WAKE UP OR SLEEP ON…

EXPOSING THE MATRIX

by Jon Rappoport

May 31, 2012

I fully realize I’m not writing in a way that pigeonholes me in some easy category. This has been the way since the beginning of this site. And there is a reason why. I was a painter for many years before I began working as a reporter. From painting, I saw that magic was real and it was powerful. I experienced it. I also saw that there was an operation underway to bury the individual—and worse, to eradicate the memory of the idea of the individual.

Real magic is the territory of the individual, not the group.

Individual power is the target of the globalists.

So I work both sides of the street, so to speak. I don’t exclude subjects simply because it puts some puzzlement in the minds of my readers. I want to shake things up. I want individuals to take full advantage of the fact that there is much, much more to life than is usually advertised. That’s why I put together THE MATRIX REVEALED. I thought it was time to lay it all out on the table.

Real magic isn’t something that takes place in dark rooms with symbols and rituals and costumes and robot followers. It isn’t a code word for Satanic. It has nothing to do with all that garbage. Real magic has everything to do with the innate ability of the individual. It has to do with breaking through the illusion that the space-time continuum rules and limits our lives. This isn’t a voyage everybody wants to embark on. But it’s a journey some people have been waiting their whole lives to take, because they realize there is something phony inherent in the reality we accept as final.

Reality isn’t only what elites are doing to the global population. It’s also about what we do to restrict our own individual power, and I’d be a liar if I didn’t point that out.

1) Introduction

You can pose a problem to a person that pits one of his emotions against another. It’s a clever strategy. In fact, it’s more than clever. It’s ingenious. For example, you hogtie him by balancing his desire for freedom against his desire to serve, to be liked.

This is no small thing. The person can’t wrap his mind around such a paradox. He feels like a steel ball in a pinball machine. He wants to be free and independent and strong, but at the same time, he wants praise and he wants to be known as “good.”

This problem, over time, if not resolved, acts like a drug on consciousness. It produces a state of narcosis. Which is another way of saying: surrender.

Surrender is a close cousin to sacrifice. Here is a quote from the Edward Bernays of fiction, the fat little manipulator, Ellsworth Toohey, a pivotal character in Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead:

“Every system of ethics that preached sacrifice grew into a world power and ruled millions of men.”

These days, millions of young students all over the world are being conditioned to support a new world in which the sacrifice and lessening of the individual are sacred virtues.

The students approve and join ranks, because they have nothing else to live for. They can’t think for themselves, they can’t imagine the other option, which is individualism. For them, individualism is degraded and stands for nothing more than unattractive unbridled greed and petty materialism. So they’re trapped.

The truth is they shouldn’t be in college at all. They should be living in the world and discovering for themselves the meaning of their lives. They should be free to make mistakes, to fail, to start over, to test themselves against group consciousness and rise above it or submit to it and experience fascism first-hand.

The famous mind-control doctor, Jose Delgado, who worked out of Yale, once wrote, “Man does not have the right to develop his own mind…” That’s precisely the position of the guardians of the Matrix.

They seek the Landru, which was the name given to a computer-simulated dictator that ruled a planet in a Star Trek episode. The population is kept subservient by this machine—all for the sake of peace and the end of violent conflict.

Well, everyone wants peace. So on one level, this radical Landru solution seems reasonable. But the price to be paid is the liberty of every person.

The aim of mind control is the use of universal ideals as the lever to push populations into a diminished state of power. “You want X, don’t you? Of course you do. You can have it, if you’re willing to make a sacrifice.”

And what is that sacrifice?

Self.

So you get this paradox, for example. “All selves want peace. Here is peace. Just give up self.”

A careful reading of the Bhagavad Gita, the famous battlefield conversation between Krishna and Prince Arjuna, reveals that Self is presented as a shifting ground of meaning. One the one hand, Self is distinct and individually immortal. On the other hand, Self is a piece of a larger Being, a piece of cheese in the Big Cosmic Cheese.

This latter version is important as one instance among thousands, historically, in which we’re told that Self should be splendidly sacrificed—after all, it is an illusion that walls us off from “greater enlightened consciousness.” But the illusion is not self; it is actually the fabrication of the Big Cheese. That is the principle that enabled the ancient caste system—and it is being repeated today, as individuals are enlisted in the Larger Cause of “humanity.”

Here is the problem. If distinct and individual self is defined as petty and grasping and shallow and arrogant and even “mentally disordered,” then when a person considers the possibility of rejecting the Big Cheese of “higher collective consciousness,” the alternative (individuality) seems unpleasant, to say the least.

And that is why I have been writing on these pages for the past ten years.

Because there is a way to see the individual as great and free and powerful and creative, possessed of an infinite quality called imagination. And when that view comes to the foreground, the world (and the Matrix) are turned upside down. Forever.

All spiritual systems are false. They either teach individual absorption into some greater whole, or they teach freedom while organizing that freedom under the banner of authority, which is no freedom at all.

2) Notes on the Foundation of Magic

Magic rests on the ability to set aside the personal conviction that physical reality flows always and only as we experience it every day.

There are an infinite number of possible magics, which is to say, one can come at magic from an infinite number of paths. They are not rote copies of someone else’s system. And by system, I mean something divorced from self, divorced from one’s own desires.

As an analogy, consider the following: you read a book containing a hundred short stories. In each of these stories, there is a person who does magic. Each person does magic in a different way. You discover that, in one of the stories, the way a person is doing magic has a particular resonance, a particular closeness for you. Would you try to do magic by using the other 99 approaches, or would you go to the one that has strong appeal first?

Magic works changes in the space-time continuum. Magic overrides or replaces or supersedes the normal actions of the continuum.

Trying to explain how magic works by citing principles, methods, laws, and systems of the continuum is not informative.

The continuum can be likened to a machine that makes drip-coffee, one drip at a time. Serial time and serial chains of cause and effect are the patterns. Magic does not operate in that fashion.

The stories and sustaining myths we tell ourselves over and over, the stories to which we return, again and again, are capsules in which we float; and we sense that, if we can extend those tales, take them further than we have ever taken them before, we might emerge into the realm where we can do magic. This is called escape from the labyrinth.

Certainly, our state of mind, when we try to do magic, is important. If we are carrying too much baggage, if we feel burdened by our situation in life, we reduce our chance of success.

Magic has been called manifestation, and it is that. But the idea that one can start from zero and achieve manifestation in five minutes is a product of our warped desire to have everything we want all at once. It is a first cousin to entitlement.

The road to magic begins with imagination, which is the capacity to create realities that do not exist in the continuum.

The Matrix is the sum of things that keep us from doing magic. One of those things is continuing to perceive reality as we always have. Imagination is more powerful than perception.

Emotional magic begins with imagining what you desire. It is the first step. Living with and around and inside the imagining is the next step.

Trying to do magic out of an abject sense of desperation is asking for disappointment. Magic isn’t about failing to live in this world. It isn’t about mere escape. It isn’t about the overwhelming nostalgia that accompanies trying to regain something from the past that was lost. It isn’t about excusing a lack of success.

Achieving what is called the paranormal isn’t about trying to cut one’s self off from the world.

Doing magic isn’t merely substituting manifestation for hard work. A person who shrinks away from hard work shouldn’t go anywhere near magic.

A person who conceives of his own desires in some superficial flattened form needs to revolutionize and deepen his outlook. Is the absolute upper limit of what he desires a Rolex?

Wanting to help others isn’t a sign of weakness. But buying into a system that preaches and teaches helping others, while actually using that impulse to control massive populations is illusory and anti-magic.

A person who has gone beyond basing his ideas on mere feedback signals from the world and his own body, who has gone beyond seeing everything under the sun as a problem that needs to be solved, who has glimpsed the wider meaning of living a truly creative life has taken his first steps on the road to magic.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. 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.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

PETER KEATING AND THE FALSE GODS

by Jon Rappoport

May 15, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

“Once you realize the free individual can create with power, you’re immediately confronted with the question of how far that power can go. You’re dealing with assumptions of limit that have been plaguing the human race since the beginning. Remember, there is a vested interest behind every theory about restraining power.”

Jon Rappoport, The Magician Awakes (unpublished)

They come from every corner and stratum of life. Some use religion, some use economics, some use their own artificial sense of deprivation, some even use science. But they all want the same thing:

exoneration of lives lived in a sea of lies.

Most of all, they don’t want anyone to stand out from the group, the mass, the swamp, the collective. Because that presence of someone who is so separate from them could trigger alarm bells and confirm their deepest fear:

an individual with power and his own singular creative vision can exist.

They want you to believe you’re just a drop of water in the great ocean and once you attain higher consciousness you’ll give in and float in the sea, and you’ll offload that oh-so primitive concept of yourself as Self. You’ll be One with all the other undifferentiated drops of water.

Or, to put it another way, you’ll have a grand case of amnesia, narcosis.

So go ahead, join the club, join the Matrix. Membership is free. At first. Then you have to surrender up everything you have, everything you are, everything you could be.

In their ritual of joining, people present a sword on which is inscribed: I’M NOT VERY MUCH.

Just that little phrase can open the door into the Collective, can give you entrance into the Matrix of the common consensus.

In The Fountainhead (1943), architect Peter Keating swung that sword. And on the other side of it, there was a second matching inscription:

I AM GREAT BECAUSE OTHER PEOPLE THINK SO.

Keating, the social grasper, finds acceptance from people of influence. They welcome him and reward him with commissions because, well, they think they are supposed to; after all, his name has been bandied about by “those who should know Quality.”

It’s a world in which no standards apply except the opinions of people who carry weight.

And Peter is conventionally handsome, he’s the golden boy, he’s quick, he can design buildings that look like other buildings, he can work with others, he can look like he’s enjoying life, he’s good at parties, he’s congenial.

On what other basis should rewards be handed out? What else exists?

Unfortunately and fatally, Keating knows the real answer to that question, since he’s the boyhood friend of Howard Roark, the man who does have a singular vision, who stands beyond the crowd without trying.

Keating returns to Roark time after time; to insult Roark, to beg him for help, to be in the presence of a Force.

Not determined enough to be himself, still possessed of a shred of conscience, Keating is caught in the middle, between the man of vision and power (Roark) and new friends who offer him, Keating, “the glittering world”—and the grips of this vise are unrelenting.

Adulation, money, success, fame, acceptance…Keating is given all these things, and still he destroys himself.

Here is yet another reason The Fountainhead provoked such rage from the self-styled elite: they’re committed to live on an insider’s rotting feast of mutual admiration and support, and in Keating they see themselves reflected with a clarity they’d assumed was impossible to construct. But there it is.

The very people who launched attack after attack at Rand, for pawning off such preposterous characters as real, were boiling inside, as they viewed themselves on the screen of her imagination and in the pages of her novel.

How dare she claim that ideals exist beyond the automatic reach of the wealthy!

Money is proof of value, whether it is inherited, stolen, or coerced!

The avid socialist who owns six houses and a fleet of servants must have special knowledge of what the world needs, because he is rich!

Keating is eventually reduced to an abject yearning: would that his life had been lived differently, better—while at the same time he maintains a dedication to hating that life he might have had. He’s consumed by the contradiction. He sees his own career fall apart, while Roark’s ascends. The tables are turned. But beyond that, Keating has administered a poison to his own psyche, and the results are all too visibly repellent.

The Keatings of this world carry water for their masters, who in turn find bigger and better manipulators to serve. It’s a cacophony of madness, envy, and immolation posing as success.

The world does not want to watch itself through the eyes of Ayn Rand. It does not want to see the juggernaut of the drama playing out, because, as with Keating, it is too revealing. And yet Rand has been accused, over and over, of being an author of cartoon personae!

She elevates characters and destroys other characters. She picks and chooses according to her own standards and ideals. She never wavers. She passes judgment. She differentiates vividly between the forces and decisions that advance life and those that squash it.

Again and again, she comes back to the fulcrum: the collective versus the free individual; the featureless consensus versus unique creative power.

Creative power isn’t a shared or borrowed quality. One person doesn’t live in the shadow of another. The creator finds his own way, and if that weren’t the case, there would be no basis for life.

We are supposed to think existence by committee is a viable concept. This is a surpassing fairy tale that assumes the proportions of a cosmic joke.

And now, a sharp turn in the road…

WHAT ARE THE LIMITS OF INDIVIDUAL POWER?

The Matrix is every form and fashion and venue of mass consensus, extending from social relationships to the very primacy of the so-called laws of the space-time continuum. It is all hypnotic. It is all fiercely defended.

At the same time Rand was writing Atlas Shrugged, the New York painters known as Abstract Expressionists were watching their public fame diminish. These artists (whom Rand would have hated had she paid them any attention) were riverboat gamblers out on the edge, who declared in their own way that space was a malleable invention. They weren’t challenging physicists to a duel, but they were asserting a freedom that was unnerving to the rulers of the art world.

The amusing and absurd thing was, for centuries painters had known about space. They had experienced the effects of manufacturing it on the canvas. They understood a psychology of creation that was too extreme and heretical to voice. Sumerian artists and Egyptian artists and Greek artists and African artists and Persian artists understood it.

And if painters had experienced their own invention of space, what about architects, sculptors, choreographers, stage directors, conductors?

For a very long time, percolating under the surface of art, there has been a growing consciousness that The One Space and The One Time are fictions. We can detail The One and study it and generate workable equations and formulas about it, but that doesn’t make it supreme.

“Many worlds, not one.”

Who really wants to enter this discussion, though?

Well, I’ve been carrying on my side of it for some years now, and I claim that, for a fuller understanding of The Matrix, you need to engage this subject and pursue it wherever it leads.

The very same dedication to, and acceptance of, the elite that Peter Keating lived for is applicable to the elite One Space and One Time formulation of this universe. The mindless cocktail parties at which Keating worked the room and made new friends is, to a startling degree, the chatter and movement of chunks of matter in outer space, in whose presence we seek some strange sort of redemption.

“We worship The One Space and The One Time of the Universe. All hail!”

Whereas the free individual with power can and does exceed those space-time walls.

The free individual with power who creates is working with forces that go beyond the Continuum. His own forces.

The hypnotic apparatus that weaves itself into the Matrix is there to convince us that all human creation takes places inside this Continuum.

We have been led to believe that, if individuals can create spaces and times and energies that are beyond this Continuum, we will be forced to accept some hazy mystical explanation for it. We’ll be back in times of gross superstition.

That belief is incorrect. It stems from fundamental misconceptions about what the individual is, as distinct from the group, and how distinct from the group the individual can actually become.

Not as a cold lifeless being, but as a dynamic powerhouse pursuing his creative goals.

The truth, if we could see it that way, is that such individuals gain a new relationship to the world. They bring energy to it, they bring innovative ideas and inventions and new startling kinds of beauty. Not because they are in thrall to humanity, not because they feel compelled to serve, not because they need to satisfy others, but because in the natural course of things, what they invent spills over its borders and ignites the imaginations of those ready and able to respond.

The myth of Prometheus, who stole fire from the gods, was mollified to make it acceptable to the citizenry. In fact, he committed this act because it fulfilled him, and incidentally the energy/fire he brought back to Earth benefited others. Much later, that myth was further distorted to turn Prometheus into Lucifer, the light-bearer, who broke the pact with God and thus became Devil, the personification of evil. The Lucifer story was told and promoted to build a false puerile ceiling on individual power.

There is no ceiling.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. 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.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

HIDDEN POWER AND THE MATRIX

by Jon Rappoport

May 5, 2012

“We the People…”

Underneath that formulation is the Individual.

“The people” is a convenient term for “every INDIVIDUAL.”

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

Are “the people” a group? Are we all crew members, tasked with designated functions, wearing uniforms, working on a space ship? Well, that’s the ultimate Globalist formulation.

However, from the point of view of the free individual, things are upside down. It is HIS power that is primary, not the state’s, not the government’s, not the group’s.

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

The most significant factor is: THE OBSESSION TO ORGANIZE.

I’m not talking about organizations that actually produce something. I’m talking about organizations that PLAN MORE ORGANIZATION OF LIFE.

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

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

Jack True, the groundbreaking hypnotherapist I interview in THE MATRIX REVEALED, had a few things to say about this “mental disorder”:

“If you put a few dozen colored blocks on a table in front of an adult, he might arrange them in patterns and structures. But some adults would prefer to form a committee to study how the blocks could be arranged, and a committee to evaluate the first committee.

“That’s a joke, but it’s based on reality. I’ve had patients who are constantly looking for ways to fend off life through organization. Their psychological filters are so fine almost nothing gets in.

“In a light trance, without any suggestions from me, they begin categorizing. Everything in its place, everything with a name and a label and a defined connection to other labels. It’s quite fantastic.

“On some level, these people actually believe a tree thinks of itself as a tree and an ant thinks of itself as an ant. You know, with the LABEL.

“It’s not an accident that elite groups like the British Royal Institute [of International Affairs] are kissing cousins of the British biologists who spend years and years devising more precise definitions of sub-sub-sub species.

“When people like this gain political and economic power, they look at the world and see large areas of ‘unorganized threat.’ Whatever is unorganized is, for them, by definition, a threat.

“Once in a great while, when you can shake one of these obsessives out of his habit, when you can get him to perceive reality more directly, he feels like he’s come out of a dream. I mean that literally. He was in a dream.

“You can see this dream operating when the task forces of psychiatrists get together to form new definitions of mental disorders. They’re splitting hairs of hairs that don’t even exist. But they think they do [exist], because without them they’d feel lost…”

THE JOURNEY TO GREATER INDIVIDUAL POWER IS ABOUT: ERASING THE SEPARATE INTERNAL COMPARTMENTS OF ENERGY THE PERSON HIMSELF HAS ORGANIZED.

I had early experiences of this when I began painting in 1962. The walls and compartments collapsed. Energies that had been kept apart flowed together. Lakes and rivers joined the ocean, finally.

The effect of this was enormous. I experienced a power that had been hidden from me.

I was suddenly an individual sprung from the group. Problems I had been puzzling over dissolved and disappeared.

Becoming joined with my own power was fluid. It came through to me as almost a physical process.

The trigger for all this was painting spontaneously in my studio, in somewhat the same way Asian Zen painters had been working for centuries.

Looking back on it now, it’s obvious that one of the effects of painting was: un-organizing a learned synthesis I’d acquired. I was offloading a “comprehensive mental strategy” tied to the way language was supposed to construct reality.

Perception of your own increased power is a function of cracking open the egg of your old, habitual, subconscious world-view. Your own fixed abstraction of reality.

These aren’t theoretical matters. They’re more real than the sensation of driving a car at 150mph on the highway. They’re more immediate than the taste of food or walking in a hurricane or trading punches in a boxing ring.

Flashing forward to 2001, when I began writing on the Web, I found myself joining together 1) everything I was learning about the Matrix with 2) my work and experience as a painter. One side was the vast organization-operation of the elite global planners, the nuts and bolts of which were being described to me by former insiders who had contacted me; and on the other side was individual power as it can actually exist, beyond the structures and shapes of that Matrix.

I wanted to explain the process of Matrix-building, so my readers could understand it at the level of engineering. And I wanted to reveal how individual power could reconnect walled-off interior energies and thereby exceed the influence of the Matrix.

Current technological civilization depends on fixed structures and forms and ideas and methods and systems. It succeeds brilliantly. But the side effect is a tendency to view reality through those lenses. And in the process of doing that, a person, as Jack True expressed it, “unconsciously invents a huge cabinet of drawers, and he puts what he labels as various kinds of energies into those separate closed compartments. This is draining. This cuts him off from power. This inhibits him from expressing power.”

Ellis Medavoy, retired propaganda insider and operative, whom I also interview in THE MATRIX REVEALED, explained it from his side of the Grand Game: “ALL propaganda, in one way or another, is aimed at prolonging amnesia in individuals about their own power. It’s much easier to do this when the individual has ALREADY put himself in a dream. The dream is: ‘I don’t have Mississippi Rivers of energy, I don’t really have power that amounts to anything, I don’t understand what power means.’”

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

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

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

Or, if he is attracted to some form of self-improvement, it’s a matter of choosing between cliches. Which cliché sounds better? Which cliché seems to offer more hope for less effort? Which cliché will connect him to people who accept the same cliché?

And then there is this one: many people believe power is a monolithic force like a tsunami rolling over everything in its destructive path; therefore, who would want it?

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

Freedom in the political sphere assists the possibility of freedom in the individual sphere, and that second freedom is so poorly appreciated that it’s rejected as an illusion.

I’m saying there are whole universes of freedom. (And none of them have to do with The Group.)

The first real painting I ever made, in the summer of 1962, in a loft on 19^th Street in Manhattan, relayed a message back to me: THIS painting is a world you want to exist; this is a world you’ve been unable to describe or explain—and now you don’t have to explain it because it’s there on the canvas. That was an electric jolt. I had never experienced that kind of feedback before. It changed my whole outlook on my life in a few minutes.

What happened there? The feedback was:

“This is a new world you just made because you want it. LOOK AT IT. This is all your energy coming together. You’re using it to make a world that exceeds language, that breaks out beyond the ceiling of what language can produce.”

Whereas, on the other hand, the Matrix is a closed circus. Lots of tricks, lots of injections of “reality.”

Then, on top of that, we seem to be closed off from the circus! That’s right. Elites plot and plan and execute to make us think we can’t even get a ticket to the circus, so we naturally strain harder to sneak in and stay there, because if somebody tells us we’re not allowed in, we assume it must be important and desirable. The con of cons.

And eventually, we’re in the circus so long we can’t conceive of another reality. This circus must be It. This must be the only reality. How could I ever have thought there would be another one?

And now all psychological and physiological and mental and physical and emotional and perceptual and hormonal processes undergo a major shift, IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE US TO THIS ONE AND ONLY REALITY. IN ORDER TO PROVE THAT, YES, THIS IS THE ONLY REALITY THAT COULD EXIST.

And perhaps, in the circus, I’m the master with the whip and you’re the elephant, or you’re the master and I’m the elephant, and we switch back and forth, and we’re both trying to figure out what permanent, yes, permanent role we want to have in the circus. We’re jockeying for that role. That’s how we use our freedom.

Yes, this is pretty far-out stuff. I know that. So be it.

Language accomplishes wonderful and astonishing things. But it also shapes our view and understanding of reality. It limits that view. It hardens it over time.

Language is far more than a set of symbols. It’s the girders and beams and struts and floors and roofs and walls of the reality we accept. It’s the multi-faceted instrument we use to organize and over-organize our perception of reality. It’s the ultimate means of organization.

I’m not preaching a message about destroying language. That would be absurd. I’m indicating that it’s possible to break through to a place that is outside language. And that place is where we no longer have separate compartments of energy and power. The separate compartments are gone. Freedom and power take on a whole new significance.

As I continued painting in the summer and fall of 1962, I found myself in a state of mind I’d never experienced before. I no longer had a stake in the old game. Therefore, I could deal with that game and the people in it with an unexpected level of confidence.

I felt like an explorer who was going out every day into new worlds (that I was making in the studio)…and then at night, I would come back, and what I was coming back to was wonderful as well.

Decades later, when I began interviewing “Matrix insiders” who had defected from their work, I could approach these conversations as if I were talking to builders and architects and artists. In these interviews, the insiders saw and understood more about what they’d been doing than they knew before, because I knew they had hitched their wagons to a perverse version of art. I knew that in my bones, and I could talk to them on that level. I could get them to explain their nuts-and-bolts work in the same way an architect would describe a building he was designing.

We are all designing our lives as architecture, and in the process we are over-organizing them. We’re putting our energy and power into separate compartments. We think we’re missing details of our master plans, but actually we’re putting too many details into the plans. We’re falling into mechanical strategies that align us with the Matrix.

However, the more we understand the Matrix, the more we see how we’re cooperating with it, and then we can move away from that basis of operation.

The other half of my work involves developing techniques that put us in a direct uninterrupted line of access to our own power. Not the fragmented walled-off territories of that power. The whole unending ocean of it.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. 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.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

It Takes a Village to Ruin Everything: Enemies with Benefits in the NWO

by Jon Rappoport — author of THE MATRIX REVEALED

April 21, 2012

“You want to know how elites solve problems? Here’s their formula: smaller problem, bigger solution. And when that doesn’t work? Concoct a huge problem that doesn’t exist and solve it with a huge program.” — Ellis Medavoy, retired propaganda operative, in THE MATRIX REVEALED

“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” — David Rockefeller in Memoirs (2003)

In a future sea of darkness, the islands of light, toward which people desperately grope, are clusters of buildings occupied by mega-corporations and government agencies.

To achieve a measure of survival, people seek those islands and the jobs that come with them.

When you sign on and are accepted, you pledge a loyalty that knows no bounds, because there is no viable alternative. You cease worrying about the crimes your employer is committing, because you are safe, you are out of the darkness, and you want to stay there.

What would cause this future to come to pass? Many answers have been offered. I’ll add a factor to the list.

It concerns a method of problem-solving. Here is the premise: if a difficulty crops up, solve it by enlarging the scope of the relevant factors.

More precisely, ARTIFICIALLY enlarge the scope of the relevant factors.

This is Elite Problem Solving.

In 1996, Hillary Clinton’s book, It Takes a Village, appeared. In it, she argued that a whole community must solve the problem of raising a child. Of course, this was pretentious nonsense. It runs parallel to the idea that no entrepreneur can prosper without infra-structure that is built with public money, and therefore the entrepreneur and his output should be the property of the state.

Starting with the individual child, Clinton offers a solution that encompasses a town or a community or even a city…or who knows…maybe a planet.

But one, the original problem isn’t solved (if it was a problem to begin with), and two, the solution is an artifact designed to regulate a larger environment. To put it another way, Clinton’s model makes it necessary to put everyone under the gun because a child may be a problem.

Problem: 50 small fish might be wiped out by allowing water from rivers to irrigate farmland. Solution: we must consign the whole valley of farms to eternal drought.

If the free market gives birth to 12 million companies and corporations, this creates the “problem” of uninspected potential crimes. Therefore, we have to put the world under the regulatory eye and nose of agencies, whose ultimate objective is to wipe out those enterprises, or weaken them to the point at which they will be absorbed in much larger corporations—until, finally, there are 400 mega-corporations that are responsible for 80% of all international trade and production.

Then and only then can we feel safe. Then and only then can we know that government will exercise proper control over business on planet Earth.

Of course, when 400 corporations do constitute the productive engine of Earth, they will have bought off governments so they can do exactly as they like. They will partner with governments to share the spoils. Which was part of the idea in the first place.

Again, the method is: whatever the size of the original purported problem, make the solution bigger and more encompassing.

If one gun (fired by one person) killed one person, confiscate all guns everywhere.

Here is another example: if you foment and prepare and fund and supply a war between two major powers, in the aftermath you will solve the problem of reconstruction by welding those powers together as one Complex…in which case, you end up with larger unified organizations than when you started, and you control that unified whole.

You can call this approach SMALLLER PROBLEM, LARGER SOLUTION.

Look at the opposite strategy, which is no longer held to be viable: you create self-sufficiency wherever possible. Responsible self-sufficiency. Most people don’t have a clue what that means.

Suppose you started a small nation. You would be faced with the problem of survival. How would you solve that? You could forge all sorts of relationships with other countries in the areas of trade, loans, and purchases of material…except you know that these other nations are corrupt beyond the telling of it. Their governments are corrupt, their economies are corrupt, their leaders are criminals. Do you opt for this larger entangling solution, or do you decide to make do with what you have and innovate and work your way toward the objective of your own national self-sufficiency?

If you opt for the second choice, what happens? It has rarely if ever been tried. These days, you would be accused of isolationism and, at the very least, “exiled from the world community.”

And yet, theoretically speaking, if you could survive and prosper as a new nation, dedicated to inculcating the self-sufficiency of every citizen as a long-range goal, you would stand as a shining example to the rest of the world. You would have made the great experiment with freedom work. This was, in a way, what the original American Republic was built to achieve, before it was subverted, at the latest, three or four minutes after the Constitution was drawn up.

During World War 2, members of the Council on Foreign Relations were tasked with setting out a plan for the creation of the United Nations, the grand global solution to war everywhere at all times.

As we have seen, its emerging agenda has been a covert op to control many facets of of human life in all nations, under the rubric of “sustainability.”

In 1988, two UN agencies that seemed to have little power, the World Meteorological Association and the Environmental Programme, created the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC went on to spearhead the drive to convince the world that man is causing so much atmospheric warming, civilization will soon end if the UN doesn’t radically reorder the behavior of all societies and individuals.

The science behind this warming claim has been shown to be without merit, but the campaign to “solve” warming continues.

A child in a classroom fidgets in his chair and looks out the window. He doesn’t respond immediately when the teacher asks him a question. Well, this child needs to be “solved.” For that, a school counselor is brought in, who in turn recommends a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist makes a diagnosis of ADHD, which doesn’t exist. There is no test for it. The child takes Ritalin, and within eight weeks falls into a funk. The psychiatrist diagnoses this as a new emerging condition, clinical depression, rather than an understandable reaction to Ritalin. He prescribes one of the SSRI antidepressants. Two months later, the child cuts himself. The psychiatrist, ignoring the fact that these SSRI drugs are known to cause suicide, decides to prescribe an even stronger chemical, one of the so-called antipsychotics. The parents refuse to allow this. Child Services is called in. They interview the parents and suggest that a charge of medical neglect could be brought against them, in which case the child might be taken from the home and put into state-sponsored foster care.

It takes a village.

An innovative but struggling company, Silk, which markets organic soy products, sells itself to Dean, a giant agribusiness corporation. Dean turns around and begins buying cheaper soy from China, rather than from the US organic farmers who were supplying Silk. Some of those US farmers go out of business. This is called “free trade,” and is justified by the claim that we’re all living in a Global Village, and the sovereignty of nations is merely an outmoded fiction. Loyalty to one’s own country is scoffed at as “primitive.”

All over the planet, huge agribusiness corporations are bringing local farmers to their knees. These corporations are international. They owe no allegiance to any nation. They float.

Here is Richard Bell, a former financial insider I interviewed in THE MATRIX REVEALED:

“Some day, up the road, a few of these agribusiness corporations will merge into a super-entity. Then what will we have? Is this still the free market? Of course not. The level playing field no longer exists.

“In certain areas of the world, you can grow rice much more cheaply. If you turn those areas into gigantic rice plantations, you can then export that rice anywhere and overwhelm local farmers.

“Why don’t governments stop this? Because they signed on to membership in the World Trade Organization with its rules. And here’s the kicker: overall food production declines. Government pension funds and banks are INVESTED in the stock of that super-agri-entity. They want to see that stock price rise. They’ll do NOTHING to interfere with that.

“It’s really a closed system. The whole idea is to make it look like free-market capitalism, when it isn’t. It turns out that you need separate nations to have capitalism. You need tariff protections. You need nations that figure out how to move toward self-sufficiency. You won’t learn these principles in college courses. You’ll learn just the opposite.

“I spoke to an economics professor at an Eastern university. He told me my analysis of capitalism was correct, but if he taught that and pushed it too far, he would never gain tenure. He would eventually be forced out of his job.

“Essentially, he was admitting that his university was operating under a forced system of mind control. There were no options. Forces were at work, on many fronts, to make sure that Globalism was the preferred curriculum.

“I undertook an analysis of the sources of funding for that university. Where was the money coming from? Who was issuing grants and contracts to the university? What was the university fund invested in? The answers clarified things. The university was floating on money that was dedicated to the precepts of Globalism.

“The university was, when you boiled it down, a PR agency working for Globalism. And here was an interesting irony: there were students at that university who were protesting Globalism, and they were supported by a few professors. Do you get it? The protests were really a charade, and the students were unwitting dupes, whose real function was to make it appear that the university was a bastion of free ideas. The protests were a cover story. A cover story to hide the true intent of the university.

“I dug further, and I found a few professors and administrators who KNEW THAT.”

We have been sold a fiction. Time and time again we have been told that no nation can exist and survive on its own. Self-sufficiency is a foul and selfish myth. Every nation needs vital resources it doesn’t have. It can only obtain them from another country.

This presupposes that the ingenuity and imagination of the human mind is limited in what it can devise. Which is the biggest lie of all.

Discrediting the notion of self-sufficiency is the cornerstone in the building of Globalism.

Why do you think we are bombarded with stories and pictures of poverty around the world? Why do you think stories of celebrities adopting babies from “The Third World” are given such wide play? Because our so-called leaders really care? This op has as its goal fostering the amorphous conviction that everyone must pitch in to help everyone at all times everywhere.

And THAT sets the stage for what? Not share and care. Not a better world. No. It sets the stage for mega-corporations and their partner governments and banks, backed up by intelligence agencies and armies and “missionaries,” to enact their Great Solution: global control, management, governance.

The celebrity, bouncing her new adopted baby on her knee, says, “I know, in the end, when all this is done, our leaders will make it a better world. I know they will. Share and care will win.”

That’s not the plan.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. 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.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

UNDERMINING THE EDUCATED CLASSES WITH PSYCHOLOGY

by Jon Rappoport

author of THE MATRIX REVEALED

April 19, 2012

“…the methods that are used by law enforcement to gain confessions are based upon extremely powerful psychological techniques that have been known to social scientists for decades. These same methods have been used by marketers and conmen alike for centuries to convince regular people to do their will. That fact that these same techniques can be applied by law enforcement to get people, who often times should clearly have known better, to give statements that result in lengthy imprisonment, or even execution, is a testament to the power of such techniques!” — Eric Mings, PhD of interrogationpsychology.com.

For many new readers who are coming to my work for the first time, part of my approach is to analyze systems that operate as mind control.

These systems aren’t called mind control. They work by shrinking down the vision of what a human being can be. They reduce, limit, restrict—sometimes in the name of “good science.”

Such systems are often thought of as “realistic.” They appeal to the educated classes because they are taught in colleges, and because they can be studied extensively.

During one of my interviews with retired propaganda master Ellis Medavoy (pseudonym), he stopped and said, “Look, you really want to understand what psychology is all about? It has two main uses now. Profiling a potential enemy, and concocting successful advertising. In both cases, it looks for the lowest common denominator. Is that what you want therapy in an office to deliver to a patient? A lowest common denominator?”

With the onset of Freudian psychoanalysis, intellectuals in the West began to perceive a new way of looking at the human being: as a bundle of INTERIOR problems, which needed to be resolved through a deep understanding of primary traumas sustained in childhood.

These problems were touted as UNAVOIDABLE. There was no way to work around them, except through therapy.

This sort of propaganda was undertaken by newly minted “mental-health professionals,” who were busy creating journals and conferences and faculty positions, in order to cement their status in society.

Essentially, their sales pitch was: we’re indispensable; we are the only people who can restore true sanity.

As psychology spread its wings, the restoration of sanity, which from the beginning was a fatally flawed jumble of nonsense, took on a different hue. It morphed into: making people normal.

This was an easier goal to comprehend, and it fed into the fears of those who wanted to be accepted in a world that was becoming increasingly conventional and conformist.

Of course, normalcy could never be adequately defined, but people had a sense of what it meant. That was good enough. Getting along with others was part of it. Feeling comfortable in a group was part of it. Sharing similar ideas and feelings was part of it. Being a member of a team was part of it. Learning to live with limitations was part of it.

All these factors helped extend the growing political concept of Collectivism, a system in which the so-called needs of the many are placed light-years ahead of the needs of the individual.

Psychological therapy was now viewed as a process through which a patient could learn to adapt and adjust—and moreover, such adjustment was deemed “recovery from neurosis.”

In other words, it wasn’t just superficial socialization. It was the attainment of inner equilibrium, a victory in which “what a human really is” was achieved.

This was the new propaganda.

Well, what else would you expect? Psychologists couldn’t simply say, “We’re training you to fit in.” They had to dress it up.

The bottom line here—and it is a very significant one—is that great individual achievement was taken off the stage.

It was replaced by an average life. Furthermore, psychologists made it their business to point out that great heroes often suffer from mental disorders.

The overall effect on civilization, as psychology was integrated into the language and the every-day consciousness of citizens, was enormous.

GREAT INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENT was downplayed. It was no longer a widely accepted goal. Its day had passed.

“Do you want to ‘distort your psychology’ in order to attain some sort of illusory greatness, or do you want to be happy?”

Many, many people, in all times and places, are on the lookout for ways to accept stripped-down lowered expectations; psychology provided that in spades. Normalcy was now a “theory of the mind.”

And here is where the placebo effect enters in. Humans, when pressed, when they feel their present situation is intolerable, will look to any hope for relief. If it is offered by a psychologist, a patient will INVENT A ROLE FOR HIMSELF in which he truly does want to be “normal” above all else. In this role, he will find, in therapy, exactly what he needs to confirm that, yes, he has these interior problems that can be worked out and resolved through the language and the concepts of psychological therapy.

The good patient.

The good patient reconstructs his past to fit the basic notions of therapy.

And it works, like any placebo does—for a little while. Then the construct fractures; and the outcome splits open like a badly designed coat.

Psychology, as it turns out, is merely a sub-category of theater, played out on the basis of not knowing it is theater.

The sacrifice is: great individual achievement.

And the rest is history, which we are living through now.

The answer is to restore what has been sacrificed.

And when you start down that road, you inevitably meet up with your own imagination, and you can’t deny it. If you’re honest, you realize you’re a great deal more than you thought you were. Therefore, you can’t fall back on foolish little prescriptions. You can’t play the same old games. You can’t use a system to make yourself blind.

My description of the basis of modern psychology should make it obvious I am talking about a system of mind control. It (psychology) is somewhat subtle, because it quietly rejects the larger context in which an individual could operate on his own.

Instead, it substitutes notions like “compensation,” “acting out,” “personal drama.” In and of themselves, these labels might, in some situations, be vaguely interesting. But when wedded to the prospect of CURING a person of their negative impact, the stage is set for a reduction of energy, creative power, and space. Why? Because the terms of the problem have been placed on a smaller platform and the dimension of the solution has also been prefabricated to fit that platform.

Psychotherapy is to the creative life as a kitchen melodrama is to high adventure.

Think about it. If you were consciously setting out to corral and capture a significant segment of the educated population, without arousing their suspicion, you could succeed grandly if you educated them about the purported composition of their struggles—by naming the elements holding them back from progress, by claiming that these elements are, indeed, real, by choosing elements that actually shrink the field of operation, by essentially defining what a life consists of…and then stepping in and saying you can make that life better. It’s like redefining three-dimensional chess as checkers and then sorting out winning checkers strategies.

“You see, the large and great life is a delusion based on neurotic fantasy. The smaller life is real. And we can help you with that.”

Of course, this is unspoken. But it’s there. And it is sold.

“We’re going to take a life that could be A,B,C,D, and miniaturize it down to lower-case a,b,c,d. We’re going to carry out this miniaturization process so skillfully and so insistently that, eventually, the person forgets there even is an A,B,C,D. Then we have him. Then we can rearrange those a,b,c,d deck chairs and he’ll believe we’re helping him. That’s how we win.”

That’s the shell game. That’s the operant conditioning. That’s how it works.

Here are a few more comments from Ellis Medavoy on the subject:

“At some point, as I was doing medical propaganda, I came across a few operatives who were using their contacts to promote psychology as an essential part of society. It took me a little while to see what their game was.

“They were working for what I call the Collectivist Elite, the men who are trying to make a world of obedient androids, satisfied androids. Well, that’s mind control. These operatives, doing their propaganda, feeding stories to the press, were pushing a general idea of psychology.

“Their version of psychology, when you boil it down, is: we’re all living in a park. It’s a good park. We can all be happy if we stay there and work together and cooperate. But part of this cooperation means we all admit we’re deficient. We need a fix, a cure. We can get that cure if we realize that every impulse we have toward being a self-sufficient individual is really a symptom, and the symptom needs to be wiped out.

“The idea that an individual has tremendous power is another symptom that really needs to be cured.”

Once you get a person to accept the myth that his most pressing desire is to be “normal,” you can perform many manipulations. You can play on his need to be part of the group, the team. You can use veiled threats of exile from the group. You can pretend your manipulations are really only an effort to bring him into the “community.” You can pretend you’re just trying to help him be what he wants to be. You can promise him acceptance. It all hinges on this operation designed to “shrink him down” so he views Normal as his highest and most proper ambition.

And what can he offer in his defense? How can he fight you off? What can he use as a standard, against which he can compare Normal?

If you mention INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM, POWER, IMAGINATION as that standard, he’s in the dark. He doesn’t know what you’re talking about. He’s entered into a state of amnesia about those qualities.

And in that state of amnesia, he’ll admit to having committed offenses. He’ll confess to crimes he never even contemplated.

As documented by Dr. Peter Breggin in his classic work, Toxic Psychiatry, about 35 years ago a bridge was built between the profession of psychologist (and psychiatrist) and the pharmaceutical industry.

Since psychology was already sinking into a morass of behavior-control (my analysis), why not take the next step and simply say all these “symptoms” were really brain imbalances and deficits?

Forget science. By the way, there are no chemical or biological tests to support a diagnosis of ANY so-called mental disorder. But the “science” of “brain imbalances and deficits” could be sold. It could be marketed.

The pharmaceutical industry could save a languishing and increasingly unpopular profession (psychologist/psychiatrist), by buying expensive ads in journals, funding conferences, awarding grants, bankrolling graduate studies.

Talk therapy would be replaced by the prescription pad. The drug companies would develop and market the chemicals. The “therapists” would handle the diagnoses and write the scripts.

And so that marriage was made.

Which takes us all the way from Freud (and his early Pavlovian counterparts) to the present Century of the Brain and Its Control.

To many people, that doesn’t look so bad at all. It looks good, because they have forgotten the potential power, freedom, and imagination at the core of Self.

They have stopped exploring how far and how high that power, freedom, and imagination can go. Such a journey means nothing to them.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. 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.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com