Category Archives: Individual Freedom

The Individual vs. Globalism

The Individual vs. Globalism

by Jon Rappoport

February 7, 2018

“Global solution” means the individual is cut out of the equation, he doesn’t count, he doesn’t mean anything in the larger scheme of things, he’s just another pawn and cipher to move around on the board.

This is purposeful.

This is the script for the future: create problems whose only solution appears to be collective.

Psychologically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually divert the individual’s attention from his own vision, his own profound desires, his own imagination—and place it within The Group (“all of humanity”).

Propagandize the idea that, if the individual concerns himself with anything other than The Group, he is selfish, greedy, inhumane. He is a criminal.

More and more, this is how the young are being trained these days.

The grand “we” is being sold to them like a cheap street drug. They buy in. They believe this “we” is real, instead of a hollow con designed to drag them into a Globalist framework owned and operated by mega-corporations, banks, foundations, governments, and ubiquitous Rockefeller interests.

And what of the individual, his mind, his unique perception, his independent ideas, his originality, his life-force?

Swept away in the rush toward “a better world.”

I have breaking news. Earth is not a spaceship and we are not crew members. If Earth is a spaceship, it has serious design flaws, because it keeps making the same trip around the same sun every year.

Each one of us does not have a specified function, as a crew member would.

Going back as far as you want to in history, shortage and scarcity in the world that engendered a crisis was either created by some elite or maintained by them, for the purpose of eradicating dissent and fomenting a collectivist solution. Meaning a solution that came from the top. Meaning a solution that reduced individual freedom.

In recent human history, a different idea emerged: severely hamstring government, in order to protect the individual against it.

This idea has had a very tough time. Collectivists have fought it every step of the way.

But regardless of circumstances, the individual can author his own freedom and what it implies. He can discover, within himself, extraordinary possibilities. He can contemplate what it means to create reality that expresses his most profound desires.

And then he can begin a voyage that no one and no group can stop.

Civilizations come and go, rise and fall; the individual remains.

The word “imagination,” when properly understood, indicates that the individual can envision and then create futures that never were, and never would be, unless he invented them.

Imagination is the opposite of “provincial,” “restricted,” “well-known,” “familiar,” “accepted.”

That is its challenge to the status quo.

That is the true threat the individual poses to all predictive systems.

“It’s all just information” is a psyop code-phrase. Ideas, thoughts—nothing is original, nothing is new; we all “share” information floating in the collective consciousness; the individual invents nothing.

Which is the opposite of the truth.

The individual invents everything.

He can’t be predicted when he is himself. He is not a pattern. He is not a system.

He is not anyone else.

He thrives on his own inspiration.

He is not a piece of universe.

He is not a humble servant of Order.

He invents the space and time of his own time to come.

As early as 1961, a brilliant healer, Richard Jenkins, whom I write about in my book, The Secret Behind Secret Societies, explained what was to come. He wrote me a note, which I’m paraphrasing from memory: “People are confusing their own empathy for others with some inflated idea about group-identity. They aren’t the same. People are becoming afraid of their own unique and distinct existence. This is a social fear. A new social contract is being foisted on the population. Either you belong, or you have no rights. This is a totalitarian concept. It’s coming in through the back door.”

Well, now, it’s right there at the front door.

The individual still has a choice. But he has to make it.

Explore his own power, or give it away for nothing more than an illusion of belonging.

Stoke the fires within, or form a diluted image of self, and bow down to The Group.

The “I” is not isolated. He can reach out to others whenever and however he wants to. The question is, is he moving on the ground of his own independence, or is he searching for a group life raft, to which he will attach himself without thought or hesitation?

Beyond economics or politics, Globalism is a system that offers a life raft which is heading toward a machine-future. Disembark and find the great We, a construct of integrated parts, each of which is an individual, in a state of spiritual amnesia.

Happiness there is function and sedation, shadowless, wiped clean of distinctions.

This is the elitist end-game of social justice and equality.

It’s a fake culture.

It’s a grid of artifice, laid over the individual.

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

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

The Individual, his freedom and victory

The Individual, his freedom and victory

by Jon Rappoport

February 6, 2018

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

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

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

The free individual isn’t shaped. He shapes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The free individual certainly helps others, but he is against a culture that is so preoccupied with “raising up the lowest” that it nurtures a hatred of liberty. And this is a crux, because growing millions of people are all too eager to shed the last fragments of Self to join in a fantasy of “everybody gets everything.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

These days, it is the Group that is elevated. We must absorb the individual in the system so the Group is protected and safe.

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

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

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

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

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

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

That day will dawn.

But why wait?

Why not act now?

Why not launch your greatest dream?

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

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

A new reality is here

A new reality is here

This is what I’d call a “long-range” article. Very long-range

by Jon Rappoport

February 5, 2018

“The One Great Reality for Everyone has been fading away. The One has become the Many. What did you expect? This is what you get when you get freedom. Multi-dimensional Reality.” (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)

The new reality is Decentralized Power. It’s not a distant hope. It’s happening.

For one thing, I’m talking about major media and their crumbling power. Shaping minds was once easy. It’s not anymore.

These days, if you don’t like one alt-news site, there are 100,000 more.

Yes, we’re in the middle of a bumpy ride. It’s not Santa Claus coming down the chimney with gifts for all. Major media and social media are fighting back. Their desperation is signaled in their efforts to use the label Fake News, and in open moves to censor news that’s “different.”

Don’t expect this battle to be easy. The transition is a long one.

But take heart. Be aware that things are changing around us. Right now.

This decentralization will ultimately affect every individual, not just groups. The Big Split will filter down to every human on the planet. Don’t be timid about assessing this paradigm shift. It’s gigantic.

The point is: WE’RE NOT ALL HEADING TOWARD ONE UNIFIED BETTER REALITY. That’s the con. That’s the Globalist wet dream. That would be replacing one form of mind control for another. That would be a puerile version of New Age nonsense. No, what is happening cuts much deeper.

People will say this shift is dangerous, because it supports the atomization and isolation of every individual. Where are the ties that bind, they will say. We must all agree on a program for a better future. We must all come together.

These notions are merely the rear-guard action of minds trying to preserve the old way.

As individuals re-fit their own sense of reality, they find ways to reach across the divide and communicate with each other. This is not an insoluble problem. THIS IS PEOPLE DISCOVERING HOW TO MEET A CHALLENGE.

Yes, there are those who will see this new state of affairs as hopeless. But keep in mind—such people are always interpreting life as hopeless. They will grab every new development as “proof of failure.” So be it.

The present and future are multiple realities. Which is the actual definition of an open society.

Individuals, re-fitting and recreating and discovering their own perception of reality, is not a one-time one-stop shop. It’s an ongoing process. Fleeing the process to go back into the arms of centralized consensus is only a temporary diversion. It will not hold.

The history of Western philosophy is one thinker after another trying to describe ultimate reality for everyone. It’s this. No, it’s that. In every case, the power of the individual is basically ignored. That farce has come to an end.

The decentralization of the media-apparatus is a sign of a much deeper trend. THE INDIVIDUAL is front and center. Trying to put that genie back in the bottle will not work. It’s too late. Now, every person will feel the need to develop his own reality. It may start as a nagging minor impulse, but soon enough the impulse will light up. It will come through as the Great Adventure.

Untold numbers of people are already at the starting gate, whining and moaning and complaining and commiserating. And stalling. But the dictum is loud and clear: FIND AND INVENT YOUR OWN REALITY. And then: MAKE IT FACT IN THE WORLD.

“Well, I didn’t bargain for that. I was just defending freedom of the individual.”

But think it through. Where does that freedom lead? What does it point to? The freedom to come to some new consensus that every soul will sign up for? A way to toss that freedom on the junk heap? A Disneyesque dream we can all swim in together?

What is freedom for? It comes from and by the individual. Toning it down to a set of convenient “new” shallow understandings “we can all share” will only be a temporary way-station.

I don’t write for people who are dedicated to The Ordinary. I don’t write for defenders of a consensus. I don’t write for people whose version of perspective extends three feet in front of their noses. All along, for the past 17 years, on this site, I’ve been writing for people who are adventurous about their own futures.

The next 20, 50, 100, 1000 years are going to be very interesting. Every possible effort will be made to shape the individual from an external point of control. These efforts will seem to succeed—but they will be superseded by breakouts, which will move according to no system.

And the proposition that all these breakouts will be nothing more than bursts of primitive violence is shortsighted. Something much deeper and higher is happening.

At the core, individuals are MAKING realities. They’re inventing them. This process is simultaneously grounded and soaring. As Dostoevsky once advised, “Head in the clouds, feet in the mud.”

Technocrats like to imagine a future world where society is fitted together as a machine, an all-embracing mechanism powered at the flip of a switch. But the more profound world, which is emerging, is decentralized. Not one dream, but many, side by side. Not dreams from the top of the food chain, but from independent individuals.

On top of that, the technology exists to help make every one of those individuals self-sufficient.

Education, in spite of programs drilling a small set of fatuous values into many heads, is also decentralizing. Why? Because more and more students are realizing they have to educate themselves, independently, on their own.

Hive consciousness will keep resurfacing to tempt the timid. “Please, please, let me belong!” But the innate psyche of the individual is more powerful than collective fantasies, in the long, long run.

The new reality of many realities is here.

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

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

What American thinkers once wrote about The Individual

What American thinkers once wrote about the individual

The individual under attack

by Jon Rappoport

February 1, 2018

“It’s instructive to read what authors wrote about core values a hundred or two hundred years ago, because then you can appreciate what has happened to the culture of a nation. You can grasp the enormous influence of planned propaganda, which changes minds, builds new consensus, and exiles certain disruptive thinkers to the margins of society. You can see what has been painted over, with great intent, in order to promote tyranny that proclaims a greater good for all.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Here I present several statements about the individual, written in 19th century America. The authors, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, and James Fenimore Cooper were prominent figures. Emerson, in his time, was the most famous.

“All greatness of character is dependent on individuality. The man who has no other existence than that which he partakes in common with all around him, will never have any other than an existence of mediocrity.” — James Fenimore Cooper

“The less government we have, the better, — the fewer laws, and the less confided power. The antidote to this abuse of [by] formal Government, is, the influence of private character, the growth of the Individual.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson

“The former generations…sacrificed uniformly the citizen to the State. The modern mind believed that the nation existed for the individual, for the guardianship and education of every man. This idea, roughly written in revolutions and national movements, in the mind of the philosopher had far more precision; the individual is the world.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson

“If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” — Henry David Thoreau

“They [conformists] think society wiser than their soul, and know not that one soul, and their soul, is wiser than the whole world…Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members….Whoso would be a man, must be a nonconformist…. Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson

Can you imagine, today, any of these statements gaining traction in the public mind, much less the mainstream media?

Immediately, there would be virulent pushback, on the grounds that unfettered individualism equals brutal greed, equals (hated) capitalism, equals inhumane indifference to the plight of the less fortunate, equals callous disregard for the needs of the group.

The 19th-century men who wrote those assertions would be viewed with hostile suspicion, as potential criminals, as potential “anti-government” outliers who should go on a list. They might have terrorist tendencies.

Contemporary analysis of the individual goes much further than this.

Case in point: Peter Collero, of the department of sociology, Western Oregon University, has written a book titled: The Myth of Individualism: How Social Forces Shape Our Lives:

“Most people today believe that an individual is a person with an independent and distinct identification. This, however, is a myth.”

Callero is claiming there aren’t individuals to begin with. They’re a group.

This downgrading of the individual human spirit is remarkable, but it is not the exception. There are many, many people today who would agree (without comprehending what they are talking about) that the individual does not exist. They would agree because, to take the opposite position would set them on a path toward admitting that each individual has independent power—and thus they would violate a sacred proscription of political correctness.

These are the extreme conformists Emerson was referring to a century and a half ago.

Unable to partake in anything resembling clear thought, such people salute the flag of the Collective, blithely assuming it means “whatever is best for everyone.” Such questions as “who defines ‘best’” and “who engineers this outcome” are beyond their capacity to consider. They rest their proud case in vagueness.

Without realizing it, they are tools of a program. They’re foot soldiers in a ceaseless campaign to promote collectivism (dictatorship from the top) under the guise of equality.

Let me repeat one of Emerson’s statements: “The antidote to this abuse of [by] formal Government, is, the influence of private character, the growth of the Individual.” The corollary: If there is no widespread growth of individuals and their independent thoughts, actions, and moral consciousness, if they don’t widen their horizons and spheres of influence, then in the long run what check is there on government?

Demeaning the individual is, in fact, an intentional operation designed to keep government power intact and expand its range.

Consider this question: If all opposition to overbearing, intrusive, and illegitimate government were contained in organized groups, and if there were no independent “Emersonian” individuals, what would be the outcome?

In the long term, those groups would stagnate and fail in their missions. They would be co-opted by government. Eventually, all such groups would be viewed as “special needs” cases, requiring “intervention” to “help them.”

That is a future without promise, without reason, without imagination, without life-force.

That is why the individual remains vital; above, beyond, and through any blizzard of propaganda.

“Art is individualism, and individualism is a disturbing and disintegrating force. There lies its immense value. For what it seeks is to disturb monotony of type, slavery of custom, tyranny of habit, and the reduction of man to the level of a machine.” — Oscar Wilde. The Soul of Man under Socialism (1891)

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

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

Logic and the Constitution

Logic and the Constitution

by Jon Rappoport

January 30, 2018

Note: I include a basic logic course in my collection, The Matrix Revealed. I present an 11-hour audio section, “Analyzing Information in the Age of Disinformation,” in my collection, Power Outside The Matrix.

Yesterday, my article, Logic and the Declaration of Independence, traced the structure of Thomas Jefferson’s formal argument for breaking away from England.

Today’s college students would have a very difficult time perceiving that argument, since they rarely study logic at any depth.

But it would be nearly impossible for them to probe the Constitution and find the basic underlying premises.

The preamble to the Constitution contains rhetoric that gives no warning of what is to come.

Preamble: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

To exhume the purpose of the Constitution, one would have to read it and study it, and then decide what the document is driving at.

But since logic is no longer taught as a required subject in schools, the door is open to all sorts of bizarre reactions to the presence of ANY information.

Here are four favorites:

One: grab the headline or the title of a document, make up your mind about how you “feel,” and ignore everything else.

Two: Actually read the document until you find a piece of information that appeals to you for any reason; latch on to it, and run with it in any direction. In all cases, the direction will have nothing to do with the intent of the document.

Three: From the moment you begin to read the title of the document, be in a state of “free association.” Take any word or sentence and connect it to an arbitrary thought or feeling, associate that thought with yet another arbitrary thought…and keep going until you become tired or bored.

Four: Ask the most aggressive person you can find what the document is about and accept whatever he says.

You might be surprised at how many people use these four “methods of analysis.”

The very idea that the author of the document is making a central point doesn’t really register. And certainly, the notion that the author is providing evidence for the central point and reasoning his way from A to B to C is alien.

A college liberal education? These days it could be imparted in a matter of weeks, simply by hammering a small set of values into students’ skulls—along with requisite guilt and fear at the prospect of wandering off the reservation.

Logic as a subject is viewed with grave suspicion, as if it might involuntarily take a person down the wrong track and dump him in a politically incorrect ditch—a fate to be avoided at all costs.

Therefore, the practice of rational analysis is on the way out. Too risky. Besides, the preferred method of dealing with opponents is screaming at them, shoving them off stage, and whining about “being triggered.”

Studying the Constitution reveals that its driving force is: the limiting of centralized power.

Checks and balances, separation of powers, enumerating federal powers and yielding all other powers to the individual States and the people—it’s all there, but today’s students would have a hard time seeing it, much less understanding WHY.

Today, the centralized federal government (and its corporate collusions/partnerships) is an awesome colossus. Most people take that as a given.

Unlike the Declaration of Independence, which announces every move it makes and explains why, the Constitution reveals its purpose and method from the inside, so to speak, after analyzing it.

The Constitution was a pact among the former colonies, the newly formed States. The States were not eager to submit to a central government.

The abusive experience of Europe, behind the new citizens, was Rule From Above, by tyrants. Individual rights and private property had been hard won. They had to be protected at all costs.

So: bind up the central government; set one branch against another; allow only certain specified centralized powers; leave the rest to the States; permit as much individual liberty as possible. In fact, individual liberty was at the heart of the document.

Naïve students, demanding purity and perfection in the document, will never find it. For example, the Constitution was fully ratified in 1790, and slavery was formally abolished in 1865.

The logic of the Constitution was a two-step: limit federal power; these are the ways to accomplish it.

One could argue for or against each piece—but first he would have to recognize the pieces were there. These days, attaining that recognition is a serious problem.

Who would want to teach logic to students? What a waste of time. The purpose of education these days is injecting values and slogans and attitudes; and associating those values with attractive images. For that, you don’t need a mind. You only need mush that can be shaped.

And after what passes for a high school education, the mush is there. It has no clues about processes of thought.

Nevertheless, just suppose a teacher wanted to go where no one has gone for a hundred years or so. How would he start? Where would he start?

At the bottom.

Find a coherent newspaper article about politics. Have the students read it. Then ask them: what does the first paragraph state? What is it saying?

You may be surprised at the variety of opinion.

“It says Martians will be here soon.”

“It says President Obama was born in Hawaii.”

“It says cooking rice is easy.”

“It says I’m triggered and vulnerable.”

Carry on a discussion for as long as it takes, until most of the students know what the first paragraph actually states. This may be a half-hour, a week, a month. Who knows?

Repeat the process with each paragraph of the article. If that takes a year, so be it, because you can’t move further until students understand the text. I know that is a mystical and esoteric notion, but accept it on an experimental basis.

Next step: ask the students whether the author of the article is trying to make an overall point. Ask them what that point is.

“His point is he doesn’t like working-class people.”

“He loves cats.”

“He wants everybody to move to Mars.”

“He’s political.”

“He’s asking us to give money to Marco Rubio.”

Your work is cut out for you. Keep going until the fog clears. Have the students read the article over and over until most of them see the actual point the author is trying to make.

Then—how did the author try to convince you his point was correct?

Then—did you see a hole in his attempt to convince you? A gap? A wrong move?

This is the general sequence of steps. Basically, you’re sticking the students’ noses in the text. Again and again. You’re focusing them on specifics. You’re showing them the difference between their own opinions and random associations and what the author is saying.

You’re doing the one thing they’ve avoided doing. You’re standing in for every incompetent teacher they’ve ever had. You’re reversing years of desultory derangement in classrooms.

You’re making students more intelligent. That’s a very tall order. It takes commitment. If you don’t have it, get out of the business.

Mainstream news is a wonderful source for non-logic.

Logic topples arbitrary authority.

Logic allows you to move inside a complex argument. Once inside, you can give the argument a haircut and see its essence.

The interesting thing is: once people actually know what an author is saying; once they know what conclusion he’s reaching; once they know how he’s getting there; they can see the flaws and the omissions and the insupportable inferences.

They can see the line of reasoning, from beginning to end.

The lights go on.

A heretofore mysterious territory comes into focus.

The differences between fact, lie, assumption, argument, polemic, and propaganda emerge and the mind begins to breathe.

Perhaps for the first time.

Beginning in ancient Greece, coming up through the Middle Ages, and into the 19th century, logic was one aspect of education called the Trivium (“the three”): in sequence, a student learned grammar, then logic, then rhetoric.

Except in scattered places, where people have consciously instituted a revival of the Trivium, that integrated method of teaching is gone now.

Instead, in primary and middle schools, we have superficial coasting through many academic subjects, minus the necessary exercises and drills to ensure that students grasp material. In other words, we have imposed ADHD.

Finally, studying logic gives a student an appreciation of consequences. For example, a politician announces a high-flying generalization, as a plank of his platform. Two things ought to follow. The student does his best to translate that generality into specific terms which actually mean something. Then he traces what would happen if the plank were, in fact, put into effect; what would the consequences specifically entail? There are always consequences—it’s just that most people never see them or think about them, because they haven’t the foggiest idea about how to flesh them out and map them.

Logic: one of the great contributions to civilization, left to die on the vine.

It needs to be resurrected, in full flower.

power outside the matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

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

Logic and the Declaration of Independence

Logic and the Declaration of Independence

—What are your premises? State them. What implications flow from your premises? State them. What conclusion do you draw? State it. In a bygone era, this used to be called a formal logical argument—

by Jon Rappoport

January 29, 2018

Note: My collection, The Matrix Revealed, contains a basic logic course. And my collection, Power Outside The Matrix, contains an extensive 11-hour audio presentation, Analyzing Information in the Age of Disinformation.

Logic, these days, has been replaced in schools with a mind-control apparatus that involves the following:

EVERY POINT OF VIEW IS EQUAL.

EVERYBODY HAS TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE WHOLE.

TRUE CRITICAL THINKING, WHICH IS THE EXCLUSIVE TERRITORY OF THE INDIVIDUAL, LEAVES PEOPLE OUT OF THE GROUP AND IS THEREFORE PREJUDICIAL.

If you favor this new formulation and think it’s useful, I have condos on Jupiter for sale.

The point of modern education, more and more, is:

“Good people belong to the group.”

“The Group is everything.”

“If you don’t belong to the Group, you have a mental disorder.”

Why is all this emphasis put on the Group?

The answer to that question also gives you the reason logic isn’t taught in schools anymore:

The independent self-sufficient individual is being phased out.

The independent individual who knows how to think and make lucid judgments on his own is a threat to the EMERGING RELIGION OF GLOBALISM.

Some people think education has been hijacked for the purpose of training children to become robotic workers for the State. That’s partly true, but education is also the proving ground for the religion of the Group.

This religion doesn’t need or want logic. Logic would be disruptive. It would differentiate one student from another.

A few years ago, I spoke to a teacher who was introducing his class to logic. He told me, “These are very bright kids. They’re all going to college. They said they couldn’t learn logic. They couldn’t do it. They had some kind of mental block.”

As we talked further, it became obvious that the mental block was an idea of THE GROUP. These kids had already been indoctrinated into “cooperative thought.” They instinctively realized that, if they studied logic, the Collective would break apart. Each student would have to stand on his own, and that prospect was frightening.

A person either wants to think for himself—and knows how to—or he prefers the hazy hive-like existence of belonging to something that is less than he is.

It’s that simple.

Several years ago, I came across a letter to the editor of Commentary Magazine, from its January 1979 issue. The author was a Thomas Jefferson scholar, Wilbur Samuel Howell.

Howell made several key points. As a college student, Jefferson studied philosophy and logic under Professor William Small, at William and Mary. Small had come to the college from Aberdeen, Scotland, where he had studied under William Duncan, a renowned logician and author of Elements of Logick. Indeed, Jefferson later remarked that Professor Small had gone a long way toward shaping his life.

Therefore, it’s no surprise that the Jefferson-authored Declaration of Independence would adhere to a logical structure. Indeed, the Declaration is a kind of argument from first premises, through to a conclusion.

I went back and read the Declaration, and I’ll open up its logical structure.

It begins with this:

“When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

Jefferson, in this prologue, indicates that the people should state their reasons for separating from a ruling power. Before he goes on to do that, he enunciates his first premises.

All men have rights, and to secure them, they create governments.

Second, the people have the authority to abolish any ruler that tries to destroy those rights, and, in its place, the people should institute a new government.

Third, when a long history of tyrannical abuse proves that the old government cannot be corrected, the people have a duty to overthrow it.

Here is the relevant text:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. –Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.”

What remains is for Jefferson to list the abuses of the British Crown; to prove, in other words, that the King has, in fact, brought on such a stream of tyrannical actions.

Well, here are the abuses—the first 20 of a longer list:

“He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

“He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

“He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

“He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

“He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

“He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

“He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

“He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

“He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

“He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

“He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

“He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

“He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

“For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

“For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

“For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

“For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

“For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

“For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

“For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies…”

At this point, Jefferson makes it clear that the colonists have tried, without success, to correct these tyrannical abuses through peaceful means. They are not acting in haste:

“In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

“Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity.”

Jefferson then announces his conclusion, based on the prologue, the original premises of his argument, and the examples he has cited to show that the heart of these premises is true:

“We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.”

—Fire, passion, even poetry, held within the flow of a logical progression.

Jefferson was not only a devoted student of logic, he wanted to make the great case for freedom and independence by using its power.

In his mind, freedom and logic were connected.

If in our schools, in 2017, logic as a distinct subject has been reduced to paltry terms, how are students able to grasp the majestic nature of freedom, as expressed in the Declaration? How are they able to understand that living in freedom is more than vaguely drifting from one slogan to another, one addled piece of political rhetoric to another?

Note: James Madison, thought of by many as the father of the Constitution, studied logic intensely at the College of New Jersey. The course followed the pattern laid down in a famous 17th-century book, Logic or the Art of Thinking.

The Matrix Revealed

(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.

The vision of technocracy and your future

Technocracy for planet Earth

by Jon Rappoport

January 8, 2018

“Well, boys, we’ve got this strange thing called THE INDIVIDUAL. Could somebody tell me what he is? He’s not conforming to our algorithms. He’s all over the place. And while we’re at it, what the hell is this IMAGINATION? It keeps slipping out of our grasp, it doesn’t fit the plan…”

PART ONE

—Technocrats say they want to wipe out poverty, war, and inequality. But in order to achieve these lofty goals (or pretend to), they need to re-program humans—

Technocracy is the basic agenda and plan for ruling global society from above, so we need to understand it from several angles.

Consider a group of enthusiastic forward-looking engineers in the early 20th century. They work for a company that has a contract to manufacture a locomotive.

This is a highly complex piece of equipment.

On one level, workers are required to make the components to spec. Then they must put them all together. These tasks are formidable.

On another level, various departments of the company must coordinate their efforts. This is also viewed as a technological job. Organizing is considered a technology.

When the locomotive is finished and delivered, and when it runs on its tracks and pulls a train, a great and inspiring victory is won.

And then…the engineers begin to think about the implications. Suppose the locomotive was society itself? Suppose society was the finished product? Couldn’t society be put together in a coordinated fashion? And couldn’t the “technology of organizing things” be utilized for the job?

Why bother with endlessly arguing and lying politicians? Why should they be in charge? Isn’t that an obvious losing proposition? Of course it is.

Engineers could lay out and build a future society that would benefit all people. Disease and poverty could be wiped out. Eliminating them would be part of the blueprint.

This “insight” hit engineers and technicians like a ton of bricks. Of course! All societies had been failures for the same reason: the wrong people were in charge.

Armed with this new understanding, engineers of every stripe began to see what was needed. A revolution in thinking about societal organization. Science was the new king. And science would rule.

Of course, for an engineered world to work, certain decisions would have to be made about the role of the individual. Every individual. You couldn’t have an air-tight plan if every human were free to pursue his own objectives. Too many variables. Too much confusion. Too much conflict. Well, that problem could be solved. The individual’s actions would be tailored to fit the coordinated operations of the planned society.

The individual would be “one of the components of the locomotive.” His life would be connected to other lives to produce an exemplary shape.

Yes, this could imply a few problems, but those problems could be worked out. They would have to be worked out, because the overriding goal was the forming of a world organization. What would you do if one bolt (an individual human) in one wheel of a locomotive was the wrong size? You would go back and correct the error. You would re-make the bolt.

Other people entered the game. High-echelon Globalists saw technocracy as a system they could use to control the population.

Essentially, an already-misguided vision of a future technocratic utopia was hijacked. Something bad was made much worse.

In a nutshell, this is the history of technocracy.

A locomotive is a society? No. That was the first fatally flawed idea. Everything that followed was increasingly bizarre.

Unfortunately, many people in our world believe in Globalism, if you could call a partial vague view a legitimate belief. They dreamily float on all the propaganda cover stories—greatest good for the greatest number of people; no more poverty; equality of sharing; reducing the carbon footprint; a green economy; “sustainable development”; international cooperation; allotting production and consumption of goods and services for the betterment of everyone; and all of this delivered from a central platform of altruistic guidance.

If you track down the specifics that sit under these cover stories, you discover a warped system of planning that expresses control over the global population.

The collective utopia turns out to be a sham.

Waking up is hard to do? Breaking up is hard to do? They must be done.

A workable technological fix is a very nice achievement when the project is a machine. But transferring that glow of victory to the whole of society is an illusion. Anything that calls itself education would tackle the illusion as the first order of business.

Engineering society requires engineering humans.

That is the fatal flaw.

It’s called mind control.

PART TWO

Any genuine artist, any builder of communities, any sane activist, any honorable visionary stands outside technocracy, and is not part of this program.

Instead, his thrust is toward more individual freedom and a more open society with greater decentralization of power.

Decentralization is the key.

The use of technology does not imply living inside its control. The use of technology does not imply that society should be laid out like a giant machine with fitted parts.

Those futurists who have offered “overall plans” for the disposition of society generally ignore or sidestep the issue of who is going to administer the plan. To say this is an error is a vast understatement.

Where is one far-reaching center of power in our world that would run society?

All such centers of power are, first and foremost, dedicated to their own survival. And after that, they are dedicated to control of the territory they believe they own. THE INDIVIDUAL is a messy thing that needs to be sidelined or dealt with as a disruptive element.

I speak to those people who understand that the idea of the free, independent, powerful, and creative individual is being sidelined, shelved, and sent down the memory hole. This is no accident. This isn’t just a devolutionary trend. Technocrats see this as a necessary action, in order to “clean up” their equation for the civilization they’re building. The individual is a slippery variable that throws a monkey wrench into formulas.

PART THREE

Imagination never dies.

It belongs to the individual. It isn’t property of the group.

It enables solutions that eradicate problems and get out ahead of problems before they raise their heads.

Time and time again, the individual, as he wends his way through life, encounters persons and organizations that consider imagination a negative. In the clearly defined shapes of society, imagination must take a back seat to planning.

Is the individual resistant to such manipulations, or does he give in?

This is the key question.

Does the individual view society as an operation that can potentially lift up individuals and empower them? Or does he give in to the idea that society should create more and more dependent people?

The individual can be a source of spreading freedom, or he can defend the notion that there are an endless number of “entitlements” that must be honored.

Technocracy promotes entitlements as a doorway into the future. Its ultimate entitlement goes this way: you have the right to be re-programmed to believe you have a slot in the future world; we will make this slot as attractive as possible; you will serve the overall good as we engineer it.

That is the fundamental justification for the Welfare State. It’s the justification for a future technocratic policy which will assign citizens energy quotas. A citizen would be permitted to consume a set amount of energy in a given time period. (So-called smart meters are a step in that direction. The meters enable more specific measurements of energy consumption.)

This is how technocracy views the future…your future.

The ultimate technocratic vision? Your brain is a processor, and your brain is your mind. That’s all your mind is. Therefore, connecting your brain to a super-computer, or to the Cloud, will magically expand your mind and make it “more than human.”

You will become trans-human. A hybrid of human and machine.

This is the fairy tale to end all fairy tales.

It’s wishful fantasy dressed up as science.

The idea is: you will become More. You will overcome the limits and problems associated with being an individual.

Every individual will receive the same information and the same answers and the same solutions from the Cloud. AUTOMATICALLY.

This is the programmer’s wet dream.

Technocrats will thus be able to build a global society and control its every facet.

That’s the revolution.

The counter-revolution is YOU.

The free individual.

Never forget it.

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

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

Who I write for

Who I write for

by Jon Rappoport

January 8, 2018

“Imagination is the soul’s way of saying: I never give up.” (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)

I have published this piece before. It stands as my best description of why I do what I do. And now I’m adding a new introduction:

When I began writing seriously, in the summer of 1959, the idea that I would focus on The Individual was the farthest thing from my mind.

I assumed everyone was an individual. Case closed. Why bother to mention it? Why bother to think about it?

Even then, though, a massive propaganda operation was underway. It was aimed at replacing the individual with the group. Some people call this cultural Marxism. It’s much larger than that. It’s Collectivism at every possible level. It aims to eradicate the individual’s awareness that he is an individual. Why? Because if he truly knows what he is, then he also knows that society and civilization are opposing him. They are dedicated to the creation and sustenance of groups. Groups are manageable. Individuals aren’t.

Needless to say, much has happened since that time.

Skipping ahead, by the late 1990s it had become apparent to me that many people were falling by the wayside. Their “universal tolerance” was a form of self-sabotage. They were sacrificing themselves on the soft buttery altar of “doing good.” It was obvious to me, for example, that the notion of repairing all past injustices of society was a well with no bottom. It was a covert op. It was an attempt to entangle minds in a case of amnesia about individual power. Rather than trying to raise people up, it was a plan to victimize a permanent (and ever expanding) underclass.

I wasn’t sure my message about all this would reach many readers. I wasn’t sure what their reaction would be. But I didn’t care. I was motivated to make my case. So I did. So I do.

And lo and behold, people have responded. Over and above the nonsensical static of trolls and self-appointed victims, a wave of confirmation reached me. People were still there—as individuals. They knew it. They were seeing the demise of society around them.

Beyond confirmation, though, what I was aiming at was (and is) expansion of individual power. Not just an acknowledgment of it.

Power. Creative power. The power of imagination. The capacity of the individual to conceive of his deepest desires, pursue them, and turn them into visible fact in the world. (This is shorthand for what I cover extensively in my collection, Exit From The Matrix.)

Since I was a child and read great sea-adventure novels and science fiction novels, I assumed that fleshing out a vision of what one wants for his future was the obvious and standard enterprise for every person. Of course, I was grossly overestimating the situation. But I never lost that fundamental understanding. And never will.

Societal reality, consensus reality, “world reality,” is basically a gigantic covert op. It’s designed to keep the individual inside a set framework of response and consent. It is hugely destructive. As a reporter for the past 30 years, I’ve investigated many cases and angles of this op, and I’ve published my findings without compromise.

But always, above and beyond that, I’ve been referring to the individual and his capacity to create and build better realities of his own choosing. Gorgeous, free, open, wild, unfettered, majestic realities.

That’s my introduction, for the moment. Here is the article, Who I write for:

Consciousness.

Freedom.

Power.

The individual.

Imagination. Creating new realities.

Society and civilization as a potential force for helping to liberate the individual.

Underneath all my articles, all my investigations into corruption and crime at the highest levels, these above factors have been my motivation,

Who do I write for?

I write for people who recognize they can do something for themselves and others, who can improve their lives and consciousness and power.

I write for people who want to increase their own power.

I’ve been at this for 35 years. I recognize there are people out there who dig down and discover massive chunks of corruption, crime, and conspiracy in the world—and then they twist that knowledge to say: “See, this is why I can’t make any progress in life. This is why I’m blocked. This is why I’m having trouble. This is why I can’t do anything.”

I’m not writing for those people.

They’re using their hard-won knowledge to doom themselves to a life they don’t want. They jumped out of one box and put themselves in another one.

Regardless of how bad things are in this world, there is always something a person can do. For himself, and for others.

In doing that, in moving toward the life he wants most profoundly, in taking creative action, he becomes more alive, more conscious, more powerful.

He is the person I’m writing for.

I’m writing for those men and women.

There is the Personal and the Planetary. They can’t be entirely separated and walled off from each other.

But that doesn’t mean one sphere should be absorbed in the other.

You can’t eliminate personal desire from the equation and expect to find all the life you want. It doesn’t work.

I write for people who have at least glimpsed the power of their own imaginations, and want to increase that power.

I write for people who, becoming aware of how fake realities are built, cross over and realize they can invent better realities and futures.

I write for people who can wake up to that.

I write for people who want to understand the details of how corrupt and deceptive realities are built. My investigative articles serve that purpose.

I write for the individual.

I write for myself.

I write to expose corruption to the light of day, because I want to.

I write for people who understand they can become more alive.

I write for people who are willing to consider something new, who aren’t trapped by the belief that everything important is ancient.

I write for people who hunger for adventure.

I write for people who know they have the strength to make something happen.

I write for people who suspect they have latent capabilities that can come to the surface.

I write for people who realize answers and solutions to their own lives come from themselves.

I write for people who refuse to relinquish their individuality.

I write for people who want to increase the power and range and scope of their own imaginations, in order to discover and invent new startling enterprises and adventures.

I write for people who are on a spiritual road that isn’t clouded by convenient slogans, who know their journey is unique to them, and not part of a system.

I write for people who’ve taken hold of their own freedom and want more freedom.

I write for people who can follow a train of thought.

I write for people who have done their best to make their way through life, who sense there is something more, who want knowledge that will be liberating, not entrapping.

I write for people who, acknowledging that systems and structures can be quite useful, reject the idea that all of life is encompassed by a system.

I write for people who want more power to think, do, create—rather than being told what to think and create.

I write for people who, understanding conspiracies, don’t fold up, but rather, as my friend Catherine Austin Fitts says, want to start their own (good) conspiracy.

I write for all these reasons and more.

I write for people who, when they discover how much corruption abounds, refrain from demanding that others tell them what to do about it—but rather discover/invent for themselves what actions they can take.

I write for people who don’t give up.

I write for people who have already found some answers and some success, and want more.

I write for pleasure and enjoyment.

I write for people who want to read.

I write for people who want to consider ideas that reach miles and miles past the borders of consensus reality.

I write for people who are sick and tired of how this world is being run, and want to do something about it, want to discover the creativity within themselves that will provide answers.

I write for people who never give up.

I write for people who want to make a better world, by their own definition, and will work toward that end.

I write for people who have thrown away this formula: a) blaming others for their own shortcomings; and b) using that blame to build their own personal prisons of despair.

I write as part of the business I run, the sole proprietorship called nomorefakenews. On that site, I sell my products. I’m an entrepreneur. I believe in giving value for value. Since I started nomorefakenews in 2001, I’ve written a stream of articles people can, in fact, read for nothing.

I write for people who can follow this train of thought: a) discover the nuts and bolts of how elites invent reality for rest of us (The Matrix Revealed); b) instead, extend the power of their own imaginations and invent better realities (Exit From The Matrix); and c) attain the power to operate inside and outside the Matrix (Power Outside The Matrix). Yes, that’s a plug for my three Matrix collections.

I write for people who aren’t afraid of having power.

I write for people who know the difference between belonging to a group that ultimately asks them to surrender their own individuality, and a group composed of true individuals.

I write for people who do their best to weather every storm.

I write for people born into a place that has been taken over by corrupt fascists.

I write to rise as high as I can.

I write to expose every restraint of freedom I can perceive.

I write to say this space-time box is not the only place there is.

I write to say every individual who inhabits a physical form is immortal, whether he likes it or not…and it’s better to face the truth than deny it.

I write to promote both logic and imagination—each in its own sphere of action.

I hope I write for you.

Exit From the Matrix

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

(New piece up at my other blog OUTSIDE THE REALITY MACHINE entitled “The artist inside”. Click here.)

Jon Rappoport

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

A break from reality: the path of the artist

A break from reality: the path of the artist

by Jon Rappoport

December 19, 2017

“The artist invents new space, where there wasn’t space before, and then he creates new energies there. Artists produce unprecedented dimensions and worlds.” (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)

Among all spiritual paths described by teachers, now and in the past, the one represented by artists is unique.

Quintessentially unique.

Why? Because—and this is vital to understand—the path of the artist has no explicit cosmology, no preordained content, no catalog of wisdom.

In other words, no prior meaning has been imposed on it.

This is not a path replete with its own metaphysics.

No one is in charge of the path.

For all these reasons, the path of the artist is not normally recognized as being spiritual.

And yet it is. It is forged in freedom, and it has been established by artists from the dawn of time, from the moment the first human scratched the first drawing on the wall of a cave.

He was saying, “Reality is not final.”

“The wisdom of the clan isn’t the only wisdom.”

He was saying, “This path is for the individual.”

Who knows what price he paid for his daring?

But he opened the way for all artists to come.

There is a line that separates everything a person knows from the Mystery that lies beyond.

Most people are content to rearrange and filter and study what they already know. They may glimpse the sea of mystery, but they don’t want to enter it, because: they have no map.

And yet, the key to greater consciousness is always in that mystery.

The mystery can be entered, but not through conventional means. It can be traveled, but not with someone else’s navigation chart. It can be illuminated, but not through a process of head-on discovery.

The mystery is progressively revealed through the act of creating. The act of imagining. The act of inventing what wasn’t there before.

This is what the artist does.

He brings about a dimension-shift.

He makes quantum leaps, spontaneous actions, improvisations that have never occurred before, that are unique to him, in the moment.

As a resultant effect, he experiences insights that are beyond his current state of knowing, beyond what anyone else in the universe can transmit to him.

This path, obviously, is not a system. It is beyond all systems and structures. Beyond all charts, all diagrams, all blueprints, all cohered wisdom.

This path is always new.

That is its opportunity: to transcend repeating and restating what you already know and limiting where you can go.

It’s the opportunity to move out of the welter of thoughts that occupy your mind, into the action of inventing new reality—on a blank canvas, on an empty page, and most importantly, on the yet uncreated space of your future.

We are all artists who make reality. We are meant for that life, in the same way the body is meant for breathing and moving.

In these times, many people have opted for a more passive form of spirituality, in which acceptance of things-as-they-are is considered an end in itself.

Along the artist’s path, spontaneously, rise up answers to the most profound questions you have been asking, since it first occurred to you that life, mind, thought, and the universe might be more than they seem.

These answers are uniquely yours. They’re not replicas, they’re not copies; they’re not second-hand.

They incur no debt or obligation. They’re free, and they expand freedom. They’re yours, and they transform your energy. They’re new, and they initiate your intensified experience of the moment, the here and now.

Everything I’m describing and alluding to here is different from the work of the Reality Manufacturing Company (RMC), which spools out Things-As-They-Appear-To-Be.

In the political arena, for example, the RMC manufactures untold numbers of cover stories, to obscure the fact that Control is the single goal of elites.

At the apex of the pyramid of control is mind control:

A shared understanding (illusion).

“We all know that ABCDEF are true.”

Defection from the illusion is easy to label a mental disorder.

The physical world is real. Claiming it is the only reality is a strategy designed to keep the individual from embarking on his path of creating realities.

On that path, in freedom, the individual finds his own truth.

“Re-entering” the world with that truth is power. Leverage. Unshakable personal unique knowledge.

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

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

The search for pure ideals in politics

The search for pure ideals in politics

by Jon Rappoport

December 18, 2017

Al Gore was pure. George W Bush was a monster. John Kerry was pure. Bush was still a monster. John McCain and Mitt Romney were monsters. Barack Obama was pure. Trump is pure. Hillary is a monster. Round and round it goes.

Reverse the labels, turn them upside down, inside out, and you arrive at the same dead-end alley at midnight: none of the big-time pols are pure. Far from it.

Yesterday I posted my article on some of the upsides and downsides of Trump. Today, let’s take just a brief small peek at Obama.

Obama was close to purity, “though some of his policies may have been wrong headed.” Really?

The leftist Guardian (1/9/17): “In 2016, US special [military] operators could be found in 70% of the world’s nations, 138 countries – a staggering jump of 130% since the days of the Bush administration.”

“…in 2016 alone, the Obama administration dropped at least 26,171 bombs. This means that every day last year, the US military blasted combatants or civilians overseas with 72 bombs; that’s three bombs every hour, 24 hours a day.”

“As drone-warrior-in-chief, he [Obama] spread the use of drones outside the declared battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, mainly to Pakistan and Yemen. Obama authorized over 10 times more drone strikes than George W Bush, and automatically painted all males of military age in these regions as combatants, making them fair game for remote controlled killing.”

The champ of bombing. But “pure.”

In 1994, I ran for a seat in the US House of Representatives. Halfway through my campaign, I woke up one day and said, “What the hell am I doing?” I saw one possibility, in case I won. My team and I would go to Washington, rent large trucks, and slap very large posters on them, titled: CORRUPT CONGRESSMAN OF THE WEEK. We would show a photo of the target legislator, and list, in one column, his voting record, and in another column, the money he’d taken to cast those votes. Every week, we’d do that. We’d drive those big trucks around Washington streets, slowly, and in the heaviest traffic. And that’s pretty much all we would do during my term in office. Of course, I would get censured by the House in my first week, and probably booted out of that august body. But it would be fun. And the publicity could highlight the issue of non-purity.

I lost the primary election to a 20-year incumbent, Henry Waxman. So that was that.

The pressures and forces acting on a politician in Washington are numerous. His own Party leaders are telling him how to vote on bills. Lobbyists too numerous to mention are leaning on him for help. (For example, the mighty AIPAC, which is always on the alert re the interests of the state of Israel.) Businessmen from a Congressman’s home district want pork; federal funds for projects. Then there are murky and clandestine influences that come through cutouts for intelligence agencies and the military. The Congressman is spied on by the NSA and other such outfits. His own staff may contain watchdogs, who are secretly reporting his words, attitudes, and actions to these agencies. Outright bribes and offers of future employment in the private sector are quietly placed on the table. The social scene in Washington is seeded with denizens who have agendas and want to be “friends.” It never ends. Every Tom, Dick, Harry, and Mary knows that Washington is where the big money and status live. They come there to Get Some, if they can. Pure ideals? Never heard of them.

On top of all this, you have compromise. “Sir, you’ll never get this bill passed with the current wording. You’ll have to make significant changes. Ask yourself whether you want nothing or a piece of something. Because that’s the situation. And if you do compromise, you’ll be expected to support other people’s bills in the future, bills you won’t like…”

Washington is a giant barn that smells so bad no one in his right mind would want to put a foot in it.

“Giant” is a key word. The severely limited central government spelled out in the Constitution is but a faint memory of a “simpler time.”

The sheer number of crimes taking place in the barn are far too numerous to prosecute, even if the will were there to do it.

If you look up the hill from the barn, you’ll see the mansion where the Rockefeller Trilateral Commission, the inner core of the Council on Foreign Relations, a few Bilderberg agents, Rothschild men, Vatican reps, Chinese and Russian “observers,” EU Globalists, military industrial neocons, and assorted other power players arrive and depart. They monitor the activities in the barn and make sure the general tenor of decisions nudges America deeper into an interdependent web of “the new international order.”

There are several wild cards.

First, for better or worse, “the people.” The population of the nation. They aren’t all asleep. Many are waking up.

Second, independent media, which are exposing corruption and crimes at high levels.

Third, citizens who do have ideals that mirror the faded document called the Constitution, and are motivated to run for public office—who refuse to compromise, who are willing to flame out in Washington, while standing for what they believe in. If they are elected in the first place. A few hundred of these relentless individuals could have a dramatic effect.

The men in the mansion on the summit of the hill are relying on cynicism to carry the day. That’s what they want. They love cynics. And cynics love to say there are no answers and all is lost. That’s how cynics get their juice. They celebrate all political failures, which confirm their world view.

And this is where we come to the inner psychology of the individual. If cynicism reigns, a day of reckoning is on the way. For a while, rejoicing over doom is fashionable and exciting. But then the picnic turns sour. It rains, the food is spoiled, the earth is muddy, the landscape is gray and unforgiving. What then?

Finding lost ideals and charting a new course. Refusing to surrender. Accessing the North Star of imagination, which never dies—and from which limitless energy and unpredictable solutions flow.

THIS inner psychology is outside The System. Utilizing it allows you to re-enter the world with new ideas and answers of your own. Your own.

Newsflash: The game is afoot. It is never over.

As in: never…

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

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