Censored Language and the Mind-Prison of the Group

The bottom-line goal of all social constructs is convincing individuals they are, first and foremost, part of a group. If this strategy for control succeeds, then criminals and hustlers of every stripe can peddle their stench-ridden wares. To groups.

The collective is, above all, a funnel into which propaganda can be poured, like swamp water. You are black. You are white. You are blue. You are purple. You're a Jew. You're a Christian. You're a Muslim. Above all else, that's what you are. That's the game. That's the con. You're not you. No. You're not unique. No. You're not an individual. No. You're in a group. You always were. You always will be.

And because you're green with red polka dots, all sorts of statements apply directly to you. Some of those statements are acceptable, and some are not. Some words directed at you are reasonable, and some are illegitimate. The illegitimate words must be censored and banned. The people who speak those words must be punished and exiled.

God forbid, you, as a green person with red polka dots, should realize you are fundamentally beyond red and green, you are something far more, you are you and no one else is you. The State doesn't want you to realize that. The State doesn't want you to realize you're outside. You're not supposed to be that free. You're not supposed to claim you're that free.

Jon Rappoport

You're supposed to be a fragment of a huddled mass defending itself against illegitimate language. That's one of your main jobs.

And if you walk away, if you leave the group, you're a traitor. You're a deserter. If you stay in the group forever, you're good. You're in a mind-prison, where you ought to be. And from prison, you can declare, over and over, how wonderful your group is. And if you discover these declarations do nothing for you, personally, in your efforts to improve your life, that's perfectly all right. That's normal. You can pretend. You can fake it. You can assert that things are getting better for you, because your group is receiving more special attention, more positive attention.

Yes, social movements and political movements have brought about positive change for groups. Of course. But the whole purpose of these changes should be to funnel members in those groups up into being individuals, not members. Liberation of the individual is the purpose. The State and other repressive forces want people to stay in groups and think of themselves in those terms. Always.

There are many strategies for doing this. One of them is: arrange for attack-language to be used against the group. And then try to censor that language.

"Group member" is an artifact. It's an ID card. It's shorthand. These days, it's becoming, through social pressure, mandatory. You're in group X. “The unity of the manipulated collective consists in the negation of each individual and in the scorn poured on the type of society which could make people into individuals." (Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno, Dialectic of Enlightenment)

In the long run, The Group is painted as "inherently special," but with none of the qualities that truly make the individual free and powerful. Which is the whole point, as far as the State is concerned: make the individual powerless, make him disappear.

"All greatness of character is dependent on individuality. The man who has no other existence than that which he partakes in common with all around him, will never have any other than an existence of mediocrity." (James Fenimore Cooper, "On Individuality")

"If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away." (Henry David Thoreau, "Walden")

Face it. In order for any group to receive "special attention," it must remain a group. Its members must not ascend to becoming individuals who graduate from the group. The group must always, therefore, appear to be under attack. And if this project lags, attacks must be concocted and promoted.

To be more precise, there is a spectrum. At one end is the group-swamp. All the members have forsaken their individuality and identify with the prime group-characteristic. Then there is the free and awake and strong individual. Then there is the group composed of such free individuals, who see the wisdom of cooperation, without sacrificing themselves on the altar of fear, without feeling they must Belong.

Jon Rappoport is the author of three collections, The Matrix Revealed, Exit from the Matrix, and Power Outside the Matrix. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. For his free emails see http://nomorefakenews.com/