England, Australia, Canada, USA: poof
The program to erase the individual
by Jon Rappoport
August 13, 2015
"The
less government we have, the better, - the fewer laws, and the less
confided power. The antidote to this abuse of formal Government [taking
more power for itself], is, the influence of private character, the
growth of the Individual." (Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1844)
"If
it were felt that the free development of individuality is one of the
leading essentials of well-being...there would be no danger that liberty
should be undervalued." (John Stuart Mill, 1859)
"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, 1854)
"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, 1891)
I
could have added a number of other countries to those in the title of
this article. In those I mentioned, there was once a tradition of the
free and independent and unique individual. That tradition has faded
like a photo on an old postcard.
The individual is now considered
a) a criminal by definition, or b) a member of a group defined solely
by ethnicity, color, religion, gender, or c) either in the 1% or the
99%.
But the individual is not considered to be himself/herself. Certainly not. Anything but.
In
any of these countries, go back through the speeches of recent
presidents and prime ministers and try to find a significant, positive,
extensive mention of the individual. Good luck.
These days,
mention "private property" and "individual" in the same sentence, and if
you're understood at all, chances are you'll be labeled with some
slur---because public-everything is supposed to be the utopian answer to
humankind's ills.
At one time, it was believed that a
centuries-long struggle to liberate the individual from both church and
king was meaningful. It was where history was heading. It was about
more than economics. Freedom of thought and expression had something to
do with it. Of course, the individual had to have an operating mind,
if his independent thoughts were to add up to anything.
The power
of the individual. That phrase carried a message. It was
well-received. The idea that government existed in order to enforce a
basic minimum of laws which would support the individual; that idea made
sense.
The idea that innovations were made by the individual, not the committee. That notion had currency.
But this trend stalled and reversed.
It
reversed, for example, in the hands of people suddenly called social
scientists. These were bloviating academic analysts of societies, who
were unleashed to pontificate opinions as if they had been confirmed by
laboratory experiments.
One of the founders of sociology, Emile
Durkheim (1858-1917), coined the phrase "collective consciousness."
Durkheim insisted there were "inherent" qualities that existed in
society apart from individuals. Exposing his own absurd theory, he went
so far as to claim suicide was one of those qualities, as if the
"phenomenon" were present beyond any individual choice to end life.
He wrote:
"Man
is the more vulnerable to self-destruction the more he is detached from
any collectivity, that is to say, the more he lives as an egoist." In
other words, according to Burkheim, the individual who rejects the
norms and conformity of society must be wrapped up in himself in some
morally repugnant way. There are no other alternatives. He's either part
of the collective or he's tinged with criminality.
In his book,
The Division of Labour in Society (1893), Burkheim spun moral conscience in the following fashion:
"...Make yourself usefully fulfill a determinate function."
He cited this as a kind of command issued by collective consciousness.
This is the presentation of the individual human as machine-cog.
From
the mud of sociology's beginnings, the long sordid history of the
academic discipline brings us to something like this. Peter Callero, of
the department of sociology, Western Oregon University, has written a
book titled:
The Myth of Individualism: How Social Forces Shape Our Lives (2013, 2nd Ed):
"Most
people today believe that an individual is a person with an independent
and distinct identification. This, however, is a myth."Staggering.
But as public relations and propaganda experts have learned, hauling a
really huge lie in front of the public gives you a better chance of
being believed than telling a small lie does.
When Callero writes
"distinct identification," he isn't talking about ID cards and Social
Security numbers. He's asserting there is no significant difference
between any two people. There aren't two individuals to begin with.
They're a group.
This downgrading of the individual human spirit
is far from accidental. It's launched as a sustained propaganda
campaign, the ultimate purpose of which is top-down control over the
population.
Here's another gem:
"The cold truth is
that the individualist creed of everybody for himself and the devil take
the hindmost is principally responsible for the distress in which
Western civilization finds itself - with investment racketeering at one
end and labor racketeering at the other. Whatever merits the creed may
have had in the days of primitive agriculture and industry, it is not
applicable in an age of technology, science, and rationalized economy.
Once useful, it has become a danger to society." (Charles Beard, 1931)
Beard,
a celebrated historian, sees no difference between individual
racketeering and the individual freely choosing and living his own life.
In making this judgment, he becomes an intellectual/propaganda
racketeer of the highest order.
One more:
"British
empiricist philosophy is individualist. And it is of course clear that
if the only criterion of true and false which a man accepts is that
man's, then he has no base for social agreement. The question of how man
ought to behave is a social question, which always involves several
people; and if he accepts no evidence and no judgment except his own, he
has no tools with which to frame an answer." (Jacob Bronowski, Science and Human Values, 1956).
Bronowski
is quite sure that hearing other people's evidence and then keeping
one's own counsel is wrong. One has to accept that evidence on its face.
This is sheer idiocy. Individuals are capable of deciding, on their
own, what social agreements to enter into. They aren't permanently
enmeshed from birth.
Even more to the point, Beard and Bronowski
were both high-achieving individuals---who then turned around and
celebrated the kind of society that would try to flatten and level the
individual to an average.
The world has many such experts. They
rise high enough and then they preach collectivism. They become social
meddlers. They believe they have the tools to plan what kind of world we
should live in---since they are not part of that world anymore.
Freed
from the obligations with which they want to bind us, they can scheme
and fantasize about social, economic, and political constructs in which
The Group is all.
This is elitism par excellence.
~~~~
What is the primary power of the individual?
It is the power to create.
If that idea seems shop-worn or vague, it is only because the creative
force of the individual has been purposefully downgraded from a
hurricane to a drizzle. The force is now viewed with a blank stare of
non-recognition---or it has been transferred over to used car salesmen
and other hustlers who have rebranded themselves as self-improvement
gurus, who reduce their proclamations to the language of infomercials.
Cheapening
the most profound human impulses and energies is part and parcel of
engendering a civilization that looks, sounds, feels, and tastes like a
cartoon. We live in it. It is often vicious and painful for many
people, but it is a cartoon. Intellectually, it imitates life with
shortened perspectives and short-circuited ideas.
But...the
individual does not have to buy any of this. The individual can
refuse. He can take up a different position. He can invent from the
platform of his own freedom.
He doesn't have to play the part of idiot or slave.
He
can reject the collective and the group. He can pursue the unlimited
space that opens up when he is launching his best future.
The
tradition of the individual, in the nations where it once existed, where
it was fought for, may be dead; but the individual himself is not dead.
He can find his way. He can return to the center. He can live through and by his own imagination, come hell or high water.
He can walk away from every fungus-ridden collectivist scheme and invent his own destiny.
He can stop prostrating himself before the billion possible little phony gods the salesmen are selling.
The
endless volleys of contemporary criticism aimed at "the human species"
and its desecrations, crimes, and insanities do not distinguish The
Group from the individual. They attempt to bury the individual, but
they fail.
You are not everyone else, and everyone else is not
you. That absurd prescription is glazed, re-fried, many-times-boiled,
and sold-on-a-stick "ancient Asian wisdom," in modern-mall "spiritual
centers" of the West. It has been recycled to conceal its collectivist
message.
The individual, no matter how hard he tries, can't rid
himself of his independence, creative-force, power, or freedom. He can
induce amnesia, but somewhere within himself, he knows what he is doing.
~~~~
Dedicated
slaves are a dime a dozen. But there was once a tradition in some
nations, and it stood for the unique individual. It was real. It was
never perfect; far from it. But it existed. That tradition was
hijacked and turned inside out.
As the battle for individual
freedom and independence gained ground, education was seen as the means
to teach boys and girls what it meant to be a citizen in a limited
Republic. That was a major purpose of schooling.
But as
education was turned into a quacking duck, as too many students refused
to learn, as too many teachers refused to teach, as too many citizens
didn't care, as government slyly expanded its reach and size and
control, the public education experiment went down the drain. And so
did limited government.
The resurrection of the individual by the
individual is now the course. It can only be understood by those who
know that "average" and "normal" aren't the objectives.
There are
many, many people who are living half-blind, while believing that they
can see clearly, and that everyone else should see on this level. That
is another feature of the cartoon.
Don't buy the cartoon.
The
group has no creative power or imagination. It merely pretends it
does. It passes a gross imitation from hand to hand...and if it ever
stops, it will find dust, only dust...
You can find this article -- with all the source links to it, and more at NoMoreFakeNews.com.
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.
Use this link to order Jon's Matrix Collections:
No comments:
Post a Comment