Bill Gates vs. freedom
By Jon Rappoport
"Under the surface of this global civilization, a great and
secret war is taking place. The two opponents hold different conceptions
of Reality. On one side, those who claim that humans operate purely on
the basis of stimulus-response, like machines; on the other side, those
who believe there is a gigantic thing called freedom. Phase One of the
war is already over. The stimulus-response people have won. In Phase
Two, people are waking up to the far-reaching and devastating
consequences of the Pavlovian program." (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)
"From the moment the first leader of the first clan in human
history took charge, he busied himself with this question: 'What can I
say and do that will make my people react the way I want them to.' He
was the first Pavlov. He was the first psychologist, the first
propagandist, the first mind-control boss. His was the first little
empire. Since then, only the means and methods have changed." (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)
A thought-form is a picture-plus concept in the mind that tends to guide behavior.
A dominant thought-form in Earth civilization today is:
universal rule through gigantic, highly organized structures; e.g.,
mega-corporations that owe no allegiance to any nation.
Imagine a few thousand such corporations with interlocking
boards and directorates; colluding with super-regional governments and
their honeycombed bureaucracies; combined with regional armies,
intelligence agencies and technological elites; hooked to a global
surveillance operation; in control of media; cooperating with the
largest organized religions on Earth.
Imagine all this as essentially one organization---and you see the thought-form in its wide-screen version.
Top-down as top-down has never been before.
Functions and compartments defined and specialized at every level, and coordinated in order to carry out policy decisions.
As to why such a thought-form should come to dominate human affairs, the simplest explanation is: because it works.
But beneath that answer, for those who can see, there is much, much more.
Individuals come to think that "effective" and "instrumental" and "efficient" are more important than any other issues.
Keep building, keep expanding, keep consolidating gains---and above all else, keep organizing.
Such notions and thought-forms replace life itself.
The Machine has come to the fore. All questions are now about
how the individual sees himself fitting into the structure and function
of The Machine.
Are human beings becoming social constructs?
Populations are undergoing a quiet revolution. We can cite
some of the reasons: television; education; job training and employment
requirements; the Surveillance State; government organizations who
follow a "zero tolerance" policy; inundation with advertising.
Yes, it's all geared to produce people who are artificial constructs.
And this is just the beginning. There are a number of
companies (see, for example, affectiva.com) who are dedicated to
measuring "audience response" to ads and other public messages. I'm
talking about electronic measuring. The use of bracelets, for instance,
that record students' emotional responses to teachers in classrooms, in
real time. (Bill Gates shoveled grant money into several of these
studies.)
Then there is facial recognition geared to the task of revealing how people are reacting when they sit at their computers.
Push-pull, ring the bell, watch the dog drool for his food. Stimulus-response.
It's not much of a stretch to envision, up the road a few
years, whole populations more than willing to volunteer for this kind of
mass experimentation. But further than that, we could see society
itself embrace, culturally, the ongoing measurement of stimuli and
responses.
"Yes, I want to live like this. I want to be inside the
system. I want to be analyzed. I want to be evaluated. I want to accept
the results. I want to be part of the new culture. Put bracelets on me.
Measure my eye movements, my throat twitches that indicate what I'm
thinking, and my brain waves. Going to a movie should include the
experience of wearing electrodes that record my second-to-second
reactions to what's happening on the screen. I like that. I look forward
to it..."
In such a culture, "Surveillance State" would take on a whole new dimension.
"Sir, I want to report a malfunction in my television set. I
notice the monitoring equipment that tracks my responses to programs has
gone on the blink. I want it reattached as soon as possible. Can you
fix it remotely, or do you need to send a repair person out to the
house? I'll be here all day..."
People will take pride in their ongoing role as social constructs, just as they now take pride in owning a quality brand of car.
The thought process behind this, in so far as any thought at
all takes place, goes something like: "If I'm really a bundle of
responses to stimuli and nothing more, then I want to be inside a system
that champions that fact and records it...I don't want to be left out
in the cold."
Here is a sample school situation of the near future: for six
months, Mr. Jones, the teacher, has been videotaped, moment by moment,
as he instructs his class in English. All the students have been wearing
electronic bracelets, and their real time emotional responses
(interest, boredom, aversion) have also been recorded. A team of
specialists has analyzed the six months of video, matching it up, second
by second, to the students' responses. The teacher is called in for a
conference.
"Mr. Jones, we now know what you're doing that works and what
you're doing that doesn't work. We know exactly what students are
positively reacting to, and what bores them. Therefore, we're going to
put you into a re-ed seminar, where you'll learn precisely how to teach
your classes from now on, to maximize your effectiveness. We'll show you
how to move your hands, what tone of voice to use, how to stand, when
to make eye contact, and so on..."
Mr. Jones is now a quacking duck. He will be trained how to
quack "for the greater good." He is now a machine toy. Whatever is left
of his passion, his intelligence, his free will, his spontaneous
insights, his drive to make students actually understand what they're
learning...all subordinated for the sake of supposed efficiency.
Think this is an extreme fantasy? See the Chicago Tribune, June 12, 2012, "Biosensors to monitor students' attentiveness":
"The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which has poured
more than $4 billion into efforts to transform public education in the
U.S., is pushing to develop an 'engagement pedometer.' Biometric devices
wrapped around the wrists of students would identify which classroom
moments excite and interest them -- and which fall flat."
"The foundation has given $1.4 million in grants to several
university researchers to begin testing the devices in middle-school
classrooms this fall [2012]."
"The biometric bracelets, produced by a Massachusetts startup
company, Affectiva Inc, send a small current across the skin and then
measure subtle changes in electrical charges as the sympathetic nervous
system responds to stimuli. The wireless devices have been used in pilot
tests to gauge consumers' emotional response to advertising."
"Gates officials hope the devices, known as Q Sensors, can
become a common classroom tool, enabling teachers to see, in real time,
which kids are tuned in and which are zoned out."
"Existing measures of student engagement, such as videotaping
classes for expert review or simply asking kids what they liked in a
lesson, 'only get us so far,' said Debbie Robinson, a spokeswoman for
the Gates Foundation. To truly improve teaching and learning, she said,
'we need universal, valid, reliable and practical instruments' such as
the biosensors."
"The Gates Foundation has spent two years videotaping 20,000
classroom lessons and breaking them down, minute by minute, to analyze
how each teacher presents material and how those techniques affect
student test scores."
"Clemson received about $500,000 in Gates funding. Another
$620,000 will support an MIT scientist, John Gabrieli, who aims to
develop a scale to measure degrees of student engagement by comparing
biosensor data to functional MRI brain scans [!] (using college students
as subjects)."
When you boil it down, the world-view represented here has
nothing to do with "caring about students." It has everything to do with
the Pavlovian view of humans as biological machines.
What input yields what response? How can people be shaped into predictable constructs?
As far as Gates is concerned, the underlying theme, as always, is: control.
In this new world, the process of thinking and comparing and
independently judging, and the freedom to make individual
choices...well, for whatever that was worth, we can't encourage it for a
whole society. It's too unpredictable. We don't have time for that sort
of thing. No, we have to achieve reduction. We have to seek out lowest
common denominators.
This is what universal surveillance is all about; the
observation of those denominators and the variances from them---the
outlying and therefore dangerous departures from the norm.
"Well, we've tracked Mr. Jones' classroom for a year now, and
we've collated all the measurements of reactions from the students. It
was a wonderful study. But we did notice one thing. All the students
showed similar patterns of reactions over time...except two students. We
couldn't fit them into the algorithms. They seemed to be responding
oppositely. It was almost as if they were intentionally defecting from
the group. This signals some kind of disorder. We need a name for it. Is
it Oppositional Defiance Disorder, or is it new? We recommend attaching
electrodes to those two students' skulls, so we can get a better
readout of their brain activity in real time."
You see, everything must be analyzed on the basis of stimulus
response. Those two students are suffering from a brain problem. They
must be. Because if they aren't, if they have the ability to choose and
decide how to respond, then they have free will, and that can't be
measured. Much deeper, that also suggests an X-factor in humans, wherein
the flow of chemicals and atoms and quarks and mesons and photons don't
tell the whole story. The rest of the story would imply the existence
of something that is...non-material...above and beyond push-pull cause
and effect.
The gatekeepers of this world are obsessed with ruling that
out. They guard Reality itself, which is to say, their conception of
Reality. They are willing to spend untold amounts of money to make that
Pavlovian conception universally accepted and universally loved.
Because they own that conception. They are the self-appointed title holders. They are the kings of that domain.
I feel obligated to inform them that their domain is much,
much smaller than they think it is. And in the fullness of time, which
is very long, the domain is going to fall and crack and collapse and
disintegrate. And all their horses and all their men won't be able to
put it back together.
Eventually, a man like Bill Gates will be forgotten. He'll be
a small footnote on a dusty page in a crumbling book in a dark room on a
remote island.
A morbid venal fool who chased, for a brief moment, fool's gold.
There is an irreducible thing. It's called freedom. It is native to every individual.
Sometimes it rears its head in the middle of the night, and the dreamer awakes.
And he asks himself: what is my freedom for?
And then he begins a voyage that no device can record, measure, or analyze.
If he pursues it long enough, it takes him out of the labyrinth.
Pavlov wrote: "Mankind will possess incalculable advantages and extraordinary control over human behavior
when the scientific investigator will be able to subject his fellow men
to the same external analysis he would employ for any natural
object..."
Basically, Pavlov was promoting the idea that whatever an
individual perceives and feels about his own experience is a confused
mess and an obstruction.
Rather, the individual should ignore all that tripe, and
instead, allow himself to be a "natural object," see himself as a clean
and simple response mechanism, as planned inputs cause him to behave in
various ways.
In other words, then he will have no life.
Bill Gates and other elite planners are working toward this end.
When Ray Kurzweil talks about hooking brains up to
super-computers, he is envisioning a process of downloading that goes
beyond choice. Somehow, automatically, the brain and the individual (he
apparently believes they are the same thing) will receive inputs that
translate into knowledge and even talent. This is another fatuous
version of Pavlov.
In Brave New World, Huxley wrote: "Hot tunnels alternated
with cool tunnels. Coolness was wedded to discomfort in the form of hard
X-rays. By the time they were decanted the embryos had a horror of
cold. They were predestined to emigrate to the tropics, to be miner[s]
and acetate silk spinners and steel workers. Later on their minds would
be made to endorse the judgment of their bodies. 'We condition them to
thrive on heat', concluded Mr. Foster. 'Our colleagues upstairs will
teach them to love it'."
Stimulus-response.
If researchers developed this technology, who could doubt
that elite planners would push it forward? It would be the culmination
of their dream.
The freedom of the individual, his innate capacity to make
wide-ranging choices, is the monkey wrench in the program. It is
anti-stimulus-response.
This is why you would have to search far and wide to find, in
one school, anywhere, on any level, a course that examines and promotes
individual freedom.
It is anathema to the plan.
It is the silver bullet for the vampire.
Freedom comes from Within the individual, not from Without.
On the level of political control, freedom emerged and broke through during centuries of struggle.
Now, and in the future, every individual carries that torch.
So it is incumbent on the individual to understand the scope
and meaning and power of his own freedom, and to decide for himself what
his freedom is FOR.
What will he choose to launch from that great space?
No comments:
Post a Comment