Category: The Individual
"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…"
—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.
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.
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.
Read More At: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Posted on January 9, 2018 Categories Big Government, News, Technocracy, The IndividualTags Big Government, Collectivism, Individuality, Technocracy, The IndividualLeave a comment on The Vision Of Technocracy & Your Future
Format ImagePosted on August 25, 2017 Categories News, Quote Of The Day, The IndividualTags Mark Twain, Reason For Being, The IndividualLeave a comment on Reason For Being
Format ImagePosted on August 23, 2017 Categories Books & Literature, News, Quote Of The Day, The IndividualTags Books, Harper Lee, The Individual, ThinkingLeave a comment on Books | Thought | Independent Mind
Like a car with high fins and long protruding tail lights, the phrase "independence of mind" has gone out of style, especially at colleges and universities where it ought to be the most profound ideal. The thugs have taken over.
As recently as 2008, a professor of Jurisprudence at King's College London, Timothy Macklem, described the phrase in this fashion:
"Independence of Mind [explores] the ways in which the fundamental freedoms help us to achieve something even more profound, by enabling us to arrive at beliefs, convictions and voices of our own, so that we truly come to think, believe, and speak for ourselves in the rich and various ways that the freedoms then protect. Privacy grants us the distance and refuge from others necessary to develop views of our own; freedom of speech calls on us to imagine ways of expressing ourselves that are both true to the views we have developed and innovative in their own right; freedom of conscience enables each of us to create a distinctive rational personality in which to embed the convictions that we wish to treat as non-negotiable…"
If the professor taught at one of many American "liberal colleges" today, a mere nine years after he wrote that description, he would be pilloried and subjected to prolonged attacks from students and even other faculty.
That's the pace of change these days.
I started NoMoreFakeNews.com in 2001. Independence of mind was a given for me. As the years passed, I saw the need for promoting it and defending it. I still do. More than ever.
What drives the human spirit isn't sameness from individual to individual. It's difference. It's uniqueness. The people who know that and embody it are the lights that burn and keep burning. They're inextinguishable.
The betrayal of independence of mind is fantastical in the culture. It raises a stink to the heavens. It oozes fanaticism.
Many of the little academic intellects who support that betrayal and play its tunes are Marxists in disguise, who seek revenge on humanity for their own failures and shortcomings, by putting populations under the totalitarian gun of political correctness. This is "progressivism."
Without knowing it, I grew up on the legacy of Emerson and Thoreau and Walt Whitman. These giants of literature and philosophy had breathed the air of independence and knew what it meant in their blood and brains and souls and minds. They heralded an age that came and then went, buried in a growing landfill of collectivism.
The myth that the onrushing political Left was composed of millions of awake and aware individuals was eventually exposed as a gigantic lie.
There is a choice: the glory of the individual or the glory of the mob?
Whoever takes his own independent ideas and prizes them has something the mob can never fathom.
What does censorship mean to a person who has nothing that could be censored? Why would he be concerned about shutting up other people, since he has nothing of his own to express that might be censored?
What does "having an idea" mean to a person who has never considered making a distinction between what he thinks and what others, to whom he attaches himself, think?
In the description of independence of mind I quoted above, what would the following phrase mean to a person who is always surrounded with allies who mimic each other's thoughts: "Privacy grants us the distance and refuge from others necessary to develop views of our own."
Privacy? What is that? What is it for? Who needs it? Why would anyone seek it?
Therefore, what harm could come from spying on others?
Who stands up for something on his own when he has nothing to stand up for on his own?
In the delirium of the collective, it is always overcast and dim, and the occasional joys come from acts of destruction against the vague "other."
The first sacrifice by the true believer is the sacrifice of self. From that, everything else follows with dead certainty.
No matter what the state of the culture, independence of mind is a virtue of the highest order.
It is there for anyone who wants to achieve it.
Posted on August 23, 2017 Categories Censorship, Conformity Crisis, Freedom, The IndividualTags Censorship, Collectivism, Conformity Crisis, Freedom, Independence Of Mind, The IndividualLeave a comment on Obsolete Phrases: "Independence Of Mind"
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather, an irate, tireless minority keen to set brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."
– Samuel Adams
Posted on August 21, 2017 Categories Mindset, News, The IndividualTags Change, Mindset, Perseverance, Samuel Adams1 Comment on Mindset | Perseverance | Individuals
"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: establish severely hamstrung 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.
Therefore, "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 the ultimate riverboat gambler. He bets the house on his own as-yet uncreated future.
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 (part of the Exit From The Matrix collection), 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
Posted on August 21, 2017 August 21, 2017 Categories Conformity Crisis, Globalism, News, The IndividualTags Conformity, Conformity Crisis, Globalism, Individuality, Jon Rappoport, The IndividualLeave a comment on The Individual Vs. Globalism
Format ImagePosted on August 18, 2017 Categories News, Quote Of The Day, The IndividualTags Destiny, Gandhi, Habits, Power, Values, WordsLeave a comment on Thoughts | Words | Habits | Values | Destiny
The key document here is the 2010 Rockefeller Foundation brainstorming exercise, "Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development".
It imagines various disasters and possible responses to them.
The report presents a friendly and concerned front, but reading between the lines, you can see Globalism at work, shoring up a new and improved international order—as if that solution is the only viable future for humanity.
Here is a choice bit of scenario-building and forecasting from the report:
"In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit…national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems—from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty—leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power."
Ah yes, the favorite phony stepchild of the Globalists: a pandemic. Forget the fact that every dire prediction of worldwide destruction from a dreaded virus, during the past 15 years, has fallen flat. SARS, Swine Flu, West Nile, Bird Flu, etc. Duds.
Here's another preposterous Rockefeller future, from the viewpoint of 2010:
"Undeniably, the planet's climate was becoming increasingly unstable."
"Sea levels were rising fast, even as countries continued to build-out coastal mega-cities."
"In 2014, the Hudson River overflowed into New York City during a storm surge, turning the World Trade Center site into a three-foot-deep lake. The image of motorboats navigating through lower Manhattan jarred the world's most powerful nations into realizing that climate change was not just a developing-world problem."
The last Time I looked, New York City was not underwater. Submarine taxis weren't taking people to work.
Now read further, to get a flavor of the Rockefeller solution to the "climate disaster." Notice that an international order, and NOT separate nations, is required:
"In such an interconnected world, where the behaviors of one country, company, or individual had potentially high-impact effects on all others, piecemeal attempts by one nation here, one small collective of environmental organizations there, would not be enough to stave off a climate disaster – or, for that matter, to effectively address a host of other planetary-scale problems."
"But highly coordinated worldwide strategies for addressing such urgent issues just might. What was needed was systems thinking – and systems acting – on a global scale."
"International coordination started slowly, then accelerated faster than anyone had imagined."
"In 2015, a critical mass of middle income and developed countries with strong economic growth publicly committed to leveraging their resources against global-scale problems, beginning with climate change. Together, their governments hashed out plans for monitoring and reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the short term and improving the absorptive capacity of the natural environment over the long term."
"In 2017, an international agreement was reached on carbon sequestration (by then, most multinational corporations had a chief carbon officer) and intellectual and financial resources were pooled to build out carbon capture processes that would best support the global ecosystem. A functioning global cap and trade system was also established."
"Worldwide, the pressure to reduce waste and increase efficiency in planet-friendly ways was enormous."
Now here is the big one, with technocracy as the master:
"New globally coordinated systems for monitoring energy use capacity – including smart grids and bottom-up pattern recognition technologies – were rolled out. These efforts produced real results: by 2022, new projections showed a significant slowing in the rise of atmospheric carbon levels."
"Inspired by the success of this experiment in collective global action, large-scale coordinated initiatives intensified. Centralized global oversight and governance structures sprang up, not just for energy use but also for disease and technology standards. Such systems and structures required far greater levels of transparency, which in turn required more tech-enabled data collection, processing, and feedback."
"Enormous, benign "sousveillance" systems allowed citizens to access data – all publicly available – in real time and react. Nation-states lost some of their power and importance as global architecture strengthened and regional governance structures emerged. International oversight entities like the UN took on new levels of authority, as did regional systems like the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD), and the Asian Development Bank (ADB)."
Are you following this? The monitoring of energy use, for example. This is nothing less than moment to moment tracking of energy production and consumption, planet-wide.
It's the ultimate top-down force. What flows from this position is the ALLOCATION of energy to every nation—and, up the road, TO EVERY HUMAN.
"Mr. Jones, your energy-use card shows you've reached your limit for this month. Ten days left until February 1. All your energy-producing devices and assets will shut down now. Have a nice day."
You don't think that could ever happen? There is no way to assign energy-use limits to nations without directly impacting use by individuals.
I also hope you noticed the reference to emerging "regional governance structures." The takeover of separate nations by the UN, the EU, and other unelected bodies.
This is the preferred and mandated Rockefeller solution.
And now a word about the hated and loved Donald Trump. Whatever you think of him, he raised the issue of Globalism, front and center. He shot down the Rockefeller TPP treaty. He didn't sign the Paris Climate pact. He emphasized nationalism, as opposed to internationalism. He mocked climate-change "science."
For the moment, let's assume the very worst. Trump didn't mean anything he said. He was a liar, is a liar, and will be a liar. He was actually put in office by the Globalists, who wanted a ludicrous enemy to play off of. He wasn't and isn't an enemy of Globalism. He's a complete fraud. By relentlessly attacking Trump, the Globalists will defeat their "last opponent," and in the next election they will sweep into power as never before, believing they can then complete their plan for worldwide domination. Let's assume all this.
Nevertheless, millions and millions of people have become alerted to this thing called Globalism as a destructive force with a covert agenda of planetary control.
Observers can go full-bore gloom and doom, claiming it doesn't matter. They can bitch and moan about how nothing has changed. They can confirm their own personal prophecy of failure along all fronts.
Or they can try to wake up more people to what Globalism is really all about.
All along I've said I'm far more interested in the people who supported Trump, for their own reasons, than I'm interested in Trump. And I'm not particularly interested in those supporters' reasons, either—except when FREEDOM is involved.
The freedom to take destiny into their own hands.
That idea is not dead. It will never be dead.
Time is long.
THE INDIVIDUAL is at the very bottom of the Globalist plan. He is considered to be a fly in the ointment who needs to be eradicated, in favor of The Group.
He is considered to be an extinct evolutionary appendage.
That is why the Globalist superstructure must be defeated.
Psychologically, spiritually, mentally, emotionally, creatively, a separate nation is better than an oligarchical global government.
An individual is better than a nation.
A free individual is better than a sleeping individual.
A self-empowered individual—free, responsible, rational, intensely creative—is possible and necessary.
This is where it all starts.
This is where it has to start.
It doesn't start with a global glob of fantasizing utopians, who are unaware they're acting on behalf of an Earth Empire.
Posted on July 25, 2017 Categories Conformity Crisis, Freedom, Globalism, Technocracy, The Individual, TyrannyTags Conformity Crisis, Freedom, Globalism, Rockefeller, Technocracy, The Individual, TyrannyLeave a comment on Wake Up To The Rockefeller Movie Of Political Reality
The Individual Vs. The Illusion Of Consensus Reality
This is such a supercharged subject, I could start from a dozen places.
But let's begin here: the individual is unique, because he is himself. He is unique because he has his own ideas, because he has his own desires, because he has his own power. That power belongs to no one else.
In particular, it doesn't belong to the State. The State will always try to suggest that it is granting power to the individual, but this is a lie. A lie broadcast with ill-intent.
While everyone else is trying to manufacture connections to the group, under the banner of a false sense of community, the individual is going in the opposite direction.
Philip K Dick: "Insanity—to have to construct a picture of one's life, by making inquiries of others."
Consensus reality is the reality of sacrifice. It is coagulating energy, form, content, substance that takes on amorphous shapes studded with slots into which people can fit themselves.
The independent individual thinks what he wants to think. Over time, he keeps graduating into new, more nearly unique levels of what he wants to think.
He rises to his own thoughts.
There is no subject and no substance which is not infiltrated by consensus reality. Wherever you look, you will encounter it. The group is the basis of consensus reality, and the group-pact extends everywhere. The group fears a sector where only individual thought can tread.
That would be dangerous to the illusion. "Well, we've got things well in hand in most places, but over there and over here we're not in charge."
No, that doesn't work for the group. The exceptions would blow a hole in the rule.
"Stay away from the corner of Lexington Avenue and 34th Street. Something too weird is going on there. We come in and try to inject consensus on that spot and it doesn't work. Our 'sharing' energy bounces off that corner. We may have to call in the troops to surround the place and cordon it off."
"Group consensus is fraying and fragmenting in Area 768-B! Call the professors and pundits! Discredit the individual! Call him a monster! Do something fast!"
Consensus reality is an illusion in the sense that you can see it and I can see it, but we didn't sign up for it.
The individual can opt out. That doesn't necessarily mean the consensus disappears; you can still see it, but you see it without accepting it.
You can see the oasis in the desert and know it is a mirage. You have your own water, you don't have to run toward the mirage and fall down on your knees and try to drink from the pool.
Philip K. Dick: "Because today we live in a society in which spurious realities are manufactured by the media, by governments, by big corporations, by religious groups, political groups…increasingly, we are bombarded with pseudo-realities manufactured by very sophisticated electronic mechanisms…And this is an astounding power: that of creating whole universes, universes of the mind. I ought to know. I do the same thing."
The strong and free individual evolves. He doesn't stay the same. He continues to emerge with new ideas, new energy, new invention. He becomes larger. He gains more power.
When the illusion of consensus reality attains a level beyond mere slogan, it enters the realm of systems. This is its most convincing format. A system appears to be watertight. Each one of its parts has relations with the whole.
This is interesting, because that mirrors what a group is. Each member is a part that connects to the whole.
Consensus as a system is like a game of chess that plays the same moves over and over. Game one is the same as game two, three, four…
That's where its illusion of power comes from.
The individual, though, doesn't proceed according to systems. He isn't moving from one closed context to another.
Consensus is the coin of the realm. It is forced from the top, and it is signed up for at the bottom. One hand washes the other.
Societies may begin through consensus, but if they have any courage, they shift focus to the job of pulling away coercive restraints on the individual. Regardless, the individual asserts his freedom. It is his to begin with, not the group's. No one gives it to him.
Earth's societies have moved rapidly to an inverse, an upside down structure, in which freedom is looked upon as a privilege grudgingly accorded in the absence of a reason to take it away.
The group has conception of Normal. Normal is like a message passed around, from hand to hand, and when you look at it closely, for content, it dissolves. There was really nothing there.
Group consensus is mindless hive-action covering a vacuum.
Here is what occasionally happens to people who have hidebound political ideologies. The people on the Left move further and further to the Left, and the people on the Right move further and further to the Right. Finally, they are both so distant from the State they meet and stare at each other in shock. At that point, they are just individuals.
"But society runs on groups! It must have groups!"
And what? The individual must give in and join and belong?
Consensus reality is a cartoon that is trying to become as real as steel. What deconstructs the steel and exposes the cartoon? There is only one thing that can do that. Nothing and no one else is going to do that.
The individual does it.
Posted on July 24, 2017 July 24, 2017 Categories Big Government, Conformity Crisis, The IndividualTags Conformity Crisis, Systems, The IndividualLeave a comment on The Individual Vs. The Illusion Of Consensus Reality
Book Review: Churchill & Orwell: The Fight For Freedom by Thomas E. Ricks | #SmartReads
TheBreakaway | BreakawayConciousness
July 1, 217
"In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
"Political language…is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind."
In Churchill And Orwell, Thomas E. Ricks does an apt job of juxtaposing two of history's pillars of freedom – Winston Churchill and George Orwell, whose real name is Eric Arthur Blair.
The author follows the lives of these men through the 30s and 40s with lucidity, while comparing and contrasting key elements of these stalwarts of critical thought and independence.
Though both men were incisive writers that did not overlook the power of the written word, each man went through his own trials and tribulations that helped mold who they became. Those life lessons they learned helped each become staunch supporters of freedom and individuality in a world that sought then, as it still seeks now at times, to conform individuals at nigh every turn.
With a critical eye to the unique path these men have walked, the author sagely states that their path:
"… is a path we should all strive for if we are to preserve the right to think, speak, and act independently, heeding the dictates not of the state or of fashionable thought but of our own consciences. In most places and most of the time, liberty is not a product of military action. Rather, it is something alive that grows or diminishes every day, in how we think and communicate, how we treat each other in our public discourse, in what we value and reward as a society, and how we do that."[1]
Such a compelling statement beckons rumination for those that value freedom. Freedom isn't something that's merely handed down, but an idea that's alive, fluid, wholly able to grow or whither depending on how it is treated.
As such, given the totalitarian train of tyranny and fascism that is barreling down the pike, it would be wise to reap wisdom from these prescient pillars of the past, whilst also contemplating what Freedom truly means to us.
If the past is any indication of the future, and we certainly know that it is, then given the cyclic nature of history and man's inability to learn from the past, then it is only a matter of time before we are waist deep in the very totalitarian and tyrannical issues that both Churchill and Orwell fought to prevent.
This makes learning our history and from those that stood before us and fought the good fight an imperative. If not, humanity is merely choosing the path of ignorance once again.
Churchill & Orwell: The Fight For Freedom is an evocative read, made all the more relevant by the rise in tyranny and censorship that seeps further into society. The courage Churchill and Orwell brought to bear in the fight for freedom was immeasurable, just as their wisdom is timeless. To ignore their words and actions would be unwise, and if we do that, we do that at or own peril.
[1] Thomas E. Ricks, Churchill & Orwell, pg. 269.
If you find value in this information, please share it. This article is free and open source. All individuals have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Zy Marquiez and TheBreakaway.wordpress.com.
Zy Marquiez is an avid book reviewer, inquirer, an open-minded skeptic, yogi, and freelance writer who aims at empowering individuals while also studying and regularly mirroring subjects like Consciousness, Education, Creativity, The Individual, Ancient History & Ancient Civilizations, Forbidden Archaeology, Big Pharma, Alternative Health, Space, Geoengineering, Social Engineering, Propaganda, and much more.
His other blog, BreakawayConsciousnessBlog.wordpress.com features mainly his personal work, while TheBreakaway.wordpress.com serves as a media portal which mirrors vital information nigh always ignored by mainstream press, but still highly crucial to our individual understanding of various facets of the world.
Posted on July 1, 2017 Categories A Blank Canvas - TheBreakaway Original Content, Big Government, Books & Literature, Censorship, Conformity Crisis, Freedom, The Individual, Totalitarianism, TyrannyTags #SmartReads, Big Government, Books, Censorship, Churchill & Orwell: The Fight For Freedom, Churhill, Freedom, Orwell, Thomas E. Ricks, Totalitarianism, TyrannyLeave a comment on Book Review: Churchill & Orwell: The Fight For Freedom by Thomas E. Ricks | #SmartReads