’s all about “we” and “us” and “everybody” and “humanity” and “the people.” It’s syrup poured on the innocent and the confused.

The Left argues that the mega-corporations are in charge. The Right argues it’s government. As Robert Anton Wilson once wrote: “They’re both right.”

The Corporate State, looked at from any angle, is in the business of reducing the individual to undifferentiated mush.

The technocratic wet dream of hooking 10 billion brains to a super-computer, and thus giving birth to “enlightened consciousness,” is the pseudoscientific version of a collective utopia. The “right answers” to all questions are fed back down a pipeline into every mind.

But it turns out there is the right to be wrong, which is to say, the individual has the freedom to dissent from any and all groups.

He can think, and act on what he thinks, without consulting a manual. He can perceive reality on his own terms. He can go further and invent realities.

He can oppose the mob and the machine.

If none of this ignites a spark in his mind, he can lie down and wait for the steamroller.

Somehow, the most diehard advocates of the State ignore American foreign policy: war, wholesale destruction. They studiously develop amnesia on that front. They don’t bother trying to probe the personality of a government that professes to solve the problems of 300 million people at home, when that government pursues perpetual war abroad.

“…when he [the independent individual] merges his person into an organizational structure, a new creature replaces autonomous man, unhindered by the limitations of individual morality, freed of humane inhibition, mindful only of the sanctions of authority.” (Stanley Milgram, “Obedience to Authority,” 1974)

Yes, inside The Group, authority takes over, and its prescriptions replace ethics.

“We are not talking about mere instinctive conformity — it is, after all, a perennial failing of mankind. What we are talking about is a rationalized conformity — an open, articulate philosophy which holds that group values are not only expedient but right and good as well.” (William H Whyte, Jr.)

Replacing individual values with group values invokes a formula: “the greatest good for the greatest number of people.” This is magnetically attractive for the young on two counts. One, it seems to involve a simple rational calculation. And two, it spreads “the good” around like jam to “everyone.”

Exit From the Matrix

Of course, it’s a total con. Who decides what the greatest good is, in any given situation? And who enforces it with laws and guns and courts and prisons?

“If she herself had had any picture of the future, it had been of a society of animals set free from hunger and the whip, all equal, each working according to his capacity, the strong protecting the weak…Instead—she did not know why—they had come to a time when no one dared speak his mind, when fierce, growling dogs roamed everywhere, and when you had to watch your comrades torn to pieces after confessing to shocking crimes.” (George Orwell, Animal Farm, 1945)

The Group does not move forward, it devolves. It reverts back to primitive impulses, while justifying its so-called principles as instruments of the highest order.

“One egg, one embryo, one adult—normality. But a bokanovskified egg will bud, will proliferate, will divide. From eight to ninety-six buds, and every bud will grow into a perfectly formed embryo, and every embryo into a full-sized adult. Making ninety-six human beings grow where only one grew before. Progress… ‘Ninety-six identical twins working ninety-six identical machines!’ The voice was almost tremulous with enthusiasm. ‘You really know where you are. For the first time in history.’ He quoted the planetary motto. ‘Community, Identity, Stability.’ Grand words. ‘If we could bokanovskify indefinitely the whole problem would be solved.’” (Aldous Huxley, Brave New World, 1932)

Yes, the perfect Group. Humans made in hatcheries, according to plan. Group identity replacing individual identity. The All of the All.

Why bother with individual achievement? Why bother with “thoughts that separate one person from another?” Why-can’t-we-just-get-along becomes: why can’t we all think the same thoughts?

We can, with enough generations of programming. With synthetic production lines in birth-hatcheries.

Greatest good for the greatest number becomes a different kind of number.

For those who don’t want to take things that far, there are less radical versions of The Collective Glob in the propaganda mall. From the mystical to the political, there is a whole range of messages.

They all include the word “we”. For some reason, I never signed up for that “we.” Maybe you didn’t either. This article is for you.

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.

Dateline 2072: the new pope of NSA-Google-Facebook

by Jon Rappoport

July 23, 2014

(To join our email list, click here.)

It was a time of great celebration.

The President was about to appoint a new Pope of NSA-Google-Facebook. Aside from 12 Western states, where gangs ruled the population, America was united as never before.

What many writers were calling The Greater System had taken hold in consciousness. People were aware they were living inside a bubble of super-surveillance, and they loved it.

Therefore, the appointment of a new Pope was a momentous event.

The man of the hour, the saint-in-waiting, was Jonas Hoover, formerly a professor at MIT. Famously, at the age of nine, Hoover had written this Facebook post:

“Below, you’ll see a complete inventory of every product I own, with footnotes on method of purchase in each case. My parents’ voting record for the past twelve years is also included, along with their job history, college transcripts, tax returns—and a link to audio recordings of 2000 phone conversations I’ve had over the past two years. See the link to our family’s complete medical records. My diary entries are included. As you’ll discover, I’ve profiled myself 236 times, each time attempting to identify more relevant markers that predict my behavior in a variety of situations. Feel free to contact me for more information, if you are a profiling agency. I’m seeking employment in the surveillance field…”

As a high school senior, at the age of 15, Hoover had published an essay in Metadata, the NSA-Google journal. Academics across America had praised it, particularly this trenchant passage:

“The Constitution was a noble attempt to explicitly limit systems by eroding the power of centralized authority. That document was mainly about enforcing less structure.

“However, the hunger to develop structure is what humans possess in abundance. They impose structure and live off it, like junk food. And why shouldn’t they?

“The overall template of the Surveillance State used to be grounded in the premise that everyone is a potential threat and danger to the herd. Therefore, spy on everybody.

“Now, however, we are well past that point. We recognize that living inside the space of universal surveillance, as a voluntary act, is its own reward, its own joy. No reasons necessary.

“A whole life can be lived by detailing that life and publishing it for all to see—hundreds of thousands of pages, hundreds of thousands of hours of video. A grand confession, if you will, but without guilt, without remorse.

“We’re talking about a bubble, inside which the narratives of our lives are floated and used to sell a product. Who buys? Who doesn’t? Well, each one of us is a product, and we offer ourselves to the world. No need to be anxious about succeeding. Someone somewhere will buy us.

“We’re audience, and as Marshall McLuhan once put it, ‘Audience is actor.’ We’re actors and we reveal our character in immense detail. The burden of ethical, political, or psychological considerations is gone. We’ve evolved past the need of carrying it. This is happiness.

“We’re looking at a kind of Mobius Strip or Escher drawing that feeds back into itself.

“In this state of mind, we tend to perceive reality on the basis of what we think other people are perceiving. Through universal self-surveillance, we move closer and closer to the far shore, where we are all, in fact, perceiving the same thing. And what is that thing? It’s a mere reflection passed through billions of mirrors, around and around, evanescent, sparkling, devoid of content.

“This is the day toward which we all strive.

“Critics have claimed this is voluntary self-induced mind control; people digging themselves a deeper hole in consensus reality. I view it as liberation. Don’t you?”

power outside the matrix

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

In the Oval Office, in front of television cameras broadcasting to the world, the President, a minor functionary in the federal bureaucracy, bowed before Jonas Hoover and took his hand. He raised it and kissed the ring. He stepped back.

Hoover smiled and nodded.

“My fellow citizens, I’m honored by this appointment. It signals a new era for us all. From the shores of the old Silicon Valley, to the bunkers of Colorado, to the city of Detroit rebuilt as a single networked data storage facility, one idea has traveled through this great nation for a hundred years: tracking. Yes. We have now tracked ourselves to a degree never before thought possible. Remember Socrates’ ancient advice: know thyself. Well, now we do.

“Conscience, hope, anxiety, desperation; all gone. Outmoded. With gladness in our hearts, we give ourselves over to What Is. Every detail of it. We can record it, transmit it, save it, collate it.

“And with my ascension, we can inscribe it in the book of life. Open your church doors. Flood into their chapels. Give thanks. I am here to wipe away the last shred of doubt. We have arrived.

“This message has been brought to you by NSA-Google-Facebook, your window on the universe, and universe’s window on you.”

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 Church of Progammed Perception

The Church of Programmed Perception

by Jon Rappoport

July 3, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

“Consider something you take for granted, something everyone takes for granted. Now back up from it, back up far enough and you begin to realize it’s arbitrary—it doesn’t have to be that way. It could be another way, or it could vanish and not exist at all.” — Jon Rappoport, The Underground

The logic of space and time is the system/arrangement in which we find ourselves; the way we perceive reality.

Objects are next to each other, behind each other, in front of each other. And wherever they are, they are in space.

This space. Earth. Sky. Stars. We are here, and this is the deal, the contract, the set up.

A building 50 feet away from us looks bigger than it does when it’s a mile away.

Space endures. It doesn’t suddenly fold up. It doesn’t fall apart. There may be wormholes and black holes, but generally there are no visible exits from space. The fabric doesn’t tear and rip in the wind. This space doesn’t suddenly find itself superseded and replaced by another space. We don’t walk out of space.

Of course, most people would say, “How could things be otherwise?”

Actually, this question speaks to the rigidity of the perceptual arrangement. It’s a much denser version of “how could my opinion be other than true?”

And time is just as bad. Events must proceed is sequence. There are “before” and “after.”

We might notice there are days during which time crawls along and other days during which it speeds by, but confidence remains that a working clock is the final judge and makes no such subjective distinctions.

However, the passage through space and time appears to contain exceptions or anomalies. For example, if we accept the notion of quantum entanglement, two particles, quite far apart, both register an impact visited on one particle at virtually the same moment.

But not to worry. We don’t see that happening with the naked eye. As far as we’re concerned, space-time is “uniform” in all respects.

Then there is the issue of the composition of matter. A vase on a table is made out of tiny, tiny particles in motion separated by enormous amounts of space. We don’t see it that way.

The spectrum of human perception is limited, and we are catching only the “gross aspect” of What Is.

All matter is un-solid energy moving in space, but we’re only given a perceptual system that allows us to deal with solid objects.

And this deal is so embracing, we can strike the vase with a hammer and break it into smaller solids.

In terms of ordinary experience, all bases are covered.

Operating systems, programmed perception, endure across the range of all possible conditions.

And now comes the wild card.

Imagination.

A painter invents something on a piece of canvas. A writer writes a novel. A composer writes a symphony, which is not a language in any terms with which we are familiar, and yet we sit in a hall and listen to it, and afterwards, we talk about the effects it had on us.

We say art is weaker than every-day space-time reality, but is that true?

Or are we just sticking to the contract we signed, the deal?

The modern surveillance state is only one way in which people are urged to “remain normal.” The whole apparatus of perception is a programmed norm.

Imagination ignores the apparatus. All it does is invent realities.

The human race acts as if it’s constrained from believing in imagination.

But what if that constraint were broken?

What would happen then?

One reality, indivisible, with injustice for all, would fall by the wayside.

The stranglehold would be destroyed.

Most realities are created by imagination.

Actually, if you understand that the program of human perception was also created by imagination, you can simply say:

Imagination creates reality.

Exit From the Matrix

Consider a museum. You have the building and the hundreds of paintings hanging on the walls. Then you have the realities in those paintings which the artists imagined. We say the reality of the building is stronger and more uniform than what the artists imagined.

Why?

“It just is. And also, the building and the pieces of canvas can be measured, but what the artists imagined is open to interpretation.”

Consider a measurable symphony hall vs. the music the audience hears in it. Aren’t there moments when the symphony—however many ways it is being “interpreted” by the audience—is so strong it virtually blots out the perception of the hall?

What’s the substance of this contract into which we’ve entered?

“Okay, here’s the deal. The physical world is certainly there, but we’re going to program you so you only see it as we want you to see it. And you’ll also believe imagination is a ‘secondary tool’, a weak sister. For example, the content of a painting will never assume the importance of a wall or a car or a cloud—unless you move outside your program. To keep that from happening, we’ll have gangs of experts who label you as sick and insane. Have a nice day.”

When people say, “Imagination? I don’t know what you’re talking about, I don’t have any imagination,” they’re saying, “I’m loyal to the program.”

Groups applying peer pressure, experts, governments—they all define spaces over which they assert ownership, and they claim you’re in their spaces and therefore you must perceive the consensus they establish.

This con extends all the way up to the logic of space and time: you have to see the way you’re programmed to, and you have to ignore anomalies—especially the grand anomaly called imagination.

And eventually we get to this: the life you have was given to you; the he, she, it, or they who presented you with that gift of life have the right to tell you what you can see and what you can’t see. You have no life of your own.

Therefore, at the highest possible level, you’re in debt, you’re a debt slave.

And right next door to debt is guilt. Amorphous guilt.

And then you have organized religion.

Perhaps you’ve noticed these religions invent and promote their own cosmologies, their own pictures of the universe, the cosmos.

This is what they want you to see. This is part of their programmed-perception operation.

“Hi, I’m from the Church of Programmed Perception. I’m here to give you your booster shot. You’ll see more clearly, and you’ll bury that annoying and distracting thing called imagination ever deeper. Roll up your sleeve. This’ll only take a second.”

Jab. Inject.

That second then becomes forever.

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 www.nomorefakenews.com

How many covert ops can dance on the head of a pin?

How many covert ops can dance on the head of a pin?

by Jon Rappoport

June 27, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

These are notes on covert ops I’ve made over the years. They apply to any arena where deception is the name of the game.

Every covert op needs a cover story. That is, the public must be made to look in the wrong direction.

A cover story not only hides the identity of perpetrators, it also imparts the wrong meaning to the event being staged.

Example: a war is set in motion, in order to bankrupt several governments. But the public is told the war means: “protecting democracy.”

Major covert ops have more than one objective. A war will bankrupt governments; it will also result in a peace treaty that creates a larger cooperative structure than previously existed, spanning several nations—and the men who end up running that larger structure are the same men who triggered the war in the first place. They wind up with more control and power than they had before.

Covert ops of great size and importance must include the laying of false trails. Thus, in the wake of the op, investigators will find clues that lead them down roads that come, eventually, to alleys that dead-end against blank walls.

In the process, they discover perpetrators who weren’t really perpetrators. They discover motives that weren’t true motives. They pick up hints that were deposited like break crumbs to divert and mislead.

In case some element of the actual covert op is revealed, there is the limited hangout. This is a confession. It offers a mea culpa, but only concerning a relatively trivial factor.

“Yes, our agency did make mistakes, and those mistakes led to the loss of public funds. But we are taking steps to assure nothing like this ever happens again…”

And of course, in order to “take steps,” the agency needs a larger budget.

A massive series of connected covert ops, over a long period of time, are built, as a kind of hierarchy that leads to some ultimate objective. This is the “ops within ops” strategy.

Identifying and derailing a handful of ops will not stop the overall program.

For example, an ultimate objective would be: the triumph of Globalism. This means putting the nations and peoples of the world under a single management system.

That system, an enormous bureaucracy run at the very top by a small secret group, would eventually make all important decisions involving: politics; the economy; money; credit; production and distribution of goods and services; energy; military use of force; media/propaganda content; medical treatment; mega-corporate power; natural resources; food; water; geo-engineering; freedom of speech; education; geo-distribution of populations.

In order to create this overarching reality, multiple systems of mind control, indoctrination, self-policing, and operant conditioning must be enacted and expanded.

Such a conspiracy (Globalism) does not need the conscious cooperation of many people who are “in on the secret.” That childish position is repeated intentionally by idiots and dupes and pawns and infiltrators.

Compartmentalization is the key. You can take any group and assign it various separate tasks, each one masked by “humanitarian” slogans, and you will get eager compliance.

power outside the matrix

Only a few people in charge see the big picture and understand how the separate tasks (ops) combine to achieve the overall goal.

The art and skill of covert ops involve coordinating such machinery to yield the desired result.

The main propaganda/media approach is: “Events that are taking place in the world are unrelated. These crises and problems are separate fires breaking out, without a central cause.”

To view this in action, just watch the network evening news. It’s an exercise meant to engender partitioned minds, which nibble a bit here, a bit there. Stories break out, are covered, and then disappear, to be replaced by new material.

The elite anchors are inducers of short-term memory and long-term amnesia.

Alongside media, a continuous downpour of propaganda urges the primacy of the group and the mass and the collective beyond any “selfish” concerns.

This op is intended to erase the very concept of the individual.

Why? Because the free, powerful, and independent individual can expose how “the group” is being recreated every day as a mythological symbol.

A symbol of (false) hope, caring, dependence, passivity, acquiescence, surrender, and envelopment within the banner of “enlightened humane leadership.”

If it quacks and walks like an organized religion, it is some version of an organized religion. It doesn’t need a God. It just needs a priest class to preach Rescue For All People.

Quack, quack. Op, op.

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 www.nomorefakenews.com

Google and the World Brain

Google and the World Brain

by Jon Rappoport

January 8, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

In a BBC documentary, “Google and the World Brain,”
the issue of author copyright is explored. Google has scanned and published out-of-print books that are still covered by copyright.

Interviewed, Kevin Kelly (twitter) (also here and here), the co-founder of Wired, makes a startling remark. In his view the whole issue of copyright is archaic. He explains that all authors draw their ideas from previous authors and therefore don’t own their own ideas.

It’s wonderful to witness such bloviating on the cusp of the New Civilization, in which “you didn’t build that” is taken to unprecedented levels.

Kelly should start a publishing firm; all his authors would work for free. After all, nothing is original, nothing is new, and these writers are merely rearranging other people’s words.

You might be surprised at how many people actually believe this tripe Kelly is passing along.

It’s part of the vastly expanding operation aimed at the individual.

The “modern” position is, we’re all one great big group. Kelly adds an historical touch. We’re just recycling the past.

Rimbaud was just redoing Shelley. Dylan Thomas was adding a few exhibitionist touches to Shakespeare, who was aping Sophocles. Plato was mimicking generations of Egyptian high priests. Socrates was staging dialogues based on arguments between cave men.

If we could climb into a time machine, we could travel back to the age of the Neanderthals and find all subsequent ideas of any value in their conversations. Certainly.

And I’m sure the Neanderthals were stealing thoughts after listening to what ants and gorillas and cabbages were saying.

The individual imagines and creates? Ho-ho-ho. Ridiculous. Kelly has put a lid on that fiction. Perhaps he’ll publish a list of authors from whom he’s borrowed, and then we can read their work and ignore his.

Yes, it’s all spiritual collectivism, and we’re melting down into one cosmic goo-glob, and it’s marvelous. Everything is free.

“It’s all information” is the code phrase, as if all data are like all other data, and therefore diminished—in which case “information is power” means degraded and shrunken power.

When it comes to intelligence—that is, actual intelligence—the capacity to see how a book is unique, rather than “like” another book, is far more important than the perception of sameness.

The Matrix Revealed

And Kevin Kelly notwithstanding, the individual creator is real, not a fiction.

A book isn’t just a whole bunch of data, and it isn’t just a whole lot of borrowing and reshuffling from past authors.

The very basis of meaning, without which we would all be swimming in a sea of gibberish, isn’t a phenomenon of the Group. Meaning ultimately comes down to each individual and his perception. We may share a common language, but individuals shape it and individuals understand it. Or don’t.

The move to wipe out the entire concept of the individual and erase it from human consciousness is a propaganda op. It is far easier to wield control over a group.

“We” isn’t an advanced form of “I.”

Here is where things are heading: “I/we is/are together.” Then: “We are together.” Then: “We.” Then: Nothing. Oblivion.

The failure to see this is a direct consequence of the failure of a person to know he is an individual.

That Google would even consider digitizing and publishing books that are still under copyright, that still belong to the author, reveals how casual their concept of the individual is.

“Just another greedy mega-corporation” doesn’t capture what is really going on here.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM 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 www.nomorefakenews.com