The "dependent victim" psy-op
By Jon Rappoport
ANY person who exits an "officially designated
victim-group"...and then succeeds in life on his own...and then goes one
step further and refuses to identify his entire existence with his
former group...but instead stands as a unique individual...why, that
person, at the very least, must be a criminal, if not a terrorist,
right?
That's the crux of the issue: never leave your group.
That's how society, civilization, and culture are promoted these days.
"Groups have needs, agendas, and problems, and the solution will come from government." That's the all-embracing formula.
The fake appearance is: victim groups are fighting for
recognition and special status, and the government is pushing back---but
that's now a ruse. That's a cover story. In fact, victim groups and
government have the same goal: a relationship based on dependence. One
side depends and the other side gives and protects.
The individual is out of the equation. He is portrayed as the
greed-obsessed reason these victim groups exist and need help in the
first place.
Banks, Wall Street, and mega-corporations are depicted as the end result of individualism.
In fact, government, banks, Wall Street, and
mega-corporations are joined at the hip. They brush each other's teeth
first thing every morning.
Political correctness and the burgeoning movement to outlaw
"offensive language" are merely tactics to: preserve groups' separate
identities; foment conflict between them; and ultimately foster their
dependence on government authority.
The truth is, you can't get free individuals to depend on government. Only "besieged groups" can be relied on for that purpose.
In the State's eyes, a perfect society would be composed of
groups who have entirely forgotten the concept of the individual, as if
it never existed.
For example, 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."
When Callero writes "identification," he isn't talking about
ID cards and Social Security numbers. He's asserting an absence of any
uniqueness from person to person. He's claiming there is no significant
distinction 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 billions of people
organized into groups.
Here are several remarks, meant to defame the individual, from people I would call high-IQ idiots (at best):
"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 [individualist] 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.
"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.
The State and its allies are real oppressors who contribute
mightily to creating real victims; but what I'm talking about here is
growing numbers of people who voluntarily take on the victim-mantle and
seek comfort in nests of self-promoting groups who exaggerate and
distort their own claims to special status.
The State needs these people. The State wants these people. Increasingly, the State employs these people.
Edward Bernays, the father of modern public relations, wrote:
"It is sometimes possible to change the attitudes of millions but
impossible to change the attitude of one man."
Bernays understood that the basis of successful propaganda is a mass audience, an audience composed of groups, not individuals.
When a group assigns itself solid "victim-status," it creates
one basic rule: a member must not leave the group. Why? Because if he
does, he's claiming he is no longer a victim---and that assertion is a
betrayal.
Nice and neat. A prison.
"I'm a free individual."
"You're crazy. There is no such thing. Now get back in the group where you belong."
Down at the root, betrayal begins as self-betrayal. The
individual gives up the ghost. From that point on, his politics don't
matter. He forgets what he could have been. He defines himself by race
and religion and country and rank ideology and group. He finds words and
feeling through which he can express his role in a stage play that
decays him from the inside out.
Eventually, if lunatics have their way, every person on
planet Earth will be designated a victim. That will be the group of
groups.
It won't matter why and how everyone supposedly turns out to
be a victim. The reasons will be forgotten. People will "instinctively"
sign on to the agenda.
And the management team running the world will put another check mark on their sheet of objectives:
"Earth is beginning to resemble one giant hospital/mental institution. Break out the champagne."
There is only one problem. That plan is fraying at the edges.
People are waking up and swimming to the surface through layers of
deception. They're returning to themselves. They're recognizing
group-ism for what it is: a meltdown into self-sabotage.
The artifact is the collective. The self is real.
Power, choice, and freedom never go away.
They may hide, but they can be resurrected.
Then the whole fake game crumbles.
No comments:
Post a Comment