by Jon Rappoport
August 29, 2018
(To join our email list, click here.)
In several recent articles, I’ve exposed the myth that socialism is a revolution of and for the people. (‘socialism’ archive here)
I’ve presented evidence that socialism is actually a movement owned, operated, and funded by ultra-wealthy elites.
Dupes, foot soldiers, blind idealists, indoctrinated students, and low-level thugs are recruited through cutouts to serve the agenda of Rockefeller Globalists, for example, who are determined to bring about worldwide socialism.
Socialism, in a nutshell, equals ultra-rich elites (represented by the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg, etc.) owning the free market, cutting out competition, and creating more powerful, overarching, central governments.
Hidden in the plan is the granting of greater dominion to mega-corporations. This is a key fact.
The US Constitution was a document that established extremely limited central government. Regardless of the motives of the authors and the state legislatures that ratified it, the ideas contained in the Constitution were, and are, extremely oppressive toward large centralized structures controlling the people.
But there was another factor present at the beginning of the American Republic.
At the dawn of the United States, corporations were chartered and thus allowed to operate by the individual states. If a corporation, in the eyes of a state legislature, violated a basic trust by harming the people, committing offenses against the citizenry, the legislature could summarily cancel their charter and literally exile them from the state.
This power followed, in part, from the fact that corporations were not and are not individuals. They do not have the rights and freedoms of individuals. Corporations were not granted the rights of citizens in the Constitution.
Richard Grossman, an activist and scholar of US corporate history, unearthed and made lucid these facts.
At the birth of the American Republic, therefore, there was a double limitation on power. Central government and corporations were both strapped and shackled.
Of course, just as the federal government has been allowed to expand like an unchecked fungus, so has corporate power.
Under socialism (aka Globalism), mega-corporate power is the prow of a ship that sails on and on and conquers the economies of the world.
Corporate crimes go unpunished.
Contrary to popular belief, the real agenda of socialism has nothing to do with prosecuting those crimes.
The idea, for example, that greater socialism in America would defeat Monsanto is ludicrous in the extreme.
Monsanto is one of the components of actual socialism—the real, not the fake, version.
Again, socialism is by, for, and of the ultra-wealthy elites. It is not a movement on behalf of the downtrodden.
As Gary Allen puts it in his 1971 classic, None Dare call It Conspiracy: “…pressure from above and pressure from below… The pressure from above comes from secret, ostensibly respectable Comrades in the government and [elite Globalist] Establishment, forming, with the radicalized mobs in the streets below, a giant pincer around middle-class society. The street rioters are pawns, shills, puppets, and dupes for an oligarchy of elitist conspirators working above to turn America’s limited government into an unlimited government with total control over our lives and property.”
“The American middle class is being squeezed to death by a vise. In the streets we have avowed revolutionary groups… Virtually all members of these groups sincerely believe that they are fighting the Establishment. In reality they are an indispensable ally of the Establishment in fastening Socialism on all of us. The naive radicals think that under Socialism the ‘people’ will run everything. Actually, it will be a clique of Insiders in total control, consolidating and controlling all wealth. That is why these schoolboy Lenins and teenage Trotskys are allowed to roam free and are practically never arrested or prosecuted. They are protected. If the Establishment wanted the revolutionaries stopped, how long do you think they would be tolerated?”
Gary Allen wrote that passage in 1971. Does it ring a familiar bell now?
As philosopher George Santayana famously wrote in 1905, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
Equally famous is the prescription for all advertising: repeat the same message over and over, so it sinks into the mind and forms a false impression of truth.
Thus it has been with the basic message of socialism. “This is a form of government that finally serves the people. It is the people rising up to take the reins of power.”
Once that notion is rigidly fixed in consciousness, it is impossible to believe socialism is actually emanating from the elite of the elite.
Fortunately, more and more people are waking up to the basic con of fake news, which doesn’t only broadcast distorted current events spooling out through screens, day by day.
Basic themes of fake news also span decades and even centuries.
What will happen when enough young people, who want to tear down the structures of the monopolists, realize those same men are bankrolling them in the streets?
What will happen when these young people realize their teachers and mentors and handlers and professors have been feeding them the precise reverse of the truth?
As long as independent media continue to proliferate, that day is coming.
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, 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.
In what sense is “Monsanto one of the components of actual socialism”?
They feed the whole world with their poison food, so people will get sick and die.
Remember that the socialists want to reduce the world population to 500 Million
So there is a similarity, both socialism and Monsanto kill lots of people. That does not of itself make Monsanto a component of ‘real socialism’, so I’m not clear what Jon means by this claim, seems like a red herring in an otherwise great article,
I agree. But the meaning is something like socialism~antinationalism. Overriding all borders to maximise profits while grassroots socialism is about uniting across borders to outmanoever both big and small capitalists. Outmaoevering the small capitalists is what libertarians point out results in bashing the middle class from both directions.
The internationalist character is much harder for grassroots to come to grips with and so the resourced transnational elites can direct such forces against particular targets like Tsar Russia.
And also the left has been feeblevoiced about this aspect and thereby rendered themselves powerless against globalism for profit.
That’s a very tenuous connection. I wish Jon simply explained what he means by that.
If the defining characteristic of socialism is the absence of private property rights, then the only way I can make sense of this is to consider all multinational companies as mobile, shape shifting dictatorships, meta-states, slowly sucking up all wealth into abstract, paper entities so that they will collectively become the global socialist state, composed of several or maybe one mega corporation controlling All wealth, ostensibly “on behalf of the people”, while satisfying the material needs of its employees. Total dependency, no private property. But Jon doesn’t say that, so not sure what he meant.
I believe there is some semantic confusion here: what Jon describes in his article is more properly called Fascism (union of corporation and state) than Socialism. Actual idealistic socialism — which has never been implemented on this planet except on the tribal level, at the maximum — is intended to sufficiently liberate the populace from the struggle for life’s basics that, ultimately, there is room for true anarchy. In other words, government becomes unnecessary. Unfortunately, power inevitably corrupts the human spirit (power over others, that is). What Jon is describing is a process that emerged from the collapse of the monarchic system in Europe, came to maturity after World War I, and blossomed globally after World War II. In other words, the Germans lost the battles but the Nazis (deceptively-named National SOCIALISTS) won the war, and have been “winning” ever since. Co-opting the happy-sounding ideas of populism and socialism is one of their most “stupendous maneuvers,” as Carlos Castaneda’s Don Juan Mateus might say, but as Jon points out very sharply, it’s strictly a wolf in sheep’s clothing kind of thing.
As John D Rockefeller said – “Competition is a sin.”
The same people who funded the establishment of the Communists in the USSR, funded the Nazis in Germany. They are behind the industrialization of China’s technocratic dictatorship and have funded Jihadi Islam. They love tyrannical government- because it gives them a monopoly over the people of the world. They are the enemy of Humanity.
Two thumbs up to the dumbass brownshirt youths who will do the bidding of their globalist pimps only to be first against the wall.
They think they are rebels when they are only reciting the pablum of worthless Marxist rat professors who under tenure and can never be fired.
It won’t matter that you got your Cliché Guevara buttplug at Hot Topic when the controllers decide that the “rebels” are no longer useful.
It couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of useless idiots.
Corporations Cannot be Sovereign Governments:
https://anticorruptionsociety.com/lawfully-yours/corporations-cannot-be-sovereign-governments/
Like it or not, The United Corporations of the World (UCW, you mean you have not heard of them?) is a sovereign world government already in power. There is nothing to dispute. And they got it in for us all.
Australia is a good example with land expropriation and now they want to control their guns. Germany is divided. Why can people see what is happening by observing other countries.
And what about South Africa expropriation of white farmers’ lands going on right now?
“What will happen when enough young people, who want to tear down the structures of the monopolists, realize those same men are bankrolling them in the streets?”
I’ve been thinking along the same lines, lately. Contrary to the current narrative, today’s young people are *very* intelligent. True, they are beffudled, confused, and perhaps more than a little hopeless at times but who the hell wouldn’t be considering the sophisticated psychological operations arrayed against them by these powerful elites (spoon-fed to “the massses” by their moutpiece: the ubiquitous Fake News)?
What happens as they awaken to the REALITY of their predicament in increasing numbers?
We are living in interesting times …
Growing numbers of students, skipping class…
https://www.wsj.com/articles/schools-crack-down-as-more-students-cut-class-1535621403
Jon, I absolutely love these types of topics, which you excel at and it stimulated ideas in my head. I am gong to focus on just 2 things, since that is all my limited mind can handle at any given time.
First:
Jon: “Socialism, in a nutshell, equals ultra-rich elites (represented by the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg, etc.) owning the free market, cutting out competition, and creating more powerful, overarching, central governments.
Hidden in the plan is the granting of greater dominion to mega-corporations. This is a key fact.”
Yes! Absolutely! And beyond any doubt or challenge. This is the primary problem I’ll get to. The 2nd is:
Mental competency! Typically only an issue with old people, people debilitated by illness as well or they are not conscious or are in a coma, or those too young to make their own decision. Or the Mentally ill, due to abuse or born defects.
Now the pretense of the USA is that the citizens control their destiny by electing who they want to represent them and act in their collective interests.
But it was never specified, or methods created, to make sure the representative actually represented their interests in good faith and due diligence. What if he she did not? And how to fix that! I say, any representative voting against what the people want, ought to be hung for treason. Its that simple. But no such provisions were even close to being made. No Accountability once elected!
That leaves one last problem. The Most High Elite can buy any and all politicians and have done so since the Industrial revolution began in earnest. Money buys government control and the most high elite Major Industrial unions and their financiers all work to protect their “united interests in common.” They look out for themselves. They are the undisputed kings as Jon pointed out. They have front organizations that enable a level of discretion and secrecy with uncertain, hidden agendas. They put into office anyone they want with money, threats and blackmail.
So our lords, masters, and gods, are the most high Elite. Neither we or any other nation have any say in anything. We are all truly slaves in every sense of that word. Myself, I am also the N word. I would prefer that name be applied to me, rather than a respectful one, because they do not treat me with respect, so call me by the way you treat me, as the N’s or the past were treated, though some of those N’s were white, Irish, Chinese and many others. We are all N’s when you get down to it. I just want it acknowledged when they address me. I am not ashamed of the name. I wear it with pride, not shame. And I do not want any false pretense that I am treated fairly or humanely. Call me what I really am.
The 2nd matter mental competency and Rockefeller that Jon mentioned. Old J.D.R and his Board of Education Foundation set out to make us fare more stupid by pretending to want to increase literacy, when we already had the highest rates of literacy that have probably ever existed. Early American settlers were those seeking to get out from under the oppressive lack of any upward mobility/opportunity. So they educated themselves, based on a religious set of convictions. They could read and write as an article of faith, really.
But He was lying. What he actually did was deprive us of meaningful education that we would have better had working on the farm with dad and him relating his experiences and knowledge.
So mandatory Education was installed in 1860 and now in 2018, we are total idiots who can see past our noses. We have no idea how our world really works. We are as dumb as the day we were born. Most animals have more brains than we do.
So Alas, our way out is not a way out. It is our prison. Our own lack of brains dooms all for the sake of the mass of “useful idiots.” It is NOT within the collective power of the people do to anything other than to look forward to our extinction. We did not come with manuals when we were born. And we learned nothing along the way.
The survival of the fittest means that we are not fit so we will not survive. Stupidity results, ultimately in death. And justly so. What a man sows or does not sow, ought to be what he reaps. Its only fair. You only get out of it what you put into it.
So here is the last irony. If I was a big leader with a big army and I came over here and killed many and bombed the hell out of everything. I would be called a monster, except by the elite.
But now if I simply go out, dully authorized and deputized by the Elite to make the people believe that good is bad, and right is wrong, and up is down and in is out, And that socialism is our salvation, not our demise, I will as effectively destroy this nation to the same degree that Nuclear Holocaust might effect.
And why? Because the world is now full of mentally incompetent imbeciles, who can not see right from wrong. All they see is the dangling carrot at the end of that stick. Socialism, where ya never have ta work. Oh, and your government really cares about you. My boss said I had to say that, and not doubt, most Americans will believe that because diversity is our strength, isn’t it?
Agreed, Jon.
However, I am wary of Allen. He wrote his book at a time when anti-red fever was, the “old guard” had begun their five years planning (culminating with the end of Vietnam). Why was Allen so widely promoted? A “glitch” in the system? Or was is presenting an “anti-framework” on behalf of to ensure the establishment could herd “revolutionaries” and control thought patterns/conceptualisations? Did he furbish any “remedies” or provide pertinent attack strategies against those that offend? If so, I missed them.
Of course, I don’t agree with the term “globalism”. This is a cover for Zionism (be it “the Jews” have been conned by the same imperialist puppet masters) in my opinion.
Best
OT
Allen died at the age of fifty from liver cancer. By natural causes? Who knows. He had a radio show when he called Carroll Quigley, who denied having anything to do with the books Quigley knew full that he authored. This illustrates that Quigley feared the consequences of discussing these matters for a wide lay audience.
I think the Birchers were controlled opposition but Allen may have been too individualistic (ie truly libertarian) to fit in to any covert scheming.
Even Senator McCarthy seems to have discovered that Moscow wasnt the mastermind behind the various example of socialism which he initially assumed. But that meant the end of his career.
The Cuban revolution was definitely supported by the elites. The Cia the next highest level of the state department, ie, just under Eisenhower and Dulles and the NYT. Three Us ambassadors confirmed that under oath.
Yes Gary Allen dared bring that up unlike most libertarians although they usually agree about the middleclass being the target. But they usually dont mention who really is behind it but simply argue about weakening the state and bash the socialists without calling them dupes for the oligarchy. The socialists often genuinely dont know about the origin of socialism. Or in rare cases when they do, they dont think it would be good for the cause to bring it up. Since mainstream socialists dont see things the way Allen explains and that libertarians seldom give you the full picture the question is, do they even agree with Allen or do they believe socialism has taken on a life of its own independent of its origin and not fully under control by the oligarchy’s puppeteers or wannabe puppeteers.
I tend to think this latter perception is more descriptive of the opposing parties whether or not the independence is significant.
Some libertarians do critisise the transnational corporations for how they abuse many services and products such as in medicines, food, GMO etc and thereby do distance themselves from the monopoly capitalists.
But they dont bring up socialism as having originated from capitalists.
On the other hand they do say that socialists and environmentalists are dupes for the oligarchs of the current era.
I believe Lenin made his variant of socialism take on a new direction not wanted by his angloamerican supporters.
I’m not defending Lenin only suggesting that the intention from Britain was to see Tsar Russia turning into a multitude of weaker states but that instead Lenin created a strong empire.
Even if this also turned out to suit the British in that it filled a function in the profitable WWII it may not have been the initial aim.
And concerning European socialdemocrats. I dont think the angloamericans have felt that the scandinavian welfare states were ideal from the point of view of the hegemon.
They (eg Karl Rove) collaborated with Fredrik Reinfeldt from Swedens formerly conservative party to destroy the swedish model.
I am not sure when Rove came in but I think it was early in Reinfeldts career. Reinfeldt early on wrote about the swedes as the sleeping people and said he wanted to destroy the welfare system by overloading it with massimmigration. Not exactly that wording but it captures the spirit.
This indicates at least to me that socialism is seen by its detractors as independent.
good insight.
I read about corporations and NGO’s creating problems around the world; but, who is/are the predominant group of people – race, ethnicity, religion, etc…, that have the most control over the highest (unseen/unheard) levels of power around the world? Sometimes the discussions seem sterile when terms like “corporations” or “NGO’s”, (the financiers’ of every revolutionary movement) are left unborn. Should we find out who the people are, and who the families are, that have the most control?
Some say the Bond-movie title Octopussy was a hint about the eight controlling families.
Intermarriages among the wealthy to keep their fortunes and power is an important factor. Since they have designed the laws via their puppet parliaments there are no simple ways to decode who really owns what.
Each old (oligarchic) family probably has a family tree involving many thousand individuals. So they can permeate the whole society.
Apparently independent celebrities may belong to such trees and play a role as protectors of the status quo.
One way to do that is to consume peoples time with harmless nonsense or novels and entertainment which lead people away from anything that would threaten the established order. Another is by organising controlled opposition and thereby kidnap and redirect people from fruitful action.
The controlling families dont mind using their own for such purposes.
The portrait painter Miles W Mathis has made investigations of such hidden contexts. He often points out that many genealogies are ‘scrubbed’, indicating that there undeniably is something hidden.