The Individual Versus The Planned Society


At the outbreak of World War II, the Council on Foreign Relations began making plans for the post-war world.

The question it posed was this: Could America exist as a self-sufficient nation, or would it have to go outside its borders for vital resources?

Predictably, the answer was: imperial empire.

The United States would not only need to obtain natural resources abroad, it would have to embark on endless conquest to assure continued access.

The CFR, of course, wasn’t just some think tank. It was connected to the highest levels of U.S. government, through the State Department. A front for Rockefeller interests, it actually stood above the government.

Behind all its machinations was the presumption that planned societies were the future of the planet — not open societies.

Through wars, clandestine operations, legislation, treaties, manipulation of nations’ debt, and control of banks and money supplies, countries could be turned into “managed units.”

Increasingly, the populations of countries would be regulated and directed and held in thrall to the state.

And the individual? He would go the way of other extinct species.

For several decades, the pseudo-discipline called “social science” had been turning out reams of studies and reports on tribes, societal groupings and so-called classes of people.

Deeply embedded in the social sciences were psychological warfare specialists who, after World War II, emerged with a new academic status and new field of study: mass communications.

Their objective? The broadcasting of messages that would, in accordance with political goals, provoke hostility or pacified acceptance in the masses — hostility in support of new wars and acceptance of greater domestic government control.

Nowhere in these formulas was the individual protected. He was considered a wild card, a loose cannon; and he needed to be demeaned, made an outsider and characterized as a criminal who opposed the needs of the collective.

As the years and decades passed, this notion of the collective and its requirements, in a “humane civilization,” expanded. Never mind that out of view, the rich were getting richer and poor were getting poorer. That fact was downplayed, and the cover story — “share and care” — took center stage.

On every level of society, people were urged to think of themselves as part of a greater group. The individual and his hopes, his unique dreams, his desires and energies, his determination and willpower were all portrayed as relics of an unworkable and deluded past.

In many cases, lone pioneers who were innovating in directions that could, in fact, benefit all of humanity, were absorbed into the one body of the collective, heralded as humane and then dumped on the side of the road with their inventions.

Their breakthroughs could upset favored monopolies and actually elevate the lives of people. Therefore, men like Nikola Tesla and Buckminster Fuller had to be buried.

In other cases, there was very little praise before burial: Wilhelm Reich, Dr. William Frederick Koch, Royal Rife.

In the planned society, no one rises above the mass, except those men who run, operate and propagandize the mass.

In order to affect the illusion of individual success, as a kind of safety valve for the yearnings of millions of people, the cult of celebrity emerged. But even there, extraordinary tales of rise and then precipitous fall, glory and then humiliation, were and are presented as cautionary melodramas.

The onrush of technocracy gears its wild promises to genetic manipulation, brain-machine interfaces, and other automatic downloads assuring “greater life.” No effort required. Plug in, and ascend to new heights.

If the individual has any place in this future, it is: working at a job, keeping his or her head down, supporting the family, gradually wearing down, and dying. In more and more cases, the job is within, or attached to, government.

Freedom? Independence? Old flickering dreams vicariously viewed on a screen.

Individual greatness, imagination, creative power? A sunken galleon loaded with treasure that, upon closer investigation, was never there to begin with.

The plan is all that is important. The plan involves universal surveillance, in order to map the lives of billions of people, move by move. In order to design systems of control within which those billions live, day to day.

But the worst outcome of all is: The individual cannot even conceive of his own life and future in large terms. The individual responds to tighter and control with a shrug, as if to say, “What difference does it make?”

He has bought the collectivist package. His own uniqueness and inner resources are submerged under layers of passive acceptance of the consensus.

And make no mistake about it, this consensus reality, for all its exaltation of the group, is not heraldic in any sense. The propagandized veneer covers a cynical exploitation of every man, woman and child.

Strapped by amnesia about his own freedom and what it can truly mean, the individual opts for a place in the collective gloom. He may grumble and complain, but he fits in.

He can’t remember another possibility.

Every enterprise in which he finds himself turns out to be a pale copy of the real thing.

This is why I have been so critical of the recent ballot initiatives urging labeling of genetically modified food. The group, in this case, is the mass of consumers, people who buy. This is the apotheosis of a movement against a titan, a monster, Monsanto. “Know what you buy, know what you eat, and we will triumph over evil.”

The prospect of victory on these terms is, in the long run, non-existent. Why? Because the deep energies and power and desire for freedom remain untapped.

Based on supposed knowledge of what works in the political arena, the men who have been dictating the terms of the “good message” are shortchanging this opportunity.

As businessmen, they are tuned to the marketplace. But that is not where this struggle really lives. It lives in the hidden places of every repressed individual who wants out, who wants to come back to himself, who wants to stride out on a stage and take the battle to the enemy.

And these failed political campaigns are an example of what millions of people in this country want on a much broader level.

They want freedom and power again. They want to feel alive. They want to feel they’re fighting and winning in the true space where the heart and soul of the struggle can be experienced in the deepest way, where their own amnesia shatters and they remember who they are and they see what evil is trying to accomplish, in order to keep them in a trance.

When a political campaign taps into that, it will have legs. It will have legs and wings, it will mean something about victory in this stolen nation.

And it will mean that the extinct individual returns.

–Jon Rappoport

Personal Liberty

Jon Rappoport

, The author of an explosive collection, "The Matrix Revealed," Jon Rappoport was a candidate for a U.S. Congressional seat in the 29th 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 United States and Europe. Rappoport has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic and creative power to audiences around the world. His blog, No More Fake News, can be read here.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • Warrior

    Ooh, Jon, your thoughts are antithetical to “progressive doctrine”. Be careful, the obamanuts will be out soon and may report you.

    But on a more serious note, I hope the obamanuts take back this message. Your savior is a fraud. He’s going down with his obamanation of a law. Scrap him, piglosi, reid and every other democratically “controlled” progressive along with them. Are you starting to WAKE UP America and see the continued damage these people have wrought? Do you think “Detroit” just happened! This scenario is being played out again and again throughout the world wherever “progressives” are in “control”.

    • KG

      I do have to say that Mr Rappoport gives a good argument for letting insane people be themselves. It’s when these psychotics convince a group of people that they are right is when you get into trouble. The best example I can think of is conservative America.

      • Cat

        Actually, I was just thinking similar thoughts about the “progressives”, most notably this recent usurpation.

      • momo

        ” It’s when these psychotics convince a group of people that they are right is when you get into trouble.”
        You talking about yourself or Obama?

      • Vis Fac

        KGB they let you out of the asylum to be yourself so why are you complaining? We are more tolerant of you than you are of us so in that respect you are a HYPOCRITE You are the poster child for the Socialism-Liberalism-Communism Psychotics Anonymous (SLCPA) that is convinced you know everything and have the authority to dictate how others should live.

        Conservative America” has nothing on you socialist liberals. Conservative America did not destroy the best medical system in the world Your Gullible
        Obnoxious Pejorative Philandering Prevaricating Progressive Party (GOPPPPP) did a number on that

        Wise men speak because they have something to say; and liberal fools like you speak because you have to say something.

        To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

        You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

        Libertas inaestimabilis res est

        • KG

          You do realize that the author, Jon Rappoport, believes in Aliens and ‘alternative medicine’ like Orgon Chambers and admires a first-class nut by the name of Wilhelm Reich?

          Oh, I see. ‘Birds of a feather flock together’. Did you do your orgone treatment this morning after your yogurt enema?

          • Vis Fac

            What I do realize is that you are off your rocker and apparently you dipped into the Psilocybin once too often and haven’t the foggiest Idea what you are saying. I know others are thinking the same as I am. Do yourself a favor and stop embarrassing yourself (and all of us as well) it’s painful to watch someone flail around and dribbling on yourself like you do.

            Wise men speak because they have something to say; and liberal fools like you speak because you have to say something.

            To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

            You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est

          • KG

            So you do agree with Mr Jon Rappoport and his crank ideas about ‘individuality’ even though your most proudest achievement was membership in a GROUP of people? I see, you are blind AND stupid!

          • Vis Fac

            I agree (in principal) to/with anything you disagree even if I have no idea what you are talking about. We Marines are a core group of individual thinking people not the mindless automatons you Marxists Socialists and Communists are You are so far fetched and miserable you cling to anything that is seemingly free and socialistic.

            There is no such word combination as “most proudest” It’s either proudest or most proud so that in effect nullifies any of your statements to date. (your brain has been nullified ever since your proudest achievement was when you embraced Marxism Socialism and Communism) You are a POX on society and are taking space that a more deserving individual should occupy.

            My achievements far surpass any of yours so this point is moot most!!!

            Wise men speak because they have something to say; and liberal fools like you speak because you have to say something.

            To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

            You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est

          • KG

            quote: My achievements far surpass any of yours so this point is moot most!!!

            ‘Moot most’? or ‘the most moot’?

            Proverbs 16:18
            New Living Translation (NLT)
            18 Pride goes before destruction,
            and haughtiness before a fall.

          • texastwin827

            OMG, KG….does your ignorance know no boundaries?

            That “group” as you call it, is the US Marines…they are a TEAM (big difference from a “group”) of INDIVIDUAL men who are the best trained, in the world. There is a reason for the phrase ” A few good men” because it takes less Marines to get the job done, than any other military force, in the WORLD!

            I doubt seriously, that you could even make it through Marine boot camp, let alone survive, in the places they are sent!

            Semper Fi, Force Recon!

          • KG

            ‘Give me a room full of West Point graduates and I’ll win a battle. Give me a handful of Aggies and I’ll win a war’
            Gen George S Patton

            I was merely pointing out the fact that despite the individualness of the men, their strength lies in the GROUP. Individually, they are relatively easy to pick off. But as a collection of individuals they have strength thats greater than the sum of the whole. That’s where so-called ‘individualists’ get it all wrong. That’s why our president, Mr Obama, was correct when he said ‘…you didn’t build that.’ Because the truth is WE ALL BUILT THAT.

          • WTS/JAY

            What troubles you, KG, did you gargle too much semen this morning?


    We have the 10 commandments, The Bill Rights, and the U.S. Constitution. Keep your powder dry and be on guard.

    • Vis Fac

      All words to live by Others include the following:

      There comes a time when you have to stand for the Constitution or die by legislation one usurptive bill at a time.

      If you want a vision of a liberal future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever

      A liberal is a power worshiper without power. Liberal one dimensional Idiot-ology is playing with fire by people who don’t know that fire is hot!!

      When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty, and there is nothing more to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader. Plato

      “Politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.” George Orwell

      Wise men speak because they have something to say; and liberal fools speak because they have to say something.

      To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

      You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

      Libertas inaestimabilis res est

  • stanbyk1

    Yes, we have all witnessed the results of progressivism and liberalism. All one has to do is go back to Soviet Union experiment. It worked so well that Soviet bloc no longer exists. Notice how everyone in those countries are rushing back to that utopian system.


    Dumbing Down America -by Dr. Samuel Blumenfeld

    I am often asked to name those educators responsible for the change in primary reading instruction which has led to the decline of literacy in America. People ask this because by the time they understand the history of the reading problem and of the dumbing down process that has been going on in our public schools for the past forty years, they recognize that all of this is not the result of a series of accidents but of conscious, deliberate decisions made by our educational leaders.

    After twenty-five years of research, I can state with complete confidence that the prime mover in all of this was none other than John Dewey who is usually characterized as the father of progressive education. Yet the change of the teaching of reading is probably Dewey’s greatest contribution to the tranformation of American education from an academically oriented process to a social one.

    The progressives were a new breed of educator that came on the scene around the turn of the century. These rejected the religion of the Bible and placed their new faith in science, evolution and psychology. Indeed, men like G. Stanley Hall, James McKeen Cattell, Charles Judd, James Earl Russell traveled to Germany to study the new psychology under Prof. Wilhelm Wundt at the University of Leipzig. It was these men who later imposed the new psychology on American education and transformed it permanently from its academic function to one dedicated to behavioral change.

    John Dewey got his education in the new psychology under G. Stanley Hall at John Hopkins University. In 1887, at the tender age of 28, Dewey felt that he knew enough about psychology to be able to write a textbook on the subject, entitled fittingly Psychology. In 1894, Dewey was appointed head of the department of philosophy, psychology and education at the University of Chicago which had been established two years earlier by a gift from John D. Rockefeller. In 1896, Dewey created his famous experimental Laboratory School where he could test the effects of the new psychology on real live children.

    Dewey’s philosophy had evolved from Hegelian idealism to socialist materialism, and the purpose of the school was to show how education could be changed to produce little socialists and collectivists instead of little capitalists and individualists. It was expected that these little socialists, when they became voting adults, would dutifully change the American economic system into a socialist one.

    In order to do so he analyzed the traditional curriculum that sustained the capitalist, individualistic system and found what he believed was the sustaining linchpin — that is, the key element that held the entire system together: high literacy.

    To Dewey, the greatest obstacle to socialism was the private mind that seeks knowledge in order to exercise its own private judgment and intellectual authority. High literacy gave the individual the means to seek knowledge independently. It gave individuals the means to stand on their own two feet and think for themselves. This was detrimental to the “social spirit” needed to bring about a collectivist society. Dewey wrote in Democracy and Education, published in 1916:

    “When knowledge is regarded as originating and developing within an individual, the ties which bind the mental life of one to that of his fellows are ignored and denied.”

    “When the social quaility of individualized mental operations is denied, it becomes a problem to find connections which will unite an individual with his fellows. Moral individualism is set up by the conscious separation of different centers of life. It has its roots in the notion that the consciousness of each person is wholly private, a self-inclosed continent. intrinsically independent of the ideas, wishes, purposes of everybody else.”

    And he wrote in School and Society in 1899:

    “The tragic weakness of the present school is that it endeavors to prepare future members of the social order in a medium in which the conditions of the social spirit are eminently wanting …”

    “The mere absorbing of facts and truths is so exclusively individual an affair that it tends very naturally to pass into selfishness. There is no obvious social motive for the acquirement of merely learning, there is no clear social gain in success threat.”

    It seems incredible that a man of Dewey’s intelligence could state that the sort of traditional education that produced our founding fathers and the wonderful inventors of the 19th century lacked “social spirit” when it was these very individuals who created the freest, happiest, and most prosperous nation in all of human history. It was the progressives’ rejection of God which made them yearn for a utopia created in their own depraved human image. And so, high literacy had to go.

    Dewey wrote in 1896, after the Laboratory School had been in operation for nine months:

    It is one of the great mistakes of education to make reading and writing constitute the bulk of the school work the first two years. The true way is to teach them incidentally as the outgrowth of the social activites at this time.

    Thus language is not primarily the expression of thought, but the means of social communication … If language is abstracted from social activity, and made an end in itself, it will not give its whole value as a means of development … continued: