| 
			
 
 
  by Jon Rappoport
 October 21, 2015
 
			from
			
			JonRappoport Website 
			
			
			Spanish version
 
 
			  
			  
			
			 
			  
			  
			"If you controlled the 
			meaning of The Good,
 
			and you had unlimited 
			propaganda resources and access to the press,  
			and if you also had control 
			over the Armed Forces and the police,  
			you could build a new society 
			in short order.  
			You could wreck centuries of 
			tradition in a few decades.  
			And if you had the education 
			system in your back pocket,  
			you could wipe out the memory 
			of what formerly existed.  
			No one would remember. No one 
			would care.  
			This is happening now, in 
			Europe.  
			Ignorance is enlightenment."
			 
			(The Underground, Jon Rappoport)
 
			  
			One of the basic principles
			
			of elite Globalism is:
 
				
				the end of borders, the end of 
				separate nations. 
			
			
			The European Union was built for 
			this purpose, step by step, out of the ashes of World War 2:  
				
				a super-bureaucracy and political 
				management system for the whole continent. 
			But that was not enough. There had to be 
			a way to wipe out separate and sovereign nations at ground level, to 
			irrevocably change the landscape.
 It is open borders;
			
			floods of immigrants; "replacement 
			populations"; an influx of people who have no intention of accepting 
			the customs and way of life in their new homes.
 
 The end result?
 
			  
			A de facto reconfiguring of national 
			populations, so that, when you look at the makeup of Europe 20 years 
			from now, you will say: 
				
				"Why do we think of Germany or 
				France or England? They don't really exist. All of Europe is a 
				vast mix of immigrants. Europe is really one country now. So 
				let's erase all those old artificial borders." 
			Eventually, even uttering words like 
			"Swedes, Norwegians, Germans, French, Dutch…" will be considered 
			micro (or macro) aggressions against the "people of Europe."
 Of course, in reaching this point, there will be a certain amount of 
			chaos and violence. The EU is banking on its ability to control it, 
			to put it down where necessary, and to maintain its hold as the one 
			and only governing force in Europe.
 
 On a cultural level, names like Locke, Shakespeare, Goethe, Mozart, 
			Beethoven, Bach, Lorca, Goya, Cezanne, Monet, Van Gogh, 
			Michelangelo, Rembrandt, Dante, Galileo, Faraday, and even "modern" 
			names like Bartok, Stravinsky, Rimbaud, Orwell, and Camus will be 
			vague dusty ghosts that provoke uncomprehending stares.
 
				
				"The past is dead."
 "Oh, but don't worry about that. The important thing is, every 
				person living in Europe is a citizen of Europe, and is entitled 
				to benefits. This is humane, this is The Good, this is the 
				triumph of the benevolent State. Nothing else matters."
 
			All European languages will eventually 
			be reduced. Who has the right to speak words that the majority of 
			people can't understand?
 What I'm sketching in here is the grid that will be laid over 
			Europe.
 
 And of course, as automation comes on with a rush, many 
			"citizen-workers of Europe" will become unnecessary. Even great 
			corporations will fall, because they won't be able to sell their 
			products to an impoverished population. They'll hope against hope 
			that the billions of people in the East, China and India, will give 
			them new markets.
 
 Against this background, the individual human being will be looked 
			at, from the top, as a cipher, a unit in "models and algorithms."
 
 The question is,
 
				
					
					
					How many individuals will take 
					the bait and regard themselves as mere "parts" in the 
					overall system?
					
					How many will give in and 
					consider their future a function of how much they can obtain 
					from The State, free of charge?
					
					How many will come to believe 
					that their power, as individuals, is inconsequential - or 
					even a delusion? 
			Why do I bother bringing this up?  
			  
			Because, regardless of the prevailing 
			collectivist mindset - propagandized and promoted and exploited from 
			an elite level - State repression, in all its forms, falls on each 
			individual.
 If the very concept of the individual is wiped out, what is left?
 
 In 1859, John Stuart Mill wrote:
 
				
				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. 
			Conversely, when the free development of 
			individuality is of no concern, liberty will die.
 Boris Pasternak, the Russian novelist and poet, who knew a 
			thing or two about political repression, wrote (1960):
 
				
				They [the Soviet bureaucrats] don't 
				ask much of you. They only want you to hate the things you love 
				and to love the things you despise. 
			This reversal is being imposed now, in 
			Europe.
 Defectors from the old USSR would recognize it in an instant, having 
			lived through it themselves. The European version seems softer and 
			gentler, but that is just a matter of strategy. The culture is being 
			cooked more slowly.
 
 But just because secret police aren't knocking on doors in the 
			middle of the night and making mass arrests, that isn't a sign that 
			individual freedom reigns.
 
 A number of European political leaders are telling their 
			constituencies,
 
				
				"You have no right to oppose the 
				flood of immigration on any grounds. To do so, to utter such 
				public statements, is an offense." 
			Does that sound familiar?
 The wet dream of every collectivist is coming true. All power at the 
			top; all conformity (called "unity") everywhere else. The new USSR.
 
 In the old days, the East German police kept records on every 
			citizen and blanketed the population with snitches and spies. The
			
			modern Surveillance State has 
			replaced that, searching for "nodes of discontent."
 
 Collectivists may pay lip service 
			to the dangers of State surveillance, but when it is used to root 
			out people who can't envision a better world based on, among other 
			features, open borders, well, this is just an enforcement of The 
			Good upon those who can't discover it for themselves.
 
 If The Humanitarian Way needs a nudge and boost, why not?
 
 For dyed-in-the-wool collectivists, freedom isn't just a roadblock; 
			it's an irrelevant illusion. It never existed. All humans are 
			operating according to programs, and have been since birth. 
			Therefore, install a better program, by any means necessary and 
			available. Produce "kinder people."
 
 This is both a political and a technological imperative.
 
 Open borders and unlimited immigration is a good test case. For 
			people who feel imposed upon, who feel their communities are being 
			torn apart, who feel personally threatened, who feel this is, 
			indeed, a covert operation to transform Europe into a new 
			USSR, there is a need for re-education at the deepest level 
			possible.
 
			  
			Because, surely, such people are 
			suffering from profound disorders. Their circuits are crossed. Their 
			brains are defective. They can't see the larger picture.
 They would never be able to see, for example, the wisdom of the 
			words of 
			Zbigniew Brzezinski, David 
			Rockerfeller's alter ego, who wrote, in 1969:
 
				
				The nation state as a fundamental 
				unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal 
				creative force: International banks and multinational 
				corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in 
				advance of the political concepts of the nation-state. 
				
						
				
						Between Two Ages - America's Role 
				in the Technetronic Era - Page 28 
			Here is the Globalist tactician at work, 
			a man who seems to hate the old USSR, but is seeking to install a 
			version of the same collectivism, through other means.
 If Lenin were alive today, he would look out over Europe and 
			agree that his agenda is alive and well.
 
			  
			He might object to the relatively slow 
			pace. He might want more violence. But he would grudgingly 
			acknowledge that his descendants have discovered a few new tricks. 
			He would have to approve of the "humanitarian altruism," and the way 
			it is being modeled and manipulated, so that the edifice of The Good 
			appears as a shining beacon in the darkness.
 Nice movie. Excellent production design. Tears of sympathy rolling 
			down the cheeks of the audience.
 
 Minds reduced to one constant:
 
				
				we must care for the less fortunate. 
			Trillions and trillions of dollars 
			devoted to elicit that sentiment, regardless of the circumstances, 
			or the true malignant outcome, or the actual sinister intent of
			
			the elite artists of reality.
 
   |